Posts

Sudanese Christians arrested and fined for selling food during Ramadan

While Christians in the U.S. persist in assuming that Ramadan is an entirely benign religious observance, their coreligionists in Muslim countries do not have that luxury.

“Sudan: Fines Issued in Sudan’s El Gedaref for Selling Food During Ramadan,” Radio Dabanga, June 13, 2017 (thanks to International Christian Concern):

El Gedaref — The court in El Gedaref has fined people, including Christians, for selling food and tea during the fasting month of Ramadan.

More than 10 people received a fine of SDG2,000 ($298) each. Lawyer Ramzi Yahya told Radio Dabanga that public order police arrested them during a campaign last week.

“This is a clear discrimination against Christians and contrary to the slogans of religious coexistence launched by the Sudan Government for the international community.”

Yahya said that local restaurants have been barred from catering during Ramadan for two years in a row. “Meanwhile there are a considerable number of Christians and other people who excuse themselves from the fasting in El Gedaref.”

Freedom of Christians probed

The European Union Special Envoy for the Promotion of Freedom of Religion or Belief visited Sudan mid-March to inquire about the situation of Christians and the demolition of churches in the country. He pointed to the planned demolition of 27 churches and church buildings in Khartoum which was delayed after an appeal was made to the court by lawyers….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Israel: Muslims murder their niece in honor killing for fear she would date men

Sweden: 100 Muslim migrant youths attack police with stones, sticks and bats

Georgetown professor promotes ‘religious discrimination’ against Jews

The radicalization of our nation’s colleges and universities continues apace. Hard-left, antisemitic propaganda has now been institutionalized in academia. The ugliest rhetoric is sanctioned under the guise of “free speech,” while courageous voices for freedom are blacklisted. My colleagues and I are banned from speaking, for the most part. And in the rare instance where we are invited, violent and vicious pandemonium ensues. Robert Spencer’s talk at the University at Buffalo, Milo at Berkeley or mine at Brooklyn College best demonstrate what we face. And yet, Linda Sarsour, a pro-jihad terror activist and vicious anti-Semite is invited to give the keynote commencement address at CUNY (which we are protesting on May 25th here).

Professor Jonathan Brown is a notorious Jew-hater with a long history of anti-Semitic agitation. His wife is the daughter of Palestinian Islamic Jihad leader Sami al-Arian.

“Georgetown professor Jonathan Brown openly rallies for ‘religious discrimination’ against Jews,” Canary Mission, May 18, 2017:

Jonathan Brown [Jonathan A.C. Brown] has demonized Israeli Jews and Judaism. He  has implied that the Palestinian-Israeli conflict could be solved if only “Jews in Israel” were told that “they are not allowed to take stuff that doesn’t belong to them.”

In February of 2017, Brown found himself embroiled in controversy after he was accused of supporting non-consensual sex and slavery in early Islam. The incident is detailed later in this profile.

Brown has endorsed the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement’s attacks on Israel, made under the guise of support for “human rights.”

Brown is a tenured Associate Professor of Islamic Civilization at Georgetown University (Georgetown). He is the Alwaleed bin Talal Chair of Islamic Civilization in Georgetown’s School of Foreign Service (SFS). Brown is also the Director of the Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim Christian Understanding (CMCU) within the SFS. The CMCU is known for its links to the Saudi government.

Brown is son-in-law to Sami Al-Arian, a former University of South Florida (USF) professor, who was revealed in 2006 to be a leader of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), a specially designated terrorist organization. The United States government deported Al-Arian to Turkey in 2015. Brown’s wife is Al-Jazeera senior producer Laila Al-Arian.

Demonizing Israeli Jews

On February 26, 2015  — at a multi-denominational symposium hosted by the Policy Studies Organization (PSO) titled: “Religious Politics in the Middle East: The Religious Dimension of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict — Brown said: “The problem is that the Israeli political creature, the Israeli political establishment, has not told Jews in Israel that they are not allowed to take stuff that doesn’t belong to them and that is, I think, a fundamental problem… If you can tell people that your religious belief does not give you the right to take the possessions of someone else. Ok? Then If that were established, I think that would completely change, you know, the reality 180 degrees.”

Promoting Faith-Based Segregation

On February 26, 2015, at the above-mentioned symposium, Brown suggested that Americans would have to overcome their “allergy to the idea of religious discrimination” if they wanted to envisage a realistic end to the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. Brown went on to say and that even within the context of a totally secular democratic state, it would be “absolutely disastrous” for Palestinian Muslims or Palestinian Christians if “a Jew’s allowed” to go into the holy places of other religions “and just start praying there.” Brown said that we “need to accept that” Jerusalem might have to become a “very divided city under some kind of international or … external control.”

Later, Brown highlighted the Palestinian’s perception of being “encroached upon” by Israeli Jews and posited that a “clear notion of stable boundaries and separations”  would lead to a “cosmopolitan atmosphere” and help in “building trust.”

Earlier in the symposium, Brown said “I don’t want to say that this isn’t a religious issue, because I think it very clearly is — especially from the Jewish and the Christian perspective — But I think, actually, from the Arab/Muslim perspective not so much.”

Brown argued that even “if you could just erase religion from the minds of Palestinians, they would still have all the problems that they have now” and “the problem would still not be resolved.” Brown also posited that the willingness of fundamental Islamists to fight alongside secular Arabs against Israel showed that the fundamentals of the conflict were not religious.

Brown later posited: I think the religion is the superstructure and the unresolved issues of control and disenfranchisement and land and power and and rights — these are the real issues.”

Presenting BDS as a Muslim Duty

On November 4, 2016, in a podcast titledDiffused Congruence: The American Muslim Experience,” Brown insinuated that Muslims have a religious responsibility to promote BDS. After listing the various religious, cultural and professional affiliations of some people who support BDS — and singling out some Jews, in particular — Brown went on to say: “Who’s the ones who are going against BDS and undermining it now? It’s the young Muslims. Think about that disgrace.” (7:20).

Brown made his comments in the context of slamming a Jewish-Muslim dialogue project known as the Muslim Leadership Initiative (MLI,) which was founded by Imam Abdullah Antepli, the first Muslim chaplain at Duke University. MLI is an educational program for Muslim Americans to “understand why Jews believe what they believe, how Jews see their history, why Jews are so attached to this contested strip of land (Israel) — and thus to better engage with American Jews.” According to Antepli, “MLI aims to put mainstream North American Jewry in conversation with their Muslim counterparts.”

Brown said he had no problem with young Muslims “dialoguing” with Jews or Zionists “anywhere.” However, he said that since the organizers “insisted” that the program be held in Israel, it “should reveal what the actual purpose is… to break the boycott in going there.”

Demanding Israel Surrender “Power”

In the same podcast, after arguing that religious segregation is a necessary prerequisite to trust building, Brown argued the basis for the Arab-Israeli conflict is really a political one, caused by an imbalance of power and resources.

Brown argued that if one group has “armed power… resources and international power” and another group does not, then “until that imbalance is rectified, in some way, there’s not going to be a solution.” Brown said you “can’t have peaceful relations or solving an age-old conflict unless the party that is in power surrenders that – until you have some kind of equitable distribution.”

In his closing remarks, Brown responded to a request for his solution to the psychological-religious divide between the parties. Brown hypothesized that “theoretically for an Islamist” such as “someone in Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ)” will assert that his religious goals might be to “establish an Islamic state here” and “have Sharia Law” and to “drive all the Jews into the sea.”

Challenging “Freedom” and “Consent”

On February 7, 2017, Brown’s comments at a lecture titled “Islam and The Problem of Slavery” made national headlines. Multiple media outlets accused Brown of speaking in favor of slavery and rape —  a claim which Brown denied. The controversy began with a blog post by freelance writer Umar Lee, who attended Brown’s lecture.

On February 8, 2017, it was reported that Brown had conservative journalist Andrew Harrod ejected from the lecture hall, prior to the start of Brown’s formal remarks. Brown referenced the ejection at the beginning of his lecture — and publicly derided the ejected reporter.

Below are a selection of controversial statements Brown made during the lecture and the Q&A period that followed:

In response to a questioner who characterized imposed slavery as a “wrong,”  Brown said: “If you’re Muslim, the prophet of God … had slaves. He had slaves. There’s no denying that. Are you more morally mature than the prophet of God? No, you’re not.”

Brown also said: “Slavery cannot just be treated as a moral evil in and of itself, because ‘slavery’ doesn’t mean anything. The moral evil is extreme forms of deprivation of rights and extreme forms of control and extreme forms of exploitation. I don’t think it’s morally evil to own somebody, because we own lots of people all around us and we’re owned by people.”

