• Religion Of Peace

  • Archives

  • 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

Gradualism: The Strategy of the Tortoise

by LINDA GOUDSMIT

…Islamic law unambiguously splits the world into two perpetually warring halves-the Islamic world versus the non-Islamic-and holds it to be God’s will for the former to subsume the latter. Yet if war with the infidel is a perpetual affair, if war is deceit, and if deeds are justified by intentions-any number of Muslims will naturally conclude that they have a divinely sanctioned right to deceive, so long as they believe their deception serves to aid Islam ‘until all chaos ceases, and all religion belongs to God.’ Such deception will further be seen as a means to an altruistic end.”  

Central to understanding taqiyya and the principles of deceit is Muhammad’s famous utterance “War is deceit.” 

According to Islam the world is still at war so deception is fully endorsed and has extreme implications for our new President Donald Trump. If President Trump intends to make America-first decisions in the Middle East he needs a translator because the Arab leaders speak “Islamic” English and not the same English that President Trump is speaking. Words like peace, terrorism, and extremism have very different meanings in the West than they do in the Middle East. 

Former FBI counterterrorism special agent John Guandolo gives a brilliant explanation of the challenges President Trump is facing in his report: 

“In his speech, which preceded President Trump’s comments, Saudi King Salman made many references to “terrorism” and “extremism” and the need to eradicate it from the planet.  Specifically, he said the world must  “stand united to fight the forces of evil and extremism whatever their sources are in response to the dictates of our Islamic religion…Terrorism is a result of extremism.”

When muslim leaders use words, those words must be understood as they are defined in Islam, not as they are understood in the West.

“Terrorism” is defined in Islam as “killing a muslim without right.” Under sharia muslims may be killed if they apostasize from Islam, kill another muslim without right, or if they violate any other law under sharia for which there is a capital crime. Otherwise, to kill a muslim is to be a “terrorist.”

“Extremism” in Islam is to exceed ones ability – to move the Islamic Movement ahead too quickly, thus putting the muslim ummah (global muslim community) in danger because this risks losing muslims who do not understand their duties under sharia and exposing Islam’s true intentions to the non-muslim community thus bringing violence upon muslims – terrorism….

Read more: Family Security Matters http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/gradualism-the-strategy-of-the-tortoise#ixzz4kwEr39W9
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution

NAMING THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD A NATIONAL SECURITY THREAT

It’s time to start speaking the truth about the Brotherhood.

By Daniel Greenfield

The Muslim Brotherhood is to Islamic terrorism what a virus is to disease. Major terrorist leaders from the Caliph of ISIS to Arafat have the Muslim Brotherhood on their resume. And the current leader of Al Qaeda led a Muslim Brotherhood splinter terror group. But its linkages to Islamic terrorism are only a secondary aspect of the organization whose focus is on Islamizing nations through more subtle means.

Paradoxically the Brotherhood has met with far less success in the Muslim world than in the West. Its greatest victories in the Arab Spring would not have happened without Obama’s backing and its takeovers of Egypt and Tunisia were rolled back by popular uprisings while its efforts in Libya, Syria and Yemen were stymied by armed conflict with other Muslims.

The Muslim Brotherhood is unpopular in Egypt these days. It’s also unpopular with Americans.

In one poll, 61 percent of Americans had an unfavorable view of the Muslim Brotherhood. Only 11 percent had a positive view of the Islamic supremacist organization. Only 5 percent of Americans saw the Muslim Brotherhood’s takeover of Egypt as a positive development.

Unfortunately Obama is at odds with the views of most Americans. The Muslim Brotherhood may have lost power in Cairo, but it still wields a great deal of power in Washington D.C. Brotherhood front groups such as CAIR and ISNA have open access to the media and dominate all discussions about Islam. The MSA dominates American campuses despite its history of terror ties.

As David Horowitz has warned, “The principal institutions of Islam in this country, the Muslim American Society, the Muslim Students Association, the Islamic Society of North America, to name a few — are all fronts for the Muslim Brotherhood.”

But not every country is equally willing to roll over for the Muslim Brotherhood’s hate network.

The Muslim Brotherhood headquarters was in London, but while Washington D.C. panders to the violent Islamic supremacist organization, the UK decided it did not want to host its Jihad. Last year, the British government authorized a report on the Muslim Brotherhood by veteran diplomat Sir John Jenkins. The report has been submitted to parliament and it’s making waves…

More

“Bridge-Building” to Nowhere: The Catholic Church’s Case Study in Interfaith Delusion

Obama’s ‘Blame the Video’ Fraud Started in Cairo, Not Benghazi

By Andrew C. McCarthy

Here is the main point: The rioting at the American embassy in Cairo was not about the anti-Muslim video. As argued here repeatedly (see hereand here), the Obama administration’s “Blame the Video” story was a fraudulent explanation for the September 11, 2012, rioting in Cairo every bit as much as it was a fraudulent explanation for the massacre in Benghazi several hours later.

We’ll come back to that because, once you grasp this well-hidden fact, the Obama administration’s derelictions of duty in connection with Benghazi become much easier to see. But let’s begin with Jay Carney’s performance in Wednesday’s exchange with the White House press corps, a new low in insulting the intelligence of the American people.

Mr. Carney was grilled about just-released e-mails that corroborate what many of us have been arguing all along: “Blame the Video” was an Obama-administration–crafted lie, through and through. It was intended, in the stretch run of the 2012 campaign, to obscure the facts that (a) the president’s foreign policy of empowering Islamic supremacists contributed directly and materially to the Benghazi massacre; (b) the president’s reckless stationing of American government personnel in Benghazi and his shocking failure to provide sufficient protection for them were driven by a political-campaign imperative to portray the Obama Libya policy as a success — and, again, they invited the jihadist violence that killed our ambassador and three other Americans; and (c) far from being “decimated,” as the president repeatedly claimed during the campaign (and continued to claim even after the September 11 violence in Egypt and Libya), al-Qaeda and its allied jihadists remained a driving force of anti-American violence in Muslim countries — indeed, they had been strengthened by the president’s pro-Islamist policies.

The explosive e-mails that have surfaced thanks to the perseverance of Judicial Watch make explicit what has long been obvious: Susan Rice, the president’s confidant and ambassador to the U.N., was strategically chosen to peddle the administration’s “Blame the Video” fairy tale to the American people in appearances on five different national television broadcasts the Sunday after the massacre. She was coached about what to say by other members of the president’s inner circle.

One of the e-mails refers expressly to a “prep call” that Ambassador Rice had with several administration officials on late Saturday afternoon right before her Sunday-show appearances. The tangled web of deception spun by the administration has previously included an effort to distance the White House (i.e., the president) from Rice’s mendacious TV performances. Thus, Carney was in the unenviable position Wednesday of trying to explain the “prep call” e-mail, as well as other messages that illuminate the Obama White House’s deep involvement in coaching Rice. The e-mails manifest that Rice’s performances were campaign appearances, not the good-faith effort of a public official to inform the American people about an act of war against our country. Her instructions were “To underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy”; and “To reinforce the President and Administration’s strength and steadiness in dealing with difficult challenges” (emphasis added).

Carney risibly claimed that the “prep call” was “not about Benghazi.” Instead, according to him, it was “about the protests around the Muslim world.”

Two points must be made about this.

The first involves the administration’s blatant lying. Benghazi was the only reason Rice was going on the Sunday shows. If the massacre had not happened, there would not have been an extraordinary administration offering of one top Obama official to five different national television networks to address a calamity that had happened a few days before.

Moreover, as is well known to anyone who has ever been involved in government presentations to the media, to Congress, to courts, and to other fact-finding bodies, the official who will be doing the presentation is put through a “murder board” preparation process. This is a freewheeling session in which the questions likely to be asked at the presentation are posed, and potential answers — especially to tough questions — are proposed, discussed, and massaged. The suggestion that Rice, less than 24 hours before being grilled by high-profile media figures, was being prepped on something totally separate and apart from the incident that was the sole reason for her appearance is so farfetched it is amazing that Carney thought he could make it fly….

More

The Fatal Fallacy of Muslim Outreach

By Pamela Geller

When the government engages in “Muslim Outreach,” what are its objectives?  To make us safe?  To undermine the vicious ideology that commands our conquest, subjugation, and oppression?  Or to appease and capitulate to these supremacist groups?  Clearly it is the last, and the consequences of such foolhardy and delusional efforts render us less safe, as in the case of the Boston Marathon jihad bombers, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.

 

Those devout Muslims in Boston designed bombs to tear through the flesh and bone of babies, mothers, and families, and only a couple of brave politicians have shown interest in the motive.  Is that what we have become as a nation?  A people?

 

The Boston bombers have said they slaughtered Americans in the cause of Islam.

 

Yet it was only Representative Louis Gohmert (R-TX) who has shown any interest in the implications of this.  Gohmert is a hero, a singular man of courage.  He pressed FBI director Robert Mueller last month until finally Mueller admitted that the only contact that the FBI had with the Boston bombers’ terror mosque was “outreach.”

 

Outreach is a euphemism for submission.  With the Boston jihad bombings, the mosquerade of “outreach” achieved its goal of deceiving and “subduing” the dhimmi FBI.  Americans were murdered in cold blood, but the FBI’s “outreach” with the terror mosque was successful.

 

Gohmert, a member of the House Judiciary Committee, also blasted the FBI in April over how political correctness prevented investigators from honing in on the Boston bombing suspects.  The Obama administration scrapped all mention of jihad and Islam from all FBI training manuals.  That scrubbing came at the insistence of Muslim groups with which the FBI and other agencies were engaged in “outreach.”

 

And in Tennessee, under the guise of “Muslim Outreach,” Obama’s Department of Justice has vowed to criminalize postings on social media that offend Muslims.  So Muslim Outreach has become the apparatus for Sharia implementation.  U.S. Attorney Bill Killian led a seminar there recently about how civil rights laws could be used to criminalize criticism of Islam.  Will Killian vow to criminalize the vicious Jew-hatred commanded in the Quran?  Will Killian ban the hate speech in the Quran?  No, but he has vowed to criminalize postings on social media that criticize Islam or offend Muslims.

 

In January 2012, I received the first in a series of DOJ bundles in response to my FOIA request filed close to a year before that.  Specifically, I asked for “records relating to the meeting of the ‘Monthly Outreach Meeting’ with Muslim and Arab groups at the Civil Rights Division. Specifically, include lists of attendees at each monthly meeting, the agenda of each meeting and any minutes or summary prepared subsequent to each meeting. Please also specifically note the meetings at which the Attorney General of the United States attended.”

 

The principal impact of reading through the material was the sheer bulk of it.  Hundreds and hundreds of pages of e-mails, documenting nearly daily friendly contact, consultation, cooperation, and collaboration between the DOJ and Hamas-linked Muslim Brotherhood groups.  One thing was clear: the Muslim Brotherhood had fully infiltrated command and control at the Department of Justice civil rights division….

More

Plot Thickens in Saudi National Case

By Arnold Ahlert

Abdul_Rahman_Ali-Alharbi_1-300x286

Radio talk show host Glenn Beck is continuing to investigate Abdul Rahman Alharbi, the Saudi national initially identified as a “person of interest” in the Boston Marathon bombing atrocity. And while many on the left are ridiculing Beck’s efforts, it is difficult to dismiss the possibility that some kind of deception is being perpetrated by the Obama administration. As the rest of the media remain silent, Beck continues to release almost daily a slew of troubling revelations backed by solid evidence.

On Monday night, the radio host made no bones about where he stands. “You want to know why we have terror over and over in our streets?” Beck asked. “Saudi Arabia. It is time someone on network television says it.” He also took the media to task. “We let everyone have all of the other information because we care more about the truth, more about you getting the news,” he said. “There is not ever going to be a member of CAIR crossing this threshold to have a private meeting with me to tell me exactly what would be in my best interest. I’m not taking the meeting. We move differently here. We are an American network, owned by an American. I am sick and tired of being told there is nothing left to see, move along,” Beck elaborated, noting that since he owns the Blaze network, he is beholden to no outside interests, or foreign (read Saudi) money.

On Tuesday, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano added fuel to Beck’s fire. Napolitano, who refused to answer any questions about Alharbi immediately following the terror attack, engaged in this somewhat Orwellian exchange with Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA). “With regard to the Saudi student, was he on a watchlist, and if so, how did he obtain a student visa?” Grassley asked. Napolitano firmly responded, “He was not on a watch list.  What happened is–this student was, really when you back it out, he was in the wrong place at the wrong time. He was never a subject. He was never even really a person of interest. Because he was being interviewed, he was at that point put on a watch list, and then when it was quickly determined he had nothing to do with the bombing, the watch listing status was removed.”

Beck kept up the pressure on Tuesday as well. He said that “more attention should be paid” to Alharbi, based on information he claims was given to him by government officials “at the highest levels,” some of whom have been “threatened with twenty years in prison…to get this information to you.” Beck dropped another bombshell on his show that night. He told his audience the DHS has “no idea” where Alharbi is currently located. He further noted that Alharbi’s student visa “only permits him to be attending school in Findlay, Ohio, but he never enrolled.”

This latter revelation is troubling. As the Boston Herald reported on April 18, “FBI and ATF agents, along with Boston cops, swarmed the 22-year-old man’s Ocean Avenue apartment Monday night, grilling his roommate for hours and removing several items in evidence bags.” Thus, some obvious questions arise. Why was a man who was supposed to be enrolled at a college in Ohio, living in an apartment in Boston? What has happened to the bags of evidence removed from his apartment? Furthermore, as Beck reasonably concluded, how can Napolitano possibly assert that Alharbi was never even a person of interest, given these two revelations?

Fox News’s Todd Starnes added to the controversy. He reported that Alharbi “had been flagged on a terror watch list and was granted a student visa without being properly vetted.” Starnes went further. “A source close to the investigation revealed that Abdul Rahman Ali Alharbi had been deemed inadmissible under the section of the Immigration and Nationality Act which declares ineligible for a visa– any alien who is engaged in or is likely to engage after entry–in terrorist activity.”

Yesterday, Beck put far more credence behind the reality that Napolitano is utterly disingenuous and Starnes is onto something. After beginning with a brief review of the timeline during which Alharbi went from a “person of interest, to witness, to victim, to nobody,” the radio host presented information obtained by what The Blaze website described as a source who “directly read the original event file, and multiple government sources with knowledge of the case and files (who) contributed their knowledge.”

In short, Beck had allegedly obtained a copy of the original event file.

It was filled with bombshell after bombshell. It revealed that Alharbi was “armed and dangerous,” admitted to the country under “special advisory option usually reserved for visiting politicians, VIPs, or journalists,” and that he was granted his status “without a full vetting.” Moreover, despite officials explaining that Alharbi’s once pending deportation was due to an expired visa, the event file reveals his visa is good until 2016. It further reveals that he was admitted to the country in Boston, even as it says he is a student at the University of Findlay, in Findlay, Ohio.

Beck went further still. “When a file is created in the system, the author(s) are notified via email when it is accessed and given the email address of the person accessing, so there is a record within the government data system of who was there,” he noted. “It was amended to remove the deportation reference, then someone later went in and tried to destroy both the original event file and an amended versions. We won’t say who at this time, but copies have already been made,” he warned….

More

Islamists Exploiting the Interfaith Racket

By Hillel Zaremba

While it is all well and good to encourage the commonalities that unite Americans of all faiths, it is equally important to inquire into the bona fides of organizations that onlyclaim to promote tolerance. Philadelphia presents a sorry but enlightening example of how groups whose agendas directly challenge American values get a free pass from the interfaith establishment due largely to the firmly held belief that “diverse” (and disquieting) viewpoints must be respected — as long as they are Muslim.

A prime example of this is the Mayor’s Office of Faith-based Initiatives(MOFI), “the primary liaison between the Office of the Mayor and Philadelphia’s diverse communities of faith and their leaders.” Despite being provided with evidence of the U.S. government’s case against one of its partners, the terror-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the office’s interim director, Reverend Malcolm Byrd, declared: “We will engage with CAIR. … We don’t have to endorse you to work with you.” After reviewing the evidence, MOFI decided to maintain the relationship.

According to this twisted logic, MOFI ought to welcome the KKK, a group which misappropriates Christian symbols and beliefs, or local supporters of the Westboro Baptist Church, with their strident attacks on homosexuals and Jews. It does not, but it does welcome the Nation of Islam, whose leader Louis Farrakhan unabashedly declares Jews to be part of “the Synagogue of Satan.”

A similar approach is exhibited by the Interfaith Center of Greater Philadelphia (ICGP), “dedicated to interreligious dialogue, education, and community building.” It seemed reasonable to assume that the organization would want to vet its members to some degree, to be sure they truly embrace tolerance and respect for diversity. The ICGP’s executive director, Abby Stamelman Hocky, soon disabused us of that notion.

While teens that take part in an ICGP initiative called Walking the Walk are encouraged to ask “the tough questions,” Hocky was disinclined to take seriously information collected from the websites of three of the Muslim groups participating in it. If we really knew the leaders of these groups, we were told, we would be convinced they were, in truth, moderates; repeated requests to facilitate meetings with these leaders were ignored.

By ignoring the ideologies held by Muslim groups, the ICGP and others afford cover for those whose beliefs would otherwise be abhorrent to them, like the Villanova-based Foundation for Islamic Education (FIE). FIE hasdescribed itself as a satellite campus of Al-Azhar University of Cairo, while its leaders and faculty have sanctioned suicide attacks against Israeli civiliansdefended the execution of Muslims who convert out of their faith and threatened Copts  for questioning the Qur’an….

More

%d bloggers like this: