Exacerbating Racism in America

While America has unquestionably had deep racial problems and an agonizing history of oppressing Black people through slavery, Jim Crow, and other outrages, it seems that there are some among us who do not ever want to see the problems solved—or to admit progress in any form. There are those who make enormous profits, both monetarily and socially, by perpetuating the friction caused by America’s racist past, in contrast to Martin Luther King Jr.’s hope of a color-blind society.

Now comes word of a new “devotional” by a professor at a once-Baptist college. This “devotional,” a book geared toward helping its readers walk with God, is sold at a major retailer. Source: “Not the Bee,” 4/7/21.

It includes a “Prayer of a Weary Black Woman,” supplicating, “Dear God, please help me to hate White people. Or at least to want to hate them….I want to stop caring about their misguided, racist souls, to stop believing that they can be better, that they can stop being racist.” She also prays that she won’t just hate the Trump-supporters and Fox News-viewers.

This is wokeness on steroids—promoting hatred instead of love—in the name of God, no less, as long as it’s hatred promoting the right kind of racism. Is there a right kind of racism? Of course not.

Jesus said that we should love those who hate us and pray for those who persecute us. To whom is this “theologian” praying? It is certainly not the God of the Bible.

The sad thing about this example of horrible theology is that it exacerbates America’s racist problems, but worse, it pollutes the solution. The very solution to racism can be found in the Bible—but this book perverts it, as the KKK has perverted it.

I remember once interviewing a former killer for the Ku Klux Klan, Tommy Tarrants, Jr. The FBI agent trailing him called him a “mad dog killer.” When he was captured, he was sentenced to 30 years.

While in prison, he came across a Bible. He told me that formerly, he used to skim through the Bible—but just in a cherry-picking way, to find things that supposedly supported his racist views. But later when he actually read the Scriptures, he was convicted of his sin, including his sin of racism. Through the power of Jesus Christ, Tommy was thoroughly transformed. Tarrants even went on to pastor a biracial church and to co-write a book with a black evangelical minister, John Perkins. The book was entitled, He’s My Brother.

Evangelist Alveda King, MLK’s niece, once told me that we have stop thinking in racist terms: “You go to Acts 17:26, ‘Of one blood God created all people to live together on the earth.’ Now, if we are separate races, we cannot possibly be brothers and sisters. So, we have to see ourselves as one race, one human race, created by God, and we’re supposed to live together in this world as brothers and sisters. So, that’s a fundamental truth that America has not yet embraced. I believe in America in the twenty-first century, we still see ourselves as separate races. But we are one human race, and we are one blood.”

Indeed, we are all creatures of God, created in His image. And those who know the Lord through Jesus Christ are all children of God.

Many of America’s founders recognized how important private, voluntary religion was—how it shaped character. For example, Virginia’s first governor, Patrick Henry, observed: “The general diffusion of Christian knowledge hath a natural tendency to correct the morals of men, restrain their vices, and preserve the peace of society.”

Though primarily a Deist, Ben Franklin once noted (in a letter to the president of Yale): “the most acceptable service we render to Him is in doing good to His other Children.”

We tend to forget that this slice of time is between Christ’s first coming and His second coming.

What will things be like under Christ’s reign? In the book of Revelation, the Apostle John got a taste of life in heaven: “After this I looked, and behold, a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands.”

In heaven, there is no distinction between the races, so why should be there such distinctions here on earth among those created in the image of God? And why should anyone pray to God to put in their hearts a hatred for people with different skin color? May God grant us the grace to replace hate with love.

©Jerry Newcombe. All rights reserved.

Deborah Lipstadt’s Distorted Antisemitism Definition

“Many Jews involved with progressive causes are increasingly feeling this tug, if not outright war, between their Jewish and political identities,” wrote antisemitism historian Deborah E. Lipstadt in her 2019 book Antisemitism: Here and Now. President Joe Biden’s decision to resume American aid to the terrorist-sponsoring Palestinian Authority (PA) on Israel’s Holocaust Remembrance Day only highlighted this ongoing conflict for Jewish Biden supporters such as Lipstadt.

Lipstadt in her book strove to give an impartial review of modern antisemitism across the ideological spectrum, but her evident political biases marred otherwise insightful analysis. Particularly her antipathy towards Donald Trump stood out, as she equated this uniquely pro-Israel president with the notoriously anti-Semitic British Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn. “I don’t know if either of these men is an anti-Semite,” she wrote, but “both have facilitated the spread of antisemitism.”

This Trump-Corbyn “comparison is so flawed as to be absurd,” correctly countered conservative Jewish writer Ben Cohen wrote in a 2019 review of Lipstadt’s book. As he explained:

Trump may be guilty of occasionally encouraging or even enabling anti-Semites in small ways, but Corbyn is an anti-Semite, and one with a public and considered fondness for the world’s most vicious and bloodthirsty haters of Jews.

As Lipstadt’s own book documents for quizzical readers, Corbyn’s scandalous record includes defending viciously anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists and calling Hamas and Hezbollah terrorists “friends.” By contrast, she discussed certain truly troubling Trump statements, including his 2015 comments during the Republican presidential primaries to the Republican Jewish Coalition. “None of this, however,” Cohen accurately assessed of Trump, “places him remotely in the same corner as Corbyn, who is blatantly guilty not only of enabling but of fomenting anti-Semitism as an integral element of his ideological worldview.”

Lipstadt in her book offered a leftist apologia for Corbyn’s antisemitism. “Fundamental to Corbyn’s political weltanschauung is an automatic—critics might call it knee-jerk—sympathy for anyone who is or appears to be oppressed or an underdog.” Thus she concluded:

It is doubtful that Corbyn deliberately seeks out anti-Semites to associate with and to support. But it seems that when he encounters them, their Jew-hatred is irrelevant as long as their other positions—on class, race, capitalism, the role of the state, and Israel/Palestine-are to his liking.

By contrast, Lipstadt demonized Trump as a bigot, even though President Trump actually denounced white supremacists, anti-Semites, and other extremists on numerous occasions. “Trump was, and still seems to be, unwilling to castigate, much less mildly criticize, actions by the white supremacists, racists, and anti-Semites who voted for him and who continue to support him,” she wrote without substantiation. In this context rang hollow her qualification that “I’m not suggesting, of course, that they represent all of Trump’s supporters.”

Bizarrely, Lipstadt in her anti-Trump screeds overlooked the history of openly racist Democratic presidents such as Woodrow Wilson. “In the United States, for the first time in many decades—perhaps for the first time ever—these haters believe that they have sympathetic allies in the White House.” Trump “has not disabused them of that notion,” she wrote, even though anti-Semites such as the perpetrator of the 2018 mass shooting at Pittsburgh’s Tree of Life synagogue repeatedly denounced Trump for being too pro-Jewish.

A vaguely defined “alt-right” loomed large in Lipstadt’s book. She defined Milo Yiannopoulos, a pro-Israel, ex-gay man who once “married” a black man, as among this hateful “movement’s ideologues.” His former employer, the conservative Breitbart News (where this author has written), and its former editor, the Trump adviser Steve Bannon, also drew Lipstadt’s scorn. Without any particular examples, she criticized:

There is no credible evidence that Bannon is himself an anti-Semite, but it is extremely distressing that right-wing Jewish groups that trumpet his support for Israel ignored the racism, anti-immigrant, and white nationalist views promulgated by Breitbart News when he ran it.

Again without citing evidence, Lipstadt fretted that under Trump “alt-right” members “have managed in recent years to establish direct links to people with influence, including those in high-level government positions.” In addition to his pro-Israel record, Trump strengthened federal government efforts against college antisemitism, won increased black support with his economic growth policies, and appointed the first openly gay man to cabinet rank. Yet she counterfactually wrote:

Trump’s anti-Semitic followers believe that his dog whistles give them free rein to openly acknowledge their contempt for racial minorities, Muslims, homosexuals, and Jews. They are convinced, not without reason, that they have had a direct impact on government policy.

Any anti-Trump rant would be incomplete without myths about the violent 2017 Charlottesville, Virginia, protests. Trump had rightfully condemned “many sides” here among battling white supremacists and leftist extremists such as Antifa, whose destructiveness has only become clearer in subsequent years. Yet Lipstadt whitewashed the latter by condemning Trump for “moral equivalency between racists and the counterdemonstrators.”

Lipstadt also promoted in her book and subsequently the ubiquitous Charlottesville hoax that Trump had praised racist demonstrators there as “very fine people.” While condemning these racists, he had used these words in general reference to people debating and protesting on both sides in Charlottesville over a Robert E. Lee Confederate war memorial. But Lipstadt scolded Trump for praising “‘very fine people’ marching with the white supremacist protesters.”

Concerning Islamic antisemitism, Lipstadt stood on firmer ground. She recognized that “within sectors of the Muslim community, particularly in Europe, there is endemic antisemitism” and some Muslims “have been raised to hate Jews.” She observed:

Various studies, including one conducted in 2017 by the University of Oslo, have shown that attacks on European Jews, particularly physical assaults, come in the main from radicalized Muslims. Interviews with German Muslims, including well-educated professionals, feature comments about Jews that sound as though they have come directly from the notorious anti-Semitic forgery, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

Brief hints of this antisemitism’s historical basis in Islamic doctrines, which define the subjugated dhimmi status of Jews and other non-Muslims under Islamic rule, appear in Lipstadt’s book. Under various European and Islamic religious discriminations, “Jews were hated because they refused to accept Christianity and, later, Islam.” Jews had “centuries-long second-class treatment in Islamic lands” and even today Muslim-majority states are rife with discrimination against Jews and other religious minorities. In Israel, Islamic rages arise when Jews “return to their ancient homeland, which was for centuries part of the Islamic empire.”

Rather than critically analyze this history, Lipstadt offered more politically correct explanations for Islamic antisemitism. She suggested that European Muslim antisemitism “is part of a larger problem of integration” and referenced not Islamic, but “leftist antisemitism,” when analyzing the notorious Palestinian-American political activist Linda Sarsour. Meanwhile Lipstadt invoked the totalitarian neologism “Islamophobia” amidst her warnings against “demonization of Muslims.”

Lipstadt also insightfully examines economic warfare against Israel in the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) campaign, a “direct descendant of Marxist antisemitism and anti-Zionism.” A key BDS demand is a “right of return” to Israel of millions of descendants of some 600,000 Arabs who fled what became Israel in its 1948 independence war. This demographic destruction of Israel’s Jewish state, she wrote, or “negation of Jewish nationhood is a form of antisemitism, if not in intent, then certainly in effect.”

Irrespective of practical political effects, Lipstadt noted, BDS aims “to toxify Israel” by presenting it as uniquely evil among the world’s nations. In American academia, this “impact of BDS on Jewish students is quite real. Jewish students running for office in student government have also been uniquely targeted by Israel-bashers.” This demonstrates that a “myopic focus on Israel is anti-Semitic in consequence, if not in intent.”

Lipstadt’s anti-BDS stance makes ironic her acclamation of Biden’s victory days after the November 2020 presidential elections. In Biden she saw a “leader of the country who will unequivocally condemn antisemitism and extremism.” Yet his numerous anti-Israel administration appointees have included BDS supporters.

Such matters must appear secondary to Lipstadt, whose apocalyptic denunciations of Trump during and after the 2020 elections angered many Jews with what they condemned as Holocaust-trivializations. She helped launch on September 29, 2020, a Jewish Democratic Council of America campaign advertisement that compared Trump’s presidency to the 1930s rise of Nazi Germany. She later coauthored a Washington Post editorial that analogized Trump’s “democracy denial” challenges to the election results to “Holocaust denial.” Jewish legal scholar Nathan Lewin castigated this “shameful Holocaust denial” in a “rant with a blatant political bias,

Israeli Jews, 70 percent of whom supported Trump’s reelection in surveys, have greater fear of Biden resuming the Middle East policies of President Barack Obama, whom Lipstadt supported in both the 2008 and 2012 elections. Biden, for example, has already lifted sanctions imposed by Trump on the dangerous, nuclear-proliferating Islamic Republic of Iran. Biden also seems to agree with Lipstadt’s hackneyed analysis in her book that the “current situation in the West Bank is untenable” and the “most reasonable solution would be two states,” Israel and Palestine, with secure borders. By contrast, Israeli Jews have personally experienced how Islam’s “endemic antisemitism” precisely in the Muslim-majority Middle East has only turned Israeli “land for peace” territorial withdrawals into jihadist bases for attacks on Israel.

“Fight the good fight,” Lipstadt penned in autographed book copies she distributed to a November 19, 2019, audience at the Israeli embassy in Washington, DC, including this author. Yet many would agree with the book reviewer Cohen that her analysis is unfortunately “deeply unsatisfactory” in places, such as her book endnotes, where she uncritically relies upon Southern Poverty Law Center leftist smear merchants. “Although she is by no means blind to left-wing anti-Semitism, her eyesight must be adjudged impaired—as indeed it also is on the subject of Islamist anti-Semitism,” Cohen wrote in 2019 in words only more valid today.



Muslim Leaders Enraged, Demand Apology as Jay-Z Wears T-Shirt with Image of Mosque on It

India: Supreme Court dismisses as ‘frivolous’ petition calling for removal of Qur’an verses that promote hatred and terror

Germany: Muslim who stabbed two says ‘areas in which Islam does not rule are war zones’

Vienna: Mosque in which jihad murderer was active and which supported his jihad activities is reopened

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Anti-Free Speech Muslim Group Sues Facebook for Not Removing Sites Opposing Jihad Violence

The tech site Engadget reported Thursday that the far-left legal group Muslim Advocates has filed a consumer protection lawsuit against Facebook for allowing “anti-Muslim hate to spread on the platform, leading to real-world harm.” The organization provided a list of what it claimed were 26 “anti-Muslim hate groups,” including organizations that are dedicated simply to opposing jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women, gays, and others, including my own news site Jihad Watch, the David Horowitz Freedom Center, the Center for Security Policy, and other groups whose main crime is opposing leftist Islamopandering and the left’s tendency to turn a blind eye to the human rights abuses sanctioned by Islamic law.

Engadget quoted a Facebook spokesperson in full defense mode: “We do not allow hate speech on Facebook and regularly work with experts, nonprofits, and stakeholders to help make sure Facebook is a safe place for everyone, recognizing anti-Muslim rhetoric can take different forms. We have invested in AI technologies to take down hate speech, and we proactively detect 97 percent of what we remove.”

Anyone who has been paying attention can see what is coming. Jihad Watch and the others targeted will disappear from Facebook and ultimately from the Internet altogether, whether as a result of this suit or some other. This suit itself has a very good chance of succeeding, as Muslim Advocates is extremely powerful and influential.

Back in October, Old Joe Biden gave an address filled with cringeworthy pandering to Muslim Advocates, the group that has brought this suit. Nor is Muslim Advocates’ clout something new: back on October 19, 2011, Farhana Khera of Muslim Advocates sent a letter to John Brennan, who was then the assistant to the president on national security for Homeland Security and Counter Terrorism, denouncing what it characterized as U.S. government agencies’ “use of biased, false and highly offensive training materials about Muslims and Islam.” It criticized “the FBI’s use of biased experts and training materials.”

Khera complained that my books could be found in “the FBI’s library at the FBI training academy in Quantico, Virginia”; that a reading list accompanying a PowerPoint presentation by the FBI’s Law Enforcement Communications Unit recommended my book The Truth About Muhammad; and that in July 2010 I “presented a two-hour seminar on ‘the belief system of Islamic jihadists’ to the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) in Tidewater, Virginia,” and “presented a similar lecture to the U.S. Attorney’s Anti-Terrorism Advisory Council, which is co-hosted by the FBI’s Norfolk Field Office.”

These were supposed to be terrible things because I was bigoted and hateful. But many of the examples Khera adduced of “bigoted and distorted materials” involved statements that were not actually bigoted and distorted at all, but simply accurate. Nonetheless, Brennan immediately complied. In a November 3, 2011, letter to Khera that — significantly — was written on White House stationery, Brennan promised that the government would “ensure that federal officials and state, local and tribal partners receive accurate, evidence-based information in these crucial areas.” That led to the erasure of all mention of Islam and jihad from government counterterror materials, and the birth of the Countering Violent Extremism program, which ignores jihad violence and focuses on a largely imaginary “right-wing extremism.”

So Muslim Advocates has connections that go up to the very top, and likely knows where to find a compliant judge who will rule in its favor in this suit.

Also note how the group, with help from the establishment media, has already moved the conversation away from where it should be. Engadget takes for granted that the 26 groups Muslim Advocates is targeting really are “anti-Muslim hate groups.” Engadget never even for a moment considers the possibility that some or all of these groups have been unfairly characterized, and neither does any other media story I have seen on this suit. Neither Engadget nor any other “news site” reached out to me for comment, or, apparently, to anyone else involved with the targeted groups, as none of the stories about this suit contain a single quote from anyone except Muslim Advocates and Facebook.

Yet that is really the point that should be at issue here. Is my work and that of the others targeted in this suit going to be banned as “hate speech” without any opportunity for discussion, explanation, or appeal, but simply on the word of far-left hate groups such as the Southern Poverty Law Center, which has a long record of smearing legitimate groups that dissent from the far-left agenda by lumping them in with the KKK and neo-Nazis? The answer to that question appears to be yes. Is the American court system going to take for granted and validate with legal precedent the claim that opposing jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women, gays and others constitutes “anti-Muslim hate”? The answer to that question appears to be yes as well.

So any day now could be the last day for Jihad Watch and other sites that oppose jihad terror. The U.S. will, possibly even before the end of this year, enter a marvelous new world free of “anti-Muslim hate,” that is, free of any criticism of Islam, jihad, or Sharia. Will that bring an end to jihad violence and the human rights abuses sanctioned by Sharia? Unfortunately, no.


Psaki: ‘Encounters of known and suspect terrorists’ at the border are ‘very uncommon’

Biden’s handlers fund Palestinian Authority, which funds magazine that teaches children Hitler was heroic, ‘daring’

UN applauds Biden administration gift of $250,000,000 in ‘aid’ to Palestinians

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Once Upon a Time, in America

Anthony Esolen: Sin makes the sinner a cripple. The principles of sin do more: they cripple a whole people. They cramp the spirit.

Pictures come to mind when I think of the Lonely Revolution – that deterioration of the principles governing sexual behavior in the ruins of the Christian West.

One is of my father and my mother, before they were married, and of my father’s brother and his fiancée, at a lake near home. It is difficult to explain to young people how varied and energetic our social life once was in America; outdoors whenever it could be, indoors otherwise – at dance halls, playhouses, bowling alleys, schoolhouses, diners, and churches. The lake I have in mind was still a public business when I was a boy, with a large concession stand and an arcade with games. That’s all gone now, and nothing has come to take its place.

But there they are, four young people in bathing suits, on a summer day with probably a hundred other young couples on that same small beach, either high school sweethearts, or couples courting or just married. People did not assume, seeing them, that they were in bed with one another, because unless they were married, it was very likely not true.  The assumption of moral behavior made the scene possible.  

I will hear the objection, “Go to the ocean and you’ll see couples.” But we aren’t at the seashore. We are nowhere that requires a special trip. We are wherever you may go in public on a pleasant day. You find boys and girls, young men and women, in pairs.  The pairing implies no sexual consummation. They like each other.

The moral law that cleared the space for innocent flirtation, however, did imply more, because it had an aim, taken for granted. The coupling is directed toward marriage. Most people in those days were married before age twenty-six, even though the men had to do stints in the armed services, and though people had far fewer material comforts than we have.

In our time, very few people marry that young; many will not marry at all; divorce, which in my parents’ generation was rare and scandalous, is common; children grow up without their fathers; and it is hard to name a single custom, in our raising of children and in our brittle social life, that is aimed toward getting people married and helping them stay that way.

We are rapidly saying farewell to the last generation in America that can remember what it was like to have musicians playing live, every weekend at a dance hall within walking distance or a short drive; or what it was like to be young, in love, doing all the fun things that your schoolmates were doing, plenty of them involving a lot of physical delight, but not requiring that you take off a stitch of clothing.

Sin makes the sinner a cripple. The principles of sin do more: they cripple a whole people. They cramp the spirit. The Lonely Revolution has left a trail of mistrust, regret, recrimination, and despair – and many people who marry do so only after a series of sexual wrecks and betrayals.

That is not to mention the many millions of children who have been born out of wedlock, or who were cut to pieces in the womb. Where is the joy the revolution promised? Where are the marriages, stronger than ever, and rich with children? Where is the sweetness, the love and gratitude, that should bind the sexes?

Another picture, forty years later. I am teaching at a still somewhat Catholic college, though the Lonely Revolution has run through it also, like a scorching fire. I am walking to class, when I catch sight of a boy and a girl doing something stunning, in public.

They’re holding hands.

It strikes me with shock that I have not seen such a thing for a very long time. My readers may say, “But wait, I still see that!” Every day, every week? The point is that you should no more have to try to remember such a thing, than you should have to try to remember when you last saw a group of boys playing baseball in an open field, just for the fun of it, or many another good and beautiful thing that should be ordinary, but that in our time is rare to unknown.

If you do not see these things all the time, something is wrong. In my parents’ time, and this was still so when I was in high school, though it would come to a quick end, there was more love-making (in the old sense of flirting, kissing, dancing, talking, kissing some more, and so forth, without fornication) than now, and more marrying and having children.

Someone will say that people hid their misery back then. This is to argue from lack of evidence. You posit a magical cause, the hiding that by definition you cannot see, and you limit its operation to the time you depreciate.

No doubt, there will always be unhappiness in human life. But imagine that business people all decided that sharp dealing and other cheats would be permitted, even celebrated. It isn’t that you never had cheats before, or only that you would have more cheating now. It’s that ordinary features of business life would cease to be, for lack of trust. We would soon be unable to imagine that they could exist – as now we can hardly imagine that picture of chastity and passion at the lake.

One more scene. I’m at Magdalen College of the Liberal Arts, and I see a young man and woman, holding hands, as they walk to the chapel. Here, where the moral law is not just respected but loved, the boys and girls – pardon the youthful phrase – genuinely like each other, before they have chosen one as special.

The mirth, the ease, the trust, the beauty and the goodness of it, are like blossoms returning to a land when the poisons that had left it barren have been leached away.


Anthony Esolen

Anthony Esolen is a lecturer, translator, and writer. Among his books are Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture, and Nostalgia: Going Home in a Homeless World, and most recently The Hundredfold: Songs for the Lord. He is a professor and writer in residence at Magdalen College of the Liberal Arts, in Warner, New Hampshire.

EDITORS NOTE: This The Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. © 2021 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.org. The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

Jordan’s ‘House of Cards’–The implications for Israel

Israel could face a situation, where along its lengthiest border, there would no longer be a conservative, pro-Western monarchy, but an extreme Muslim regime, with incandescent hostility towards the Jewish state

There is nothing certain, but the uncertain. ~ Traditional Proverb.

Incoming media reports from Jordan indicate that the clash within the royal family earlier this week has now been resolved…or quashed.

Swirling shrouds of suspicion & uncertainty

However, much uncertainty still shrouds the recent events in the Hashemite monarchy as to whether there was a genuine attempt at a coup, led by King Abdallah’s half-brother and former crown prince, Hamzah bin Hussein; or a pre-emptive power play by the king himself against his recalcitrant sibling.

Prince Hamzah was Jordan’s heir apparent for five years after his father, King Hussein, died in 1999. But in 2004, King Abdullah stripped him of his title, later appointing his then-teenage son, Prince Hussein bin Abdullah, as crown prince.

Amid conflicting reports that Hamzah had been placed under house arrest—and following a number of high-level arrests allegedly linked to a coup attempt– he accused the Jordanian leadership of corruption, incompetence and harassment in a video conveyed to the BBC.

Hamzah denied that he was part of any initiative to undermine the regime, and although the military had claimed that he was not under house arrest, it did disclose that he had been ordered to stop actions that could be used to harm Jordan’s “security and stability“.

Lingering tensions in the palace & in the streets

Jordan’s deputy prime minister, Ayman Safadi, accused the prince of liaising with foreign parties regarding the destabilization of the country, claiming that he had been under surveillance for some time.

Significantly, whatever truly transpired, it was serious enough for other regional states such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt, as well as the United States, to pledge their support for the king.

Although it seems that for the moment matters have been smoothed over, with Hamzah signing a letter, stating: “I place myself in the hands of his majesty the king… I will remain committed to the constitution of the dear Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan“, tensions —designated by some as “unprecedented”—still remain.

Indeed, the affair is considered so sensitive that a ban, imposed on all news outlets and social media platforms, has been placed on any public discussion of it, as well as on all images and video clips related to the inquiry.

With few natural resources, Jordan is a country beset by a myriad of domestic problems, crumbling infrastructure, a hopelessly overloaded welfare system, inundated by refugees fleeing war-torn neighbors, widespread civil discontent and frequent protests, all exacerbated by a raging COVID-19 pandemic.

According to CNN, poverty and unemployment are at record levels and have driven Jordanians to the streets. However, “tolerance for protests has diminished significantly”—increasing the likelihood of further instability and disaffection with the leadership.

Topographical barriers and security

All of this throws—or at least should throw—into sharp relief one factor, often overlooked in the press reports covering the developments there—with far-reaching security implications for Israel and the feasibility of a prospective Palestinian state.

This is the crucial importance for Israel of the possibility—the more austere some might say, the probability—of a regime change in its eastern neighbor, and the attendant significance of the territory usually allotted for a future Palestinian state—namely, the highlands of Judea and Samaria (aka the “West Bank”).

This territory towers above Israel’s heavily populated coastal plain, controls the approaches to Greater Tel Aviv, dominates crucial infrastructure installations and systems—including Israel’s only international airport, Ben Gurion, sits atop vital water resources, and abuts the Trans-Israel Highway, the major thoroughfare connecting the North of the country with the South.

These highlands are the sole topographical barrier between Jordan and Israel’s crowded coastal megalopolis. Any forces—regular or renegade—deployed on them will have complete topographical command and control over all of central Israel, with the ability to disrupt daily life at will—making it impossible to maintain any semblance of social and commercial routine.

Topography & security (cont.)

Accordingly, as any prospective Palestinian state will be sandwiched between Israel in the West and Jordan in the East, it matters greatly whether Jordan is ruled by a government that strives to rein in forces hostile to Israel or one that is indifferent to their aggressive intent—or worse, is willingly complicit with it.

If the monarchy falls, or is even sufficiently weakened, so as to become a mere puppet regime of more powerful radical forces, Israel could find itself in a dire situation.

For along its Eastern border, there may no longer be a conservative, relatively moderate pro-Western monarchy but in all likelihood, an extreme Muslim regime with an incandescent hostility towards the Jewish state. This will make the highlands of Judea & Samaria (“West Bank”) even more crucial for Israel’s security.

Avoiding the nightmare

The underlying lesson for Israeli policymakers is that the country’s working assumption must be that the Hashemite Kingdom has a limited shelf-life and it would be wildly imprudent to base any long-term strategic planning on its long-term durability.

Consequently, Israeli strategic planners must prepare blueprints for the country to contend with a daunting situation in which—along its longest frontier and narrowest dimension—it is confronted with a huge expanse of hostile territory, stretching from the fringes of Greater Tel Aviv to the border of Iraq—and perhaps beyond.

As Israel has little to no ability to determine who will—and who will not—rule Jordan, the only way it can avoid this potential nightmare scenario is to ensure continued its own control of these highlands—which ipso facto—precludes the establishment of a future Palestinian state on them.

©Martin Sherman. All rights reserved.

Photographic evidence shows Jerusalem Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini at Nazi concentration camp

As The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS details, for years before the establishment of the State of Israel, the Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, fought strenuously against Jewish settlement in the Holy Land, which had accelerated after Britain’s 1917 Balfour Declaration calling for the establishment of a Jewish homeland in the Middle East.

Beginning in 1919, al-Husseini began organizing jihad attacks against Jews, as well as riots in Jerusalem in 1920 during which six Jews were killed and two hundred injured. The following year, British high commissioner Herbert Samuel responded to al-Husseini’s instigation of jihad violence by appointing him mufti of Jerusalem, hoping that this gift would lead al-Husseini to be “devoted to tranquility.”

Instead, al-Husseini continued to incite violence, including riots in Petach Tikvah and Jaffa just weeks after he became mufti; forty-three Jews were killed. A British government report stated that “the Arab majority, who were generally the aggressors, inflicted most of the casualties.”

This continued to be true as Muslim Arabs attacked Jews over the next two decades, largely at al-Husseini’s instigation. Instead of confronting its mufti, in May 1939 the British government limited Jewish settlement in Palestine to seventy-five thousand over the next five years, thereby rewarding jihad violence by giving the mufti part of what he wanted (if it had been up to him, Jewish entry into the Holy Land would have been halted entirely, and the Jews there expelled) and condemning to death in the Holocaust untold numbers of Jews who might have escaped.

From 1941 to 1945, al-Husseini lived in Berlin, where he became close friends with Adolf Eichmann and Heinrich Himmler, and met with Adolf Hitler. Eichmann’s assistant, Dieter Wisliczeny, testified at the Nuremberg Trials that the mufti had been a central figure in the planning of the genocide of the Jews:

The Grand Mufti has repeatedly suggested to the Nazi authorities—including Hitler, von Ribbentrop and Himmler—the extermination of European Jewry. He considered this a comfortable solution to the Palestine problem….The Mufti was one of the initiators of the systematic extermination of European Jewry and had been a collaborator and adviser of Eichmann and Himmler in the execution of this plan. He was one of Eichmann’s best friends and had constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures. I heard him say, accompanied by Eichmann, he had visited incognito the gas chambers of Auschwitz.

Eichmann denied this, but in any case, there is no doubt of the fact that the mufti was openly calling for the mass murder of Jews. In a broadcast on July 7, 1942, the mufti exhorted Muslims in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, and Palestine to kill Jews, basing his exhortation on a flagrant lie:

A large number of Jews residing in Egypt and a number of Poles, Greeks, Armenians and Free French, have been issued with revolvers and ammunition in order to help them against the Egyptians at the last moment, when Britain is forced to evacuate Egypt….

You must kill the Jews, before they open fire on you. Kill the Jews, who have appropriated your wealth and who are plotting against your security. Arabs of Syria, Iraq and Palestine, what are you waiting for? The Jews are planning to violate your women, to kill your children and to destroy you. According to the Muslim religion, the defense of your life is a duty which can only be fulfilled by annihilating the Jews. This is your best opportunity to get rid of this dirty race, which has usurped your rights and brought misfortune and destruction on your countries. Kill the Jews, burn their property, destroy their stores, annihilate these base supporters of British imperialism. Your sole hope of salvation lies in annihilating the Jews before they annihilate you.

Al-Husseini also actively intervened on numerous occasions to ensure that Jews were not deported from Europe—thereby ensuring that extermination was the only option left for the fanatical Nazi Jew-haters. As late as July 25, 1944, al-Husseini wrote to Joachim von Ribbentrop, the German minister for foreign affairs:

I have previously called the attention of your Excellency to the constant attempts of the Jews to emigrate from Europe in order to reach Palestine and asked your Excellency to undertake the necessary steps so as to prevent the Jews from emigrating. I had also sent you a letter, under date of June 5, 1944, in regard to the plan for an exchange of Egyptians living in Germany with Palestinian Germans, in which I asked you to exclude the Jews from this plan of exchange. I have, however, learned that the Jews did depart on July 2, 1944, and I am afraid that further groups of Jews will leave for Palestine from Germany and France to be exchanged for Palestinian Germans….It is for this reason that I ask your Excellency to do all that is necessary to prohibit the emigration of Jews to Palestine, and in this way your Excellency would give a new practical example of the policy of the naturally allied and friendly Germany towards the Arab Nation.

Al-Husseini was a committed collaborator with the Nazis, traveling from Berlin to Bosnia in 1943 to raise up a Muslim SS company, which was responsible for killing ninety percent of the Jews in Bosnia, as well as for the burning of numerous Serbian churches. He noted the convergence of the goals of Islamic jihad and those of the Nazis. “It is the duty of Muhammadans in general and Arabs in particular to…drive all Jews from Arab and Muhammadan countries…. Germany is also struggling against the common foe who oppressed Arabs and Muhammadans in their different countries. It has very clearly recognized the Jews for what they are and resolved to find a definitive solution [endgültige Lösung] for the Jewish danger that will eliminate the scourge that Jews represent in the world.”

In a 1944 broadcast, he made that “definitive solution” explicit: “Kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases God, history, and religion.” His call was an echo of the Qur’an’s call to “kill them wherever you find them” (2:191, 4:89) and to “kill the idolaters wherever you find them.” (9:5)

Al-Husseini was arrested by French troops in May 1945, but the French refused requests from the British to turn him over to their custody. The British may have wanted to put him on trial, as he was a British citizen (of their Palestinian mandate) and a collaborator with the Nazis. Instead, the French put him on a plane to Cairo, where he resumed his jihad against the Jews. The Muslim Brotherhood successfully prevailed upon the Egyptian government to grant him asylum. He died peacefully in 1974.

“Photographic Evidence Shows Palestinian Leader Amin al-Husseini at a Nazi Concentration Camp,” by Wolfgang G. Schwanitz, Tablet, April 7, 2021:

In 2017, Jerusalem’s Kedem auction house posted three of six previously unknown photos on the internet, in which the grand mufti of Jerusalem, Amin al-Husseini, inspects a Nazi concentration camp along with Nazi senior officials and government figures. According to the auctioneers, an expert was of the opinion that these inmates performed forced labor at the Trebbin camp near Berlin, which was, from 1942 to 1945, an SS artillery training place with a branch of the Sachsenhausen concentration camp in Oranienburg. Built after World War I as a Christian “City of Peace,” it was taken over by the SS in 1935. Among the prisoners were Jews from Hungary. Forced labor, terror and violence characterized their daily lives. Kedem hoped viewers would help identify men in the photos.

As it turns out, I can now shed light on five of the foreign guests in the pictures—global leaders whose presence reflects the transregional history between Europe, the Middle East, India, and America. The photographs also provide irrefutable proof that all of the men present had precise knowledge of the fate of Jews in Hitler’s Germany—and of the likely fate of Jews in their own home countries under Nazi rule. According to Kedem, the photos are stamped “Photo-Gerhards Trebbin.” This stamp indicates that they were probably photographed in Trebbin, 30 kilometers south of Berlin, “around 1943.” The six photos were auctioned for $12,300 to a private individual who, I would argue, should post the remaining three images on the internet as a humanitarian gesture to families of the prisoners.

Only three of the seven men pictured survived World War II and its immediate aftermath. The two German officials in uniform were both directly involved in the Holocaust. Before and after their trip to the camp, Adolf Hitler met separately with each of the foreign guests, who included the Palestinian leader al-Husseini, the former Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Kailani, the Croatian Ustasha ideologue Mile Budak, and the Indian Hindu leader Subhas Chandra Bose. So who were they?

Mile Budak was the ideologue of Croatia’s ethno-radical, anti-Semitic Ustasha party, which ran a Nazi satellite state formed in 1941. On the left is Dr. Fritz Grobba, a former envoy to Kabul, Baghdad, and Jidda. He was a Protestant and not a member of the Nazi Party. He had been in charge of the Middle East in the German Foreign Office since early 1942.

Grobba and the two Arab leaders pictured had supported the anti-British coup in Iraq, which was followed by the al-Farhud pogrom in mid-1941. In it, 179 Jews were killed and many stores looted. Masterminds like al-Kailani and al-Husseini wanted to signal, there in a 2,500-year-old community, how Arabia’s Jews should be treated.

In the second photo is the politician Arthur Seyss-Inquart, who presided over Hitler’s Anschluss of Austria in 1938 and two years later served as commissioner for the occupied Netherlands. In the process, he oversaw the deportation of 100,000 Jews to death camps and the enslavement of half a million Dutch people, half of whom were forced to go to Germany as slave laborers.

After the Nuremberg trials in 1946, Seyss-Inquart ended up on the gallows for his crimes against humanity. Budak shared this fate a year earlier in Zagreb, where he was hanged as a war criminal for his policy of sending Jews, Serbs, Sinti, and Roma to death camps.

On the other hand, both Arab leaders continued their anti-Jewish and Islamist policies unimpeded after the end of the war: al-Kailani until 1965 and al-Husseini until 1974. Outside of Israel, Nazism had hardly been delegitimized in the Middle East, and its adherents often came to power after the war ended. The Iraqi al-Kailani staged a coup in Baghdad but failed. He was sentenced to death, then exiled to Beirut.

Al-Husseini also found himself in Beirut, where he was active in the World Islamic Congress, which he founded in Jerusalem in 1931 (he opened a Berlin branch a year later). With robust backing, he rose to become the first “Global Grand Mufti.” A mufti is a religious and legal authority who hands down rulings on everyday issues to believers in his jurisdiction. His late half-brother Kamil was the previous grand mufti of Jerusalem. Al-Husseini received the title in 1921, and in order to preserve and expand his transregional “Mideast-Europe” legacy after 1945, he chose as his representatives Said Ramadan for Europe, in Switzerland, and Yasser Arafat in the Middle East. The Mufti advised Arafat in 1968 to take over the Palestine Liberation Organization (which he headed until 2004) and “to liberate Palestine,” operating out of Gaza with Fatah troops.

Unmentioned, but visible in photo 1—though the angle and quality mar it—is almost certainly Indian nationalist Subhas Chandra Bose. Also called Netaji, Hindi for “The Respected Leader,” he probably died in a mid-1945 plane crash near Taiwan. Controversy over his role diminished in 1997 when he was given his place in the Indian pantheon of liberation leaders. However, questions linger about his close Nazi contacts and meetings in 1942 in Berlin with Hitler and SS chief Heinrich Himmler. Since the first photo shows flowering plants, it probably dates from the second half of 1942, when Bose was still in Berlin—making the identification all the more likely….

Born in 1886, Fritz Grobba survived WWII and 10 subsequent years in the Soviet gulag. After his release in 1955, he advised Bonn on Middle East policy as a retiree until 1973. Another German diplomat who appears in the pictures but is not mentioned in the Kedem catalog is Martin Luther, who served as undersecretary of state in the Foreign Office. He conspired against his boss, Joachim von Ribbentrop, and as a result was sent to the Sachsenhausen concentration camp in early 1943. He died shortly after the end of the war.

During WWI, Luther served with an army railroad regiment up to the Balkans, where he heard about the Armenian genocide. Two decades later, as head of the German Department of the Foreign Office, he was one of 15 Nazis at the Wannsee Conference who coordinated the “logistics of mass murder.” About 100 “Asia fighters” who served alongside Germany’s Ottoman allies during WWI rose to Nazi leadership after 1933, many of whom served the West German government in Bonn after 1950.

The auction text mentions al-Husseini, the other key figure in this group. Some see al-Husseini’s Nazi contacts as reflecting a pragmatic interest in obtaining a strong foreign ally for Arab national goals. Others link the mufti’s enthusiasm for Nazi plans for the Final Solution to his additional desire to bring genocide to Palestine and the Middle East. The new pictures are important evidence in this debate.

What is certain is that al-Husseini rose to become the primary non-European aide and activist for Hitler’s Middle East. Interrogated by the Soviets in 1946, Grobba confirmed Hitler’s and von Ribbentrop’s plans for genocide in the Middle East. Some say the mufti embodied the Palestinian national consensus, a claim that rests on the supposition that a Palestinian “nation” existed prior to WWII. Surely, not all Palestinian Arabs should be associated with al-Husseini, whatever his titles and ambitions; some of them worked against the Axis powers.

As officers, Grobba and al-Husseini were brothers-in-arms in 1915, including in areas where Armenians were deported. Both men spoke Turkish. They met during the 1930s in Iraq, where the German envoy Grobba dealt with Iraqi state representatives and grew to dislike al-Husseini. In his eyes, a cleric without a state styling himself the “grand mufti” should not act as a politician. Their mutual dislike increased after the failed Baghdad coup against the British in mid-1941.

A British adviser in Iraq, Archibald McDougall defended Grobba in The Times, saying he was not a “Nazi Lawrence of Arabia” stirring up Muslims but rather a hard-nosed career diplomat. Berlin then grew suspicious of Grobba. Rumors circulated that he had invited Jews to his receptions, that he was a Freemason, and that he preferred al-Kailani to the mufti. His career faltered, as he was caught between the two Arabs frequently arguing over “who would be the real leader.”

Hitler’s choice was clear: al-Husseini. He saw in the mufti a principal actor in the Middle East, and a “realist.” Benito Mussolini followed Hitler’s lead and recognized the mufti as the most competent spokesman for the Arabs who could help the Fascist-Nazi alliance in reshaping North Africa.

It was against this political backdrop that SS chief Heinrich Himmler invited select Nazis and their guests to visit his concentration camp system. At the end of June, Grobba noted, the two Arabs each instructed two of their aides to join an SS training course that included a visit to a concentration camp. Al-Kailani wanted to go along to see if this system could be a model for Iraq, where there was a large Jewish community. Grobba agreed: The assistants were going anyway, so there was nothing wrong with it. Still, the SS asked the German Foreign Office to sign on….

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Farrakhan: Capitol attacker ‘would have been a star in the mission of the resurrection of our people’

Farrakhan will never say anything like this, but in attacking Capitol police officers and murdering one of them, Noah Green did fulfill his potential as the Nation of Islam sees it. His action was a manifestation of the Nation’s hatred and bloodlust.

“Nation of Islam Calls Supporter Who Assaulted U.S. Capitol ‘Brother With Such Great Potential,’” by Alana Goodman, Washington Free Beacon, April 6, 2021:

The Nation of Islam said it is investigating what caused one of its followers to stage a deadly assault against U.S. Capitol police last week, calling the deceased attacker a “brother with such great potential” who could have been a “star in the mission of the resurrection of our people.”

The group distanced itself from the attack by its supporter Noah Green, saying it “absolutely disavow[s] this act that resulted in the senseless loss of life,” and indicated that it was looking into a number of potential explanations for “what caused this”—including mental illness, depression, Green’s own claims that his food was being poisoned, and that he was under “mind control.”

“I am sure, had [Green] been blessed to come through the crisis that he was going through, he would have been a star in the mission of the resurrection of our people,” said Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan. “We need to know what happened to our brother.”

Green, a 25-year-old Nation of Islam supporter, killed Officer William Evans after ramming his car through a barrier at the Capitol on Friday. Green attacked a second officer with a knife before being shot and killed by police.

The Nation of Islam described Green as a young man who “struggled in his early life but overcame much as a student to graduate with a degree in finance. He had a wonderful, noble idea to help the black and brown people through his knowledge of finance.”

The organization added that “our research is continuing into what happened to this young man and we cannot rest until we find out what caused him to take a turn like this. We are saddened by the loss of this brother with such great potential.”…

Farrakhan regularly calls Jews “satanic” and claims they control the media, financial industry, and global politics. He has also described white people as “potential humans” who “haven’t evolved yet.”…


Biden State Department Claims It’s ‘Historical Fact’ That Israel Occupied ‘Palestinian Territories’ in 1967

Netanyahu: ‘I say to our closest friends: A deal with Iran that threatens us with annihilation will not obligate us’

Germany: Church torched in Muslim stronghold — before fire started, witnesses saw youths running away

Photographic evidence shows Jerusalem Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini at Nazi concentration camp

Cameroon: Muslims step up jihad attacks on civilians, murdering at least 80 since December 2020

Muslims enraged, demand apology after Jay Z spotted wearing t-shirt with image of mosque on it

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Sabbath—A Gift from God

One of the saddest things I saw on Easter Sunday was Amazon delivery trucks on the road. Having to work on Sunday is bad enough, but Easter?

Amazon drivers face many other challenges as well. MSN.com reports (4/4/21) that the E-commerce giant finally acknowledged that some of their drivers are under stress where they can’t even take proper bathroom breaks. But enough about Amazon.

Violating the Sabbath principle is not healthy for society nor for us as individuals. God rested after His creation. He commands us to rest for a day a week.

Sunday as the Lord’s Day is even found in the U.S. Constitution. Article 1, Section 7 specifies: “If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.”

In other words, says Dr. Daniel Dreisbach of American University, an author on the influence of the Bible on our founding fathers: “The President is given ten days in which to consider whether to veto a bill or not, Sundays excepted…excluding the Lord’s Day.”

God made the Sabbath—a day off—for our benefit. We violate the principle to our own detriment.

I remember seeing years ago a documentary segment on CNN where they interviewed Truett Cathy, the founder of Chick-fil-A, and they gave him a hard time for being closed on Sunday. He said that he did this to honor God’s command. But he noted that a side benefit arose from this. The company was able to attract some of the best and brightest personnel in the fast food business to work for them. The company has risen to be the third-highest grossing food chain in America, despite being closed 52 days a year more than its competitors.

Throughout history, various leaders honored the Sabbath principle. For example:

  • Church historian, Philip Schaff, in History of the Christian Church, wrote of British King Alfred’s legal reforms: “His code is introduced with the Ten Commandments and other laws taken from the Bible…it protects the laboring man in his Sunday rest.”
  • Abraham Lincoln issued his “Order for Sabbath Observance,” November 15, 1862: “The President, commander-in-chief of the army and navy, desires and enjoins the orderly observance of the Sabbath by the officers and men in the military and naval service. The importance for man and beast of the prescribed weekly rest, the sacred rights of Christian soldiers and sailors, a becoming deference to the best sentiment of a Christian people, and a due regard for the Divine will, demand that Sunday labor in the army and navy be reduced to the measure of strict necessity.”
  • Explorer Captain John Cook, notes author Desmond Wilcox, honored the Sabbath: “On Sundays, Cook’s usual captain’s inspection was always followed by a religious service. Cook appeared on deck and the drum beat the retreat. Men fetched stools from below and brought chairs for the officers. The bell was tolled and the church pendant was hoisted at the gaff. Cook conducted the service on the quarterdeck, with a Bible and a prayer book in front of him, placed on a cloth draped over the compass box. A lesson was read, a hymn sung.”

Not all governments have appreciated the gift of the Sabbath. Walter Grab, author of The French Revolution, writes: “At the suggestion of the deputy Romme, the Convention voted on 5 October 1793 to abolish the Christian calendar and introduce a republican calendar . . . . Weeks were replaced with periods of ten days (decades) so that the Christian Sunday would disappear.”  Napoleon later restored the Christian calendar, including the “Christian Sunday.”

My dad once told me about an executive he knew who died relatively young, presumably from overwork. The man was so busy that he would take his Christmas cards with him that he had received the previous winter to the beach the next summer in order to try and keep up with his correspondence.

Dr. Richard Swenson, a medical doctor and author of Margin: Restoring Emotional, Physical, Financial, and Time Reserves to Overloaded Lives, notes, “Life is a journey, but it is not a race. Do yourself a favor and slow down….God never intended for time to oppress us, dictating our every move.”

The early Christians worshiped Jesus on Sunday because that’s when He rose from the dead. Every Sunday is a reminder of Easter Sunday. It’s sad enough to see commerce on Sunday; it is sadder to see it on Easter Sunday itself.

The Sabbath is a gift from the Creator—a day of rest, for our benefit. We cast it aside at our own peril.

©Jerry Newcombe. All rights reserved.

“Biden” Moving Missile Defense Systems Out of Saudi Arabia, Trying to Blow Up Trump’s Middle East Peace

There is no “Biden” – he’s a corpse. The Democrat ruling cabal is blowing up the peace in the Middle East.

Biden Moving Missile Defense Systems Out of Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia must be feeling pretty naked right now against the Houthis and Iran.

By: Jewish Press, April 2, 2021:

The Wall Street Journal reports that President Biden has directed the Pentagon to begin removing some of the US’s military resources out of of the Middle East, and specifically out of Saudi Arabia.

The WSJ says that the US already removed three Patriot antimissile batteries out of the region, including one at the Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia, but the move was

Also diverted away from the region is the permanent aircraft carrier presence and surveillance systems. There will be a “carrier gap” in the region for at least a short period.

The Biden-Harris administration also considered removing the THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense) defense system, but is keeping it there for now. The THAAD provides protection against the types of ballistic missiles that Iran and its allies use.

Despite these moves, the Pentagon says it is helping the Saudis prepare to defend themselves against the rocket attacks from the Houthis.

According to the WSJ article a US official claimed, “The bottom line is that the Houthis need to know that we are standing with the Saudis and we will continue to support their right to self-defense.” Though US officials said they couldn’t explain the current escalation of Houthi attacks on Saudi Arabia.

The Biden-Harris administration has been on the offensive against Saudi Arabia since the beginning of the their presidency, by blocking a weapons deal, and publishing a report to shame Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in connection to the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Biden has threatened to “recalibrate” the US relationship with the Saudis, and is making good on that promise.

The Biden-Harris team also froze an arms deal with the UAE, which came after the UAE signed the Abraham Accords normalization agreement with Israel. Both the Saudis and the UAE view Iran as a direct threat and threat to the region.

The Biden-Harris administration want to return to negotiating a nuclear deal with the Iranians, who are trying to obtain nuclear weapons. The Iranians repeatedly threaten to wipe out Israel.

According to a report in Defense World last month, the Saudis have begun negotiating with the Russians for the purchase of S-400 air defense systems and Su-35 jets. The THAAD antimissile system is the competitor to the S400, and is reportedly one of the weapon system purchases that the Biden-Harris administration froze.

RELATED ARTICLE: SEGREGATION: Vermont Opens Early COVID Vaccine Access On Explicitly RACIAL LINES

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

Female Genital Mutilation: Sara’s Story

Sara’s story is brutal, emotional, and tears at the soul. Her bravery in telling it is a testament to her survivor spirit.

A young woman from the United States shared her story with us. This is Sara’s journey out of Islam and her voice against FGM.

I cannot stay silent anymore!

“My name is Sara. I was born in Somalia but grew up and lived in a refugee camp in Kenya half of my life. My biological mother died right after I was born. My biological father and I were separated due to the civil war in Somalia 1991. Many years later, I came to America without a formal education and did not even know how to write my first name. Today, I graduated with my bachelors degree in social service and am seeking my masters for social worker!

I am an ExMuslim, and though I do not like labels , I feel compelled to use this word ExMuslim to normalize the dissent of Islam, that it’s ok to leave Islam without consequences! Getting beaten up is something normalized in the Somali community.

I remembered very well a big event that took place in my teenage years, one time my biological father’s side of the family wanted me to do something that I didn’t want to do, so I was beaten for questioning since I was a small girl. Beating of women happens all the time in the Somali community, even here in America, because it is written in the Quran. There was an incident one evening, I was told to do something that I didn’t agree to. During this incident, I was beaten brutally, abused emotionally and physically.

I escaped from my biological family to seek a better life. Many years later, I came to America with basically no formal education. In other words, I didn’t even know how to write my own name! This means I literally started from zero at the age of seventeen!

Currently, I live in America, and with hard work and dedication I’ve learned how to read, write and speak English! Today, I’m writing a book to share my story and voice. I’m grateful and thankful for having this opportunity to be able to explore my potential and most importantly, I was able to free myself from the Hijab and Islam! This was difficult to do, being part of the Somali community, because I was looked down on as bad girl! It was very difficult to take off my hijab and speak out and challenge the old narrative!

Since working in the school system, I have seen that girls are scorned if they do not wear their hijab, (here in America) so almost all of them wear it. I was told not to associate with non-Muslims, even though many of the people who have been kindest to me are non-Muslims. 

I remembered when I first came to the USA at the age of seventeen, all the girls who I came with all got married and got jobs. I remember that back in Kenya especially in the camp where I grew up, girls got married (arranged and forced) at very young ages between 14- 15. In Somali culture and community, it’s common practice. I was against girls being forced to marry without their consent. This should not happen to anybody. I never pictured myself in a life like that. I dreamed of a different world where I could choose what I wanted in life. My goals and dreams were to become literate. I had dreamed as a little girl that someday, I would go somewhere in the world and become something! I didn’t quite know what that “something” was, but I knew I wanted to become educated and especially learn how to read and write.

My caregivers wanted me to do the same thing the other girls were doing. This meant they thought I should get married and maybe also get a job and make money so that I could send some financial support to people back in Kenya. I stood up for myself because my dream was to go to school and get education even though the family didn’t approve of this. However, with determination and dedication I stood up to them and stuck to my word. I said it is never too late to learn and I am going to become literate!

I discovered that it’s a lie that Allah will strike you down if you remove your hijab in public. When I first removed my headcover (Hijab), it was the first time since I was six or seven. I felt good about my decision and it absolutely was an empowering experience! It was a beautiful moment to feel the wind through my hair, especially when I rode my bike! I learned how to ride a bike about 3 years ago! I remember where I grew up, girls didn’t ride bikes because that was not acceptable and was said to be cultural appropriation.

I believe it was around 2016 to 2017 when I started looking into Islam and its teachings in a critical manner. One day while I was having a conversation with a Somali coworker, Ayaan H Ali’s name came up in the conversation. The person I was having a conversation with said “Ayaan needs to die and deserves to be killed!” I replied, “Why would you kill someone? Doesn’t she have the same rights as you?” Then this person said to me, “Do you know that I can kill you (meaning me) if you leave Islam and remove your headcover?” (hijab). That day I was terrified and so heartbroken that my coworker told me she can kill me and Ayana because her book (Quran) allowed her to do so!

I would say this was my full wake up call and I started reading about Islam and its teachings. I’ve discovered that if individuals simply decided to leave this ideology of Islam and its teachings, they are apostates. This means Islam and its teachings call for my death and many other ExMuslims! These threats, bullies and abuses happen around the world, even in America. That this happens in America is not right to me!

We need to deal with Islam’s denials, stigmas and taboos. We are told not to talk about Allah’s words which I find very hard. We need to discuss the rights of the whole human being, women, children, and vulnerable people. It is sad that the religion of Islam cannot tolerate critique/criticism. I have always thought that if religion is truly from a creator, that it should speak for itself. I have a dream that someday people will look at each other as human beings, rather than at their race or religion.


Between the ages of 5 to 6, I and many other innocent little girls including one of my cousins were forced to undergo female genital mutilation. Even today, 31 years later, I and many girls who went through these horrible practices still suffer from PTSD and trauma.

I remembered that it was mid morning when an old lady came to my house at a refugee camp. We as little girls were told it was something good for us. This was done to all girls and it was normalized in this community. To be quite honest everyone was going through these horrible practices because it was part of the culture and also religion encourages that girls must be purified so they can be clean and to make sure they’re virgins until their marriage.

Just thinking about this now my stomach literally turns upside down and how absolutely disgusting and disheartening these forms of child abuse and sexual abuse are been allowed in this century!

It was very painful and this was done without any medical procedure. No medicine. In other words, no Novocain for numbing the areas that have been cut off and scraped off. I don’t remember a lot, my mind has blanked most of it out, but I have seen it being done to other girls. The procedure I had is called Firauni. The girl is held down, everything is scraped off, the girls’ legs are tied together so the skin will fuse together. After several weeks, if the fusion did not take place, the whole procedure is repeated. There is only a small hole left for urination and menses. It’s horrible and inhuman and it should not done to any human being! I’m myself and many Somali girls have gone through the Firauni type. 80 % to 95% of Somali girls have gone through the FGM.

Usually the individuals who perform FGM are older persons between 50 to 70 years of age or even sometime older. Most of these ladies are illiterate individuals and don’t do anything about health risks and childhood trauma that come with these experiences. These elderly women do get paid for performing these practices. I would say places where I grew up in the Kenya camp, I can swear that it was done 100% to little girls and every girl I know has gone through FGM! If you didn’t go through this, these girls were bullied, excluded, abused, and singled out from the Somali community! Literally, if you didn’t go through this, you are or were an alien in the world and invisible.

In the West it’s happening secretly. We know that children (girls) are taken over seas and I have no doubt it’s also being practiced here secretly even though it’s illegal. It is still happening in America and other western nations. Going back to this part of my memory that I’ve sort of deleted because the pain and the darkness that comes with it hasn’t been easy but it was definitely therapy to write about it.

Now that I live in this great country USA, I can heal myself and also help others to heal from this awful trauma from childhood! Also I am grateful that now I’m able to read and write and use my voice and fight these horrifying practices. It breaks my heart this is happening still today especially in a world such as America and the Western world that is supposed to protect little children from these horrifying things.

It absolutely makes me sad and angry that I had no choice. The camp where I grew up, every girl went through it because it was something that was normalized through the community I grew up in. The irony of this is that here in the USA, we should not allow these horrifying practices to be continued, but it still happens!

I have a message for those who claim to say they care for people such as immigrants. If you do care, I urge you to take a immediate action to stop FGM forever and ever! 

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is my hero, and I was so excited that I could meet her! The Somali community hate her and threaten her, but she keeps fighting against FGM. She is my inspiration! Her story and her voice is forbidden in the community. If people hear her name, automatically they jump to the conclusion that she is awful and she shames the Somali culture and Islam!

Yes, I would like to bring awareness and also encourage and empower individuals to share their stories/perspectives and voices! Yes, I am against any ideologies especially Islam gender-discrimination and many other problematic issues that take place within this ideology. In my opinion, it is so sad that the religion of Islam cannot tolerant, any critique/ criticism. In my opinion, Allah’s words takes human dignity/rights away

No human being, especially children, should go through these awful dark traumatic experiences! I’ll fight for those who are voiceless, children and vulnerable people! That’s why it’s important for me to share my story and voice.

Sara’s letter to “This American Life” organization

FGM is practiced all over the world. The story below is reminiscent of Sara’s story. This was reported on several years ago on Iraqi television.

Four-year-old “Shwin” enters the room, cuddling a plastic toy, not knowing what awaits her. Her mother holds her down on an old blanket, and moments later, an elderly woman takes out a razor and cuts off a small part of the baby’s reproductive system (clitoris). The woman says that “the circumcision of the girl child is dependent on her physical development. (development of the clitoris) It may happen in some at the age of three or four, but it does not appear before seven in others.” The woman then sprinkled the affected part with ashes “in order to heal the wound quickly and for blood to clot and the child not to bleed. I learned the profession 20 years ago, and a doctor advised me to pay attention when cutting the clitoris, so that this does not negatively affect her sexual feelings and to avoid bleeding.” She adds that “cutting must be according to the Sunnah (sharia) of the Prophet Mohmad only, because this tradition we inherited is old and it is present in Islam. The Messenger ordered us to follow his Sunnahs and this is why we practice it.”

The woman who carried out the FGM explains that she receives 2,000 Iraqi dinars (one and a half dollars) for each FGM and that she circumcises more than 100 girls every year.

This is not an unusual practice in Iraq either. A study was conducted in 190 villages in Kurdish region of Iraq. Between 75% to 95% of women and small girls have faced FGM. Generally today, the age of procedure is 14, but it is done younger as well, as in the story above. No anesthetic, no disinfectant, no sterile instruments. It is done by local women, behind locked doors of the home.

The World Health Organization has published an extensive article on the practice.

  • Female genital mutilation (FGM) involves the partial or total removal of external female genitalia or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons.
  • The practice has no health benefits for girls and women.
  • FGM can cause severe bleeding and problems urinating, and later cysts, infections, as well as complications in childbirth and increased risk of newborn deaths.
  • More than 200 million girls and women alive today have been cut in 30 countries in Africa, the Middle East and Asia where FGM is concentrated
  • FGM is mostly carried out on young girls between infancy and age 15.
  • FGM is a violation of the human rights of girls and women.
  • Treatment of health complications of FGM in 27 high prevalence countries costs 1.4 billion USD per year.

Female circumcision is practiced in 27 African states, in Indonesia and in Kurdish region in Iraq. Parts of a woman’s genitals will be circumcised without any reason except that sharia requires it.

Parents force their daughters or sisters to undergo FGM. It is not a government directive, but much pressure is put upon families to perform FGM on their females. Women who faced FGM feel ashamed and have suffered not only pain, but lack of confidence in their sexuality. They have less desire to have sex. Many women try to hide the fact that they have undergone FGM.

Many girls in the community, if they voice misgivings or refuse, are attacked by the women in the community. They are threatened by the men that marriage is out of the question unless they are circumcised.


FGM has been revealed to be practiced in Canada and the United States as well. Often, girls are sent to their country of origin to have the procedure, but it is also performed here in secrecy.

In 1997, the Parliament of Canada passed an amendment to the Criminal Code of Canada expressly prohibiting all forms of female genital mutilation in Canada. Under the code, it is prohibited to aid, abet or counsel such assault and to interfere with genitalia for nonmedical reasons. Moreover, the amendment expressly prohibits the transport of a child outside of Canada for the purpose of obtaining female genital mutilation. Anyone found to have carried out these offences faces up to 14 years in prison and/or a fine.

Such a law does not prevent communities from performing FGM. The Somalian community is known for this practice, and it is done within the community. Other Islamic communities in Canada also practice it, but it is sometimes fought against by the women in the community.

In the United States, a doctor was charged for involvement in FGM procedure. The case, believed to be the nation’s first involving female genital mutilation emerged in April 2017 when a Dr Nagarwala was arrested and accused of heading a conspiracy that lasted 12 years and involved seven other people. In 2020, a federal judge dismissed the most serious remaining charge against the doctor.


Sara’s story, and the stories of many other women like her need to be told. Although she has gone through so much trauma in her life, she is full of hope and thankfulness for her opportunities in her new home, the United States of America. Many of her communications with us ended with expressions of peace and kindness.

Much more needs to be done to expose this barbaric practice. No matter how uncomfortable it makes us, we need to expose this practice more and more, so that it is truly eradicated.

Sara’s postscript

I previously mentioned that I left Islam because I remembered as a little girl, I never had the choice to decide if I wanted to be Muslim or follow this ideology! I was unfortunately (I feel) born into this ideology and to be Muslim was expected of everyone who was Somali!

When we leave the religion of Islam, it’s not like other religions like Christianity. Individuals who leave this particular ideology, their lives are on the line! Since I am no longer practice Islam or I should say not Muslim and especially speaking out, sadly it comes with consequences that even in the west we have to be careful and avoid going to places that will put us in danger!

I’m much happier to not belong to a toxic and unhealthy ideology and community any longer! I’m stronger and a better human being. 2021 is the year that I finally am no longer staying silent and hiding who I am! I am very passionate regarding freedom, especially freedom of religion!

It’s time for individuals like me to speak out and share their voices and stories! Stay humble and spread kindness .

As a Somali-American I agree with what Ayaan says. Ayaan’s story and experiences overlap with mine and there are much similarities with experiences. Reading her book The infidel was reading my own story! It so relatable for me, especially to someone who grew up in a refugee camp! As I am new to this journey of sharing my story and voice in public, I am learning a lot and willing to listen and learn from others. I’m nervous and excited for where this journey is going to take me! Thank you for reading my story!




Boulder Mosque Suspends Prayers Over Fears of ‘Backlash’ After Massacre

Muslims from Syria and Iraq crossing into U.S. from Mexico, enter country unvetted

Azerbaijan: Muslims partially destroy yet another Armenian church in occupied Artsakh

Nigeria: Muslim youths drag man from his home and burn him to death over claims he insulted Muhammad

Meghan Markle gave $13,000 to anti-‘Islamophobia’ group, which kept donation secret to avoid hurting its reputation

Turkey’s Religious Affairs Directorate top dog: ‘Let’s protect our children from ideologies other than Islam’

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Significance of the Empty Tomb

These times are uncertain. Many people struggle sleeping through the night. Many people have serious financial struggles because of the response to Covid-19. The news seems to be bad, and other times it’s worse.

But Easter bursts in with the message that Jesus conquered death, and by faith in Him, we can be “more than conquerors” through Him who loved us. But can historians prove that Jesus of Nazareth literally, bodily rose from the dead 2000 years ago?

The Scottish Enlightenment skeptic David Hume opined that Jesus could not have risen from the dead because dead men don’t rise from the dead. Well, generally, they don’t. That’s why the Easter story is so significant.

The bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead was so momentous it ended up changing the world. The very year you were born is indirectly tied to that event. Time is measured by the birth of Jesus because His coming was so significant.

The resurrection is so significant because if it is true, it means all the other claims of Christ are true—that He was the Son of God, that He died for sinners, that He will one day judge us all. Every beat of the human heart is dependent on Jesus. Even the most hard core skeptic draws every breath he draws courtesy of Christ. We all have a vested interest to know what happened on that first Easter morning.

Dr. Paul L. Maier is a best-selling author and a retired professor of ancient history from Western Michigan University. He’s a first rate, Harvard-trained historian. I’ve had the privilege to interview him for TV and radio several times through the years.

He once told me in an interview for Christian television: “The tomb of Joseph of Arimathea, into which Jesus was buried on Friday, was in fact empty on the morning of the resurrection. Now I’ll be the first to say that an empty tomb does not prove a resurrection, but reverse it: You can’t have a resurrection without the tomb being empty as its first symptom. And the empty tomb can be proven.”

Maier notes that it can be proven by sources hostile to Christianity.

He states, “Where on earth did Christianity first begin? The answer would be Jerusalem. The first proclamation that Jesus was the Messiah who rose from the dead took place in Jerusalem.

But there it would have been least likely that the resurrection would have been announced, if the moldering body of Jesus of Nazareth were still available.”

“Imagine the scenario,” opines Maier: “[The Chief Priest] Caiaphas—confronted by the apostles claiming the resurrection—would say, ‘Oh you poor, benighted fisherman, follow me; let’s go over to the tomb.’ Then he would have had the stone removed and say, ‘Behold, the moldering body of Jesus. What is this claim about a resurrection?’ If that had been the case, if that tomb had the body of Jesus, there wouldn’t have been a Christian church on earth at all. It would have died out as some peculiar Jewish sect.”

The temple authorities claimed the disciples stole the body during the night. This claim, notes Maier, is positive evidence for the empty tomb from a hostile source. Why would they see the need to explain away the empty tomb? Only because it was actually empty—thus establishing this historically-inarguable fact.

Another convincing proof that Jesus rose from the dead is the sudden transformation of the apostles, the original skeptics of the resurrection. They were dejected and ready to move on to other things (or even back to fishing or their previous occupations). They hid for their lives out of fear after the arrest and crucifixion of Jesus.

And then something happened that changed them—they claimed they had seen Him risen from the dead—in a multitude of appearances, over many weeks, in a variety of settings, day and night. And seeing the risen Jesus transformed them into bold, unstoppable witnesses. They became fearless, even in the face of martyrdom, which many of them experienced.

Through the ages, Christians from all walks of life have found great comfort in the resurrection of Christ. Take, for example, George Washington, the father of our country.

Behind George Washington and Martha’s sarcophagi in Mount Vernon, chiseled in stone, are these words from Jesus in John 11:25, “I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live.” You can see these words for yourself in what is reported to be the most visited home in America.

During these days of great upheaval and uncertainty, what a privilege it is to trust in Jesus Christ, the only one who ever conquered the grave.

He is risen. He is risen indeed.

©Jerry Newcombe. All rights reserved.

Take Down the Flag

Anthony Esolen: It’s not necessary to point at individuals, but that “rainbow” flag, which stands for the whole sexual revolution, must go.

The Vatican recently declined to permit Catholic clergy to bless same-sex unions, averting an immediate and world-wide schism. No one should be surprised; relieved, perhaps, but not surprised. The Vatican has declined to overturn the whole of Scriptural anthropology as regards the sexes, not to mention any coherent view of Creation itself – of the formal order imprinted with the wisdom of God.

Meanwhile, the world rolls on.

In the space of a few hours, I first heard the critics for Turner Classic Movies defending old films, though they were sometimes compromised by their racism-sexism-homophobia-transphobia. The critics spoke as if no decent person could take issue with the now settled moral wisdom that equates them all, and heaps them all together with the same reproach.

Then, I heard of two middle-school boys chosen to portray gay lovers in a school play. And of a young boy, in another school, set to sing a crude song about getting an erection when he looks at a certain girl in class.

Threesomes are everywhere in the news. I doubt whether there is a single public school in the nation that does not fly the rainbow flag, here, there, everywhere, in textbooks, in lesson plans, in reading assignments, and on the lapels of the teachers.

Wickedness, said Edmund Burke, is too clever to appear in the same form always. Our passions – pride, envy, wrath, lust, avarice – remain the same, but they move from fashion to fashion. That is why man so often attacks forms that have largely passed away. Gibbeting the carcass, Burke called it.

Nor do the new forms attract monsters alone. I am sure there were plenty of nice people who raised the swastika in their homes, not really hating Jews, but content to be swept along with the new, the ground-breaking, the Autobahn-building, the Germany-reviving, the right-thinking leaders of opinion.

I am sure there were plenty of nice people in Stalinist Russia, who raised the hammer and sickle in their homes, not really hating the Ukrainians or the recalcitrant Orthodox, but content to be swept along with the new, and so forth. The desire to get decent work, or to keep your job, or to be approved by the right-thinking leaders of opinion can do the trick and not require any great degree of courage in evil.

I am not saying that the Rainbow is the same as the swastika or the hammer and sickle. Of course it is not. I am not saying that it is just as bad: when we are dealing with fundamental evils, the question has no meaning. Was worshiping Baal just as bad as worshiping Moloch? While we quarrel over style in lust or hate, the principles themselves, Baal and Moloch, enjoy some flaming spiritual cognac and clink their glasses together. And Baal has slain his millions, too.

I have no desire to point at individuals. I have much sympathy for people who, in this intensely lonely time, catch at a same-sex relationship as at some last hope. But the Rainbow stands for the whole sexual revolution.  

I am not talking about sexual sin, which we will always have with us, as we will always have lies, thievery, murder, blasphemy, and treachery. The sexual revolution is not a weed. It is a tree: planted with deliberation, watered and tended. It is not an aggregate of sins or bad habits. It is a principle bearing evil fruit.

The principle is that of bodily autonomy: what consenting adults do sexually is their business and no one else’s. Add romantic passion to sweeten the principle, add feminism to obscure the truth that men are for women and women are for men, wait a few decades for tastes to change, and you have the whole sequoia.

It was not gay people who mostly planted and fertilized that tree, though they lent their sweat to it too. But it does not matter how the tree came to grow, and to grow now so tall that it casts its shadow over the entire western world. The point is that that tree must come down.

Again, I do not say there will be no sexual sins. I mean that the principle must be repudiated: the tree is the principle and it bears the bad fruit of the principle.

I fear that some Catholics will tolerate the tree, because they do not want to hurt the feelings of those who relish the fruit, or because, even if they have no taste for that apple and its like, they do have a taste for this apple; for the tree is generous and offers plenty for every taste, bad fruit in a wide variety.

Perhaps those who planted it had no notion that it would come to this. They thought, perhaps, that a certain politeness would contain the evil: we would wink at John and Mary shacking up, but not at John and Martin; we would allow for divorces only in the hard cases; we would go for contraception but not abortion; we would go for homosexual pseudo-gamy but not for polygamy; not considering that the firmest moral steel is hardly sufficient to keep an evil principle contained.

And politeness, niceness, is paper, not steel.

The tree must come down.

Think, think what ordinary and human things we might again see, things to be expected, easily attained, matters of course: plenty of healthy young love between boys and girls, rather than a minefield for the moral and immoral both; surer direction for young people whose road to healthy manhood or womanhood has been made difficult by misfortune or the sins of their elders; a clearer and more grateful appreciation of each sex for the other; and with it all, sins and failures, weeds springing up as always, but in patches or one by one, not by design, not with the whole soil’s moisture and nourishment going to feed a vegetable leviathan.

The flag must come down.


Anthony Esolen

Anthony Esolen is a lecturer, translator, and writer. Among his books are Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture, and Nostalgia: Going Home in a Homeless World, and most recently The Hundredfold: Songs for the Lord. He is a professor and writer in residence at Magdalen College of the Liberal Arts, in Warner, New Hampshire.

EDITORS NOTE: This The Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. © 2021 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.org. The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

Washington, DC: Black Teens Charged in Death of Muslim Uber Driver

I figure this is news you have already seen, but just now as I searched around I see that it took days for the disgusting story to spread.  Why?

My guess is that it doesn’t fit the mainstream media’s narrative when members of one minority group, in this case Blacks (girls), kill a member of another ‘oppressed’ group, a Muslim man.

And, it all goes down in Mayor Muriel Bowser’s and Black Lives Matter capital city where black lives matter and others not so much!

It sure is a good thing we have the UK Daily Mail because as I began my reading this morning, it was challenging to find a succinct account of what happened almost a week ago.

Anwar died last Tuesday when he was ejected from his Honda Accord after two teenage girls allegedly tasered him and tried to steal his car.

That was bad enough but compounding the horrible event, Bowser attempted to protect the image of Washington DC’s black community by initially lecturing drivers to be more careful about keeping their cars out of the hands of thieves.

DC Mayor Muriel Bowser DELETES ‘tone deaf’ tweet about avoiding auto theft that she posted after days of silence over carjacking death of UberEats driver

Washington, DC, Mayor Muriel Bowser has deleted her ‘tone deaf’ tweet advising people on how to prevent auto theft after days of silence about UberEats driver killed in a carjacking in the city.

Bowser’s official Twitter account posted a Metropolitan Police Department video about preventing car thefts on Sunday with the caption: ‘Auto theft is a crime of opportunity. Follow these steps to reduce the risk of your vehicle becoming a target. Remember the motto, #ProtectYourAuto.’

The tweet drew outrage from critics who called it tone deaf in light of the death of 66-year-old Mohammad Anwar. Anwar died last Tuesday when he was ejected from his Honda Accord after two teenage girls allegedly tasered him and tried to steal his car.

The tweet was deleted late Sunday.


The Daily Mail continues…..

The backlash over Bowser’s tweet followed graphic new video shared on social media has shown the events leading up to Anwar’s tragic death as well as the moment the suspects attempt to run away as he lay motionless on the sidewalk.

A father-of-three from Springfield, Virginia, Anwar was making deliveries for UberEats when the two teens, aged 13 and 15, approached his car and tasered him in an attempt to steal the vehicle.


A judge concluded that the two teen girls pose a threat to the community and are a potential flight risk, and ordered them detained pending their next court appearance scheduled for March 31.

There is much more including more photos and the sickening video.

Where is CAIR?

My first thought was: so what is CAIR saying since they have been sucking up to BLM since at least last June?  Have they blasted the mayor? Called for Bowser’s resignation? Called for more police protection?

Have they called it a hate crime, or an anti-immigrant xenophobic crime?

You can bet if the teens were white you would be hearing that cry already.

Have they said “all live matter?”

If anyone sees a statement from CAIR, let me know!

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

What Did FBI Know About Syrian Muslim Boulder Supermarket Shooter?

The media is running away from the Boulder supermarket shooting after the killer turned out to be a Syrian Muslim immigrant. It keeps trying to refocus on the details of the guns that he used. If the media really believes that guns, not Muslim terrorists, kill people, it should take a look at the weapons that ISIS and Al Qaeda uses, and urge them to adopt gun control.

Meanwhile, the New York Times slipped in an interesting little note in between all that claims that Ahmad Al-Issa was an angry loner.

“The suspect’s identity was previously known to the F.B.I. because he was linked to another individual under investigation by the bureau, according to law enforcement officials.”

That raises all sorts of questions.

The FBI doesn’t investigate shoplifters or build lists of connections to people for petty crimes. That means we’re likely dealing with either terrorism or serious criminal activity.

Al-Issa didn’t have much of a criminal record beyond a violent assault on a classmate over his religion or ethnicity. That makes terrorism far more likely.

The authorities and the media are reluctant to answer the big question.

Some ISIS supporters have celebrated Al-Issa’s attack, treating it as Muslim terrorism, but ISIS does not appear to have even tried to claim credit. This doesn’t mean that Al-Issa wasn’t a Muslim terrorist. But given how much we’ve heard about his paranoia, he may have successfully pulled off an attack by not making the familiar amateur Jihadi mistake of trying to contact ISIS or Al Qaeda.

Finally, while the term ‘lone wolf’ gets thrown around a lot, Al-Issa might be the real thing. A Muslim terrorist who plotted and carried out an attack independently of the usual online Islamic terror infrastructure. He kept it simple and succeeded in killing ten people.

Also, this does not appear to be a suicide attack. Unlike many ISIS Jihadis, Al-Issa wanted to live. He took off his clothes and shouted, “I’m naked”, to make sure the police didn’t shoot him.

Jihadis have been taken alive often enough, but either Al-Issa panicked or he planned all along to be taken alive and had worked out how.

That’s suggestive of a different approach. We may learn in the coming days that Al-Issa followed the familiar playbook, complete with oath and black flag, but it’s possible that he really was a lone wolf who took a different approach, avoiding the copycat failed ISIS plots for something that worked.



Michael Moore: Boulder Shooting Shows Gunman Assimilated into American Culture

Islamic State jihadis online celebrate Boulder massacre: ‘More kuffar shot in Colorado!’ ‘Maybe a brother!’

Australia: Three Muslims admit plotting jihad massacre for ‘advancement of Islam through violence’

Germany: Berlin appoints pro-Hamas Islamic supremacist to commission against ‘anti-Muslim racism’

India: Four recent incidents of Muslims spitting on food of non-Muslims, one said he’d been doing it for years

Greece: Muslim migrant sexually assaults woman, had sexually harassed five other women as well

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

USA Today fires ‘race and inclusion editor’ for claiming Boulder jihadi was ‘angry white man’

As a Syrian, Ahmad Al Issa is indeed “white,” but of course what Hemal Jhaveri meant was that he was a white, Christian, Trump-supporting Enemy of All That Is Good. It is extremely strange that USA Today fired her. In today’s “journalistic” culture, it would have been less surprising if she had been given an award and promoted.

“USA Today ‘Race and Inclusion’ Editor Fired For Falsely Blaming White People For Boulder Shooting,”

by Paul Joseph Watson, Summit News, March 26, 2021 (thanks to Ken):

A ‘race and inclusion’ editor was fired by USA Today after she falsely blamed the Boulder supermarket shooting on white people.

“It’s always an angry white man. Always,” tweeted Hemal Jhaveri on Monday evening immediately after news of the shooting broke.

The gunman was named the next day as 21-year-old Ahmad Al Aliwi Alissa, a migrant from Syria.

“Hi friends. Some news,” tweeted Jhaveri earlier today. “I am no longer working at For The Win and USA TODAY. Here’s what happened.”

In a Medium piece about her dismissal, Jhaveri explains that even after seeing a picture of the shooter, she tweeted a “dashed off over-generalization” about the culprit.

“It was a careless error of judgment, sent at a heated time, that doesn’t represent my commitment to racial equality,” Jhaveri said. “I regret sending it. I apologized and deleted the tweet.”…

However, Jhaveri thinks that her firing wasn’t specifically in relation to that tweet, but to others in which she was “publicly naming whiteness as a defining problem.” She also referenced a 2017 tweet in which she called out “a reporter’s white privilege” as another reason for her dismissal.

“My previous tweets were flagged not for inaccuracy or for political bias, but for publicly naming whiteness as a defining problem,” Jhaveri said. “That is something USA TODAY, and many other newsrooms across the country, can not tolerate.”

The now unemployed journalist also claimed she was the victim of racist “microaggressions” carried out by “majority white” USA Today staff during her 8 year run with the media outlet….

Jhaveri wasn’t the only journalist to let slip anti-white racism in the aftermath of the shooting – literally countless others posted similar tweets.

None of them appear to have been fired.


UK: Government’s ‘Islamophobia’ advisor calls for Muhammad images to be as unacceptable as ‘the n-word’

Hamas-linked CAIR pressures Baltimore to remove ‘Islamophobic’ image from curriculum, calls for more censorship

Mozambique: Islamic State jihadis ransack town near gas developments worth $60,000,000,000

Bangladesh: Muslims attack Hindu temples, train, government offices, stone police in rage over Modi visit

Teen Vogue presents ‘Queer Muslim Heroes to Celebrate This Muslim Women’s Day’

Muslim Politicians in Secular India Dream of Creating More Pakistans

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Netflix Declares War on Jesus [and Gun Owners]

Not content with glorifying pedophilia in Cuties, Netflix in season three of the animated Paradise P.D. features an episode that, according to NewsBusters, is not only devoted to “attacking gun rights,” but was also “blasphemous against Christianity, featuring a video of a gun-wielding Jesus that turns into a porno.” Great, Netflix! Edgy! Courageous! Cutting edge! Stunning and brave! Now, when is your cartoon show featuring, say, a machete-wielding Muhammad who takes up with a nine-year-old Aisha? If we had any actual journalists, they would be asking Netflix officials that question, and there is no doubt about what the answer would be: Netflix has far too much respect for Muslims and Islam to produce a show like that.

Ah yes, respect. As Bob Dylan’s character Jack Fate puts it in Dylan’s underappreciated movie Masked and Anonymous, “I got a lot of respect for a gun.” As everyone knows, the real reason why Netflix doesn’t hesitate to make fun of Jesus and Christians but wouldn’t dream of subjecting Muhammad and Muslims to the same treatment is because they know that Christians won’t kill them for doing so, not even those crazed “right-wing extremists” that we keep hearing about who are supposedly the greatest terror threat we face today. But with Muslims, it’s a different story: Netflix, if it ever dared to produce an animated show about Muhammad, knows that it’s entirely within the realm of possibility that a jihadi could emerge who would be intent upon separating the heads of Netflix executives from their bodies. That’s how “respect” is born these days.

But Netflix didn’t care to demonstrate any respect for Christians the fiendishly obscene episode of Paradise P.D. entitled “Trigger Warning.” In it, according to NewsBusters, a foe of disarming the populace offers to take proponents of that disarming on a tour of the National Rifle Association. “The tour includes a gun pit with a dead kid buried in it and the corpse of Charlton Heston used as a statue, complete with a quote – ‘Pry this gun from my cold, dead hands and win a Republican Senate seat.’ The head of the NRA, Mr. Chip F**k-Yeah, shows them a video using Jesus as a prop to show how “guns make a better world.” The video is horrifically offensive, with Jesus coming down from the Cross to kill his persecutors with machine guns then have sex with two women.”

Believe it or not, it just gets worse from there. But aside from this article and a few others, no one will take any particular note. The establishment media certainly won’t: today’s “journalists” generally hate Christianity as much as Netflix does. But a particularly piquant comparison comes from France. Shortly after a Muslim beheaded schoolteacher Samuel Paty on October 16, 2020 for showing a cartoon of Muhammad in his class, it came to light that French police called in Paty and interrogated him over allegations of “Islamophobia.” Paty told them, and he was right, that “I did not commit any offense.”

In today’s world, however, he did. It is a massive de facto offense against contemporary woke sensibilities to offend Islam and violate Sharia blasphemy laws. That is true in the United States no less than it is in France. When Pamela Geller and I held our Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon Contest in 2015 in defense of the freedom of speech, and Islamic State jihadis attempted to kill us all, Geller was roundly condemned not just by leftists by even by prominent people who are often considered conservatives (including Bill O’Reilly, Laura Ingraham and Greta van Susteren) for daring to commit what they considered to be a gratuitous offense to Muslims. The idea that it is important to defend the freedom of speech against violent intimidation, and not validate that intimidation by giving in to it, did not impress them at all.

The freedom of speech is the foundation of any free society, and so Netflix is entirely free to depict Jesus in a lewd and ridiculous manner, and to mock gun owners as paranoid lunatics. The double standard, however, grows ever more glaring. If Netflix had been operating in France and made fun of Muhammad, police would have called in its executives for questioning. In the United States, if it had made fun of Muhammad, they might not have had to talk to the cops, but they would have been inundated with charges of “racism” and “Islamophobia.”

What is all this going to look like five or ten or twenty years down the road, as Americans, and Westerners in general, grow ever more accustomed to the idea that one must adhere to Sharia blasphemy restrictions on mockery, or even criticism, of Islam, but the West’s own culture and traditions, rife as they are with “white supremacism” and “hate,” are fair game. It seems to be a recipe for cultural and societal surrender.


Biden’s handlers appear to be ‘using loopholes when dealing with Iranian regime’ in $1,000,000,000 ransom payment

Top PA official uses female jihadis as proof that women have equal rights in the Palestinian territories

Germany: Woman converts to Islam, joins ISIS, has her young teen son get firearms training at jihad training camp

Why Erdogan pulled Turkey out of European treaty aimed at protecting women from violence

Kenya: Muslims murder five people, injure dozens as bus drives over roadside IED

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

A Lenten Meditation on Cancel Culture

Every day seems to bring new examples in the news of our cancel culture. Cancel culture is a cancer to our culture.

The examples border on the ridiculous:

  • Alfred Hitchcock’s thriller “Psycho” is sexist.
  • The Muppets require a disclaimer from Disney.
  • Dr. Seuss, the famous children’s author, becomes radioactive for reportedly having engaged in racist drawings.
  • Mr. Potato Head is sexist.
  • Disney classics Dumbo and Peter Pan allegedly perpetuate racist stereotypes.
  • Cartoon skunk Pepe Le Pew is a rapist, and Speedy Gonzalez embodies an anti-Mexican message.

And on it goes. And these are but mild examples.

I’m all for being sensitive and trying not to needlessly offend anybody. But the problem now is that feigning offense bestows cultural power, so no amount of sensitivity is enough. Inasmuch as any of this deals with race, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. gave the perfect remedy—judge others by the content of their character and not the color of their skin.

But today cancel culture has almost become a joke—only it is not funny. As Tucker Carlson noted recently, one of the great victims of cancel culture is humor.

Above all, cancel culture lacks grace–God’s amazing grace. Lent is the 40 days (Sundays not counted) between Ash Wednesday, when we remember that we were made of dust and to dust we shall one day return and Easter Sunday, when Jesus rose from the dead.

Lent is 40 days because when Jesus began His ministry, He fasted for 40 days in the wilderness, where He was tempted by the devil. But He did not give in.

Christ lived a perfect life and was the only human being to ever do so. He (who was fully God and fully man) then voluntary offered Himself as a sacrifice for sins on the cross and offers forgiveness for those who believe.

Recognizing the need to be forgiven is essential to salvation. But there seems to be no forgiveness in cancel culture. Pity the poor soul who offends liberal sensibilities and then seeks atonement. As some learn the hard way, no matter how much abject groveling they do, there is no forgiveness in cancel culture.

Somehow the woke folk see themselves as perfect. They remind me of a 250-year-old dialogue between General Oglethorpe (founder of the American colony of Georgia) and the preacher John Wesley (founder of the Methodist Church).

Said Ogelthorpe: “I never forgive, and I never forget.”

Responded Wesley: “Then, Sir, I hope you never sin.”

Thankfully, even some on the left recognize that cancel culture is no good for the culture. As even Bill Maher noted recently, the left should stop with the cancel culture, lest it come back to cancel the left one day.

Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law professor emeritus, said, “I hope all Americans wake up to this…I hope it’s not just the ‘shoe is on the other foot’ test. Now, the conservatives are the victims of cancel culture so they’re big supporters of the Constitution and constitutional rights. During McCarthyism, it was the left that were the victims, and the right were the oppressors.”

The Epoch Times noted (3/5/21): “’Americans are showing increased and substantial concern about the growth of cancel culture,’ said Mark Penn, the director of the Harvard CAPS-Harris Poll survey.”

Well we should. Dr. Peter Lillback founded the Providence Forum and serves as its president emeritus. I once interviewed him about the Christian origins of our freedom as Americans. He said we should learn from William Penn, the founder of Pennsylvania. In the late 1600s, Penn created a large colony where people could be free to practice their religion as they saw fit. It was a “holy experiment.” Conscience rights of the individual were to be respected.

Lillback told me in reference to Penn, “When he defended the freedom of conscience, he wrote a great book on it. He put on its cover Matthew, chapter seven and verse twelve. Not everyone knows that reference, but it’s the Golden Rule, ‘do unto others as you’d have them do unto you.’” (The words of Jesus from Matthew’s Gospel.)

Lillback notes, “Basically, what he was saying is: I didn’t like it when I was put in the Tower of London for my conscience. Now that I’m building my own civilization, I’m not going to put you in prison because you disagree with my Quaker faith.’ He said, ‘The freedom we want for ourselves we must give to others.’” Amen.

Cancel culture eats away at all these things, throwing forgiveness out the window in the process. Cancel culture is reminiscent of those ancient statues of snakes in the process of eating themselves in a circle. It would be best for all of us for this cancer in our culture to be uprooted and replaced by Christian liberty, grace, and true tolerance.

©Jerry Newcombe. All rights reserved.

Biden Reportedly Briefed That Boulder Mass Murderer Had ISIS Sympathies

But as far as Biden’s handlers are concerned, the jihad massacre is just an opportunity to push for disarming Americans.

“‘ISIS sympathies’: Boulder shooting suspect identified as Ahmad Al Issa,”

by Art Moore, WND, March 23, 2021:

The suspect in the deadly shooting at a Boulder, Colorado, grocery store on Monday has been identified as Ahmad Al Aliwi Al Issa.

Boulder Police Chief Maris Harold said at a press conference Tuesday that Al Issa has been charged with 10 counts of first-degree murder. Harold said the 10 victims range in age from 20 to 65. The suspect was shot in the leg and was in stable condition at an area hospital. Al Issa bought a Ruger AR-556 semi-automatic rifle on March 16, according to court documents

Boulder County District Attorney Michael Dougherty said authorities haven’t determined a motive.

“Why did this happen?” Dougherty asked. “We don’t have the answer to that yet and the investigation is in its very early stages.”

However, journalist Jack Posobiec, citing an unidentified White House official, said President Biden “has been briefed the Colorado shooter had ISIS sympathies.”

In a subsequent tweet, Posobiec said, “It is beginning to look like the Boulder shooting was a jihadist terror attack.”

Later Tuesday, Posobiec, citing a national security source, said Al Issa was a Syrian refugee who arrived through an Obama-era asylum program.

And Tuesday evening, the New York Times reported he was known to the FBI. The paper said Al Issa was linked to another person who has been under investigation but didn’t give more details.

The National File reported Al Issa’s purported Facebook page, which has now been removed, included pro-Islam and anti-Trump messages.

Screen shots of the Facebook page taken by Twitter users show Al Issa was a devout Muslim, the National File said.

In a post June 5, 2019, Al Issa said he believed he was under attack from “racist Islamophobic people” who were “hacking” his smartphone.

“Yeah if these racist islamophobic people would stop hacking my phone and let me have a normal life I probably could,” he wrote.

Of Islam, he wrote, “Muslims might not be perfect but Islam is.”

Al Issa said in a purported Facebook post that Donald Trump won the 2016 election because of “racism”:


Al Issa’s brother, Ali Al Issa, told the Daily Beast his brother was “very anti-social” and paranoid.

In high school, the brother said, he often said he was “being chased, someone is behind him, someone is looking for him.”

Al Issa was “short-tempered” and “scary,” according to a former high school wrestling teammate, Dayton Marvel, the Denver Post reported.

Marvel said Al Issa once threatened to kill people during a match.

“He was kind of scary to be around,” Marvel said….


Boulder Shooter is ISIS Sympathizer, Leftists Hardest Hit

The Boulder Jihad Massacre: Clearing Away the Deceptions

Islamic State: Pope’s Iraq trip a ‘crusade’ to ‘remove the Sharia of Allah from this land’

Norway: 16-year-old Muslim who ‘believes the killing of infidels is legitimate’ had bomb-making manual

Belgium: On anniversary of Brussels jihad massacre, Muslims declare that they’re the real victims

UK: ‘British man’ jailed for encouraging acts of jihad terror in Bangladesh

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Covering Up Ahmad Al Issa’s Islamic Yearnings

Denying the Jihad in the Boulder Jihad.

Editors’ note: As we witness U.S. authorities and the establishment media trying to de-Islamize the Jihad in Boulder and to obscure the fact that the Jihadist perpetrator, Ahmad Al Issa, is a Muslim migrant ISIS sympathizer, a vital question confronts us: why does the Left consistently engage in Jihad Denial? Why is it so invested in denying the Islamic roots of Islamic Jihad?

This is, without doubt, one of the most pertinent questions of our time, especially now with the Boulder Jihad — and its tragic victims — hovering right before our very eyes. Frontpage Mag editors have therefore deemed it vital to run, below, an excerpt from Jamie Glazov’s book, Jihadist Psychopath: How He is Charming, Seducing, and Devouring Us.

The excerpt, which includes sections of Chapter 1 of the book (‘The Case’), details the Obama administration’s horrific record of trying to hide and camouflage the true sources of Islamic terror — an effort that spawned catastrophic consequences.

This documentation equips us with the understanding of why Jihadists like Ahmad Al Issa are able to sow the destruction that they do today — and so easily. It also sets the foundation for our insight into why exactly the Left practices Jihad Denial — and what all the specious ingredients of that denial entail. These facts will all be unveiled in several published segments of Jihadist Psychopath in our forthcoming issues of Frontpage Mag.

Don’t miss this essay below.

[To read the chapter on what the Left actually is — and why it aids and abets Jihad — read Utopian VirusHERE. The Virus in Power, meanwhile, explores how the Left took power in America — and why it had such an easy time doing so. Read it: HERE. The introduction crystallizes the general nature of Jihad Denial: HERE.]

The Case.

On May 13, 2010, Attorney General Eric Holder had an incredulous and perplexed expression on his face as he sat before the House Judiciary Committee. He just couldn’t understand what Representative Lamar Smith, the ranking Republican on the Committee, was asking him, over and over again. Specifically, Smith wanted to know if Holder thought that “Radical Islam” had any connection to Jihadist attacks perpetrated against the United States. Rep. Smith had to ask the same question, repeated in different ways, six times while Holder looked confused and uttered short rejoinders about how Rep. Smith’s questions weren’t making sense to him. Finally, apparently realizing that Rep. Smith would not desist, Holder affirmed that whatever it was that the congressman was talking about (Holder would not pronounce the words), it was definitely not connected to the attacks to which Smith was referring. [1]

Holder’s behavior before the House Judiciary Committee clearly reflected the position of the Obama administration on the terror war — a position that the administration had made conspicuously evident from the moment it took office. It would be the Hear No Islam/See No Islam position when it came to terrorism. Whenever Jihadists would strike, Jihad Denial would be the name of the game. This, of course, was central to the Left’s cause, since denying Jihad and its true roots helps to advance the progressives’ goal of making America more vulnerable to Jihad. And now the progressive dream had come true: the Left had its own Radical-in-Chief in the White House who was faithfully executing its destructive agenda.

Obama’s new path of Jihad Denial and romancing the Muslim Brotherhood took on devastating significance in October 2011, when his administration dutifully followed Muslim Brotherhood “requests” and purged all FBI and other intelligence agencies’ training manuals of any mention of Islam and Jihad.[2]

The Department of Defense followed suit and enforced a purge of all individuals who didn’t toe the new Party Line. New disciplinary action and re-education was made mandatory for anyone in the government who dared to acknowledge Islam’s role in the terror war.[3] Those who courageously told the truth about Islam, such as the scholar Robert Spencer, were removed from their positions as trainers of FBI and military personnel on the jihad threat and were replaced by members of Muslim Brotherhood front groups such as CAIR and ISNA.[4]

In the State Department, meanwhile, officials would be forbidden from asking Muslim immigrants about their views on Sharia and Jihad before approving their visa applications.[5]

A “counterterrorism” government guide would also tell officials that keeping Muslims out of the country for supporting Sharia Law violated the First Amendment. [6] All American officials and investigators were now permitted to consider only violent or criminal conduct in the terror war. Radical ideology was to be ignored, particularly if it had the veneer of “religious expression.”[7]

It soon became clear that Countering “Violent Extremism” {CVE) was the Obama administration’s primary “focus” in the terror war. It served the administration’s agenda perfectly because, at first glance, no one could point to what it was exactly that was being countered. There was no clear objective or identification of any specific enemy and, unsurprisingly, no mention of Jihad or Islam. Countering “violent extremism” became one of those very vague and ambiguous goals to which the administration could refer when it came time to prove it was doing something about terrorism when, in fact, it was doing absolutely nothing at all.[8]

While the CVE strategy had its nebulous aspects, there was actually something that it very clearly sought to “counter.” Indeed, it became quite evident that there were certain individuals, along with an ideology, that the administration regarded as “extremist” and that it wanted to block. And who were the guilty parties? The truth-tellers about Jihad, of course. The counter-jihad movement represented the true “violent extremism” because, according to the administration, it was instigating all the terrible and racist hatred that was being displayed against Muslims everywhere.[9] The evidence substantiating this supposed reality proved non-existent, but the notion prevailed nonetheless. And it was here that we saw the Left’s upside-down inversion of who the good and bad guys really were: Jihad had somehow become the victim, while the victims of Jihad became the terrorists.

The administration’s CVE charade was, in a nutshell, really all about one basic agenda: enforcing Jihad Denial and persecuting the dissidents who violated it. This situation yielded a disaster: the real threat facing America could not be named or labelled. In his book Catastrophic Failure: Blindfolding America in the Face of Jihad, author Stephen Coughlin documents how, under Obama, a dire threat was reduced to a “nameless abstraction.” U.S. leaders and intelligence agencies ignored the most basic tenets of intelligence, which included the critical component of threat identification. The problem, notably, began in the Bush administration. Having worked himself in the Joint Chiefs of Staff Intelligence Directorate in the immediate post-9-11 period, Coughlin recalls how he discovered that,

within the division there seemed to be a preference for political correctness over   accuracy and for models that were generated not by what the enemy said he was but on what academics and “cultural advisors’ said the enemy needed to be, based on contrived social science theories.[10]

Under Obama, the situation went from bad to worse. Coughlin describes how Islamic supremacists became completely aware of the administration’s calculated self-delusion and, consequently, felt arrogantly at ease in actually molding American leaders’ thinking and policies. Our enemies, Coughlin writes, “successfully calculated that they could win the war by convincing our national security leaders of the immorality of studying and knowing the enemy.”[11] As a result, they became overridingly confident in their ability to fulfill the Muslim Brotherhood’s goal, which the Brotherhood boasted about in its own documents, of sabotaging the United States through the process of “civilization-jihad” and achieving this goal by Americans’ own hands.[12]

Thus, America’s suicidal disposition in the terror war reached a crisis level under Obama, when American officials actually started seeking advice and direction from precisely those forces seeking to destroy the country. As Coughlin shows, while the government identified certain individuals and organizations as providers of material support to terrorism, and as members or allies of the Muslim Brotherhood, it simultaneously sought out “those same people as cultural experts, ‘moderates’ and community outreach partners.”[13]

With Obama in the White House, therefore, the enemy was in effect advising Americans and formulating their policy on how to promote their cause. Obama was also mischaracterizing the conflict America was in. “The public face of Islam in America,” Coughlin notes, “was shaped by the Muslim Brotherhood.” Islam in America, in turn, “took the form favored by the Brotherhood.”[14] This catastrophe was compounded by the surreal fact that many officials in senior positions in the Obama administration didn’t even know anything about Islam and were completely oblivious to the Islamic doctrines that justify and even mandate Jihad against the West.[15]

Suffice it to say that while threat identification is the foundation for any successful war effort and is, therefore, crucial to protecting Americans and enhancing our security, under Obama such identification was impossible. As Coughlin points out, “a postmodern form of relativism” had rendered America “incapable of recognizing existential epistemic threats and hence made it defenseless in the face of them.”[16]

And it got worse. Not only did the Obama administration avoid recognizing the true threats that faced America, it spent a significant amount of time chasing around non-threats on purpose. Immense resources were wasted on investigating harmless non-Muslims solely for the sake of appearing non-racist. “Since 2009 we’ve opened investigations of groups we knew to be harmless,” a Pentagon counterterrorism official revealed, “they weren’t Muslims, and we needed some ‘balance’ in case the White House asked if we were ‘profiling’ potential terrorists.”[17] In this way, the Obama administration could proudly maintain that it was not engaged in “Islamophobia.”[18]

Meanwhile, The Obama administration was not content with solely silencing threat identification within the government. It would cause embarrassment, after all, if the media and American citizens could still talk openly and honestly about the ideology that posed a threat to America and the West. House Democrats, therefore, faithfully sprung to action and launched an effort to criminalize truth-telling about Jihad in the country at large. Their effort produced House Resolution 569, which leading Democrats in the House of Representatives sponsored on December 17, 2015. Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary, the resolution sought to destroy the First Amendment by condemning hateful rhetoric towards Muslims in the United States.[19]

Conflating truth-telling about Jihad with the supposed hatred of all Muslim people, the resolution sought to criminalize any attempt to accurately identify America’s enemies and the ideology that inspires them. As Robert Spencer notes, the resolution used

the specter of violence against Muslims to try to quash legitimate research into the motives and goals of those who have vowed to destroy us, which will have the effect of allowing the jihad to advance unimpeded and unopposed.[20]

The Left’s effort with House Resolution 569 was an extension of U.N. Resolution 16/18, the effort pushed by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (O.I.C.), the 57-nation alliance of Muslim states, to stifle free speech about Islam globally by implementing a U.N. rule against the so-called “defamation of religions.” The real aim of U.N. Resolution 16/18 is, of course, to shut down “Islamophobia,” which means to curtail any truth-telling about Islam and to impose Islamic blasphemy laws worldwide.[21]

Any law applied in the U.S. that is based on House Resolution 569 or U.N. Resolution 16/18 would be a violation of the U.S. First Amendment. But this doesn’t concern leftists very much, since that is precisely their objective. This explains why Hillary Clinton personally committed the State Department to impose U.N. Resolution 16/18 on the United States in her meeting with the General Secretary of the O.I.C. in July 2011, while she was serving as Secretary of State. Clinton also affirmed that, until the effort could become U.S. law, there would be action undertaken — by means of “peer pressure and shaming” — to intimidate Americans who engaged in the kind of speech that U.N. Resolution 16/18 sought to end. Then, tellingly enough, in June 2012, when Assistant Attorney General Tom Perez was asked by the Chairman of the House Subcommittee on the Constitution to confirm that the Obama administration would “never entertain or advance a proposal that criminalizes speech against any religion,” he refused to answer.[22]

While the Obama administration and its leftist loyalists were busy trying to impose Islamic blasphemy laws on the United States, other American progressive forces empowered Islamic supremacism in other realms. The leftist leadership of New York City, for instance, became busy accommodating Muslim Brotherhood directives by preventing the New York Police Department from focusing on Muslims in fighting Jihad. The process started in 2012, when the Muslim Students Association (MSA), a Muslim Brotherhood front group, filed a federal lawsuit (along with a few other Muslim Brotherhood plaintiffs) against the NYPD. In its complaint, the MSA charged that the civil rights of Muslims were being violated by the NYPD’s use of informants and plainclothes detectives to monitor various Islamic institutions — particularly MSA chapters — in the New York/New Jersey area.[23]

In early January 2016, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio and Police Commissioner William Bratton agreed to a settlement that would exempt Muslims from NYPD surveillance. The new guidelines explicitly barred police officers from basing any future law-enforcement investigations on race, ethnicity, or, as in the case of the MSA, religion.[24] As part of the settlement, New York City also deleted from the department’s website an exhaustive NYPD report, titled “Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat,” which provided a crucial tutorial for all law enforcement organizations seeking to understand how an individual is moved to Islamic radicalization.[25]

The NYPD’s traditional practice of cultivating informants and using undercover investigators within the Muslim community had undeniably prevented many Jihadist attacks.

But now, with more than thirty thousand worldwide Muslim terrorist attacks inspired by Islamic texts since 9/11,[26] with Jihadist attacks on the rise globally, and with the FBI recently stating that it was investigating as many as 900 open cases on individuals suspected of being ISIS operatives,[27] it has become illegal for the NYPD to single out anyone in the Muslim community for surveillance and undercover operations. As writer Daniel Greenfield noted regarding this development, “if a successful terror attack occurs in New York, it will be because Bill de Blasio crippled the NYPD at the behest of Islamic groups.”[28]

In America, we see how the Left succeeded through Obama in enforcing Jihad Denial and in enabling the strength of Islamic supremacist forces. In achieving this feat, progressives empowered the advance of Jihad and Sharia in the United States, which made the nation vastly more vulnerable to its enemy’s attacks.

It is undeniable that the Jihadist attacks that occurred on American soil throughout the Obama years could have easily been prevented. This fact will be heavily documented later in our story, but for now we will cite just one illustrative example: the Boston Marathon Massacre that the Tsarnaev brothers perpetrated on April 15, 2013, did not have to happen. The Russians, after all, had warned the FBI about the Tsarnaevs before the massacre, but the intelligence agency found nothing after its “investigation” of the two brothers. This is because the Bureau had its hands tied behind its back with the Jihad Denial rules of the administration. It couldn’t ask the right questions, nor pursue the right and necessary leads.

Jamie Glazov holds a Ph.D. in History with a specialty in Russian, U.S. and Canadian foreign policy. He is the editor of Frontpagemag.com, the author of the critically-acclaimed, United in Hate: The Left’s Romance with Tyranny and Terror, and the host of the web-tv show, The Glazov Gang. His new book is Jihadist Psychopath: How He is Charming, Seducing, and Devouring Us. Visit his site at JamieGlazov.com, follow him on Twitter: @JamieGlazov, and reach him at jamieglazov11@gmail.com.


[1] Stephen Dinan, “Holder balks at blaming ‘radical Islam’,” The Washington Times, May 14, 2010. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/may/14/holder-balks-at-blaming-radical-islam/#ixzz30MluWyrS

[2] Robert Spencer, “Hillary Lets the Jihadist Cat Out of the Bag,” Frontpagemag.com, January 24, 2013. http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/robert-spencer/hillary-lets-the-jihadist-cat-out-of-bag/print/

[3] Stephen Coughlin, Catastrophic Failure: Blindfolding America in the Face of Jihad, (Center for Security Policy Press: Washington D.C., 2015), pp.21.

[4] Robert Spencer, Arab Winter Comes to America: The Truth About the War We’re In, (Washington, D.C: Regnery, 2015), pp. xiii-xvi; Frank Gaffney, The Muslim Brotherhood in the Obama Administration, (Sherman Oaks, CA, David Horowitz Freedom Center: 2012).

[5] Leo Hohmann, “Exploding Muslim immigration overwhelms FBI,” WorldNetDaily.com, July 17, 2015. http://www.wnd.com/2015/07/exploding-muslim-immigration-overwhelms-fbi/#vJezltXyYmuQXX0j.99

[6] Daniel Greenfield, “Counterterrorism Gov Guide: Keeping Out Muslims for Sharia Law Violates First Amendment,” The Point, Frontpagemag.com, December 16, 2015. http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/261149/counterterrorism-gov-guide-keeping-out-muslims-daniel-greenfield

[7] Ibid.

[8] For an authoritative account of the CVE strategy, see Stephen Coughlin Interview, “The Hoax of ‘Countering Violent Extremism’” on The Glazov Gang, JamieGlazov.com, April 12, 2016. http://jamieglazov.com/2016/04/12/the-hoax-of-countering-violent-extremism-on-the-glazov-gang/

[9] Ibid.

[10] Coughlin, p.12.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Ibid.

[13] Ibid, p.13.

[14] Ibid, p.17.

[15] Ibid., p.14.

[16] Ibid., p.17.

[17] John R. Schindler, “The Intelligence Lessons of San Bernardino,” Observer.com, December 14, 2015. http://observer.com/2015/12/the-intelligence-lessons-of-san-bernardino/

[18] Ibid.

[19] Robert Spencer, “House Democrats Move to Criminalize Criticism of Islam,” Frontpagemag.com, December 29, 2015. http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/261268/house-democrats-move-criminalize-criticism-islam-robert-spencer

[20] Ibid.

[21] Deborah Weiss, “Democrats Castigate ‘Anti-Muslim’ Speech in Proposed Legislation,” Frontpagemag.com, January 26, 2016. http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/261550/democrats-castigate-anti-muslim-speech-proposed-deborah-weiss; Robert Spencer, “Secretary of State Clinton says State Department will coordinate with OIC on legal ways to implement UN’s resolution criminalizing ‘defamation of religion’”, JihadWatch.org, August 3, 2011. http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/08/secretary-of-state-clinton-says-state-department-will-coordinate-with-oic-on-legal-ways-to-implement

[22] Melanie Arter, “DOJ Official Won’t Say Whether Justice Department Would ‘Criminalize Speech against Any Religion’”, CNSNews.com, July 26, 2012. http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/doj-official-won-t-say-whether-justice-department-would-criminalize-speech-against-any. See also Coughlin, p.22.

[23] John Perazzo, “The MSA Defeats New York,” Frontpagemag.com, January 12, 2016.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/261427/msa-defeats-new-york-john-perazzo; for documentation of the MSA being a Muslim Brotherhood front group, see the profile on the MSA at DiscovertheNetworks.org: http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6175

[24] Ibid.

[25] Paul Sperry, “The purge of a report on radical Islam has put NYC at risk,” NYPost.com, April 15, 2017. http://nypost.com/2017/04/15/the-purge-of-a-report-on-radical-islam-has-put-nyc-at-risk/; Patrick Dunleavy, “NYPD Caves to Political Correctness,” InvestigativeProject.org, January 8, 2016. http://www.investigativeproject.org/5121/nypd-caves-to-political-correctness

[26] See the website thereligionofpeace.com which keeps a track of the number of Islamic terrorist attacks since 9/11.

[27] Kevin Johnson, “Comey: Feds have roughly 900 domestic probes about Islamic State operatives, other extremists,” UsaToday.com, October 23, 2015. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/10/23/fbi-comey-isil-domestic-probes/74455460/

[28] Daniel Greenfield, “Bill de Blasio Cripples NYPD Surveillance of Muslim Terrorism,” The Point at Frontpagemag.com, January 7, 2016. http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/261384/bill-de-blasio-cripples-nypd-surveillance-muslim-daniel-greenfield

Boulder Jihad Mass Murderer Had Planned to Hit Trump Rally, also Targeted Churches and Temples

Time to start calling for “jihad control” legislation like Trump’s jihad immigration ban. Or will the media disappear this news story after running article after article about “white supremacist” shooter? Apparently Democrats consider slaughter in the cause of  Islamic supremacism to be righteous ……..

Boulder jihad mass murderer had planned to hit Trump rally, also checked churches as potential targets

By: Robert Spencer, March 23, 2021:







Colorado Is One of Few U.S. States with Universal Background Check Gun Controls

Biden calls on Senate to pass GUN CONTROL ‘immediately’ after Boulder jihad mass murders but remains silent on religious motive

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.