On August 9, 2015 — according to a February 11, 2017 screenshot on Twitter — Brown said on Facebook: “I think people have a lot of things mixed up in their minds, forming a sort of outrage soup they can’t deal with. I think one has to proceed in an orderly way 1) slavery is, in general, allowed in Islamic law. 2) It’s very possible (and it’s actually happened) to declare that slavery is no longer permissible whether due to consistent failings in treatment of slaves or the decision of governments for the common good of the Muslim community. 3) But it’s not possible to say that slavery is inherently, absolutely, categorically immoral in all times and places, since it was allowed by the Quran and the Prophet. 4) Slave women do not have agency over their sexual access, so their owner can have sex with them.”

Explaining Non-Consensual Sex

During his February 7, 2017 lecture, Brown challenged modern standards of morality that define human beings as “autonomous agents” and dictate that “the sine qua non of morally correct sex is consent.”

Brown went on to say: “For most of human history, human beings have not thought of consent as the essential feature of morally correct sexual activity. And second, we fetishize the idea of autonomy to the extent that we forget – again, who’s really free? Are we really autonomous people? What does autonomy mean?”

Brown then followed up: “We have this obsession with the idea of autonomy” —  and proceeded to equate the servitude of those pressed into sexual slavery or serving as concubines to individuals subject to voluntarily assumed familial obligations, stemming from marriage.

Walking Back Controversial Statements

On February 17, 2017, Brown defended his statements, in the Washington Post, stating: “These people criticizing me don’t know the difference between the past and the present tense. The talk I gave was historical description.”

On February 16, 2017, Brown wrote an article for the online magazine Muslim Matters where he explained his statements. There, Brown wrote: “As a Muslim today, I can say emphatically that slavery is wrong and that Islam prohibits it … It’s easy for me to say this looking back on slavery in American history, because our American slavery was a manifestation of the absolute domination of one human being by another that is, in my opinion, a universal wrong across time and space.”

On February 11, 2017, Brown tweeted: “Islam as a faith and I as a person condemn slavery, rape and concubinage.”

BDS

The BDS movement was founded in 2005 by Omar Barghouti and asserts that it “works to end international support for Israel’s oppression of Palestinians and pressure Israel to comply with international law.”

BDS initiatives include compelling institutions and individuals to divest from Israeli-affiliated companies, academic boycotts, anti-Israel rallies and protests.

The movement’s most notable achievement has been the infiltration of university campuses through lobbying for “BDS resolutions.” In these cases, backed by university anti-Israel affiliates, student governments have brought to vote on some form of boycott of — or divestment from — Israel and Israeli-affiliated entities. These resolutions, although non-binding, have been passed by student governments on numerous North American campuses.

BDS activity is often aggressive and disruptive. It has been noted that universities that pass BDS resolutions see a marked increase in anti-Semitic incidents on campus. In 2013, when the student government of the University of California Santa Barbara (UCSB) debated a BDS resolution, reports emerged of violent threats and the spitting on a student wearing a Star of David necklace. As a result, the student government chose to vote via a “secret ballot” in order to ensure their own safety.

RELATED ARTICLES:

For Some, Sex Appeal is Part of Jihad’s Lure – IPT News

Imam in Canada defends imam in Denmark who called for killing of Jews

‘I am going to work for ISIS. I hate you guys,’ says 12-year-old Syrian refugee girl

“When officers arrived, the 12-year-old punched one while he had his back turned, and tried to hit him a second time. She threatened to make false allegations that the police had ‘touched her,’ and threatened to kill the officers. ‘I am going to work for ISIS. I hate you guys,’ she told police…She also said in her statement to police that she thought the 911 calls were funny and she would do it again….’I hope that she has learned through this process that the police in Canada are there to help us and are not there to hurt us,’ Tasche said at the hearing, which was translated for the accused.”

Keep on hoping. But we are likely to hear from this girl again, and not in a positive way.

isis training in orphanage“Refugee girl sentenced for 60 fake 911 calls,” by Katie May, Winnipeg Free Press, April 28, 2017 (thanks to Blazing Cat Fur):

A young Syrian refugee with a traumatic past and a hostile attitude toward police has ended up with a criminal record at only 12 years old.

The 12-year-old girl, who recently arrived in Winnipeg with her family, was charged with public mischief and assaulting a police officer after she and her younger sister called 911 60 times between July and August last year. They used different cell phones they found, making false reports that were designated as high-priority and wasted police’s time, court heard. After the final 911 call on Aug. 24, police responded to the family’s home, diverting resources away from investigation of a bomb threat that was happening simultaneously downtown.

When officers arrived, the 12-year-old punched one while he had his back turned, and tried to hit him a second time. She threatened to make false allegations that the police had “touched her,” and threatened to kill the officers.

“I am going to work for ISIS. I hate you guys,” she told police, according to details shared in court during the girl’s sentencing this week.

She also said in her statement to police that she thought the 911 calls were funny and she would do it again. She spent 21 days in jail at the Manitoba Youth Centre following the charges.

She was sentenced to one year of probation, during which she must complete 75 hours of community service work and write letters of apology to the police officers involved.

The girl spent time in a refugee camp before her family was able to come to Canada and settle in Winnipeg.

“We know that (she) and her family went through some particularly difficult things in Syria,” said her defence lawyer, Hillarie Tasche, who said the 12-year-old and her sister are now receiving counselling with help from an Arabic translator.

“(She) has learned more and more that what she did was wrong and also that saying she wanted to work with ISIS was wrong because they were the very people that were trying to hurt her and her family,” her lawyer said, adding the girl has had to overcome cultural differences and a very different relationship with people in uniform.

“I hope that she has learned through this process that the police in Canada are there to help us and are not there to hurt us,” Tasche said at the hearing, which was translated for the accused….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Robert Spencer heading to Iceland, Left-fascists in uproar

Australia: Muslim teen who shot man left note: “I have come to put terror in your hearts”

Islamic State Answers Pope Francis: Ours Is a Religious War and We Hate You

Of course, the Pope will insist he knows more about Islam then devout Muslims.

The Islamic State directly attacks Francis for claiming that “authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Quran are opposed to every form of violence,” saying that by doing this, “Francis continues to hide behind a deceptive veil of ‘good will,’ covering his actual intentions of pacifying the Muslim nation.”

Pope Francis “has struggled against reality” in his efforts to portray Islam as a religion of peace, the article insists, before going on to urge all Muslims to take up the sword of jihad, the “greatest obligation” of a true Muslim.

Of course. SMH

Islamic State Answers Pope Francis: Ours Is a Religious War and We Hate You,” by Thomas D. Williams, Breitbart, August 3, 2016:

The Islamic State terror group has come out publicly to reject Pope Francis’ claims that the war being waged by Islamic terrorists is not religious in nature, assuring the pontiff that their sole motivation is religious and sanctioned by Allah in the Qur’an.

The Islamic State terror group has come out publicly to reject Pope Francis’ claims that the war being waged by Islamic terrorists is not religious in nature, assuring the pontiff that their sole motivation is religious and sanctioned by Allah in the Qur’an.

In the most recent issue of Dabiq, the propaganda magazine of the Islamic State, ISIS criticizes Pope Francis for his naïveté in clinging to the conviction that Muslims want peace and that acts of Islamic terror are economically motivated.

“This is a divinely-warranted war between the Muslim nation and the nations of disbelief,” the authors state in an article titled “By the Sword.”

The Islamic State directly attacks Francis for claiming that “authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Quran are opposed to every form of violence,” saying that by doing this, “Francis continues to hide behind a deceptive veil of ‘good will,’ covering his actual intentions of pacifying the Muslim nation.”

Pope Francis “has struggled against reality” in his efforts to portray Islam as a religion of peace, the article insists, before going on to urge all Muslims to take up the sword of jihad, the “greatest obligation” of a true Muslim.

Despite the obviously religious nature of their attacks, the article states, “many people in Crusader countries express shock and even disgust that Islamic State leadership ‘uses religion to justify violence.’”

“Indeed, waging jihad – spreading the rule of Allah by the sword – is an obligation found in the Quran, the word of our Lord,” it reads.

“The blood of the disbelievers is obligatory to spill by default. The command is clear. Kill the disbelievers, as Allah said, ‘Then kill the polytheists wherever you find them.’”

The Islamic State also reacted to Pope Francis’s description of recent acts of Islamic terror as “senseless violence,” insisting that there is nothing senseless about it.

“The gist of the matter is that there is indeed a rhyme to our terrorism, warfare, ruthlessness, and brutality,” they declare, adding that their hatred for the Christian West is absolute and implacable.

The fact is, even if you were to stop bombing us, imprisoning us, torturing us, vilifying us, and usurping our lands, we would continue to hate you because our primary reason for hating you will not cease to exist until you embrace Islam. Even if you were to pay jizyah [tax for infidels] and live under the authority of Islam in humiliation, we would continue to hate you.

In a recent press conference, Pope Francis told journalists  that the world is at war. “But it’s a real war, not a religious war,” he said.

“It’s a war of interests, a war for money. A war for natural resources and for the dominion of the peoples.”

“Every religion wants peace,” he said.

What a delusional tool.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on PamelaGeller.com. To stay on top of what’s really happening please follow Pamela on Twitter and like her on Facebook here.

Hypocrite Lecteur

“And you, hypocrite lecteur,
What makes you so superior?”

– Louis Simpson, from There You Are

I find it so very telling that whenever a majority of the population show their support for a cause or a personality the media and the Left disagree with or disapprove of, that support is deprecated as populism–as though populism (read the penchants of the majority) were some coveted evil bandied about by the banausic and non-elites of Western democracies; as though the wishes of the majority were become worthy of contempt precisely at the moment those wishes might empower that majority. Whatever happened to “We the people”? I believe it is high time that the wishes of the majority took precedence over the parochial and selfish interests of political bureaucrats, and especially now that the majority have made it known–or rather, are making it known– that they’ve quite had enough of the multiculturalism experiment and are more than tired of having the debilities of Islam obtruded into their choice of television and radio narrative every day. Enough already.

The first definition of the word populist in the Penguin dictionary is “A member of a political party claiming to represent ordinary people.” The second is “Someone who has or cultivates an appeal to ordinary people.” Is this not also the definition of every politician that ever ran for office? The popularity of Donald Trump is denigrated by the Left and the media as an evil populism simply because he is bold enough to bring to light the fact that the religion of Islam has become a problem for the Western world and because the majority of the citizens of that Western world are extremely concerned about this problem. Shouldn’t this particular vein of populism be an issue that all politicians, if they are truly concerned about the future of their country as an abiding democracy, whether Democrat or Republican, attend to with their full and undivided attention?

Michael Harrington wrote in 1962 that, “The millions who are poor in the United States tend to become increasingly invisible….It takes an effort of the intellect and will even to see them.” The same can be said of those millions who refuse to endure the contorted concept of multiculturalism, an insalubrious idea the Western media and political elite have turned into a populism of their very own. These millions have become not only increasingly invisible, but their voice, when it is heard, if at all, is maligned and emasculated back into the silent and stifled existence from whence it struggles to egress. To publicly contend that all religions are not equal, or more precisely, that Islam and the Muslim are become a relatively dangerous and obtrusive element within Western democracies, is to proceed against the current of this particular populism, an adventure that can arouse the ire of both journalist and politician alike. But even more disconcerting, it appears that soon, and very soon, such an intellectual venture will bring down upon oneself the wrath and weight of the state.

Many Western journalists (but not all), who have always asserted themselves as guardians of “freedom of the press” have now become shamelessly censorious of nakedly obvious truths, especially those truths concerning the egregious behavior of Muslim religious. And the state, whose duties include what the common citizens of every Western democracy have always assumed is a defense against encroachment of foreign influence and discriminatory cultures, is fast becoming a peremptory and imperviable purveyor of foreign influence and discriminatory cultures. Samuel P. Huntington warned that, “The survival of the West depends on Americans reaffirming their Western identity and Westerners accepting their civilization as unique not universal and uniting to renew and preserve it against challenges from non-Western societies.”

In his book Mass Hate, Neil Kressel remarks about the people of Germany during the Holocaust, “…some historians, particularly those of a psychoanalytic bent, have crawled deeper into the psyche of the German people and attempted to stake out the contours of what might be described as a collective national pathology.” I believe that within the psyche of the worldwide Muslim Ummah there exists a collective imperialist pathology, and it’s based on Islam’s promised and prescribed universal Caliphate. And just like Adolf Hitler’s genocidal dream of a thousand year Reich, this pathology is anti-Jewish to the core. This is the most dangerous populism on the planet. Right up there with the populism that today invokes the power of the state upon anyone who refuses to swallow the multiculturalism pill and the immeasurably convoluted notion that all religions are equally deserving of our respect. Innocent people–men, women, and children–are being murdered every day in the name of Islam, and yet our condemnation of these horrors and the savages who commit them is labeled as a worthless and simplistic populism.

To the real Islamophobes, the journalists and politicians afraid of offending the more dangerous adherents of Islam, I say, “And you, hypocrite lecteur, what makes you so superior?”

RELATED ARTICLE: Two ‘Mohameds’ shoot up Calgary bar; here’s how the media reported it

Do Muslims Around the World Really Hate the United States? Answer: Yes!

The hatred of infidels is a religious imperative in Islam. No matter how fast we dance, appease, pay, accommodate, and submit, the hatred and holy war will not cease.

Do Muslims Around the World Really Hate the United States? Yes!

In an article entitled, “Do Muslims Around the World Really Hate the United States?”published at Foreign Policy and widely circulated in mainstream media circles, i.e., GOP candidates are being pilloried for their opposition to jihad, sharia, and ISIS infiltration here in the United States.

Countering the reasonable and rational, Foreign Policy warns us that the Muslim world hates us, citing Pew Research Center data and various other surveys of Muslim “publics [that] have been asked whether they have a favorable or unfavorable view of the United States.” But as is to be expected from Foreign Policy, their focus is wrong, as is their analysis of the problem and their proposed solution.

As the Republican candidates debated in Las Vegas Tuesday night, Foreign Policy tried to portray them as overestimating the jihad threat. Its article claimed that “the race has oddly enough turned into a referendum on the roughly 3 million Muslims in the United States — and on the 1.6 billion outside its borders.” This was unwarranted – or so Foreign Policy would have you believe, for while “intense anti-American sentiment can be found in Egypt (53 percent held a very unfavorable view of America in 2014) and Jordan (51 percent very unfavorable in 2015),” such sentiment “has actually ebbed among Muslims in the Palestinian territories and Pakistan. And in both Indonesia and Nigeria, countries with some of the largest Muslim populations in the world, strong majorities voice a favorable view of the United States. In fact, their pro-American sentiment is stronger than that in Germany.”

All this shows that the establishment media is once again missing the point. Let’s talk about these Pew and Gallup surveys of the Muslim world. The question isn’t so much “whether they have a favorable or unfavorable view of the United States,” or whether or not the most recent polls show “intense anti-American sentiment” or “pro-American sentiment.” The question is, whether they have a favorable or unfavorable view of the infidel, and how favorably they view jihad and sharia. That data will reliably reveal what they really think about America.

A November poll by the Pew Research Center revealed significant levels of support for ISIS within the Muslim world. And another poll released in November shows that a third of Syrian refugees are ISIS sympathizers. The Pew poll validates everything I have been saying and blows the fiction that the media, academic and cultural elites have been spinning, as in this Foreign Policy article, clear out of the water. Even worse, you can be absolutely sure that the real extent of this support is higher than the Pew data indicates. Much higher. These Muslims just admit to it. Others do not.

Other surveys show that 58% of Muslims in the U.S. reject criticism of Islam as a right; 46% want such blasphemers punished legally. Twelve percent want them killed. 25% of Muslims in the U.S. think that jihad suicide bombings are justified in some circumstances. Do you think such people love America in any genuine sense?

The gist of the Foreign Policy article is that we have a problem: many in the Muslim world don’t like us, and it must be our fault, and clearly the rhetoric we are hearing in the fight for the GOP nomination isn’t helping. This is placing the blame, the onus on us, when in fact this Muslim hatred for the United States predates this election. It predates 9/11 — what was their excuse then? It predates the Hizballah bombing of our Marine barracks in Lebanon in 1983. It predates the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948. It goes back to Muhammad.

Articles such as this one in Foreign Policy are designed to shut down and shut up the conversation concerning jihad, sharia, and Muslim immigration. The Republicans have taken a stand against sharia restrictions on speech (“do not criticize Islam”) imposed by the media over the past ten years. When Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)) declared Tuesday night that “political correctness is killing people,” he nailed it. Actually it’s sharia that’s killing people, but I won’t split hairs. The American public is embracing the candidates’ candor. The GOP opened a window and let the truth in.

The hatred of infidels is a religious imperative in Islam. No matter how fast we dance, appease, pay, accommodate, and submit, the hatred and holy war will not cease. On the contrary, the more we submit and reward the hatred and terror, the more we will have to surrender.

RELATED VIDEO: ‘By The Numbers: The Untold Story of Muslim Opinions and Demographics’

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on PamelaGeller.com. To stay on top of what’s really happening please follow Pamela on Twitter and like her on Facebook here.

Ohio Muslim: “Kill them in their own lands, behead them in their own homes”

“And kill them wherever you find them”: that’s in the Qur’an three times (2:191, 4:89, and 9:5). Not that this has anything to do with Islam. “Akron man arrested on a terrorism charge,” by Eric Heisig, Cleveland.com, November 12, 2015:

AKRON, Ohio — The FBI on Thursday arrested an Akron man on a terrorism-related charge.

Terrence J. McNeil, 25, is charged with one count of solicitation of a crime of violence….

McNeil, according to U.S. Attorney’s Office, supported the Islamic State, a terrorist organization also known as ISIL.

He is accused of uploading a file on Sept. 24 to a Tumblr account that showed photos, addresses and military branch of purported members of the military. One of the slides in the file reads:

“O Brothers in America, know that the jihad against the crusaders is not limited to the lands of the Khilafah, it is a world-wide jihad and their war is not just a war against the Islamic State, it is a war against Islam…Know that it is wajib (translated to “necessary”) for you to kill these kuffar! and now we have made it easy for you by giving you addresses, all you need to do is take the final step, so what are you waiting for? Kill them in their own lands, behead them in their own homes, stab them to death as they walk their streets thinking that they are safe…”

The final image in the file shows a photo of a handgun and a knife with a note that says “and kill them wherever you find them…,” according to prosecutors.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Islamic State claims jihad suicide attacks in Beirut that murdered 43

Bald Islamic State jihadist nabbed getting hair transplant

Islamic State collects tribute [jizya] from Christians in Syria

Jizya is the tax the Qur’an and Islamic law levy on “the People of the Book” as the hallmark of their submission to and subjugation by the Muslims.

“Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” (Qur’an 9:29)

A hadith depicts Muhammad saying: “Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war…When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them…. If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them.” (Sahih Muslim 4294)

Thanks to TerrorMonitor.org.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Robert Spencer, PJM: Relax: The UK government is fighting “all forms of extremism”

Kansas: Muslim gets 20 years for jihad bomb plot at Wichita airport

Philadelphia: Muslim Professor Denounces ‘Dirty Jewish Zionist Thugs’

American academia has degenerated to an extremely low state these days. Most universities are centers of Leftist indoctrination rather than genuine centers of higher learning in any real sense anymore, and faculties are filled with Islamic supremacist ideologues like Omid Safi, Reza Aslan, and Kaukab Siddique, who have a free hand to inundate their hapless students with anti-American apologias for jihad terror. Useful Idiots such as the likes of John Esposito, Juan Cole, Carl Ernst, Mia Bloom, and Christine Fair work energetically to further the same agenda, with a relentless disregard for facts, fairness, and objectivity. Opposing voices are not engaged, but ruthlessly suppressed.

Today’s colleges and universities are turning out brainwashed lemmings ready to accept and enforce authoritarian thought control and the ruthless suppression of dissent.

“Unapologetic Muslim Prof Denounces ‘Dirty Jewish Zionist Thugs,’” by Pamela Geller, Breitbart, August 12, 2015:

Kaukab Siddique, an associate professor of English at Lincoln University in Oxford, Pennsylvania, has called me and other defenders of free speech “dirty Jewish Zionist thugs” – and of course, he refuses to retract. On the contrary, the Philadelphia Inquirerreports Kaukab Siddique spewed, “I would say it again.”

Such ideological rhetoric and hatred has been normed by a sharia-adherent culture, and most particularly by leftist academia. Islamic Jew-hatred has become mainstream under the guise of “Palestinianism,” when it is actually nothing less than a recrudescence of Nazism.

Reporter Susan Snyder validates this vile professor’s hatred in the Philadelphia Inquirer when she describes me as “anti-Muslim.” I am not anti-Muslim, I am anti-jihad. But if she described me that way, people would think, “What’s wrong with that”? Snyder goes on in her article to use the radical, far-left fringe group the Southern Poverty Law Center to smear me even more. Mind you, all this is in an article about a Muslim professor at an American university calling Jews, and me in particular, “dirty Jewish Zionist thugs.” Snyder works hard to norm this depravity. She did not, of course, bother to contact me for comment.

Snyder writes that Siddique “doesn’t regret” calling us “dirty Jewish Zionist thugs,” and quotes his defiance: “I would say it again.” Siddique says that my organization, the American Freedom Defense Initiative, in holding our free speech event in Garland, Texas that was attacked by Islamic jihadists, was committing “cultural genocide.” He added: “She did the worst, other than killing us.” 

In calling our free speech event in Garland “cultural genocide,” Professor Siddique reveals how truly insidious his agenda really is. Standing for free speech against violent intimidation is “cultural genocide”? Snyder passes on this ridiculous claim without remarking upon it. What Siddique is saying is that violating Islam’s blasphemy laws is tantamount to mass murder — and the only alternative is that we submit and accept those blasphemy laws.

Clearly, Snyder has no idea what is at stake when she runs interference for this monster. She apparently doesn’t realize that she and her fellow journalistic shills will have to toe the Islamic supremacist line, too — or else. She is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist: she ought to know better.

I am not Siddique’s only target. Snyder quotes Siddique saying that “one reason Bill Cosby’s accusers did not come forward sooner could be that ‘many women are sluts’ and opposed a ‘homo uprising.’”

This, too, Snyder passes on without comment. Imagine if a Republican or a Jew said, “many women are sluts.” Snyder would take to the front page of the Philly Inquirercalling for their heads.

Siddique even says: “If you can’t talk and you can’t express yourself at a university, then you can’t express yourself anywhere.”

Snyder does not see the irony is this? Siddique calls our defense of free speech “cultural genocide,” when in fact, sharia is cultural genocide. Islamic history is built upon cultural annihilations, jihad wars, and enslavements.

Undeterred, Siddique goes on to deny the Holocaust: “Were there ovens?…If you study the pictures of Auschwitz, there are no ovens there.” This poisonous Holocaust denier is teaching our children.

How did we get here? The silence of reasoned, the rational. The silence of everyone who stood silent when they came after us, fearing they’d be labeled “Islamophobes” and “racists” by Jew-haters and radicals. Even worse were those who, like Donald Trump, came out against us and sided with these savages.

Snyder makes sure to include a defense of Siddique’s keeping his position at Lincoln University: “As unpalatable as some of these remarks may seem, professors have the right to speak about public matters without fear of repercussion, said Gregory F. Scholtz, of the American Association of University Professors.”

Leftist hypocrisy. Where are the conservative voices on campus? The pro-Israel voices? There is a silent and understood ban on such voices. On the extraordinarily rare occasion my colleagues and I are given an opportunity to speak, madness ensues (here and here).

Worst of all, back in May, when ISIS first issued its fatwa calling for me to be murdered, Siddique wrote on Facebook:

Very cleverly, the corporate media are trying to present the Texas situation as ISIS vs. Geller. The Prophet Muhammmad [sic], pbuh, is the , [sic] leader of the ENTIRE UMMAH, not just of ISIS. Two of ISIS gave their lives for the honor of the Prophet, pbuh. We can’t do that, but the law of this land gives us the right to speak out. ISNA, ICNA and CAIR think you can simply ignore blasphemy. Millions embraced Islam because of Malcolm. Imagine what America’s oppressed people think of us when we don’t speak even when our greatest sanctity is violated? Muslims, we are waiting for Allah’s wrath to descend on us.

Notice how he doesn’t condemn ISIS. He says that ISIS is part of the umma, in arguing that the entire umma should be trying to kill me, not just ISIS. Siddique is, like ISIS, trying to enforce sharia blasphemy laws by force, trying to intimidate the West into silence in the face of the jihad threat. That is the entire reason why I held the event in Garland: to show that at least some people in the free world were not going to submit to violent intimidation, but were going to stand up for free speech, which is a cornerstone of any free society. Siddique fears this freedom and all free discussion and debate, for it would lead people away from his narrow and violent belief system. He wants to blot free speech out by means of violence, just as all of sharia is enforced by violence: stonings, amputations, etc.

And this man is a professor at an American university.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Idaho: Muslim convicted of supporting jihad group, had explosives

New York: Propagandist for lone wolf jihad attacks gets 22 years

Sweden: Muslims Hound Christian Asylum Seekers out of Immigrant Housing

“They dared not stay. The atmosphere became too intimidating.” Intimidation and bullying — that is the Islamic supremacist modus operandi the world over. And the whole world seems to have forgotten how one best responds to a bully.

“Christian Asylum Seekers Hounded Out of Immigrant Housing by Muslim Residents,” by Oliver Lane, Breitbart News, July 21, 2015 (thanks toBlazing Cat Fur):

A group of Christian asylum seekers in Sweden were subjected to bullying tactics by Muslim neighbours for wearing the symbol of the cross.

The group consisted of two Christian families who lived in an asylum house of approximately 80 individuals – the majority of whom were Syrian Muslims. Described as “fundamentalist Islamists” by major Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter, the other residents told the Christians they were not to wear their symbols of faith in the building, and they would not be allowed to use the communal areas while they were in use by Muslims.

After being threatened and harassed on a number of occasions the small group of Christians, which are likely to have been Syrian Christian refugees fleeing the Islamic State, packed and left “fearing for their own safety”. A spokesman for the government migration agency responsible for the centre they had been staying in said:

“They dared not stay. The atmosphere became too intimidating. And they got no help… They chose themselves to organize new address and moved away without our participation because they felt a discomfort”….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Video: Muslim smashes wine bottles in Paris market to enforce Sharia

Seattle officials join push for Sharia-compliant mortgages, loans