VIDEO: Islamists Infiltrate the U.S. Political System by Oren Litwin

Islamists have been attempting for years to gain influence within the US political system. They align themselves with the left wing of the Democratic Party not because they support LGBT rights or abortion, but to gain power through the progressive agenda of intersectionality and multiculturalism.

Recently Islamists have begun electing their own candidates, who presented moderate views while campaigning, but after being elected champion left-wing causes. And in private, Islamist activists often say that when they have enough power, they will turn on their progressive allies and implement their own priorities.

Don’t miss our next video — subscribe free to the Middle East Forum YouTube channel!

RELATED VIDEO: ‘Jexodus’ encourages Jewish people to leave the Dem Party

EDITORS NOTE: This Middle East Form column with video is republished with permission.

VIDEO: Hamas-linked CAIR exploits New Zealand massacre to try to shut down opposition to jihad terror

The Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and its allies have for years been trying to shut down all opposition to jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women, gays, and others. They have succeeded in fooling many people into thinking that it is “bigotry” and “racism” to oppose jihad terror, and have made those who discuss the motivating ideology behind jihad terror toxic in the public square. Now Hamas-linked CAIR is attempting to use the New Zealand massacre to achieve total victory: the complete closure of all media platforms to foes of jihad terror and Sharia oppression.

In its press conference on the New Zealand mosque shootings, CAIR top dog Nihad Awad named Donald Trump as responsible for the massacre, despite the fact that in the murderer’s insane “manifesto,” he asks himself: “Were/are you a supporter of Donald Trump?,” and answers: “As a symbol of renewed white identity and common purpose? Sure. As a policy maker and leader? Dear god no.” The “symbol of renewed white identity” part is all that the media is quoting. He never says he was incited to violence by Trump, or says anything about Trump and Muslims at all. Awad also named Pamela Geller and me: “Years ago when another terrorist attacked in Norway he quoted islamophobes like Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller.” Yes, he also quoted Barack Obama and John F. Kennedy and Charles Darwin and a host of others. He said he was inspired to violent actions by al-Qaeda. Awad does not, of course, say anything about that.

Anyway, CAIR’s press conference was a full-court press for censorship, and it painted, yet again, a large target on our backs for increasingly unhinged and violent Leftists, as well as jihadis. CAIR calls for a total silencing on all platforms of so-called “hate groups,” i.e., those who dare to note that jihad terrorists are inspired by Islamic texts and teachings. And it will not be at all surprising if they succeed in getting us completely silenced. If and when we are, however, the jihad will not stop. There just won’t be anyone around who dares to oppose it.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Nigeria: Muslim suicide bombers try to enter church, are stopped, blow themselves up outside the church building

Nigeria: Muslims murder over 20 Christians with machetes and gunfire

Robert Spencer in FrontPage: ISIS Spokesman: ‘What’s Our Crime? We Just Wanted to Apply Sharia.’

RELATED VIDEO: Leftist NYU Students Blame Chelsea Clinton For Christchurch Terror Attack Because She Condemned Ilhan Omar’s Anti-Semitism.

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column with video is republished with permission.

Fox Condemns Pirro for Asking if Omar is Pro-Sharia

The fair and balanced network is now as unfair and unbalanced as the rest of them. My latest in FrontPage:

Breitbart reported Monday that the Fox News Channel “condemned host Jeanine Pirro’s remarks on Rep. Ilhan Omar’s (D-MN) use of a hijab and said the issue has been dealt with directly.” Sounds serious. But what Pirro actually said was something Fox should have been applauding, if it hadn’t already become just another establishment network.

Pirro said: “Think about this: She’s not getting this anti-Israel sentiment doctrine from the Democrat Party. So if it’s not rooted in the party, where is she getting it from? Think about it. Omar wears a hijab, which according to the Quran 33:59, tells women to cover so they won’t get molested. Is her adherence to this Islamic doctrine indicative of her adherence to Sharia law, which in itself is antithetical to the United States Constitution?”

Predictably, the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) called on Fox to fire Pirro. Like a shark, CAIR can smell blood in the water: instead of defending Pirro for asking a perfectly legitimate question, Fox immediately reacted as if Pirro had stolen Barack Obama’s parking space, denouncing Pirro’s words with stern self-righteousness: “We strongly condemn Jeanine Pirro’s comments about Rep. IlhanOmar. They do not reflect those of the network and we have addressed the matter with her directly.”

Pirro, issued a clarification, to little effect: “I’ve seen a lot of comments about my opening statement from Saturday night’s show and I did not call Rep. Omar un-American. My intention was to ask a question and start a debate, but of course because one is Muslim does not mean you don’t support the Constitution. I invite Rep. Omar to come on my show any time to discuss all of the important issues facing America today.”

Fox is increasingly slipping into the Leftist echo chamber. It is terrified of discussing these issues. A few years ago, Jeanine Pirro contacted me and was going to have me as a featured guest on a special show about Sharia. She was very excited about it, and all the arrangements were made to fly me in and get me set up in the studio. Then at the last minute, everything was canceled — it was clear that Fox executives had told her she was venturing into forbidden territory. They willingly kowtow to the Southern Poverty Law Center’s defamation campaign targeting foes of jihad terror and Sharia oppression of women and others. But last night, Pirro ventured off the reservation again, daring to suggest that Ilhan Omar’s hijab showed her to be Sharia-compliant.

There is so much confusion on this issue, even among people who should know better. Media critic John Nolte tweeted: “Does a Jewish man who covers his head put the Torah above the Constitution? Does a Catholic woman who covers head put the Pope above the Constitution? What a stupid thing to say.”

No in both cases, because in both cases the headwear in question is not part of a larger system that is incompatible with Constitutional rule. However, the hijab is part of such a system, and that’s all Pirro was saying. Fox should not have rebuked her, but this is the age of pandemic cowardice, so it was likely unrealistic to expect anything else.

Ilhan Omar herself, not surprisingly, was happier with Fox News than she has probably ever been, and tweeted: “Thank you, @FoxNews. No one’s commitment to our constitution should be questioned because of their faith or country of birth.”

But that wasn’t really what Pirro did. Pirro suggested that Omar’s anti-Semitism came from Sharia. And indeed, Sharia is indeed inveterately anti-Semitic: the Qur’an demonizes the Jews in numerous ways. It depicts the Jews as inveterately evil and bent on destroying the well-being of the Muslims. They are the strongest of all people in enmity toward the Muslims (5:82); they fabricate things and falsely ascribe them to Allah (2:79; 3:75, 3:181); they claim that Allah’s power is limited (5:64); they love to listen to lies (5:41); they disobey Allah and never observe his commands (5:13). They are disputing and quarreling (2:247); hiding the truth and misleading people (3:78); staging rebellion against the prophets and rejecting their guidance (2:55); being hypocritical (2:14, 2:44); giving preference to their own interests over the teachings of Muhammad (2:87); wishing evil for people and trying to mislead them (2:109); feeling pain when others are happy or fortunate (3:120); being arrogant about their being Allah’s beloved people (5:18); devouring people’s wealth by subterfuge (4:161); slandering the true religion and being cursed by Allah (4:46); killing the prophets (2:61); being merciless and heartless (2:74); never keeping their promises or fulfilling their words (2:100); being unrestrained in committing sins (5:79); being cowardly (59:13-14); being miserly (4:53); being transformed into apes and pigs for breaking the Sabbath (2:63-65; 5:59-60; 7:166); and more. They are under Allah’s curse (9:30), and Muslims should wage war against them and subjugate them under Islamic hegemony (9:29).

Sharia also mandates that women cover their heads:

“And tell the believing women to reduce their vision and guard their private parts and not expose their adornment except that which appears thereof and to wrap their headcovers over their chests and not expose their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands’ fathers, their sons, their husbands’ sons, their brothers, their brothers’ sons, their sisters’ sons, their women, that which their right hands possess, or those male attendants having no physical desire, or children who are not yet aware of the private aspects of women. And let them not stamp their feet to make known what they conceal of their adornment. And turn to Allah in repentance, all of you, O believers, that you might succeed.” (Qur’an 24:31)

“O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.” (Qur’an 33:59)

“Narrated `Aisha (the wife of the Prophet): `Umar bin Al-Khattab used to say to Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) “Let your wives be veiled” But he did not do so. The wives of the Prophet (ﷺ) used to go out to answer the call of nature at night only at Al-Manasi.’ Once Sauda, the daughter of Zam`a went out and she was a tall woman. `Umar bin Al-Khattab saw her while he was in a gathering, and said, ‘I have recognized you, O Sauda!’ He (`Umar) said so as he was anxious for some Divine orders regarding the veil (the veiling of women.) So Allah revealed the Verse of veiling. (Al-Hijab; a complete body cover excluding the eyes).” (Bukhari 79.14.6420)

Wearing hijab is a sign that one accepts these imperatives. That is not necessarily true, as lots of women of all perspectives wear headscarves, but when a Muslim woman wears hijab, it’s reasonable to surmise that she accepts the Qur’an and Sunnah, the sources of Sharia. Sharia denies the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, the equality of rights of women, and the equality of rights of non-Muslims. Wearing hijab is a sign of adherence to Sharia.

So what did Judge Jeanine Pirro say that was wrong about Ilhan Omar? She asked questions that need to be asked. Fox should be apologizing to Pirro, not Omar.

RELATED ARTICLES:

As Iran imprisons women for not wearing hijab, UN names it to women’s rights committee

Iran: Videos show violent assaults on women for not wearing hijab

RELATED VIDEO: Glazov Moment: In Defense of Judge Jeanine.

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission.

Ilhan Omar, Leader of the Democratic Party

The anti-Semitic Congresswoman has hypnotized the Democrats, if not the world. My latest in PJ Media:

Just days ago, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) faced rebuke, albeit indirectly, from her own party in a resolution condemning anti-Semitism that had been developed as a response to her repeated anti-Semitic statements — including the bizarre and paranoid assertion that “Israel has hypnotized the world.” Today, it is clear that if anyone has hypnotized the world, or at least the Democrats, it is Omar herself. She stands victorious as the new master of the Democratic Party.

Omar’s victory is total. The anti-Semitism resolution was turned into a condemnation of “Islamophobia” and “white supremacism,” she remains on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and the entire Democratic leadership has made it clear that they don’t dare cross her.

To be sure, the resolution as it was passed contained a condemnation of anti-Semitism, and even of accusations of dual loyalty, in which Omar had indulged when she railed against “the political influence in this country that says it is okay to push for allegiance to a foreign country.” Nancy Pelosi, however, was quick to insist that the resolution wasn’t referring to Omar: “I thought the resolution should be largely issued to anti-Semitism, and Islamophobia, etc., anti-white supremacist, and that it should not mention her name … because it’s not about her.”

All right. So the resolution condemns the practice of “accusing Jews of being more loyal to Israel or to the Jewish community than to the United States,” and states that this “constitutes anti-Semitism because it suggests that Jewish citizens cannot be patriotic Americans and trusted neighbors.” The resolution was conceived only after Omar denounced “the political influence in this country that says it is okay to push for allegiance to a foreign country.” But Pelosi says that the resolution doesn’t refer to Omar.

Indeed, it doesn’t. It was initially drawn up because of her, only her, but her supporters quickly demonstrated their power in the new, avowedly socialist, fanatically anti-Israel Democratic Party. Only then did the resolution get supplemented with references to the Dreyfus Affair (timely!) and to white supremacists demonstrating in Charlottesville (relevant!).

Pelosi later explained that Omar’s words “were not based on any anti-Semitic attitude,” the poor victim just “didn’t have a full appreciation of how they landed on other people where these words have a history and a cultural impact that might have been unknown to her.”

Pelosi sounds as if she has been hypnotized.

And not just her: No one in the Democratic Party leadership has raised the slightest murmur of protest over the fact that Omar remains on the Foreign Affairs Committee, and has essentially suffered no consequences whatsoever for her open expressions of anti-Semitism. The clear lesson of the events of this past week is that the sclerotic Democratic Party establishment lacks the will to tangle with Omar, who is an exponent of a skilled and ruthless propaganda machine that has long been in the Democrats’ corner, but has never — until now — turned its brute force against the Democrats themselves.

What Pelosi and her cohorts learned this week is that if they cross Ilhan Omar, they will be accused of “racism” and “Islamophobia” just as swiftly and reflexively as those smear labels are applied to Republicans who dare to speak honestly about the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat. The Democrats’ long record of support for mass Muslim migration into the U.S. and resolutely opposing any realistic analysis of the motivating ideology behind jihad violence counts for nothing if they get in the way.

This became clear when Omar’s staunch ally Linda Sarsour railed against Pelosi after the initial anti-Semitism resolution was announced. Pelosi, said Sarsour, was a “typical white feminist upholding the patriarchy doing the dirty work of powerful white men. God forbid the men are upset — no worries, Nancy to the rescue to stroke their egos.”

That’s the kind of rhetoric that Leftists have been using against conservatives for years. Pelosi must have been shocked beyond measure to find it used against her. And given the fact that for decades Leftists have demanded, and usually received, the capitulation of conservatives in the face of such rhetoric, Pelosi could do nothing else but capitulate herself.

And so Ilhan Omar is the new leader of the Democratic Party, complete with all her anti-Semitism. The next time she says something anti-Semitic, and she certainly will, there will be not the mildest statement of contradiction from Democratic leadership. What can they possibly say? She has already faced them down and won….

Read the rest here.

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission.

Children’s Crusade for Peace: How Globalists Sell Whole Generations into Slavery

Last summer, a young couple traveled to Tajikistan. They wanted to prove to themselves and to the whole world that evil did not exist, that all people are good, and the stories about Muslim terrorists were only a scarecrow for stupid children. They were riding bicycles when a car crashed into them at full speed. They were murdered by people shouting “Allahu akbar.”

In December of the same year, two young Scandinavian girls traveled to Morocco, where local young people invited them for a night picnic in the Atlas Mountains. The next morning, the girls were found with their throats cut and the “pleasant young people” published a statement that these murders were an act of revenge upon the West.

In October 2015, a young activist of the “No Borders” group went to a refugee camp to help Sudanese refugees, and was brutally raped. Her friends recommended that she not report the rape to police. In 2018 in Germany, three German women were killed by their partners, who were Afghan migrants.

Modern youngsters refuse to believe that there is evil, barbarism and fanaticism in the world. They believe that Islam is a religion of peace, and that terrorism and hatred are the result of social inequality. They believe that if you smile to people, people will smile back. They are deprived of the basic instinct of self-preservation.

A bird would fly away from a cat, an antelope would run away from a lion. However a young man or a girl from California, London, Berlin or Toronto, with a trusting smile, is ready to walk into the paws of two-legged bearded predators with Kalashnikovs and the Koran in their hands. “Hostages of utopias,” they go on crusades for peace under the auspices of the globalist elite, influenced by powerful groups:

Leftists

Islam does not tolerate communism and any progressivism, considering this as Devil’s seduction. For progressives, the End of History would be a global state of universal justice. For Muslims, the End of History would be a Caliphate based on Sharia.

“It is our duty to declare Islam (…) against their democracy, …and against their communism, which is equivalent to atheism and international despotism,” claimed Hasan Al-Banna, the creator and ideologist of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The adherents of political Islam can use communists as “useful idiots,” but then ruthlessly destroy them, as the Ayatollah Khomeini did to the communists from the Tudeh Party and the Fedai Iranian People, who drove the revolution. They were accused of witchcraft and communion with Iblis (the devil), severely tortured and murdered. The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt that overthrew Mubarak launched a persecution of pro-Western youth.

It’s interesting that Marx did not have any sentiments towards Islam. “The Koran and the Mussulman legislation emanating from it reduce the geography and ethnography of the various people to the simple and convenient distinction of two nations and of two countries; those of the Faithful and of the Infidels. The Infidel is ‘harby,’ i.e. the enemy. Islamism proscribes the nation of the Infidels… In that sense the corsair-ships of the Berber States were the holy fleet of Islam.”

I am calling on the Leftist youth who follow Corbyn, Bernie Sanders, Livingstone and Melenchon to read their guru better.

Human rights defenders

Islam doesn’t accept the very concept of “human rights,” because a man here doesn’t have rights a priori: a man belongs entirely to Allah and the ruler. There are no human rights organizations in the Middle East, and if you happen to find some, they look like anti-Zionist Jews in the former USSR. Genuine human rights defenders, such as Turan Dursun, are murdered or are forced to hide all their lives, like Salman Rushdie.

Still, human rights defenders can only see the “suffering of the Palestinians” and the misery of Muslims in Myanmar, without trying to understand why they are being killed there. Unfortunately, they are suffering because Muslims ruthlessly slaughtered Buddhists and imposed Sharia. Young human rights defenders are absolutely ignorant about historical facts.

The military and intelligence establishment

Youth believe people who wear military rank do it all for nothing.

John O. Brennan sympathized with Hezbollah and called Jerusalem “al-Quds.” According to FBI Director Chris Wray, the threat of white nationalism in the U.S. is more dangerous than that of ISIS. In Britain, the government’s terror watchdog, Max Hill, demanded that the government abandon the concept of “Islamic terrorism.” In Germany, police had “no evidence” that Salafi bikers led by Marcel Kunst were dangerous. In France, in September 2017, an extremist from the DGSI “black list” was enlisted in the “Adjoint de Securité” gendarmerie patrol department. The Conseil d’État, according to Yves Mamou, became a stronghold of jihad activity in the heart of France. In Sweden, according to Mattias Karlsson of the Sweden Democrats, “we have a police commissioner (Dan Eliasson) who more sympathizes with the murderers than their victims.”

In Israel, the main security threat comes not from Iran, but from its own generals. Their obsession with “peace” led to mass terror twice (under Yitzhak Rabin and Ehud Barak) and created, thanks to Ariel Sharon, a nest of jihadists in Gaza. The new generation of generals, rushing to power, is also ready to bring the next generation, by the definition of Rabin, “to the altar of peace.”

The Church

Islam turned the Hagia Sophia church in Constantinople into a mosque, and the al-Aqsa mosque now stands on the site of the Byzantine church on the Temple Mount, originally the location of the Jewish Temple.

Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, called on Muslims to “conquer Rome.” Dr. Subhi Al-Yaziji, dean of Koranic studies at the Islamic University of Gaza, called on Muslims to “conquer Andalusia and the Vatican” after Palestine.

The Pope declared that the rights of migrants trumped national security concerns and that “Muslim terrorism does not exist.” He also declared that Muslim migrants “are warriors of hope” and claimed that “Christian and Islamic worlds protect common values.”

Catholic Relief Services distributed U.S. food aid to al-Qaeda jihadists in Syria; US Catholic bishops welcomed the blocking of Trump’s immigration ban.

The situation with the Protestants is not better. Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams backed the introduction of Sharia courts in Britain; a United Church of Christ congregation claimed that Islam was more progressive than Christianity; Westminster Abbey hosted a service in which Muhammad was introduced in a sequence of great prophets of the humanity, and was ranked higher than Jesus.

It is assumed that all of this will attract multicultural youth to the Church. In fact, they will ascend to Calvary.

Jewish organizations and progressive rabbis of the USA

The Islamic world is soaked with pathological anti-Semitism, from the surahs of the Quran to blood libel and conspiracy theories.

However, leading Jewish groups and progressive rabbis, targeting youth who have lost touch with roots and history, pander to Islamic organizations such as ISNA and support the anti-Semitic Muslim Congresswomen, Hamas and BDS supporters Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar. At the same time, they hate Trump, who strongly supports Jews and Israel.

Thus a new breed of mice is cultivated – mice voluntarily running into the paws of a cat.

African-Americans

Islam considers Africans as people not even of the second, but of the third class: despicable descendants of Ham. After the conquest of North Africa and the Horn of Africa, Muslims created giant slave markets there. Even now, Arab countries have semi-legalized slavery, and the descendants of black slaves in Basra who were brought to Iraq in the ninth century are still called “abd” (“slave”). Even President Anwar Sadat of Egypt was called “Black Poodle” and “The Monkey” for his dark skin color, and the Egyptian soccer player of Nubian origin Mahmoud Abdel Razak quit soccer because of racist insults.

Nevertherless, Louis Farrakhan is followed by a million of young black men, and Black Lives Matter supports CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood.

Feminists

It is well known that the status assigned to a woman in Islam is somewhere in between camel and sheep — closer to sheep. They are slaves, a machine used for procreation. Even sensual pleasures are forbidden to them, because they undergo female genital mutilation (clitoridectomy).

The first feminist and the author of the “Declaration of the Rights of a Woman and a Citizen,” Olympia de Gouges, died in 1793 on the guillotine with the words: “If a woman has the right to step on a scaffold, she must have the right to step in the parliament.” Her young ignorant and stupid followers in pink blouses shouted out “Allahu akbar” together with Linda Sarsur during the Women’s March. They returned women from parliament to the scaffold and even worse — to primordial slavery.

Sex minorities

Pakistani preacher Shaykh Hamza Sodagar, invited to Britain in October 2016, defined the position of Islam as follows: “There are five punishments for homosexual men. First, probably the easiest one, is to behead them. The second, is to burn them to death. Third, to throw them off a cliff. Fourth, crash them to death with bricks. And finally, a combination of all of the above, is the fifth.”

Of course this is not a full list. There are other ways. In December 2015, a homosexual from Gothenburg felt pity for two young refugees from Morocco whom he encountered in the park, invited them to his home, and offered them food and clothing. He surely believed that there was no evil in the world. After having a good meal, they raped their benefactor, dressed him in women’s clothes, and eventually strangled him with a dead snake, which they found in the park.

However, the LGBT community supports migrants and opposes Trump. The openly gay Prime Minister of Ireland, Leo Varadkar, invites Third World migrants to his country. He prepares a “bright future” for LGBT youth exactly according to Sheikh Hamza’s prescription.

The entertainment industry

Any art, including painting, theater, cinema, is unacceptable in principle for Islam. Hollywood, as a symbol of the promiscuity and sinfulness of the West, is even more unacceptable.

However, there are no more zealous defenders of Islam than those you can meet in Hollywood. “Only love stops hate, and bombings only create more ISIS. … Love your enemy. Don’t create more of them,” Hollywood director Josh Fox said.

The poor girls in the Atlas Mountains believed this.

In 1212, tens of thousands of boys and girls from all over Western Europe traveled to Jerusalem, led by the belief that “the sea would part with them.” The authorities did not interfere, the Church encouraged them, merchants provided them with ships. The girls and boys sailed and … disappeared. They were all brought to Algeria, where Muslim slavers were waiting for them. This event is known as the Children’s Crusade.

Nowadays globalist elites send inexperienced and naive children to a painful death, as did the Franciscan monks, monarchs and merchants in 1212.

Preachers believed that “innocent souls” would make satisfaction for the guilt of “original sin” (in our case, the sin of colonialism). Rulers wanted to demonstrate loyalty to the religious ideal (now it is the pseudo religious cult of multiculturalism). Merchants did business as usual.

The writer David Baker called this event the “Crusade of Tears.” The Crusade of Tears: this is what lies ahead of the younger generations of the West.

COLUMN BY

ALEXANDER MAISTROVOY

Alexander Maistrovoy is the author of Agony of Hercules or a Farewell to Democracy (Notes of a Stranger), available at Amazon and Barnes & Noble.

Democrats retreat from anti-Semitism resolution after backlash defending anti-Semitic Rep. Omar

Ilhan Omar, not Nancy Pelosi, is the future of the Democrat Party. The longstanding antisemitism of the Left has now been validated and accepted as mainstream. Expect much, much more of it to come, from Omar and others.

“Democrats retreat from anti-Semitism resolution after backlash,” Associated Press, March 7, 2019:

House Democrats on Wednesday postponed indefinitely a vote on a resolution condemning anti-Semitism after a contentious meeting in which some new members confronted leaders over their push to rebuke Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota.

In the party’s weekly closed meeting, Democrats protested the way Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other leaders tried to rush out a resolution this week responding to Omar’s latest remark about Israel. Omar last week suggested the Jewish state’s supporters are pushing lawmakers to pledge “allegiance” to a foreign country.

That forced Democratic leaders to respond, but their draft of the resolution condemning anti-Semitism angered Omar’s fellow freshmen and their liberal supporters. Pelosi had already said the measure would be broadened to decry anti-Muslim bias. But that didn’t quiet the ranks, and the party’s first major dissension broke out in an uncomfortable confrontation, according to three officials familiar with the episode, who, like others, spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private matters.

The upheaval prompted Democrats, who regularly celebrate their diversity, to push off a decision about the resolution.

“It is shameful that House Democrats won’t take a stronger stand against Anti-Semitism in their conference,” President Donald Trump tweeted. “Anti-Semitism has fueled atrocities throughout history and it’s inconceivable they will not act to condemn it!”

“My comments were about the process we are using when concerns arise,” Hayes said in a statement. “As a member of Congress I should not get important information from cable news.”

Two people with knowledge of the situation said Hayes was engaged in conversation with a colleague when Pelosi asked her a question. The congresswoman did not respond because she did not hear the speaker address her, these people say. Most lawmakers had left the room at the time.

Then Pelosi said, “If you’re not going to listen to me, I’m done talking,” according to a person in the room.

A senior Democratic aide said Pelosi had earlier acknowledged the issues and said the resolution was not final. One person in the room quoted the speaker as saying the leaders had tried to increase communication so that members stay united and have “a clearer understanding of what our purpose is as a caucus, how we proceed.”

Some Democrats hugged Omar, one of two Muslim women in Congress, during the meeting, according to other officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity. She’s also received powerful boosts from fellow Democratic freshmen Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan….

There was also dissension among the Democrats on whether a resolution condemning anti-Semitism was even necessary, given that the House voted on a similar measure already.

“I’m not sure we need to continue to do this every single time,” said Rep. Pramila Jayapal, the co-chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Anti-Israel Advisers Lead Bernie Sanders’ Presidential Run

Islamic Terrorism Accounts for 91 Percent of European Terror Victims

Ilhan Omar’s Impoverished View of Religious Freedom

Podcast: A Jewish Conservative Discusses Rep. Omar’s Anti-Semitic Remarks

Pelosi’s Shameful Decision to Place Rep. Omar on Foreign Affairs Committee

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission.

Guardian runs piece entitled “Why it’s OK for young Muslims to be radical”

For years, Western analysts at all points on the political spectrum have used the qualifier “radical” when speaking about jihadis (“radical Islamists”) and their motivating ideology (“radical Islam” or “radical extremism”). The point was to preserve the fiction that Islam is a religion of peace that doesn’t teach violence against unbelievers, and that the “radicals” were twisting and misusing its teachings.

And now, in Britain’s far-Left Guardian, Ali Nobil Ahmad wants non-Muslims to accept the idea of “radical Muslims” as a good thing. He says he isn’t referring to jihad terrorists, but if his words are heeded, the effect will be greater complacency regarding jihadis, and even more hesitancy among British authorities to do anything about the problem they present. Britain will become even more prostrate before the advancing jihad than it already is.

Did the Guardian publish Nazi propaganda in 1942?

Ali Nobil Ahmad

“Why it’s OK for young Muslims to be radical,” by Ali Nobil Ahmad, Guardian, February 28, 2019:

The legal and moral conundrums posed by the return (or not) of British jihadis following the collapse of the Islamic State “caliphate” has triggered renewed anxiety about the place of Muslim youth in western society. The home secretary, Sajid Javid’s populist bid to strip Shamima Begum of citizenship has heightened the pitch of an emotive debate. But little has changed in Britain’s approach to counter-terrorism, soon to undergo independent review following years of heavy criticism.

The Prevent strategy places entire communities under suspicion without necessarily being effective. European equivalents have fared similarly. A €2.5m French deradicalisation boot camp in the Loire valley asked participants to sing the national anthem, eat non-halal food and learn “Republican values” without rehabilitating a single individual.

When policymakers talk about preventing “radicalisation”, they are missing the point: there’s nothing inherently wrong with being radical. The term can simply mean rejection of the status quo. The French and American revolutions, universal suffrage and the end of colonialism all involved political subversion. Politics has long been ideological and international. (Think George Orwell and the Spanish civil war).

Yet still we talk about Muslim youth in the hackneyed language of the early 2000s, in which “radical” ideas must be neutralised through social engineering. A good (Muslim) citizenry, in this logic, is politically docile, disengaged from world affairs and discouraged from combining religion with political activism.

Muslims of my generation, growing up in the 70s and 80s, were inspired by radical ideas derived from secular humanism. Confronted with racial and social injustice in Britain, many of us found solace and solidarity in third worldism and socialist internationalism – without subscribing to indiscriminate violence.

Muslims in the UK who have grown up after 2001 have done so in an era of nihilistic surrender to the capitalist world order and the political status quo. Unsurprisingly, some have veered towards one or the other current extremes of political Islam.

Of course, the reasons hundreds were seduced by the death cult of Isis cannot be explained solely by a lack of alternatives. Recruitment was driven as much by crass adventurism and bloodlust. The public is justified in feeling revulsion towards returning marauders, whose crimes should be prosecuted with the full force of British and international law.

But the choices of a few cannot be allowed to bar generations of young Muslims from trying to change the world. Rather than view them with fear, a supposedly open society like the UK should ask how their dynamic potential can be allowed to flourish….

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column with images is republished with permission.

VIDEO: An Ad For Coca-Cola, and For Islam by Hugh Fitzgerald

Above is the Coca-Cola ad for Ramadan 2018. It’s a remarkable performance, and I’ve tried to give it the attention it deserves. It lasts for 2:14.

We open to a scene of an obnubilated sky (0:00-0:09); it’s early morning in the outskirts of a city. At 0:10, a pretty young woman, veiled and covered from head to foot, appears. The sun is beating down, but nonetheless, she must stay covered. She is seen running to catch a bus (0:11-0-15), but just as she is about to reach the door, the bus pulls away at 0:16. A look of anguish passes over her. (0:20-0:21). Now she must walk into town, quite a distance, and we see her walking under that pitiless sun, clearly suffering. For her faith. (0:21-0:24) She is now in town, we see from the a crowd of pedestrians around her. As she walks, she has brief encounters with various Infidels, all of them disturbing. At 0:27 she passes people eating — a hard thing for a Ramadan observer to bear. Couldn’t these people eat indoors? may be her fleeting thought. But she will remain strong. A girl who is coming from the the other direction gives her a nasty look as she passes (0:31) Headshot of determined Muslim girl: she will go on! (0:32). Then a young man brushes by her, knocking — it seems deliberately — against her shoulder (0:33-0:34). She keeps walking, persevering in her righteousness. At 0:36, a middle-aged besuited man walks past her and gives her a hostile look. Yet again! She is then seen walking down some steps, where two girls sitting on those steps. As soon as she passes them, one of the girls pulls her hood over her head (0:40), cruelly mocking the hijabbed Muslim girl, and she and the other girl laugh at their unfunny joke. (0:41-0:42).The Muslimah pays no attention.

At this point (0:42) a pretty ponytailed Western jogger appears, in headband and running suit. She glances briefly, it seems, over at the Muslim girl (whom we do not see), and then goes up to the Coca-Cola stand, all bright and shining, where she orders one bottle of Coke from a bearded young man at 0:44. Then we see the Muslim girl, still with that look of anguish on her face (apparently Ramadan is quite an ordeal, to judge by the girl’s expression of agony throughout until she can, at the end, break her fast with a Coke). At 0:45, the jogger looks back at the Muslim girl, a concerned expression on her face. At 0:46, a close-up of the Muslimah’s anguished noble face. At 0:47-0:48 the jogger, clasping her bottle of Coke, looks over at the Muslim girl and, concerned, orders a second bottle of Coke for her. At 0:50, the Muslim girl, still with that anguished expression, moves toward the parapet. At 0:52, a close-up shows her eyes half-closed in anguish. At 0:53, the jogger looks over, while she is being handed a second bottle of Coke, at the Muslim girl. At 0:55, the jogger takes the second bottle; she is now smiling. At 0:56, she starts to walk, a smile on her face, holding the two bottles of Coke, over to the Muslim girl. The Muslim girl’s face is shown, still reflecting psychic pain. (0:57-0:58) She moves to the parapet, wheres she unwraps from what looks like a napkin two dates (1:00-1:01), to be eaten later, at the end of the fast. We see her troubled silhouette at 1:02-1:04. The jogger comes over to the parapet. (1:05) At 1:06, we see  two bottles of Coke. At 1:07, the Muslim girl looks over at the two bottles of Coke, and thinks. Can she? Should she?

At 1:10, each girl takes hold of one of the bottles. At 1:11, the Muslim girl is still thinking. At 1:13, the Muslim girl smiles gratefully, looks over at the jogger, but she cannot — the smile suggests — accept. At 1:14-1:15  is a shot of the hands of both girls, each holding a bottle of Coke. At 1:16, the jogger looks over at the Muslim girl and gives a quizzical look — why aren’t you drinking? At 1:17, both girls are seen in silhouette, both thinking. At 1:18, the jogger puts her bottle to her lips. She holds it there, but without drinking, until at 1:24 she puts the bottle back down. She seems to now have had her epiphany; it wouldn’t be right to drink in front of an obviously parched Muslim. And that’s a lesson for all of us. At 1:26 we have a shot of the two Coca-Cola bottles. At 1:28, both girls lean over the parapet, looking out over the city. At 1:29, the Muslim looks over at the jogger. From 1:30-1:34, the Muslim girl slowly develops a shy smile. At 1:35, a shot of both girls, looking over the parapet again. From 1:35 to 1:41, we see the real stars of this video, the two bottles of Coke. At 1:41-1:42, the jogger is seen in sihouette. At 1:50, the sky suddenly darkens — at last, sundown has come. It only takes a second, apparently, and the Muslim girl now raises the bottle. They both can enjoy their Cokes. A cooling wind is suddenly blowing, too. Clearly all nature is refreshed. The Muslim girl puts the bottle to her lips and keeps drinking until 1:57, when she puts the bottle down. At 1:59, there’s a shot from the rear, as the jogger faces her new friend. A friendship has been formed, as only friendships can, when bottles of cold Coca-Cola are being consumed.

Shyly, the Muslim girl hands her new friend, who offered her hope not hate, one of the two dates she had been saving to eat when she finally could break her fast. At 2:02-2:03, they both eat their dates. At 2:07, we see the two girls, now fast friends, in silhouette, and above them, a bright circle appears in the sky; it’s the Coca-Cola logo, promising heavenly bliss. A thin white Muslim crescent envelops two thirds of it. At 2:06 the Muslim is smiling, happy. At 2:12, four lamps in the Muslim mosque style drop down from the sky. Look closely at them, because the light in each one is in the discernible shape of a Coca-Cola bottle. The girls continue to lean over the parapet, drinking their cokes, eating their dates. It’s a wonderful world. On the screen these words appear: “What Unites Us Is Bigger Than What Divides Us.” And then: “Taste the Feeling.”

There are several themes here. One is of the brave, long-suffering Muslim girl, who has managed to withstand all temptations until after sunset, when at long last she drinks her Coke and eats her date. A second is of the sheer malignity she must endure from Infidels, from the young woman who gives her a nasty look, to the young man who knocks into her, to the older man who passes her with an expression of clear disapproval, to the two young girls who cruelly mock her hijab. It is not until she finds her friend, the jogger, that her calvary ends.

What should a good Infidel do during Ramadan? Do what the jogger did. Don’t drink in front of those who are fasting. Show sympathy. Offer them something, but make sure you do so only after sundown. For What Unites Us — in this case, Coca-Cola, that wonder-working elixir — will overwhelm What Divides Us (those dirty looks, that deliberate shove, that completely uncalled-for mocking of the hijab). Muslims are always ready for friendship, like this noble girl suffering for her faith. It’s we who need lessons in decency and true tolerance.

The clever mendacity of this advertisement deserves to be examined. It’s having its effect. So far it has been seen by more than 3 million visitors at YouTube. So take a look; see, in slow motion, just how they convey their message, both for Coca-Cola and for Islam. You may even conclude from this ad, as I have, that Nothing Goes Better With Coke.

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column with images and video is republished with permission. The featured photo is by Daria Nepriakhina on Unsplash.

Amazon bans “Mohammed’s Koran” by Tommy Robinson and Peter McLoughlin

Those who object to my labeling Leftist totalitarians “fascists” should take careful note of this story. What group is most famous for burning books? That’s right. And what group is doing it now? Right again. Anyway, I predicted this, but like Peter McLoughlin, I didn’t think it would come so soon. On January 7 of this year, I published an article at PJ Media about Amazon pulling doormats featuring Qur’an verses from sale because Hamas-linked CAIR found them offensive. In that article, I asked: “How long will it be before Hamas-linked CAIR starts demanding that books that criticize jihad terror and Sharia oppression of women, gays, and others also be dropped by Amazon?”

It is more likely in this present case that the British government and the BBC (which Tommy Robinson has just spectacularly embarrassed) are behind this than Hamas-linked CAIR, but nonetheless, we have now arrived at the point where Amazon, which, with Barnes and Noble, which is also not carrying this book, has a virtual monopoly on book sales, is indeed dropping books that are critical of jihad terror and Sharia oppression. So the answer to my question in the January 7 article, “How long will it be?” turns out to have been 51 days.

Whatever anyone thinks of Tommy Robinson or the Qur’an, this is a serious development that anyone who cares about the freedom of speech should be extremely concerned about. This book is critical of the Qur’an; it calls for no violence and is not inaccurate. Anyone who has written a book that is critical of anything should read the writing on the wall and realize that once this censorship begins, it won’t end with Tommy Robinson or Qur’an-critical books. But they won’t. PEN, the international organization that is supposedly dedicated to defending the freedom of speech, is made up of hard-Leftists who won’t utter a whisper for Tommy Robinson’s book. They don’t realize that what is being done to him can be done to them. But it will be.

“BREAKING Tommy Robinson NEWS: Book Burning Begins,” Brian of London, February 27, 2019:

They have banned the Koran from Amazon. But not just any Koran: they’ve banned the edition of the complete text of the Koran co-authored by best selling writer, Tommy Robinson along with Peter McLoughlin. Peter McLoughlin’s other book “Easy Meat” is the ONLY scholarly review of the entire subject of Muslim rape gangs raping and enslaving non-Muslim young girls in the UK for the last four decades.

I just recevied [sic] this email from Tommy Robinson’s co-author of Mohammed’s Koran, their joint book which contains the entire unedited text of the Koran and 100 page introduction. Mohammed’s Koran is purely re-ordered in chronological order. You can find my review of it at New English Review.

Peter McLoughlin writes:

Amazon have banned Mohammed’s Koran and deleted it from their database (which means even second hand copies cannot be sold). This is the twenty-first century equivalent of the Nazis taking out the books from university libraries and burning them.

Can you think of another scholarly book on Islam that has been banned by Amazon? Mein Kampf is for sale on Amazon. As are books like the terrorist manual called The Anarchist Cookbook.

My recent research shows that the content of Mohammed’s Koran is being taught in universities across the West i.e. they are teaching the chronological order of the Koran and what this means re abrogation. However the academics are using a 1953 book which is being reprinted every two years. Clearly they know this subject is important (or else an obscure scholarly book from 1953 would not be reprinted every two years).

Having spent far too many years doing research in universities I know how they desperately scrabble around for subjects on which to write books and articles. So I know that if this was any other subject than one which truthfully explains the pervasive and perennial problem of Islamic terrorism, then there would be half a dozen books published on it over a couple of decades. But I suspect no academic dares to write an updated account of this subject for fear either a) Muslims will kill them or b) the general public might get wind of the importance of the topic.

Amazon refuse to re-instate the book and refuse to explain why it has been banned.

So they have banned the No.1 best-selling exegesis of the Koran. I can’t get my head round it. Every few weeks for the past 18 months they had emailed me asking to put it into special sales programmes, as it was selling so well. For 18 months they sought to profit even more from the sales. This is a book where verified Amazon customers left over 1000 five star reviews of the book over the last 18 months.

As dark as my vision is, I thought we were ten to twenty years away from dissenting books from being banned.

I suppose I should take some pride in having written a book with 600 footnotes that is worth banning. I feel like I am in the company of William Tyndall. One of the things that motivated me to write that book was I thought that virtually every other book on Islam pulled its punches.

Well, I disagree with that, as my books don’t pull any punches, but McLoughlin is otherwise correct: this is extremely ominous.

RELATED ARTICLE: Germany Promotes Antisemitism and Anti-Israelism

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column with images is republished with permission. The featured image is by geralt on Pixabay.

John Wants the Police Killed, Twitter Takes John’s Side!

Twitter is at it again. Canary Mission’s Twitter account has been penalized for exposing a violent anti-Semite whose tweets encourage the killing of police officers.

This time, Twitter has locked the Canary Mission account in favor of one of the most outrageous people we have ever investigated. 

SKIP TO THE BOTTOM FOR HOW YOU CAN HELP!

John Zahariev has encouraged violence against the police and advocated for America’s destruction. He has promoted violent revolution, spread hatred of America and Israel and shown support for a convicted terrorist. He has also mocked pro-Israel students and is a supporter of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) at the University of Houston.

On February 18th, 2019, Canary Mission received the following message from Twitter: “We’ve temporarily limited some of your account features.”

The account lock was due to this tweet Canary Mission posted about Zahariev:

@UHouston student and SJP affiliate John Zahariev @violaslayvis hates the police: “Police don’t get conditional hate from me. F**k em all.” “lets hope the police die.” & then “Are they shooting the police? ✊🏿✊🏿✊🏿 Hope the 🐖🐖💀💀💀👻. (pigs die)”

A Precursor to Violence

Too often, threatening social media posts are a precursor to actual violence. Before Robert Bowers walked into the Tree of Life Synagogue and gunned down innocent congregants, he posted on Gab, “I can’t sit by and watch my people get slaughtered. Screw your optics, I’m going in.”

None of us can stay silent in the wake of this kind of hateful and violent language. Here are just a few examples of the frightening individuals on Twitter we have worked hard to expose:

  • Lara Kollab, a Cleveland Doctor who tweeted that she would give Jewish patients the “wrong meds.”
  • Nancy Salem, a preschool teacher who told a friend to have a safe trip in Israel and “kill some jews!”

  • Ahmed Ellahi, “Set Fire to the Jews”

  • Nadera Masad, “MOTHA F**KA PLEASE, I hope every zionist gets their eyes eaten out with spoons and their heads ripped off with a nail clipper #killyourself.”

  • Adham Asi, “I really want to join Hamas!”

  • Laith El Haj, Corrections Officer, “We should build camps again and start burning the Jews again. No lie.”

  • David Bryson, White Supremacist, “Jews want to take our guns and exterminate us. We should do to them what they intend to do to us!”

  • Samer Alhato, “@BarackObama shut up about gay marriage and go kill all the Jews.”

  • Samaria Ruiz, White Supremacist: “4/20 IS MY F**KING BIRTHDAY! SMOKE JEWS EVERY DAY, FAGGOTS.”

  • Jared Howe, White Supremacist: “A Jew in the oven is worth two in the FEMA camp.”

  • Matt Pedata, White Supremacist: “I am utterly disgusted by the Jewish Problem in our society. I would relish the chance to see a Zionist Holocaust brought toward Israel!”

  • Burkan Aranki, “Mmmaaaannnnnnnnnnn what’s with all this peaceful approaches!?? F**k that. I want terrorism and another intifada.”

  • Dina Barakat, “InshAllah you do awesome on your exam! Remember: Imagine it’s a yahoodi [Jew], KILL IT!”

  • Hanadi Abdan, “lol let me blow up this bint al yahoodi [daughter of a Jew] pls  🌈.”

  • Mohammed Najjar,  “I got palestine inside my blood and bones, I’ll hit you in the face with a rock from a mile away, that’s what i call reaching a milestone.”

HOW CAN YOU HELP?

COMPLAIN TO @TwitterSupport

Text to send to Twitter Support:

“I am appalled that you have locked the account of @canarymission and ignored their appeal. Canary Mission’s sole purpose is to expose hatred and bigotry! Their account is a vital service to the public. Please reinstate it fully and immediately. Thank you”

GET OTHERS TO SUBSCRIBE

Get your friends to SIGN UP to our email list (Twitter cannot take that away).

VISIT CANARY MISSION’S WEBSITE

Keep visiting CanaryMission.org  –  we are upgrading and adding new profiles all the time.