DOJ shaking down Bensalem, Pennsylvania for rejecting mosque

Dept. of Jihad. Source: Justice Department sues Pennsylvania town for rejecting mosque – Washington Times

The Justice Department is taking a Pennsylvania town to court over a municipal board’s denial of a zoning application for a mosque, accusing officials of discriminating against a local Muslim organization on the basis of religion.

The Bensalem Township violated the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act when its zoning board in 2014 rejected a zoning request that would have allowed the Bensalem Masjid to build a mosque in the town, Justice Department attorneys wrote in a complaint filed Thursday in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

“Our Constitution protects the rights of religious communities to build places of worship free from unlawful interference and unnecessary barriers,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Vanita Gupta, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. “The Department of Justice will continue to challenge unjustified local zoning actions around the country when they encroach upon this important civil right.”

Members of the local Muslim community sought to build a mosque after years of renting a local fire hall for worship services. In 2012, the Bensalem Masjid organization met with elected officials to discuss options for building a 17,000-square-foot mosque on land adjacent to the township.

But as plans moved forward and the group attended a series of meetings before the Bensalem Township Zoning Hearing Board, the complaint alleges that Bensalem Masjid was treated differently than other religious and non-religious groups that had sought similar zoning variances. The board, which ultimately rejected the application in a 4-0 vote, treated other groups “more favorably than it treated the Bensalem’s Masjid’s application throughout the variance process.”

Specifically the complaint alleges that in other instances the board required only one hearing to make a zoning variance application while there were six hearings conducted as part of the Bensalem Masjid’s application.

“As another example, the Board asked questions of the Bensalem Masjid that it did not ask of many of these other applicants, including whether its membership would increase and whether it would attract members from outside of Bensalem Township,” the complaint states.


Those are legitimate questions. What they should have been asking is: who is funding your mosque? Will you preach jihad? Will you preach sharia? Will you segregate women and force them to use a separate entrance and be treated as unequals? Do any of your executives or founders have links to terrorism or the Muslim Brotherhood? Among many other legitimate questions Bensalem residents ought to have answers too. The mosques present small proposals and then when the multitudes show up, they disrupt traffic flow, park on neighbors lawns, block streets and eventually force towns to permit mosque expansions.

Under Hillary Clinton mosques there will be thousands more mosques needed in towns all across America.

Meanwhile, the DOJ’s latest sharia enforcer Gupta, is not new to Creeping Sharia readers:

Please read and share via the buttons below. We are posting only 3-4 stories a day, primarily issues and events in the U.S. It’s hard to keep up but Americans need to know what is going on. Spread the word.

 

 

When it comes to Big Lies about Islam, nothing much has changed except the administrations

But it has gotten worse and more obvious. Diana West writes:

I am struck anew by how very long this official effort to suppress the facts about Islam (not, not, not “Radicalislam”) has been going on — throughout the Obama administration, of course, but long before it began. This battle of suppression was already being waged when on September 17, 2001 President George W. Bush told the nation, “Islam is peace.” Soon he would send armies into that Islamic world of peace to do battle, wholly ignorant of Islamic war, or jihad.

Read the excerpt below from American Betrayal

Source: The Death of the Grown-Up | Home – See-No-Jihad = Homeland Insecurity

Once upon a time, about a decade ago …

… in this long-drawn-out post-9/11 era, this admiral received a lengthy, extensively documented briefing on the Islamic doctrine of jihad (Islamic war) from Maj. Stephen C. Coughlin, U.S. Army Reserves. Coughlin is an expert on the legal-religious doctrine that Islamic terrorists claim as the justification for campaigns of violence against infidels and rival Muslims.3 His briefings, which I’ve attended multiple times, are legendary in security circles in Washington and elsewhere for their comprehensive, if not overwhelming, compilation of factual, Islamic-sourced evidence, which demonstrates, for example, that Islamic terrorists are not “hijacking” Islamic law (sharia) when they engage in jihad. On the contrary, they are executing it. Nor are they “twisting” the foundational principles of Islam as codified in each and every authoritative Islamic source. They are exemplifying them.

