Obama Has Imported 6,726 Syrian Muslims to U.S. in FY16, Only 23 Christians

Less than one-half of one-percent. Taxation for Islamization! The same Islamo-policy is causing death and destruction in France and Germany and every other country where the unvetted Muslims invade. In the U.S., rapes and threats of rapes by Muslim invaders are increasing  (Idaho, Mass., Minn., N.Y. to name a few).

refugee-terrorSource: 6,726 Syrian Refugees Admitted to U.S. So Far in FY16–But Only 23 Are Christians

With ten weeks to go until the end of the fiscal year, the Obama administration continues to admit Syrian refugees at an accelerated pace, and has now exceeded two-thirds of President Obama’s target of 10,000 by September 30.

The proportion of Christians among those resettled continues to languish below half of one percent, while other non-Sunnis account for just over one percent.

As of Monday, 1,515 Syrian refugees fleeing the civil war in their homeland had been admitted since the beginning of July, and a total of 6,726 since FY 2016 began on October 1, according to State Department Refugee Processing Center data.

Of the July arrivals, 1,501 (99.0 percent) were Sunnis, and three (0.19 percent) were Christians. The other 11 (0.72 percent) were other Muslims.

Of the 6,726 total Syrian refugee arrivals since the beginning of FY 2016, 6,625 (98.4 percent) were Sunnis and 23 (0.3 percent) were Christians – including 15 described simply as “Christian,” five Catholics, two Orthodox and one Greek Orthodox adherent.

The remaining 78 (1.1 percent) comprised 49 refugees described in the data simply as “Moslem,” 17 Shi’a Muslims, 10 Yazidis, one of “no religion” and one “other religion.”

To reach its 10,000 target by September 30, the administration will need to admit average of 1,597 each month for July, August and September. With a week of this month to go, and 1,515 admitted as of early Monday, the July target looks to be easily within reach.

Of the 1,515 refugees from Syria admitted since the beginning of July, 363 (23.9 percent) are men between the ages of 14 and 50, another 322 (21.2 percent) are women aged 14-50, and 784 (51.7 percent) are children aged under 14 – 371 boys and 413 girls.

Their ethnic breakdown is: 1,472 Arabs, 22 Kurds, 18 Turkmen and three Armenians.

Of the 6,726 admitted since in FY 2016, 1,661 (24.6 percent) are men 14-50, while 1,537 (22.8 percent) are women aged 14-50. Another 3,240 (48.1 percent) are children aged under 14, made up of 1,658 boys and 1,582 girls.

Of the 6,726, 6,159 are Arabs, 497 are Kurds, 49 are Turkmen, four are Turks, three are Armenian, two are Syriac, one is Assyrian and 11 are “other.”

The 6,726 Syrian refugees have been resettled across the nation, with the largest groups going to Michigan (782), California (603), Arizona (512), Texas (471), Pennsylvania (429), Illinois (421), New York (367), Florida (329), North Carolina (312) and Ohio (305).


By design, the Muslim world has not taken any of their own refugees. This is by design.

islam-refugee-invasion

 

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.

Corporate America is Allowing Sharia to Creep In

We would re-title this, Corporate America – Led by Big Media – is Ushering in Sharia. And Obama is enforcing it. Just another form of jihad.

 

Excerpt via: Counter Jihad

Muslims make up only one percent of the population, but file 40% of workplace discrimination complaints.

The authors in the Bloomberg article reveal information that shows the strength of Muslim activism in trying to transform America through litigation – especially that of the workplace to become more sharia compliant.  The Bloomberg article states:

While people who practice Islam make up only about 1 percent of the U.S. population, some 40 percent of religion-based workplace complaints filed with the U.S. Equal Opportunity Employment Commission last year were related to Muslims. The agency has pursued a wide range of disputes, including whether Muslims can be fired for refusing to handle pork or alcohol at work. In many instances, the courts have said they cannot.

It’s shocking that such a small fraction of the U.S. population are exerting so outsized an influence.  What should businesses do – cater to Muslim religious demands in order to avoid complaints?  The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) states, “An employer does not have to accommodate an employee’s religious beliefs or practices if doing so would cause undue hardship to the employer.”  Furthermore, trying to pacify sharia compliant Muslims is useless, since sharia is an all-encompassing ideology that dictates not just clothing and diet but includes rules for speech, prayer, banking, commerce, etc. The Bloomberg article gives a short list of how some companies are furthering this gradual sharia agenda:

JPMorgan Chase & Co. provides transportation to mosques, and other places of worship, for employees in offices not big enough to have prayer rooms. Alcohol wasn’t served at a recent party at a New York architecture firm because a new staff member who’s [sic] Muslim wouldn’t feel comfortable attending if it were, according to the office manager, asking not to be named because he’s not authorized to speak publicly about the firm. At Accenture Plc, the corporate calendar is organized to prevent events from conflicting with Muslim holidays, as well as those of other faiths.

