The UK Left: 'Europe Needs To Just Get Used to Attacks Like Manchester"

Apparently children are just meant to be sacrificed for the greater goal of multiculti according to Britain's Left. Can't do anything about it you know, just like the weather.

Katty Kay is a well known BBC anchorwoman, and she pretty much said exactly that in an interview with far Left MSNBC personality Mike Brzezinsky.

Here's a partial transcript:


MIKA BRZEZINSKI, MORNING JOE: Katty Kay, your reaction and also tell us about this part of the country.

KATTY KAY, BBC: Manchester is about three hours northeast of Britain. It's Britain's second biggest city. It has, of course, as do most British cities, a large immigrant, and large Muslim population. It is the kind of place where Ariana Grande would go and play up in the north of the country.

And now the investigation will try to be on whether this person acted alone or whether there is some kind of cell behind it. It's particularly awful, this one, because it was girls. My daughter is 11. Her greatest wish in life is to go to an Ariana Grande concert. Ariana Grande is coming to play in Washington, D.C. in September and she really wants tickets for it. And those are the kinds of kids that were at this concert. It was families. And the heartbreaking news that we're getting from the Manchester police this morning, the statements they're putting out of mothers they found who are still looking for their daughters and daughters they found still looking for their mothers and they can't find the rest of their families.

And I think that's what's making -- Europe is getting used to attacks like this, Mika. We have to because we are never going to be able to totally wipe this out. As ISIS gets squeezed in Syria and Iraq, we're going to see more of these kinds of attacks takes place in Europe. And Europe is starting to get used to that. None of us are used to having children targeted in this way, young girls targeted in this way.

Here's the full interview:



This, by the way, is pretty much what French President Macron said, that attacks like Bataclan and Nice were simply the price to pay for 'a truly multicultural society.'

This woman has already surrendered. She's prepared to become a dhimmi, a 'protected person' with no real rights except what her overlords decree. Perhaps someone ought to clue her in as to how many girls like her daughter fare in a number of Muslim dominated countries like Egypt and Pakistan. Non-Muslim girls there are routinely kidnapped, 'converted' to Islam and 'married' to their kidnappers, after which they are not even allowed contact with their families except on the whim of their new owner.

Her nonsense about the cause being pressure on ISIS in places like Iraq and Syria is ridiculous. Perhaps if the UK and other European countries weren't letting these people in, things like this just might not happen. You think? Even a child who touches a hot stove and gets burned has the brains to figure out that it's a bad idea to repeat the behavior.

And that goes for native born jihadis too. There's no reason not to have them face a deportation tribunal.And no reason not to subject jihadist Mosques and Imams to surveillance.

Salman Abedi, the suicide bomber who was actually set off the nail bomb at the Manchester auditorium, wasn't from Iraq or Syria. He was British born, and actually a so-called 'known wolf' who was already on the radar of British police with known ties to Islamist terrorism. Yet there the was, free as a bird.

Did I mention the weather earlier? Well there's little control over that. But what happened at Manchester could have been controlled and avoided, provided Britain's government wants it so.

The British Left in general is pretty much taking the same position Katty Kay is. Because there's a national election coming up in a week or two in which Labour is already trailing badly. So the spin is necessary.

And Katty Kay isn't alone here. The far Left Guardian is equally spinning the narrative, but in a more subtle, evil way. Prominent columnist George Monbiot's shtick is that we have to submerge our outrage and remember what he calls our common humanity:

The terrorists want to drive us apart, to sow suspicion and fear, to oblige us to replace liberty with security and answer them with bombs and bullets of our own. For a terrorist organisation any of this, if implemented, would mean mission accomplished. So we should do the opposite. We defy them by proving that this is not what we are. And the proof is everywhere. [...]

This is why terrorism happens: those who perpetrate it know that an attack on one is an attack on all. People are killed or injured in order to maximise the distress suffered by a far greater number – and to induce us, blinded by outrage, to forget our humanity and to lash out. This then cultivates a political environment in which terrorists prosper: a nation dominated by fear, a cycle of revenge, and the escalation of conflict.

Altruism and empathy are what binds us together, and what defines us. We should let no one distract us from this central fact of our nature: neither terrorists nor those who, in response to them, demand that we slam our doors in the faces of an entire community or an entire religion.

What a fine, humanitarian human being! Ummm, except when it comes to Jews and especially Israel. He's a prominent supporter of BDS and a pal to Labour's anti-semitic leader Jeremy Cobyn. He also was a founder of George Galloway's Hamas and Hezbollah friendly Respect Party.

Obviously, nail bombs in pizza parlors that kill and maim Jewish children aren't something to condemn at all for Mr. Monbiot. After all, it's the Jew's fault isn't it? Always is.

If the European Left has its way, Europe's people will simply be limited to the options Mohammed told his followers to give them in Qur'an 9:5, also known as 'The verse of the Sword'; to become corpses, Muslims,or tribute paying slaves.

The Brits, the French, all of the free people of Europe are going to have to decide whether what they believe in is worth fighting for.

Who's The Real Christian?

Pope Francis has made a crusade of his quest to weaken the Catholic Church and the West with demands that illegal migrants and Muslim 'refugees' be accepted into western countries. Today, he singled out presidential candidate Donald Trump for special criticism, saying that if Trump planned to build a wall to protect America's southern border, he is "not Christian" according to the Associated Press.

Trump's response? Classic:



So here we have a presidential candidate actually promising to defend Christians, something Pope Francis has never actively done during his tenure as Pope... and this pontiff attacks him??

It's also worth nothing that not only has Trump repeatedly made the point that he favors legal immigration, but that most of the Republican candidates - Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, even John Kasich - at least favor increased border security, thus proving Trump's claim that this pope is being manipulated specifically against him. Given the billions of US dollars that flow across the border in the form of cash from expatriate Mexicans legal and non-legal, the Mexican government obviously has an interest in the status quo.

And so does the Catholic Church. One thing that wasn't mentioned in the media was how much money the Church is getting from the Obama administration to' process' all these illegal aliens...a cool $9 million in addition to millions of dollars in existing grants and additional funds given by the Obama regime to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Catholic Charities, and the Catholic Legal Immigration Network.

And as far as Muslim 'refugees,' here's something else that didn't make the headlines...the U.S Conference of Catholic Bishops is meeting with the Muslim Brotherhood front group the Islamic Society Of North America
(ISNA)and other similar organizations in a whole series of 'interfaith dialogues' entitled 'A common word between us.'

Having read the Qu'ran, that title immediately caught my attention, but I'll let Islamic scholar Robert Spencer tell it:

What do you think is the goal of such groups in engaging in “dialogue” with Catholic bishops? The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ 2014 statement on “dialogue” quotes the 2007 document sent to the Pope and other Christian leaders, A Common Word Between Us and You. It is likely that not a single one of the bishops was ever curious about where the phrase “a common word between us and you comes from beyond the Qur’an citation provided in that document’s epigraph. If they had looked it up in the Qur’an, they would have found that the full passage is not a call for mutual understanding and mutual respect; rather, it is an exhortation to Christians to convert to Islam: “Say: ‘People of the Book! Come now to a word common between us and you, that we serve none but Allah, and that we associate no others with Him, and do not some of us take others as Lords, apart from Allah.’ And if they turn their backs, say: ‘Bear witness that we are Muslims’” (3:64). Since Muslims consider the Christian confession of the divinity of Christ to be an unacceptable association of a partner with God, this verse is saying that the “common word” that Muslims and the People of the Book should agree on is that Christians should discard one of the central tenets of their faith and essentially become Muslims.

For groups such as ICNA and ISNA, that is almost certainly what the “dialogue” is all about, along with compelling Catholic leaders to remain silent about Muslim persecution of Christians, as when Robert McManus, Roman Catholic Bishop of Worcester, Massachusetts, suppressed a planned talk at a Catholic conference on that persecution, explaining: “Talk about extreme, militant Islamists and the atrocities that they have perpetrated globally might undercut the positive achievements that we Catholics have attained in our inter-religious dialogue with devout Muslims.” Evil works under the cover of darkness, and McManus, drunk on “dialogue,” was happy to supply that cover.

But the typical modern Catholic bishop, coddled, cosseted, regal, arrogant, authoritarian, ignorant, self-infatuated, and utterly devoid of charity, will never deign to acknowledge any of this. They are blind guides.