For reasons that should become clearer over the following pages, this briefing on these basic facts of jihad doctrine is typically our top military leaders’ first exposure to what is known in Pentagon parlance as the “enemy threat doctrine.” I am not exaggerating. Years of battle—even worse, years of battle planning—have passed without our leadership having studied, or even having become acquainted with, the principles and historic facts of Islamic war doctrine. Four years into the so-called war on terror, then–Joint Chiefs Chairman Peter Pace even pointed this out in a speech at the National Defense University on December 1, 2005.4

Notwithstanding Pace’s concern, the study and analysis of Islam and jihad remained de facto forbidden in policy-making circles inside the Bush White House, which even codified a lexicon in 2008 to help government officials discuss Islamic jihad without mentioning “Islam” or “jihad.”5 The Obama administration would carry this same see-no-Islam policy to its zealous limit, finally mounting a two-front assault on the few trainers and fact-based training materials that were sometimes (sparingly) used by law enforcement agencies and the military to educate personnel about Islam and jihad. What history should remember as the Great Jihad Purges of 2012 began at the Justice Department, affecting domestic law enforcement agencies, and spread to the Pentagon, affecting the entire U.S. military.

First, the FBI eliminated hundreds of pages of “anti-Islam” educational material from its own training programs and those of other law enforcement agencies. Several Muslim advocacy groups applauded these purge results at the briefing at the bureau on February 15, 2012, “unexpectedly” attended by FBI Director Robert Mueller himself.6 Next, on April 24, 2012, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin E. Dempsey ordered a similar scrub, calling on the entire U.S. military to “review” its educational and training classes, files, and rosters of instructors to ensure that no members of the armed services were studying material “disrespectful of the Islamic religion.”7

What exactly does the U.S. government and its Muslim advisers consider “anti-Islam” or “disrespectful,” or, as a Pentagon spokesman put it on Al Jazeera TV, “warped views”?8 One trophy of this so-called Islamophobia that made it into Wired.com (whose reportage seems to have energized if not triggered these government purges) was a PowerPoint slide created by Stephen C. Coughlin about the “permanent command in Islam for Muslims to hate and despise Jews and Christians and not take them as friends.”9

Pretty disrespectful and warped for sure—but only if Coughlin’s premise and supporting documentation were untrue. The statement and the documentation, however, are incontrovertible. There is a permanent command in Islam for Muslims to hate and despise Jews and Christians and not take them as friends. The slide in question includes citations of the most authoritative Islamic texts, the Koran and the hadiths (the sayings and deeds of Mohammed, which Muslims hold sacred) to document its veracity.10

Veracity is not the issue here, though. Evidence is not the issue here. Reality is not the issue here, either. The issue is a commandment from on high in government—“Islam is a religion of peace.” It is the Big Lie that is the basis of the prevailing ideology, and, above all, the Big Lie must live. No one in the leadership contradicts it “because then,” as Hans Christian Andersen tells us, he would be “unfit for his job or very stupid.”

Admiral X certainly didn’t want anyone to think that. So what did he make of his Coughlin briefing, an introduction to the central Islamic doctrine of jihad and its role in driving global jihad? How did he react to the spectacular if not shattering array of information contained in the authoritative Islamic texts and books of authentic, mainstream Islamic jurisprudence before him, which shattered the Islam-is-peace mantra?

He said, and I quote, “I’ll have to check with my imam on that.”

I was staggered when I first heard this story, and, in a way, I still am. Was the admiral kidding? Did he not have the wit to make up his own mind based on the ample, annotated, inconvenient evidence before him? Witlessness, however, wasn’t the admiral’s problem, just as witlessness wasn’t the problem in the Justice and Defense Departments. If the admiral was announcing that he would be deferring to “his imam”—in other words, to an Islamic interpreter of things Islamic—on the matter of Islamic war-making doctrine, there was a reason for this, and it had nothing to do with IQ. Similarly, if FBI Director Mueller and Joint Chiefs Chairman General Dempsey were deferring to the wishes of an array of Muslim advocacy groups—including groups designated by the U.S. government as Muslim Brotherhood front groups11—regarding education about Islam, something else had rendered them, and countless others like them in military, security, and civilian leadership, incapable of assessing facts and passing judgment.

What was it?

This is the leading question that guided the research going into this book. What, in a nutshell, throughout eight years of George W. Bush and four years of Barack Obama, caused our leadership to deny and eliminate categorically the teachings of Islam from all official analysis of the global jihad that has wracked the world for decades (for centuries), and particularly since the 9/11 attacks in 2001? This omission has created a scrupulously de-Islamized, and thus truly “warped,” record for future historians to puzzle over. What will they make, for example, of a 2007 ninety-slide briefing on “the surge” in Iraq presented by counterinsurgency guru David Kilcullen that failed to mention Islam (let alone jihad war doctrine) once? Instead, the militarily, politically, and aca- demically elite audiences for whom the presentation was created were asked to “think of the [Iraqi] environment as a sort of ‘conflict ecosystem.’ ”12 How will they explain Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s 2009 “assessment” of the war against Islamic jihadists in Afghanistan, which, in sixty-six pages, contained not one discussion of Islam, jihad, or how they fit into both the Taliban struggle and the Afghan people’s antipathy for Western forces? How will they explain why “everyone” agreed to fight blind?

To be fair, there is one passing reference to Islam in the McChrystal assessment. Calling for an improved communications approach, the commander demanded that insurgents and jihadist militias be “exposed continually” for their “anti-Islamic” use of violence and terror. The report elaborates, “These include their causing of the majority of civilian casualties, attacks on education, devel- opment projects, and government institutions, and flagrant contravention of the principles of the Koran” (emphasis added).13

It would be easy to toss off a derisive quip at this point and move on, but it’s well worth mulling over how it could be that eight years after 9/11, a West Point–trained, battle-hardened, and by all accounts capable commander fighting jihad forces in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan could assume the role of an apologist for Islam rather than an expert analyst of holy war as waged against his own forces. Flagrant contravention of the Koranic principles of jihad? Au contraire. Between the Koran’s teachings against befriending Christians and Jews (noted above) and its teachings that it is a “grave sin for a Muslim to shirk the battle against the unbelievers,” as the scholar and critic Ibn Warraq explains (“those who do will roast in hell”), it is also perfectly Islamic to wage jihad against any and all infidel “education, development projects,” not to mention against Muslims not actively fighting or supporting jihad.14

Don’t just take my word for it. Back in 2003, the man who used to be described as Osama bin Laden’s “spiritual guide” castigated President Bush along similar lines, and rightly so. In response to Bush’s repeated slander of the religion of jihad as the “religion of peace,” Abu Qatada said, “I am astonished by President Bush when he claims there is nothing in the Koran that justifies jihad or violence in the name of Islam. Is he some kind of Islamic scholar? Has he ever actually read the Koran?”15

If Bush, or McChrystal for that matter, ever did crack the book, he read only the “good parts”—the 124 verses of tolerance—that are rendered meaningless according to the rule of “abrogation.” The rule of abrogation is the key that Islamic scholars use to resolve contradictions within the Koran. By means of this doctrine, Koranic passages are “abrogated,” or canceled, by any subsequently “revealed” verses that convey a different meaning. In other words, when there is a contradiction (e.g., don’t kill the infidel vs. yes, kill the infidel), whatever was “revealed” to Islam’s prophet, Mohammed, more recently trumps whatever was “revealed” before it. This technique comes from Mohammed himself at the Koran’s sura 2:105: “Whatever verses we [i.e., Allah] cancel or cause you to forget, we bring a better or its like.”

It’s a simple concept, unforgettable once taught—but our elected officials, our military and other security providers, our pundits and other public voices seem never to have learned it, much less explained it to the rest of us. Or worse, they are ignoring it on purpose. In this ignorant morass, then, We, the People are left on our own to make sense of misinformation and disinformation. Why? Why haven’t they sought and told the truth?

There are reasons. In his book What the Koran Really Says, Ibn Warraq explains that while abrogation resolves the abundant contradictions to be found in the Koran, it “does pose problems for apologists of Islam, since all the pas- sages preaching tolerance are found in Meccan (i.e., early) suras, and all the passages recommending killing, decapitating and maiming, the so-called Sword Verses, are Medinan (i.e., later).” His conclusion: “‘Tolerance’ has been abro- gated by ‘intolerance.’”16 Just to be clear: Islamic tolerance in the Koran has been canceled by Islamic intolerance in the Koran.

Like Coughlin’s slides and presentations, this fact contradicts the Big Lie at the root of the prevailing ideology: “Islam is a religion of peace.” Therefore, our leaders don’t want us to know it. They also don’t want to know it themselves. So they don’t, as the Kilcullen “surge” presentation and the McChrystal Afghanistan “assessment” demonstrate. Such knowledge would collapse their deceitful balloon of “universal” values, which rises on the hot air of “Kum-bay- a”-interchangeable sameness. Such a collapse would, in turn, doom the relativism, moral and cultural, that currently drives these same utopian fantasists to undermine liberty in their quest to order or even rule our world and beyond.

Suppression of the facts, then, becomes the only way to keep this enterprise of lies buoyant, something for which there is ample precedent in our past, as the pages ahead will show. Under both the Bush and Obama administrations, then, any fact-driven discussion of Islamic religious, legal, and historical imperatives to make holy war until the world is governed by Islam threatened this same enterprise and had to be, in effect, outlawed and later officially forbidden. “Cultural sensitivity” had to become the name of the game. Thus, as Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey wrote in April 2012, U.S. military programs must “exhibit the cultural sensitivity, respect for religion and intellectual balance that we should expect of our academic institutions.”17 In plain English: Whitewash Islam or else.

Why? And how did the whitewashing of Islam become the business of the United States government? This is another question that inspired this book. It is also a question which, true confession, has driven me to distraction for more than a decade. Sometimes I despair. Sometimes I play it for laughs, or at least revel a little in the absurdity. You have to. Imagine the following scenario coming across your desk: Kifah Mustapha, a known Hamas operative and unindicted coconspirator in the landmark Holy Land Foundation trial, gets invited into the top secret National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) and then to the FBI’s training center at Quantico.18 The auspices were a six-week “Citizens’ Academy” hosted by the FBI in 2010 as part of the agency’s “outreach” to the Muslim community.

You look at the story and rub your eyes. A Hamas operative? An unindicted coconspirator? Must they “reach out” quite so far? Here we see the U.S. offi- cials charged with fending off the jihad that Mustapha’s activities supported (as laid out in court documents filed by federal investigators) flinging open the doors to this man on their own terror watch lists. How could this even be happening?

“The plugs had to be pulled” on the watch system just to get Mustapha in the NCTC door, Patrick Poole wrote online at PJ Media, quoting a Department of Homeland Security official. After all, “the NCTC has Kifah Mustapha on the highest watch list we have.”19

Unbelievable. So who pulled those plugs? Wouldn’t it be great to get a bunch of national security pooh-bahs into one room and ask them?

It would be—and so it was. In September 2010, at a Washington conference on domestic intelligence, I took the opportunity to ask as many of these officials as possible this very question. First up was James Clapper, director of national intelligence, who would later make history, or, rather, antihistory, by proclaim- ing the Muslim Brotherhood to be a “largely secular organization.”20 During a question-and-answer session, I asked him about FBI “outreach” to Mustapha. “I think the FBI will be here later,” Clapper boldly punted (laughter in the room). Meanwhile, he continued, there is “great merit in outreach, to engage as much as possible with the Muslim community.” Subtext: Bringing a Hamas op into a top secret security installation is no big deal.

Between panels, I buttonholed panelist Sean Joyce, a senior official with the FBI. What did the FBI executive assistant director for national security think about the Mustapha incident?

“We don’t comment on individuals,” he told me.

OK. How about commenting on a blanket policy regarding FBI tours of sensitive installations for unindicted coconspirators and terrorist group operatives?

“Again, we don’t comment on individuals.”

It’s not every day that you notice a former director of the Central Intelligence Agency standing around, so I asked Michael Hayden for his overall opinion of the speak-no-Islam policy that let jihadists through the door. “People I trust”—uh-oh—”say to be careful not to use the term ‘jihadist’ because it does have a broader use across the Islamic world,” he said, referencing the definition of jihad as “inner struggle.”

Oh, please. This is another Grand Pulling of Wool over Infidel Eyes. Why? There is precisely one explicit reference in the Koran to jihad (“ja-ha-da”) “as an inner, spiritual phenomenon, not as an outwardly (usually military) phenome- non.” So writes Tina Magaard, a Sorbonne-trained linguist specializing in tex- tual analysis. “But,” she continues, “this sole reference does not carry much weight against the more than 50 references to actual armed struggle in the Ko- ran (and even more in the Hadith).”21

Unfortunately, I didn’t have a Magaard cheat sheet with me when I hap- pened on the former CIA director, so I just erupted, politely: So what? That doesn’t affect the accuracy of “jihadist” as a description of the enemy!

Then again, not using the word “Islamic,” he continued, “obfuscates the is- sue (and) neuters our understanding” of Islamic terrorism “however perverted it might be.” Hayden continued, meaningfully: “This is in no way a comment on the Islamic faith.”

Heaven forfend. The Islamic faith can inflict censorship, death for leaving Islam, marital rape, polygamy, and slavery on the world, but please, none of the above is in any way a comment on the Islamic faith. Or so the American “intelligence” community has determined. What we inadequately label “political correctness” has obfuscated and neutered fact-gathering and conclusion- drawing powers to the point where the “political correctness,” too, is obfus- cated. To wit: NCTC Director Michael Leiter next took the podium to address the conference and declared “there was no PC-ness” on his watch. “If someone is inspired by Islamic ideology—” he began, then stopped. “Let me rephrase that: al Qaeda ideology . . .”

Poor baby.

Later, I had an opportunity to ask Leiter what he thought about the FBI bringing Mustapha into NCTC. “Ask the FBI,” he suggested helpfully.

Isn’t NCTC your shop? I asked.

“Actually,” he explained, “the building isn’t owned by us. Three organiza- tions have offices there.”

When I picked myself up off the floor, he was still talking. “It’s more complicated—talk to the FBI. They’ve got a lot more information than I do.”

The FBI better be good, right? They should be prepared, anyway. Indeed, on taking my Mustapha question, FBI Director Robert Mueller, the confer- ence’s final speaker, said he’d been briefed to expect it. His response? “I’m not sure I agree with the predicate of your question, and we’re not going to debate it here.”

He continued discussing the Citizens’ Academy program, which he described as “exposing the FBI to a variety of communities.”

“Exposing” is right.

He, too, wouldn’t discuss individuals, he said, but added, “We do look into the individuals that we invite into the Citizens’ Academies.” The man who pulled the plugs had spoken, but he explained nothing. Soon, the FBI director would make his way out of the conference hall, his security detail in tow. And he drew himself up more proudly than ever, while the chamberlains walked behind him, bearing the train that wasn’t there.


West adds to the evidence of Muslim infiltration in our security agencies with this montage:

 

 

 

 

Muslim “refugees” secretly flooding into these U.S. states

Source: Refugees secretly flooding into these states

Despite more reports in recent weeks about Muslim “refugees” raping and attacking people in the U.S. and Europe, President Obama has ramped up his Syrian refugee program – delivering 625 to U.S. cities in one week and crossing the 6,000 mark for total Syrians who have entered the country since October.

With a little over two months before the Sept. 30 deadline to fulfill his promise to the United Nations to resettle 10,000 Syrians, Obama has delivered 6,227 Syrian migrants to 38 states and dozens of cities.

That means more than 1,000 have arrived just since July 1.

Of the 6,227 total who arrived since Oct. 1, 2015, only 23 have been Christian and 10 Yazidi. All the of the remaining 6,194 Syrians, more than 98 percent, have been Sunni Muslim. That’s the same sect that makes up the ranks of ISIS, al-Nusra Front and other groups that are viciously persecuting Christians in Syria.

Michigan, California, Arizona, Texas and Illinois are the top five states for numbers of Syrian refugees received so far in fiscal 2016. These refugees are hand-selected by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to be permanently resettled in the U.S.

Only 12 states and the District of Columbia have not received any Syrian refugees so far in fiscal 2016. Those states include Alaska, Alabama, Delaware, Arkansas, Hawaii, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, Wyoming and West Virginia.

Wyoming is the only state that does not participate in the federal refugee program. Montana has been among the states being eyed for future resettlement of Syrians. A resettlement office has been opened there but so far no Syrians have arrived.

More than 99 percent of the Syrians being permanently resettled in the U.S. are Muslim, with less than 1 percent being Christian.

The U.S. resettled 1,682 Syrians in fiscal year 2015 and only 105 in 2014.

The 10,000 Syrian refugees coming in fiscal 2016 are in addition to the 75,000 refugees being delivered to U.S. cities and towns from all other countries. They come from Somalia, Afghanistan, Sudan, Iraq, Burma, Bosnia, Congo and many other countries. The refugee drop-offs are done in almost total secrecy, often without the knowledge of even the mayor or schools superintendent.

WND reported last week that in Lowell, Massachusetts, a 13-year-old girl was twice groped at a public pool July 7 by a 22-year-old man freshly imported into the community from Syria as a “refugee.”

The city manager of Lowell told his local newspaper Tuesday that he was not even notified by the U.S. State Department or its resettlement contractor that Syrians were being delivered to his community.

Is your city a Syrian destination?

Cities receiving Syrian refugees over the past nine months include the following:

  • Arizona: Glendale, Tucson, Phoenix
  • California: San Diego, Sacramento, Los Angeles
  • Connecticut: New Haven, Hartford, New Britain, Stratford, West Haven
  • Florida: Tampa, Clearwater, Jacksonville, Del Ray Beach, Palm Beach, Miami, Orlando, Kissimmee, Lauderdale Lakes, Opa-Locka, Pensacola and Tallahassee
  • Georgia: Atlanta, Savannah, Stone Mountain, Marietta
  • Illinois: Chicago, Rockford, Aurora, Moline, Hickory Hills
  • Colorado: Denver and Thornton, Colorado
  • Idaho: Boise
  • Indiana: Indianapolis and Carmel
  • Des Moines: Iowa
  • Kansas: Kansas City and Wichita
  • Kentucky: Louisville and Lexington
  • Louisiana: New Orleans and Baton Rouge
  • Maine: Portland
  • Maryland: Baltimore, Riverdale, Ellicott City, Silver Spring
  • Massachusetts: Worcester, Springfield-West Springfield, Lowell, Westfield, Billerica
  • Michigan: Dearborn, Clinton Township, Detroit, Grand Rapids, Troy, Battle Creek, Ann Arbor, Bloomfield Hills, Bloomfield Township, W. Bloomfield Township, Madison Heights, Sterling Heights, Ypsilanti, Lansing
  • Minnesota: Minneapolis, Rochester and Savage
  • Missouri: Saint Louis, Columbia, Creve Coeur, Kansas City
  • Nebraska: Omaha
  • New Hampshire: Concord
  • New Mexico: Albuquerque
  • New York: Buffalo, Albany, Syracuse, Brooklyn, Utica, Rochester, New York
  • New Jersey: Elizabeth, Camden, Bellmawr, Hawthorne, Jersey City, Moorestown, Woodland Park and Paterson
  • Nevada: Las Vegas
  • North Carolina: High Point, Raleigh-Durham, Greensboro, Winston-Salem and Charlotte
  • Ohio: Columbus, Toledo and Cleveland
  • Oklahoma: Tulsa
  • Oregon: Portland and Beaverton
  • Pennsylvania: Erie, Philadelphia, Harrisburg and Pittsburgh
  • Rhode Island: Providence
  • South Carolina: Columbia
  • Tennessee: Nashville and Memphis
  • Texas: Dallas, Fort Worth, Austin, Houston, Plano, Sugar Land, Tomball and San Antonio
  • Utah: Salt Lake City
  • Virginia: Charlottesville, Newport News, Roanoke, Harrisonburg, Powhatan and Falls Church
  • Washington: Spokane, Seattle, Richland, Kent
  • Wisconsin: Oshkosh, Sheboygan, Milwaukee, Madison.

One city listed above that has received Syrian Muslims, Palm Beach, Florida just arrested 3 Muslims who had a Syrian contact.

Where Muslims migrate, mosques are built. Where mosques are, sharia and jihad are preached. Where sharia and jihad are preached, freedom of non-Muslims erodes quickly and terrorists are bred. Your town or city is next.

Obama finally finds a cop he likes…a Muslim, in White House Ramadan speech

Muslims chant “Four More Years!” at Obama’s Ramadan celebration in the White House.

muslims-pray-whitehouse-2016

Muslims praying in the Whitehouse via Twitter

Excerpts and fables from Obama’s alternative Muslim America via: Remarks by the President at Eid Reception | whitehouse.gov

This year, for my last year as President, I wanted to do something a little bit different, and I’m very proud to host this Eid celebration at the White House.

Today is also another reminder that Muslims have always been a part of America.  In colonial times, many of the slaves brought over from Africa were Muslim.  We insisted on freedom of religion, in Thomas Jefferson’s words, for, “the Jew and Gentile, the Christian and the Mahometan.”  For more than two centuries, Muslim Americans of all backgrounds — Arab and Asian, African and Latino, black and white — have helped build America as farmers and merchants, factory workers, architects, teachers and community leaders.

And Muslim Americans have enriched our lives every single day.  You’re the doctors we trust with our health, entrepreneurs who create jobs, artists who inspire us, activists for social justice — like the LGBT Muslims who are on the frontlines in the fight for equality.  (Applause.)  You’re the athletes that we cheer for — like American fencing champion Ibtihaj Muhammad — (applause) — who is going to be proudly wearing her hijab when she represents America at the Rio Olympics.  No pressure.  (Laughter.)

Muslim Americans help keep us safe.  You’re our firefighters, our police officers — like Deputy Police Chief Malik Aziz of the Dallas Police Department, who’s helping that community that is still grieving heal after the tragic attack against law enforcement in that city.  “There can be no actual progress unless we actually work together,” Malik has said.  “The police and the community must work together.  There is no us versus them.”  So we thank Malik for his outstanding service.  (Applause.)

AUDIENCE:  Four more years!  Four more years!

THE PRESIDENT:  No, no, no, no, no.  No, no.  Michelle is going to come down and scold you.  (Laughter.)  Don’t say that.

That’s the story of Aref and Aida Saad.  Where are they?  There you are way in the back.  You can see their hands.  In 1973, Aref and Aida decided to pack up their lives in Lebanon and come to America in search of a better life.  The couple settled down in Detroit, Michigan.  Aref spotted an opportunity — he started a distribution company that specialized in halal meat, to serve the growing Muslim population in Detroit.  Forty years later, it’s a thriving company.  And they’re now paying it forward — one of their daughters, Fayrouz, used to work in my administration — she now she works with the Detroit Mayor’s office helping to welcome today’s immigrants and refugees.  (Applause.)

So the Saads, they set a great example for new arrivals like Heba and Rahaf Alrahawan.  Heba and Rahaf, where are you?  There you are.  So back home in Syria, these two sisters watched as the growing violence leveled their neighborhood, demolished their home, destroyed their father’s car company.  And in 2012, their family fled Syria and spent four years in Malaysia as refugees.  Four months ago, they were able to come to Brooklyn to start their lives over.  In their first week, they signed up for English classes.  Heba works in a clothing store on the weekends, studies English during the weekdays — hopes to save enough money to enroll in college to study information technology.


Recap: They came and made food for Muslims. Probably hired Muslims. Their daughter grew up to work for the first Muslim president. Now she helps bring more Muslims to America. The Saad’s – they were imported to America, signed up for taxpayer funded English classes and then took a job from an existing American citizen in Brooklyn. Or was hired by a Muslim in a Muslim store that doesn’t hire Americans?

The video is not on the White House youtube page but on other sources: (see more videos in the Comments below h/t Martin)

The leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood front and unindicted co-conspirator to the largest terror financing conviction in U.S. history were in the White House.

isna-whitehouse-ramadan


Most Americans will never step foot in the White House, but Muslims including members of terror-linked groups have easy access.

Watchdog Files FOIA For Details on Obama’s “Jihad” Word-Purge

Or as one government whistle-blower calls it, “The Great Purge.”

Source: ACLJ Seeks Information from Obama Administration’s “Jihad” Word-Purge | American Center for Law and Justice

The Obama Administration, in lockstep with groups like Muslim Advocates and CAIR, is hamstringing our ability as a nation to combat jihadist terror. How? By prohibiting the use of “offensive” religious, legal, and cultural terms like “jihad,” “sharia,” “takfir” or “umma.”

That’s right. The government is honoring demands to “purge” these words from its “lexicon” – including law enforcement and intelligence training material and other government documents.

Today, the ACLJ filed new Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests in order to get to the bottom of these outrageous and dangerous policies. We sent these FOIA requests to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and six of its components, including ICE, TSA, Customs and Boarder Patrol, and the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. The records we requested will reveal who was involved in these decisions, what outside groups were influencing these decisions, when these decisions were made, and why. The American people need to know, and they deserve to know.

It became clear that a FOIA request was necessary when, on June 28, 2016, a Senate Judiciary subcommittee held a hearing entitled “Willful Blindness: Consequences of Agency Efforts To Deemphasize Radical Islam in Combating Terrorism.”

Continue reading

“Moderate” US-Backed Islamic Rebels Executing, Torturing, Kidnapping … and Imposing Sharia Law

Source: “Moderate” US-Backed Islamic Rebels Are Committing Summary Execution, Torture, Kidnapping … and Imposing Sharia Law | Zero Hedge

Spreading Democra … (cough) … Terrorism and Fundamentalist Islam

In a new report, Amnesty International documents war crimes by US-backed groups.

Ahrar al-Sham.  Secretary of State Kerry just said that this group is a “subgroup” of both ISIS and Al Nusra (Al Nusra is Al Qaeda).  Ahrar al-Sham is supported by close Western allies Saudi Arabia and Turkey (the latter is a NATO member).

The Amnesty report documents that Ahrar al-Sham:

  • Kidnapped children and placed them for long periods of time in solitary confinement, leading to hallucinations
  • Kidnapped a media activist for criticizing the extremist rebel group on Facebook and accusing it of corruption (he is still detained)
  • Confiscated the homes and stolen the belongings of Christians
  • Destroyed churches
  • Arrested and interrogated a woman just released by government forces for not wearing a veil, and repeatedly threatened to conduct a virginity test

Nour al-Din al-Zenki. This is a CIA-approved rebel group that has received TOW anti-tank missiles.

The Amnesty report documents that Nour al-Din al-Zenki:

  • Tortured journalists, humanitarian workers and media activists
  • For example, one humanitarian worker was abducted and tortured by for complaining about the misuse of funds in a hospital in Aleppo
  • Another media activist was kidnapped for criticizing “the unjust rule of some the armed groups [and issues] such as corruption” on Facebook. He said he heard people being tortured in other rooms while he was abducted
  • Abducted Christians

16th Division.  This group is backed by the U.S.

The Amnesty report documents that the 16th Division:

  • Tortured detainees
  • For example, an Arab man drove his female Kurdish neighbor to a dentist appointment in Aleppo. She was kidnapped at a checkpoint by the 16th Division.  The woman’s son went looking for her, and he disappeared as well

The Levant Front coalition. The Carnegie Endowment states that most of the rebel groups in the Levant Front coalition likely receive support from the Military Operations Center, a Turkey-based rebel facility that the U.S. helps operate with its allies.

The Amnesty report documents that the Levant Front:

  • Has carried out numerous summary killings through its Shria courts. Some have been “execution-style killings in front of crowds.”
  • The “Supreme Judicial Council” run by the Levant Front admitted to Amnesty that the punishment for apostasy – i.e. failing to conform to fundamentalist Islamic beliefs or practices – is execution. “Death sentences are carried out in the detention center according to Shari’a principles,” the deputy director said
  • Kidnapped people for complaining about corruption

Unfortunately, there is plenty of other evidence that US-backed Islamic “rebels” are really terrorists.

And there is overwhelming evidence that the U.S. or its closest allies are backing designated terrorist groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS in their quest to carry out regime change in Syria … again.


Keep in mind, Hillary Clinton was funding these groups back in 2012.

Terror-linked Muslim Group CAIR Met with Congress 325 Times in 2016

obamacair

Source: CAIR Met With Congress 325 Times in 2016

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a group identified by the Justice Department as a Muslim Brotherhood entity and designated as terrorists by the United Arab Emirates, boasts of having 325 meetings with members of Congress or their staff over the last year.

The group says it also enjoyed $3 million worth free advertising through media appearances this year alone, resulting in 50 million views of its work.

CAIR’s fundraising video boasts that there were 14,000 mentions of CAIR on radio or television this year alone, and that it has a database of 1.6 million media contacts to use. The organization said it has 65 trained spokespeople, 29 offices and 35 full-time lawyers.


Much of that on Fox News. Read it all.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 58,526 other followers

%d bloggers like this: