• Religion Of Peace

  • Archives

  • Muslim Mafia: The book CAIR wants banned – Order your copy now

  • Elisabeth was found guilty of hate speech crimes for speaking the truth about Islam. Click to donate to her legal defense fund

  • Categories

  • Meta

  • This blogsite / website is not the official website of ACT! for America, Inc. This blogsite / website is independently owned and operated by that ACT! for America chapter named on this site. The statements, positions, opinions and views expressed in this website, whether written, audible, or video, are those of the individuals and organizations making them and and do not necessarily represent the positions, views, and opinions of ACT! for America, Inc., its directors, officers, or agents. The sole official website of ACT! for America, Inc. is www.actforamerica.org
  • Statements, views, positions and opinions expressed in articles, columns, commentaries and blog posts, whether written, audible, or video, which are not the original work of the ACT! for America chapter that owns and operates this website / blogsite, and is named on this website / blogsite are not necessarily the views, positions, and opinions of the ACT! for America chapter that owns and operates this website / blogsite

Islam for Dummies: A Journalist ‘Guide’ Whitewashes Islam

by ANDREW E. HARROD

“[U]ninformed, inaccurate or consciously provocative journalism” concerning Islam worries Lawrence Pintak, founding dean of Washington State University’s Edward R. Murrow College of Communication.

Unfortunately, Pintak’s remedy to this problem, the online guide “Islam for Journalists” edited by Pintak, betrays an absurdly benign understanding of an Islam whose apparent only fault is being slandered by others.

“Across the Muslim world today,” Pintak’s introduction notes, “extremists are wielding their swords with grisly effect, but the pen…can be just as lethal.”

The 2012 “lewd cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad” in the French satire magazine Charlie Hebdo, for example, receive Pintak’s censure while, like many journalists today, he uncritically applies the honorific “Prophet” to Islam’s founder. Charlie Hebdo’s editor had condemned the weapons used in violent reactions to the anti-Muhammad “Innocence of Muslims” internet movie trailer preceding his cartoons. Yet the “weapon he controlled can do far more damage,” Pintak warned in equating speech with the violent reactions of others, then “evident in the conflagration…erupting across the Muslim world.”

Screenshot of the "Innocence of Muslims" portrayal of Muhammad. (Image: YouTube screenshot)

Screenshot of the “Innocence of Muslims” portrayal of Muhammad. (Image: YouTube screenshot) 

“A commitment to press freedom is in my blood,” Pintak qualified against suspicions of censorship. Yet speaking of the 2005 Danish Muhammad cartoons and their violent response, Pintak showed sympathy for those who refused their publication.

“[M]any Muslim journalists,” Pintak related in denying these “Motoons” any news value, “simply couldn’t understand why Western news organizations would republish the offensive images just because” of a legal right. Yet “journalism is not supposed to be a weapon” but rather “to inform, not inflame; to understand, not distort,” in contrast to “propaganda.”

The Danish cartoons exhibited “in our increasingly interconnected world,” writer Jonathan Lyons similarly relativized, “a number of central issues.” These included the “proper extent of press freedoms; minority rights; the shifting landscape of blasphemy laws and prohibitions; and the history of Muslim grievance toward the West.”

Rather than criticize Muslim rioters, Lyons complained that “almost no one reported on…the Danish media and its supporters as cynical provocateurs motivated by domestic political concerns.”

Beyond free speech controversies, “Islam for Journalists” favored Islam with numerous biased and false statements.

After discussing how Islam “roughly translates as ‘surrender’ or ‘submission’…to the will of Allah,” Pintak noted that Muhammad in Islam, “although he is not divine, he is considered ‘the Perfect Man.’”…

More

Sharia law coming to a swimming pool near you

by Michele Hickford

Photo: Kyndell Harkness/Star Tribune

…According to the report, during the hourlong swim practice, all other swimmers are cleared out of the pool. The men’s locker room is locked and female life guards are brought in. “I think this is just a great opportunity for them to learn basic skills that we take for granted,” said Sgt. Jennifer O’Donnell, who has worked with the Somali community regularly during her time with the department.

I would have thought that teaching the basic skills of liberty and freedom for all people would be a better lesson. Should we not instead be teaching these young girls that America is a land of equality of opportunity and they need not be castigated as a second class citizen?