Blind guides is being charitable. Although to be fair these bishops are simply following like sheep in the path of dhimmitude set for them by the last two popes, Benedict and Francis. Neither of these popes ever did or have done anything to protect the Middle East's Christians from what amounts to genocide, or urged the Western nations to take them in as refugees or protect them in any way. Instead, they're willing to turn a blind eye and participate in the process of bringing in Muslims to America for their own Thirty Pieces of Silver.

And this Pope has the nerve to say that Donald Trump is not a Christian? Tell me, who's the real Christian? Who's pledging to defending them and their faith and who's essentially ignoring their terrible plight and selling them out?

As a parting note, I should say that Pope Francis actually does approve of border walls and strict immigration policies...for himself and the Vatican:

The Vatican, for its part, welcomes millions of visitors a year — but allows only a very select few, who meet strict criteria, to be admitted as residents or citizens.

Only about 450 of its 800 or so residents actually hold citizenship, according to a 2012 study by the Library of Congress. That study said citizens are either church cardinals who reside in the Vatican, the Holy See’s diplomats around the world, and those who have to reside in the city because of their jobs, such as the Swiss Guard.

Spouses and children who live in the city because of their relationship with citizens — including the Swiss Guard and workers such as the gardener — have also been granted citizenship. But that means few of the Vatican’s citizens are women.

A Vatican spokesman did not return an email seeking comment on its policy.

Just like most Marxists, Pope Francis is a major hypocrite.

The Two Things That Would Sink An Independent Scotland No One's Mentioning

 

The votes have been cast in the Scottish referendum by now, and in a few hours we should see the results.

Frankly I have no particular dog in this fight except that I normally favor people running their own affairs. Most of the arguments the Brits have been using amount to scare tactics, but just like any divorce  both sides have cards to play in the negotiations that are going to occur if there's a 'yes' vote.

The Scots are going to want their fair share  of assets they helped pay for, like consulates, military hardware, public works and infrastructure, government revenues and other joint national assets. The UK is going to want the Scots to assume a portion of the UK's joint debt, perhaps agree to house Britain's Trident nuclear subs for a few years, and maybe a cut on the North Sea  oil revenues in exchange.

All this can be worked out.

But an independent Scotland is absolutely bound to fail unless there are some radical changes. And not for any of the reasons I've heard anyone on the NO side mention.

One of the chief reasons the Scots want out is because frankly, they favor much more of a welfare state than the English do. In fact, there are a lot of the English that favor Scottish independence because of it.

The Scots envision themselves as another Norway or Denmark, but that kind of society comes with a huge price tag. I doubt many 'Yes' voters have ever seen what a Danish tax bill looks like.

And believe it or not, going that route is one of the chief things that will smother an independent Scotland. Sky high taxes and regulations are guaranteed  to send manufacturers fleeing and foreign investors seeking more inviting climes.

Even worse, that sort of environment destroys one of the major things an independent Scotland has going for it  - the entrepreneurial spirit the Scots used to be renowned for world wide. The Scots are relying on the oil, but all indications are that it's tapping out. What will really make an independent Scotland succeed is the energy, brains and marketing skills of its people. Singapore or Israel would be a far better model for Scotland than Norway.

But of course, there's another problem the Scots are going to have to overcome to make an Independent Scotland a success, and this one's the real kicker.

The yardstick for a population to replicate itself is a fertility rate of at least 2.1 per woman. The current rate (as of 2010, the last census) of non-Muslim Scots? About 1.2 kids per woman, while the Muslim rate in Scotland is 2.8 to 3.0..and that doesn't account for the ongoing immigration that's still incoming.Or polygamy.

Jimmy may not be pumping out the bairns anymore, but Abdullah is. And even more, because the native Scot population is aging while the Muslim immigrants tend to be younger, you'll see at some point in the not too distant future a disproportionally Muslim electorate. Sharia, anybody? It already has a decent start in the UK anyway.

I have to maliciously chuckle at this just a bit because of the  profound anti-Israel bias common in Scotland, which frequently crosses over the line into rank anti-semitism.The Scottish National Party and it's leadership have been particularly odious, comparing Israel to ISIS and calling for a 'Zionist-free Scotland.'

 


This, by the way is one reason I have no feelings one way or the other about an independent Scotland.But that aside,  unless the Scots start having a lot more kids, they aren't going to have a country anyway, and there's an ugly surprise in store. . The kilts, sporrans, tartans and  and pibrochs that the Scottish national movement now embraces as symbols of their heritage will give way to burkahs, niqabs, and squalor.

And that's what will ultimately make an independent Scotland a failed state, unless things change.

Disgraceful - UK Takes Sides With Hamas Against Israel In Gaza War

 

A number of British Jews continue to wonder at the rise in Jew hatred in the UK. I can't imagine why. After all, there's a great deal of truth in that old saying that a fish rots from the head.

Israel buys a few components to defend itself from the likes of Hamas from the UK..a few parts used in the Hermes drones, a few parts used in radar systems and pilot ejector seats on Israel's planes. . There are about 12 arms export licenses involved, something like $70 million (£42 million) in exports involved since 2010, so it's small..

 

Today, British Business Secretary Vince Cable announced that Great Britain will void all 12 export licenses if hostilities with Hamas resume, whether Hamas is the aggressor or not.Essentially, the UK has picked sides in the war and is protecting Hamas, which the European Union (EU)of which the UK is a member includes on its list of terrorist groups.

  And it's not just the Conservatives. UK Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg of the Liberal Democrats, the Conservative Party's coalition partners made a statement  last Tuesday supporting the suspension of all arms exports to Israel.

David Cameron traveled to Israel last March in the midst of Hamas bombarding Israel to try to strengthen commercial ties with Israel in an attempt to revitalize Britain's economy, particularly in the high tech sector and was accompanied by a number of business men. While he was there he said this:

“Let me absolutely clear about these attacks from Gaza, we condemn them completely,” Cameron said. “They are a reminder once again of the importance of maintaining and securing Israel’s future and the security threats you face, and you have Britain’s support in facing those security threats.”

He also said that “these attacks are completely indiscriminate, aimed at civilian populations and that is a demonstration of how barbaric they are.

We now see what that 'support' is worth - like Cameron's word, absolutely nothing. And British Jews with eyes to see also now know exactly why the Jew hatred and Israel bashing in Britain is so endemic.

The UK supports the genocidal Hamas. It's that simple.And this pathetic attempt at blackmail of Israel  proves it

The components Britain is attempting to blackmail Israel with are easily obtainable elsewhere. But Britain's honor? Gone beyond redemption.

Drool, Britannia.

 

Pew's Cowardly Dhimmi Poll Is An Absolute Disgrace

 

Pew Research is a non-partisan, self founded arm of the Pew Foundation who does polls and surveys both in America and overseas. Their most recent one is part of their Religion In Public Life project, and is entitled, 'How Americans Feel About Religious Groups.'

A number of questions were asked about how people in different groups feel about other religious groups, and even atheists were included as both subjects for others and as respondents.

The results are quite interesting. For instance, according to the poll, the three religious groups ranked on Pew's 'thermometer' as eliciting the warmest and most positive reactions were Jews(63), Catholics (62) and Evangelical Christians (61). The two groups getting the most frigid reactions were atheists (41) and at the bottom of the pile, Muslims (40). members of the groups were allowed to vote on their feelings for their own group..with a giant glaring exception that was a despicable example of political correctness at its worst.

Pew, unlike many of polls these days is wide open about revealing their mechanics..exactly what questions were asked, who was polled, how many of each group were polled, how those polled broke down in terms of party affiliation, age, sex, education, race, etc. They even broke down the results with the responses of the members of a particular group included and the total results among the other groups with the responses of a particular group excluded.

Guess which group they didn't poll.

 


There are over three and a half million Muslims in America, and Pew somehow couldn't find a reason to interview a single one for their survey.

Why?

It's well known that a significant number of Muslims are extremely intolerant of Christians, Hindus, and especially Jews, and that the Qu'ran and Hadiths actually promote this. Was Pew afraid of revealing that in their findings?

Were they afraid that revealing it might even spark a lower rating for Muslims the next time out?

Or was it merely an attempt to show Christians and Jews as intolerant of Islam while not revealing how intolerant of other faiths many Muslims are?

 

Pew might try to hedge and say that they didn't interview anyone but Jews or people belonging to Christian groups. So then, why interview people who characterize themselves as atheists and agnostics, around 20% of the poll survey?

And for that matter, why not include Buddhists and Hindus in the survey? Was that an attempt at a cover for Pew's avoidance of surveying Muslims?

No matter how you slice this, it's absolutely ridiculous and I'm surprised at Pew, a reputable organization pulling this.

They aren't fooling anyone who's paying attention.

An Honor Killing On Campus

 

Regular members of Joshua's Army may recall the name Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

She was raised as a Muslima in Somalia and Saudi Arabia, survived female genital mutilation, beatings, abuse and various aspects of Somalia's internecine clan warfare and became a devout member of the Muslim Brotherhood, after which her questions about Islam and the life she was leading led her to escape being 'given' in marriage to a distant male relative she had never met.and flee to Holland. There, she was granted Dutch citizenship and eventually became a member of the Dutch parliament where she became a voice alerting the people of her adopted country to the menace of radical Islam, and against the abuse of Muslim women and children in the Netherland's Islamic ghettos.

She later collaborated with the late filmmaker Theo Van Gogh on a film called 'Submission', which chronicled the plight of many Muslim women victimized as she was by the traditional tribal culture.The film caused a firestorm of protest among Muslims. Van Gogh was murdered in broad daylight by a fanatic Muslim while cycling to work one morning in 2004 and then had his corpse ritually mutilated. A note was pinned to Van Gogh's corpse promising Ayaan Hirsi Ali that she was the next target, with explicit Qu'rannic details of her `crimes against Islam' as an 'apostate', a death sentence in Islam. Other death threats followed, and Ayaan has lived under 24 hour security protection ever since.

She went through the experience of being forced to move out of her apartment because her Dutch neighbors were annoyed that the security protection 'inconvenienced them' and because they were afraid that the violence directed towards Ayaan Hirshi Ali might involve them. And the Dutch government, which was obligated to pay for her security as a member of Parliament also disliked the cost, the inconvenience and the political stigma of protecting an 'enemy of Islam' in a country that's over 25% Muslim, so they found a trumped up reason to take away her citizenship and force her to step down from her seat in parliament. Whereupon, she came here to America and became a noted author and speaker. You can read her story in her books 'Infidel', 'Nomad',and 'The Caged Virgin'

Since she came to America, she's been a tireless advocate for freedom and for women's rights,at the risk of her life and safety. Among other things, she helped form the AHA Foundation, which works to protect and defend the rights of women in the West from oppression justified by religion and culture.

So Brandeis decided to honor Ayaan Hirshi Ali. She was to be their commencement speaker and receive an honorary degree.

But when the local chapters of Muslim Brotherhood fronts like CAIR and the Muslim Student's Association heard about this, they went absolutely ballistic and were able to rope in enough guilty and frightened non-Muslim Lefties to go along with the mob to get Ayaan's honorary degree 'rescinded' and her invitation to speak revoked.

"This is a real slap in the face to Muslim students," said senior Sarah Fahmy, a member of the Muslim Student Association who created the petition said before the university withdrew the honor.

"But it's not just the Muslim community that is upset but students and faculty of all religious beliefs," she said. "A university that prides itself on social justice and equality should not hold up someone who is an outright Islamophobic."

Thomas Doherty, chairman of American studies, refused to sign the faculty letter. He said it would have been great for the university to honor "such a courageous fighter for human freedom and women's rights, who has put her life at risk for those values."

Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the nation's largest Muslim advocacy group, said, "It is unconscionable that such a prestigious university would honor someone with such openly hateful views."

The organization sent a letter to university President Frederick Lawrence on Tuesday requesting that it drop plans to honor Ali.

"This makes Muslim students feel very uneasy," Joseph Lumbard, an American convert to Islam and the chairman of Islamic and Middle Eastern studies, said in an interview. "They feel unwelcome here."

The university said that the decision had been made after a discussion between Ali and university President Frederick Lawrence.According to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, that 'discussion' consisted of a phone call made simply to inform her after the decision had already be made.

A key part of the decision was said to be a statement by Ayaan Hirsi Ali in a 2007 Reason interview in which she said about Islam, "Once it's defeated, it can mutate into something peaceful. It's very difficult to even talk about peace now. They're not interested in peace. I think that we are at war with Islam. And there's no middle ground in wars."

"She is a compelling public figure and advocate for women's rights, and we respect and appreciate her work to protect and defend the rights of women and girls throughout the world," said the university's statement. "That said, we cannot overlook certain of her past statements that are inconsistent with Brandeis University's core values."

What are those core values?

Not too long ago, Brandei, which is a Jewish sponsored but secular university awarded an honorary degree to writer Tony Kushner at the 2006 commencement, one of the most bigoted and self-hating anti-Zionists on the planet.

Kushner has a number of inflammatory statements on record, like, “The biggest supporters of Israel are the most repulsive members of the Jewish community,”  and saying on another occasion that Israel’s founding a “mistake,” and that it “it would have been better if Israel never happened.”

 Brandeis (at least then) had a number of pro-Israel students and faculty, but when they raised questions about the propriety of a Jewish sponsored university,especially one named after one of the leaders of the Zionist movement in America honoring the likes of Tony Kushner, here's what the university president told them.

Brandeis bestows honorary degrees as a means of acknowledging the outstanding accomplishments or contributions of individual men and women in any of a number of fields of human endeavor. Just as Brandeis does not inquire into the political opinions and beliefs of faculty or staff before appointing them, or students before offering admission, so too the University does not select honorary degree recipients on the basis of their political beliefs or opinions.

Of course, Kushner, aside from his 'anti-Zionist' credentials is outspokenly gay and a member of New York's Leftist intelligentsia. Ayaan Hirshi Ali? Well yeah, she's black, but she's a conservative who's very much off the reservation. And let's repeat the mantra, everyone...thou.shalt.not.criticize.Islam.ever.

Another interesting recipient of an honorary degree from Brandeis is Israeli author Amos Oz. Oz is a rigorously secular denizen of the Far Left who ran unsuccessfully in 1973 for the Knesset as part of the Moked (New Left/Communist Front) Party. He is sharply critical of Zionism as well as Judaism in general almost to the point of hatred, describing religious Jews as "Hezbollah in a skullcap."

Speaking in 1989 to his pals in the peace at all cost crowd in Tel Aviv, Oz described the Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria as “A small sect, a messianic sect, obtuse and cruel, emerged a few years ago from a dark corner of Judaism, and it is threatening to destroy all that is dear and sacred to us, to impose on us a wild and insane blood ritual ... They are guilty of crimes against humanity, their Jewishness is of the Hezbollah kind, their Zionism is like Abu Nidal’s."

Then there was this, in one of his essays: “Why didn’t Israel develop as the most egalitarian and creative social democratic society in the world? I would say that one of the major factors was the mass immigration of Holocaust survivors, Middle Eastern Jews and non-socialist and even anti-socialist Zionists.”

“Then there were the masses of Orthodox Jews… to whom socialism meant blasphemy and atheism.”

“As for the North African Jews,” Oz writes, they were “conservative, puritan, observant and family oriented and to some extent, chauvinistic, militaristic and xenophobic.”

Oz has even maintained a friendship with Palestinian terrorist Marwan Barghouti, who's currently serving five life terms in Israeli custody for the multiple murders of Amos Oz's fellow Israelis.

In short, Oz, in spite of his talent as a writer is a great example of a Jewish anti-semite. But Brandeis had no problem awarding him an honorary degree, in 1998.

I guarantee you there were no Muslims protesting about Brandeis honoring these two on the grounds of disrespect for Judaism or the feelings of religious Jewish students..

So I suppose these are the 'core values' of Brandeis. You have to be a celebrity of the Left...conservatives and classic liberals not allowed. You can criticize Judaism and Christianity all you want, but you must appease Islam in your public life,always, no exceptions allowed. Or someone could get hurt. And if you're a self-hating Leftist secular Jew who despises Israel, you're practically a slam dunk to receive an honorary degree and get an opportunity to speak and indoctrinate the students at Brandeis.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali had a few things to say about this, talking to FOX's Megyn Kelly last night:



Yesterday, Ayaan Hirsi Ali issued a statement expanding on her remarks to Megyn Kelly:

Yesterday Brandeis University decided to withdraw an honorary degree they were to confer upon me next month during their Commencement exercises. I wish to dissociate myself from the university’s statement, which implies that I was in any way consulted about this decision. On the contrary, I was completely shocked when President Frederick Lawrence called me — just a few hours before issuing a public statement — to say that such a decision had been made.