In addition, “[o]ne goal of the Horizon Blue Cross and Blue Shield Q&A session in Newark last year was to dispel concerns that Islam is a dangerous faith[.]” Since, when did it become the job of a health insurance network to advocate for Islamic apologetics?  Is that not the job of clerics and believers of the faith?  For that matter, when did employers become a free taxi service to the local “place of worship”?

We have seen accommodations for Muslim employees played out in businesses such as prayer rooms, prayer breaks, reassignments when faced with pork and alcohol products, permitting Islamic clothing and facial hair, and in many other areas. Some U.S. companies are willing to go to outstanding lengths to appease one percent of the U.S. population because some Muslim activists shout the loudest. Corporate America needs to say “No!” to more sharia.


Check out Bloomberg’s Carol Hymowitz repeat the Muslim victimization non-sense in the link above.

PS: Wait until Muslims are 10% of the U.S. population. 20%. 30%!

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.

5-Year-Old Idaho Victim Raped By Muslim Migrants Still Being Terrorized

…by city and state officials and Muslim refugees including at least one of the perpetrators.

Source: Exclusive – Pamela Geller: Hospital Refuses to Release Medical Records of Five-Year-Old Idaho Victim Raped By Muslim Migrants – Breitbart

A five-year-old girl was raped and urinated upon by three Muslim migrant boys in Twin Falls, Idaho; one of them, a 14-year-old, videotaped the attack. After the attack, instead of getting justice, the victim’s family has been abused and targeted by law enforcement and medical authorities as if they were the criminals. The mother cannot get copies of the medical records of her own child, or transcripts of 9-1-1 calls made on the day of the attack.

In examining notes taken of their conversations with the victim’s mother, I was taken aback by how contemptuous they are of her. They talk down to her, as if she were the perpetrator, not the mother of the victim of this monstrous attack.

It is outrageous. And it gets worse. The supposedly seven-year-old rapist who put his penis in the girl’s mouth, urinated on her and in her mouth, and who reportedly owned the blue pocket knife that he used to threaten her, was never even removed from his home. That family still lives next door to the victim. For the longest time, the attacker wasn’t even limited in his access to the community’s children; now he must be supervised by someone 14 years old or older. When they stipulated this, the court had to have been aware that the boy who videotaped the rape was 14. This a gross insult against this victimized family — and a direct result of a judge’s decision.

Meanwhile, the neighbor of the family who caught the perpetrators in the act, an elderly woman known to all as “Grandma Jo,” has been living in constant terror since she first happened upon the grisly scene. She has been stalked by the Iraqi family of the seven-year-old attacker. Her apartment is back-to-back with theirs; they peer into her windows and pace back and forth in front of her apartment in a clearly menacing manner.

The victim’s family has received no assistance — no financial aid from federal or state programs to help them relocate. It is almost impossible to find a place to rent because of the housing shortage due to the sudden crush of refugees. Rents have gone way up as well. The five-year-old rape victim is still living next door to the ringleader of the Muslim mob that raped her. She is terrified and won’t leave the house, as the attacker’s family members walk by the victim’s family’s windows and taunt them.

The poor girl desperately does want to play outside, but it isn’t safe to do so without parental supervision. Recently a carload of Muslim males pulled up in front of mother and daughter. The car stopped and its occupants stared them down. The mother witnessed one of the males run into the house and get something that appeared cylinder-like: at the time she was afraid it was a gun. Moments later, their house was being struck by bottle rockets. This isn’t an isolated case in Twin Falls, as there have been other reports of American homeowners having their homes struck by bottle rockets. And let’s be serious: these people are not celebrating the Fourth of July or Americanism.

The prosecuting attorney has gone out of his way to imply that this rape was false information. His interviews have led the media and public officials to deny clear facts of the case. The U.S. Attorney for Idaho even vowed to charge anyone who made false statements about the perps. The Hamas-tied Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has whined that the case has become “a lightning rod for anti-Muslim, and anti-refugee sentiments.”

A source close to this horrifying case has struck back against the disinformation being propagated in the case, and sent me a complete time line of events. So here at last is what really happened, straight from someone who was deeply involved the whole time.

On Thursday, June 2, 2016, the little girl was assaulted by Muslim migrant boys: two Sudanese boys aged around 10 and 14, one Iraqi boy around seven years old. The girl said that they used a knife and dragged her to an apartment laundry room at Fawnbrook apartments in Twin Falls. They were caught in the act by a neighbor — Grandma Jo. According to Grandma Jo, when she opened the laundry room door, she saw two boys standing over the naked victim, urinating on her and “pulling” themselves. She told the attackers to get dressed. Then she helped the victim get dressed (in her urine-soaked clothing). A neighbor arrived to help, and the victim was taken to her family apartment. Her maternal grandmother arrived, the girl was washed and dressed, and the family called 911 three times.

Before the police arrived, the 14-year-old attacker disappeared. Eventually, Twin Falls County Sheriff personnel arrived, as well as police. They took statements. The two attackers who could be found were “scolded” and told to obey Grandma Jo. The police warned them to be good or they would come get them in a large school bus and take them to jail; they were told to obey Grandma Jo in order to avoid this.

That evening, the little girl was taken to the Emergency Room at Saint Luke’s Hospital, where she was examined for rape and blood work was taken. The girl’s parents say that at Children at Risk Evaluation Services (CARES), she was examined by a Dr. Reese. She was told to go for second evaluation on June 6 with CARES doctors. It is unclear if at this or any other time the assailants were frisked, examined, or subjected to blood or urine tests. They were not restrained or removed from their homes.

The next day, two police detectives interviewed Grandma Jo in her home. A police detective, J. R. Paredez, brought the victim a stuffed toy.

On Monday, June 6, CARES interviewed the little girl while Detective Paredez and two counselors watched. Photographic evidence was taken of what was taken at the time by the girl’s parents and a doctor to be a cut on her neck, as well as of her private area. Days later, however, the girl’s mother called CARES for an update and was told that the neck cut was actually just a scratch, and that this was determined by “blood vessel” appearance – an evaluation based on examination of a photo, not a reexamination of the victim.

The family put the victim in a day-care center in order to remove her from proximity to the perpetrators, who continued to run unrestrained in the complex. The victim’s family is poor; their sister-in-law paid the center’s $500 bill.

On June 7, KMVT, a local TV news station, published a Facebook news story on possible sexual assault at Fawnbrook.    

Six days later, on June 13, citizens address the Twin Falls City Council during “public input” to question them about the rape of the child. The next day, a collection was taken up for the girl’s family; they were presented with the money on June 15.

On June 16, the Prosecuting Attorney’s office called the family while the supporter who had taken up the collection for them was visiting their home. Both parents spoke to Janice Kroeger, the Senior Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, and told her that they wanted the attackers prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

The next day, a detective called the family at 11:45 a.m. to say that warrants would be issued for the arrest of the attackers, but time was needed to process them. The family was fearful of backlash from the families of the perpetrators. Several individuals began video surveillance of the area.


Note: On the morning of June 18, Creeping Sharia posted on the rape based on a tip, and hundreds of other sites – large and small – ran with it. The only apparent misstatement was the nationality of the perpetrators – Iraqi/Sudanese not Syrian. Everything else has been corroborated. Readers – keep sending tips and links. Article continues below.


On Saturday, June 18, two of the perpetrators, both Sudanese Muslim migrants, were arrested. Kroeger called the victim’s family from the Prosecuting Attorney’s office to tell them that the arraignment would be Monday, June 20, at 1:00 p.m. The father of the victim told Kroeger that the family insisted on being involved in all the hearings. Curiously, Kroeger questioned his interest in the case. Continue reading

New ‘Islamophobia’ Report Authors Linked to Hamas Terrorists

Islamofauxbia. The “report” is a hitlist and incitement to murder.

Excerpts from: New Islamophobia Report: Authors Linked to Hamas

A new report on the so-called “Islamophobia Network” has been released, authored by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the leader of American Muslims for Palestine — two groups with ties to Hamas financiers and a vivid history of extremism, slander and deception.

Here are three facts about the authors:

Both are linked to Hamas financiers based on prosecutions by the U.S. government.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), as explained in our factsheet, has a history of Islamist extremism including links to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. In fact, the Justice Department labeled CAIR an “unindicted co-conspirator” in a Hamas-financing trial and listed CAIR as a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity.

The other official author is the University of California-Berkeley Center for Race and Gender. If you look more closely, you’ll see that the responsible section of the center is the Islamophobia Research and Documentation Project. So, who was the real author from the University’s staff?

The aforementioned project is led by Dr. Hatem Bazian, chairman of American Muslims for Palestine (AMP), co-founder of Zaytuna College and co-founder of Students for Justice in Palestine. Click either of those two links to learn about the history of Bazian and his organization.

Bazian’s AMP has extensive links to the same Brotherhood/Hamas circle that CAIR does.

It is their financing that is suspect.

It is CAIR and AMP, not the “Islamophobia Network,” that is closely associated with extremist and even terrorist financing.

They believe in lying and media manipulation.

Islamist groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas lie all the time. Islamist texts regularly justify or even mandate deception, particularly when dealing with perceived adversaries of the Muslim world (as they surely view the “Islamophobia Network”).

Two of CAIR’s founders, including its current executive director, were at a secret Hamas/Muslim Brotherhood meeting in Philadelphia in 1993. The transcripts show the participants, including one of CAIR’s co-founders, emphasizing using deception to influence American public opinion and how to play tricks with semantics. There was no room for interpretation.


Read it all at clarionproject.org and demand major media stop using Hamas-CAIR to lie to the American public and put us all at further risk of Islamic terror.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 58,530 other followers

%d bloggers like this: