Posts

The Refugee Travel Loan Fraud

What is the world coming to?

Yesterday we learned that the Southern Poverty Law Center could (fingers crossed!) implode and now The New York Times (The New York Times!) reports on the deep dark secret about travel loans to refugees that you pay for with your tax dollars.

I first heard about the travel loans in 2007 and wrote about them from time to time at Refugee Resettlement Watch, but I don’t recall any major publication saying much about them and certainly not with a questioning tone about how the nine federal ‘non-profit’ refugee contractors benefit from collecting the loans.

For many of you it’s bad enough that we give no-interest loans and that a large number are never repaid, but for me the scam has always been that the contractors (six are supposedly ‘religious’ charities) benefit financially from the deal.

Here is The New York Times.  The story begins with the obligatory sob story to soften up the reader.

A few years ago, when Rana Safieh learned that the United States had given her family refugee status, she was overjoyed.

In 2012, Ms. Safieh fled Syria with her four children after their house was bombed. Since then, Ms. Safieh, who had been an elementary schoolteacher in Damascus, had been living with her mother outside of Cairo. The money she’d saved from selling off her jewelry had run out, and she could find only part-time work. Ms. Safieh’s children were unable to attend Egyptian schools because of their immigration status.

In December 2016, as the family finally prepared to leave Egypt for the United States, Ms. Safieh signed a promissory note to repay a travel loan, offered by the International Organization for Migration on behalf of the State Department, which would cover their airline tickets.

“I was so happy I didn’t pay attention to how much they would charge me,” Ms. Safieh said in Arabic over the phone from Albany, where she now lives. “I just wanted to leave.”

About seven months later, Ms. Safieh started getting notices in the mail about paying back the $5,356 loan.

“I almost had a heart attack,” she said.

Then this…

For decades, the State Department has funded interest-free travel loans to refugees who, like Ms. Safieh, cannot afford the cost of relocating here. Six months after their arrival, borrowers are expected to start repaying the loans to one of nine private nonprofits, known as resettlement agencies, which are involved in helping refugees start their new lives here. When refugees make their travel plans, they are assigned one of these resettlement agencies through the International Organization for Migration, which administers the travel loans.

I want you to open the link above for the nine private nonprofits and see that The New York Times actually uses information from the Center for Immigration Studies —will wonders never cease!

The NYT continues….

The average loan per person is $1,100, and that amount can quickly increase when considering a full family. Meanwhile the resettlement agencies, including World Relief, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and the International Rescue Committee, all of which collect the travel loan payments but have nothing to do with granting them to begin with, retain up to 25 percent of the total payments.

According to the most recent data from the State Department, in 2017, refugees made over $66 million in loan repayments. Of that amount, a bit over $14 million went to the resettlement agencies.

Some advocates think that these agencies should not be taking money from those they are trying to help. The nonprofits involved claim that these fees go toward their administration costs and programming, all of which is focused on giving refugees long-term financial security.

[….]

Eskinder Negash, the president and chief executive of the United States Committee for Refugees and Immigrants, the agency assigned to collect payments from both Ms. Safieh and the Majeeds, argues that the fee is fair; if the State Department requires refugees to pay back their loans, his nonprofit should be allowed to recoup its costs, which include paying three full-time employees who coordinate the repayments.

“The question is whether we should charge refugees for their transportation to begin with,” Mr. Negash said.

According to a spokeswoman for the State Department, which, it must be said, takes a loss in the travel loan transactions, having refugees pay for their travel expenses helps defray resettlement costs and can strengthen the newcomers’ resolve for a successful migration.

[….]

To date, slightly over 18 percent of all the loans issued to refugees in 2016 did not receive a single payment, according to data from the State Department. These missed payments were reported to credit agencies.

The (bogus) argument by both the State Department and the contractors is that it teaches refugees how the American credit system works and that they must have good credit to survive.  The flip side of course is that when they don’t pay, as so many can’t pay (because we have imported very poor people), it means they develop a terrible credit score!

There is much more here.

Contractor boondoggle!

But, that still doesn’t answer the question about why the collection agency must be the contractors who then get to pocket millions of YOUR tax dollars!

To learn more about Eskinder Negash, visit RRW HERE.

By the way, Judicial Watch attempted to get travel loan information out of the US State Department here.

What do you do?  This is one more issue you should let the President know about.  The Administration could reform this portion of the US Refugee Admissions Program if they wanted to without Congress.

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column 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.

Why We Are Losing to Political Islam

We need to face some facts. We are losing our fight against political Islam not because Islam is so strong. No, we are losing because we act, talk and plan like losers.

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.

North Dakota: Somali Woman Charged with ‘Terrorizing’ Plays the Victim Card

Diversity is beautiful alert!

Thanks to reader Michael for sending this news from Grand Forks, North Dakota’s Valley News Live that initially reported on the arrest of ‘new American’ Hawo Ahmed for threatening to use a large knife to terrorize people in her apartment complex parking lot.

Ahmed (26) followed up by calling the station and saying (among other things) in a lengthy interview,

“I’ve already been convicted in public. They already see me as the guilty Muslim terrorist that needs to be sent back to her country, that doesn’t belong here.”

See what else she told Valley News Live!

Woman accused of terrorizing says she’s being targeted due to her race and religion

A day after our report that a Grand Forks woman was arrested for making a terroristic threat, she called Valley News Live claiming that she’s innocent.

In an exclusive interview that was more than 20 minutes long, Hawo Ahmed, 26, shared her side of the story in an incident that landed her in jail.

Ahmed was arrested for threatening to cut three people with a knife.

“I feel like I’m a Muslim woman who’s being attacked because I am a Muslim woman living in Grand Forks,” Ahmed said.

Court documents detailed several serious allegations against Ahmed. She not only threatened the lives of three women in November of 2018, but threatened to slash their tires and smash their car windows.

Throughout our interview, Ahmed maintained her innocence. She also took issue with critical comments she’s been receiving on Facebook.

“I turned myself in because I know I didn’t commit the crime. I’m innocent and I know I can prove it,” Ahmed said.

According to the Grand Forks Police Department, one of the victims feared for her life because Ahmed is known to climb onto balconies at her apartment complex.

[….]

Despite her claim that she’s being targeted because of her race and religion, we obtained court documents showing a lengthy criminal history.

Visit Valley News Live and see where else she ran afoul of the law.  And, don’t miss their news video clip!

Then this,

“I’ve already been convicted in public. They already see me as the guilty Muslim terrorist that needs to be sent back to her country, that doesn’t belong here,” Ahmed said.

For more, click here.

I traveled through this area during my 2016 (6,000 mile!) tour of refugee hot spots in the US.  The Refugee Industry and the Open Borders pushers are working diligently to diversify the far reaches of America!  If this is not happening where you live, you need to educate your friends, neighbors and family members about stories like this!

Tlaib: Democrats were upset by Omar’s anti-Semitic remarks because of “Islamophobia”

The idea that anyone might be troubled by allegations that supporters of Israel have a higher loyalty to another country besides the U.S., and are being bribed by moneyed Jewish organizations, is absurd to Rashida Tlaib — after all, she likely believes both of those things. So to her, the uproar over Ilhan Omar’s anti-Semitic remarks, even though the Democrats capitulated so spectacularly to Omar, is all because of “Islamophobia.” And she says she has a lot of work to do — i.e., work to make sure that no one dares oppose anything a Muslim says or does, for fear of being tarred with this smear term.

“WATCH: Tlaib Explains Why People Reacted Negatively to Omar’s Comments And She’s Way Off,” by Beth Baumann, Townhall, March 11, 2019:

Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) was interviewed on “the Circus” on Showtime. During the interview, Tlaib explained to host Alex Wagner why she believes Americans are so upset by Rep. Ilhan Omar’s (D-MN) anti-Semitic comments.

“Rep. Omar…Why do you think people in your own party reacted so strongly to what she said?” Wagner asked.

“You know, I’m trying to figure it out. This past week I feel, and I know this would be somewhat shocking for some, but I think Islamophobia is very much among the Democratic Party as well as the Republican Party,” Tlaib said. “And I know that’s hard for people to hear, but here’s only been four members of Congress that are of Muslim faith. Three of them currently serve in this institution. More of us need to get elected but more of us need to understand as we come into this institution that I have a lot of work to do with my colleagues. ”

“So, you think Democrats have some Islamophobia, and that’s at the root of some of this consternation?” Wagner asked.

“I think our country’s struggling with it,” Tlaib replied.

Wait a minute.

When the House passed their resolution condemning religious hatred, a full on brawl broke out. Democrats didn’t want to name Omar out specifically so they muddled the resolution’s language down to include all religious groups.

What Omar said was wrong. What Omar said was anti-Semitic. Making the assumption that being pro-Israel means someone holds their allegiance to Israel over the United States is absurd. She deserves to be called out for what she said. People didn’t wake up one day and decide to attack Omar because she’s of Islamic faith. People are attacking her anti-Semitic stance, which she has repeated over and over again….

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

Philadelphia mosque where imam preached Jew-hatred says they’re ‘shocked and outraged’ that he did [Video]

“We are shocked and outraged to learn that one of our guest speakers said reprehensible anti-Jewish remarks on the floor of Al-Aqsa,” said mosque official Chukri Khorchid, but it’s more likely that he is shocked and outraged that one of their guest speakers got caught making reprehensible anti-Jewish remarks.

There you go again, Spencer, you greasy Islamophobe, always assuming the worst — right? In this case, as in so many others, there are eminently sound reasons for doing so.

As I showed here, what the imam Abdelmohsen Abouhatab preached was based on passages from the Qur’an and Hadith. What’s more, the Qur’an 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).

“War is deceit,” said Muhammad (Bukhari 4.52.268).

An update on this story. “North Philadelphia mosque officials apologize for anti-Semitic statements delivered in sermons by guest imam,” by Kristin E. Holmes, Philadelphia Inquirer, March 9, 2019:

Officials at a North Philadelphia mosque known for its commitment to interreligious dialogue have apologized for anti-Semitic statements made by a guest imam during several sermons delivered there over the last few months.

The comments in Arabic by Imam Abdelmohsen Abouhatab at Al-Aqsa Islamic Society included a reference to Jews as “the vilest” people, according to videotaped excerpts released last week by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), which monitors and translates Arabic and Muslim media….

The Inquirer has confirmed the accuracy of the translation with several area professors who are fluent in Arabic.

Al-Aqsa leaders condemned the comments in a statement on the mosque’s website.

“We are shocked and outraged to learn that one of our guest speakers said reprehensible anti-Jewish remarks on the floor of Al-Aqsa,” Chukri Khorchid, secretary of the mosque’s board of trustees, and Imam Mohamed Shehata said in a statement posted on the Al-Aqsa Society website. “This in no way represents our beliefs or policies. We condemn this action and will make sure that this never happens again.”…

Officials of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) in Philadelphia reached out to the mosque after learning about the statements and were told that Al-Aqsa Society leaders had launched an investigation and also affirmed that “hate against Jews or any group” would not be tolerated, according to a statement released Saturday by the ADL.

“We are grateful for Al-Aqsa’s rapid and resolute response, and we will continue to serve as a resource to the mosque as they work to combat anti-Semitism,” the ADL statement said. “As we have often said while standing alongside our Interfaith partners in the wake of acts of bigotry: anti-Semitism and hate have no place in our communities.”…

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

House Dems Cave In to Islamist Lobby

Democratic members of the House have missed an opportunity to stand tall against bigotry and its public perpetrator – anti-Semitism and Congresswoman Ilhan Omar.

Beginning with the correct intention to swiftly pass a resolution against Omar’s recent spewing of vile anti-Semitic tropes, they have now stalled – and instead shown their true colors. Resolution 2.0 will now be watered down. It will not call out Omar by name and most likely contain condemnations of anti-Muslim sentiment, among other possible modern-day crimes.

The new resolution will be proposed at some undisclosed time in the future, thus rendering virtually meaningless (if it even happens). If our politically correct world won’t allow a condemnation of the oldest bigotry in the book as a stand alone, then whatever does end up being passed will be disingenuous.)

As President Trump rightly pointed out:

The stall on the resolution was just the opening the Islamist front in America needed to jump into the fray, distorting the conversation and making it all about Islamophobia.

(As if there is some balance – or a push-pull between Judaism and Islam. Yet for Islamists there is.)

No matter what Omar’s real words were (you can read those here and here), Islamists and their enablers are now busy reframing Congress’ now-failed condemnation of Omar.

It is now “anti-Muslim sentiment that is driving the attacks on her.”

Never to miss an opportunity to bring in as many victim groups as possible to lap up the sympathy, sharia-apologist Linda Sarsour stated about Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (perceived to be one of the driving forces behind the condemnation), “Nancy is 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.”

Nihad Awad, founder and executive director of the Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)whines about Israel and the pro-Israel lobby group AIPAC having “undue influence in our Congress and on our foreign policy,” playing the victim card again.

(Ironically, if Israel and AIPAC had that kind of influence, you would think it wouldn’t be so difficult to get a resolution passed against anti-Semitism.)

Notably, Awad’s organization, CAIR, is the same organization that allegedly devised a “thinly disguised money-laundering scheme” to hide millions of dollars of donations from foreign entities.

Those entities most likely included Saudi Arabia and Qatar, who themselves have spent billions of dollars on congressional lobbying and investments in America’s top academic institutions.

Last time I checked, lobbying was legal in America, thus making it acceptable. Yet in the words of founding father George Washington, writing to the first Jewish congregation in the New World, “happily the Government of the United States gives to bigotry no sanction.”

Unfortunately, the Democrats in the House have missed an opportunity to prove that to be true.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Ocasio-Cortez Accuses Pro-Israel Group of ‘Coming After’ Her, Omar and Tlaib

Anti-Israel Advisers Lead Bernie Sanders’ Presidential Run

Islamist Thugs Abuse Muslim Reformist Women Calling Out Ilhan Omar

Ilhan Omar Rages Anti-Semitism; Pelosi Whimpers ‘Apologize’

Congresswoman Ilhan Omar Compares Israel to Iran

Dutch Islamic scholar: “No Western country has successfully integrated Muslims”

“Dutch author and sociologist Ruud Koopmans said this week that Muslims are more difficult to integrate into Western society than other migrant groups because of a literal interpretation of the Quran prevalent among Muslims.”

Koopmans called this a “threat to world peace.” Most Muslims agree that “Muslims should return to the roots of Islam,” while a whopping “75 percent think there is only one interpretation of the Qur’an possible to which every Muslim should stick.” That interpretation is normative Islam, and the one that resulted in over 11 million Muslims being murdered for not being Muslim enough since 1948, along with innumerable non-Muslims. It’s also the same interpretation that for a millennium and more has divided the world into two camps: the House of War (Infidel countries) and the House of Islam (Islamic countries), with the mandate that the latter must conquer the former.

Jihad Watch and other organizations that support the principles of free society in the West have been warning about these truths for a long time, while Leftists and Islamic supremacists work to obscure them and continue to erode the foundations of societies that are built on human rights and freedom. It is key to understanding the global jihad to accept the fact that the jihad imperative is rooted in Islamic doctrine. Understanding this will enable the West to stand firmly for freedom and establish sensible policies, including an end to the open-door immigration that advances the hijrah (jihad by immigration).

“Islamic Scholar: No Western Country Has Successfully Integrated Muslims,” by Thomas D. Williams, Breitbart, March 8, 2019:

Dutch author and sociologist Ruud Koopmans said this week that Muslims are more difficult to integrate into Western society than other migrant groups because of a literal interpretation of the Quran prevalent among Muslims.

Ruud Koopmans, professor at the Berlin Social Science Center and author of several books including Contested Citizenship: Immigration and Cultural Diversity in Europetold the Danish newspaper Berlingske that whereas most groups of migrants integrate relatively quickly, especially from one generation to the next, Islam stands out as an exception.

“Although it’s not completely absent in Muslims, the change is much slower,” he said, noting that a literal interpretation of the Quran prevents them from integrating into Western countries.

In an earlier published study titled “Fundamentalism and out-group hostility,” Koopmans compared Muslim radicalism with Christian radicalism to better understand why Islam stands out for its isolationism.

“Almost 60 percent agree that Muslims should return to the roots of Islam,” he wrote, while “75 percent think there is only one interpretation of the Qur’an possible to which every Muslim should stick.”

Koopmans, who has been studying Islam for over twenty years, also found that “65 percent say that religious rules are more important to them than the laws of the country in which they live.”

Regarding Christian citizens on the other hand, Koopmans found that fewer than 4 percent “can be characterized as consistent fundamentalists.”

“I conclude that the Islamic world is lagging behind rest of the world when it comes to democracy, human rights, and political and economic development,” Koopmans told Berlingske in his interview this week.

“The main problem is how many Muslims and, globally, how many Muslim countries interpret Islam. Namely, in a way that basically claims that the Qur’an and the Sunna must be taken literally, and that the way the Prophet lived in the 7th century must be the yardstick for how Muslims should live in the 21st century,” he said.

“Such a brand of Islam is, firstly, a threat to world peace. Secondly, it prevents integration,” Koopmans concluded.

Although it is politically taboo to draw distinctions between ethnic groups when it comes to immigration, some scholars, including Pope Benedict XVI, have urged the West not to assume that all cultures share its basic suppositions about the human person and society.

Prior to his election as pope, Joseph Ratzinger wrote that “the interplay of society, politics, and religion has a completely different structure in Islam” than it does in the West.

Unfortunately, he added, much of today’s discussion in the West regarding Islam “presupposes that all religions have basically the same structure, that they all fit into a democratic system with its regulations and the possibilities provided by these regulations.”

“The Koran is a total religious law….

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