Why is it that America must accept this cultural norm and the Somali community not accept ours? “We have to have privacy,” said Ubah Ali, who is the mother of 12 year old Rayan Dhamuke. During the past summer, the little girl had to visit the pool at 5 a.m. so that she would have the privacy she needed to enjoy the water while still adhering to her family’s cultural and religious beliefs.

This is how it subtly begins, the emotional tug to allow the young girl “privacy” to swim. Hani Hussein, who volunteers at the Al-Ihsan Islamic Center in St. Paul, said she looked into reserving public pools for girls, but it was too expensive.

You can only imagine the outcry from the ACLU and atheist organizations if a Christian group were advocating for “private” swim time. I thought our country struck down the concept of “separate but equal?”…

More

How the Muslim Brotherhood Is Winning in America

By Ryan Mauro

“…..Mauro: Do you believe the Islamists are capable of taking over the U.S. or soon will be? If not, then what is the threat this network poses?

Guandolo: It is clear they believe they have already won. They are waiting for the game clock to run out. Part of the problem in getting Americans to see the imminent threat is that they, like the U.S. security services, are completely focused on the kinetic stuff—bombings, shootings, etc. We need to worry about these, but it isn’t how they intend to defeat us.

The MB strategic plan says they are waging “Civilization Jihad” to destroy our civilization and that they will use our leaders to do their work for them (“by their hands and the hands of the believers”). When the U.S. wrote constitutions in Iraq and Afghanistan imposing sharia and created two Islamic Republics; that is civilization jihad by our hands.

When the MB launches a revolution, overthrows numerous governments and kills scores of people, our government calls it a “freedom movement” organized by “students on Twitter” and then proceeds to financially and materially support the MB in Egypt, and then Al-Qaeda/MB in Libya and Syria. That is “civilization jihad” by our hands.

When the Hamas and MB entities in America tell the White House they are “offended” over training about this movement and its doctrinal basis in sharia law and that training is shut down and replaced by training from MB organizations, that is “civilization jihad” by our hands.

I could go on, but I think your readers will get the point. As I see it, we’re five minutes into the first quarter of the football game. The MB is out on the field and they are winning 72-0. We are on the sidelines in baseball outfits wondering what inning it is.

The MB has a strategic plan and an operational plan to implement it. They are well-organized, well-funded and disciplined. They have thousands of organizations working daily to overthrow our governmental system and erode our society of the basic founding principles.

We cannot even speak about the threat for fear of offending our MB and Hamas advisers. Who do you think is going to win this war if it continues this way?”

Read the entire interview at http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/how-muslim-brotherhood-winning-america

How the Muslim Brotherhood Is Winning in America

Former FBI Agent John Guandolo: ‘We’re 5 minutes into the 1st quarter of the football game. The MB is winning 72-0.’

BY RYAN MAURO

 

Prominent Islamists in America: CAIR's National Communications Director and Spokesperson Ibrahim Hooper (left), Dalia Mogahed, Obama's advisor on Muslim affairs and Zaytuna founder and lecturer Zaid Shakir (far right). Background: federal agents involved in the investigation of the Holy Land Foundation.

….Mauro: Do you believe the Islamists are capable of taking over the U.S. or soon will be? If not, then what is the threat this network poses?

Guandolo: It is clear they believe they have already won. They are waiting for the game clock to run out. Part of the problem in getting Americans to see the imminent threat is that they, like the U.S. security services, are completely focused on the kinetic stuff—bombings, shootings, etc. We need to worry about these, but it isn’t how they intend to defeat us.

The MB strategic plan says they are waging “Civilization Jihad” to destroy our civilization and that they will use our leaders to do their work for them (“by their hands and the hands of the believers”). When the U.S. wrote constitutions in Iraq and Afghanistan imposing sharia and created two Islamic Republics; that is civilization jihad by our hands.

When the MB launches a revolution, overthrows numerous governments and kills scores of people, our government calls it a “freedom movement” organized by “students on Twitter” and then proceeds to financially and materially support the MB in Egypt, and then Al-Qaeda/MB in Libya and Syria. That is “civilization jihad” byour hands.

