‘No-go’ zones ‘fact of life’ in Europe

WND, By Jerome Corsi, Jan. 30, 2015:

NEW YORK – Amid controversy over whether or not Muslim “no-go” zones exist in Europe, Soeren Kern, a senior fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute and also at the Madrid-based Strategic Studies Group, contends they are “a well-known fact of life” in many parts of the continent.

“Europe’s no-go zones are the byproduct of decades of multicultural policies that have encouraged Muslim immigrants to create parallel societies and remain segregated from – rather than become integrated into – their European host nations,” Kern wrote Jan. 20 in a Gatestone Institute paper titled “European ‘No-Go’ Zones: Fact or Fiction.”

Kern asserted the “problem of no-go zones is well documented, but multiculturalists and their politically correct supporters vehemently deny that they exist.”

“Some are now engaged in a concerted campaign to discredit and even silence those who draw attention to the issue,” he said.

As WND reported, Steven Emerson, director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, ignited the furor when he said in a Fox News interview Jan. 11, “there are actual cities like Birmingham that are totally Muslim, where non-Muslims just simply don’t go in.”

Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo threatened to sue Fox News, charging its coverage of the issue “insulted” Paris, and the news channel issued an apology. But contrary to how it was widely reported, Fox News didn’t apologize for saying there were “no-go” zones, and supporters of Emerson argued he was guilty only of overstatement, not fabrication.

“I think Steve Emerson’s biggest mistake was to apologize so profusely,” Kern argued. “If Emerson had just said, ‘I made a mistake and what I meant to say was parts of Birmingham, not all of Birmingham,’ that would have been OK. But once you apologize and show the slightest bit of weakness, the attackers attack and try to devour. I think that’s what happened to Steve.”

In an interview with WND, Kern said supporters of multiculturalism typically have derided any news source or politician who dares openly proclaim the existence of “no-go” zones throughout Europe.

He believes the damage done to Emerson by the comment will pass.

“Emerson is a solid researcher, and his work is very well respected,” Kern said. “I think this will blow over; but we’re already entering presidential campaign mode for 2016, and I believe the entire controversy over ‘no-go’ zones in Europe is a completely fake, contrived controversy.

“I think the controversy is really only in the United States, and the French picked up on it,” he said. “If you read the readers comments in the French newspapers on the Fox News controversy, it is overwhelmingly, like nine comments out of 10, that readers agree with what Fox News said originally. Ordinary readers in France know what’s going on, even if the mainstream media on both sides of the Atlantic are trying to cover it up.”

Failed model

Kern believes the “multicultural model in Europe is failing.”

“There has been so much invested in this over the last 30 years, that those people who are promoting this are very afraid this is going to be reversed,” he said.

Kern stressed that uncontrolled immigration of a growing Muslim population is the underlying issue in many European countries.

“In Europe, like in the United States, immigration is literally out of control,” he said. “But the big difference is that in the United States, when you have Latin American immigrants coming across the border, they have a Roman Catholic Western worldview. But in Europe, with mass immigration coming from North Africa and the Middle Eastern countries, it’s a completely different worldview.”

Consequently, he said, a “huge clash of civilizations develops in Europe, and I think that’s why many want to cover this up and discredit anybody who talks about this openly.”

He thinks “the writing is on the wall,” and many more terrorist attacks like the one on Charlie Hebdo in Paris are inevitable, particularly in Europe.

Kern cited the rise of populist politicians such as Marine Le Pen in France, with polls showing that if there were a presidential race in France today there would be a blowback, as “a lot of French people are upset that immigration, security and integration issues have been swept under the carpet too long.”

Read more at WND

Islamic State’s Sinai ‘province’ claims simultaneous attacks on Egyptian military, police

LWJ, By

Wilayat Sinai, or the Sinai Province of the Islamic State, claimed responsibility for a series of attacks throughout the Sinai yesterday via posts on Twitter. In a statement released earlier today, the organization said the operations were revenge against the Egyptian government for imprisoning the “sisters.” Two pictures of the attacks, one of which can be seen above, were posted with the statement.

The same justification has been offered by Ajnad Misr (“Soldiers of Egypt”) for its operations in Cairo and elsewhere. The jihadists claim that devout Muslim women are being oppressed by the government and, therefore, need to be avenged.

Wilayat Sinai says in its statement today that complex assaults were carried out against the Egyptian military and police in El Arish, Sheikh Zuweid, and Rafah. The raid in El Arish appears to have been the most sophisticated, as it involved three explosives-laden vehicles.

Interestingly, the group says that it launched the assaults, utilizing almost one hundred fighters (a claim that cannot be independently verified), after nighttime curfews went into effect. It did so to supposedly minimize the loss of civilian life.

The Islamic State and its so-called “provinces” are not known for their concern for civilian casualties in the Muslim majority world. Al Qaeda and its branches have attempted to steer their violence away from Muslim civilians, however. And, interestingly, Wilayat Sinai’s claim in this regard is again similar to how Ajnad Misr says it carries out its operations inside Egypt.

Ajnad Misr, which was designated as a terrorist organization by the State Department in December, is an offshoot of Ansar Bayt al Maqdis (“ABM”) and has not sworn allegiance to Abu Bakr al Baghdadi’s organization.

ABM’s Sinai faction pledged allegiance to the Islamic State last November and was quickly rebranded as the group’s Sinai “province.”

The number of casualties caused by the attacks varies across press accounts.

According to an Egyptian health official who spoke with Agence France Presse (AFP), at least 40 people were killed and dozens more were injured. Other reports say the number of casualties was lower. Wilayat Sinai’s statement implies that the number of people killed or wounded is much higher.

Regardless, the attacks are clearly the deadliest ones conducted by the group since it swore allegiance to the Islamic State.

The New York Times reports that the series of raids were carried out on the North Sinai security directorate headquarters, an army base, various security checkpoints, a hotel, the capital of the province, and a security camp.

Wilayat Sinai claimed several terrorist operations in late December, one on a natural gas pipeline that extends into Jordan and two others on Egyptian military vehicles.

The group has repeatedly targeted the Egyptian military in the Sinai, and killed dozens of soldiers in October, leading security forces to impose curfews in the North Sinai. Wilayat Sinai specifically mentions those curfews in today’s statement.

According to CNN, hundreds of police and troops have been killed in the last year and a half, since the military’s ouster of President Mohammed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood in July 2013.

According to one report in the Financial Times , Wilayat Sinai’s large-scale operations may have spurred smaller cells in other cities to also strike out in Suez, Cairo, and Port Said.

Despite the military’s crackdown since October, security forces are clearly unable to prevent these types of significant, multi-stage assaults from happening, highlighting flaws in Egypt’s ability to combat the jihadists.

Following Thursday’s raids, Egypt’s Supreme Council of Armed Forces (SCAF) released a statement on the army spokesman’s Facebook page announcing it would ramp up operations to crackdown on militants in the Sinai. And President Abdul Fattah al Sisi cut his trip to an African Union summit in Ethiopia short due to the attacks.

In addition to the photo shown above, Wilayat Sinai released this photo from yesterday:

Middle East Terror: Iran’s influence grows after Yemen’s political collapse

CSP, by Fred Fleitz, Jan. 30, 2015:

The international community is starting to realize the seriousness of the political chaos in Yemen, which has expanded Iranian influence in the region, bolstered Al Qaeda and could lead to the secession of the southern part of the country. This situation may also result in a political realignment that puts the family of the former autocratic president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, back in power in an alliance with the Iranian-backed Houthis, a Shiite insurgent group in northern Yemen that forced President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi and his cabinet to resign last week.

The political deterioration in Yemen might have been prevented if the United States had fully backed Hadi and not gone along with a transition plan that removed Saleh from power in 2012 but did not force him from Yemen’s political scene.

Saleh used his influence to undermine the Hadi government through army units and tribes loyal to him. While Hadi closely cooperated with U.S. counterterror operations against Al Qaeda, the Obama administration did nothing to prop him up. Unaware of the how fragile the Hadi government was, the Obama administration as recently as last September claimed Yemen was a success story for U.S. Middle East policy.

On Sept. 10, President Obama said in a speech, “This strategy of taking out terrorists who threaten us, while supporting partners on the front lines, is one that we have successfully pursued in Yemen and Somalia for years.” Two weeks later, the United States recommended U.S. citizens leave Yemen after Houthi rebels occupied Sanaa, the capital, and Al Qaeda fired a rocket at the U.S. embassy.

Massive Arab Spring protests in 2011 led to Saleh’s resignation in February 2012 after more than 33 years in power. Having been granted immunity from prosecution in a deal that handed power to Hadi, Saleh’s main objective since he left office reportedly has been to propel his son, Ahmed Ali Saleh, to the Yemeni presidency.

Even though his government persecuted the Houthis and they were part of the Arab Spring demonstrations that drove him from office, Saleh struck an alliance with Houthi leaders that allowed them to occupy Sanaa last September. Because of recent demonstrations in Sanaa by its Sunni majority against the resignation of the Hadi government and the occupation of the city by the Shiite Houthis, Houthi leaders may be considering restoring the corrupt Saleh family to power or installing a Saleh family ally. According to Yemeni law, Parliament Speaker Yahia al-Rai, a close ally of Saleh, is next in line to assume the presidency.

The return of the Saleh family to power would be a step backward for Yemen and could pose significant security implications for the region and the United States. If the Saleh family or a Saleh ally assumes the presidency, the new government probably would abandon Hadi’s power-sharing and political reform efforts, most of which were opposed by the Houthis. Such a transition would bring back the corruption and probably the oppression of the Saleh regime.

A new Yemeni government, whether it is headed by the Saleh family or not, will be controlled by the Iran-backed Houthis. This deeply worries the Saudis, who regard the Houthis as an Iranian proxy and last year declared them a terrorist organization. Although the U.S. might be able to buy off a new Yemeni government to get it to continue to participate in counterterrorism efforts, the Iran angle, the Houthis’ hatred of the United States and Saleh’s possible anger over being removed from power could make this difficult to achieve.

Meanwhile, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), the world’s most dangerous Al Qaeda franchise, and the separatist Southern Movement, which wants southern Yemen to secede, are poised to exploit Yemen’s political chaos and may be collaborating. AQAP has tried to take advantage of the chaos of the last few months by staging suicide attacks in Sanaa.

Further complicating this situation, ISIS reportedly has entered the scene in Yemen and is competing with AQAP for recruits. Saudi leaders also are worried about Islah, a growing Muslim Brotherhood party in Yemen.

Although the Houthis are enemies of the Southern Movement and AQAP, they are looking for autonomy for their area in the north and probably have no plans to invade the south to battle these groups. This could lead to the secession of parts of southern Yemen (which had been a separate state until 1990) and a stronger, more consolidated AQAP.

The Obama administration needs to work with regional states, Europe and the United Nations to come up with a comprehensive strategy to promote stability, power sharing among regional groups and a new constitution in Yemen. Though there are currently many unknowns as to how the political crisis there will play out, given the country’s reliance on Saudi financial aid to run the government — aid that Riyadh cut off in December — and the Houthis’ hostility toward AQAP, an agreement between the international community and the Houthis to implement such a strategy may eventually be possible.

But even if such an agreement is reached, Iran’s increased influence in Yemen through the Houthis is unlikely to be reversed and will pose new security concerns for Saudi Arabia, the United States and the region.

Taliban claim insider attack at Kabul Airport that killed 3 US contractors

LWJ, by Bill Roggio, Jan. 30, 2015:

The Taliban claimed last evening’s attack at Kabul International Airport that killed three American contractors. The insider or green-on-blue attack, where a member of the Afghan security forces kills Coalition personnel, is the first of its kind recorded this year.

The attacker, who was dressed in an Afghan military uniform, killed the three contractors and wounded one, Major General Haq Nawaz Haqyar, the commander of Afghan police at the airport, told Pajhwok Afghan News . An Afghan was also killed in the shooting, Haqyar said. It is unclear if the Afghan who was killed was the shooter.

The US Department of Defense confirmed that three Americans and an Afghan were killed in the shooting.

Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Muhajid claimed the attack in two statements on his Twitter account, and said it was executed by Ihsanullah, an “infiltrator … from Laghman province working inside Kabul airport.”

“The attack killed 3 American terrorists and wounded 4 others before the infiltrator was martyred by return fire,” Muhajid claimed. The tweet included the hashtag “Khaibar,” a reference to the Taliban’s offensive that was announced in May 2014. The Taliban said it will continue to launch insider attacks, as well as encourage Afghan soldiers to execute such operations.

The Taliban have devoted significant effort into attempts to kill NATO troops and foreigners by infiltrating the ranks of Afghan security forces. Mullah Omar affirmed this in a statement released on Aug. 16, 2012, when he claimed that the group had “cleverly infiltrated in the ranks of the enemy according to the plan given to them last year [2011],” and he urged government officials and security personnel to defect to the Taliban as a matter of religious duty. Omar also noted that the Taliban had created the “Call and Guidance, Luring and Integration” department, “with branches … now operational all over the country,” to encourage defections. [See Threat Matrix report, Mullah Omar addresses green-on-blue attacks.]

Overall number of insider attacks still unknown

The last known insider attack took place on Sept. 16, 2014 in the western province of Farah. In that attack, an Afghan soldier gunned down a Coalition trainer inside a military base.

The previous attack occurred on Aug. 5 at a training center in Kabul. An Afghan soldier killed a US major general and wounded 16 more military personnel, including a US brigadier general, a German general, five British troops, and at least one Afghan officer. The Taliban did not claim credit for the attack, but praised the Afghan soldier who executed it.

There were four insider attacks recorded in Afghanistan in 2014, according to The Long War Journal’s statistics. The number of reported green-on-blue attacks on Coalition personnel in Afghanistan has dropped steeply since a peak of 44 in 2012. In 2013, there were 13 such attacks. [For in-depth information, see LWJ special report, Green-on-blue attacks in Afghanistan: the data.]

The decline in attacks may be due to several factors, including the continuing drawdown of Coalition personnel, reduced partnering with Afghan forces, and the adoption of heightened security measures in interactions between Coalition and Afghan forces.

However, many insider attacks remain unreported. If an attack by Afghan personnel does not result in a death or injury, and it is not reported in the press, the Coalition will not release a statement on the incident.

The International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), which was disbanded at the end of 2014, told The Long War Journal in March 2012 that “these statistics,” the number of attacks that did not result in a casualty, are “classified.”

“[A]ttacks by ANSF on Coalition Forces … either resulting in non-injury, injury or death … these stats as a whole (the total # attacks) are what is classified and not releasable,” Lieutenant Colonel Jimmie Cummings, ISAF’s former Press Desk Chief, told The Long War Journal. Cummings said that ISAF is “looking to declassify this number.” The number was never declassified.

Admirals, Generals: Pentagon Tapes Indict Hillary

WND, by Jerome Corsi, Jan. 29, 2015:

NEW YORK – Recordings of top Pentagon officials in 2011 strongly criticizing Hillary Clinton for leading a State Department “march to war” against Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi in 2011 and for working with the Muslim Brotherhood confirm the conclusions of the Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi, according to members who spoke to WND.

CCB members said the recordings revealed by the Washington Times provide additional evidence to support the group’s interim report concluding the Obama administration “changed sides” in Libya, rejecting an effort by Gadhafi to abdicate and choosing instead to arm al-Qaida-affiliated militia seeking to forcibly oust the dictator.

Last week, WND reported retired Adm. James Lyons’ conclusion the Obama administration could have ousted Gadhafi peacefully by accepting a deal brokered in March 2011 by retired Rear Adm. Chuck Kubic with AFRICOM in Germany.

“The release of the Pentagon secret tapes by the Washington Times today validates the CCB interim report that the Libyan war was totally unnecessary, since it now has been validated that Gadhafi was willing to abdicate and that he had no intention of causing a humanitarian crisis, as promoted by Hillary’s State Department,” said Lyons, a former four-star admiral who served as the commander-in-chief of the U.S. Pacific and a founding member of the CCB.

The CCB – comprised of 17 retired admirals and generals; former intelligence agents; active anti-terrorist experts; media specialists; and former congressmen – has been conducting its own investigation and working behind the scenes for the past year and a half to ensure Congress uncovers the truth of what happened in Benghazi and holds people accountable.

“It is long past time that the Obama administration and especially his then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton come clean about why they were so determined to turn on Gadhafi – our ally in the war against al-Qaida – and instead chose to arm and support al-Qaida militias fighting to overthrow him,” said Clare Lopez, a former career operations officer with the CIA and currently vice president for research at the Washington-based Center for Security Policy.

Lopez said it’s “critical to note that Gadhafi was actively engaged with Department of Defense officials to arrange discussions about his possible abdication and exile when that promising development was squashed by the Obama White House.”

“The Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi has been asking ‘Why?’ for well over a year now,” she said. “It is time the American people and the families of those who fought and gave their lives at Benghazi in September 2012 were told why those brave Americans had to die at all, much less die alone with no effort made to save them.”

Retired Army Maj. Gen. Paul E. Vallely, another CCB founding member, told WND in an email that the Washington Times disclosure puts additional pressure on Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., to subpoena Clinton and other key Obama administration officials to testify soon in public before the House Select Committee on Benghazi.

“Delays by Gowdy are unnecessary at this time,” Vallely insisted. “Gowdy can press forward now as he does have sufficient intelligence and documents to call all witnesses and issue subpoenas as necessary.”

“Additional delays will only give the obstructionists in the Obama White House, the State Department and the Democrats in Congress time to thwart the efforts of the select committee,” Vallely said. “Gowdy needs to call immediately former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former Obama administration CIA Director General David Petraeus and former director of both the CIA and the Department of Defense Leon Panetta, as well as General Dempsey, the current chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.”

Retired Air Force Gen. Thomas McInerney, also a founding member of the CCB, was equally disturbed over the content of the Pentagon recordings revealed by the Washington Times.

“It becomes obvious these Pentagon tapes reveal a starting point by the Obama administration to start switching sides by taking down Gadhafi when all informed analysts knew that Benghazi was the incubator for radical Islam in sending suicide bombers to Iraq to kill American troops,” McInerney said.

“Why the administration wanted to do this is bewildering, but the evidence continues to grow,” McInerney added, citing as evidence President Obama’s enthusiastic support for former President Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood in his country, as well as the Obama administration determination to exchange five Muslim “high value targets” from Guantanamo for U.S. Army soldier Bowe Bergdahl, who was held captive by Taliban-affiliated radicals in Afghanistan after he allegedly deserted his unit.

The disclosure of the Pentagon recordings also prompted CCB members to comment on the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood on the Obama administration.

“The war in Libya was a manufactured war produced in part by the influence the Muslim Brotherhood exerted on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, with the Muslim Brotherhood penetrating her office through the influence of Huma Abedin, Clinton’s longtime deputy chief of staff, who transferred to the State Department to serve as Clinton’s aide,” Lopez added.

WND has reported extensively Abedin’s family origins in the Muslim Brotherhood and her work for a dozen years as an assistant editor for the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs for the Institute for Muslim Minority Affairs. The organization was founded by her late father and directed by her mother with the full backing of the Muslim World League, an Islamic organization in the Saudi holy city of Mecca founded by Muslim Brotherhood leaders.

“Remember that Huma Abedin’s family’s Saudi ‘godfather’ is Abdullah Omar Nasseef, the founder of Rabita Trust, an al-Qaida funding institution that was shut down after 9/11. These were the connections advising our secretary of state — it’s called an influence operation,” Lopez said.

Lopez said that also during that time, among the closest advisers to John Brennan, now head of the CIA, and Dennis McDonough, currently White House chief of staff, when they were on the National Security Council was the son of the Sudanese grand mufti, Imam Mohamed Magid, the president of the Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated Islamic Society of North America, ISNA.

ISNA was listed by the Department of Justice as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 2008 Holy Land Foundation trial, which convicted the organization and its leaders of funding the terrorist organization Hamas, Lopez noted.

Magid, imam at All Dulles Area Muslim Society, near Washington, D.C., is a member of the board of advisers to the Department of Homeland Security’s Countering Violent Extremism working group.

***

UAE, Qatar Pouring Millions into Brookings on Nuclear Iran, Terrorism Policy

Washington Free Beacon, by Alana Goodman, Jan. 28, 2015:

The Brookings Institution has accepted over $7 million from the United Arab Emirates and Qatar since 2013 to fund research issues related to the Iranian nuclear negotiations and terrorism, according to records obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

The think tank revealed the financial information to Congress as a result of the new “Truth in Testimony” public disclosure law, part of the rules package passed by Congress at the beginning of the year. The new law requires congressional witnesses to report any foreign contributions their organizations have received that are related to the hearing topic.

On Tuesday, Brookings nonresident fellow J.M. Berger testified at a House Foreign Affairs subcommittee hearing on “The Evolution of Terrorist Propaganda: The Paris Attack and Social Media.”

Berger filed a disclosure form stating that since 2013 Brookings had received millions in foreign funding potentially related to the hearing issue from the governments of Norway, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates.

In 2015, the UAE gave Brookings $1 million as part of a three-year grant that began in 2013, Qatar contributed $1.1 million, and Norway gave $800,000.

Qatar has already promised $557,657 in funding for 2016, according to the disclosure form.

Brookings senior fellow Robert Einhorn, who testified at a House hearing on Iran Nuclear Negotiations After the Second Extension on Tuesday, disclosed that the think tank had received several million dollars from the UAE, Norway, and CENTCOM potentially related to the issue.

The New York Times reported last September on the influence of foreign government money on research at the Brookings Institution and other think tanks.

The Times reported that Qatar had pledged a four-year, $14.8 million donation in 2013 to Brookings, which recently opened a center in Doha.

The endless Muslim indoctrination of hate in children

With the 70-year anniversary of the end of the horrendous holocaust, founded by Amin al-Husseini (the Ottoman Palestinian jihad founder) in collaboration with the Nazi’s, it is about time the general public learn that the endless hate propaganda and persecution of Jews originates from Muslims and Islam 1,400 years ago. Muslim racism against the Jews was imported into Europe for more than 1,000 years via 580 Muslim attacks, occupation efforts and slave raids.

Amin Al-Husseini was sentenced to ten years imprisonment for violent riots initiated against the British, but was pardoned. Had the British executed him instead and before he got appointed Grand Mufti to establish his jihad we may not have had the Palestine-Israel conflict today, which is now the foremost subject in every Muslim country worldwide. Muslims will always persecute the Jews and seek to hate and kill them, unless the Quran changes, but Al-Husseini made this ideal…

Voluntary’ Sharia Tribunal in Texas: This Is How It Starts

Islamic Tribunal Website

by Pamela Geller, Breitbart, January 28, 2015:

Hijab Day at NP3 High School

Jihad Watch, by Robert Spencer, Jan. 28, 2015

A Jihad Watch reader in the Sacramento area has sent me this flier (click to enlarge), showing that today is NP3 Hijab Day at NP3 High School. NP3 stands for Natomas Pacific Pathways Prep; the school is in the Natomas Unified School District in Sacramento. This all started with a student at NP3 High who is an intern for the Hamas-linked terror organization the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). This student gave a presentation about Islamophobia and Islam at what was a mandatory staff meeting that also included an official CAIR representative.

The school then now decided to sponsor an official “Hijab Day” in cooperation with Hamas-linked CAIR. The flier also shows that another Muslim Brotherhood-linked organization, the Muslim Students Association, is also involved. Every female member of the faculty and staff, and students as well, has been encouraged to wear a hijab today. NP3’s principal, Tom Rutten, has been strongly encouraging everyone to participate and wear one.

Please contact Tom Rutten and let him know, politely and courteously, that there are religion-and-state issues involved here, and also that public schools should not be working with groups that have demonstrable and proven links to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. Also ask him when is NP3 Priest Collar and Nun Habit Day, and when is NP3 Kippah Day — or is it only Islam that gets this treatment? Ask him when is NP3’s day to honor women and girls who have been brutalized and murdered for not wearing hijab. Ask him why he is celebrating a garment that is, for all too many women, a sign of oppression and misogyny. Rutten is at 916-567-5740.

Scott Dosick is President of the Board of Trustees of the Natomas Unified School District. He is at sdosick@natomas.k12.ca.us. Remember that over at Hamas-linked CAIR they will be licking their chops and ready to pounce on any indication that Rutten or Dosick have been getting “hate messages” or “threats.” Do not give them ammunition in their jihad against freedom: be polite, courteous and reasonable in all communications, limiting discussion to asking calmly why Islam is getting this preferential treatment in a public school.

Surrender: BBC Arabic and Al Jazeera English want to ban the word “terrorist” from reporting

By Allen West, Jan. 28, 2015

Is anyone still talking about Charlie Hebdo? I wondered how long the response would last. We saw world leaders come together – well, one was missing — to denounce the violence and stand for free speech.

Everyone was saying this would be the turning point and perhaps finally there would be global and widespread condemnation of militant Islamic jihadism.

Well, the only sustained response has come from the Islamic terrorists themselves– from the Philippines, to Yemen, to Kabul, and just recently in Tripoli. And all you have to do is listen to the words of Turkish President Erdogan, who blamed the cartoonists and the violent protests from across the Islamic world — because you’re not allowed to “mock” Muhammad. And if you didn’t know, that’s one of the traditions of Muhammad, since he killed those who mocked him.

So here we are, what — two, three weeks later after the horrific massacre in Paris? And what is the response from Western media?

Surrender.

As reported by the UK Telegraph, a senior executive at the BBC said “the perpetrators of the Charlie Hebdo massacre in Paris should be not be described as “terrorists” by the BBC as the term is too “loaded.”

“Tarik Kafala, the head of BBC Arabic, the largest of the BBC’s non-English language news services, said the term “terrorist” was seen as “value-laden” and should not be used to describe the actions of the men who killed 12 people in the attack on the French satirical magazine.”

“We try to avoid describing anyone as a terrorist or an act as being terrorist,” Mr Kafala told The Independent.“What we try to do is to say that ‘two men killed 12 people in an attack on the office of a satirical magazine’. That’s enough, we know what that means and what it is.” He added: “Terrorism is such a loaded word. The UN has been struggling for more than a decade to define the word and they can’t. It is very difficult to.”

The BBC is not alone. The Washington Times reports that “Al Jazeera English executive Carlos van Meek banned his news employees from using words like “terrorist,” “Islamist” and “jihad,” explaining that it’s important to realize that some might take offense — that one person’s idea of terrorism is simply another person’s fight for freedom.”

Yes, one person’s savage beheading of a civilian, is just…well, a savage beheading – but it’s ok, because it’s in the fight for freedom.

It just never ceases to amaze me how the Islamapologists will just break their necks to play nice and not offend the enemy. They’ll come up with the most inane excuses to basically say there’s no reason to refer to the enemy in the manner in which they refer to themselves.

Not only are Islamic terrorists killing us, they’re making us too scared to even call them who they are — the ultimate in forced censorship. How could this happen?

Think of the battles Western civilization has fought against Islamic jihadism. Charles Martel in 732 at the Battle of Tours. The Venetian fleet in 1571 at Lepanto. The Germanic and Polish Knights at the Gates of Vienna in 1683. Or how about a young America which crushed the Barbary pirates of North Africa in the early 1800s? When did we become so cowardly — and folks, that is exactly what this is. Oh, excuse me, not all of us — when did the leadership in the West become so doggone skittish?

“Of the Paris case, Mr Kafala said: “We avoid the word terrorists. It’s a terrorist attack, anti-terrorist police are deployed on the streets of Paris. Clearly all the officials and commentators are using the word so obviously we broadcast that.” Mr Kufala’s stance is in line with the BBC’s editorial guidelines on reporting “terrorism” which state: “[The BBC] does not ban the use of the word. “However, we do ask that careful thought is given to its use by a BBC voice. There are ways of conveying the full horror and human consequences of acts of terror without using the word ‘terrorist’ to describe the perpetrators.”

You gotta be kidding me. It appears the Patriots football team isn’t the only place you’ll find deflated balls.

Folks, if I were the Islamic terrorists, I’d press the attack as well. Weakness is so enticing and has a sweet aroma for those who sense fear. Can any of you imagine Sir Winston Churchill going on the air during the Battle of Britain and imploring the Brits not to speak ill of the Nazis?

“The value judgements frequently implicit in the use of the words ‘terrorist’ or ‘terrorist group’ can create inconsistency in their use or, to audiences, raise doubts about our impartiality. “It may be better to talk about an apparent act of terror or terrorism than label individuals or a group.” When reporting an attack, the BBC guidelines say it should use words, which specifically describe the perpetrator such as “bomber”, “attacker”, “gunman”, “kidnapper” or “militant.”

In other words, try to find anything to call the enemy something palatable — not to the enemy, but for us. This goes beyond PC, it is abject dismissal and reflects a cowardly reticence to confront the “boogeyman.”

Some say we don’t need to define the enemy. Then how do you defeat them when you refuse to acknowledge the ideology that fuels them and is the core of their belief system? When Western media outlets run away in fear and report in a fearful manner, we will never see the enemy for who they are – because the media reports are in effect censored.

What this means is that the Islamic jihadists are winning the propaganda and information war.

You want an example of how insidiously pandering we appear? Read this closing statement: “A BBC spokesman said: “There is no BBC ban on the word ‘terrorist’, as can be seen from our reporting of the terrorist attack in Paris, though we prefer a more precise description if possible – the Head of BBC Arabic was simply reflecting BBC editorial guidelines and making a general point about the nuances of broadcasting internationally.”

There is no nuance when someone is being beheaded — and there should be no nuance in reporting such savage and barbaric behavior.

Jordan agrees to prisoner swap with ISIS in deal that could free pilot, Japanese journalist

Jordanian pilot, Lt. Muath al-Kaseasbeh was captured by ISIS fighters in Syria last month. (AP Photo/Raqqa Media Center, File)

Fox News, Jan. 28, 2015

Jordan has agreed to demands from ISIS that it release a female jihadist held since 2006, in a move that could free a Jordanian pilot captured in Syria last month and possibly a Japanese journalist who pleaded for his life in a video released by the terror group on Tuesday.

Jordanian government spokesman Mohammed al-Momani said in a statement the nation was prepared to free Sajida al-Rishawi, who was convicted of taking part in a deadly hotel bombing, if the Jordanian pilot, Lt. Muath al-Kaseasbeh, is released unharmed. His comments were carried by Jordan’s official Petra news agency. Although he made no mention of Japanese journalist Kenji Goto, a hostage audio message released by Islamic State a day earlier tied Goto’s fate to that of Al-Rishawi, as well.

Al-Rishawi was sentenced to death in Jordan for her involvement in a 2005 terrorist attack by Al Qaeda on hotels in Amman that killed 60 people. Jordan is reportedly in indirect talks with the militants through religious and tribal leaders in Iraq to secure the hostages’ release. The chairman of the foreign affairs committee of Jordan’s parliament, Bassam Al-Manasseer, has been quoted as saying that Jordan and Japan would not negotiate directly with the Islamic State group and would not free al-Rishawi for the Japanese hostage only.

Earlier Wednesday, the mother of the Japanese hostage, Kenji Goto, appealed publicly to Japan’s premier to save her son. The mother, Junko Ishido, read to reporters her plea to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, which she said she sent after both Abe and Japan’s main government spokesman declined to meet with her.

“Please save Kenji’s life,” Ishido said, begging Abe to work with the Jordanian government until the very end to try to save Goto.

“Kenji has only a little time left,” she said.

The Jordanian government is under growing pressure at home to win the release of the pilot, with his father, Safi al-Kaseasbeh, pleading with Jordan “to meet the demands” of the Islamic State group.

“All people must know, from the head of the regime to everybody else, that the safety of Mu’ath means the stability of Jordan, and the death of Mu’ath means chaos in Jordan,” he told The Associated Press as about 200 of the pilot’s relatives protested outside the prime minister’s office in Amman, chanting anti-government slogans and urging that it meet the captors’ demands.

The development came after Islamic State released a flurry of grim threats at the West, one of which included an apparent beheading of a captured Kurdish soldier. In that video, discovered by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) on Tuesday, three Islamic State fighters stand behind the kneeling Kurdish fighter as one of the extremists launches into a diatribe against the U.S. and other Western nations.

Read more

Islamic State appoints leaders of ‘Khorasan province,’ issues veiled threat to Afghan Taliban

An organizational overview of the Khorasan Shura. The Islamic State has appointed Hafez Saeed Khan as the Governor of Khorasan province.

By

Abu Muhammad al Adnani, a spokesman for the Islamic State, announced the group’s “expansion” into the lands of “Khorasan” — modern day Afghanistan, Pakistan and parts of the surrounding countries — and declared former Movement of the Taliban in Pakistan (Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan or TTP) commander Hafez Saeed Khan as the “governor” of Khorasan province. Khan had previously served as the Movement of the Taliban in Pakistan’s emir for the tribal agency of Arakzai.

Adnani made his announcement in a nearly seven minute audio taped speech titled, “Say, Die in Your Rage!” which was published on Jan. 26 2015 by the Islamic State’s Al Furqan media outlet. [For a translation of the speech, by Pieter Van Ostaeyen, see ‘Audio Statement by IS Spokesman Abu Muhammad al-‘Adnani as-Shami.’]

The declaration comes only a few weeks after a conglomeration of former TTP officials formed the Khorasan Shura and pledged bayat, or allegiance, to the Islamic State. [See Long War Journal report, Pakistani Taliban splinter group again pledges allegiance to Islamic State.]

The Islamic State spokesman acknowledged Khan’s pledge of allegiance to Abu Bakr al Baghdadi as Commander of the Faithful and the Caliph of Muslims, and claimed that Baghdadi had accepted the pledge and appointed Khan as the province’s governor and Mullah Abdul Rauf Khadim as the deputy governor. Khadim, a former Guantanamo detainee and former senior Taliban commander in southern Afghanistan, has reportedly been operating in Helmand province on behalf of the Islamic State. [See Long War Journal report, Ex-Gitmo detainee leads contingent of Islamic State fighters in Afghanistan.]

Adnani further urged the “mujahideen in Khorasan” to come forth and obey the commands of Khan and Khadim. Notably, Adnani also urged caution in his call to arms, noting that “the factions will assemble against you and the rifles and bayonets fixed against you will multiply.” He encouraged the mujahideen to stand firm against “factionalism and disunity” and to meet these challenges by “unsheathing your swords and spears.” Although not clearly stated, Adnani was issuing a veiled threat to the Taliban factions, both Afghan and Pakistani, that opposed the creation of the Khorasan Shura and who were opposed to the Islamic State.

The Afghan Taliban movement has been consistent in avoiding recognizing the Islamic State and its Caliph Abu Bakr al Baghdadi since the reclusive leader of the Afghan Taliban, Mullah Mohammad Omar, has previously held the title of Commander of the Faithful position since 1996.

Adnani’s declaration and Baghdadi’s reported approval for the Islamic State to expand into Afghanistan and Pakistan could incite divisions within the various Taliban factions operating in both countries. The cohesion of many Taliban factions has been compromised over the past few years, mostly due to attrition and leadership decapitations, as well as ideological differences and personal feuds.

Islamic State’s ‘province’ claims responsibility for attack on hotel in Tripoli

LWJ, by Thomas Joscelyn, Jan. 27, 2015

Gunmen stormed the Corinthia hotel in Tripoli early this morning, killing at least five foreigners and three guards, according to initial reports. Foreign government officials, including those serving as diplomats, and tourists have frequented the hotel in the past, making it an attractive target for jihadists.

The terrorists responsible for the raid reportedly met resistance from security forces. As of this writing, however, the siege was not over.

The Associated Press reported that a car bomb was part of the attack. Images posted online show what appears to be an explosion outside of the hotel. Some of the photos have been published on Good Morning Libya, a Twitter feed that is run by supporters of General Khalifa Haftar, whose forces have been battling jihadists throughout Libya. One of the photos can be seen at the beginning of this article. Online jihadists are claiming that suicide bombers were used in the car bombing.

According to the SITE Intelligence Group, the Islamic State’s so-called “Tripoli Province” claimed responsibility for the attack in a short message that was posted on Twitter. The message stated that “heroes of the Caliphate” are responsible for the operation, which has been named the “Battle of Abu Anas al Libi.”

An image published online by the organization’s media operatives can be seen to the right.

Al Libi was a core al Qaeda operative who was captured in Tripoli in early October 2013 and subsequently held in the US for his role in al Qaeda’s bombings of US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in August 1998. Al Libi passed away while awaiting trial earlier this year, and jihadists blame the US government for his death, even though he died of natural causes.

Al Libi’s capture in Tripoli by US forces was denounced by many in Libya. By naming the attack after al Libi, the Islamic State’s “Tripoli Province” is attempting to capitalize on the manufactured controversy surrounding his capture and death.

In some ways, the choice of name for the attack is ironic. The Islamic State’s “provinces” in Libya and elsewhere are part of emir Abu Bakr al Baghdadi’s attempt to build international support for his caliphate, and the Islamic State’s supporters are openly confrontational toward al Qaeda. Indeed, the Islamic State’s “provinces” are intended to draw support away from al Qaeda’s international network of official and unofficial branches.

However, al Libi was a loyal al Qaeda operative. Documents recovered in Osama bin Laden’s compound show that Al Libi was appointed to al Qaeda’s security committee after he was released from Iranian custody in 2010. He sought permission from al Qaeda’s most senior leaders before relocating to his native Libya. They granted al Libi’s request and he moved back to Libya in 2011.

An unclassified report published by the Library of Congress in August 2012 identified al Libi as a key player in al Qaeda’s strategy for building a fully operational network in Libya.

Pat Condell: A special kind of hate

Muslim anti-Semitism in Europe.

Jews in Europe report a surge in anti-Semitism

http://ift.tt/15K4otz;

74% of French Jews are considering emigration

http://ift.tt/15K4mlj;

Jews flee anti-Semitism upsurge in Europe

http://ift.tt/15K4mlp;

French Muslims see Jews controlling the economy

http://ift.tt/15K4mlv;

Islamic anti-Semitism

http://ift.tt/1tlIhEY;

The global pogrom

http://ift.tt/1tlIfwN;

Jews leave Swedish city after sharp rise in anti-Semitic hate crimes

http://ift.tt/1mGQ0Fv;

Reporter wearing kippah abused by Muslims in Malmö, Sweden

http://ift.tt/15K4mBY;

Jews attacked in Malmö days after synagogue vandalised

http://ift.tt/1tlIhF9;

Jewish woman beaten by Muslims in Sweden for wearing Star of David

http://ift.tt/1tlIhVq;

The mayor of Malmö blames Jews for anti-Semitism

http://ift.tt/15K4mC3;

Anti-Semitism in Copenhagen

http://ift.tt/15K4oKf;

Switzerland: Muslim protesters attempt to storm synagogue

http://ift.tt/15K4p0u;

Belgian cafe posts a sign banning Jews from entering

http://ift.tt/15K4p0x;

Anti-Israel protesters defend Hitler. Police eject pro-Israel man

http://ift.tt/15K4p0C;

Anti-Semitism in Britain. “Sit up and take notice.”

http://ift.tt/1tlIfNk;

UK Islam apologist admits to Muslim anti-Semitism, “our dirty little secret”

http://ift.tt/1tlIibV;

The Luton Islamic Centre is a hotbed of anti-Semitic hatred

http://ift.tt/1tlIfNt;

Jewish MP cancels surgeries after threat

http://ift.tt/15K4pha;

UK Muslim gang goes “Jew bashing”

http://ift.tt/15K4phg;

Another gutless UK politician condemns the current wave of anti-Semitism without once alluding to its source.

http://ift.tt/15K4q4H;

New York City councilman David Greenfield calls out the Jew haters for what they are

http://ift.tt/15K4pxC;

Arab TV teaching children to hate Jews

http://ift.tt/15K4pxL;

Daniel Greenfield: We need to talk about Muslim anti-Semitism

http://ift.tt/1tlIg3N;

Contemporary imprints of the anti-Semitic libel, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion

http://ift.tt/1tlIg3P;

Is the FBI Entrapping Innocent Muslims?

PJ Media, by Patrick Poole, Jan. 27, 2015

Any of my regular readers here at PJ Media can attest, I am no fan of the FBI’s counter-terrorism programs. Recently, I’ve been writing about the FBI’s failures to catch “Known Wolf” terrorists – individuals who were already known to law enforcement prior to their acts of terror. So no one can accuse me of being an apologist for the bureau.

But an article yesterday in The Guardian entitled “Counter-terrorism is supposed to let us live without fear. Instead, it’s creating more of it” by two individuals currently promoting the screening of their film “(T)error” at the Sundance International Film Festival falsely claim the FBI is engaged in a deliberate effort to entrap innocent American Muslims.

Here’s the case they make:

While making our film (T)ERROR, which tracks a single counter-terrorism sting operation over seven months, we realized that most people have serious misconceptions about FBI counter-terrorism efforts. They assume that informants infiltrate terrorist networks and then provide the FBI with information about those networks in order to stop terrorist plots from being carried out. That’s not true in the vast majority of domestic terrorism cases.

Since 9/11, as Human Rights Watch and others have documented, the FBI has routinely used paid informants not to capture existing terrorists, but to cultivate them. Through elaborate sting operations, informants are directed to spend months – sometimes years – building relationships with targets, stoking their anger and offering ideas and incentives that encourage them to engage in terrorist activity. And the moment a target takes a decisive step forward, crossing the line from aspirational to operational, the FBI swoops in to arrest him.

So they accuse the FBI of setting suspects up and then arresting them – entrapment. This “entrapment” claim is commonly repeated by defense attorneys and self-styled “civil rights” groups. In fact, that’s what the authors of The Guardian article explicitly say:

The cumulative effects of FBI surveillance and entrapment in communities of color have been devastating.

I’ll leave aside their “communities of color” smear, but there is one glaring problem with their entrapment claim: in no single jihadist-related terrorism trial since the 9/11 attacks has a federal court on ANY LEVEL found that the FBI engaged in entrapment. Many suspects have made the claim, but none have successfully argued it. In only one case I remember, that of Ahmadullah Niazi, did the Justice Department voluntarily drop an indictment because of the reliability of an informant.

Those who peddle these FBI entrapment claims have been found to regularly play fast and loose with data, such as describing terror conspirators who turn state’s evidence against their partners and are sentenced to jail for their roles in terror plots as “informants.”

Another tactic taken is to equate the involvement of an informant as a de facto case of entrapment, as do the authors of The Guardian article. They cite the arrest earlier this month of a Cincinnati-area man:

A recent example: on 14 January, the FBI announced that it had interrupted an Isis-inspired terrorist plot in the United States. Christopher Lee Cornell, a 20-year-old recent Muslim convert from Cincinnati, was allegedly plotting to attack the US Capitol with pipe bombs and gun down government officials.

But then they make a colossal leap with this non sequitur:

Cornell was arrested after purchasing two semiautomatic weapons from an Ohio gun store because the man that Cornell thought was his partner was actually an FBI informant.

So the reason he bought the weapons was because there was an informant? In the information made available so far, there’s no indication that’s the case. If the record of every single jihad-related terror case since 9/11 is any guide, it’s unlikely their claim will stand. One reason why these terrorism cases have universally withstood scrutiny by the federal courts are the extensive measures taken by the FBI to prevent entrapment.

As an example of how far the FBI will go to prevent someone from turning to terror, consider the case of 19-year-old Colorado woman Shannon Conley, who was sentenced last week to four years in prison. As the court record shows, the FBI repeatedly warned Conley over a period of months not to attempt to travel to Syria to join ISIS and even talked to her parents asking them to intervene. And yet she persisted in her plans and was arrested trying to board a plane bound for Turkey. Now her parents are saying “the terrorists have won” after her sentencing blaming the federal government for prosecuting their daughter.

If anything, this administration has bent over backwards to accommodate the concerns that they are unfairly targeting Muslims, such as special rules for dealing with the Muslim community and conducting a wide-spread purge of counter-terrorism training materials at the request of Muslim organizations. Curiously, none of this is mentioned in The Guardian article.

Attorney General Eric Holder, hardly a right-wing neo-con ‘Islamophobe’, has directly challenged the claims that the FBI uses entrapment targeting the Muslim community, telling one Muslim legal group:

Those who characterize the FBI’s activities in this case as ‘entrapment’ simply do not have their facts straight or do not have a full understanding of the law.

And yet The Guardian regurgitates a number of howlers, such as this:

And on campuses across the country, Muslim student associations have banned discussions of politics, terrorism and the “war on terror.”

But Muslim Student Associations (MSA) have had no trouble at all discussing politics, terrorism and the “war on terror.” In fact, you can’t shut them up from talking about it. One topic you won’t hear addressed at MSA meetings, however, are the long litany of senior MSA leaders who have been convicted in terrorism cases.

In the absence of actual evidence, The Guardian authors have to resort to anecdotes, including this one:

After a recent screening of our film at a New York City mosque, a young African-American convert to Islam, sporting a brown full-body covering with matching hijab, confessed to us that she feels uncomfortable discussing aspects of her identity. She does not speak about her religious conversion in public, for fear of attracting or encouraging informants.

Yes, because wearing a brown full-body covering with a matching hijab, no one would ever know she’s a Muslim.

This is how laughably ridiculous those who peddle this false narrative have sunk. Perhaps a review of some of the jihad-related terror cases where FBI informants weren’t involved is warranted:

Beltway snipers John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo

UNC-Chapel Hill vehicle jihadist Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar

Seattle Jewish Federation killer Naveed Afzal Haq

Little Rock killer Carlos Bledsoe (aka Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad)

Fort Hood killer Major Nidal Hasan

Would-be Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad

Boston bombers Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev

Cross-country jihadist spree killer Ali Muhammad Brown

Undoubtedly, if FBI informants had been used in any of these cases to prevent their terror attacks, The Guardian authors, Islamic “civil rights” groups and their ilk would be crying “entrapment.”

Four years on from Egypt’s uprising, are Copts better off?

coptic-christians

It has been four years since hundreds of thousands of Egyptian protesters gathered in the capital’s Tahrir Square in a popular uprising that ousted then-president Hosni Mubarak.

Like the majority of Egyptians living under Mubarak’s 30-decade rule, Egypt’s Coptic Christians, who account for estimated 10 percent of the country’s 85 million population, demanded change.

But as Egypt marks its fourth anniversary of the Jan.25 revolution, many within Egypt’s Christian minority say the country is now better off. In fact the situation for Egypt’s Christians is “better than what it was under the Muslim Brotherhood rule, Hosni Mubarak, and even their predecessors,” according to Charl Fouad El-Masri, editor-in-chief of Egyptian daily al-Masry al-Youm.

While the Mubarak state promoted itself as one of coexistence, the regime cracked down on building new churches and Christian worship sites. Christians were seldom assigned to leading positions in the government and especially in the military, in what many critics described as an official discrimination by the state. And like Muslim Egyptians, a significant number of Christians lived under poverty line and worried about unemployment and lack of freedoms.

But with the rise of religious extremism in the Arab world in the 1970s and with the emergence of terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda calling Arab Christians “legitimate targets,” the Christian minority found itself a target of violent sectarian attacks and a victim of an indifferent state. The 2011 revolution coincided with the deadliest year of sectarian violence in decades, including the bombing of an Alexandria church and the killing of two dozen Coptic protesters by Egyptian security forces.

Following the fall of the Mubarak regime and the beginnings of Islamist President Mohammad Mursi’s rule, however, security became a pressing priority in Christians’ demands. Attacks on Copts, who make 95 percent of Egypt’s Christian population, and their institutions have been widely reported on by the national and international media.

The emergence of ultra-conservative groups in post-revolution Egypt brought about a new wave of sectarian clashes that the government, according to critics, did not pay attention to. In 2013, a video emerged online showing Egyptian police standing idly by as a mob attacked a cathedral during a mass funeral.

“Egypt’s Copts suffered during the Muslim Brotherhood rule greatly,” El-Masri added.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party won the majority of seats in the 2011 parliamentary election; and its member Mursi became Egypt’s fifth president in June 2012.

Mursi’s decree, which granted him unlimited powers, reports about violent crackdowns on journalists, liberals and demonstrators were among many issues that brought thousands of Egyptians back out on the streets calling for the president’s resignation. On June 30, 2013, and in response to the new wave of clashes that paralyzed Egypt, the Egyptian army, led by General Abdelfattah al-Sisi, ousted Mursi.

Since then, the Muslim Brotherhood was pronounced a “terrorist organization,” and its members became targets of a violent state crackdown, resulting in hundreds of deaths among Mursi supporters. Sisi became Egypt’s president on June 8, 2014.

“The outcome of the January 25 uprising was a disaster for Egyptian Christians who participated in the uprising as citizens of Egypt demanding democracy and liberty,” said

Dr. Ashraf Ramelah

, the founder and president of

Voice of the Copts.

“When the Muslim Brotherhood terrorist group achieved power, it became a nightmare not only for Christians but for anyone opposed to them,” Ramelah added.

Under Mursi, Egypt’s Christians were “unwanted, targeted, and about to face the same terror Iraqi and Syrian Christians face under Islamist terrorism there.”

“I feel Egypt would have gone in that exact direction if the Egyptian army had overlooked the people’s demands to overthrow Mursi,” Ramelah added.

Recently, Sisi has promised to rebuild damaged churches in the country.

Islam: A Diseased Ideology

By Justin O. Smith

The world is being torched and destroyed by Islam __ the Mother of all totalitarianisms __ and its Koran, the precursor to Hitler’s ‘Mein Kampf’ and “Judenrein”. No matter the terms “moderate” or “extremist”, wherever one looks today, from Niger and the recent burning of seven Christian churches, the Yemeni government’s collapse, seventeen murders in Paris and Christian genocides in Iraq and Syria, Islam is found at the heartless center of these atrocities, as its leaders have stubbornly refused to modify, humanize and reform Islam and reconcile Islam with the modern, civilized world. And the world must not allow Islam to persist.

From their own lips, the world hears Islamic religious leaders and Muslim adherents to Islam confess their desire to commit heinous acts against America, Israel and the West in the name of Allah, because the Koran demands it. We hear them utter Islamic prayers and scream “Allahu Akbar” as they commit their murders. So, there’s an obvious problem within Islam that awaits rectifying.

My April 8, 2010 article (see April 8. NEWCOPY – FOX NEWS), for ‘The Reader’, illuminated a large Islamic threat to the U.S. from the Pakistani cleric Mubarak Ali Gilani and his Jaamat al-Fuqra groups based in New York, which have been responsible for ten assassinations and seventeen bombings in America, along with 100 Hamas and Hezbollah terror cells. Leo Hohmann at WND and the Clarion Project recently duplicated this information on January 20, 2015, using the same FBI files I referenced; however, in addition, they verified the locations of 22 paramilitary camps, from California to Tennessee, and they also suggested this number is closer to thirty-five.

In a recent recruiting video captured from Gilani’s “Soldiers of Allah”, Gilani states: “We are fighting to destroy the enemy. We are dealing with evil at its roots and its roots are in America.”

A British terrorist supporter, imam Anjem Choudary and “Muslims Against the Crusades” began work in 2011 to turn twelve British cities, including London (“Londonstan”), into Islamic states. They advocate and plan for autonomous areas controlled by Sharia law, outside British jurisprudence; eighty-five Sharia courts now exist there.

Choudary defended the murderous ‘Charlie Hebdo’ terrorists. He also recently stated that the West can change their laws or there will be a “bloodbath”.

And so, why do the leaders of the United States and the European Union insist on bringing hundreds of thousands more Muslims into our nations, when the greater percentage of them seek our destruction and the end of our liberty? Just look at the Boston Bombers, the Tsarnaev brothers and Adnan Shukrijumah. But of course, Islam’s diseased ideology has infected many native born Muslims too, such as Anwar al-Awlaki, the Kouaci brothers and Anjem Choudary.

Europe and the U.S are properly alarmed by thousands of disenchanted Muslims, holding E.U. and U.S. passports, who have gone to fight in Syria and Iraq for Al Qaeda and the Islamic State. Combine this with open borders policies and an expanding cesspool of irrational, angry Islamofascists stretching from North Africa to Pakistan, and these Muslims pose a deadly threat to the civilized world.

The Egyptian government, Egypt’s President Sisi and the Ibn Khaldoun Center for Development Studies have warned the Obama administration repeatedly that the Muslim Brotherhood is exerting an inordinate influence on the U.S. government. They warn that the Muslim Brotherhood sponsors Hamas and that the MB is an international terrorist organization operating in sixty nations, “based on restoring the religious empire” (Islamic Caliphate).

On January 8th, the head of Britain’s MI5 Security Service, Director General Andrew Parker gave a speech at MI5 headquarters in London. He warned that Al Qaeda in Syria was preparing to inflict mass casualties in the West, possibly attacking public transportation and “iconic targets”. Part of his assessment stems from the appearance of Pakistani Al Qaeda in Syria.

While ninety-percent of Muslims will probably never be actual terrorists, well over 50% of the Muslim world has engaged in violent protests, mob violence and some act of war against the West, Israel and even its own people, since the Six Day War. Most Muslims also remain silent, but many cheer, about their brethren’s horrific terrorist attacks, such as 9/11 and, more recently, ‘Charlie Hebdo’.

Staying true to form after murdering more than 10,000 civilians last year (Reuters), the Islamofascists of Boko Haram murdered 2000 more innocent civilians, mostly Christians, in the Nigerian town of Baga, during the first week of January 2015. And we hold rallies, while the enemy continues on its murderous rampages, without a peep of protest squeaking out from any of the so-called “moderate” Muslims.

Turkish leader Tayyip Erdogan represents a regime that has provided material support to Hamas. He states that the term “moderate Islam” is “very ugly _ it is an offense and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam … “.

No politician has ever moved Islam to reform. A few have tried to create a new Islamic order, such as Sayyid Ali Muhammed (1819-50) and his Babi movement attempted. A decade ago, Pakistani President Musharaff and King Abdullah of Jordan called for “enlightened moderation”, however, the current Islamic trend is the systematic reversal of any gains made towards reform, like Ataturk’s philosophy in Turkey, and turning the “Arab Spring” into a campaign for the Islamic State and the return of the Caliphate.

On January 1, 2015, Egypt’s Pres, Abdel al-Sisi challenged religious leaders at Cairo’s Al Azhar University to start a “religious revolution”, because the Muslim community “is being … destroyed and is going to hell”. He continued: “It is inconceivable that the wrong ideas that we sacralize should make the entire [Muslim community] a source of concern … and destruction for the whole world”.

The Islamic component of terrorism must be confronted with extreme prejudice and deadly force by Europe and the United States, since millions of Muslims, who aren’t “extremists”, tacitly support Islam’s intolerance and terrorism. Without any reform forthcoming and the Islamic world beyond the force of reason, America must take the terrorists at their word and send these Islamofascists to hell, in a bloodbath of their own choosing, generation after generation, until they are all dead or they no longer seek to spread Islam by the sword and go forth to make war no more.

What Bobby Jindal Gets about Islam — and Most People Still Don’t

We need a great deal more honesty about the religion, as the “no-go zone” debate reveals.

National Review, By Andrew C. McCarthy, Jan. 24, 2015

In the birthplace of the Magna Carta, it has nonetheless become legally risky to speak with candor (even when quoting Churchill). Yet Louisiana’s Republican governor became that rarest of modern Anglo or American statesmen. Bobby Jindal told the truth about Islam, specifically about its large radical subset that attacks the West by violent jihad from without and sharia-supremacist subversion from within.

With Western Europe still reeling from the jihadist mass-murders in Paris at Charlie Hebdo magazine and the Hyper Kacher Jewish market, Governor Jindal outlined a bold, Reaganesque vision of American foreign policy guided by three imperatives — freedom, security, and truth. It is on the last one, truth, that our capacity to ensure freedom and security hinges. “You cannot remedy a problem,” Jindal explained, “if you will not name it and define it.”

And so he did: Our immediate security problem today “is ISIS and all forms of radical Islam.” That is, the challenge is not limited to violent jihadists who commit barbaric atrocities. Jindal elaborated: “In the West, non-assimilationist Muslims establish enclaves and carry out as much of sharia law as they can without regard for the laws of the democratic countries which provided them a new home.”

The campaign to implement and spread sharia is antithetical to Western liberty. Freedom, Jindal said, means “the ability to conduct commerce both inside and outside your borders; it means the right to speak freely, to publish any cartoons you want. It means the right to worship freely. It means the right to self-determination.” By contrast, “radical Islamists do not believe in freedom or common decency, nor are they willing to accommodate them in any way and anywhere.” Moreover, the version of sharia law to which they adhere

is not just different than our law, it’s not just a cultural difference, it is oppression and it is wrong. It subjugates women and treats them as property, and it is antithetical to valuing all of human life equally. It is the very definition of oppression. We must stop pretending otherwise.

It cannot credibly be denied that this is so, as I have documented — using not only notorious examples of how sharia is applied in countries like Saudi Arabia (where it is the law of the land), but also Reliance of the Traveller , a classic sharia manual certified as accurate by prominent Islamic scholars, including at both al-AzharUniversity (the seat of Sunni jurisprudence since the tenth century) and at the International Institute of Islamic Thought (an influential Muslim Brotherhood think tank).

Still, Governor Jindal has been pilloried since his courageous speech by tendentious critics across the spectrum, from the usual Islamist grievance chorus to Fox News commentators and British prime minister David Cameron.

Why? Because he dared notice what ought to be an inarguable fact: The non-assimilationist Muslim campaign has resulted in the rise throughout Western Europe of what Jindal described as “unofficial” “so-called” “no-go zones.”

Jindal was clearly right about this. His timing, however, was wrong: He had the misfortune to dilate on “no-go zones” at the same time that Steven Emerson, the usually astute terrorism analyst, made a no-go gaffe. Steve erroneously claimed that the entire British city of Birmingham is “totally Muslim” and has become a “no-go zone” where “non-Muslims simply don’t go in.”

Emerson has since apologized profusely. The damage, however, was done. Fox News is evidently so embarrassed at having been the forum for his faux pas (and at having been threatened with legal action by the city of Paris, which was the main target of Steve’s commentary), that the network is over-correcting. This helps stoke the Islamist meme that no-go zones are a hysterical figment of the “Islamophobic” imagination.

That is absurd, but follows naturally from two things: a common misunderstanding about sharia, and a misrepresentation that describing the incontestable fact thatsharia is being applied de facto in Europe is the same as falsely claiming that sharia is now the de jure writ of Europe.

Dreamy Islamophiles like Mr. Cameron and many of his like-minded progressives in bipartisan Beltway circles have a sputtering snit anytime a commentator associates Islam with anything other than “peace.” Consequently, the doctrine of Islam (which actually means submission) remains taboo and poorly understood in the West. One major misconception is that Islamists (i.e., Islamic supremacists or Muslims who want sharia implemented) demand that all non-Muslims convert to Islam. A no-go zone is thus incorrectly assumed by many to be a place that Muslims forbid non-Muslims to enter.

In reality, sharia explicitly invites the presence of non-Muslims provided that they submit to the authority of Islamic rule. Indeed historically, as I related in The Grand Jihad , my book about the Muslim Brotherhood and its Islamist ideology, because sharia calls on these submissive non-Muslims (dhimmis) to pay a poll tax (jizya), their continued presence was of economic importance in lands conquered by Islamic rulers.

It is therefore easy for Islamists and their apologists to knock down their strawman depiction of no-go zones as places where non-Muslims are not allowed. That is not what no-go zones are — neither as they exist in fact nor as they are contemplated by sharia. The point of imposing sharia — the reason it is the necessary precondition for building an Islamic society — is to make Islam the dominant social system, not the exclusive faith. The idea is that once sharia’s systematic discrimination against non-Muslims is in place, non-Muslims will see the good sense of becoming Muslims. Over time, every one will convert “without coercion.” The game is to set up an extortionate incentive for conversion while maintaining the smiley-face assurance that no one is being forced to convert at the point of a sword.

So radical Muslims will be welcoming to any ordinary non-Muslims who are willing to defer to their mores. What they are hostile to are officials of the host state: police, firefighters, building inspectors, emergency medical personnel, and anything associated with the armed forces. That is because the presence of those forces symbolizes the authority — the non-submission — of the state.

Notice, however, that no sensible person is saying that state authorities are prohibited from entering no-go zones as a matter of law. The point is that they are severely discouraged from entering as a matter of fact — and the degree of discouragement varies directly with the density of the Muslim population and its radical component. Ditto for non-Muslim lay people: It is not that they are not permitted to enter these enclaves; it is that they avoid entering because doing so is dangerous if they are flaunting Western modes of dress and conduct.

There is a reason that Governor Jindal qualified his invocation of the term no-go zones, modifying it with “so-called” and noting that the term is used “unofficially.” His speech was about reality, particularly where it stressed the need for truthfulness in forming policy. If our premise is reality, it is not no-go zones that are imaginary; it is the suggestion that no-go zones do not exist simply because non-Muslim entry is not literally prohibited by law. As the Gatestone Institute’s Soeren Kern painstakingly demonstrates, “Muslim no-go zones are a well-known fact of life in many parts of Europe.” It has been amply acknowledged not only in press reports and academicanalyses but by governments that must deal with them.

Have a look, for example, at the French government’s official listing of 750 Zones Urbaines Sensibiles­ — “sensitive urban zones.” France’s “ZUS” designation is significant. As the estimable scholar Daniel Pipes recounted in a column at

Nevertheless, the problem with all this semantic nattering is its intimation that we can only infer the existence of no-go zones, and of the Islamist subversion they signal, by drawing inferences from what we see happening on the ground.

Nonsense. The world’s most influential Islamic supremacists have told us in no uncertain terms that they see Muslim immigration in the West as part of a conquest strategy.

As I recounted in The Grand Jihad, the strategy is often referred to as “voluntary apartheid.” One of its leading advocates is Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the Muslim Brotherhood icon who is probably the world’s most revered sharia jurist. Sheikh Qaradawi, who vows that Islam will conquer America and Europe, and who has beencrystal clear on the incompatibility of sharia and Western democracy, elaborates:

Were we to convince Western leaders and decision-makers of our right to live according to our faith — ideologically, legislatively, and ethically — without imposing our views or inflicting harm upon them, we would have traversed an immense barrier in our quest for an Islamic state.

Translation: To establish Islamic domination in the West, we do not need to resort to terrorism or to force non-Muslims to convert; we need merely a recognized right to resist assimilation, to regard sharia as superseding Western law and custom when the two conflict, as they do in fundamental ways.

This is precisely why the Organization of Islamic Cooperation — the bloc of 56 Muslim countries (plus the Palestinian Authority) — warned in a 2010 report on“Islamophobia” that “Muslims should not be marginalized or attempted to be assimilated, but should be accommodated.” (Here, at p. 30.) It is why Recep TayyipErdogan, the Islamist president of Turkey who has systematically dismantled that country’s secular, pro-Western system, pronounces that pressuring Muslims to assimilate “is a crime against humanity.”

At Oxford, Bobby Jindal bluntly asserted that the ideology of our enemy, radical Islam,

holds the view that it is wrong to expect assimilation, that assimilation is colonialist, assimilation is backward, and assimilation is in fact evidence of cultural bigotry and insensitivity. They think it is wrong to expect that people who chose to immigrate to your country should be expected to endorse and abide by your laws. They think it is unenlightened, discriminatory, and even racist to expect immigrants to endorse and assimilate into the culture in their new country. This is complete rubbish.

That is the truth. The United States will not get national-security policy right, nor reestablish our credentials as leader of the free world, until we accept that truth. Accept it and resolve, as Governor Jindal has resolved, to tell it boldly.