Journalist: The Swedish government has betrayed its girls and women in appeasing Muslim migrants

“The study shows that more than 95 percent of assault violence in Sweden is committed by men of foreign descent.”

And yet instead of naming and prosecuting these men, Swedish authorities devote their efforts to covering this up. The Swedish government has betrayed its people. Yet the people for the most part don’t yet seem to have noticed.

Katerina Janouch

“The state should be sentenced for violation of the Istanbul Convention: A betrayal of Sweden’s girls and women,” translated from “Staten bör ställas till svars för brott mot Istanbulkonventionen: Ett svek mot Sveriges flickor och kvinnor,” by Katerina Janouch, February 25, 2018:

The Swedish state violates the Istanbul Convention, which Sweden signed in 2011, and which came into force in 2014. According to the Istanbul Convention (Article 5.2.), States that accede to the Convention have a responsibility to take the necessary legislative and other measures to prevent, investigate, punish and prosecute violent acts covered by the Convention and committed by non-state actors. As it is now, this does not happen in Sweden. Instead, the sharp increase in crime and sexual offenses causes enormous suffering for the country’s girls and women, and threatens the entire life and health of the Swedish population. Additionally, honor-related violence is increasing. Sweden has failed to protect those whom they undertook to protect. Therefore, they must be held responsible.

“Migrants threaten European women’s rights.” The statement is from the Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico, as Slovakia recently refused to sign the Istanbul Convention, which is a legally binding regional instrument on violence against women in Europe. The reason that Slovakia — together with Bulgaria — chooses not to sign the Convention is believed to be regarded as that it is too influenced by appeals that contradict the countries’ more conservative views on, for example, marriage. “All violence against women is unacceptable and has no place in our society,” said Fico. He added that the defense of women’s rights is “particularly important at a time when migrants constitute an increasing part of Europe’s population” and “hold the view of the woman as a ‘submissive creature.’”

Fico’s statement is interesting in several different ways. It also sheds light on Sweden’s so-called feminist government — which signed the Istanbul Convention on the same day it became available for signing — in 2011. In 2014, the convention came into force in Sweden.

So let’s see what the convention means — and whether it is followed in Sweden. The official name of the Istanbul Convention is the Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention and Control of Violence against Women and Violence at Home.

* The Convention condemns all forms of violence and describes violence against women as an expression of historically unequal power relations between women and men.

* It establishes that violence against women is gender-related at the structural level. The convention states that women and girls risk being exposed to gender-related violence and domestic violence to a greater extent than men.

* Prevention of violence against women is described as crucial in order to achieve equality between women and men.

* According to the Istanbul Convention (Article 5.2.), States that accede to the Convention have a responsibility to take the necessary legislative and other measures to prevent, investigate, punish and prosecute acts of violence covered by the Convention committed by non-state actors.

Does this really happen in Sweden? Or are these just some nice words in line with others that are not actually enforced?

* The Istanbul Convention contains both civil and criminal law provisions. Among other things, the states that accede to the Convention agree to criminalize psychological violence (Article 33), stalking (Article 34), physical violence (Article 35), sexual violence, including rape (Article 36), forced marriages (Article 37), genital mutilation (Article 38) and forced abortion and forced sterilization (Article 39).

This is not how the situation actually looks today in Sweden. In our country of the fine feminist government, threats, persecution, victims, harassment, rape and killing of women are threatened on a daily basis. Many perpetrators that are convicted are given ridiculously light punishment. Girls who are harassed at school often get moved, while the perpetrators remain. Girls are beaten and injured in the home. Women are threatened, harassed and injured by both close relatives, but also by strangers, in an increasing number of cases of assault violence. However, states that accede to the Convention are supposed to adopt and implement, at a national level, an effective, comprehensive and coordinated policy to prevent and combat all forms of violence against women and domestic violence (Article 7). The work of NGOs and civil society must be acknowledged, encouraged and supported (Article 9). States shall designate or establish public bodies responsible for coordinating, implementing, monitoring and evaluating policies and measures to prevent and combat violence (Article 10). The States will also regularly collect statistics and support research (Article 11).

But here is what is happening in Sweden. Swedish authorities, with BRÅ at the forefront, refuse to collect statistics about those who commit sexual assault. They are blaming everything else possible, while police and lawyers and crime victims testify that violence originating from criminal immigrants is increasing. In Sweden, we have had group violence not only against girls and women, but also against boys, and sexual violence has become colder; it has even been described as “torture-like” on some occasions. A civilian study of the origin of offenders has, in the absence of another, been made by a private individual. The study shows that more than 95 percent of assault violence in Sweden is committed by men of foreign descent. But society does not take any of this into account. In this way, Sweden is in severe violation of the Istanbul Convention….

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on Jihad Watch.

VIDEO: Iranian Women protesting against hijab to be charged with inciting prostitution, jailed for up to ten years

The idea behind the “inciting prostitution” charge is that it is women’s responsibility to prevent men from being tempted. If she takes off her hijab, she is inviting them to be tempted. And that’s tantamount to prostitution, in the Sharia-wracked minds of Khamenei and Rouhani.

“Women protesting against wearing the hijab in Iran will be charged with inciting PROSTITUTION and jailed for up to ten years as regime cracks down on growing dissent,” by Sara Malm, Mailonline, February 27, 2018:

Iranian women protesting the compulsory headscarf by taking off their hijab in public could be facing up to a decade in jail for ‘inciting prostitution’, police has warned.

Authorities in Iran are desperately trying to stem the growing protests across the country against the dress code enforced on women since the Islamic revolution of 1979.

More than 35 women have been arrested in the capital Tehran alone in the past two months, with several reportedly subjected to torture while in custody.

At least two of the arrested protesters, Narges Hosseini and Shaparak Shajarizadeh, are being charged with ‘inciting corruption and prostitution’, Amnesty International reports.

Ms Shajarizadeh was arrested last Wednesday and has reportedly been subjected to beatings in prison.

Activists claim she was also ‘injected with an unknown substance by the prison authorities’ upon her arrest.

Ms Hosseini was arrested just over a month ago and has since been in custody in unknown conditions.

If they are found guilty of inciting corruption and prostitution, they could face up to ten years in prison….

‘Rather than threatening women with jail terms for claiming their human rights, the authorities should immediately abolish the discriminatory, abusive and degrading laws and practices of compulsory veiling.’

The recent wave of defiance started with Vida Movahed, a 31-year-old mother-of-one whose protest and subsequent arrest on December 27 became headline news all over the world.

A video showing her calmly waving her white hijab tied to a stick above the crowds in the Iranian capital, went viral on social media.

Ms Movahed, who became known as The Girl In Enghelab Street, was released over the weekend, after spending a month in custody with her 20-month-daughter….

RELATED VIDEO: History of protests by Iranian Women from 1979 to 2015.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on Jihad Watch. The featured image is from My Stealthy Freedom, a Facebook page dedicated to protesting compulsory hijabs in Iran. Read on for how Iranian women are pushing back against the government.

Muslim migrant thanks ‘Mama Merkel’ for being able to practice polygamy on benefits

A 32-year-old Syrian man appeared on German media this week thanking German Chancellor Angela Merkel for allowing him to reunite with his other wife and children despite polygamy being illegal in Germany.

There is nothing new about this, as the West sinks further. Western taxpayers have been putting out money for polygamy for some time. Back in October, Jihad Watch reported about a Muslim migrant with four wives and 23 children who claimed $389,000 a year in benefits. In Britain, it was announced in January 2016 that “men with more than one wife will get extra benefits under new rules.” In Canada, according to the Ontario Family Act, women who immigrate to Canada with valid documents proving their polygamous marriages can claim spousal support and welfare benefits.

As far back as 2008, a report from Canada:

Allegedly, some Muslim males have four wives, and each wife is claiming welfare individually. Mumtaz Ali, president of the Canadian Society of Muslims, said wives in polygamous marriages are recognized as spouses under the Ontario Family Law Act, providing they were legally married under Muslim laws abroad.

German taxpayers can expect to fork out much more of their money for polygamy-related family needs, and in general, to pay for Merkel’s immigration disaster. Migration costs are already expected to be approximately 93.6 billion euros by 2020.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel (right) taking selfie with Muslim migrant.

“Syrian Migrant Thanks ‘Mama Merkel’ for Being Able to Practice Polygamy on Benefits”, by Chris Tomlinson, Breitbart, February 23, 2018:

A 32-year-old Syrian man appeared on German media this week thanking German Chancellor Angela Merkel for allowing him to reunite with his other wife and children despite polygamy being illegal in Germany.
Ahmad A., 32, opened up to German media about his lifestyle, living with his two wives, one of which he married while she was only 13, and how he lives off of benefits provided by the German government, Der Spiegel reports.

Ahmad made it clear he was thankful to Merkel for opening the country’s borders in 2015, saying: “I thank you very, very, very much, Mama Merkel. She is the only person who has felt the suffering of the Syrians. I also thank the Germans. Even if there are racists among them. But the Germans have experienced war and show great compassion for the Syrians.”

The entire family has qualified for asylum status but Ahmad made it clear he is not interested in getting a job and would rather stay at home with his six children.

Many Germans have been outraged at the fact that Ahmad’s second wife, who did not come with him initially in 2015, was allowed to join him through chain migration as part of the ‘family reunification’ programme.

Ahmad’s case is not unique as other Syrians have used the family reunification programme to reunite with their other wives.

Polygamy, like child marriage, is illegal in Germany and other western European countries, but is permitted under sharia law. Cases of both child marriage and polygamy (where a man has more than one wife) have risen in the wake of the 2015 migrant crisis….

RELATED ARTICLE: Hungary’s Prime Minister says Christianity ‘Europe’s last hope’

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on Jihad Watch.

Hungary’s Prime Minister Calls for Global Anti-Migrant Alliance

A global alliance against migration is exactly what is needed to stop the hijrah. It’s a bit like shutting the barn door after the horses have bolted, but it would be a step in the right direction. Eastern Europe, having suffered for decades under the boot of Soviet oppression, understand the gravest threat to freedom in the 21st century.

Hungary’s Orban calls for global anti-migrant alliance with eye on 2018 elections

By Marton Dunai, Yahoo News, February 19, 2018:

BUDAPEST (Reuters) – Hungarian leader Viktor Orban called on Sunday for a global alliance against migration as his right-wing populist Fidesz party began campaigning for an April 8 election in which it is expected to win a third consecutive landslide victory.

Popular at home but increasingly at odds politically and economically with mainstream European Union peers, Orban has thrived on external controversy, including repeated clashes with Brussels and lately the United Nations.

Those conflicts, mostly centered on migration since people fleeing war and poverty in the Middle East and Africa flooded into Europe in 2015, have intensified as the elections approach and Orban poses as a savior of Europe’s Christian nations.

“Christianity is Europe’s last hope,” Orban told an audience of party faithful at the foot of the Royal Castle in Budapest. With mass immigration, especially from Africa, “our worst nightmares can come true. The West falls as it fails to see Europe being overrun.”

Orban is widely credited for reversing an economic slump in Hungary and controlling its public finances, culminating in a return to investment-grade for its debt, which was cut to ‘junk’ during the 2008 global economic crisis.

To achieve that and hold onto power the prime minister, 54, has used methods that critics have called authoritarian, and picked fights with EU partners, especially in the West. Eastern leaders, most notably in Poland, have followed his lead.

But migration dominates his agenda now.

Orban said on Sunday that Europe faces a critical fissure between nation states of the East and the West, which he called an “immigrant zone, a mixed population world that heads in a direction different from ours”.

As the West wants eastern Europe to follow its lead, an increasingly vicious struggle was likely, he said, alluding to a plan to redraw the European alliance advocated by the leaders of France and Germany.

“Absurd as it may sound the danger we face comes from the West, from politicians in Brussels, Berlin and Paris,” Orban said to loud applause. “Of course we will fight, and use ever stronger legal tools. The first is our ‘Stop Soros’ law.”

Orban has for years targeted Hungarian-born U.S. financier George Soros, whose philanthropy aims to bolster liberal and open-border values — anathema to Orban, an advocate of a loose group of strong nation states that reject multiculturalism.

The Hungarian leader has advocated “ethnic homogeneity” and compared Soros, a Jew, to a puppet master unleashing immigration onto Europe to undermine its cultural and economic integrity.

A defining moment of his premiership came in 2015, as the migrant crisis peaked: he built a double razor wire fence that became the symbol of anti-migrant sentiment in Europe.

Orban also said the Hungarian opposition had failed to heed the call of history when it opposed his toughness on migrants.

Voters have responded favorably and Orban is a clear leader of all polls.

POWERFUL ALLIES

Orban has conflated the issue of immigration with the image of Soros, 87, whose name was used in a tough anti-migrant bill sent to Parliament on Wednesday.

Soros, for his part, compared Orban unfavorably to both the Nazis and the Communists, saying his rule evoked dark tones from the 1930’s — when Hungary was allied with Nazi Germany — and was more oppressive than Cold War Soviet occupation.

Orban has tightened the screws on non-government organizations, particularly ones funded by Soros, and attempted to close a prominent Soros-founded university.

Attributing to Soros a recent United Nations plan on creating a global blueprint to handle the migration crisis, Orban said he anticipated that powerful allies would help him prevent the U.N. from greasing the wheels of migration.

“Soros has antagonized not only us but also England, President Trump and Israel too,” he said. “Everywhere he wants to get migration accepted. It won’t work. We are not alone and we will fight together … and we will succeed.”

In Europe, he cited as allies Hungary’s fellow Visegrad countries Slovakia, the Czech Republic and Poland, whose ruling Law and Justice (PiS) party is also often at loggerheads with the EU. He said a victory for Silvio Berlusconi’s party in Italy’s March 4 election would strengthen the nationalist fold.

“We don’t think the fight is hopeless, on the contrary, we are winning,” Orban said. “The V4 is firm, Croatia has come around, Austria has turned in the patriotic direction, and in Bavaria the CSU has created a resistance.”

RELATED ARTICLE: Hungary First: Orban government proposes anti-Soros legislation

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Geller Report. Pamela Geller’s shocking new book, “FATWA: HUNTED IN AMERICA” is now available on Amazon. It’s Geller’s tell all, her story – and it’s every story – it’s what happens when you stand for freedom today. Buy it. Now. Here.

Italians Horrified as Muslim Migrants Barbecue Dog at Welcome Center

Where’s PETA and the evil left? Nowhere. Immigration is the oxygen that keeps the party of treason in power.

CULTURE SHOCK: ITALIANS AGHAST AS IMMIGRANTS BARBECUE DOG AT WELCOME CENTER

by Thomas D. Williams, Ph.D., Breitbart, February 16, 2018:

Animal rights activists are up in arms over attempts to barbecue a dog at an immigrant welcome center in southern Italy, with migrants insisting the practice is normal where they come from.

Members of the Carabinieri, an Italian military police force, intervened immediately after receiving a call from an employee of the center who had witnessed the scene of a 29-year-old Nigerian man intent on roasting a dog at the center in Vibo Valentia, in the Italian region of Calabria.

The man had succeeded in skinning and chopping up the canine and was in the process of grilling it for himself and some friends when he was stopped by law enforcement officers. The young woman who called the police also volunteers at a pro-animal organization in the area.

Explaining to police that such a practice is “normal where we come from,” the migrant insisted that he didn’t kill the dog but had found it dead by the side of the road and had decided to grill it. He also pleaded ignorance of Italian laws forbidding eating cats and dogs.

Police transferred the migrant to a different welcome center, located in the former Hotel Miragolfo in the nearby town of Nicotera.

Among countries of origin, Nigeria accounts for the largest single group of migrants entering Italy at present, with nearly twice as many (15.7 percent) Nigerians entering Italy during 2017 as those from Guinea, the second largest immigrant group by country of provenance (8.4 percent).

This African nation has been the focus of much local media attention in recent weeks, with reports of growth of a “ruthless” Nigerian mafia on Italian soil, and the brutal murder and dismemberment of an 18-year-old Italian girl, Pamela Mastropietro, allegedly at the hands of three Nigerian migrants.

Mastropietro’s dismembered corpse was discovered earlier this month in two suitcases outside the central Italian town of Macerata, but was missing her neck, heart and genitals. The body had also been deboned and washed in bleach.

A prominent Italian criminologist said that the modus operandi in this case matched methods typically adopted by the Nigerian mafia.

“What we have seen in the case of Pamela are the same methods the Nigerian mafia systematically employs in Nigeria and elsewhere,” Meluzzi said. “It is a routine to cut victims into pieces and, in some cases, to eat parts of their bodies.”

Troubling as well have been reports of startling percentages of female Nigerian migrants into Italy who wind up as prostitutes, whether by choice or coercion, and become virtual slaves of the Nigerian mafia.

Currently, some 80 percent of Nigerian girls and women migrating to Italy end up in prostitution, a form of sexual slavery from which the girls and women have no recourse. Roughly half of the prostitutes currently working in Italy are Nigerians.

Nigerian traffickers have exploited Europe’s migrant crisis to traffic girls across the Mediterranean to Italy to force into prostitution. From 2014-2016, more than 12,000 Nigerian girls and young women arrived in Italy, and of these, some 9,400 wound up as sex workers.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Geller Report. Pamela Geller’s shocking new book, “FATWA: HUNTED IN AMERICA” is now available on Amazon. It’s Geller’s tell all, her story – and it’s every story – it’s what happens when you stand for freedom today. Buy it. Now. Here.

Washington Post publishes article by Muslim who ‘served 13 years in federal prison for terrorism-related charges’

At least they admit it. The bio tag for this Washington Post article (thanks to Darcy) reads: “Ismail Royer is an American convert to Islam and a research and program associate at the Religious Freedom Institute, a D.C. nonprofit organization. He served 13 years in federal prison for terrorism-related charges. Since his release, he has worked in the nonprofit sector developing strategies to promote religious liberty and undermine extremist ideology.”

Which “extremist ideology”? Why not “…to promote religious liberty and undermine the jihad ideology”? Probably because what is meant by “extremist ideology” is “right-wing extremism,” a label often attached to resistance to jihad terror.

Interestingly, the Washington Post bio for Royer doesn’t note that before his incarceration, he worked for Hamas-linked CAIR.

Meanwhile, the title of this piece is “Muslims like me don’t have theological beef with evangelicals. It’s the prejudice against us that’s the problem.” Note that Royer is taking that ever-familiar stance we see again and again, on a drearily regular basis, from Muslim spokesmen: victimhood. Poor, poor Muslims are victimized by everyone else in 1000 ways — as the jihad body count rises ever higher. One would think that any man would be embarrassed to make his living as a professional whiner, but Islamic spokesmen seem to have a never-ending supply of chutzpah and no capacity for embarrassment at all.

And “Muslims like me”? What kind of Muslim is like Ismail Royer? Let’s review what the Post blandly reports as “13 years in federal prison for terrorism-related charges.” From the Investigative Project on Terrorism:

According to a biography posted on IslamOnline.net, Royer began working as a CAIR communication specialist in 1997. According to media reports, he continued to work for CAIR at least through the beginning of October 2001.

When police stopped Royer for a traffic violation in September 2001, they found in his automobile an AK-47-style rifle and 219 rounds of ammunition. He was indicted in June 2003, with 10 others, on a variety of charges stemming from participation in the ongoing jihad in Kashmir. Specifically, the indictment charged that Royer engaged in propaganda work for Lashkar-e-Taiba and “fired at Indian positions in Kashmir.”

Lashkar-e-Taiba was designated a Foreign Terrorist Organization on December 26, 2001. Thus, while news reports indicated he still worked for CAIR, according to a federal indictment, Royer purchased an AK-47 assault rifle and 219 rounds of ammunition, distributed newsletters for a group later designated as a foreign terrorist organization, and fired at Indian targets in Kashmir.

Again, Awad has minimized CAIR’s ties to Royer, noting Royer was also “a former employee of Starbucks Coffee.”

In January 2007, in response to Senator Boxer’s withdrawal of the award to Elkarra, Awad claimed that “CAIR had no knowledge of Royer’s travels and activities before he joined CAIR.”

Additional charges listed in a superseding indictment against Royer and his 10 co-conspirators included conspiracy to levy war against the United States and conspiracy to provide material support to Al Qaeda.

On January 16, 2004, Royer pleaded guilty to weapons and explosives charges and agreed to cooperate fully with the government.

He was sentenced to 20 years in prison.

Royer got out early, of course, and now proclaims that he has rejected his previous “extremism.” And so the Washington Post publishes him as if he were a legitimate spokesmen for Muslims in the United States. This is all part of the normalization of Islamic supremacism, of a piece with politicians appearing at Hamas-linked CAIR events (as we have seen recently in Ohio and Illinois).

The Washington Post is trying to condition the public into thinking that someone who used to work for Hamas-linked CAIR and served time in prison for jihad plotting is a perfectly reasonable fellow, while the real “extremists” are the foes of jihad terror. Can you imagine the Washington Post publishing an article by me or anyone else who is defamed by the hard-Left smear machine the Southern Poverty Law Center as an “anti-Muslim extremist”? They wouldn’t be caught dead. But a Muslim who worked for Hamas-linked CAIR and did propaganda work for a jihad terror work? Now, that’s someone who is perfectly within the bounds of reasonable discourse.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on Jihad Watch.

As Iranian women cast off hijab as symbol of oppression, UK Foreign Office celebrates World Hijab Day

“I can’t see the Foreign Office promoting Christianity or the handing out of crosses.”

Indeed. In the shattered, staggering, dhimmi UK, only Islam gets this fawning treatment. And it’s particularly despicable this year, for while non-Muslim women in the UK Foreign Office were donning hijabs in solidarity with hijabbed Muslimas, reinforcing the false claim that hijab-wearing women are persecuted and harassed in Britain and the West, Iranian women are risking years in prison for taking off their hijabs. The UK Foreign Office should be standing in solidarity with them and calling for freedom and the rights of women, but it will not do so — that would be “Islamophobic.”

“Foreign Office staff invited to wear hijab for the day: Civil service accused of promoting ‘oppression of women’ after giving out free headscarves,” by Ian Drury, Daily Mail, February 7, 2018:

Mandarins at the Foreign Office invited staff to wear Islamic headscarves for the day, claiming they symbolised ‘liberation, respect and security’.

The department was accused of backing the ‘institutional oppression of women’ by giving away taxpayer-funded headscarves at a walk-in event to mark World Hijab Day.

The event was held as women in ultra-conservative Iran burned their headscarves in protest at being forced to wear them or face arrest and prison.

Many Muslim women across the world have shunned the hijab – which covers the hair and neck but not the face – as an antiquated, oppressive, religious tool.

The event was last Thursday, just days before Britain marked the 100th anniversary of women being given the vote….

Anti-hijab activist Masih Alinejad told Reuters: ‘We are fighting against the most visible symbol of oppression. These women are saying, “It is enough – it is the 21st century and we want to be our true selves.”’

Tory MP Andrew Bridgen said: ‘I’d like to know whose bright idea this was. It is ridiculous, a complete waste of taxpayers’ money and not the business of a Government department.

‘I can’t see the Foreign Office promoting Christianity or the handing out of crosses.’

An internal email to Foreign Office staff said the event was taking place on February 1 between midday and 2pm inside the department’s headquarters at Whitehall.

It read: ‘Would you like to try on a hijab or learn why Muslim women wear the headscarf? Come along to our walk-in event. Free scarves for all those that choose to wear it for the day or part of the day.

‘Muslim women, along with followers of many other religions, choose to wear the hijab. Many find liberation, respect and security through wearing it. #StrongInHijab. Join us for #WorldHijabDay.’ Posters for the event, featuring Foreign Office branding, were circulated. World Hijab Day, an annual event, was also marked in the Scottish Parliament…

RELATED ARTICLES:

Canadian PM Trudeau: Sharia law is compatible with democracy

Obamagate: FBI Clinton Investigators Implicate Obama, “POTUS wants to know everything”

Newly Released FBI Text: Strzok-Page Used Untraceable Phones When ‘Talking About Hillary’

WATCH: Pamela Geller on Social Media Network Panel on Suppression of Free Speech

At Vatican, Erdogan asks Pope to help lead “concerted and continuous international effort to fight Islamophobia”

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on Jihad Watch.

Google partners with anti-Semitic, pro-Hamas Muslim group

While hounding and censoring those who dissent from the hard-Left line. Google, YouTube and the rest are not neutral platforms in the slightest degree. Their hegemony must be ended, or the freedom of speech will be a dead letter.

“Google Partners with Anti-Semitic Islamists,” by Steven Emerson, IPT News, January 30, 2018:

Why are Google and YouTube sponsoring a day-long symposium featuring a roster of speakers including known Islamist anti-Semites, as well as known militant Islamists who are long time Israel bashers and Hamas supporters? And why are Google and YouTube providing a forum for Islamists who approve of Sharia-imposed “death by stoning?”

This Wednesday’s online conference by the British-based Imams Online features a rogues’ gallery of Islamists and virulently anti-Semitic, anti-Israel speakers – and it’s all being done “in official partnership with Google and YouTube.

One of the conference’s three primary goals is “Tackling Rising Islamophobia and the Far Right Threat.”…

…spreading the false claim of rising Islamophobia actually can be seen as a national security threat. This is because that concept is based upon the false notion that there is a Western conspiracy against Islam – and that is the primary claim and motivation that induces jihadi terrorist attacks on western targets….

“For Google and YouTube to provide a worldwide forum for a group that includes known antisemites and bigots is irresponsible and beyond the pale,” said Rabbi Marvin Hier, founder and dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center. “Rather than promote tolerance and human dignity, it provides them with an enormous platform to further spew their anti-Semitism and hate! We call on Google and YouTube to immediately cancel the event!”

Google’s participation in the Imams Online summit stands in sharp contrast to its ongoing censorship of pro-Israel voices, including Prager University. Google-owned YouTube has restricted access to Prager U’s pro-Israel videos and has removed dozens of other videos for no apparent reason other than Google does not like Prager’s politics. It has likewise censored pro-Israel videos by Alan Dershowitz. This double standard belies its claims of neutrality.

Google is not the first social media giant to enter into a partnership with this highly questionable Islamic group. Faith Associates, the parent company of Imams Online, partnered in 2016 with Facebook and Twitter.

And in a similar action last November, Facebook partnered with the Muslim group Faith Associates to launch an online guide entitled “Keeping Muslims Safe Online,” targeting “hate speech.” Facebook has never offered a similar guide for other religions. Simon Milner, Head of Policy UK at Facebook, stated: “We’re proud to be supporting Faith Associates in the development of their online safety guide. Facebook welcomes all communities, and there is no place for hate on the platform.”

Yet investigative journalist and lawyer Judith Bergman noted at the Gatestone Institute: “It is curious that of all the groups Facebook could have chosen to ‘protect’ – if one is to believe that Facebook intends to ‘protect’ other groups as well – it chose Muslims. Are Muslims the most targeted group in the world today? In Canada, according to fresh statistics, hate crimes against Muslims have fallen while hate crimes against Jews have risen. In the United States, according to Gatestone’s A. Z. Mohamed: ‘Since 1992… anti-Semitic incidents have been higher than those perpetrated against other groups.’”

In line with Facebook’s inexplicable decision to host a conference with speakers, some of whose public records are parallel with neo-Nazis’ statements, we decided to check the backgrounds of the speakers at the Google/YouTube conference. And what sources of information did we primarily use? Google, YouTube and Twitter.

Adam Kelwick, a Liverpool-based imam and Muslim chaplain

In a July 2017 Facebook post, Kelwick wrote: “Muslims must visit Al-Aqsa in droves and ensure their visits adhere to the instructions of a ‘principled visitation’ as outlined by the Grand Mufti of Palestine and Jerusalem.” The Mufti whom Kelwick invokes, Sheikh Ikrima Sabri, has incited violence and condoned suicide bombing, saying: “It is the Palestinian people’s right to engage in resistance until the occupation ends. As long as the resistance is legitimate, everything related to it is also legitimate.” Of suicide bombing, he said: “It is legitimate, of course, as long as it plays a role in the resistance.”

Mahmood Chandia, a lecturer at the University of Central Lancashire

Chandia “claims in one sermon that music is a way in which Jews spread ‘the Satanic web’ to corrupt young Muslims,” the Times of Londonreported in 2007. Chandia openly endorsed Sharia-mandated death by stoning: “Death by stoning for both men and women exists to provide a social balance in a way that other people will see adultery as a deterrent. So while the Western observer might see it as abhorrent, it exists to preserve the family lineage. It is dictated by prophetic practice which is part of the Islamic religion, the Koran.”

Shuruq Naguib, a lecturer at Lancaster University

Naguib has retweeted virulent anti-Semites and anti-Israel militants, notably Ali Abunimah of the Electronic Intifada blog; Naguib retweeted Abunimah’s tweet of his pro-BDS article, “How to boycott Israel: updated guidelines for academics.”

In it, Abunimah repeats the false claim that Israel has engaged in “horrifying destruction and mass killing in Gaza,” and called for an “international academic and cultural boycott of Israel.”

Going even farther, Naguib has tweeted support for a petition calling upon the United Nations and world governments to impose a military embargo upon Israel in light of its supposed war crimes.

On Facebook, Naguib has shared a link to the article “Decolonization is a global project: From Palestine to the Americas.”

This article falsely claims that Israel expelled 800,000 of the “indigenous Palestinian people” from their homeland, saying “they were unable to return and became refugees as Zionist militias attacked and destroyed villages, towns and cities across Palestine.” In reality, “thousands of wealthy Arabs left in anticipation of a war, thousands more responded to Arab leaders’ calls to get out of the way of the advancing armies, a handful were expelled, but most simply fled to avoid being caught in the cross fire of a battle.”

Ingrid Mattson, professor at Huron University College at the University of Western Ontario and former President of the Islamic Society of North America

Mattson is a serial anti-Israel tweeter; she has tweeted in favor of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, accusing Israel of war crimes, along with almost any position that denies Israeli legitimacy. We are publishing just a handful so readers can get an idea of who Google has selected to speak to the entire world on Wednesday.

In 2014, during Israel’s defensive action in Gaza, Mattson falsely claimed that Israel’s actions were designed to “terrify people so they flee their homes – women, children, elderly all vulnerable.”

Mattson has engaged in moral equivalence between Israel and Palestinian terrorists, equating the terrorist bombing of a pizza parlor in Israel with Israel allegedly “bombing schools and hospitals” in Gaza, which only took place because Hamas was using them as “human shields.”

She has referred to Israel as an “Apartheid state.”

Also in connection with Israel’s 2014 action in Gaza, Mattson claimed that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sent Israeli soldiers to Gaza to “kill and be killed.”

She complained to then-Secretary of State John Kerry about what she termed “the terrorizing of Palestinian children.”

Myriam Francois, aka Myriam Francois-Cerrah, journalist

“Hamas’ status as an international pariah, means that the lack of sympathy reserved for an organisation listed as ‘terrorist’ by most countries in the West, now sadly extends to all Palestinians living in Hamas’ ruled Gaza,” Francois Cerrah wrote in 2013. She even defended rocket attacks from Gaza into Israel: “Just as the blockade of Gaza, ongoing since 2007, is a form of collective punishment, the current international unwillingness to protect Palestinian civilians on the grounds that Israel has a right to respond to rocket attacks, also represents a form of collective punishment.”

In line with this sympathy for Hamas, she has tweeted: “Israel accusing Hamas of war crimes? Oh the irony.”

She has even claimed that Israel’s “real purpose” in the Gaza operation was “to kill Arabs.”

Francois-Cerrah has also claimed that banning Sharia courts in Britain “would harm British Muslim women….while the call to ban Sharia councils is often seen as a way of protecting women, many women I have interviewed feel a ban would disempower them, by removing one of the potentially powerful avenues through which they could exercise religious pressure on their husbands or family members.” In reality, these courts have been found to be operating beyond the reach of British law and aiding and abetting the oppression of women.

Haaris Abdul Samad, imam of Hayes Muslim Centre

Even more disturbing is Abdul Samad’s support for Aafia Siddiqui, “Lady al-Qaida,” who is serving 86 years in prison for attacking American interrogators in Afghanistan.

Google’s Partner in Crime: Imams Online

If Google had done its due diligence and investigated Imams Online, it would have easily discovered that its partner had posted anti-Israeli blogs, supported Hamas, accused Israel of genocide and promoted Hamas talking points. An article that remains on the Imams Online website repeats vicious Palestinian anti-Israel propaganda:

We see the brutal killing of innocent children, vile abuses of power from police and servicemen, the frustration of years of oppression and hardships, the anguish and pain of mothers and fathers and within all that, the unwavering defiance of young Palestinians….

As we watch in horror the senseless killing of women and children in Palestine, Imams and Islamic leaders from around the world share in the grief and speak out in outrage to ask where has our humanity gone?..

The Islamic authorities Imams Online invokes are noteworthy. They include Yasir Qadhi, an ultra-conservative cleric who has been a Holocaust denier and believes Muslim women should not work, except as school teachers or as physicians serving other Muslim women.

The Imams Online article also quotes the imam Suhaib Webb, whom the Simon Wiesenthal Center considers to be an “anti-Semite,” saying: “The events in Palestine only increase my commitment to the BDS movement and support for organizations in America that are working to give life to Palestinians.” Webb claims that effeminate men are cursed and that Muslims should fight gay marriage. He complains that American girls are “bad people” because they “don’t wear any clothes.” He accuses Jews of trying to kill Jesus and being Muhammad’s greatest antagonists, and tells his congregation that animosity toward Jews is understandable. In 2014, Webb raised $300,000 for Islamic Relief, a Hamas-linked charity designated as a terrorist entity by Israel and the United Arab Emirates.

Imams Online also invokes another imam, Omar Suleiman, also considered an anti-Semite by the Simon Wiesenthal Center, who also retails anti-Israel propaganda: “The only result that ever comes out of constant violence and oppression is the perpetuation of animosity and the birth of countless generations of young Palestinians that will grow up in an environment that disregards their humanity and forces them to continue a tradition of resistance and protection for their lives and the lives of their families.” Suleiman has a history with Google: he prevailed upon the social media giant to skew its searches so as to present only material favorable to Islam, and to hide any material critical of Islam.

In another Imams Online post criticizing President Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, it reprints a tweet from Omar Suleiman:

In still another post, Imams Online touted the “International Day of Solidarity with Palestine” and falsely claimed: “The Palestinian people are yet to attain their inalienable rights as defined by the [UN] General Assembly; the right to self-determination without external interference, the right to national independence and sovereignty, and the right to return to their homes and property from which they had been displaced.”

MCA-UK partners with Muslim Aid. Gatestone Institute reported in 2014: “Muslim Aid, a British Muslim charity, is also presently working with the Muslim Chaplain’s Association to provide ‘opportunities to become a prison mentor.’ In 2010, Muslim Aid admitted to funding two Palestinian charities that belonged to the terror groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad. In addition, a number of Bangladeshi commentators have accused Muslim Aid of funding the violent Islamist group Jamaat-e-Islami.”

All this information is publicly available; Google either did not bother to investigate Imams Online, or simply isn’t concerned about its providing a platform for virulent anti-Semitism and Islamism. In partnering with this unsavory group, Google is demonstrating what its detractors have insisted for years: it is an enabler of Islamic radicalism and extremism.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on Jihad Watch.

VIDEO: Woman in a hijab stars in hair product advertisement for L’Oreal?

Celebrating the values of our new overlords and preparing the people for what is coming.

Amena Khan

“Woman in a Hijab Stars in Hair Product Advertisement for L’Oreal,” by Victoria Friedman, Breitbart, January 18, 2018:

L’Oréal Paris UK has cast a woman who wears an Islamic headscarf as a model in a hair care product campaign.

Youtuber and Instagram personality Amena Khan called the L’Oréal campaign, launched Monday, “game changing” for showcasing a woman who completely covers her hair in the hair care advertisement.

“How many brands are doing things like this? Not many. They’re literally putting a girl in a headscarf – whose hair you can’t see – in a hair campaign,” she told the British edition of Vogue.

The fashion magazine applauded the “conversations” the ad will “provoke”, saying that L’Oréal has now “democratised” its “Worth It” messaging.

“Whether or not your hair is on display it doesn’t affect how much you care about it,” Ms. Khan says in her portion of the one minute-ad which featured other “diverse British ambassadors and influencers”.

L’Oréal Paris UK General Manager Adrien Koskas called the commercial a “disruptive campaign for the haircare market”….

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on Jihad Watch.

Iranians are Ultimately Protesting Islamic [Sharia] Law by Raymond Ibrahim

What began on December 28 as local protests against high food prices in the northern city of Mashhad, Iran, has spiraled into mass protests consisting of some hundreds of thousands of Iranians in some two dozen cities, including if not especially Tehran, the seat of government. So far over 20 protesters have been killed and many hundreds arrested in what has been widely described as “the most serious internal crisis the country has faced this decade.”

The protests have morphed from mundane topics concerning the economy to more existential topics concerning Islamic leadership. Reportedly hundreds of thousands of protesters have been heard shouting “We don’t want an Islamic Republic,” and calling blessings on Reza Shah, the staunch secularist and political reformer who did much to Westernize Iran, until his son and successor, Muhammad Reza Shah, was deposed during the Islamic Revolution of 1979. According to Mideast media, women — such as Maryam Rajavi — are spearheading the current protests (and symbolically rejecting Islamic impositions by publicly removing their hijabs).

Even the Iranian regime sees the current unrest as a revolt against Islam. In his initial remarks after demonstrations first erupted, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei said, “All those who are against the Islamic Republic … have all joined forces in order to create problems for the Islamic Republic and the Islamic Revolution” (note the recurrent and telling adjective “Islamic”).

Even so, “mainstream media” see growing poverty and frustration at the lack of social freedoms as the only reasons behind the current unrest. Overlooked in their analysis is that, because Islam is not meant to be a “spiritual thing” one does privately, but is rather a complete system of governance, permeating the whole of private and social life, the ongoing protests in Iran, while ostensibly revolving around economic, social, and political issues, are ultimately protests against Islamic teachings concerning economic, social, and political issues, which the Islamic Republic of Iran has been imposing on the populace since coming to power in 1979.

This is evident even in the new rallying cry of the protestors — “Death to the Dictator” — in reference to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei himself. By its very nature, Islamic law — both Sunni and Shia — calls for dictatorial rule. So long as the caliph, sultan, or emir governs society according to Sharia, Muslims must obey him — even if he is a despicable and cruel personage. After examining a number of Islamic rulings from authoritative exegetes, as well as a number of statements attributed to Muslim prophet Muhammad and in the Koran concerning the importance for Muslims to follow Islamic law — which is the only relevant question of when Muslims should and should not seek to overthrow their ruler — Ayman al-Zawahiri writes,

To summarize: It is forbidden to overthrow a tyrant, but it is a duty to overthrow an infidel. If the ruler is despotic, it is unlawful for a Muslim to rally other Muslims in order to condemn him, for if they do so then they become the aggressors and it becomes incumbent for the sultan to fight them (The Al Qaeda Reader, p. 122).

As it happens, the social oppression currently being protested against in Iran — from second-class status for women, to bans on all forms of expression critical of Islam, its prophet, and his representative on earth — is mandated by Islamic law, thereby making the protesters “the aggressors.”

But even the economic aspects of the protests are largely by-products of Islamist aspirations. As Donald Trump tweeted last Friday, the Iranian “people are finally getting wise as to how their money and wealth is being stolen and squandered on terrorism.” Indeed, the economic suffering of the people has come at a time when the regime has grown rich — not least by Barack Obama giving them over $100 billion as part of a nuclear deal. The reason for the disparity is that the regime has been and continues to spend much of its wealth in trying to realize its stated Islamic ideals; that is, it prefers supporting Hezbollah (currently Forbes wealthiest terrorist organization) and Hamas (third wealthiest) against Islam’s arch “infidel” enemy, Israel, in the name of and for the greater glory of Allah, rather than feed its people.

Incidentally, because the right to protest is a given in the West, and thus occurs often, including over trivial and/or absurd matters — as when university students planned a “sh*t-in,” occupying restrooms as a way of demanding more “gender-neutral facilities” — the grave consequences of the current protests in Iran (which are unsurprisingly also connected to Islam) are as underestimated in the West as they are indicative of just how frustrated many Iranians are:

Protesters could also potentially face the death penalty when their cases come to trial, according to the head of Tehran’s Revolutionary Court, the AP reported. Iran’s semiofficial Tasnim news agency quoted Mousa Ghazanfarabadi as saying: “Obviously one of their charges can be Moharebeh,” or waging war against God [Allah], which is a death penalty offense in Iran.

Moharebeh is precisely what al-Zawahiri was referring to in the above excerpt: the only legitimate reason to overthrow an Islamic ruler is his failure to govern according to Islam — which Khamenei and his regime can hardly be accused of (from a Shia prism, that is). Seeking to depose him because he is personally corrupt, despotic, cruel, or spending more money on jihad than food is forbidden, and transforms the protesters into aggressors against Allah, a crime worthy of punishment, including death.