When Brandeis approached me with the offer of an honorary degree, I accepted partly because of the institution’s distinguished history; it was founded in 1948, in the wake of World War II and the Holocaust, as a co-educational, nonsectarian university at a time when many American universities still imposed rigid admission quotas on Jewish students. I assumed that Brandeis intended to honor me for my work as a defender of the rights of women against abuses that are often religious in origin. For over a decade, I have spoken out against such practices as female genital mutilation, so-called “honor killings,” and applications of Sharia Law that justify such forms of domestic abuse as wife beating or child beating. Part of my work has been to question the role of Islam in legitimizing such abhorrent practices. So I was not surprised when my usual critics, notably the Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), protested against my being honored in this way.

What did surprise me was the behavior of Brandeis. Having spent many months planning for me to speak to its students at Commencement, the university yesterday announced that it could not “overlook certain of my past statements,” which it had not previously been aware of. Yet my critics have long specialized in selective quotation — lines from interviews taken out of context — designed to misrepresent me and my work. It is scarcely credible that Brandeis did not know this when they initially offered me the degree.

What was initially intended as an honor has now devolved into a moment of shaming. Yet the slur on my reputation is not the worst aspect of this episode. More deplorable is that an institution set up on the basis of religious freedom should today so deeply betray its own founding principles. The “spirit of free expression” referred to in the Brandeis statement has been stifled here, as my critics have achieved their objective of preventing me from addressing the graduating Class of 2014. Neither Brandeis nor my critics knew or even inquired as to what I might say. They simply wanted me to be silenced. I regret that very much.

Not content with a public disavowal, Brandeis has invited me “to join us on campus in the future to engage in a dialogue about these important issues.” Sadly, in words and deeds, the university has already spoken its piece. I have no wish to “engage” in such one-sided dialogue. I can only wish the Class of 2014 the best of luck — and hope that they will go forth to be better advocates for free expression and free thought than their alma mater.

I take this opportunity to thank all those who have supported me and my work on behalf of oppressed woman and girls everywhere.

In a way, what Ayaan Hirsi Ali had to say about feeling sorry for Brandeis students hits the nail on the head. The confused, frightened dhimmis and Leftists who got in line with CAIR and the MSA to silence her participated in the equivalent of an intellectual honor killing. They have no idea of how Islamists regard them. They are simply Lenin's 'useful idiots' personified. And many of them will remain clueless - until the knife is at their throat.

The UK And Iran Resume Diplomatic Relations

 

Well , that didn't take long.

According to Iran's official FARS news, Britain and Iran have now officially resumed full diplomatic relations, according to Tehran’s non-resident Charge d’Affaires in London Hassan Habibollahzadeh:

Habibollahzadeh arrived in London at the head of a consular delegation on Wednesday.

The Iranian diplomat is to discuss rendering better consular services to the Iranian nationals residing in Britain as well as promotion of level of consular services both in terms of quality and quantity with British officials.

During his six-day visit to London, the Iranian envoy is slated also to review Tehran-London relations with the officials of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) as well as other relevant bodies.

Early in December in his first trip to Britain, Habibollahzadeh entered London and headed for the Embassy in Kensington to inspect the consular services rendered to the Iranians living in Britain.

How absolutely charming! I'm sure the Brits are willing to forget about Iran kidnapping its sailors on the high seas,mistreating them and then holding them for ransom.

And of course, Iran being a state sponsor to Islamist terrorism and threatening genocide against
Israel on a regular basis is hardly even worth notice.Besides, there's trade and profit to be had and after all, one doesn't want Iran to be upset with them. Perish the thought.

Actually,this has been in the works since the agreement that wasn't really an agreement was agreed upon last November. This just solidifies it.

You sometimes wonder how much a nation can abase itself.

UK And Iran Re-Establish Diplomatic Ties

 

Britain's Foreign Minister William Hague announced that Iran and Britain have agreed to re-establish full diplomatic relations. The agreement apparent was done on the sidelines of the Geneva conference.

The British have appointed Ajay Sharma, who heads the British Foreign Office's Iran department, would take up a position as charge d’affaires with Iran. Since the UK is still afraid to re-open it's embassy at this time (the Iranians storming the place in 2011 was what led to Britain severing diplomatic relations), Sharma will visit Iran on a monthly basis, as Reuters reported, but will be a non-resident diplomat.

Iran's Mehr news agency reports that Iran will send a new charge d'affaires, Hassan Habibollah Zadeh, to London, where the Iranian embassy will be re-opened.

You sometimes wonder how low a nation can abase itself, but Britain never ceases to amaze me. After having it's sailors kidnapped on the open sea and having to ransom them,allowing Iran to force the British Navy to abrogate its commitment to patrol the Persian Gulf with its allies and having its embassy overrun by a violent mob while the Iranian 'security' stood by and watched, you would think the Brits would havehad enough of this foul, terrorist supporting regime.

Nope.They're willing to bend over even further.

Given the Ayatollahs' often expressed desire to eliminate Israel, it would be only fair if Israel was to recall its ambassador from Britain in protest, over this and other matters. That won't happen, of course.

But it's sad to see the depths to which a nation that once inspired the free world has sunk.Britain is unworthy of her ancestors.

Two Very Telling Scenes From America's Cities

The Islamic Society of Boston has an interesting history.

It runs the mosque of choice of, among others convicted jihadis Tarek Mehanna and Aafia Siddiqui  as well as the Tsarnaev brothers of Boston Marathon fame. The mosque itself is very much Muslim Brotherhood oriented, and claims the Muslim Brotherhood's spiritual leader Sheik Yusef al-Qaradawi as it's major influence and spiritual guide. Qaradawi openly advocates a world-wide Islamist caliphate under sharia law, including the beating of 'disobediant' women, female genital mutilation , death for homosexuals and apostates and a second Holocaust against Jews.


The Society used Qaradiwi's name in their fundraising, and are suspected of receiving Muslim Brotherhood funds to help build the mosque. He is actually listed as an honorary member of the board.

And it isn't just Qaradawi.One of the Islamic Society of Boston's eight founding members was Abdurahman Alamoudi, who was jailed for 23 years in 2004 for material support of Islamist terrorism and money laundering.

And speaking of back door deals, the mosque itself was built on publicly owned land belonging to the City of Boston worth $1.2 million that was mysteriously gifted to the Islamic Society of Boston free of charge by Boston's Mayor, Democrat Tom Menino.

You might think that  with this kind of history and the Boston Marathon bombing still fresh in people's minds, you might think local politicians would call for an investigation of this mosque and what's being taught there.You might think that at the very least, they would distance themselves a little.

Guess again, infidel!



Yes, that's Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, who worked directly with the Islamic Society of Boston to produce the state's first ever Eid ul-Adha greetings, less than a year after the Boston attack.

But let's move on to another American city that you'd think might be a little wary of associating too closely with the Brotherhood and jihadis...New York City.

 
 The Big Apple is electing a new mayor, and the man most likely to win is Democrat Bill de Blasio. He's an interesting fellow, who describes himself as a 'democratic Socialist'. That's not surprising, seeing as back in the 1990's he was a major activist for the Sadinistas, Nicaragua's hard line Marxist dictators. He's said publicly on more than one occasion that he remains proud of his association with them.

That might perhaps give thought to some of New York City's Jews, given that the Sadinistas were vociferously anti-Semitic, seizing the main synagogue in Managua, and transforming it into a Sandinista youth center decorated with Anti-Zionist posters.  They forced the president of the synagogue to humiliate himself by publicly sweeping the streets.  The Jewish community of Nicaragua, most of whom had their property 'liberated' by the regime fled to fled to Miami, Israel and Costa Rica.


But what might make New York city's population uneasy in general is his stand on terrorism.

New York City has been the site of a lot of terrorist attacks, and even more that have been foiled due to an active counter-intelligence program originally started by former mayor Rudy Giuliani.

For instance, back in 2009, four Muslims were arrested by the FBI and charged with, among other things, plotting to blow up local buildings associated with New York's Jewish community. Their planned targets included the Riverdale Jewish Comunity Center and the Riverdale Temple.

In 2011, two Muslim men were also arrested by the NYPD for plotting to do the same thing, and they reportedly already had the explosives to do it.

What stopped these and other attacks on New Yorkers was the NYPD's counter intelligence operation, using active surveillance and confidential informants willing to work with the police to bust jihadis.

If Bill de Blasio has his way, that will no longer be something that the NYPD will be able to do. He is promising New York's Muslims that he will end the program.

Democratic mayoral candidate Bill de Blasio told a group of Muslim supporters Wednesday that they won’t have to live in fear of being under constant surveillance if he’s elected mayor.

As WCBS 880′s Jim Smith reported, de Blasio, the front-runner in the Nov. 5 general election, said that, on his watch, NYPD surveillance tactics would only be authorized to follow up on specific leads and that the police force would be under the supervision of a new inspector general.

“The efforts of surveillance have to be based on specifically specific information, and obviously you need to go through a careful vetting process,” de Blasio said during a rally at Columbus Park in Downtown Brooklyn.

Actually, for the most part the NYPD has concentrated on individuals, and on infiltrating certain mosques and Muslim groups where they're quite aware of what's being preached and taught...often after tips by confidential informants on the inside.

Like Stop and Frisk, another program de Blasio says he'll eliminate, this is an example of proactive policing that has been credited with lowering New York City's crime rate.

Equally interesting is the woman de Blasio is pictured cuddling up to above, Linda Sarsour. She's the head of the Muslim Democratic Club in New York City and the director of the Arab American Association of New York , and a well connected and frequent visitor to the Obama White House.

She has referred to Zionism as racism repeatedly,is a prominent anti-Israel activist in the city, is on record as a frequent defender of Muslim terrorism suspects, frequently advances the viewpoint that America 'is at war with Islam' and is also known for peddling conspiracy theories, like claiming that the Underwear Bomber was a CIA agent. I've also heard but not confirmed independently that she's a 9/11 truther.

And she's a major supporter of de Blasio, who is wooing her support with pledges to radically change how the NYPD protest the city.

What do these two scenarios have in common? Here we have two American cities, both victimized by Islamist terrorism, whom you would think would have learned something from the experience and would be a lot more careful about whom they elected to be in charge.

And in both cases, it appears that the electorate, rather than screaming bloody murder is opting for leadership with the same head in the sand attitude that caused so much grief, pain and destruction before. We never seem to learn.


(h/t, Jihad Watch)

This Time It's Nairobi's Turn

It's a Saturday, and so you decide to head down to the local shopping mall, maybe check out the latest computer gadgets, perhaps grab some lunch at the food court, maybe even a movie. You've been there before. It's air conditioned, and it gets you out of the house, so it's a pleasant outing with the wife and kids if you're a family man.

Except this day isn't going to be like the others. Today, you picked the wrong place at the wrong time. Today, you're going to have a collision with the Religion of Peace, and it just might be your last day on earth.

 

Islamist terrorists from Somalia's al-Shabaab targeted the crowded Westgate Premier Shopping Mall in Nairobi,Kenya at noon in a brutal assault with bombs, automatic weapons and grenades that left 68 dead and over 205 wounded at last count.This is still an ongoing hostage situation. and some of the injured were critically wounded, so it's uncertain just what the final death toll will be yet. Some of the dead reportedly were from Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta's own family.

As is usual in these attacks, the killers showed no mercy for children, the elderly, or women.They were waging jihad, and the maximum body count of infidels was all that was important. In fact, the attack took place during the filming of a children’s cooking show under a parking lot canopy, something that ensured a number of casualties among the children and their parents watching the filming.



The al-Qaeda franchise took credit for the attack on its official Twitter feed: “Only Kuffar were singled out for this attack. All Muslims inside #Westgate were escorted out by the Mujahideen before beginning the attack,” Al-Shabaab tweeted.

This confirms what a number of survivors told Kenyan security forces, that the killers asked the Muslims they encountered to identify themselves and escorted them to safety as they opened fire on the 'kuffars' - non-Muslims.

In one reported case, an Indian man who attempted to escape by claiming to be a Muslim was executed in cold blood when he was unable to name Mohammed's mother.

“They asked people ‘Are you a Muslim?’ and anyone who answered ‘no’ got a bullet,” Moshe Noiman, an Israeli living in Nairobi who witnessed the attack, told Israel’s Channel 10 news.

The Israeli coverage is no accident.The Mossad and Israeli commandos are reportedly aiding the Kenyans, and while Israel and Kenya have close relations, it goes beyond that. The mall is partly owned by Israelis and some of the hostages are said to be Israelis.

An unnamed Kenyan security source told the AFP that Israeli forces had joined Kenyan efforts to end the deadly siege. "The Israelis have just entered and they are rescuing the hostages and the injured."

Israeli foreign ministry spokesman Paul Hirschson refused to confirm or deny that its forces were involved, which is typical in these situations.



But in  the end, none of it matters.

Beslan, Mumbai, Netanya, London, Boston, Bali, Ft. Hood, Itamar, Darfur, Madrid, and now Nairobi again. And so many others. They all blur into one, because over the last decade or so, we have, as a society, normalized terrorism in the name of Islam.

Same old same old.

Muslims murder non-Muslims horrifically because of whatever grievance they feel like claiming this time. One time it's an innocent remark about a beauty contest, another time it's some cartoons, or anger over girls going to school. Sometimes it's simply because non-Muslims have the temerity to live and prosper on 'Muslim' land. Many times, it's simply old fashioned theft, rapine and pillage against non-believers.

The perpetrators might call themselves Boko Haram, or Hamas, or Islamic Jihad, or Abu Sayeff or Al Nusrah, Lashkar e Taiba, or any of the other groups actively waging jihad.

The details don't matter. The scenario is always the same. Non-Muslims are butchered in the name of Allah.Western politicians, or more often these days spokespeople issue the usual, carefully phrased condemnations. Sometimes, the perpetrators are caught and killed, many times they're not. Nothing changes. On to the next atrocity. Cycle, rinse, repeat.

Have you ever wondered why this macabre dance continues?

Here's one clue.

IIf you take a look at the official statement on Nairobi by a State Department spokes person, you'll notice something. It condemns a 'despicable terrorist attack', offers condolences to Americans and others whom were 'tragically affected', commends Kenyan security forces and promises undefined 'support'. At the every bottom, almost as an afterthought, it mentions al-Shabaab, not as a mortal enemy, but as a 'threat'.

What's missing here?

Here's clue number two, a tweet posted by British PM David Cameron:“It’s been done in the name of terror, not religion.”

Ah, and also from the UK, courtesy of Zombie, who writes on how the BBC, once the gold standard in journalism is now willing to break the rules of Journalism 101 with a misleading headline ("Nairobi Westgate Shooting Kills 11 In Kenya") the opening lede, which refers to '11 people who died in a gun battle (which directly implies there was a 'shoot-out' between equal combatants) and a subsequent paragraph which refers to "armed criminals" rather than terrorists attacking helpless civilians.

Al-Shabaab is finally mentioned in passing in the lower paragraphs ( the part of the story a great deal of research tells us the vast majority of readers skip over) but like the statement coming from our State Department, no real mention of whom they might be or what might have been the motivation for the attack.

So, what do we have in common here? A frantic, almost manic attempt to avoid even hinting, let alone mentioning one word in any form: I S L A M.

The victims in Nairobi ('people affected by the attacks?' what unfeeling arrogance!) were murdered in the name of Islam by Muslims. And yes, is has everything to do with religion.Why else do you think only non-Muslims were targeted?

That's the missing piece here, and the refusal of our elites to face up to it is not only why it keeps happening, but why we've been encouraged as a society to normalize it.

Hey, sometimes trainwrecks happen, car crashes occur, or a building collapses. Sometimes terrorists hit for some reason. Just part of the risks involved with daily life. Workplace violence, like Fort Hood. The Lottery of Life. Stuff happens. Isn't that a shame. Just suck it up and be glad it wasn't you this time.

Heaven forbid anyone should ever delve into the motivation for every one of these attacks.

But walk with me awhile and let's take a look at this from a jihadi's view point.

Islam is the only major religion that promises Paradise as a heavenly reward for murdering kufars, infidels, non-believers. It says so directly in the Qur'an and the Hadiths, in numerous places.

Many Muslims don't follow these parts of their religion, but a substantial number do. So from the standpoint of a Muslim who believes what's stated in his or her religious scriptures and who has been indoctrinated that this is the way, the truth and the light, where's the downside in murdering non-believers, who the Qur'an says are Hell bound anyway? If you do it successfully and survive, you're a hero and nothing really bad is going to happen to you. Even if you're incarcerated, the humane West will see to it that you have top quality halal food, comfortable accommodations and in most cases an early release date, and you will be thought of as a hero. In fact, if you're lucky enough to be part of Hamas or the PLO, you'll even get paid a salary far beyond what you could earn outside jail courtesy of gullible Western donors and receive a hero's welcome when you're eventually kicked loose as a 'good faith gesture for peace'.

And if you die? You become an instant shaheed, a martyr, with a promised reward of 72 nubile young women to use and abuse as your sex slaves throughout eternity as a reward.

Major Nidal Hasan, the Fort Hood killer who murdered 13 defenseless Army personnel understood this perfectly. He started by admitting to the murders in his opening statement, after he successfully demanded the right to represent himself at his trial. His defense consisted of calling three witnesses to get them to state on record that he was indeed the murderer of 13 people, including a pregnant private who lay wounded on the floor and pleaded with Hasan for her baby's life before he finished her off.

The judge, Colonel Tara Osborn obviously followed orders from higher up when she disallowed any evidence that pointed towards jihad or Islamism as Major Hasan's motive for the murders, the same thing that's been done with all of the other jihad attacks Islamic fascists have inflicted on the West. She actually tried to help Hasan by suggesting that the murders were the result of a sudden spontaneous flash of rage. But Major Hasan wanted his jihad as a Soldier of Allah and would have none of that:

"It wasn't done under the heat of sudden passion," Hasan said before jurors began deliberating. "There was adequate provocation — that these were deploying soldiers that were going to engage in an illegal war."

Not only that, but the evidence clearly showed that Hasan made thorough preparations for the killings, even going to the extent of putting paper towels in the pockets of his cargo pants to muffle the rattling of the extra ammo he was carrying to avoid arousing suspicion.

From Nidal Hasan's viewpoint, it's all good. He murdered a bunch of infidels, performed a successful jihad and is headed for a painless death via drug cocktail, followed by a traditional Muslim funeral like Osama bin-Laden's (which involves cursing non-believers) and a gala reception by Allah as an honored shaheed. Even his assets, over $300,000 in accumulated pay and benefits was donated to a charity, we're told, rather than being subject to civil recovery by the surviving victims or their families.And of course, we're not allowed to know which charity.

The jihadis who have murdered infidels from Boston, to London, to Mumbai, and now Nairobi see it exactly the same way, as a winning proposition. And that's been reinforced every time one of these attacks occur, because the non-Muslim world has refused to even condemn the ideology that drives this religiously sanctified murder, let alone punish the perpetrators or the societies that aid and abet it in any meaningful way, even in Muslim communities in the West.Is it any wonder it continues? Or that young Muslims want to emulate the Nidal Hasans? Do you think that might perhaps change if he were hung publicly with a piece of bacon shoved into his mouth and then simply dumped into the sea without Muslim rites? After all, we're being constantly told these attacks have nothing to do with Islam. so why not? And might things change if there were a price tag for aiding and abetting Islamic fascism, if the ideology itself was actually identified, targeted and attacked, especially in western countries? Might we see changes in Muslim countries that aid, finance and abet this ideology if there was a direct cost involved?

Instead, our elites have decided out of fear, political expediency or sheer personal financial gain to present Islamic terrorism as just one of those hazards of everyday life, something unpleasant that just happens and has to be expected sometimes, like a flood or a bad thunderstorm. Talk about blood for oil...



So the jihad against the West is going to continue. This time, it was Nairobi's turn. Tomorrow, it could be New York, or Zurich, or London or Nigeria. Or your town, your loved ones. It will continue because we allow it to continue, because we continue to live a lie.

Until we decide that enough is enough.

School Field Trip To Mosque Features Islamic Readings, Qu'rans For Students

Tennessee is one of the main areas targeted by Islamists for penetration. A number of foreign funded mega Mosques have been built that are far larger than needed to serve the existing Muslim population, and the Obama Department of Justice has been especially aggressive in threatening citizen's groups and local municipalities when they attempt to exercise their existing zoning laws to try and prevent it.

As reported by FOX News Radio’s Todd Starnes, Hendersonville High School recently sent its students of a field trip to a mosque as part of a three-week course on world religions. The students got a fairly slated representation of the Religion of Peace. They were given punch and cookies at the mosque and listened to readings from the Qur'an. They were also offered copies of the Qur'an to take home – which some took and others declined.

Islam defines this as dawa...a part of jihad that involves propagandizing for Islam among the infidels to make political inroads in non-Muslim countries.

While a trip was also taken to a Hindu Temple, no trips were offered to Christian churches, Buddhist temples or Jewish synagogues.

Parents were particularly outraged at this, asking why the school would tour only a mosque but not any of the other religions.

“If you can’t go to all five, why are you going to any?” parent Mike Conner inquired. “We sent the principal an email and voiced our concerns. She sent back a reply and told us they could not afford to go to all five.”

The reason the mosque got the nod becomes obvious as you find out that students who chose not to participate in the field trip were instructed to write a paper comparing and contrasting the Christian, Hindu and Islamic faiths.

The assignment included a worksheet that was visibly biased towards Islam, stating that Muslims treated their conquered people better than the United States treated minorities.

“If we were to compare the attitude of the Muslim rulers towards the minorities living under their rule during the nineteenth century – with the attitude of the Europeans and the Americans towards their minorities, I dare to say that the record of the Muslims would be better,” the author wrote.

I guess the author never talked to any Armenians, Jews, Greeks or Balkan peoples.

The worksheet further stated that the “Prophet of Islam was prepared to live in peace with the followers of other monotheistic religions,” and also said “Muslims in the Middle East and Asian conquered lands of other peoples but they did not impose their religion over them.”

Conner told Fox News his daughter declined to complete what she considered to be an unfair and unbalanced assignment.

“Because of a surplus in information on Muhammed, and a lack of complete and thorough information on Mahatma Gandhi and Jesus Christ, there is not enough true facts to properly complete a comparison and contrasting paper,” Jessica wrote on her paper.

Her parents warned her that she might be punished by her teachers for standing up for her beliefs – and she was. Jessica received a ‘zero’ for the assignment.

Conner and his wife met with school officials who refused to change their daughter’s grade or give her an assignment that was more balanced.

“They told us we were being hostile towards Islam,” Conner said. “It was a very confrontational meeting. Their attitude was, ‘I can’t believe you would question our motives with your children.’”

Conner said he hopes the school board will take action against the teachers.

“Someone needs to be held accountable,” he said. “They are our children – not theirs.”

The Sumner County School District, once this little exercise in dawa was outed has said that the district schools will no longer include visits to religious venues. But the teachers involved in this and the school principal will remain in place.

If this is what's going on in a relatively conservative area like Tennessee, can you imagine what's going on in places like California, Massachusetts and Connecticut?



Hartford, CT middle school kids visiting local  mosque in 2012, learning tenets of Islam

The Shame Of The Ft. Hood Killer's Trial Comes To An End

 

The trial of Major Nidal Hassan, who murdered of 13 of his fellow soldiers and wounded more than 30 others while they were disarmed at a dispensary inside the military base at Fort Hood has finally come to an end with a guilty verdict. One of them was a pregnant private who lay wounded on the floor and pleaded with Hasan for her baby's life before he finished her off.

 In the next phase of the trial, which will begin Monday, the military officer jurors have to  all agree to give Hasan the death penalty. If they do not agree, the 42-year-old could spend the rest of his life in prison.

I have never been more ashamed of my country.

The entire saga of Nidal Hassan, an Arab American who identified himself as a Palestinian tells much about how deeply our country has been infected by dhimmitude and appeasement - even in our military.

During Major Hassan's entire career, he made no secret of his radical Islamist beliefs and his hatred for America.At a presentation he made at Walter Reed Hospital in 2009 entitled "The Quranic World View As It Relates to Muslims in the U.S. Military" Hassan gave his views that the Qu'ran condones fighting to establish an Islamic state, that Muslim soldiers were prohibited from engaging in any actions that might result in the death of Muslims, and that all Muslims in the military should be released as conscientious objectors.

Retired Colonel Terry Lee, who worked with Hasan, surfaced after the Fort Hood shootings to say that Hasan had made remarks approving of the actions of the Muslim murderers who shot down two U.S. soldiers in Little Rock, Arkansas He told FOX News that that Hasan made "outlandish" statements against our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, among other things saying that "the Muslims should stand up and fight against the aggressor", referring to the United States.

He carried a business card that identified him as a 'soldier of Allah', carried on an open and extensive correspondence with al-Qaeda cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, and made numerous comments espousing jihad against the United States he had sworn an oath to protect and defend.

Yet he was promoted through the ranks and received excellent fitness reports.Not one of his commanding officers or fellow soldiers were willing to go out on a limb and out him as the jihadist he was because they were afraid it would mark them as 'Islamophobes' and ruin their careers, something they'd seen happen to others.

At least six months before the Ft. Hood murders, Hasan had come to the attention of federal authorities because of internet postings he made discussing suicide bombings and jihad. The postings, made in the name "NidalHasan", compared a suicide bomber to a soldier who dies to save others and sacrifices his life for a "more noble cause." Again, in spite of this blazing red flag, no official investigation was opened. No one wanted to risk harming their careers by pushing the issue. Everything was buried.

This man was an open enemy of America and lay coiled like a rattlesnake in the midst of our warriors. Like a rattler, he gave off an open warning of his presence, but he remained protected by the willingness of our government to appease Islamist fascism.

So when Hasan brought two handguns into the dispensary at Fort Hood and started murdering his fellow soldiers while screaming Allahu Akbar, it should have surprised no one.

Horrible as that was,  worse was yet to come.

The Obama Administration refused to label what happened at Fort Hood a terrorist attack, instead dubbing it 'workplace violence.' This had the effect of denying combat medals and the accompanying increased survivor benefits to the families of the murder victims as well as the wounded. And incidentally, lessening the exposure of the Army to civil suits.

Our Dear Leader as commander in chief could easily have designated the Fort Hood attacks as jihadist terrorism at the cost to the government of a fraction of what's been spent on one of his luxury vacations or perhaps canceling a couple of his White House parties. He didn't.

Weeks went by as Major Hasan toyed with the military court about representing himself and even shaving or not shaving his beard as per military regulations because yes, he remains a U.S. soldier with full pay and benefits to this day. Rather than simply forcibly shaving him as was done with Saddam Hussein, the judge, Colonel Tara Osborn allowed him to keep his facial foliage.

Major Hasan finally won the right to represent himself, with a couple of lawyers from the judge advocate's corps as advisers. He made no pretense of denying that he was the killer, admitting to the murders in his opening statement.

In an absolutely outrageous ruling that underlined our government's attitude towards Islamist fascism as well as those who volunteer to fight it, Colonel Osborn disallowed any evidence that pointed towards jihad or Islamism as Major Hasan's motive for the murders, a decision deliberately calculated to sharply reduce the awards in a number of civil suits that have been filed by the victim's families by making sure the farcical designation of 'workplace violence' remains rather than calling this what it is, or , heaven forbid , casting any aspersions on the Religion of Peace.

At one point, Judge Osborn actually tried to help Hasan,  suggesting that the murders were the result of a sudden spontaneous flash of rage,,,which would have meant murder two instead of murder one and probably life imprisonment instead of the death penalty.

Hasan would have no part of that. He wants his martyrdom as a soldier of Allah.  "It wasn't done under the heat of sudden passion," Hasan said before jurors began deliberating. "There was adequate provocation — that these were deploying soldiers that were going to engage in an illegal war."

Not only that, but the evidence clearly showed that Hasan made thorough preparations for the killings, even going to the extent of  putting  paper towels in the pockets of his cargo pants to muffle the rattling of the extra ammo he was carrying to  avoid arousing suspicion.

Major Hasan's defense, if it can be called that,  consisted of examining just 3 of the 89 witnesses to establish that he was indeed the killer.

As a soldier of Allah, he's proud of killing the infidels.After all, doesn't the Qu'ran say they're enemies of Islam who will all burn in hell anyway?

Hasan will be almost certainly convicted of murder. In the military system during sentencing, the defendant can make an unsworn statement, which means he can’t be cross-examined and Hasan will take the opportunity he's been provided with to preach jihad and justify what he did as a holy act.

Unlike his victims, Nidal Hasan will get a painless death by lethal injections, as well as an opportunity to preach a final dawa to the world. He will be looking forward to frolicking with the 72 virgins as a Holy Martyr.The Obama Administration will see to it that he gets a full Islamic funeral just like Osama bin-Laden's, which involves cursing Christians and Jews as part of the rites.

Real justice would involve a hanging with a piece of pork stuffed into Hasan's mouth and then simply tossing his body into the sea. Then it might actually serve as something of a deterrent instead of an encouragement to future jihadis seeking martyrdom. Instead, Hasan will be seen and lionized as a role model and hero by our enemies.

The Obama Administration and the Army establishment will be able to sweep this under the rug as workplace violence thanks to the compliant Major Osborn, rather than admitting that this was a terrorist attack by an Islamist fascist. Not one military officer who saw what was going on with Major Hasan and failed to speak out will be punished or demoted in any way. Major Osborn will undoubtedly receive a promotion. And  the Obama Administration, the Army establishment and most of all Major Hasan, who will have achieved what he undoubtedly feels is the perfect jihad,  will all end up getting what they wanted.

The ones who will pay the price are the victims dead and living, their families, and the military rank and file. They will be left with the knowledge that their pain and the deaths of their loved ones count for nothing, and that the nation they selflessly volunteered to risk their lives to protect will simply go along with this obscenity rather than exploding in outrage.

Major Hasan was an honest rattlesnake, who made no attempt to hide whom he was.

It is America that bears the guilt and the shame. I wonder how we can stand it.

How long, oh Lord, how long?


  

Official: Obama To Let Thousands Of Syrian Refugees Into The US

 

Obama's State Department has announced that the U.S. will take in thousands of Syrian refugees.

"Referrals will come within the next four months. We will need to interview people and perform security and medical checks," Kelly Clements, the State Department's deputy assistant secretary for Population, Refugees, and Migration.

The refugees are reportedly going to be screened for terrorist ties:

"Refugees are subject to an intensive security screening process involving federal intelligence, law enforcement, defense, and homeland security agencies," a State Department official said. "The U.S. government makes every possible effort to uphold and enhance the security screening aspects of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program. Refugees are among the most carefully screened of individuals traveling to the United States."

Sure they are. Get ready for the next batch of Tsarnaevs and Nidal Hassans.And while you're at it, ask people in Minnesota and other locales what's happened to their crime rate since the U.S. settled a bunch of Somalis there.

And considering that the Obama Administration was funding these people and arming them for months even though most of them were Muslim Brotherhood and al-Qaeda, I have a feeling that 'terrorist' label is going to be, shall we say, flexible.

I also guarantee you that few if any of these people will be Christians, since a lot of them have already fled the country..many of them undoubtedly at the hands of those we will be welcoming to our shores as refugees.They're in much more dire circumstances than Syria's Sunni Muslims, but that isn;t going to get them in.

America's Jews in particular ought to be just thrilled at these actions by the man most of them voted for. Given the level of anti-Semitism in the majority of Arab Muslims, we certainly need more of them to create a hospitable climate for America's Jews, don't we?

Back in 2009, President Obama, in an interview called America one of the world's largest Muslim nations. And just a little while ago,this president was telling the world in front of his friends in the Islamist government of Turkey that the U.S. wasn't a Christian nation.

This was more than just a simple gaffe. As Melanie Phillips precipitously pointed out at the time, it  wasn't  so much a statement of fact by the president as much as an aspiration and a goal.

And he's doing his very best to achieve it.

Missouri's Dem Governor Vetoes anti-Sharia Law Legislation

The rot goes deep.

Missouri's Democrat governor Jay Nixon was presented with SB 267 which simply said that any foreign law would have no standing in Missouri courts, mirroring a similar bill in effect in Kansas.

It passed with bi-partisan (if mostly Republican) support in the legislature..and Governor Nixon vetoed it.

"This legislation seeks to solve a problem that does not exist, while creating the very real problem of jeopardizing Missouri's families' ability to adopt children from foreign countries. Here in Missouri, we believe in strengthening families and encouraging adoption. By placing additional barriers between couples who want to adopt and children who need loving homes, Senate Bill 267 is quite simply out of step with these basic values."

*chuckle* Why would adoptions not compliant with existing U.S. and Missouri law be allowed anyway?

What Governor Nixon is really doing is helping out his pals at CAIR, the Wahhabi funded Muslim Brotherhood front group who were prompt in giving this dhimmi a nice pat on the head.

The photo above? Governor Nixon accepting a Qu'ran from Faizan Syed , the Director of CAIR Missouri who wants to prosecute Americans who insult Islam based on sharia law.

Speaking of being out of step with America's basic values, I doubt Governor Nixon has ever read the Qu'ran or looked at what sharia law actually consists of.

This veto is a disgrace to anyone who reveres our Constitution and the freedoms it enshrines.

For those of you wishing to let the governor know what you think of him, you can contact him at http://governor.mo.gov/contact/

He doesn't deserve it, but be civil.

(h/t, Creeping Sharia)

US Muslim Leaders Lobbying To Get The FBI Role In Combating Islamist Terrorism Reduced

 

A number of very well connected and politically active Muslims are pushing for a vastly reduced FBI role when it comes to investigating and preventing Islamist terrorism in America. The plan they're lobbying heavily for is to get the imams involved in doing it themselves through Obama's Department of Homeland Security.

The White House’s “Countering Violent Extremism” program “did not produce the results a lot of us were hopeful … [and] kind of collapsed towards the end of last year,” complained Mohamed Elibiary, a Texas-based advocate who was appointed to the Homeland Security Advisory Council.[...]

Elibiary’s new call for reduced policing of Islamic communities, such as Boston’s immigrant Muslims, was echoed by other speakers at the panel, which was hosted by the progressive New American Foundation in Washington D.C.

“Imams and counselors need to be given some leeway” by police, said Suhaib Webb, Imam of the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center.

The activists have a problem with the FBI, who they claim have continued what they referred to as atraditional policy of investigating jihadis for obsolete things like arrests, trials and convictions.

You know, we just can't have that.

They like the DHS CVE program much better. Funny thing, the DHS program has attracted a lot of criticism because it relies on using Muslim Brotherhood front groups like the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) as their exclusive intermediaries with American Muslims.

You might remember that the MPAC ran a major campaign telling Muslims not to cooperate with the FBI in terrorism investigations, just like CAIR and the other Muslim Brotherhood front groups:

 




And let's take a closer look at some of these 'activists'. I've already had something to say about the Islamic Society of Boston Mosque and cultural Center, an Islamist mosque with murkey funding and beginnings where Tamerlan Tsarnaev, one of the Boston Marathon Bombers liked to go for his dose of Islamist rhetoric.Funny how 'imam involvement' didn't work so well there.

And then there's Mohamed Elibiary..I know I've heard his name somewhere...of course! Elibiary is a very influential  part of the Obama Administration, who was named to President Obama's Homeland Security Advisory Council in 2010.

While he's been there, he reportedly had a big role in successfully lobbying AG Eric Holder into not prosecuting the senior executives of CAIR, The Islamic Society of North America, the North American Islamic Trust and a number of other Muslim Brotherhood front groups who were caught red handed money laundering and providing material aid to terrorism in the Holy Land Foundation trial.Although I somehow doubt Elibiary had to work all that hard, given what we know about Eric Holder.

Among other things, Elibiary is a big fan of  Iran's Ayatollah Khomeni and his Islamist style villayat-e-fiqh style of theocratic government. When Dallas Morning News reporter Rod Dreher wrote about Elibiary's laudatory remarks on Khomeni and Islamist government at a December 2004 conference in Dallas, titled “A Tribute to the Great Islamic Visionary,” Elibiary threatened him with violence.

But wait, there's more.

 October 2011  Elibiary was given access to the highly  classified  DPS database (the Homeland Security State and Local Intelligence Community of Interest, or HS SLIC) containing hundreds of thousands of intelligence reports that were supposed to be used solely to aid law-enforcement agencies. In fact, Elibiary was the only Homeland Security Advisory Council member member (out of 26) who got access to the HS SLIC.

Elibiary used this  to put together a number of classified documents that he felt promoted “Islamophobia,” and tried to leak the classified files  to a far Left  media outlet, who refused to do the story because they felt the files failed to show any real  DHS bias against Muslims.

In early November 2011, Elibiary’s access to the HS SLIC database was revoked...but he's still on the DHS Advisory Council. Of course.

No wonder he and his Islamist friends want the FBI out of the picture so that  they'll be the main channel of information.

DHS Is Training Law Enforcement To Give Muslim Brotherhood, Radical Islamists A Pass

 

This is dhimmitude on steroids.

In an official training manuals given to national and local law enforcement, the Department of Homeland Security is still emphasizing 'Right Wing extremists' but gives the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamists a pass, advising law enforcement to defer to them.

In contrast to that famous 2009 report talking about the dangers of veterans, pro-life advocates, critics of same-sex marriage, 2nd Amendment advocates and Evangelicals, the training manuals on Islamists cautions law enforcement, “Don’t use training that equates radical thought, religious expression, freedom to protest, or other constitutionally-protected activity, including disliking the U.S. government without being violent” when it comes to Islamists.

The manual, which was produced by an inter-agency working group from DHS and the National Counterterrorism Center, advises, “Trainers who equate the desire for Sharia law with criminal activity violate basic tenets of the First Amendment.”

This would be a hoot if the DHS wasn't deadly serious - Sharia law violates the First Amendment and most of the rest of the Bill of Rights explicitly!

DHS CRCL CVE Training - Dos and Donts

The checklist also advised against using Muslim “trainers who are self-professed ‘Muslim reformers’” - i.e, non-jihadi moderates - because they “may further an interest group agenda instead of delivering generally accepted, unbiased information.”

I don't know which is worse...what the DHS is saying about itself or what it's saying about Muslims, that they're naturally radical and only generally accept the Islamist and Muslim Brotherhood point of view.

The manual also tells law enforcement not to rely on “unsubstantiated theories” and “conspiracies,” that say that “many mainstream Muslim organizations have terrorist ties” or are “fronts for Islamic political organizations whose true desire is to establish Sharia law in America.”

And this manual advises advises trainees not to assume Muslim groups are “using democratic processes, like litigation and free speech, to subvert democracy and install Sharia law.”

Never mind that our own Justice Department proved just that in Federal Court in the Holy Land Foundation trail, and that U.S. District Court Judge Jorge Solis said as much in his 2010 ruling, writing, “The government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR [Council on American-Islamic Relations], ISNA [Islamic Society of North America], NAIT [North American Islamic Trust], with the Islamic Association for Palestine, and with Hamas.”

As a matter of fact, most of the senior executives of these Muslim Brotherhood fronts would be sitting in jail for money laundering and material aid to terrorism if Attorney General Eric Holder and the Obama Justice Department hadn't filed declinations to prosecute motions on all of the individuals and groups cited as unindicted co-conspirators. That ended what would have been the second Holy Land Foundation trial, an open and shut case because the groups appealed the first one, leading to Judge Solis' ruling. Obama's Justice Department essentially let CAIR, ISNA, and NAIT off the hook, as well as the executives involved.

Instead, we now have people in influential positions in the Obama Administration with strong Muslim Brotherhood ties and an official 'training manual' for law enforcement that could have been put out by the Brotherhood itself.Aside from the chilling effect this will have on law enforcement actually working to prevent jihad in America, it will also have the effect and stigmatizing American Muslims whom choose not to toe the Islamist line.

In later years - perhaps, unfortunately after we have a few more incidents that end up with more dead Americans - it will come out that the Obama Administration was just as thoroughly penetrated by the Ikhwan, the Muslim Brotherhood as the Truman Administration was penetrated by Soviet spies and sympathizers.

And it will have cost us dearly in the meantime.


(h/t to Charles C. Johnson at the Daily Caller)