Australia: Muslim rioter refuses to stand for judge, tells police officer “You’re not a lady, you’re f…ing filth”

By Robert Spencer

He doesn’t recognize the authority of non-Muslims. Pamela Geller asks the key question: “My question is, why would anyone who regarded their system of governance (no matter how savage) superior to the country in which they are living — be allowed to remain? It is treason. They should be thrown out.”

“Accused rioter Mohammed Issai Issaka berated in court after refusing to stand for Magistrate Jacqueline Milledge,” by Peter Bodkin for The Daily Telegraph, May 20 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

A MAN accused of rioting during last year’s violent Muslim protests has been berated for his “disrespect” after refusing to stand before a magistrate at his court hearing.Mohammed Issai Issaka, who was charged with riot, assaulting police and resisting arrest over the September incident, this morning said his religious beliefs stopped him for rising for the court – the standard practice whenever a judge or magistrate enters or leaves.

Magistrate Jacqueline Milledge repeatedly demanded Issaka stand for her, telling him she didn’t accept his refusal.

“You can tell me where it is in his religion that it says he cannot stand,” she said to Issaka’s lawyer, Stephen Hopper.

“I was a magistrate at Bankstown Court for four years and I have never had to deal with such disrespect.”

The hearing had to be postponed for nearly half an hour after the prosecution and defence consulted Ms Milledge, with the case eventually continuing after Issaka waited outside the courtroom as everyone stood for the magistrate.

Constable Allan Simon, who helped arrest Issaka during the CBD protests, told the court he first noticed the man take a “boxer stance” in front of a police line, where he was “jerking backwards and forwards” and “hissing” at the officers’ dogs.

He said he next saw the accused rioter about 15 minutes later when he was violently lashing out at riot squad police.

“There was like a running jump-kick at the (officers’) shields and he was punching the shields,” he said….

More

More Secrets From Huma Abedin

By Arnold Ahlert

“….Abedin is anything but a common government employee. While the mainstream media remains temporarily focused on Abedin’s role with regard to her husband’s political campaign, it remains calculatingly incurious about her work with the William Jefferson Clinton Foundation, and the tens of millions of dollars in donations it has received from such entities as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the governments of Kuwait and Qatar, Saudi businessman Nasser Al-Rashid, who has close ties to the Saudi royal family, Sheikh Mohammed H. Al-Amoudi, reputed to be one of the richest men in the world, and a group called Friends of Saudi Arabia and the Dubai Foundation.

Abedin’s earlier career also remains below the radar as well. She began working with Hillary Clinton in 1996, as the then-First Lady’s intern. She remained a loyal staffer as Clinton transitioned to the Senate, and the State Department.

During part of that time, Abedin had another job as well. From 1996-2008, she also worked as assistant editor of the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs(JMMA), a publication founded by Abdullah Omar Naseef.

Naseef was also secretary general of the Muslim World League in Saudi Arabia, a highly significant Muslim Brotherhood organization Osama Bin Laden once characterized as one of his terrorist group’s chief funding sources.

Using that connection, Naseef founded the Rabita Trust, a designated terrorist organization. In the late seventies, he hired Abedin’s parents to run his newly formed Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs (IMMA). Editing its journal has remained a family enterprise to this day, and Naseef’s tenure as a member of the journal’s advisory editorial board, seven years of which coincided with Huma’s Abedin’s tenure there, lasted until 2003–the same year he was named as a defendant in a civil case brought by victims of 9/11. Naseef was dropped from the suit in 2010, when a court decided it lacked jurisdiction over him.

Dr. Saleha Abedin, Huma’s mother, still edits the JMMA. She took over when Huma’s father, Syed Zainul Abedin, passed away. Both of Abedin’s parents, as well as her brother, Hassan Abedin, have deep, documented ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. Furthermore, her mother runs the International Islamic Committee for Woman and Child, which is part of yet another terror-designated organization known as the Union of Good.

It remains impossible to understand how Abedin received security clearance to work at the State Department, which allows her access to top-secret documents. Even if one makes the case that she should not be tainted by the dubious relationships maintained by her family members, it is impossible to disassociate her from her own relationship with Abdullah Omar Naseef and his organization.

Yet in a testament to the power of PC-inspired denial, when these and other sordid relationships were documented in a letter sent by Reps. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), Louie Gohmert (R-TX), Trent Franks (R-AZ), Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA), and Tom Rooney (R-FL) to the State Department’s Deputy Inspector General, politicians in both parties, as well as the mainstream media, accused Bachmann of engaging in a McCarthy-esque smear campaign.

The letter to the Inspector General was sent in June, the same month Abedin relinquished her position as deputy chief of staff. Whether one assumes this to be a mere coincidence or not, there is no denying that Abedin’s change in status was kept secret for nearly a year. The Obama administration could quickly put an end to this controversy by revealing the contents of Abedin’s responses contained in Standard Form 86, a “Questionnaire for National Security Positions.” That questionnaire should have been completed prior to Abedin serving in her capacity at State beginning in 2009.

No doubt a State Department up to its neck in the Benghazi scandal is too busy to respond.”

More

Brussels: European capital or Islamic center?

By Michael Curtis

Brussels as the headquarters of the European Union is the nominal “capital of Europe.”  One would expect the city to be the center of enlightenment—the exemplification of political and social tolerance and freedom of speech, assembly and religion, not to mention an advocate of human rights.  Disappointingly, recent events have shown that Brussels has increasingly become a place of lies, deliberate disinformation, political manipulation, anti-Semitism and attacks on Israel.

Recent developments, particularly Islamist political as well as physical aggressiveness, justify this sad conclusion.  One is the election in November 2012 of two Muslim politicians of the new Islam Party, Lhoucine Ait Jeddig and Redouane Ahrouch, who won seats in two of the 20 municipalities of Brussels, Molenbeek-Saint-Jean and Anderlecht.  Considering  their unqualified stated objective to make Belgians understand the advantages of having Islamic people and Islamic laws, their assertion that “then[,] it will be completely natural to have Islamic laws and we will become an Islamic state” is quite chilling.

The Islam Party intends to continue running candidates in future Belgian and European-wide elections.  It is likely to gain further successes because of demographic changes in the country.  Calculations suggest that Muslims in Belgium now number 625,000, more than six percent of the total population.  Brussels contains 300,000 Muslims—more than a quarter of its population.  It is now the largest Islamic city in Europe; by 2030 it will, according to the sociologist Felice Dassetto in her book “The Iris and the Crescent,” probably have a Muslim majority.

The heavily Muslim-populated districts of Brussels have become troubled areas, experiencing a considerable increase in crime, including about 250 gang rapes a year since 2007.  For some years, these areas have been arenas of violence: in the riots of September 2009, the Muslim inhabitants attacked the Belgian police with Molotov cocktails, stones, and tear gas.

Among other consequences of this violence, the U.S. advertising agency BBDO in June 2011 left its offices in the Molenbeek district of Brussels after stating that there had been more than 150 assaults on its staff. Other multinational corporations left the area for similar reasons.

Simultaneously with its declaration that its ultimate goal was to establish Shariah law in Belgium, the Islam Party issued three main immediate demands: halal meals in public cafeterias, national recognition of Muslim holidays and insistence that all women publicly wear hijab coverings.  The danger of that ultimate goal of the Islamic extremists has now been recognized publicly in March by the Belgian foreign minister, Didier Reynders.  He made a point of saying he was not critical of moderate Islam views but was calling for more monitoring of the messages that some imams in Belgium, about 300 of whom obtain state subsidies, are preaching in their mosques.  He drew attention to those imams or other types of preachers “who adhere to more salafist and fundamentalist views, or who support radical movements, instead of having more moderate views.”

Reynders, member of the Mouvement Réformateur, the largest Francophone party in Belgium, described his personal encounter with Islamic intolerance.  When he and other Belgian officials met in April 2012 with Abdellah Benkiran, the Muslim Brotherhood prime minister of Morocco, the latter refused to speak with Reynders’s colleague, Annemie Turtelboom, the Belgian minister of justice, because she is a woman.

Reynders is conscious of the same problem in Belgium.  Muslim leaders have refused even to shake hands with women, including a local mayor, or to mix with women in public transport.

The problem is immediate and growing.  In Antwerp, a majority of elementary school children are Muslims.  The most common name for boys born in Belgium during the last few years is Mohammed.  The country has witnessed an increase in the number of mosques and minarets, more veiled women in public, and more extreme salafist Islamic organizations.  The Muslim politicians and imams want to implement Islamic Shariah law throughout Belgium…

More

Homeland Security guidelines advise deference to pro-Sharia Islamic supremacists

By Robert Spencer

Just more of the same from the Obama Administration. “Homeland Security guidelines advise deference to pro-Shariah Muslim supremacists,” by Charles C. Johnson in the Daily Caller, May 17:

The Department of Homeland Security, which under Secretary Janet Napolitano has shown a keen interest in monitoring and warning about outspoken conservatives, takes a very different approach in monitoring political Islamists, according to a 2011 memo on protecting the free speech rights of pro-Shariah Muslim supremacists.In a checklist obtained by The Daily Caller entitled “Countering Violent Extremism Dos and Don’ts” the DHS’s Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties notifies local and national law enforcement officials that it is Obama administration policy to consider specifically Islamic criticism of the American system of government legitimate….

More

Informed and Determined

By Citizen Warrior

….”Kaibar, Khaibar” was chanted at that rally and “many others,” writes Katz. “It echoed all over the country, as Israeli flags burned in the background, from Florida to Texas, New York to California, and back to Washington, DC. To an outsider, this chant, ‘Khaibar, Khaibar, Ya Yahud, Jaish Muhammad Safayood,’ sounded perhaps like a cheerful freedom song. Many journalists told me that this was what they thought they were hearing. But its meaning is somewhat different: ‘Khaibar, Khaibar, O Jews, the army of Muhammad is coming for you.’ This song originates in a tale from the days of the Prophet Muhammad. As part of his campaign to conquer the Arabian peninsula, Muhammad laid siege to the city of Khaibar, which was inhabited by Jews. After losing several battles to the city’s powerful army, Muhammad decided to try a new tactic. He sent emissaries to Khaibar’s leaders with a message of peace. As soon as a peace treaty was signed and the gates of the city were opened, Jaish Muhammad, Muhammad’s army, stormed the city and butchered every last one of its inhabitants. ‘Khaibar, Khaibar’ means, ‘Let’s trick the Jews into making peace with us, and when they accept our offer, let’s go ahead and kill them all.’”

Do the journalists know this bit of Islamic history? Do they know that it says 91 times in the Koran that Muslims are required to follow Muhammad’s example in every particular? I doubt if one in a thousand knows even that much.

Those of us who have been awakened to the terrifying brilliance of Islam need to step up our game. Our educational campaign needs to be effective and unrelenting. We’re in a race against time. Orthodox Muslims are infiltrating and multiplying. The only thing that can put a stop to them is an informed and determined population of non-Muslims. And the only way our fellow non-Muslims are going to be informed is by hearing it from those who already know. That’s us. They’re not going to hear it at school, in the media, or from politicians. It’s just us.

But we’ve got to be smart about this, not simply passionate. We have to think in terms of small bits and long campaigns. We have to gain and maintain rapport. And we should use the effective tools we have at our disposal. If we do this, we can win.

More