The Glazov Gang Looks at Ilhan Omar


Via FrontPageMag

 

John R. Houk

© September 3, 2019

 

The FrontPageMag email alert for 9/3/19 has among its links a title linked to The Glazov Gang video: “Video: Ilhan’s Adultery? A Stoning Offense?

 

The FPM page also has a Glazov Gang 6-part series on Ilhan Omar. The titles on the page include:

 

  • Part I: Ilhan Omar’s Sharia Hate and Deception.

 

  • Part 2: In Defense of Judge Jeanine.

 

  • Part 3:  Omar Urges Release of Brotherhood Leader.

 

  • Part 4: Omar Hides 9/11 and Lies About CAIR.

 

  • Part 5: Seth Meyers’ Disgraceful Excuses for Ilhan Omar.

 

  • Part 6: Tlaib and Omar: The Eternal Cry-Bullies.

 

You can watch each of these Glazov Gang exposes on the FrontPageMag page.

 

BUT it is the title video I am interested in because it relates to my post “Ilhan Omar Adulteress & Probable Criminal” from 8/28/19.

 

So here is the Youtube page of the FPM post of The Glazov Gang looking into Omar, he promotion of Sharia Law and what Sharia says should happen relating to adultery:

 

VIDEO: Glazov: Ilhan’s Adultery? A Stoning Offense?

 

 

Posted by The Glazov Gang

Published on Aug 30, 2019

 

Please support The Glazov Gang because we are a fan-generated show and need your help to keep going. Make a contribution or set up a monthly pledge. Thank you! PayPal: https://www.paypal.me/Glazovgang

 

Follow Us Here:

Site: http://jamieglazov.com  

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang  

TWITTER: https://twitter.com/JamieGlazov  

YOUTUBE: https://www.youtube.com/user/TheFMPMG

 

JRH 9/3/19

Your generosity is always appreciated: 

Please Support NCCR

Support this Blog HERE. Or support by getting in 

the Coffee from home business – OR just buy some healthy coffee.

Fox Rebukes Pirro – Viewers Should Rebuke Fox


John R. Houk
© March 12, 2019

 

Jeanine Pirro condemned Rep Ilhan Omar’s antisemitism on her Saturday (3/9/19) show on Fox News then stated the obvious:

 

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

 

Pirro’s Fox News employers actually publicly rebuked her as if Pirro said something untrue or provocative. If it’s the truth it can’t be provocative!

 

Fox News is still the most Conservative outlet on television or shows featuring Jeanine Pirro, Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, Laura Ingraham, et al; would not be on TV. Nevertheless, Fox News has openly and disappointingly moved more and more Left-ward.

 

Robert Spencer has written a well deserved rebuke on Fox News in defense of Judge Jeanine. The Gateway Pundit exposes the specific Fox News Producer rebuked Judge Jeanine. Can you guess by the Producer’s name why she heaped grief on Pirro? The name: Hufsa Kamal

Perhaps Fox viewers should send their own mass rebuke to Fox News!?

 

Fox Contact Info:

 

  • 1 (888) 369-4762 (Customer Service according to Google)

 

 

 

 

  • Good old fashioned snail-mail:

 

Fox News Viewer Services

1211 Ave of the Americas

New York, NY 10036

 

JRH 3/12/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

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

FOX CONDEMNS PIRRO FOR ASKING IF OMAR IS PRO-SHARIA

The fair and balanced network is now as unfair and unbalanced as the rest of them.

 

Jeanine Pirro — Ilhan Omar

 

By Robert Spencer

March 12, 2019

FrontPageMag

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Sharia also mandates that women cover their heads:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

++++++++++++

Muslim FOX News Producer Who Called Out Judge Jeanine has Twitter Account Littered with Vile Attacks on Conservatives

 

By Jim Hoft

March 12, 2019

The Gateway Pundit

 

On Sunday FOX News “strongly condemned” Judge Jeanine Pirro for asking viewers if Rep. Ilhan Omar’s hijab means she follows Sharia Law.

 

Judge Jeanine attacked anti-Semite Ilhan Omar on Saturday and asked if her hijab means she’s against the Constitution.

 

 

Fox News Channel issued an official statement on Sunday: “We strongly condemn Jeanine Pirro’s comments about Rep. Ilhan Omar. They do not reflect those of the network and we have addressed the matter with her directly.”

 

Hufsa Kamal Tweet Screen Capture

 

FOX News released the statement after FOX producer Hufsa Kamal, a Pakistani-American, tweeted her disgust against Judge Jeanine Pirro on Sunday.

 

Mufsa [sic] Kamal tweeted:

 

@JudgeJeanine can you stop spreading this false narrative that somehow Muslims hate America or women who wear a hijab aren’t American enough? You have Muslims working at the same network you do, including myself. K thx. https://t.co/ZfKhRhlvM3

— Hufsa Kamal (@hufkat) March 10, 2019

 

Mufsa’s [sic] remarks made it into a report on The Hill. Mufsa [sic] inserted herself into the story.

 

Now it appears Hufsa Kamal, who is a producer for Bret Baier on FOX News, has a long history of vicious attacks on conservatives.

Hufsa has attacked Michelle Malkin, Candace Owens, Dan Bongino and Charlie Kirk.

 

Series of Hufsa Kamal Tweets Screen Capture

 

Kid Rock-Kevin Kirby-Hufsa Kamal Tweets Screen Capture

 

Ben Florence-Mediate-Hufsa Kamal Tweets Screen Capture

 

Hufsa Kamal made her account private on Monday

 

Hufsa Kamal Tweet Account Protected Screen Capture

_______________________

Fox Rebukes Pirro – Viewers Should Rebuke Fox

John R. Houk
© March 12, 2019

____________________

FOX CONDEMNS PIRRO FOR ASKING IF OMAR IS PRO-SHARIA

 

Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He is author of the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad. His new book is The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS. Follow him on Twitter here. Like him on Facebook here.

 

© COPYRIGHT 2019, FRONTPAGEMAG.COM

___________________

Muslim FOX News Producer Who Called Out Judge Jeanine has Twitter Account Littered with Vile Attacks on Conservatives

 

© 2019 The Gateway Pundit – All Rights Reserved.

 

The History of Jihad review by Dale Brown


Hat tip to apologiamixer at G+ and Youtube, I found this review of Robert Spencer’s newest book to date, “The History of Jihad: From Muhammad to ISIS”. I am currently reading this well sourced book on the reality of Islam in history.

 

JRH 10/29/18

In this current state of media censorship & defunding, consider chipping in a few bucks for enjoying (or even despising yet read) this Blog.

Please Support NCCR

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

VIDEO: The History of Jihad review by Dale Brown


apologiamixer

Published on Oct 26, 2018

 

Robert Spencer’s book The History of Jihad, from Muhammad to ISIS, a review by Dale Brown

 

Censorship/Defunding MUST CEASE!


John R. Houk

© August 25, 2018

Unless you’ve been living under a rock you are probably aware the wicked Left has been trying to mute Conservatives and Counterjihadists for some time via censorship and cutting off revenue streams.

 

I have posted on this effort to mute Conservatives several times. Here are some of the most recent titles:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Robert Spencer Censored

 

Now I am discovering the attack is pouncing on Counterjihad writer Robert Spencer. These are the platforms banning Robert Spencer:

 

Patreon

 

Mastercard has reportedly forced funding platform Patreon to kick conservative author and “Jihad Watch” owner Robert Spencer off its site.

 

“My name is April and I’m on the Trust & Safety team here at Patreon. I’ve been notified by Mastercard that we must remove your account from Patreon, effective immediately,” wrote Patreon in an email to Spencer. “Mastercard has a stricter set of rules and regulations than Patreon, and they reserve the right to not offer their services to accounts of their choosing. This is in line with their terms of service, which means it’s something we have to comply by.”

 

GoFundMe

 

After Patreon banned me without explanation, I set up a GoFundMe account, with the same goal in view of constructing a studio for Jihad Watch videos, and quickly raised over $3,000. …

 

 

But today, I got this:

 

Hi Robert,

We’re sorry, but we have canceled your 08/21 withdrawal of $3,299.42 from WePay Payments.

The funds from this withdrawal have been added back to your balance.

 

I also got multiple notices from GoFundMe; each informed me that a particular donation to me from a particular person had been refunded.

 

When I asked for a reason why they had canceled my withdrawal and were refunding all the donations to me, they did not, of course, answer.

 

MasterCard and Visa

 

[David Horowitz message to Robert Spencer]

 

Dear Robert,

 

We’re under attack by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC)…

For years, the SPLC has labeled the Freedom Center a hate group and tried to get organizations like Amazon, Facebook and Twitter to ban us and silence our message.

 

Yesterday, SPLC finally convinced MasterCard and Visa to cut us off. Now we can’t process donations from any major credit card companies.

 

In fact, if you received Robert Spencer’s e-mail last night, you may have noticed your donation was DENIED.

 

The pattern is quite obvious. If the Left can’t outright censor Conservatives and Counterjihadist websites, the plan is to starve the finances until there is no resource to operate.

 

THIS MUST CEASE!

 

Below is the Spencer email flowed by a Jihad Watch article on the situation by Christine Douglas-Williams.

 

JRH 8/25/18

Please Support NCCR

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

Robert Spencer banned from two platforms; get The History of Jihad before it’s banned, too

 

Sent by Jihad Watch Director

Sent 8/24/2018 7:02 AM

Sent from Jihad Watch

 

The History of Jihad ad

 

The fascism is coming down fast. I’ve now been banned from Patreon and GoFundMe. MasterCard and Visa have stopped processing donations for the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

Why? Because David Horowitz and I are defamed as “hate group leaders” by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which is now strong-arming businesses to deny service to us. The SPLC has been discredited as a dishonest, far-Left propaganda outfit determined to destroy all those who dissent from its Leftist agenda, but that doesn’t matter: these companies are allowing no appeal, no discussion, no right to reply.

This will by no means end with David Horowitz and me. The authoritarian Left is working energetically now to ban all dissenting voices in the run-up to the 2018 elections.

If this keeps up, only Leftists will be allowed any kind of platform anywhere.

It’s clear that I am one of the principal people in the Left’s crosshairs. Muslim Brotherhood-linked Congressman Keith Ellison has already demanded that Amazon stop stocking books by people who are blacklisted by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

I wrote The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS as a challenge to the elites’ narrative about jihad and Islam. And it’s clearer every day now that the elites are brooking no challenges to their narrative, and are moving as fast as they can to muzzle the people who refute their lies and distortions.

 

Given that initiative, and Ellison’s specific demand to Amazon, I don’t know how long The History of Jihad will be available, although I’ll circulate it in mimeographed form if I have to.

The book is listed as out of stock right now at Amazon: the publisher and distributors were caught off guard by demand much greater than they expected. But if you order it now, you should receive it soon — as long as the book burners don’t shut the whole enterprise down. They’re on the horizon. Click here to order The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS now.

And please – again, while you still can – make a tax-deductible donation to Jihad Watch here.

++++++++++++++++

Citizens beware: MasterCard and Visa cross the line into totalitarian thought control

 

Visa-MasterCard

 

By CHRISTINE DOUGLASS-WILLIAMS

AUG 24, 2018 4:20 PM 

Jihad Watch

 

Like many people, my inbox has been flooded by concerned citizens about David Horowitz and Robert Spencer over MasterCard and Visa, blocking their flow of revenue needed for daily operations. Spencer stated:

 

This is getting very serious. It won’t stop with David Horowitz or me. The Left is moving quickly to silence all dissenting voices in the run-up to the 2018 elections. The freedom of speech is the foundation of a free society, and it is rapidly being destroyed in the United States.

 

To add to the heartfelt concerns of those who respect the work of these stalwart defenders of freedom and human rights, all citizens would do well to recognize that the actions of MasterCard and Visa are also a slap in the face to their customers. These companies have infringed upon the rights of anyone who supports the cause of freedom and the efforts of Horowitz and Spencer. Customers who choose to donate to these necessary initiatives have been told that they are financing “hate” and therefore are stripped of their right to donate. They have been dictated to by MasterCard and Visa, who are acting as if they do not have the right to think for themselves as long as they want to use the services of MasterCard and Visa.

 

As totalitarianism overshadows America, no one can say that they were not forewarned. Both Horowitz and Spencer have been sounding the alarm for years; the Muslim Brotherhood plan for North America has been public knowledge for years. Its Explanatory Memorandum is expansive and detailed in describing its mission:

 

“The process of settlement is a ‘Civilization-Jihadist Process’ with all the word means. The Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood] 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.”

 

9/11 “mastermind” Khalid Sheik Mohammed stated:

 

“We will win because Americans don’t realize . . .we do not need to defeat you militarily; we only need to fight long enough for you to defeat yourself by quitting.”

 

Mohammed was correct. Far too many citizens of the West have quit — they take their freedoms of granted and are in denial, having not learned the lesson of history that fascism is insidious and does not take control of societies suddenly, as many seem to think. Its invasion is methodical and gradual.

 

Some examples of how businesses have joined the totalitarian initiative:

 

Kellogg Co. announced on November 2016 its decision to pull ads from Breitbart “because its 45,000,000 monthly conservative readers are not ‘aligned with our values as a company.’” Here we see Kellogg’s attempting to control the thoughts of citizens and impose its values on consumers. Fortunately, Breitbart “launched a #DumpKelloggs petition and called for a boycott of the ubiquitous food manufacturer, which lead to plummeting stock and reported $53 million loss in the fourth quarter.” The arrogance of Kellogg Co. was astounding, with CEO John Bryant claiming that the company’s massive losses were just a “coincidence” and not due to the boycott.

 

In the three months following Kellogg’s war against Breitbart:

 

the company has faced allegations of racism toward factory workers and has been accused of allegedly profiting from the use of child labor. Its non-profit W.K. Kellogg Foundation’s ties to radical anti-American billionaire George Soros, hate group Black Lives Matter, and deceased Cuban dictator Fidel Castro have been exposed, and the Michigan-based company is set to shutter dozens of distributions centers and lay off more than 1,100 full-time employees.

 

Last August, Paypal decided that it, too, wanted to interfere with freedom of speech and thought. The company cancelled Jihad Watch’s account, but it was reinstated not long afterward after public outrage. Meanwhile, the Islamic State used PayPal to send money to jihadis inside the U.S., but that revelation wasn’t enough to stop Paypal from pontificating in its letter announcing its reinstatement of the Jihad Watch account:

 

PayPal’s Acceptable Use Policy in our User Agreement prohibits individuals and groups from using PayPal for activities that promote hate, violence, or racial intolerance.

 

This is a key statement, as Jihad Watch is not a hate site. It is a news aggregate and commentary site dedicated to exposing the broad range of human rights abuses committed in the name of Islam, and reports from a range of news sites are referenced. Take, for example, a few recent Jihad Watch headlines:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

These are but a mere few examples, but they go on and on. What normal citizen can point out the “hate” in exposing such news? Every single day, reports emerge from the four corners of the earth about human rights abuses committed in the name of Islam, Islamic supremacist incursions into once-peaceful countries, the slaughter and injury of innocent people committed in the name of Islam, and jihad attacks. If reporting and discussing these facts are an offense to Muslims and deemed to be “hateful” and “racist,” then we need to have serious open discussions about why and how this is so. But there is a strenuous effort to shut down all discussion of these matters.

 

Meanwhile, who remembers or cares about the victims? Jihad Watch, the Horowitz Center and others that are unashamed to stand for human rights and who are grateful to those who died in the cause of freedom. Fierce battles have been waged against fascism, and if history has taught us anything, we should know that fascist regimes endeavor to control the thoughts and words of their people, as does the Southern Poverty Law Center today. The SPLC has mutated into a hate group itself. In the words of its former spokesman Mark Potok, who spent 20 years as an SPLC senior fellow (according to LinkedIn):

 

Sometimes the press will describe us as monitoring hate groups, I want to say plainly that our aim in life is to destroy these groups, completely destroy them.

 

As reported by Breitbart:

 

The David Horowitz Freedom Center has had their donation processing system blocked by Visa and Mastercard allegedly following a campaign by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Visa has since contacted Breitbart News to deny involvement in the blacklisting of the Freedom Center.

 

It is by degrees that totalitarians manage to seize control. The establishment media becomes a mouthpieces of the people in power, and soon, the population becomes enslaved to their ideologies, as we see with Islamofascism. It is abusive, oppressive and aims to silence all dissent as it marches against the House of War in order to subvert it and bring it into the House of Islam. This 1,400-year-old doctrine has infiltrated the West in the private and public sectors, and the Muslim Brotherhood, in accordance with its memorandum, has managed to redefine “hate” to mean any criticism of Islam.

 

Now Horowitz and Spencer stand accused of “hate,” without any semblance of justice or due process. MasterCard and Visa have bowed to the totalitarian impulse, and in so doing have also indicted their customers. This will continue, if there is no resistance. Let’s hope that boycotts and class action suits will soon be in the offing, prompted by both consumers and the leaders of conservative organizations.

_______________________

Censorship/Defunding MUST CEASE!

John R. Houk

© August 25, 2018

______________________

 

Robert Spencer banned from two platforms; get The History of Jihad before it’s banned, too

 

AND

 

Citizens beware: MasterCard and Visa cross the line into totalitarian thought control

 

Jihad Watch® is a Registered Trademark of Robert Spencer in the United States and other countries.

 

Content copyright Jihad Watch

 

About Robert Spencer

 

ROBERT SPENCER is the director of Jihad Watch and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He is the author of eighteen books, including the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) (Regnery Publishing) and The Truth About Muhammad (Regnery Publishing). His latest book is The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS (Bombardier Books).

 

Spencer has led seminars on Islam and jihad for the FBI, the United States Central Command, United States Army Command and General Staff College, the U.S. Army’s Asymmetric Warfare Group, the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF), the Justice Department’s Anti-Terrorism Advisory Council and the U.S. intelligence community. He has discussed jihad, Islam, and terrorism at a workshop sponsored by the U.S. State Department and the German Foreign Ministry. He is a consultant with the Center for Security Policy.

 

Spencer is a weekly columnist for PJ Media and FrontPage Magazine, and has written many hundreds of articles about jihad and Islamic terrorism. His articles on Islam and other topics have appeared in READ THE REST

 

Intro to Robert Spencer on Geert Wilders


John R. Houk, Editor

June 13, 2018

Most Americans are clueless about the enormous assault of European so-called democracies against any Free Speech exposing the god-awful crimes of Muslim immigrants, refugees and next-gen born Muslims perpetuated AGAINST the inherent non-Muslim citizens.

 

Why are Americans clueless? Because the American Leftist Mainstream Media (MSM) is quite supportive of these Free Speech restrictions.

 

Why are European democracies restricting Free Speech? Because the idiocy of cultural Multicultural Diversity has capture the political elites running those nations. Muslim crimes therefore must be hidden from their European citizens to maintain the perversity that Islamic culture is compatible with the values of Western culture.

 

In Europe you can actually go to jail for exposing Muslim crimes to the public! The latest victim that I am aware of is Tommy Robinson. I wonder how many others have been jail or prosecuted for exposing the nature of Islamic culture?

 

Americans need to pay attention to what is occurring in Europe. American Leftists (i.e. Democrats) desire to follow the European Multiculturalist paradigm.

 

JRH 6/13/18 (Hat Tip: Freedom Outpost)

Please Support NCCR

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

GEERT WILDERS PUTS THE POLITICAL ELITES ON NOTICE

The people are rising up. Can the elites put the genie back in the bottle?

 

By Robert Spencer

June 11, 2018

FrontPage Mag

 

Geert Wilders – Photo by Jan Kranendonk

 

Geert Wilders spoke at a massive rally for Tommy Robinson on Saturday. 20,000 people came out to call for Tommy’s release, and Wilders took the opportunity to put the political elites of Britain and continental Europe on notice.

 

“Our governments,” Wilders declared, “sold us out with mass immigration. With Islamization. With open borders. We are almost foreigners in our own lands. And if we complain about it, they call us racists and Islamophobes. But I say, no more! And what do you say? No more! And that’s right: enough is enough. We will not be gagged anymore. No more tyranny.”

 

It was extraordinary that the British authorities allowed Wilders into the country at all. Several years ago he was banned from entering the country, but although the ban was reversed on appeal, the British government recently banned Martin Sellner, Brittany Pettibone, Lauren Southern and Lutz Bachmann from entering, all for the crime of opposing jihad terror and Sharia oppression, and thereby made it clear that it is more authoritarian and unwilling to uphold the freedom of speech than ever – at least when it comes to criticism of Islam, Muslim rape gangs, and mass Muslim migration.

 

Even worse, the bannings of Sellner, Pettibone, Southern, and Bachmann were just part of a long pattern. Pamela Geller and I were banned from entering Britain in 2013, apparently for life, also for the crime of telling the truth about Islam and jihad. Meanwhile, Britain has a steadily lengthening record of admitting jihad preachers without a moment of hesitation. Syed Muzaffar Shah Qadri’s preaching of hatred and jihad violence was so hardline that he was banned from preaching in Pakistan, but the UK Home Office welcomed him into Britain.

 

The UK Home Office also admitted Shaykh Hamza Sodagar into the country, despite the fact that he has said: “If there’s homosexual men, the punishment is one of five things. One – the easiest one maybe – chop their head off, that’s the easiest. Second – burn them to death. Third – throw ’em off a cliff. Fourth – tear down a wall on them so they die under that. Fifth – a combination of the above.”

 

Theresa May’s relentlessly appeasement-minded government also admitted two jihad preachers who had praised the murderer of a foe of Pakistan’s blasphemy laws. One of them was welcomed by the Archbishop of Canterbury. Meanwhile, the UK banned three bishops from areas of Iraq and Syria where Christians are persecuted from entering the country.

 

But now matters are coming to a head. Apparently British authorities decided that it would be too politically costly for them to bar Wilders again. And so he entered, and spoke, and gave them a strong dose of the reality that they are determined to ignore and deny.

 

Tommy Robinson is in prison today because he violated a court order demanding that he not film videos outside the trials of Muslim rape gangs. Clearly the government’s intent was to make sure that as few people as possible discovered the truth about its massive, years-long cover-up of those rape gangs, and refusal to prosecute the perpetrators. Theresa May and company obvious hope that other Britons who are furious about the sacrifice of thousands of British girls to the idols of “diversity” and “multiculturalism” will see what happened to Tommy, and be frightened into silence.

 

The British government, in imprisoning Tommy Robinson, has shown itself willing to incarcerate people for having opinions that it considers unacceptable. That heralds the death of Britain as a free society and the beginning of an authoritarian police state there, unless this slide to totalitarianism is stopped now. British public figures, whatever criticism they have leveled against Tommy Robinson in the past, should be calling for him to be freed today, or else they will be exposing themselves as supporting the degeneration of Britain into a police state.

 

Wilders addressed this endeavor head-on, declaring: “We will not be silenced. We will not be intimidated. And we tell the governments, we are not afraid of you. We will never surrender. We will stand strong and do our duty. We will defend our civilization. And we will protect our people.”

 

Wilders added: “And I tell you, to the governments. You can throw us in jail, but you will never defeat us. Because, my friends, for every Tommy whom you imprison, thousands will rise up. So take notice, Theresa May. Take notice, Dutch Prime Minister Rutte. Take notice, Mrs. Merkel or President Macron. Take notice: the future is ours and not yours. We will defeat you politically, because we, my friends, we are the people.”

 

If Wilders’ words don’t prove true, it will be because the death of free societies in Britain and Western Europe is truly at hand.

______________________

Intro to Robert Spencer on Geert Wilders

John R. Houk, Editor

June 13, 2018

_____________________

GEERT WILDERS PUTS THE POLITICAL ELITES ON NOTICE

 

© COPYRIGHT 2018, FRONTPAGEMAG.COM

 

About Robert Spencer

 

Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He is author of the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About MuhammadHis new book is The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS. Follow him on Twitter here. Like him on Facebook here.

 

FRONTPAGE MAG IS A PROUD PROJECT OF THE DAVID HOROWITZ FREEDOM CENTER

 

The DHFC is dedicated to the defense of free societies whose moral, cultural and economic foundations are under attack by enemies both secular and religious, at home and abroad.

 

The David Horowitz Freedom Center combats the efforts of the radical left and its Islamist allies to destroy American values and disarm this country as it attempts to defend itself in a time of terror.  The leftist offensive is most obvious on our nation’s campuses, where the Freedom Center protects students from indoctrination and intimidation and works to give conservative students a place in the marketplace of ideas from which they are otherwise excluded.  Combining forceful analysis and bold activism, the Freedom Center provides strong insight into today’s most pressing issue on its family of websites and in the activist campaigns it wages on campus, in the news media, and in national politics throughout the year.

 

David Horowitz began the Center for the Study of Popular Culture in 1988 to establish a conservative presence in Hollywood and show how popular culture had become a political battleground. Over the next 18 years, CSPC attracted 50,000 contributing supporters and established programs such as The Wednesday Morning Club, the Individual Rights Foundation, and Students for Academic Freedom.

 

FrontPage Magazine, the Center’s online journal of news and political commentary has 1.5 million visitors and over 870,000 unique visitors a month (65 million hits) and is linked to over 2000 other websites.  The magazine’s coverage of and commentary about events has been greatly augmented over the last two years by the presence of four  Shillman Fellows in Journalism underwritten by board member Dr. Robert Shillman. FrontPage has recently added a blog called “The Point,” run by Shillman Fellow Daniel Greenfield, which has tripled web traffic.

 

READ THE REST

 

Robert Spencer Defends the West…


In America both the Left and the Right cherish Free Speech enshrined in the First Amendment. Or at least the First Amendment is cherished in the political spectrum’s right to criticize each other, but the Left questions the Free Speech ability of the Right to expose the truth of totalitarian issues supported by the Left. Why? Our Republic was established in rebelling against a totalitarian King between 1776 (actually battles fought in 1775 but Independence declared in 1776) and 1783 (Treaty of Paris). The Left pretends to be the Party of the People but supports Big Government control of society from top to bottom, aka totalitarianism.

 

With this all in mind, I think you will find Andrew Bostom’s book review of Robert Spencer’s “The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Free Speech (and Its Enemies)” interesting. It Points out that Islam is no friend of Free Speech and the irony of the Left trying to protect Islam from criticism.

 

JRH 8/2/17

Please Support NCCR

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

Robert Spencer Defends the West: ‘The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Free Speech’

 

By ANDREW G. BOSTOM

JULY 31, 2017

PJ Media

 

FILE – DECEMBER 25, 2013: The Egyptian interim government [sic] has declared the Mohammed Morsi led ‘Muslim Brotherhood’ a terrorist organisation. The action was taken in response to the bombing of the police station in Mansoura earlier this week, which the government has stated was the responsibility of the Brotherhood, despite denials from the group itself. CAIRO, EGYPT – DECEMBER 14: Supporters of Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi and members of the Muslim Brotherhood chant slogans during a rally on December 14, 2012 in Cairo, Egypt. Opponents and supporters of Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi staged final rallies in Cairo ahead of tomorrow’s referendum vote on the country’s draft constitution that was rushed through parliament in an overnight session on November 29. The country’s new draft constitution, passed by a constitutional assembly dominated by Islamists, will go to a referendum vote on December 15. (Photo by Daniel Berehulak/Getty Images)

 

A review of The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Free Speech (and Its Enemies), by Robert Spencer, Regnery Publishing, 2017, 274 pp.

 

———-

 

Twenty-four years ago, the late Mervyn Hiskett, renowned British scholar of the history of jihad and Islamization in sub-Saharan Africa, turned his attention to the looming impact of Islam on his own Britain and Western societies more broadly, including the United States. In his 1993 Some to Mecca Turn To Pray, he articulated presciently the Islamic conundrum now enveloping us, which requires an immediate response if we still cherish individual liberty:

 

As is so often the case when considering Islam, one has to concede the power of certain of its ideas. But when it comes to having these ideas advocated within our own shores, and as alternatives to our own insti­tutions, one must then ask oneself: Which does one prefer? Western secular, pluralist institutions, imperfect as these are? Or the Islamic theo­cratic alternative?

 

And if one decides in favor of one’s own institutions, warts and all, one then has to ask again: How far may the advocacy of Islamic alternatives go, before this becomes downright subversive? And at that point, what should be done about it? Finally, do liberal, demo­cratic politicians have the political and moral guts to do what is needed, or will they simply give way, bit by bit and point by point, to insistent and sustained pressure from the Muslim “Parliament” and other Muslim special-interest lobbies like it?

 

Robert Spencer’s concise, lucid analysis, The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Free Speech (and Its Enemies), validates Hiskett’s gravest concerns about Islamic subversion: the relentless campaign to abrogate our most basic, unique Western liberty — free expression. With characteristic erudition, attention to detail, and wit (see text box on p. 28, “Did Any Of Them Have Eating Disorders? Those Can Make You Crazy,” from this video), Spencer chronicles how free speech in Western societies has been dangerously eroded by what Hiskett aptly termed “the Muslim ‘Parliament’ and other Muslim special interest lobbies,” in full collaboration with statist Left cultural relativists.

 

The grotesque harmonic convergence between mainstream, totalitarian Islam — epitomized by Sharia “blasphemy” law — and the “democratic” totalitarianism of the Left, derived from Robespierre and the Jacobins through Communist ideologues and leaders Marx, Lenin, and Stalin, is an underlying, recurrent theme of Spencer’s urgent presentation. Indeed the latter, “Dr. Crankley’s Children” (per Whittaker Chambers’ acid 1948 discussion of the Communist legacy on the 100th anniversary of the publication of Marx’s manifesto), and their “softer” statist minions of our era, bear at least as much responsibility for the erosion of Western free speech as institutional Islam and its pious Muslim votaries. Spencer elucidates how, despite superficial appearances of being oddly conjoined:

 

… endeavoring to weaken and destroy the freedom of speech, leftists in the United States have found ready allies in the Muslim community. Many observers have remarked that the Left and Islamic supremacists make strange bedfellows: the former advocate a moral libertinism; the latter are attempting to impose a repressive moral code. What binds these unlikely allies is a shared taste for authoritarianism. Both parties want to stifle dissent, and in doing so both find themselves fighting the same foes. Why not join forces?

 

All 13 of Spencer’s carefully arranged, remarkably compendious chapters have germane (even pathognomonic!) titles, including 10 epigrams:

 

Chapter 1, “Just Stay Quiet and You’ll Be Okay”

Chapter 2, “Tailored in an Appropriate Way”: Can Free Speech Really Be Restricted in the United States?

Chapter 3, “Now Obviously This is a Country That is Based on Free Speech, but…,”: The U.S. Government vs. Free Speech

Chapter 4, The “Hate Speech” Scam

Chapter 5, “Peer Pressure and Shaming” to Rein in Free Speech

Chapter 6, “Is That Being Racist?”: Americans Learn Self-Censorship

Chapter 7, “Irresponsibly Provocative”: The Erosion of Free Speech From Rushdie to Geller

Chapter 8, “Can’t We Talk about This?”: The Death of Free Speech in Europe

Chapter 9, Catholics Against Free Speech

Chapter 10, “Not Conducive to the Public Good”: Free Speech Dies in Britain and Canada

Chapter 11, The New Brownshirts

Chapter 12, “The University Prides Itself on Diversity”: Administrators vs. Free Speech Chapter 13, “Facing the New Totalitarianism”: Fighting Back for the Freedom of Speech

 

Spencer traces the living Islamic law imperative to brook no criticism of the Muslim faith, or its prophet founder, to both canonical traditions of Muhammad and the Koran (9:14-15) itself, which exhorts Muslims to wage jihad to punish the “offending” infidels. Muhammad in effect created his own “Dead Poets Society” comprised of victims (men and women, elderly and young) slain at his behest by his most ardent early Muslim followers, for perceived “insults” to Islam’s prophet. Citing the contemporary example of the Islamic State of Pakistan (and the plight of Pakistani Christian, Asia Bibi), Spencer asks: to assure a “future free of offense to Islam,” what exactions will “our leftist politicians, media elites, and much of the Western intelligentsia” be willing to impose upon their own citizens?

 

For saying, “I believe in Jesus Christ who died on the cross for the sins of mankind. What did your prophet Muhammad ever do to save mankind?”, a Christian woman named Asia Bibi is on death row in Pakistan, where “wounding [Muslims’] religious feelings” is a crime and blaspheming Muhammad is punishable by death. Pakistan doesn’t have the First Amendment. Americans in the United States are in no danger of execution for testifying to their religious beliefs. But the Asia Bibi case illustrates the utter futility of attempting to keep Muslims from ever being offended — unless we are willing to give up our right to freedom of speech entirely.

 

Americans should not be complacent about First Amendment protections. Reminding readers that the divide separating “treasonous and seditious speech and speech that is simply unwelcome to the government” has proven controversial throughout U.S. history, Spencer avers:

 

The Sedition Act [of 1791] and the Espionage Act [of 1917] demonstrate the U.S. government has placed severe restrictions on the First Amendment’s protection of the freedom of speech in the past, and indicate that it could do so again in the future. This history also shows that the First Amendment protections of free speech are most likely to be curtailed in a time of serious and imminent threats to the nation. That time may be upon us now.

 

Spencer emphasizes one particularly alarming Obama administration reaction to the 9/11/2012 jihad massacre at Benghazi — “scapegoating a video [and subsequently the videographer] criticizing Muhammad” — which illustrates such curtailment, “placing the onus on freedom of speech.” He adds: “The unmistakable implication was that if only Americans would not criticize Muhammad, attacks of this kind wouldn’t happen.” Worse still, two days following Barack Obama’s surreal Islamic blasphemy law-compliant pronouncement to the United Nations General Assembly on September 25, 2012, that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam,” America’s first Sharia blasphemy law victim, Egyptian Coptic Christian Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, producer of the Innocence of Muslims video, was arrested, declared a “danger to the community,” and imprisoned without bail. He was incarcerated for 12 months.

 

Devoid of First Amendment equivalent laws, governed by Left statists marinated for decades in cultural relativist claptrap ideology, and subject to the same forces of Islamization by Muslim immigrant populations, Western Europe, as Spencer demonstrates, including Britain as well as Canada, is even further along the trajectory towards self-inflicted full compliance with Sharia blasphemy law.

 

Perhaps the most illuminating and disheartening chapter of The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Free Speech (and Its Enemies) chronicles progressive Western supplication to Islam since Ayatollah Khomeini’s February 14, 1989 fatwa condemning novelist Salman Rushdie to death for his The Satanic Verses, and its perceived insults to the Muslim creed and Islam’s prophet. Spencer provides an especially astute observation regarding a follow-up Khomeini fatwa denying Rushdie any leniency for repenting, and offering a reward for any non-Muslim willing to execute the beleaguered author:

 

The invitation to non-Muslims to murder Rushdie was significant: Khomeini was inviting non-Muslims to share Muslim sensibilities regarding Rushdie’s alleged offense, and trying to induce them to do so by the prospect of financial reward. It would take years for this invitation and foreigners and non-Muslims to kill Rushdie to evolve into the “shaming,” as Hillary Clinton would put it, of those who dared to decline to participate in the de facto implementation of Islamic blasphemy laws. Clinton’s “peer pressure an shaming” imperative demonstrated that, in the two decades between the Rushdie fatwa and her endorsement of UNHRC 16/18 [i.e., the United Nations Human Rights Commission’s “defamation of religion” resolution which riveted upon Islam and was aggressively lobbied for by the UN’s Muslims nation members], non-Muslims had become the principal enforcers of Sharia blasphemy law in the West.

 

Drawing upon his shared experience with journalist and activist Pamela Geller in the wake of the May 3, 2015 Garland, Texas, jihadist attack on a staid exhibit of historical and contemporary depictions of Muhammad, Spencer concludes:

 

It is not an offensive act, but ultimately an act in defense of Western civilization to show Islamic jihadists that their violent threats will not cow me and that I will not allow violent intimidation to rule the day, and that I will not offend them in any larger sense by treating them as if they were demented children who cannot control their actions and must necessarily kill in the face of being offended. It was the murderous jihadis who made drawing Muhammad the flash point of the defense of free speech, not Pamela Geller, and I.

 

It is they who, by their determination to murder non-Muslims who violate their religious law on this point, have made it imperative that free people signal that they will not submit to them. If we give in to that demand that we conform to this Sharia principle, there will be further demands that we adhere to additional Sharia principles. It is ultimately a question of whether we will submit to Sharia or stand up for freedom. At Garland we were standing. In the aftermath, it is clear a huge segment of the Western political and media elites are ready, if not eager to kneel, daring not to “provoked” their new masters.

 

A quarter century after Hiskett’s Cassandra-like warning about the liberty-crushing peril of acquiescing to Islam within Western societies, Robert Spencer has meticulously documented its most dire consequences: de facto elimination of free speech criticism of the Muslim creed — and, ultimately, free expression, overall. Spencer’s courageous and irrefragable analysis is simultaneously a tocsin of imminent calamity, and a clarion call to action in defense of free speech, our most fundamental, keystone liberty. Western freedom-loving citizens must help bring his message to American political and religious leaders before our liberties are transmogrified by the global Muslim “umma,” seeking unabashedly (since 1981) to impose “The Universal Islamic Declaration of Human Rights,” i.e., Sharia totalitarianism.

___________________

Copyright © 2005-2017 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.

 

READ THE REST

 

Muslim spokesman Mohammed Shafiq blames UK government for Manchester jihad massacre


The homicidal suicide-bombing by Salman Abedi in Manchester UK at an Ariana Grande concert killed 22 (including seven children under 18 — and injured more than 100). As is quite typical these day so-called Muslim moderates are coming forward to spout such terrorism is not the “true” Islam. The reasoning of course is the propaganda that Islam means peace. It is a 100% bogus lie that Islam is peace! Rather the better translation for English is “submission”. Submission to what? The answer: submission to the authority, superiority and hegemony of everything Islam.

 

The ONLY peace involved in submission is the acceptance of the mind-washing ideology of Islam – OR ELSE! And the result against those who refused submission: “This gives a rough estimate of 270 million killed by jihad.

 

In this modern era, the Muslim apologists take advantage of Leftist-Multiculturalist sympathies by using deceptive dialogue that provides the appearance of the abhorrence of Islamic terrorism; however, the reality is the use of twisted words that only the knowledgeable decipher to show the real intentions of an Islamic ideology or agenda.

 

Mohammed Shafiq

 

Ergo, in the wake of Islamic terrorism in British Manchester, Robert Spencer dissects the deception of Ramadan Foundation Chief Executive Mohammed Shafiq. (Just to view another source of Shafiq deception go to Stephen Knight exposing Muslim duplicity via an examination of Twitter dialogue.)

 

JRH 5/29/17 (Hat Tip: Paul Sutliff)

Please Support NCCR

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

Muslim spokesman Mohammed Shafiq blames UK government for Manchester jihad massacre

 

By ROBERT SPENCER

MAY 26, 2017 5:49 AM

Jihad Watch

 

VIDEO: Obscene: Sky news helping a muslim spokesman justify enable genocide after Manchester


 

Posted by Pamela Geller Editor-in-Chief

Published on May 24, 2017

 

Mohammed Shafiq is the Chief Executive of the Ramadhan Foundation, which claims to be dedicated to combating “extremism.” In this interview with Sky News presenter Dermot Murnaghan after the Manchester jihad massacre, he does his best to equate jihad terrorist killers with the forces who oppose them (which he smears as “far right”), dissembles about Islamic teaching, and blames the Manchester attack on the British government’s foreign policy.

 

We’re not going to let the terrorists succeed, and we’re not going to let the far-right, also, come to our city and divide us.”

 

Note the moral equivalence: there are the terrorists on one side, the “far-right” on the other, both seeking to divide people, and here is good old Mohammed Shafiq smack in the middle, the voice of sanity, the voice of reason, the voice of peace, the voice of unity. Shafiq doesn’t mention one all-important fact, and Murnaghan doesn’t challenge him on it: the “far-right” in Britain hasn’t killed anyone, isn’t plotting to do so, and isn’t condoning any violence. The death toll from Islamic jihad terrorism is 22 in Manchester, plus other violent attacks and plots in Britain, as well as 30,000 murderous jihad attacks around the world since 9/11. So Shafiq’s equivalence between the two is ridiculous. What is he trying to do? He is trying to defame and discredit those who are calling attention to the reality of jihad activity in Britain, and its motivating ideology. If he succeeds, jihad activity will go on in Britain while everyone is too afraid of being labeled “far-right” or “Islamophobic” to raise their voices in protest. And that is exactly what is happening now.

 

“No faith in this world encourages the brutal massacre of children as we saw Monday night. No faith! And if that was what my faith was teaching, I wouldn’t want to be in it, either.”

 

In reality, a hadith depicts Muhammad reacting with savage indifference to the killing of children by the Muslims: “It is reported on the authority of Sa’b b. Jaththama that the Prophet of Allah (may peace be upon him), when asked about the women and children of the polytheists being killed during the night raid, said: They are from them.” (Sahih Muslim 4321)

 

These children were collateral damage of the raid, just as they today might be collateral damage of a jihad bombing such as the one we saw in Manchester Monday night— and Muhammad allows for that.

 

“My faith teaches compassion, and they’ve distorted our faith, we’ve gotta take them on. But more importantly, as a community, we’ve still not done enough. When we’ve got young people who are so disconnected from our society that the moment we talk about what’s happening in Libya, in Syria, in regards to our foreign policy, we get accused of being apologists for terrorism. Let’s have an honest and open debate about these issues, and above all, let’s not let people divide us.”

 

Shafiq says: “We’ve gotta take them on, but more importantly” — and shifts into a critique of British foreign policy. The subtext here is that the jihad attack was the fault of British actions in Libya, Afghanistan, and Iraq. If only the U.K. would adopt a foreign policy that was to the liking of the global umma, then there wouldn’t be jihad attacks such as the one in Manchester. If the British government stops fighting against jihadis, then the jihadis will stop fighting them. This view sounds reasonable and has many advocates inside Britain, but it ignores the fact that the jihad imperative to “fight until religion is all for Allah” (Qur’an 8:39) remains even against compliant infidels. It also ignores the fact that Britain only got involved in Libya, Afghanistan and Iraq because of jihad attacks that predated those interventions and thus cannot reasonably be blamed on them.

 

Murnaghan then asks Shafiq if Muslims feel oppressed in some way, and so get the idea that they have to fight back, even in extreme form? Shafiq agrees, and continues to blame jihad terror upon British foreign policy:

 

“Yeah, so you look at what happened in Libya, we went in, we bombed Libya, and then we left, and ISIS was on the rise in Libya. The same in Afghanistan, the same in Iraq. So I’m arguing that because of our military adventures in these countries, we have allowed the terrorist narrative to take hold, we’ve allowed people to be brainwashed, and then we have what we saw here on Monday. There’s no justification –“

 

When Murnaghan asks Shafiq what he says to Muslims who want to go to Syria to join the jihad, Shafiq ends up blaming Sky News itself:

 

“Well, first of all, I think we’ve gotta take on the narrative. So they’ve got in their mindset this ideology which says you can use violence to make political points, and Islam sanctions that. And we’ve gotta use the edicts that we’ve seen from scholars like Tahir ul-Qadri or Sheikh Hamza Yusef, American, they’ve produced real strong evidence from the Qur’an and the sayings of the prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, why terrorism is wrong. And that’s what we’ve got to promote, do that, and grass roots, and actually give young people a voice and give them a platform. Cause Dermot, no disrespect to you and Sky News, on these panels, how often do we actually give young people a chance to speak up, and talk about their issues?”

 

“Edicts that we’ve seen from scholars like Tahir ul-Qadri or Sheikh Hamza Yusuf, American, they’ve produced real strong evidence from the Qur’an and the sayings of the prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, why terrorism is wrong.” Murnaghan doesn’t ask him at that point to explain what he means by “terrorism,” and that’s a shame, since all too often in such contexts sly Muslim spokesmen are referring to the supposedly “terrorist” actions of the U.K., the U.S., and Israel, and not to the actions of Islamic jihadists.

 

Murnaghan should have asked him to clarify that point especially since the reformers Shafiq mentions are anything but. Tahir ul-Qadri issued a massive fatwa against terrorism that is really just a gigantic exercise in deception: it never even mentions, much less explains away, the Qur’an passages that jihadis use to justify violence and terrorism. Moreover, Tahir ul-Qadri himself is the framer of Pakistan’s blasphemy law that has been used to persecute countless Christians and other non-Muslims. Some reformer! Hamza Yusuf is no better: he ridicules the idea of Islamic moderation and said that the victims of the Charlie Hebdo jihad massacre “knew what they were doing” — i.e., they had it coming once they blasphemed Muhammad.

 

That Shafiq is also taken for a moderate and given such a platform on Sky News and elsewhere is evidence of confused and complacent, if not complicit, the media elites in the U.K. and all over the West really are.

________________

Why Jihad Watch?

 

Why Jihad Watch? Because non-Muslims in the West, as well as in India, China, Russia, and the world over, are facing a concerted effort by Islamic jihadists, the motives and goals of whom are largely ignored by the Western media, to destroy their societies and impose Islamic law upon them — and to commit violence to that end even while their overall goal remains out of reach. That effort goes under the general rubric of jihad.

 

Jihad (Arabic for “struggle”) is a central duty of every Muslim. Muslim theologians have spoken of many things as jihads: the struggle within the soul, defending the faith from critics, supporting its growth and defense financially, even migrating to non-Muslim lands for the purpose of spreading Islam. But violent jihad is a constant of Islamic history and a central element of Islamic theology. Many passages of the Qur’an and sayings of the Islamic prophet Muhammad are used by jihad warriors today to justify their actions and gain new recruits. No major Muslim group has ever repudiated the doctrines of armed jihad. The theology of jihad, which denies unbelievers equality of human rights and dignity, is available today for anyone with the will and means to bring it to life.

 

In Islamic history and doctrine violent jihad is founded on READ THE REST

 

About Robert Spencer

 

Obama’s Gone – Learn About Stealth Jihad


John R. Houk

© January 5, 2017

types-of-jihad

President Barack Hussein Obama has gone to great lengths to lie to Americans about the dangers of Islam. He has even invited Islamists that wholly believe in bloody Jihad into the White House. On January 20th, HE IS GONE! Let us pray Trump’s America exposes the agenda of Islam in America.

 

Most Americans by now there are numerous followers of Islam – globally – that use Muhammad’s call of violent Jihad for Islam to dominate every single person on earth. I am a Counterjihadist that understands via the Muslim revered writings of the Quran (and HERE), Hadith and Sira (which encompasses the Sunnah) call for global Islamic domination to the glory of Allah and his pseudo-prophet Muhammad.

 

Here’s something you may or may not heard of pertaining to Islam: a Muslim apologist propagandizing to the tune of “Islam is Peace” will tell you there is a Greater Jihad and a Lesser Jihad. One Jihad is to wage war for Allah and prophet to spread the ummah (community) worldwide. The other Jihad is an inner struggle to be a good Muslim in the light of the Quran.

 

The Muslim apologist will tell you the Greater Jihad is the inner struggle to be a better Muslim and the Lesser Jihad is violence for Allah and prophet.

 

From the Muslim revered writings I have read, the Greater and Lesser distinction is poppycock invented for Muslims wanting to wake up in the 21st century rather than the 7th. And Western non-Muslims trained in the Western developed concept of Religious Liberty.

 

If a majority of observant Muslims would take a reform stand and publicly deny the obligations of the Quran, Hadith and Sira by making the Inner Struggle (cough – Greater Jihad) the principle of Islam, then I would buy into the Muslim Apologist claim of Islam is Peace. To an Inner Struggle Jihad as principle would go against Islam’s perfect example to be followed and imitated – the warmongering, booty-raiding, merchandiser of slavery and sex-slavery – MUHAMMAD.

 

Now that I have made my feelings clear about the practice of Jihad in Islam. I found a very educational post on The Realistic Observer. Dee Fatouros has posted what she calls a “compendium of links” on the subject of Stealth Jihad.

 

The term “stealth jihad” is a bit misleading.  The stealth jihad groups may be stealthy, but they don’t operate underground.  They have offices, spokesmen, PR people, legal teams, and impressive websites.  They present themselves as moderate mainstream groups, and for the most part the media and administration officials accept them as such.

 

How do they operate?  In general, they advertise themselves as civil rights advocates working to protect the rights of the “Muslim community.”  Using the cover of civil rights activism, the stealth jihadists have been able to score some spectacular successes. READ ENTIRETY – Bold text mine (THE WAR AGAINST STEALTH JIHAD; By William Kilpatrick; FrontPageMag.com; 9/23/16)

 

VIDEO: Robert Spencer – Stealth Jihad: What It Is and Why It Matters (56:04)

 

Posted by TJ Singh II

Published on Jul 22, 2016

 

Robert Spencer delivered a talk on “The Stealth Jihad: What It Is and Why It Matters.” In his remarks he addressed the Obama administration’s recent announcement that it will no longer use language that points to a “war on terrorism.” Mr. Spencer responded to questions from audience members.

 

JRH 1/5/17

Please Support NCCR

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

Pertinent Information Regarding Stealth Jihad

 theopolitical-nature-of-islamic-mosque

Posted by Dee Fatouros

January 4, 2017 7:29:00 PM 

The Realistic Observer

 

This post is more or less a compendium of links and excerpts detailing the entire subject of stealth Jihad and its progress in the U.S.

Unlike the violent attacks of the militant Islamists, stealth jihad is just that, a stealthy penetration of all of our social institutions.

Under the aegis of the present administration, not only has this been allowed, but encouraged and protected. Those who are concerned are, sigh, labeled Islamophobes. No discussion/disagreement allowed. Of course the Soros controlled MSM leads the way on this road of suicidal denial.

There is a great deal of information from the sites below which the MSM has deliberately [sic] failed to convey. 


Discover The Networks: Stealth Jihad

 

Terrorist attacks that involve bombings and shootings are just one component of the jihad, or holy war, that Islamists are actively waging against infidels all over the world. Another component of that jihad consists of nonviolent initiatives which can be classified as stealth (or “soft”) jihad, whose goal is the imposition of Islamic law, Sharia, over every region of the earth by non-confrontational means. Under the banners of “tolerance” and “civil rights,” stealth jihadists introduce, in piecemeal fashion, elements of Sharia into Western societies and then demand that non-Muslims make allowance for those elements. Moreover, stealth jihadists smear those who dare to discuss the negative aspects of Sharia (and Islam) as “racists” and “Islamophobes.”  continue

 

Some examples of how stealth jihad has made inroads into U.S. and Western culture include the following: 
 Frontpage Mag: The War Against Stealth Jihad

 

The term “stealth jihad” is a bit misleading. The stealth jihad groups may be stealthy, but they don’t operate underground. They have offices, spokesmen, PR people, legal teams, and impressive websites. They present themselves as moderate mainstream groups, and for the most part the media and administration officials accept them as such.

How do they operate? In general, they advertise themselves as civil rights advocates working to protect the rights of the “Muslim community.” Using the cover of civil rights activism, the stealth jihadists have been able to score some spectacular successes. In 2012, for example, more than 1,000 documents and presentations were purged from counterterror training programs for the FBI and other security agencies. This was done in response to pressure from Islamic advocacy groups who complained that the training policies were biased and offensive to Muslims. In effect, these Muslim Brotherhood-linked groups were given veto power over national security policy, and, as a result, investigative agencies were forced to limit themselves to politically correct policing.

America’s commitment to the dogma of political correctness is, in fact, the chief factor that accounts for the success of stealth jihad. The stealth jihadists are well-versed in the rules of political correctness, and they know how to use them to their own advantage. And if they can bend the federal government to their will by using these methods, they can certainly do the same to average citizens. continue

 

Americans warned: Invisible jihad occurring under our noses

 

“They use violent jihad, but they also use civilization jihad, which is a long-term form of sort of cultural jihad, so to speak, in which they infiltrate a country, a government from within … use the liberal immigration laws to their advantage and have their people not assimilate into the culture, but live in enclaves and sort of stick to themselves until they get enough numbers, until they build up their numbers, and then we see more violent jihad unfold at that point,” Hohmann explained to Elder.

Hohmann, author of the forthcoming book “Stealth Invasion: Muslim Conquest Through Immigration and the Resettlement Jihad,” said the Obama administration has facilitated civilization jihad by importing tens of thousands of Muslim refugees from the Middle East and North Africa. And he doesn’t believe there’s anything he could say to Obama that would convince the president to change his refugee policy.

“He’s going right down to the bitter end with pummeling our cities and towns with more and more refugees,” Hohmann noted. “They’re trying to get in as many as possible before he leaves office to the point where they’re even running out of money now, I hear, at the Office of Refugee Resettlement.”

To Hohmann, it looks like Obama has accomplished exactly what he set out to do.

 

Said the author: “I don’t know what I could tell President Obama other than, ‘A job well done! If your goal was to destroy America, to degrade America, to bring our cities down a notch and saddle them with a heavy burden, you’ve done a good job.’” continue

 

The Clarion Project: How Many Methods of Islamist Radicalization Remain Hidden

Many would not agree with my statement that Islamic radicalization is a hidden and still an ignored phenomenon especially in the West.

This is especially true as these terrorists are adapting newer and newer techniques and ways to influence and hence pollute the upcoming young minds.

The West has made a grievous mistake by allowing these Islamic extremists to settle, grow and even prosper on its soil in the name of human rights, and freedom of speech and liberty.

Most of the focus has been on the mosques and other religious gathering places, but that is not the whole side of the story. Living in Europe for only six months until now, I see many types of Islamic radicalization growing in new, systematic and subtle ways, unheard of via newspapers. continue

 

The Clarion Project: The Hidden Costs of Jihad

One of the objectives of Islamic State’s “attack and polarize” strategy in France is to hit the economy, an objective that was successfully attained in the aftermath of the November 2015 and January 2016 attacks, which were immediately followed by a slump in retail sales and tourism.

 

Throughout 2016, hotels in Paris were offering discounts of up to 65% on room rates to attract tourists who began to shun the city in the wake of the jihadist operations.

Another economic cost is the massive increase in expenditure on intelligence, law enforcement and security. In 2016 the DGSI, the domestic intelligence service, increased its staff by 35% from 3,500 to over 4,700. Law enforcement officers, who have accumulated millions of hours in overtime, have to be paid.

Three days after the November 13 attacks, the government announced that it would recruit an additional 5,000 police officers. Tens of millions have been allocated to deradicalization programs, reorganization of prisons and other initiatives aimed at countering jihad at home. continue

 

We have now moved from stealth to overt Jihad.

The attacks upon individual citizens, gathered groups, and our Churches are increasing.

Let us hope that the incoming administration will call things as they are and take steps to protects America. That IS the job of the President Of The United States Of America! 

_______________________

Obama’s Gone – Learn About Stealth Jihad

John R. Houk

© January 5, 2017

_____________________

Pertinent Information Regarding Stealth Jihad

 

Knowledge is power. The Realistic Observer is a non-partisan, non-profit blog dedicated to keeping our readers as informed as possible.

 

Video: Robert Spencer on Barack Obama’s Fantasy Islam


bho-i-cant-see-islamic-terror

Robert Spencer explains how President Barack Hussein Obama’s promotion of the lie that “Islam is peace” simply does not line up with the actual teachings of Islam. In watching this video – something to think about: Crooked Hillary promotes herself as the Obama third term of Office.

 

JRH 10/7/16 (Hat Tip: Miriam Haviv – Obama’s LegacyOct 05, 2016)

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

Video: Robert Spencer on Barack Obama’s Fantasy Islam

 

By ROBERT SPENCER

OCTOBER 5, 2016 12:09 PM

Jihad Watch

 

In this new video, I explain how Barack Obama’s public statements about Islam do not accord with Islamic teachings or the reality of current events.

 

VIDEO: Robert Spencer on Barack Obama’s Fantasy Islam

 

Posted by JihadWatchVideo

Published on Oct 5, 2016

 

Jihad Watch director Robert Spencer explains how Barack Obama’s public statements about Islam do not accord with Islamic teachings or the reality of current events.

____________________

Jihad Watch® is a registered trademark of Robert Spencer. in the United States and/or other countries

 

Content copyright Jihad Watch, Jihad Watch claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted.

 

Why Jihad Watch?

 

Why Jihad Watch? Because non-Muslims in the West, as well as in India, China, Russia, and the world over, are facing a concerted effort by Islamic jihadists, the motives and goals of whom are largely ignored by the Western media, to destroy their societies and impose Islamic law upon them — and to commit violence to that end even while their overall goal remains out of reach. That effort goes under the general rubric of jihad.

 

Jihad (Arabic for “struggle”) is a central duty of every Muslim. Muslim theologians have spoken of many things as jihads: the struggle within the soul, defending the faith from critics, supporting its growth and defense financially, even migrating to non-Muslim lands for the purpose of spreading Islam. But violent jihad is a constant of Islamic history and a central element of Islamic theology. Many passages of the Qur’an and sayings of the Islamic prophet Muhammad are used by jihad warriors today to justify their actions and gain new recruits. No major Muslim group has ever repudiated the doctrines of armed jihad. The theology of jihad, which denies unbelievers equality of human rights and dignity, is available today for anyone with the will and means to bring it to life.

 

In Islamic history and doctrine violent jihad is founded on numerous verses of the Qur’an — most notably, one known in READ THE REST

 

About Robert Spencer

 

ROBERT SPENCER is the director of Jihad Watch, a program of the David Horowitz Freedom Center, and the author of sixteen books, including the New York Times bestsellers The Truth About Muhammad and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) (both Regnery). His latest book is The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Iran (Regnery).

 

Spencer has led seminars on Islam and jihad for the FBI, the United States Central Command, United States Army Command and General Staff College, the U.S. Army’s Asymmetric Warfare Group, the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF), and the U.S. intelligence community. He has discussed jihad, Islam, and terrorism at a workshop sponsored by the U.S. State Department and the German Foreign Ministry. He is a consultant with the Center for Security Policy and vice president of the American Freedom Defense Initiative, and has also served as a contributing writer to the Investigative Project on Terrorism and as an Adjunct Fellow with the Free Congress Foundation.

 

Spencer is a weekly columnist for READ THE REST

 

 

Robert Spencer on Fox and Friends Discusses the Brussels Jihad Massacre


Robert Spencer promoting ISIS book

I discovered a Robert Spencer interview that was on the morning show Fox and Friends. Contrary to what Leftist Multiculturalists and Muslim Apologists might tell you, Spencer is quite the expert on all things Islam. He has taken that expertise to make a career out of exposing the dangers of Islam to Western Culture.

 

In this roughly three-minute video Spencer speaks of the idiocy lf Europe promoting the acceptance of Muslim refugees particularly those displaced by ISIS. Obama is in the same road that is happening in Europe in which numerous Islamic terrorist attacks and rapes are occurring. The context of the conversation is the recent ISIS attack via recruited Muslims in Brussels, Belgium where about thirty victims died and nearly 300 were injured by the bombs set off.

 

JRH 3/24/16 (Hat Tip: The Eaglesperch on the Google Community Anti-Islam)

Please Support NCCR

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

VIDEO: Robert Spencer on Fox and Friends Discusses the Brussels Jihad Massacre

 

 

Posted by JihadWatchVideo

Published on Mar 24, 2016

 

On March 24, 2016, Jihad Watch director Robert Spencer appeared on Fox and Friends to discuss the jihad massacre in Brussels and the likelihood of a similar attack happening on American soil.