The UN, Globalist Multiculturalism & Islam One World Despotism


John R. Houk

© July 11, 2019

 

After WWII the image of the United Nations was an international organization that the Allied victors would utilize to prevent another nation to pull any conquest objectives ala Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and Imperial Japan. After the war and the public emerging of atrocities committed by Nazis and the Japanese war machine populations of Western nations breathed a sigh of relief that a UN would prevent global despotic atrocities.

 

The first dent in this relief was the Communist international revolutionary agenda of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR – essentially Russia) and Communist (Red) China. Those Communist giants used their satellite vassal yet officially independent nations to fill the UN with Marxist opposition to everything Western especially to the USA.

 

The USSR and Red China in their efforts to woo global Communism began to assist Third World nations willing to be anti-Western (with anti-Americanism as the focus) in their development. Hence Communist revolutionaries began to emerge in newly independent nations formerly dominated as Western Colonies primarily of European nations.

 

The Muslim world advanced despots as monarchs and dictators who nationalized the Western control of the oil industries managed by Multinational Corporations (MNC). Islam is inherently antagonistic to all things non-Muslim inspired by Islamic revered writings.

 

The USSR tried to use this Islamic antipathy to export Communist principles to the Muslim world. However, Islam-alone brainwashing ultimately meant the Muslim despots used the USSR support to offset the power of Western supported MNCs. Essentially Muslim despots played an international game of pitting the USA and the USSR against each other to shore up their own Islamic authoritarian regimes.

 

THEN the unthinkable according to Islamic doctrine occurred. Jews abused for centuries in the West gained sympathy due to Nazi genocide resulting in a gradual reclamation of the Jewish Homeland. A homeland that had been under one form or another of Islamic control due to conquest since the mid-600s AD.

 

A Jewish Homeland is unthinkable because in intolerant doctrine, once conquered by Islam a land must remain Islamic forever. The Islamic vision of conquest domination in three opinions:

 

 

 

 

Five Stages of Islamic Conquest

The absence of Communist satellite nations due to the collapse of the USSR led to the domination of two groups in the UN: Nations dominated by Leftist Globalist Multiculturalism and Nations dominated by Islamic Thought.

 

Since I’m not really an erudite writer let’s look at some quotes relating to Leftist (perhaps Marxist) Globalist Multiculturalism (all from essays or opinions that should be read in full at your leisure):

 

The Pox of Multiculturalism; By Bruce Walker; American Thinker; 5/19/18:

 

What the left calls “multiculturalism” is actually the systematic destruction of cultures and the replacement of these cultures by a synthetic, artificial, and meaningless global culture.  When the left talks about “diversity,” it really means the crushing of differences in thought, values, and art into a sort of baby food which neither nourishes the soul or elevates the mind.

 

 

Multiculturalism is an effort to destroy culture in the name of harmonizing cultures.  It is, at best, gross globalist imperialism.  It is, at worst, the Orwellian deconstruction of all societal values and beliefs.

 

Multiculturalism: As A Tool To Divide And Conquer – The Layman’s Primer; By Louis Beam; LouisBeam.com:

 

No nation is born multicultured. Multiculturalism is an unnatural as well as unhealthy condition that can only afflict states in national decline. A multicultural state carries in it’s [sic] geneses the seeds of eventual national destruction.

All multicultural nations will be found to be in a state of political, moral, economic and social decay. Greed and corruption will characterize the government coupled with oppressive measures directed against citizens. Lies and deceit will be stock and trade of media, politicians, and educational institutions. Such are the bellwethers of a multiculturalist advent.

In modern times multiculturalism is instituted from the top down as an elitist ruling class tool used to play one or more racial or ethnic groups against another. The ensuing cultural melee serves the political designs, economic goals and power needs of elitist rulers and their sponsors. This technique was developed by Marxist ideologues who used multiculturalism in Russia to divide and conquer resistance to the institution of a communist state. The end result of their successful takeover was the murder of thirty million humans in the Soviet Union alone. Many more elsewhere.

The same internationalist cabals who sponsored Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin as the multicultural leaders of the Soviet state from their banking houses in New York, similarly sponsor the multicultural leaders of the United States, Canada, and Europe today. An interlocking network of foundations such as Ford and Carnegie, international banking empires such as Rockefeller and Rothschild, and government agencies firmly in their control work in tandem with controlled propaganda outlets such as the New York Times, CBS, and Hollywood, to promote, foster, and institute multiculturalism today. While the examples used in this essay deal primarily with the United States the same process with the same methods is being employed elsewhere. This of itself is prima facie evidence of a cabal which promotes multiculturalism as a tool to achieve its objectives.

Multiculturalism is being used as a hammer to forge the compliant people who will compose the obedient states of the New World Order. As a weapon of post modern political warfare multiculturalism has few equals, which, thus explains its use currently against all of Western Europe, the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Deliberate fragmentation of these nations and the resultant loss of national identity and purpose into politically disharmonious units, serves as a stepping stone to world government. And who will compose that world government? A ruling class consisting of an “economic hierarchy” that replaces the philosophy of the nineteenth century “natural hierarchy.” A force that views countries and the people that live in them first as economic targets to be exploited, and second as military targets to be defeated if they resist.

 

 

Social instability, caused by a steady erosion of standards and values, coupled with a scramble over dwindling economic opportunities by conflicting ethnic groups, produces precisely the alienation and conflict needed to implement a multicultural state. Further, the lack of common standards and values leads to personal disorganization, resulting in unsociable behavior. This is the life support system of a multicultural state. In a word: anomie.

As a political tool multiculturalism has several applications. It is used to prevent a national consensus among the electorate. The confluence of divergent life views, cultures, beliefs, religions, ethnic habits, etc. insures a swirling river of discontent upon which the multiculturalist rides. It is a perfect method of ensuring that there can never in the future be accord, unity, and a common agreed upon destiny among those ruled. Multiculturalism represents a basic form of divide and conquer, to the benefit of corrupt government and its sponsors.

Multiculturalism is likewise a financial tool used to socially and economically level a targeted population. When implemented, it becomes in fact a battle over scarce resources and shrinking economic opportunities, with government weighing in on the side of cheap labour. A continual flow of impoverished workers is insured through immigration (both legal and illegal), who by working for less compensation continually drive wages down. For the vast majority of citizens the standard of living will not increase, but rather constantly decrease.

 

As a general rule:

 

The amount of multiculturalism in any society is directly proportional to the corruption at the top of a political system and inversely proportional to national unity.

This means: multiculturalism will have succeeded in so much as the country has failed.

 

Multiculturalism can further be used as “transitional tool” to take a targeted population from one form of government to another. When a political condition of greed, massive corruption, and diversity of objective is coupled to a social condition of drugs, violence, and discontent, therein exists the perfect environment for governmental change to a system that more closely serves long term interests of ruling elitists. Seeing that both the problem and solution are provided by the same people makes the CIA’s importation of some one hundred billion dollars worth of cocaine and other drugs into the United States understandable. While at the same time explaining FBI, ATF, and other, more secretive federal government agencies involvement in domestic terrorism or its cover-up. Suddenly, that which erroneously was previously thought to be unrelated events show their common thread and purpose.

Within the deleterious milieu of multiculturalism exists the propaganda opportunity for re-education of the people into a more malleable entity. A targeted population will be shaped mentally by new forms of public education in the schools, media indoctrination, and by elitist pronouncements. Thus placed in a crucible of economic necessity and social pressure, once free citizens become despondent masses, adjusting to and accepting fundamentally changing national circumstances as a matter of expedient survival. For the reticent, conformity by force will ensue in the form of legal penalties disguised as ant-drug, anti-terrorism, or anti-hate laws. All of this leading toward what George Orwell so aptly predicted in his book 1984:

 

“Almost certainly we are moving into an age of totalitarian dictatorships. An age in which freedom of thought will be at first a deadly sin and later on a meaningless abstraction.”

A society is being spawned where those with the most unsociable behavior, deviant lifestyle, or personal failures are given the most by government. This is TRUST ME READ ENTIRE ESSAY

 

The Globalism Threat – Socialism’s New World Order; By Jeff Carlson, CFA; TheMarketsWork.com; 2/24/17:

 

 

Globalism is often clad in free trade garb but in fact there is a hindrance of free trade with globalism. Globalism, through its attempt to erase national borders (and identities), applies a broad economic brush to varying problems and economic conditions of differing regions and as a result fails by definition. Globalism tends to exacerbate economic problems rather than fixing them, and hinders free trade by distorting market responses.

Globalism initiates with talk of open borders and free trade but inevitably leads to concentrated government and centralized planning. …

 

 

Although the terms are often used interchangeably, Globalization is NOT the same as Globalism. They are very different things. Globalization is a natural economic outgrowth of trade. Globalism is a political goal – plain and simple.

 

 

Globalism differs from Capitalism in several distinct aspects. Globalism promotes globally centralized control of laws, foreign policy and monetary policy. Unlike Capitalism, Globalism inherently blends rule of law with rule of man. Globalism comes into existence through the ownership of laws. And through the ownership of law, Globalism gains ownership of nations.

 

If you refer back to Gramsci, Alinsky and the Left, you will recall I introduced several concepts – Counter Hegemony, Critical Theory and Gradualism. Antonio Gramsci created the Theory of Cultural Hegemony – the way in which nations use cultural institutions to maintain power in capitalist societies. Gramsci felt that in order to change society, the entire value systems of Societal Institutions must be overturned. This would require the introduction of an entirely new set of values and beliefs – Counter Hegemony. Gradualism – along with Critical Theory – were the processes used to achieve Counter Hegemony. Marxist/Socialist philosophers – led by the Frankfurt School – picked up where Gramsci left off and brought these ideas to America. They refined Gramsci’s Marxist ideas – they reshaped them.

 

 

If Culture is the true source of Capitalism – how do you truly change Culture? You change it by removing the identities of Culture. As Theodor Adorno stated, you create a “genuine liberal” – an individual “free of all groups, including race, family and institutions”. A Global Citizen.

 

The tool used to accomplish this goal? Political Correctness – or “same thinking”. Raymond V. Raehn put it this way; “Political Correctness seeks to impose a uniformity of thought and behavior on all Americans and is therefore totalitarian in nature”. Political Correctness is Cultural Marxism – also known as multiculturalism. Political Correctness is the translation of Marxism from economic to cultural terms. And once you’ve changed the culture you can change the laws.

 

The end game of Political Correctness – its ultimate goal – is Globalism.

 

And it is here we must be careful. For Globalization has opened a pathway to Globalism. This is the very reason the two are so often presented as the same. An economic process – Globalization – has been altered and repackaged to further a goal of societal change. This is why Globalists so often dress Globalization as Globalism. Globalization is required for Globalism to become a reality. But Globalism is NOT a necessary prerequisite for Globalization.

 

 

… Just as Communists first seek to impose Socialism on their way to Communism, so do Globalists seek to turn Globalization into a stepping stone towards Globalism. Their goal is to convince citizens they are one and the same. Using Gradualism.

 

But there is a distinct difference – and an obstacle. Globalization can lead to benefits for all while still preserving the nation-state. Which means the concept of national identity stands firmly in the way of Globalism. In order to maintain national identity you must first maintain self-governance and full sovereignty. Globalism seeks to break national identity by subsuming national laws. Ultimately, preservation of national or sovereign law is the key to preventing Globalism.

 

In 1995, the Commission on Global Governance issued a report titled Our Global Neighborhood. The report advanced the view that nations are interdependent and called for a strengthened United Nations. The Commission made a standard definition of global governance stating that;

 

“Governance is the sum of the many ways individuals and institutions, public and private, manage their common affairs. It is a continuing process through which conflicting or diverse interests may be accommodated and cooperative action may be taken. It includes formal institutions and regimes empowered to enforce compliance, as well as informal arrangements that people and institutions either have agreed to or perceive to be in their interest…It is our firm conclusion that the United Nations must continue to play a central role in global governance.”

 

It was the U.N.’s first real published step towards World Governance. Towards Globalism.

 

 

… Of particular note is the UN’s focus and treatment of Israel. Since the creation of the UN’s Human Rights Council in 2006, there have been 121 condemnations of nations for human rights violations. Of these, 62 condemnations were of Israel. Condemnations for the rest of the world’s nations combined equaled 59.

 

Corruption, fraud and mismanagement in U.N. procurement have been ongoing since the organization’s creation.

 

 

How is “piercing the shell of state sovereignty” accomplished? It is done slowly and incrementally. It is done through division – by undermining society through created rifts. It is accomplished through the application of Political Correctness. Society is slowly fractured into divisions of class, race and gender. Sub-groups are created within these divisions to further enhance societal stress. By lessening national identity the process of usurping national sovereignty becomes easier. There is a reason why George Soros, the self-avowed billionaire globalist, funds 150 different progressive organizations through his Open Society Foundation. Groups like the ACLU, Black Lives Matter, CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations), Human Rights Campaign, La Raza and the Women’s March. More importantly, this is why Globalists are in favor of unlimited immigration – and the national strife and divisions it creates.

 

… THIS MAY SEEM A LONG QUOTE BUT THE ESSAY IS MUCH LONGER AND WORTHY TO BE READ

 

I used a lot of posting space to understand the influence of Leftist Globalist Multiculturalism in the United Nations. The other influence in the UN is from Muslim dominated nations committed to Islamic Thought.

 

A rational person would think or wonder: How in the world can Marxist oriented Globalist Multiculturalism and those committed to Islamic thought be on the same page?

 

The simplistic answer is both concepts seek a global New World Order by dismantling the Old World Order.

 

The Old World Order is currently dominated a Western Christian Heritage that has developed governing institutions related to various forms of Representative Democracy. For clarity: Not absolute Democracy which degenerates into mob rule which is its own form of despotism. At present, the American Republic form of governance is the best paradigm of Representative Democracy.

 

The American Republic is the ideological enemy Globalist Multiculturalism and Islamic Thought.

 

What in the essence of the traditional sovereign American Republic bugs the crap out of Islamic Thought? For brevity’s sake here is a quick (meaning not exhaustive) comparison between Islam and guarantees in the U.S. Constitution courtesy of Bill Federer at WND:

 

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that Congress shall make no law prohibiting the “free exercise” of religion, yet Mohammad said “Whoever changes his Islamic religion, kill him.” (Hadith Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 9, Book 84, No. 57). The Quran also states in Sura 4:89 “Those who reject Islam must be killed. If they turn back (from Islam), take hold of them and kill them wherever you find them.”

 

The First Amendment states Congress shall not abridge “the freedom of speech,” yet Islamic law enforces dhimmi status on non-Muslims, prohibiting them from observing their religious practices publicly, raising their voices during prayer, ringing church bells or say anything considered “insulting to Islam.” Islamic law relegates non-Muslims to “dhimmi” status, where they are not to propagate their customs among Muslims and cannot display a cross, Christmas decorations, or the Star of David.

 

The First Amendment states Congress cannot take away “the right of the people to peaceably assemble,” yet Islamic law states non-Muslims cannot repair places of worship or build new ones, they must allow Muslims to participate in their private meetings, they cannot bring their dead near the graveyards of Muslims or mourn their dead loudly.

 

The First Amendment states Congress cannot take away the right of the people “to petition the Government for a redress of grievances,” yet Islamic law states non-Muslims are not to harbor any hostility towards the Islamic state or give comfort to those who disagree with Islamic government.

 

The Second Amendment states “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed,” yet Islamic law states non-Muslims cannot possess arms, swords or weapons of any kind.

 

The Third Amendment states one cannot be forced to “quarter” someone in their house, yet Islamic law states non-Muslims must entertain and feed for three days any Muslim who wants to stay in their home, and for a longer period if the Muslim falls ill, and they cannot prevent Muslim travelers from staying in their places of worship.

 

The Fourth Amendment guarantees “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures,” yet Islamic law states if a non-Muslim rides on a horse with a saddle and bridle, the horse can be taken away.

 

The Fifth Amendment states that “no person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime … without due process of law,” yet Mohammad said “No Muslim should be killed for killing a Kafir (infidel).” (Hadith Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 9, No. 50).

 

The Sixth Amendment guarantees a “public trial by an impartial jury” and the Seventh Amendment states “the right of trial by jury shall be preserved,” yet Islamic law does not give non-Muslims equal legal standing with Muslims, even prohibiting them from testifying in court against Muslims.

 

The Eighth Amendment states there shall be no “cruel and unusual punishments inflicted,” yet the Quran states: “Cut off the hands of thieves, whether they are male or female, as punishment for what they have done – a deterrent from Allah.” (Sura 5:38) A woman who has been raped is also punished “with a hundred stripes.” (Sura 24:2) Women can be beaten: “If you experience rebellion from the women, you shall first talk to them, then (you may use negative incentives like) deserting them in bed, then you may (as a last alternative) beat them” (Sura 4:34). Honor killings of wives and daughters who have embarrassed their families have been reported by the United Nations in Muslim populations of Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Pakistan, Syria, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Yemen and increasing in Western nations.

 

The 13th Amendment states there shall be no “slavery or involuntary servitude,” yet the Quran accommodates slavery as Mohammad owned slaves.

 

The 14th Amendment guarantees citizens “equal protection of the laws,” yet the Quran does not consider Jews, Christians and other non-Muslims as equal to Muslims before the law. Referring to Jews as “the People of the Book,” Mohammad said: “They are those whom Allah has cursed; who have been under his wrath; some of whom were turned into apes and swine” (Sura 5:60, 7:166, 2:65).

 

The 15th Amendment guarantees “the right of the citizens … to vote shall not be denied … on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude,” yet strict interpretation of Islamic law does not allow voting, as democracy is considered people setting themselves in the place of Allah by making the laws.

 

The 16th Amendment has some similarities with Islamic law, as “Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes from whatever source derived.” Mohammad said “Fight those who believe not in Allah … until they pay the jizya [tax] with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” (Sura 9:29)

 

The 18th Amendment [Blog Editor: Repealed by 21st Amendment] has some similarities with Islamic law, as “the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors … for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.”

 

The 19th Amendment allows women to vote, yet in strict Islamic countries women cannot vote.

 

The 21st Amendment allows for the sale of liquor, yet Islamic law states non-Muslims are not to sell or drink wine and liquor openly. [Bold text by Blog Editor]

 

It is my humble opinion if the Globalist Multiculturalist Left and the Muslim World ended sovereignty nations, eradicated effective Representative Democracy and/or caused the demise of the American Republic; the Globalists and some kind of Muslim coalition would engage in a bloody war for global domination. You could count on genocides from both sides.

 

NOW! To the inspiration of these thoughts leading to global strife with unpredictable winners and losers. The Gatestone Institute has posted some news about how the United Nations intends to “War” on Free Speech at least as America knows it. Many UN speech restrictions have already affected Free Speech in the rest of the so-called Free World.

 

JRH 7/11/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

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

UN Launches All-out War on Free Speech

 

By Judith Bergman

July 10, 2019 at 5:00 am

Gatestone Institute

 

  • In other words, forget everything about the free exchange of ideas: the UN feels that its ‘values’ are being threatened and those who criticize those values must therefore be shut down.

 

  • Naturally, the UN assures everyone that, “Addressing hate speech does not mean limiting or prohibiting freedom of speech. It means keeping hate speech from escalating into something more dangerous, particularly incitement to discrimination, hostility and violence, which is prohibited under international law”.

 

  • Except the UN most definitely seeks to prohibit freedom of speech, especially the kind that challenges the UN’s agendas. This was evident with regard to the UN Global Compact on Migration, in which it was explicitly stated that public funding to “media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants” should be stopped.

 

  • In contrast to the UN Global Migration compact, the UN’s action plan against hate speech doescontain a definition of what the UN considers to be “hate” and it happens to be the broadest and vaguest of definitions possible: “Any kind of communication in speech, writing or behaviour, that attacks or uses pejorative or discriminatory language with reference to a person or a group on the basis of who they are, in other words, based on their religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, colour, descent, gender or other identity factor”. With a definition as broad as this, all speech could be labelled “hate”.

 

  • The new action plan plays straight into the OIC’s decades-long attempts to ban criticism of Islam as ‘hate speech’. In the wake of the launch of Guterres’ action plan, Pakistan has already presented a six-point plan “to address the new manifestations of racism and faith-based hatred, especially Islamophobia” at the United Nations headquarters. The presentation was organized by Pakistan along with Turkey, the Holy See and the UN.

 

In January, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres commissioned “a global plan of action against hate speech and hate crimes on a fast-track basis,” and said that governments and institutions need “to mobilize solutions that respond to people’s fears and anxieties with answers…” One of those answers, Guterres appeared to suggest, is shutting down free speech. Pictured: Antonio Guterres. (Image source: Fiona Goodall/Getty Images)

 

In January, United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, tasked his Special Adviser for the Prevention of Genocide, Adama Dieng, to “present a global plan of action against hate speech and hate crimes on a fast-track basis”. Speaking at a press conference about the UN’s challenges for 2019, Guterres maintained, “The biggest challenge that governments and institutions face today is to show that we care — and to mobilize solutions that respond to people’s fears and anxieties with answers…”

 

One of those answers, Guterres appeared to suggest, is shutting down free speech.

 

“We need to enlist every segment of society in the battle for values that our world faces today – and, in particular, to tackle the rise of hate speech, xenophobia and intolerance. We hear troubling, hateful echoes of eras long past” Guterres said, “Poisonous views are penetrating political debates and polluting the mainstream. Let’s never forget the lessons of the 1930s. Hate speech and hate crimes are direct threats to human rights…”

 

Guterres added, “Words are not enough. We need to be effective in both asserting our universal values and in addressing the root causes of fear, mistrust, anxiety and anger. That is the key to bring people along in defence of those values that are under such grave threat today”.

 

In other words, forget everything about the free exchange of ideas: the UN feels that its ‘values’ are being threatened and those who criticize those values must therefore be shut down. Not only that, but — disingenuously — the UN is comparing dissent from its agendas with the rise of fascism and Nazism in the 1930s.

 

Now the action plan that Guterres spoke of in January is ready. On June 18, Guterres presented the United Nations Strategy and Plan of Action on Hate Speech:

 

“Hate speech is…an attack on tolerance, inclusion, diversity and the very essence of our human rights norms and principles,” Guterres said. He also wrote in an article on the subject, “To those who insist on using fear to divide communities, we must say: diversity is a richness, never a threat…We must never forget, after all, that each of us is an “other” to someone, somewhere”.

 

According to the action plan, “Hate is moving into the mainstream – in liberal democracies and authoritarian systems alike. And with each broken norm, the pillars of our common humanity are weakened”. The UN sees for itself a crucial role: “As a matter of principle, the United Nations must confront hate speech at every turn. Silence can signal indifference to bigotry and intolerance…”.

 

Naturally, the UN assures everyone that, “Addressing hate speech does not mean limiting or prohibiting freedom of speech. It means keeping hate speech from escalating into something more dangerous, particularly incitement to discrimination, hostility and violence, which is prohibited under international law”.

 

Except the UN most definitely seeks to limit freedom of speech, especially the kind that challenges the UN’s agendas. This was evident with regard to the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration in which it was explicitly stated that public funding to “media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants” should be stopped.

 

Whatever constitutes intolerance, xenophobia, racism or discrimination was naturally left undefined, making the provision a convenient catchall for governments who wish to defund media that dissent from current political orthodoxy on migration.[1]

 

In contrast to the UN Global Migration compact, the UN’s action plan against hate speech does contain a definition of what the UN considers to be “hate” and it happens to be the broadest and vaguest of definitions possible:

 

“Any kind of communication in speech, writing or behaviour, that attacks or uses pejorative or discriminatory language with reference to a person or a group on the basis of who they are, in other words, based on their religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, colour, descent, gender or other identity factor”. With a definition as broad as this, all speech could be labelled “hate”.

 

The action plan, “aims to give to the United Nations the room and the resources to address hate speech, which poses a threat to United Nations principles, values and programmes. Measures taken will be in line with international human rights norms and standards, in particular the right to freedom of opinion and expression. The objectives are twofold: Enhance UN efforts to address root causes and drivers of hate speech [and] enable effective UN responses to the impact of hate speech on societies”.

 

The UN makes it clear in the plan that it “will implement actions at global and country level, as well as enhance internal cooperation among relevant UN entities” to fight hate speech. It considers that “Tackling hate speech is the responsibility of all – governments, societies, the private sector” and it envisages “a new generation of digital citizens, empowered to recognize, reject and stand up to hate speech”. What a brave new world.

 

In the plan, the UN sets up a number of areas of priority. Initially, the UN will “need to know more to act effectively” and it will therefore let “relevant UN entities… recognize, monitor, collect data and analyze hate speech trends”. It will also seek to “adopt a common understanding of the root causes and drivers of hate speech in order to take relevant action to best address and/or mitigate its impact”. In addition, the UN will “identify and support actors who challenge hate speech”.

 

UN entities will also “implement human rights-centred measures which aim at countering retaliatory hate speech and escalation of violence” and “promote measures to ensure that the rights of victims are upheld, and their needs addressed, including through advocacy for remedies, access to justice and psychological counselling”.

 

Disturbingly, the UN plans to put pressure directly on media and influence children through education:

 

“The UN system should establish and strengthen partnerships with new and traditional media to address hate speech narratives and promote the values of tolerance, non-discrimination, pluralism, and freedom of opinion and expression” and “take action in formal and informal education to … promote the values and skills of Global Citizenship Education, and enhance Media and Information Literacy”.

 

The UN is acutely aware that it needs to leverage strategic partnerships with an array of global and local, governmental and private actors in order to reach its goal. “The UN should establish/strengthen partnerships with relevant stakeholders, including those working in the tech industry. Most of the meaningful action against hate speech will not be taken by the UN alone, but by governments, regional and multilateral organizations, private companies, media, religious and other civil society actors” the action plan notes. “UN entities,” it adds, “should also engage private sector actors, including social media companies, on steps they can take to support UN principles and action to address and counter hate speech, encouraging partnerships between government, industry and civil society”. The UN also says that, “upon request” it will “provide support to Member States in the field of capacity building and policy development to address hate speech.”

 

The action plan also reveals that the first concrete initiative is already planned. It is an “international conference on Education for Prevention with focus on addressing and countering Hate Speech which would involve Ministers of Education”.

 

The new action plan plays straight into the decades-long attempts of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to ban criticism of Islam. In the wake of the launch of Guterres’ action plan, Pakistan has already presented a six-point plan “to address the new manifestations of racism and faith-based hatred, especially Islamophobia” at the United Nations headquarters. The presentation was organized by Pakistan along with Turkey, the Holy See and the UN.

 

According to news reports, the plan was proposed by Pakistan’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Ambassador Maleeha Lodhi at a session titled “Countering terrorism and other acts of violence based on religion or belief”.

 

“A particularly alarming development is the rise of Islamophobia which represents the recent manifestation of the age-old hatred that spawned anti-Semitism, racism, apartheid and many other forms of discrimination,” the ambassador said in her speech. She added, “My Prime Minister Imran Khan has recently again called for urgent action to counter Islamophobia, which is today the most prevalent expression of racism and hatred against ‘the other'”.

 

“We are fully committed to support the UN’s strategy on hate speech,” said the Pakistani ambassador, “This is a moment for all of us to come together to reverse the tide of hate and bigotry that threatens to undermine social solidarity and peaceful co-existence.”

 

In 2017, Facebook’s Vice President of Public Policy, Joel Kaplan, reportedly agreed to requests from Pakistan’s Interior Minister Nisar Ali Khan, to “remove fake accounts and explicit, hateful and provocative material that incites violence and terrorism” because “the entire Muslim Ummah was greatly disturbed and has serious concerns over the misuse of social media platforms to propagate blasphemous content”.

 

At the UN, Pakistan’s Ambassador Lodhi called for government interventions to fight hate speech, including national legislation, and reportedly “called for framing a more focused strategy to deal with the various expressions of Islamophobia. A ‘whole of government’ and a ‘whole of society’ approach was needed. In this regard, the Pakistani envoy urged the secretary-general to engage with a wide range of actors, including governments, civil society and social media companies to take action and stop social media users being funneled into online sources of radicalization”.

 

The UN’s all-out war on free speech is on.

 

Judith Bergman, a columnist, lawyer and political analyst, is a Distinguished Senior Fellow at Gatestone Institute.

 

NOTES:

 

[1] According to Objective 17 of the UN Global Compact on migration, member states commit to: “Promote independent, objective and quality reporting of media outlets, including internet-based information, including by sensitizing and educating media professionals on migration-related issues and terminology, investing in ethical reporting standards and advertising, and stopping allocation of public funding or material support to media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants, in full respect for the freedom of the media.” [Emphasis added.]

____________________

The UN, Globalist Multiculturalism & Islam One World Despotism

John R. Houk

© July 11, 2019

___________________

UN Launches All-out War on Free Speech

 

© 2019 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute. [Blog Editor: Permission was not acquired to cross post. Upon request the cross post will be removed.]

 

 

How Many More Americans Must Die


It is my humble opinion there are two threats to the culture that has made America great in the past: 1) Leftist transformist ideology abandoning Christian morality and Constitutional Originalism and 2) Islamic intolerant theopolitical supremacist ideology.

 

Justin Smith passionately writes of the Islamic threat to America via the idiotic immigration rules supported by Transformist Leftists.

JRH 12/30/17

Please Support NCCR

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

How Many More Americans Must Die

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 12/28/2017 8:10 PM

 

America cannot allow a dangerous club of Islamic appeasers, apologists and willing accomplices in the federal courts and the ranks of Congress, to stay the course with their constipated logic, or their treason, and refusal to employ common sense regarding Muslim immigration into our country. They have brought a steady flow of Muslims to America, since the first World Trade Center Bombing in 1993, that has been accompanied by a constant, steady stream of Islamic terror attacks, from the 9/11 WTC attacks to Ft Hood, the Boston Bombing and more, and Americans would be well within the Constitution to demand that this club cease sheltering terrorists, terrorist candidates, and future terrorists, these sons of Mohammed.

 

Last January, every Democrat and 22 Republicans in the U.S. Senate, opposed President Trump’s travel ban imposed on terror sponsoring nations. And recently, on December 22nd 2017, the Ninth Circuit Court blocked it for the third time.

 

In November 2017, America witnessed Sayfullo Saipov, an Uzbekistan national and a Muslim, ruthlessly murder eight people on a New York City bike path. This was soon followed on December 11th 2017 by Akayed Ullah, a Bangladeshi national and a Muslim, attempting to detonate a suicide bomb in New York City; it partially exploded and injured five people.

 

How many more Americans must die before Americans stand together and deport all non-citizen Muslims and halt all Muslim immigration?

 

The truth is recognizable and exists for those informed analysts and others capable of cogent thought, regarding Islam. Islamic migration is impossible to fully integrate into American society, and Muslims are not capable of assimilating into Western civilization [HERE & HERE], holistically speaking.

 

Sayyid Qubt, one of the foremost founding fathers of prevailing Islamic thought, stated: “A Muslim has no country except that part of the earth where the Sharia of Allah is established … a Muslim has no nationality except his belief … There is only one place on earth which can be called the home of Islam, and it is that place where the Islamic state is established and the Sharia is the authority and Allah’s limits are observed …” [Similar English translation HERE – “Allah’s” translated as “God’s”].

 

An August 2011 PEW study, entitled ‘Muslim Americans: No Signs of Growth in Alienation or Support in Extremism’, noted that 65 percent of Muslims in America do not think of themselves first as Americans and only second as Muslims. This same study revealed that approximately 567,000 U.S. Muslims support terrorism, as a political tool, to a fair or great degree. Together with this, it is no wonder sixty percent of respondents stated that America would soon witness Islamic terrorism rise in America.

 

Quoting the “prophet” Mohammed from the Hadith: “I charge you with five of what Allah has charged me with: to assemble, to listen, to obey, to immigrate and to wage Jihad (Holy War) for the sake of Allah.”

 

In 1998, speaking before a packed crowd at the Flamingo Palace in Fremont, California, Omar Ahmad, founder of the Council for American-Islamic Relations, stated: “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith but to be dominant …”. His closing words stated that Islam should be the only accepted “religion” on Earth.

 

During a 2015 interview of some local Somali Muslims in Cedar Riverside, Minnesota, several Muslim men told journalist Ami Horowitz that they preferred Sharia law over U.S. law. They also wanted to suppress free speech and any criticism of Islam or the “prophet” Mohammed. One man even told her that it is right to kill anyone who insults the “prophet” Mohammed.

 

Muslims often boast that they love death more than Americans love life, but Muslims really just hate life. Although the number of Muslims willing to blow themselves up in order to murder non-Muslims seems to be small, the number of Muslims willing to condemn these terrorists is even smaller, and many Muslims cheer for the terrorists daily and each time they murder a European, Israeli or American, in this culture that refers to Adolph Hitler as “Islam’s Favorite Infidel“.

 

Hitler- Islam’s Favorite Infidel. Photo by Bosch Fawstin

 

Whether the majority of Muslims are truly “peaceful” or simply dormant, less devout Muslims, or violent fundamentalist Muslims is irrelevant, since nearly every recent terrorist seemed peaceful, until he wasn’t. Objectively good human beings, who identify as Muslim, give Islam a far better face than it deserves, and this creates a false sense of security for many Americans, and it also allows for the growth of a large, stealth jihadi terrorist population, which schemes to Islamicize America and destroy Her Republic through politics, immigration and terrorism. So, we are left a game of Muslim roulette, while our intelligence communities tackle the near impossible task of differentiating between “good Muslims” and those trying to murder us.

 

Every person can follow his own conscience in America, so long as it doesn’t interfere with sane reason or bid him act against the liberty of others. However, Islam, the Koran and the Hadith, where the true meaning of Islam can be found in practice today, as it has been for over 1400 years, embraces and commands the murder of non-Muslims and infidels, censorship, anti-Semitism, pedophilia, misogyny and wife beatings and honor killings. This is evil and the supremacist ideology of Islam sanctions every bit of it.

 

There is nothing in Islam that stays the hand of Muslims seeking to murder non-Muslims and Americans.

 

Five days after two Muslims murdered fourteen people in San Bernardino, on December 2nd 2015, the campaign team for Donald Trump stated, “Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.”

 

On July 6th 2017, President Trump spoke before the Polish people and stated: “While we will always welcome new citizens who share our values and love our people, our borders will always be closed to terrorism and extremism of any kind.”

 

It doesn’t take a genius to “figure out what is going on”, with centuries worth of evidence revealing Islam’s evil modus operandi of conquest and its continuous attacks against the West, and it is past time to close our borders and America to all Muslims. Many will call this “wrong” or “un-American”, because many already suggest that Americans must work harder to coexist with Muslims, who reject the voices of reason. Work harder towards what end? Any time we spend working with a culture that calls for our destruction, we are working towards our own destruction.

 

Too many of America’s leaders, such as National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster, do not understand, or they choose to ignore the fact, that a Muslim Crusade is underway, a war between civilizations and a war of religions, the Muslims call “Holy War”, Jihad. They don’t want to understand that for the Muslims and their Crusader Jihadis, America and the West is a world to conquer and subjugate under Islam.

 

Americans must demand that the current Congress exert its rightful control over policy matters, along with President Trump’s rightful authority, to remove the Court’s jurisdiction regarding immigration matters constitutionally under Article III. If this Congress will not, America must elect new people in 2018 who will.

 

Despite President Trump’s best efforts, today, there still exists the fraudulent mockery promoted by Leftists and Muslim appeasers and apologists, that reveres the Muslim “refugee” and immigrant invaders and slanders the defenders of America, absolves the terrorists and condemns the victims, weeps for the Taliban and curses Americans. In their effort to equate Islam’s “freedom” by way of submission to Allah to America’s real freedom and individual liberty, they essentially compare a tent in the desert to our Capitol Building and the White House.

 

Islamic ideology that devalues human life, through its belief that Paradise awaits those who “kill and are killed” for Allah (Koran 9:111) and calls openly for Israel’s destruction, this is the ideology that makes it impossible for Americans and Muslims to live in peace. This violent, evil ideology of Islam has no place for Americans or non-Muslims or Europeans and Muslims to live together, alongside on another, in peace on an indefinite basis as equals.

 

America is ours, and it cannot be for all, so long as billions of people live, who do not love freedom and constitutional governance, like most Americans do. We must see the enemy clearly in this war against Islam, since America’s survival depends on the will of Her people to prevail over Islam. We must gather the will to demand that America’s borders and citizens are protected, while we fight to defend our traditions, principles and virtues at any cost, preserving our culture and way of life in the face of those who would subvert and destroy it. Our American way of life is worth defending with our lives.

 

By Justin O. Smith

_________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Any text enclosed by brackets and all source links are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

 

Victory at All Costs


In Tolerance Name Importing Intolerance

Yesterday I posted a video that exposes that Muslim refugees are flooding into Europe without appreciation of their non-Muslim hosts violating the laws of the land with rapes, theft and murder and more. Today I’m posting a good follow-up with a great submission by Justin Smith that has the message that if the same kind of Muslims going to Europe come to America expect Islamic terrorism in one form or another.

 

JRH 4/3/16

Please Support NCCR

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

Victory at All Costs

Collect the Dead

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent: 4/2/2016 1:57 PM

 

“I’m sick of preening celebrities who tell me to ‘PrayForTheWorld’ and celebrate diversity while indiscriminate floods of Muslim refugees across Europe and America corrode the pillars of peace and freedom.” — Michelle Malkin, March 23rd, 2016

 

Four murdered Americans among the thirty-five victims in Brussels and seventy-one murdered Christians in Lahore, mostly women and children, blown apart over the Easter Weekend, are representative of the true face of Islam and the severe existential security threat Islam and Muslims pose to America, and Americans would be deluding themselves by thinking otherwise. This is a threat that will only be made worse through the delay of common sense action and the immediate halt of Muslim immigration into our country.

 

Americans cannot place any hopes on the elusive “peaceful” and “moderate” Muslims. While 70% of the followers of traditional Islam have been deemed “moderate” by Leftist politicians and intelligentsia, far too often, the reality has shown us otherwise, and once described “moderates” are found in the ranks of “radicals”, usually after another bloody terrorist attack and too late to do anything but collect the wounded, maimed and dead.

 

If, as stated by a few U.S. Senators, it is an insult to Muslims to advocate tracking Muslim refugees already here and to halt Muslim immigration for any period of time, then I suggest that Muslims stop murdering Americans. And for those who tell us to view the Muslim graves at Arlington, I tell them, that for each headstone, there are a hundred more Muslims who would happily betray America and see Her destroyed.

 

Ali Mohammed, top aide to Osama Bin Laden, immigrated to the U.S. in the 1980s from Egypt. He became a U.S. Army sergeant and an instructor at the JFK Special Operations Warfare School at Ft. Bragg. Then Mohammed went on to smuggle suspected terrorists into the U.S. through Vancouver, Canada. And, in his greatest betrayal of this generous America which offered him so much, Mohammed trained El Sayyid Nosair and Mahmud Abuhalima, who took part in the 1993 World Trade Center Bombing.

 

Brussels bombers Ibrahim and Khalid Bakraoui‘s plot to force a nuclear scientist to make a dirty nuclear bomb, brings to mind the New Jersey Al Qaeda member Sharif Mobley, currently serving time on terrorism charges. Mobley worked in several nuclear plants in Salem County, NJ and he had passed multiple federal background checks through 2008.

 

Muslims are the only people committing global wholesale murder in the name of Islam. They are the only people who openly proclaim their desire to kill Jews and Westerners, and Muslims are the only people vowing to conquer the world: These facts are not irrelevant to America’s immigration policy.

 

If every single Muslim grievance against the West and America were addressed and assuaged today, tomorrow a hundred more would be posited by the leaders of Islam, simply because we exist and are not Muslim. Anyone saying “we cannot afford to alienate” Muslims act as though it’s America’s fault that Muslim’s attack us. Offend the Muslim world or not, Islam will always manufacture one more reason to attack America.

 

Over the last four decades, Shamim Siddiqqi [An author of a treatise to Islamize West], leader of the Islamic Circle of North America, has advocated subverting our republic by linking Islamist front groups to racial politics. During the 2015 joint conference of the Muslim American Society, an overt arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, and the ICNA, Khalilah Sabra, MAS leader, openly called for “revolution”, as she discussed Muslim support for Black Lives Matter. Drawing parallels between the U.S. and the Middle East and events leading to the Muslim Brotherhood-led Arab Spring revolutions, Sabra suggested, “We are the community that staged a revolution across the world; if we can do that, why can’t we have that revolution in America?”

 

Any Muslim calling for the reform of Islam, in the Western sense of the meaning of the word “reform”, is considered a heretic. However, an infinitesimal number of liberal thinking secular Muslims, such as Irshad Manji, Dr. Zuhdi Jasser and Asra Nomani, are attempting to counter the integral violent doctrines of Islam and reform Islam. But any successes will be next to impossible to achieve, due to Islamic texts and the competing theological hierarchies of Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt. And compounding the difficulty of their task, Saudi Arabia and Egypt are still exporting the virulent Wahhabi brand of Islam to 2000 mosques across America: No one can reasonably expect Islam to achieve reformation in this lifetime or the next.

 

Perhaps millions of Muslims are already living peacefully with the rest of the world, the non-Muslims, the Christians, the infidels, as the Progressives and Muslim apologists would have us believe, but on the whole, I have yet to see it anywhere — not even in Jordan where King Abdullah has called for “reform” and yet still allows the persecution of Jordan’s Christian minority to persist. And in the meantime, their “religion of peace” is awash in the blood of Americans, Europeans, Yazidis and Christians and their fellow Muslims.

 

Where is the historical evidence of a mainstream “moderate” Islam or even Islam “the religion of peace” after Islam’s first ten years?

 

Isn’t it reasonable for Americans to decide who is allowed into our country? Isn’t it logical to determine that banning the immigration of Muslim “refugees” will prevent many terrorists from entering America too?

 

Americans have had enough of placing memorial flowers on the graves of their loved ones, who were murdered by Muslims seeking to impose Islam in the name of Allah, and as Progressives and Obama lecture the rest of America on retaining our “American values” it becomes obvious their “values” are a perversion of everything “American”. Our American values are based on Western and Judeo-Christian principles, not Middle Eastern values or oppressive teachings of the Koran, whether Muslims like it or not; and resisting a government utopian policy of open borders and coexistence that allows hundreds of thousands of Muslims to enter America and commit mass murder is not a “hate-crime.” It is our duty to prevent the murder of innocent civilians in America and to defend America and not let Her perish: Here and abroad — We Must Fight or Die.

 

By Justin O. Smith

__________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Text enclosed by brackets are by the Editor. All links are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

Religious Bigotry


Blood Stained Pakistan Flag

Shamim Masih writes about pseudo-peace negotiations between the Islamic Terrorist organization Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) – which is outlawed in Pakistan – and Pakistan’s recognized legitimate political parties. Shamim finishes by recognizing the propaganda absurdity of a seminar that took place sponsored by the Asian Study Group promoting the concept that Islam is a peaceful and tolerant of other (i.e. non-Muslim) religions. Here is the quote put out by the Pakistan event that Shamim responds to:

 

“Many mistakenly believe that Islam does not tolerate the existence of other religions. Islam recognizes that there are a plurality of religions on this earth, and gives the right to individuals to choose the path which they believe to be true. They gave the examples from the life of their Prophet (PBUH) epitomize the verse of the Quran which promotes religious tolerance and sets the guideline for Muslims’ interaction with people of other faiths.”

 

 

JRH 2/6/14

Please Support NCCR

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

Religious Bigotry

 

By Shamim Masih

Sent: 2/4/2014 7:17 PM

 

ISLAMABAD: Because of my internet problem, I couldn’t release however this matter forced me personally to do this. We are building not so much a multi-racial society or a multi-cultural society, we are building separate societies which really don’t have much to do with other. Equipped with just enough religion to hate those with another faith but not enough to love their coreligionists – Pakistanis have mostly turned their backs on religious atrocities. Religion is not to be, and was never, forced upon an individual against their own will.  Unfortunately Pakistan is facing terrorism and some Islamic fundamentalists want to impose their rigid rituals and rights and the Pakistani government is in a state of confusion whether to face them or to face terrorism. In this turmoil, government is again wasting time to negotiate with them, knowingly that this process will bring no solid result.

 

Taliban peacekeeping troops and government of Pakistan negotiators are meeting to devise a strategy for formally kick-starting a much-awaited dialogue process. The Taliban had nominated five prominent figures – Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) [Alternative PTI profile] Chairman Imran Khan, Jamiat Ullma-e-Islam (JUI-S) chief Maulana Sami ul Haq, Jamaat-e-Islamai (JI) leader Prof. Mohammad Ibrahim, JUI-F politician Mufti Kifayat ullah and Lal Masjid prayer leader Maulana Abdul Aziz to act as intermediaries between them and the government’s negotiating team. But JUI and PTI – the two avid supporters of peace talks wished the proposed dialogue luck and excused themselves from the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan’s intermediary committee. And now the Taliban will be nominate Insar Abbasi and Oriay Maqbool Jan in the squad.

 

Fawad Chaudhry, one of the PPP [Pakistan Peoples Party (Alternative PPP profile)] political leaders has demanded that people nominated by Taliban for negotiations should be arrested and investigated for their links with terrorists. I support his stance because once these people are living in the country and if they are representing the militant groups and will negotiate on their behalf it means that they are one of them either in spirit or practice.

 

Asian Study Group, in collaboration with Kuch Khass, arranged a multimedia presentation on Religious Tolerance & Islam. They believe that – “Many mistakenly believe that Islam does not tolerate the existence of other religions. Islam recognizes that there are a plurality of religions on this earth, and gives the right to individuals to choose the path which they believe to be true. They gave the examples from the life of their Prophet (PBUH) epitomize the verse of the Quran which promotes religious tolerance and sets the guideline for Muslims’ interaction with people of other faiths.”

 

I am not a religious scholar but I know about my faith and very well aware of it as well. I wanted them to ask, which Sharia you wanted to impose, either the Taliban design or what about the Sharia which is already imposed in the constitution of Pakistan or both? I feel it is already scripted and its nut shell is; both groups will sit and negotiate and design some restrictions to be imposed on margined position in the society like women and religious minorities. It may demand to tighten the rope and neck of the minorities likely poised to make the death penalty compulsory for blasphemy. Earlier Pakistan faced a looming deadline to either comply with a court ruling to amend the country’s penal code to make the death penalty the only lawful punishment for blasphemy or to appeal the order. It may restrict religious freedom or freedom of expression. It is already the practice that religious minorities are not leading a healthy life in this arena. I am afraid that Pakistani Christians are already living a miserable life and do not have the right to be heard. If the government shot the bullet putting on Taliban shoulders, what will be Christian future in this country?

 

Be Blessed,

Shamim Masih

___________________________

Edited by John R. Houk.

All explanatory links provided by the Editor. Brackets indicate Editor Additions to the text.

 

© Shamim Masih

Special Correspondents

Daily Khabrian (PakBiz.com description) & Channel – 5

Human Rights Activist

 

Snapshot of Human Rights Activism from 2011

Christian Rights Activist
Freelance Journalist 

Secretary General

REAP

Shamim Masih’s Donate/Support info:

 

Editor: For Americans especially, I have discovered the best way to donate to Shamim Masih is via Western Union sending to a Western Union agent in Islamabad.

 

FOR USD TRANSFER.
Intermediary Bank:                         MASHREQ BANK, NEW YORK
Intermediary Bank SWIFT BIC:         MSHQUS33
Beneficiary Bank:                         JS BANK LIMITED
Beneficiary Bank SWIFT BIC:                 JSBLPKKA
Bank A/c # at Intermediary bank:         70008227
Title Of a/c                                Shamim Masih
Beneficiary Account Number:                 405527

Top of Form

IBAN #                                        pk80jsbl9530000000405227

FOR GBP TRANSFER.
Intermediary Bank:                         MASHREQ BANK, LONDON
Intermediary Bank SWIFT BIC:         MSHQGB2L
Beneficiary Bank:                         JS BANK LIMITED
Beneficiary Bank SWIFT BIC:                 JSBLPKKA
Bank A/c # at Intermediary bank:         00010855
Title Of a/c                                Shamim Masih
Beneficiary Account Number:                 405527
IBAN #                                        pk80jsbl9530000000405227

FOR EURO TRANSFER.
Intermediary Bank:                         MASHREQ BANK, LONDON
Intermediary Bank SWIFT BIC:         MSHQGB2L
Beneficiary Bank:                         JS BANK LIMITED
Beneficiary Bank SWIFT BIC:                 JSBLPKKA
Bank A/c # at Intermediary bank:         10847
Title Of a/c                                Shamim Masih
Beneficiary Account Number:                 405527
IBAN #                                        pk80jsbl9530000000405227

Humor-gate in Manchester


Muslims Walking on U.S. Flag

I follow Bill Warner’s blog Political Islam. Just as the blog’s name suggests theme is exposing Islam as a religion that is more ideologically political than it is theologically religious. It is this reality that Muslim Clerics and Mullahs do not want you the kafir (Islam for non-Muslim) to know about. This is especially the case in America in our First Amendment protects Religious Freedom. If Americans ever caught on that Islam is a basically a political ideology of Supremacist Hegemonic Domination, Muslims that are purist (aka Radical Islam or Islamist or Salafist) realize that American voters would begin voting for Congressmen and Senators to protect the Constitution from Political Islam.

 

Consider this an introduction to Bill Warner’s post “Humor-gate in Manchester”.

 

JRH 6/8/13

Please Support NCCR

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

Humor-gate in Manchester

 

By Bill Warner

June 6, 2013

Political Islam

 

On June 4 the FBI and DOJ (Department of Justice) appeared at a meeting called by AMAC (American Muslim Advisory Council — Muslim Brotherhood) in Manchester, TN. The meeting was due to a joke posted by a Coffee County Commissioner on Face Book. The DOJ Assistant Attorney General said in a newspaper interview that the joke might be classified as hate speech and a crime. Below is a political leaflet handed out to the over a thousand attendees at the meeting. (A note: there are only 10,000 people who live in Manchester, TN)

This event which uses the full Federal powers of the corrupt Department of Justice to suppress free speech and shape domestic politics will not be the last. The DOJ is now a full partner with the Muslim Brotherhood.

___________________

Fast and Furious, Benghazi-gate, DOJ Reporter-gate,
IRS Suppression of Free Speech and now—

 

Humor-gate, Free Speech Intimidation in Manchester TN

 

Why has Obama shaped law enforcement into agencies of intimidation of our political speech? It all starts with the OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation) in the UN with Resolution 16/18 that criminalizes any criticism of Islam since it blasphemes Islam. Blasphemy punishment is pure Sharia law. There is NO free speech in Islam, since it does not allow any criticism of Islam. Hillary Clinton, as Secretary of State, worked for 3 days in NY with the OIC to find a way to accommodate Islamic blasphemy and slander laws in America. Tonight is the fruit of that labor.

Government agencies are trained about Islam according to Muslim Brotherhood standards. They are taught that Islam is a religion and that Muslims are just like everybody else. It is forbidden to discuss Islam as a political system. Language is controlled and jihad doctrine cannot be used in the analysis of Islamic violence.

Look at tonight’s event. The AMAC (American Muslim Advisory Council) is a political group and this meeting is political, yet the government gives all Islamic politics the cover of religion. Religious Islam disguises political Islam and tries to enforce Sharia law.

You will be told tonight that the problem with Muslims in America is how they are victims of bigoted oppression. Victimhood is a feature of Islam. Mohammed was portrayed as a victim, without any fault. Therefore, Islam is without fault and Muslims are victims. As an example, on 9/11 Muslims were the real victims, because it made some Americans criticize Muslims and Islam.

The movie shown here tonight, Welcome to Shelbyville, is pure propaganda. Why don’t they show the fact-based film, Losing Our Sons? According to our government, a joke about Muslims is a more serious problem than Carlos Bledsoe (Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad) attempting to assassinate a rabbi here in Tennessee and his murder of our military in Arkansas. Did you know that there are no jokes about Mohammed in 1400 years? Political humor such as the Mohammed cartoons can result in riots and death. In America we can tell jokes such as Jesus, Tiger Woods and Moses are playing golf…. But, can we tell a joke about Mohammed and Aisha playing golf…? Not if it offends Muslims.

When Coffee County Commissioner Barry West posted his political satire on Face Book he found out that Islam never changes. Humor about anything Islamic has been forbidden by Sharia law for 1400 years, and it will not be tolerated now. The dhimmis (Kafirs, non-Muslims, who serve Islam) rush forward to placate a humorless Islam. This is all about the Islamists making a molehill out of a mountain.

This night is an example of how Obama’s Federal government is suppressing critical thought and forcing us to submit to an Orwellian authority. Facts are bigotry. Truth is hate.

______________________

Bill Warner, Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam

 

copyright (c) CBSX, LLC, politicalislam.com
Use as needed, just give credit and do not edit.

www.politicalislam.com

 

Become Aware of Islamic Hypocrisy


Behead - Insult - Islam & Mo

John R. Houk

© September 28, 2012

 

I am a little irked by the acceptance of Islamic Supremacism by the West, especially freedom conscious America. Was the Mohammed Movie made in bad taste? Absolutely! However, the way non-Muslims are treated in Muslim dominated nations is beyond bad taste. The treatment of non-Muslims and ex-Muslims is outrageous! AND YET Freedom Conscious Americans do not display an extreme displeasure when Christians, Jews, Hindus, atheists, those that apostasize from Islam and so on whatever religion are violently abused, tortured and/or killed simply because it is offensive to Islamic Sharia Law.

 

Yet Muslim Apologists, Clerics and even Leftists typically find an excuse for Muslim perpetrated violence and accept that Islam was insulted. This is a double standard that I will no longer accept!

 

I will risk being labeled in the pejorative sense as being a bigoted Islamophobe and rail against pervading hypocrisy Muslims demand we non-Muslims (in my case a Christian) accept.

 

In the spirit of non-acceptance below is the cross posting of three counterjihad exposés that highlights the insidious nature of Islam toward non-Muslims. There will be three titles:

 

1)     US Imam: ‘Disregard First Amendment’ Replace With Sharia

 

2)     Muhammad: Islam’s Dirty Little Secret

 

3)     PA hypocrisy: Don’t defame religion (unless it’s Judaism)

 

JRH 9/28/12

Please Support NCCR

LED BY EVIL…DESTROYED BY APATHY


OIC Erasing Free Speech toon

Danny Jeffrey wrote more detail about Kamal Saleem in promoting an awareness of the dark side of Islam while preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Incidentally exposing the dark side of Islam and sharing the Gospel of Jesus Christ are both offensive to Islam. A kafir exposing Islamic Supremacism and talk about the ugly actions Mohammed is an offense that sends Muslims into apoplectic spasms of vengeful against Americans and Jews. Since sharing the Gospel of Jesus Christ means telling people that Jesus was Crucified on a Cross until death, was buried and arose from the dead to bodily life reclaiming the Divine attributes He emptied to be born a human with both the nature of God and the nature of a human thus the Son of the Living God paid the price of death that a believing humanity can choose life ALSO drives Muslims into apoplectic spasms.

 

Why?

 

It is because Muslims DO NOT believe in any of the Gospel Message of Christ. Mohammed demoted Jesus the Christ to a mere human that did not die on the Cross. Sharing the Gospel Message in Muslim dominated nations is blasphemy because the Christ-act of Redemption is an insult to Mohammed. The Gospel makes Mohammed a liar.

 

Therein lay the hypocrisy of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in sponsoring the Defamation of Religions and the allegedly watered down version that is the U.N. Resolution 16/18. The OIC ONLY has Islam in mind. Muslims do not understand that Islamic Supremacism and Sharia prohibitions against public display of Christianity. You have got to know that is insulting to Christians. Thus the U.N. should be railing on the OIC nations about persecuting Christians for their faith.

 

And this is where Danny Jeffrey’s compelling thoughts come in.

 

JRH 9/18/12

Please Support NCCR

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

LED BY EVIL…DESTROYED BY APATHY

 

By Danny Jeffrey

September 16, 2012

Freedom Rings 1776

 

I woke up at 4:30 this morning, got a glass of iced tea and turned on my computer. It will be a while before I go back to sleep for I watched a fifteen minute video that I must write about. It was inspiring, and as I watch my beloved nation disintegrate I take inspiration anywhere I can find it.

The video in question had been posted by a Facebook friend and I decided to give it a try. It was of a repentant Islamic terrorist who loyally served Allah in his homeland and was so adept and devoted that he was sent to America as an infiltrator joining in the stealth Jihad that is bringing America to its knees. After arriving here he got to know America, its people, and the Christian faith, which he adopted and in doing so became a great American Patriot.

To be perfectly honest I almost turned the video off after a minute or two and would have had it not been so highly recommended  by one I admire tremendously. There before me I saw what many refer to as a “Bible Thumper”, but I was to soon learn that there is far more to this man than that. The following is the comment about the video that I left for my friend and others to read:

“I regard myself as spiritual but not religious. This man is extremely religious; we differ only on that premise, but if it is religion that has turned him into a great American patriot then I gladly grant him his belief and welcome him to our nation as my equal. He brought me to tears with his words and his salute to our military and again when he warned America that Hillary Clinton is in the process of implementing Resolution 16/18. The tears on this topic were for the stupid people of this nation who have no idea what Resolution 16/18 is.


It strikes me as odd how a man raised to destroy America can come to love this nation, lead in the fight to protect it, be prepared to die for it, and out patriot our “Patriots” who will not even take the time to read about what is happening to this crumbling country. So many feel that they are showing patriotism by posting patriotic pictures with catchy slogans and have no idea at all about the horrid reality we face. This man is truly awake, while half of America is brain dead, and most who claim to be awake are only sleep walking.


My friend, I welcome you to America. Love that flag as I do and I shall proudly stand and die beside you in its defense.”

This is the video.

 

There is one thing that Mister Saleem mentioned in the video that troubles me. He mentioned that Islam has two basic flag colors … Black and white, black for war, white for peace. Hillary Clinton is photographed above proudly standing beside the flag of Pakistan which is typically green with a white crescent and star. Hillary’s outfit is green, that flag is not. It is black!

Today the hottest news and the latest smoke screen has to do with the Islamic attacks on our embassies. Thanks to the internet, it has now been revealed that those attacks were well planned in advance and in response to one of our drones taking out a terrorist leader and that we had intel at least two days in advance that our embassies were to be attacked, and no preparations for additional security was initiated. That sounds suspicious and many are asking why the State Department would intentionally allow American lives to be needlessly sacrificed and the only reason they can surmise is bureaucratic incompetence.

Believe me, those people are not incompetent, but it is a good smoke screen to hide behind as their agenda is implemented. Kamal Saleem, in the video above, spelled out that agenda when he warned that somewhere between January and March, Resolution 16/18 will be brought to bear against any who dare speak ill of Islam. I have written more extensively on this resolution in my The New Gate Keepers series but a brief description of 16/18 is that it will make it illegal for anyone to say anything disrespectful about Allah or Islam, and that includes telling the absolute truth about this Cult of Death, or even quoting passages from the Qur’an that indicate what a danger it presents to the world.(More on this in The New Gate Keepers 3.0 and The New Gate Keepers 6.0)

As to their incompetence, which I deny, and their smoke screen, which I can see through: The Embassy attacks are blamed on the moronic and amateurish video put together a Coptic Christian from Egypt, now living in the U.S. and on parole following prison time for fraud. Someone should take him behind the woodshed and teach him a lesson in manners but the federal government has no right to attack his First Amendment rights, yet they do, and for their own reasons.

I am certain that you have noticed that every time there is a well publicized shooting the leftists jump into the fray advocating gun control. Our Islam supporting bureaucrats are doing the same thing using this video as an excuse to advance the goals of Resolution 16/18 and pass laws forbidding “Hate Speech” against Islam. Now, anyone who superficially reads the terms of this resolution will read that it prohibits defamation of “Religion”, but the term “Religion” is a baited trap for the unwary. To the Western mind, “Religion” is a broad all encompassing term and they would see no discrimination in the wording of that accord.

 

Oh, but there is a wicked web involved in these accords. In earlier accords/treaties Islam has put forth the foundation that Islam is the only true religion and we have signed on. Therefore 16/18 would prohibit our mentioning Islam while still allowing Islam to spread their religious beliefs, such as you see in the adjoining photo, without violating the terms of resolution 16/18, which is endorsed by the U.N., Hillary Clinton, Barrack Obama, the leaders of the Democratic Party and most of the GOP.

My friends, we are outnumbered, surrounded, infiltrated, and almost certain to be outvoted in November, but we have one advantage that they have not been able to take away. We are not outgunned.

Danny

 

Suggested Reading…

The New Gate Keepers Compilation

In The Hour Of Need

Obama Actually Want Israel To Attack Iran

______________________________

About Danny Jeffrey:

 

I’m sixty seven and since Ronald Reagan left office I have watched my country slowly deteriorate as freedoms are lost and the value of our currency dwindles. This has been a slow but steady decline until Barrack Obama entered the White House. I will not refer to this man as President. That is a job that deserves respect and he has earned none at all. I am convinced that were it not for the Tea Party stirring up the public we would now be living under a total dictatorship. He seeks only power and has no loyalty at all to the United States, and as long as he is in office I shall write to any who will read and speak of what he is and what he is doing to this country.