When the Hamas and MB entities in America tell the White House they are “offended” over training about this movement and its doctrinal basis in sharia law and that training is shut down and replaced by training from MB organizations, that is “civilizationjihad” by our hands.

I could go on, but I think your readers will get the point. As I see it, we’re five minutes into the first quarter of the football game. The MB is out on the field and they are winning 72-0. We are on the sidelines in baseball outfits wondering what inning it is.

The MB has a strategic plan and an operational plan to implement it. They are well-organized, well-funded and disciplined. They have thousands of organizations working daily to overthrow our governmental system and erode our society of the basic founding principles.

We cannot even speak about the threat for fear of offending our MB and Hamas advisers. Who do you think is going to win this war if it continues this way?

More

The Battle of the Burqa

By Enza Ferreri

clBritain is reaping the fruits of its multi-decennial multicultural policy. What is euphemistically called “tolerance” – and realistically “bending over backwards” – to Islam is showing its unwelcome effects.

If anyone doubts that Muhammadanism is a supremacist doctrine, this doubting Thomas should take a look at what’s happening in an English school currently in the news.

Britain’s first Muslim “free school” (that is, government-funded but outside local authority control), Al-Madinah School in the city of Derby, underwent a two-day (October 1-2) inspection by officials of the government’s education regulator Ofsted. The school has been shut during and after the inspection by its Principal allegedly “owing to a health and safety issue.”

This is how Al-Madinah describes itself:

A strong Muslim ethos will give the school its uniqueness… At the center of our school is a community of pupils, able to enjoy learning in a caring Islamic environment.

The school is said to be controlled by Islamic hardliners who ban children from playing stringed instruments (forbidden by Islam), singing, except Islamic faith songs, and reading fairy tales, as these are “non-Islamic.”

The school’s former head Andrew Cutts-McKay and former deputy Suzanne Southerland claim they were “bullied, sidelined” and forced to leave by members of the school’s trust, which is predominantly Muslim….

 

….It’s clear that a certain discontent with Islamic dress is growing in Europe. France in 2011 banned Muslim as well as non-Muslim face-covering clothing because it prevents the identification of a person, on the grounds of both security and social communication.

Ban opponents claim it breaches individual freedoms. It does, and so does having a number plate on your vehicle, so if you want to use your car for a get-away after a bank robbery you can’t. That’s a limitation on personal freedom we all must accept in order to live in a civilized society.

The French concern is totally justified. In June this year six men in burqasraided London’s Selfridges department store, smashing glass cabinets and stealing high-value watches.

The same ban was attempted in Britain in 2010 with Conservative MP Philip Hollobone’s bill, unsuccessful due to claims that it would breach the Equality Act.

Two weeks ago the Italian Swiss canton of Ticino voted in favour of a burqa ban.

It will be a difficult battle, with two steps forward and one step back. In France the ban has caused riots and violence. Back in Britain, the city of Birmingham’s Metropolitan College, which had for some time had a policy forcing students to remove veils, hoodies and hats while on its premises to be identifiable for security reasons, was made to retract it in September by a planned mass demonstration against “’Islamophobia” and an online petition signed by 9,000. A prospective student started the row by complaining to her local paper that she was being discriminated against.

While the debate over female Muslim attire has in recent weeks dominated UK headlines, a student in South London’s Bromley College, asked to remove her cap for identification and security reasons, refused to do so unless Muslim women removed their headdresses too, rightly complaining of double standards.

When defending their presumed “right” to act like Muslims, the followers of Muhammad sometimes let their guard down and reveal something about themselves.

Britain’s Home Office Minister Jeremy Browne, pointing out that the government should consider an Islamic dress ban, did something that you don’t see often. Very timidly, he hinted at reciprocity, a thorny issue for Muslim sensitivities, by saying:

That would apply to Christian minorities in the Middle East just as much as religious minorities here in Britain.

The chief executive of the Ramadhan Foundation Mohammed Shafiq responded that he was “disgusted” by Browne’s comments.

What disgusted him? The proposed, very mild exception to the kid-glove treatment that Muslims receive over here or the slight indication that Christians should not be massacred over there?

More

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,627 other followers

%d bloggers like this: