Never forget 9/11 2001
Never forget Benghazi 9/11 2012
Those who forget history………….
The steel that won’t bend. God bless America.
Posted on June 20, 2017 – True Pundit
I adopted two infants from Korea and am the grandson of Italian immigrants — so why would I want to ban Muslims from immigrating to this wonderful, accepting nation? The short answer is that, “Immigration minus assimilation equals segregation and eventually invasion.” Think about it.
Let me get the obvious out of the way. Not all Muslims are terrorists, or support terrorism, but most good Muslims cannot be good Americans and still follow their beliefs.
June 6, 2017
Recent comments by Dar al-Hijrah Imam Shaker Elsayed endorsing female genital mutilation as “the honorable thing to do” reportedly is prompting calls within the congregation for Elsayed’s ouster.
The Falls Church, Va.-based mosque is among the area’s largest, so the conflict attracted Washington Post coverage Monday evening. But reporter Abigail Hauslohner repeatedly lost focus, cramming in references to the “right wing” organization which flagged the Elsayed video and to increased hate crimes targeting Muslims.
The undoctored video showing Elsayed’s comments about female sexuality was posted by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), which focuses on Islamist extremist rhetoric throughout the world. MEMRI is a non-partisan organization that has been quoted by international media thousands of times and also works with governments that span the political spectrum. In the interest of disclosure, Investigative Project on Terrorism Executive Director Steven Emerson served on MEMRI’s board for several years until recently resigning. Accusing MEMRI of being right wing — in a deliberate effort to discredit the widely praised international organization – tells you more about the reporter’s agenda than anything else.
The tape accurately reflects Elsayed’s comments – Dar al-Hijrah acknowledged this by issuing an apology. It vehemently rejected as offensive Elsayed’s claim that failure to clip a girl’s clitoris leads to “hyper-sexuality.”
But that wasn’t enough. After reporting about calls for Elsayed’s firing, Hauslohner again diverted a story about an extremist statement from an imam to an entirely separate issue.
Yeah, speaking as a religious community leader, he said something horrifying, the article implies. But, other people do horrible things, too!
Hauslohner invoked hate crimes statistics and last week’s murders in Portland of two men who defended a hijab-clad woman and her friend from a white supremacist lunatic. And she cherry-picked one overheated Twitter comment, noting that the writer’s avatar was a Trump-Pence campaign button.
That was relevant. Previous Elsayed statements showing a pattern of radical thought, however, were not mentioned.
In addition to his FGM advice, Elsayed dove headlong into anti-Semitism when he recently preached that peace with Jews is impossible, because they “will not deal with you fairly and squarely,” another MEMRI dispatch reports. Deception “is in the genes, it is in the blood,” he said in the video posted to the mosque’s YouTube channel Friday. Jews “have killed three prophets before, and they sent the fourth to the Romans to kill him or crucify him.”
Speaking to a student group in 2013, he said Muslims were first in line when there is a need for giving – for things like prayer, charity and community service. “But,” he added, “they are last if anything is being distributed, unless it is arms for jihad,” Elsayed said. “We are the first to rush and run to defend our community and defend ourselves. The enemies of Allah are lining up; the question for us is, ‘Are we lining, or are we afraid because, because they may call us terrorists.'”
In 2004, while serving as a top official with the Muslim American Society (MAS), Elsayed praised Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna in an interview with the Chicago Tribune. Al-Banna, who created a movement bent on creating a global Islamic state, offered “the closest reflection of how Islam should be in this life,” Elsayed said.
The article’s focus was on the Brotherhood’s secret American network. MAS, the Tribune reported, was the Brotherhood’s U.S. branch.
Two years earlier, Elsayed defended suicide bombers and the reverence they receive as “martyrs.” Speaking in Arabic at a conference MAS organized with the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), he decried the label “suicide bombers” as unfair. “Nobody who is not Muslim has any right to decide for us, we the Muslims, whose is a martyr or another. We as Muslims will decide that. It is in-house business.”
When Muslim honor is violated, he added, “Jihad is a must on every man, every child and every woman. [They have to make Jihad] with every tool that they can get in their hand. Anything that they can get in their hand they should fight with it. And if they don’t have a weapon in their hands, then [they will fight] unarmed.”
Shaker Elsayed is the story, or at least he should be. The Post’s “Yeah, but” approach deprived readers of significant and relevant context and hid the fact that, for 15 years, he has harbored and espoused the most radical ideology.
[The IPT accepts no funding from outside the United States, or from any governmental agency or political or religious institutions.]
When the left desperately try to frame even this problem as some attack on Muslims or Islam is too rich. The press will do it for them, no problem. So it’s us, the sharia and Islam resisters that are the problem — not what they are actually doing. Hard to believe that media in a free country would choose to take that route.
Trump reportedly backing off of executive order
Leo Hohmann — WND
President Trump has decided not to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a foreign terrorist organization, at least for now, according to published reports citing pressure from the U.S. State Department and the King of Jordan.
Anonymous sources told the Washington Times that the administration “backed down from a plan to designate the Brotherhood” after an internal State Department memo advised against it.
The State Department’s argument – put forth in a memo to the White House – comes down to a belief that there is actually more than one Brotherhood and that one side is not as bad as the other because it works through democratic processes in the Middle East, the Washington Times reports.
Yet, it’s always been known that the Brotherhood operates on multiple levels.
According to scholar Martin Kramer, the Muslim Brotherhood from its early days had “a double identity.” Kramer, as quoted by Discover the Networks, writes:
“On one level, they operated openly, as a membership organization of social and political awakening. [Founder Hassan] al-Banna preached moral revival, and the Muslim Brethren engaged in good works. On another level, however, the Muslim Brethren created a ‘secret apparatus’ that acquired weapons and trained adepts in their use. Some of its guns were deployed against the Zionists in Palestine in 1948, but the Muslim Brethren also resorted to violence in Egypt. They began to enforce their own moral teachings by intimidation, and they initiated attacks against Egypt’s Jews.”
Former Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., one of the earliest advocates of banning the Brotherhood in the U.S., describes it as “the mother lode of global terrorism.” She told WND President Trump is unlikely to be successful in defeating Islamic terror without confronting the head of the snake.
“It is the umbrella organization from which all terrorism flows because the Brotherhood’s goal is global Islamic rule,” Bachmann told WND. “It’s no coincidence that every terrorist act stems from the same Muslim Brotherhood motivation: Global governance under Islamic Shariah law.”
Again with the anonymous sources but, that aside, it is a reminder of the real problem. Sound familiar? Of course it does. The Muslims play the notion to the hilt that on one side there are terrorist Islamists while on the other there are those peacenik Muslims. Which ones are the activists? That would be the terrorist, caliphate ones — including ISIS, al Qaeda, Taliban et al. It’s blatantly obvious the peaceniks are not the activists, else they would be at odds with Islamist terrorists. But that disagreement and conflict is strangely missing, which is part of the problem.
It would be hard to imagine the “Shining city on a hill” — as Reagan coined the US — being the biggest promoter of abortion on the planet, if it is to remain true to that notion. But no, it doesn’t make sense. Nor does it make sense not to label a terrorist organization a terrorist organization, one with ties deep into this “shining city on a hill”.
Obama loyalists still at CIA fuel radical Islam
Jerome R. Corsi | Infowars.com – February 16, 2017 | Infowars
WASHINGTON, D.C. – It’s time to “drain the swamp” at the CIA, as former CIA Director John Brennan, a clear Muslim sympathizer, packed the agency with Obama loyalists determined to bring down the Trump administration.
Looking for anti-Trump leakers, President Trump needs to be as concerned about the CIA as the NSA.
Few remember that it was John Brennan’s private security company that was responsible for the breach of State Department files which sanitized the passport records (still never seen by the public) of presidential candidate and then-Sen. Barack Obama prior to the 2008 presidential election.
On March 21, two unnamed contract employees for the State Dept. and a third were disciplined for breaching Obama’s passport files. Two were found to be employees for Stanley, Inc., a security firm based in Arlington, Virginia, that was headed by former CIA agent John Brennan, who was then serving as an advisor on intelligence and foreign policy to Sen. Obama’s presidential campaign.
Brennan was an undergraduate at the American University in Cairo in the 1970s, where he studied Arabic. In 1976, he voted in the presidential election for Communist Party USA candidate Gus Hall. He speaks Arabic fluently, having served in the CIA as station chief in Saudi Arabia.
On Feb. 13, 2010, as President Obama’s chief counterterrorism advisor in the White House, Brennan hosted a public forum, co-hosted by the White House Office of Public Engagement and the Islamic Center at New York University, where he quoted a lengthy statement in Arabic which he didn’t translate for his English-speaking audience.
How come no one in the media ever talks about the real problem? Press is supposed to be our fourth estate, what keeps the public informed and the national conversation honest. (I know, but that’s the ideal you hear)
The poster child of this is the travel ban that got so much media attention. They decry it as a Muslim ban for one thing. It isn’t. How many Muslims have freely come and gone through America while this supposed Muslim ban was enacted?
Delta also has a major computer malfunction meltdown causing chaos and confusion. No, no one said that, media hardly paid attention to it. Instead, they only called Trump’s Executive Order “chaos and confusion.” So a major airline grounds itself but they are worried about 109 people scrutinized in their travel, from seven selected countries — now that is real chaos and confusion.
Protesters swarm airports causing chaos and confusion while protesting, you guessed it, the “chaos and confusion.” The protests that have gotten all too common. At the drop of a hat, Soros protesters descend. Please, anyone care about the real problems?
I have a suggestion for media and people from these affected countries. If you have a ISIS caliphate operating within your borders, you might need to be on a travel bad. Just saying.
Start with the real problem. Rather than anyone blaming America or the Executive Order; why not blame the real source of the problem? Why can’t they blame the root cause? Islamists, a caliphate and terrorism are the reasons such an order was necessary. They are the source of all the trouble. But they cannot address the fundamental problem.
And the people who are affected by this travel ban should look at the real source of their problem. If we were honest and faced the problem that way, we would realize what the real problem is. We must blame and aim at the radical Islamic terrorists and the terrorist, ISIS caliphate. To blame anything else is just a diversion from the truth. Deal with that problem and the other ones go away. But the left cannot seem to wrap it’s collective mind around that.
How about they go protest ISIS, terrorists, Islamists and Sharia-pushing clerics who created the reason for wide concerns? No, they’d rather blame a plan, they’d rather blame President Trump, blame racism, blame America….or anything but the real cause.
Listen to one of our own about how it is in one of those so-called “banned” countries.
That’s the way it is there. And they have problems with what we are doing in the USA?
One thousand chapters strong across America with 400 thousand members, ACT has been speaking out on the issues of Islamic Radicalism within our borders and beyond.
So it is only natural they had a curious eye on the inaugural events. Guess what they found at one of the services?
(ACT)On January 21st, the noble occasion of Interfaith National Prayer Service at the Washington National cathedral was poisoned by the presence of a radical Islamic cleric named Mohamed Magid.
The attendance of Magid at this occasion to honor President Trump and Vice President Pence, clarifies with absolute precision, how close the tentacles of radical Islam can stretch towards those with the very task of eradicating them.
Magid serves as the executive director of the All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS) Center and is the former executive director of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), which according to declassified FBI memos, acted as a Muslim Brotherhood front group as early as 1987.
Magid has endorsed sharia governance, and the establishment of an Islamic caliphate. To advance his dream of a caliphate, Magid believes in incremental infiltration of both government, and the media.
A 1991 document from ISNA’s mothership, the Muslim Brotherhood, stated “its work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within.”
The Muslim Brotherhood also considered Magid’s ISNA as “our organizations and the organizations of our friends.”
Given these facts, a man as dangerous and radical as Magid should not be allowed anywhere near the President of the United States.
Magid, and many others like him, are crafty characters who understand that by attending this noteworthy event, they can now claim innocence from radical ties since they were seen attending an interfaith prayer service with the President of the United States.
This is why eradicating the stealth jihad is one of the most critical aspects of the war on terror. While combatting ISIS is paramount, we must open our eyes to the infiltration taking place within our own borders.
Always trying to innoculate themselves against the boilerplate of radical Islam. If they wanted to try so hard not to represent themselves as radicals, then why are they engaged in proliferation of radicalism, as radicals? Of course truth and honesty are also their enemies, so it figures they would try to represent their real cause as harmless.
My friend, Pepp, recently reminded me of a scripture I think also apples here.
1 Peter 5:8
“Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour.
I thought ACT explained Islamists’ rationale very well. Just being seen at events is an attempt to normalize the very type of people who mean us harm.
This is all part of the greater problem I have tried, very hard, to write about. That is they are opportunists, in the same form of other radicals in our country. And they seek to extort every opportunity they can find. It is what they do.
…in their policy of bigotry.
Obama, let the door hit you on the way out.
H/T to Act for America
Let me check my end of the year list, not quite complete:
I mentioned the hypocrisy of the left.
I mentioned the evil nature of the Left
I mentioned the inability of the Left to relate to real, working people.
I mentioned the arrogance of Obama, Hillary and Democrats.
I mentioned how we are worse off now, practically than ever in history.
The world is more dangerous now than before Obama controlled the White House.
I wrote about reasons for supporting Trump, and some of the problems coming.
I mentioned what Islamists are doing to threaten and bring down America.
I mentioned political correctness, the favorite tool to push the Left’s agenda.
I said a lot about Russia, and where politicians failed to confront serious threats.
I talked about Christian victims and the Islamic agenda.
I mentioned most of the problems with ISIS and the caliphate.
I mentioned the stupidity of Democrats and some Republicans.
I mentioned the failure of the establishment and leaders to take people seriously.
I covered the mockery of Christians and their values everywhere.
I talked about the absurdity of the claim Trump was wrong for Christians.
I listened to all their absurd arguments on….well, everything.
I dignified their bafoonery by just talking about their schemes and motives.
I tried reasoning with the unreasonable Left.
I pointed out ruling class elitists and establishment don’t get it – and don’t care.
I’ve given much more time an energy to it all than they really deserve.
As to conclusions, well, that’s a deep subject. If enlightenment was the age of reason, then we are now in the age of anti-reason. That’s the point: the left no longer wants to explain, or even defend, what they do.
They just claim it is their inherent right to force their political ideology on everyone. And it is a political ideology. The harder it is forced down our throats the better they like it. The people who preach tolerance actually do not want to get along with anyone. Conflict is their means and their motive. Have you ever heard people talk so much about revolution while they were actually in control?
Hope and Change
Change is coming, change happened; but the naysayers are still wallowing in their denial. For eight years they talked about hope and “change.” Now it finally happened and boy are they pissed. We proved they really wanted no change at all, only total control.
Why didn’t they just say that instead of claiming to want change? Change you can believe in was total control, which is the only thing they do believe in. But total control does not require belief… only submission.
After the election, they are still campaigning only to overturn the results of the election. So they appeal to electors to overturn the results of the electoral college. They are never really satisfied, even when they get what they want. Or especially when they get what they want because then they just want more.
Hillary’s campaign and Democrats now complain about the influence Russia had in the election — or how much it hurt her. But then they claim Hillary won the popular vote by almost 3 million people. What is their point? So maybe they mean Russia hurt her electoral college path. Hmm, how’s that?
What about the Russiaphobia they spread about Trump? Do they care what effect that had? How about when Mike Morell, former CIA director, called Trump an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation? Do they really want to talk about the Russian effect? How about when they claimed Trump could not be trusted with the nuclear codes? But Hillary had a rogue server risking national security but they are talking about threats? Nuclear. The idea was to present Trump as a bigger security threat than Hillary.
What have we learned? As Solomon said, there is nothing new under the sun. Any means to their ends — or to clarify it, their means has no ends. Yet it is an incomplete list.
Now Michele Obama is out of hope, once again. No longer is she “proud” of America.
Fleeting pride didn’t take long. It makes me wonder what her hope was really in?
Feelings, “nothing more than feelings”:
[ABC]Obama said Russian President Vladimir Putin “is well aware of my feelings about this, because I spoke to him directly about it.”
Obama declined to say how the U.S. planned to respond, but White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Wednesday that Obama believes in a “proportional response.”
President Obama, the guy who promised Putin more flexibility in his second term, now says he told Putin to “cut it out” on DNC and Hillary’s campaign hacking. He warns the cyber threat is real…like the Russian threat, Syria, ISIS, and a near-term North Korea problem — all second only to that immediate Climate Change threat. Check!
RightRing | Bullright
Fake news alert: No assault, no victim, no news…. no phony racist attackers.
She made it all up — and now she’s under arrest.
The Muslim college student who claimed she was harassed on the subway by three men who shouted “Donald Trump,” called her a terrorist and tried to rip her hijab off her head has admitted to detectives that she concocted the entire story, the Daily News has learned.
“Nothing happened — and there was no victim.”
Where are the people who are worried about fake news. How about fake victims?
So her freedom of speech apparently includes filing false police reports.
Hey, fake news media, I got your “fake news” right here!
CNN tried to help Obama explain his legacy in an interview with Fareed Zakaria.
“The ability of ISIL[sic] to not just mass inside of Syria, but then to initiate major land offensives that took Mosul, for example, that was not on my intelligence radar screen,” Obama told Zakaria.
Oops, cleanup in isle one. Anyone would have to ask “what the hell else was not on your intelligence radar screen? And why the hell wasn’t it?” Not Fareed.
But don’t expect his sycophant media darlings to breach that deep subject with him. It was similar to his statement that his big error was not having a “day after plan” for Libya. He drops these assertions then….silence.
We know at the very same time his intelligence radar was failing, he was dismissing the threat of the ISIS caliphate by calling them a JV team, making excuses for them, and instructing us that they are not Islamic. Or he was engaged in arguing against people — lecturing us on — using the term “radical Islamic terrorism.” He was lecturing Christians about the Crusades and our lack of love. Most of which he took great pleasure in.
What was going on there besides his malfunctioning radar screen? It was that he embarked on a misinformation campaign about it all. It seems to reveal he did know but was in denial and trying to deceive us about it. Obama’s fellow travelers were also busy saying that our real threat was not from ISIS — and their vast network of sympathizers — but from “homegrown,”white Christian terrorism. Aka “Look over there, don’t look at Islam.”
That was all part of Obama’s misinformation campaign he rolled out on America while the Commander-in-Chief’s radar screen was supposedly on the fritz.
So he didn’t know or realize the threat of “ISIL” in real time. Normally he has to find out things from the media, first, and then be reminded while discussing his legacy.
Obama parses the damage by explaining it this way:
“Have we been flawless in the execution of what is a complicated policy in the region? Absolutely not. I think flawless is not available when it comes to foreign policy or the presidency, at least with mere mortals like me at the helm,” he told Zakaria. “But have we made, I think, the best decisions that were available to us, at each stage? The answer is yes.” – more
Still he claims to have made the best decisions… at each stage, even with a radar malfunction. Is he contemptible? Now we are being lectured about fake news stories.
RightRing | Bullright
6 Oct 2016 | Breitbart
Pollster and political analyst Pat Caddell discussed results from the latest Breitbart News/Gravis poll on Thursday morning with Breitbart News Daily SiriusXM host Alex Marlow, saying, “In particular, I’m fascinated with this refugee question. We’re seeing great opposition even among large numbers of Democrats and Hillary voters against the refugee expansion, which the mainstream media basically doesn’t cover.”
“It didn’t get a lot of play, or at least coherent play, in the debate,” continued Caddell. “That’s about sixty percent” opposed to the expansion of the program.
Caddell also pointed out that about seventy percent of those polled opposed the United States “relinquishing its management” role with the Internet, seeing it as “a really bad idea.”
About half of respondents saw it as “another sign of American weakness.”
I guess they will have to come up with some new names to demonize them.
Hungary has drawn criticism for favoring Christian over Muslim refugees from Syria and Iraq.
This week, Hungary, which has during the past year come under pressure for its handling of Europe’s mass migration crisis, has become the first government to open an office specifically to address the persecution of Christians in the Middle East and Europe.
“Today, Christianity has become the most persecuted religion, where out of five people killed [for] religious reasons, four of them are Christians,” Catholic News Agency (CNA) quoted Hungary’s Minister for Human Resources, Zoltan Balog, as saying. “In 81 countries around the world, Christians are persecuted, and 200 million Christians live in areas where they are discriminated against. Millions of Christian lives are threatened by followers of radical religious ideologies.”
Yet at the same time, many of our leaders like Obama and Hillary Clinton, along with countless subordinate officials, refuse to call them Radical Islamic Terrorists.
But they have seen fit to condemn the Crusades or criticize Christians whenever possible. And they do throw around words like Islamaphobia to describe their own political critics.
Faced with confronting ethnic or religious cleansing, they cannot be forced to utter the words radical Islamic terrorists. That could offend Muslims. But they can call out critics of their refugee policy that caters to Muslims as bigots. These leaders and officials worry about families of illegal immigrants or Muslims being ripped apart byt the rule of law, yet cannot condemn the slaughter of Christian families and cleansing in Iraq and Syria.
At least Hungary can call it out and recognize it — for the human rights catastrophe it is.
A frosty terrorism response to Turkey, and on to politics as usual.
Sorry, but we have never had a genuine “happier note” with Obama. Clearly his golden rule is never let terrorism get in the way of your political agenda. Turkey no exception.
Obama’s presidency has been terrorism by other means. He worries about offending his BFF Mo-Bro and the greater Islamic family. Obama stokes fears of Global Warming.
On Wednesday, Obama took less than a minute giving condolences to Turkey, saying he “called President Erdoğan” this morning. Then he said “On a happier note.” turning to the politics of his meeting in Canada. No matter how hard he tries, his climate change, global warming agenda will not defeat terrorism.
Contrast Turkey with Orlando where he didn’t even bother to call the governor. I cannot think of a more disgusting example of a President than Barack Obama, or their nominee.
We were told by Loretta Lynch that love and compassion are the solution to the terrorism in Orlando. Maybe if the victims in San Diego would have given the shooter another baby shower or housewarming, the Islamists would have taken a shine to them?
Now Hillary says
FB: “Terrorists have struck again in the heart of one of our NATO allies—and all Americans stand united with the people of Turkey against this campaign of hatred and violence. Already, stories of heroism on the part of Turkish police are emerging, as their quick actions to confront the suspects may have prevented an even worse tragedy. Today’s attack in Istanbul only strengthens our resolve to defeat the forces of terrorism and radical jihadism around the world. And it reminds us that the United States cannot retreat. We must deepen our cooperation with our allies and partners in the Middle East and Europe to take on this threat. Such cooperation is essential to protecting the homeland and keeping our country safe. Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims, their families, and the Turkish people.”
Do you mean “retreat” like you and Obama did in and after the Benghazi attack? You mean how you made excuses and lied about the source of that attack? You mean how we stood down our defense in response to that attack even while you were the chief proponent of military action in Libya? A place now known as a terrorist haven and failed state. Thanks.
John Kerry, live from Aspen, said:
“We are still collecting information and trying to ascertain what happened and who did it,” Secretary of State John Kerry told reporters Tuesday at the Aspen Ideas Festival. “And I won’t comment further on it except to say that this is daily fare. That’s why I say the first challenge we need to face is countering non-state violent actors.”
“Heigh-ho heigh-ho,” it’s off to collect we go…
You can bet that if Obama does say more about Turkey’s terrorism attack, it will be to lecture Christians for their reaction, lack of empathy, patience, or some nonsense. The brutal truth of the Islamic war on the West to be buried in a subterfuge of political attacks. Much like a terrorist cell, Obama really only has one thing in mind.
RightRing | Bullright
By George Drivas – June 24, 2016 | Associated Media Coverage
According to several recent reports, the Muslim community has made a donation in excess of $87,000 to the family of Orlando nightclub shooter Omar Mateen.
It’s currently unknown how the funds will be distributed, however it’s been said that the majority of the $87,000 will be allocated to Omar Mateen’s widow Noor Salman and father Seddique Mateen. Sources indicate that the remaining funds will be distributed among Omar’s siblings. Prior to distributing the donation, the Mateen family is expected to provide Omar with a ‘proper Islamic funeral’.
The whereabouts of Omar Mateen’s widow Noor Salman are currently unknown and cause for controversy as rumors of her potential grand jury indictment in connection to her husband’s June 12th shooting spree circulate…/
Hamza Aadil Malak made the following statement during his interview with Crane:
“Though we condemn the actions of Omar Mateen and will continue to stand with the victims of this unexpected tragedy, we must also stand with the members of our community. The family (of Omar Mateen) are unfortunately victims to this tragedy by association and the support we provide will be unwavering during this difficult time.”
So must stand up for the family of Omar after gunning down 100 people, killing 49. That is worthy of “unwavering support.” And that is standing with their [Muslim] community?
Message received. But Islamophopbia is the problem.
I’ve had it with the anti-Islamophobes.
by Abha Shankar
IPT News — June 20, 2016
The father of Orlando mass shooter Omar Mateen has longstanding connections to prominent Islamist groups in the U.S., a document discovered by the Investigative Project on Terrorism shows. Seddique Matin is listed as president of a then-new American Muslim Alliance (AMA) chapter in Fort Pierce in a July 1997 announcement archived by the IPT.
The AMA sponsored several radical conferences in the U.S. and its leader, Agha Saeed, has spoken in defense of convicted terrorists, including Aafia Siddiqui (a.k.a “Lady al-Qaida”), Palestinian Islamic Jihad board member Sami Al-Arian, and Pakistani intelligence lobbyist Ghulam Nabi Fai.
The Fort Pierce chapter is among 10 new AMA chapters opened, the announcement in an AMA bulletin says.
In its posts, the AMA refuses to consider any Islamist motivation for the attack and lays the blame for Omar Mateen’s massacre which killed 49 people at the Pulse nightclub solely on the country’s lax gun laws.
See IPT — The Investigative Project on Terrorism
Eric Bolling filled in on the O’Reilly Factor. A former Obama advisor, Nayyera Haq, argued for more gun control laws. Eric laid out the Islamist problem spreading like wild fire. Well, it’s hard to deny, hard as libs try.
The terrorist was “a homophobic who clearly had mental health issues”.
She claimed we are making progress on ISIS, but that as we make gains in the ME, ISIS gets desperate calling for lone wolf attacks. “As you beat back ISIS on the ground in Syria and Iraq, they spread to Europe and US. So that’s a separate problem,” she said.
Then came the revelations of CIA Director Brennan. He tells us the are coming here and scheming to exploit the refugee program and immigration. Nayyera Haq said:
“I think a big part of the answer is: now that it’s coming to America homeland, let’s not make it easy for people to get weapons like AR-15s or any other weapons… now, absolutely.”
Did she make that loud and clear? We have to sacrifice our rights and guns because the terrorists are coming here. That might have been a Freudian slip, but it’s the ugly truth. They must crack down on our rights because of Radical Islamic Terrorists and jihadis — which they can’t even mention — are obsessed with killing. Target guns not terrorists.
Let me flush that out further. Immigrants, real immigrants, typically come here to assimilate into America. Islamic radicals come here to assimilate America to them, Islam. They don’t want any part of assimilation and if we have to sacrifice or lose things because of them coming here, all the better. That is not immigration, that’s an invasion, a hostile takeover. But Islamists already declared war on us, so it’s no surprise.
Incidentally, the Radicals and Muslims are some of the most vocal supporters of gun control, why is that? I’ve read articles by so-called moderate, liberal Muslims for gun control. Stop looking at their Islam faith, blame our gun laws, they say. Absurd.
So now for a message to our Commander and Denier:
Mr. Obama, if you really want Americans to resent Muslims, then take our rights away and demand we sacrifice our guns because the Radical Islamists’ political agenda cannot be controlled or defeated. That will make Americans respect Muslims more, won’t it?
That is not a wise trade off: making new rights and protections for Muslims while you take away our Constitutional rights. Then again, Obama will not enforce the laws there now, and scrubbed regulations for offensive words. What these radicals and terrorists are doing is treason, something like what you’ve been doing. But here is the king of deception himself.
“The reason I am careful about how I describe this threat has nothing to do with political correctness and everything to do with actually defeating extremism,” Obama lectured us after Orlando.
“There’s no magic to the phrase ‘radical Islam. It’s a political talking point, not a strategy.”
“It wouldn’t make us more safe, it would make us less safe, fueling ISIL’s notion that the West hates Muslims.” – NOLA
Even within that rebuttal he could only call it extremism. Obama is an extremist obfuscater of the first degree. Our greatest threat is still sitting in the Oval Office.
RightRing | Bullright
“In fact, as the pressure mounts on ISIL, we judge that it will intensify its global terror campaign to maintain its dominance of the global terrorism agenda.”
“We judge that ISIL is training and attempting to deploy operatives for further attacks,” he said. “ISIL has a large cadre of Western fighters who could potentially serve as operatives for attacks in the West. And the group is probably exploring a variety of means for infiltrating operatives into the West, including refugee flows, smuggling routes, and legitimate methods of travel.”
“They’re taking advantage of the liberties that we’ve fought so hard to defend,” he said.
But Comander-Divert-and-Deny is worried about guns. Never mind immigration, border or refugee crises. Priorities. He has already disrupted our law enforcement process and supplanted political correctness throughout. He ignores the central, overwhelming threat. The one he shall not name, RIT. I smell another Obama lecture coming to Americans .
Message — target guns not Islamist terrorists.
I need to jump into my way-back machine to make some observational connections.
I’ve been following this popular political narrative for years, decades now. What I have seen is stunning hypocritical ignorance on the left to accept reality.
Back before Islamic radicalism was really on the radar to most people, we had these philosophical and religious conversations bustling around, later on the web with the internet. They were fairly simple to follow. There were passions on both sides.
The secularists on the rise were out in force to seize control of public dialogue. Successful in many aspects, the idea was to purge any mention of religious expression. But of course that was a political discussion, I mean what else could it be? It was laced with vitriolic hatred for anything of religious nature. Any morals or values founded on Christian principles were deemed taboo, at least for practical applications. Enter religious freedom and the 1st amendment debate. Of course, those spewing hatred were atheists, humanists and secularists, or anti-religion zealots. Anyone else was just not with the times, or hip to reality, as they portrayed it. That is a powerful marginalization tactic embraced by the Left, to simply dismiss a whole segment of society. An especially large one.
Somewhere along the way, we also had the creation of the moral majority. (founded in ’79, dissolved in late 80’s w/ resurgence in early 2000’s) Remember Jerry Falwell who was the poster child for all things Christian meddling in politics, and a huge target of the secular Leftists who despised him. This was was a reaction to the times not the cause of them. Now I won’t say Christians were always the innocent victims, they’ve had their share of problems. We are reminded all the time, so leave that to critics who regularly make the case. I don’t need to.
Onward to dialogue
These conversations took shape around religious liberty. Christians were frustrated by the onslaught of what were some heavy-handed, viscous anti-religion zealots. Okay, so they said their beef was with organized religion of all stripes. They set out with fervor to descend on any sites or organizations spewing Christian rhetoric or themes. That would become easy with Google ordering their popularity. Any place serving up or discussing Christian perspectives inevitably got a visit from one or more of these villains.
Often their M/O was a sneaky way to gain credibility by, first, appearing to agree with some part of the discussion, but then taking issue with the direction it was going. They usually got more argumentative as it went to eventually full rage at the site, its people, and their “narrow-minded” views — according to them. Typically they would post stuff countering the Christian message, in calculated ways, then accuse the site of not honoring the first amendment if it was removed or they were banned. This was just a game and they would come back under another alias if they were ejected.
It was sort of a daily thing. The more popular the site was the more persistent they got. Their goal was to shut it down, or confuse it so people lost interest, or eventually drive the owners to throw up their hands. It only took a few of them to wreak havoc on a site. These trolls may have been easy to spot but that didn’t matter. Most people are very familiar with that formula, which is the point. It was too common but worth remembering now.
Many Christian authors or site owners made a habit of saying other opinions were welcomed. That was a huge invitation. Trolls would hang any rules around the site’s neck in a typical liberal process-style argument — just like radicals do. Why do I bother with all this background? It is to remember where we’ve been, sort of like Moses reminding Jews of the goal instead of focusing on the hardships.
As things do on the internet, it evolved from there. Many people thought it was too much trouble to have an open, public, Christian forum on the net. One by one, many larger ones disappeared or reinvented themselves.
Then there were blogs sponsored by the Town Hall website. It was a hub for conservatives to hang out, talk, network, and explore news and activism. Many Christians migrated to these blogs as they popped up weekly on their pages along with the current news and regular columnists. That lasted until they decided they didn’t want the hassles anymore or server space became a factor. Off the starry-eyed bloggers went to start their own blogs, experience in tow. But before that happened, the same sort of pattern formed of Liberals and antagonists invading TH pages with regularity. It was as if Liberals had no other place to go or anything else to do except troll Townhall pages and blogs in search of arguments, causing chaos — not to mention calling people names using every personal attack they could come up with.
Onward and upward
Many former participants or bloggers found their homes on new blogs in the blog domains. Conservatives and Christians sort of regrouped in new and different areas. Many focusing on just politics, and some only on Christian topics. Some combined topics with news and current causes. It became a hodgepodge network of activism and information that breathes life into an otherwise hum-drum internet catering to liberal news and savvy entrepreneurs.
There was now a counterweight of conservative opinion out there, widely spread, even before social media like Facebook and twitter took off. You can still find some larger sites that stick to Christian issues or forums. They don’t make quite the same “all are welcomed” claims because, face it, all are not welcome — nor should they be. Some just want to cause chaos. It’s an evolving world in technology and information.
Evolution in motion
Back in early 2000’s things did change with the attack on 9/11. But before that we had the attack on the Cole and earlier WTC bombing in the 90’s. So those conversations and awareness was already out there. Though 911 did change many things, including dialogue on the web. The anti-Christians, naysayer antagonists and Leftist zealots on the internet were flummoxed on strategy.
They still opposed the Christians in the usual manner. But adjustments were made in dialogue regarding the newfound fears of terrorism. Christians were taken more seriously and had some credibility. Christians may have had a point to their concerns after all?
Then came the reminder of the left’s religious obsession almost immediately after 9/11. There was an onslaught of talk and fear that this would cause a huge backlash and resentment against Muslims. Who would be the villains? (not the anti-reliegion zealots) But it didn’t have to be real. Just the possibility of it happening was enough to provoke all kinds of talk, suspicions, theories aimed at Christians. What did we do… did Christians cause the attack? Were we to blame?
The double standards came out front and center. Here was religious-based hatred driving terrorism via Islamists. It would seem the classic example Leftists had hunted for over the years. Finally, they had the connection of bigotry and hatred to religion. What did they do? So they preached tolerance. Their longstanding intolerance for Christianity suddenly morphed into tolerance for Islam — for anything but Christians. They were fascinated by Islam. We were told it was a peaceful religion. It was only a handful of people, obviously off the path, who committed violent jihad. The former Christian critics became self-anointed tolerance experts.
Do you think that would translate to say Christianity? Why should it in their minds? They had already made their case against old, ancient, superstitious beliefs. But a complete pass was granted to Muslims and Islam. Almost immediately, Islamic spokesmen came out telling us that it had nothing whatsoever to do with Muslims or their peaceful religion. And they looked to cite any example of bigotry they could find as Islamophobia.
Suddenly it was us, the victims, who had a disease: Islamophobia was the diagnosis and watchword. The mission was complete. Christians went from being victims, and direct targets of hatred, to the culprits of anti-Islamic hate. It didn’t even take note that those fighting for religious freedom were the Christians. Now they were the chief villains.
RightRing | Bullright ©
by Tammy Bruce on April 2, 2016
Yeah, the technical issue of being like Stalin. After all, don’t all ‘technical issues’ magically eliminate the words Obama especially hates and refuses to use, and only those word, like “Islamic terrorism,” from the comments of visiting Heads of State?
It appeared this week that the White House censored a video of the French president to omit him saying the words “Islamist terrorism” during a speech at a bilateral meeting, but officials claim a technical glitch caused the ill-timed dropped audio. […]
Oh that word that causes the White House to lose their cool, giving them them heartburn and headaches. The people should be protected from such dangerous words.