The Greatest Islamophobia Hoax in America Exposed

The ‘Islamophobic’ shooter of three ‘Palestinians’ in Vermont actually supported Hamas.

When three Arab Muslim students were shot and wounded in Burlington, Vermont, politicians and the media immediately hyped it as the ‘Islamophobic Crime of the Century’.....

President Biden...Vice President Kamala Harris...Bernie Sanders...Sen Peter Welch...Sarah George, the local State’s Attorney...Burlington Police Chief Jon Murad...Vermont Lt. Gov. David Zuckerman...

All of these claims, along with many others around the shootings, were based on lies.

The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee falsely claimed that “a man shouted and harassed the victims, then proceeded to shoot them. We have reason to believe this shooting occurred because the victims are Arab.”

In reality, they had been shot by a local resident outside his house who did not say a word....

The three Muslim men were returning home from a party on Saturday night when James J. Eaton, a local resident with a history of mental instability, stumbled out of a white clapboard house on the residential street and without a word fired four shots at the three men.

Eaton had been described as “that hippie guy” and “progressive”, an organic farmer who had posted a meme with a definition of “Amerika” that called it “the worst sense of the United States, ie imperialism, corruption and the global exportation of American culture.”

He appeared to be a Biden supporter

Media outlets, anti-Israel activists and politicians attributed the shootings to the Hamas war. Everyone from Biden and Kamala on down emphasized the “Palestinian” identities of those shot and implied that Eaton had attacked them because he was opposed to the ‘Palestinian’ cause.

In reality, Eaton supported Hamas.

Read the whole thing. 

Trump’s praise for the dog that helped capture al Baghdadi was a psy-ops classic

That's what I thought at the time.

Muslims, you see, are taught that dogs are unclean. Have al Baghdadi taken down by an “unclean” animal is an extra dose of humiliation, somewhat akin to the perhaps apocryphal story of General "Black Jack" Pershing ordering Muslim terrorists he was fighting in the Philippines in the late 19th century buried with pig carcasses in order to prevent their entry into heaven.

The Bush Pipe Dream

No one expected Iraq to turn into Denmark.  What the Bush administration expected was that by having elections, giving people an opportunity to choose their own leaders, Iraq would become a modern democracy.  They were foolish and I predicted that they would fail. 

 

But neither is there any reason to believe that “Muslim Arabs alone of all peoples are destined to live in tyranny forever, unable to sustain any kind of halfway-decent halfway-democratic government” without an interim period of benevolent rule by people who believe in decent democratic government.

The problem with Muslim society is Muslim culture which has several thousand years of embedded experience of tyranny and corruption reinforcing all the actions that militate against the decent democratic government.

The belief that Muslim countries can convert the modern democracies on the European model is as much a pipe dream on the Right as the belief on the Left that Socialism will work if only we give it another try.

Japan is an example of a country with no history of democracy being converted into a decent democracy.  Germany – with the failed example of the Weimar period – had no history of being a successful democracy, yet it is today.  But before they were “turned loose” as it were, they experienced decades of military occupation following the Second World War.  In fact, to this day, there are American military bases in both countries.

Britain left behind it scores of countries they once colonized and then set free, many of which have become stable, decent democracies, including the United States, Canada, Australia, and India. 

The big difference between the success of the British Empire and the Allied victory in World War 2 was the imposition of decent rule by a foreign agent who believed in honest, representative government at home and the imposition of good government on a people and culture who were not familiar with any of the basic tenants of a decent representative republic.  

The experience in Iraq demonstrates that in a culture ruled by a dictator you will have rampant corruption and – in the case of most Muslim countries – a tribal system in which the first loyalty is to the tribe rather than to the nation.  Combine that with unreformed Islam and all you will get from an election is the elevation of the next theocratic dictator whose objective is to gather wealth for himself and his tribe. 

Mark Steyn: "A Fatwa of One's Own"

From the National Post, December 5th of 2002.  As relevant today as it was then.

To be honest, I felt mildly envious when I saw Zulf M Khalfan's letter on Tuesday. Mr Khalfan, of Nepean, Ontario, was responding to David Frum's defence of Isioma Daniel, the Nigerian journalist now in hiding after remarking that the Prophet Muhammad would have been happy to take the winner of Miss World for his wife. Mr Khalfan replied that, as Muhammad's wives are accorded "an honourable status," it was obviously grossly objectionable to suggest that a woman who "exposed herself" - by wearing make-up and a bikini - would be an appropriate spouse for the Prophet.

Fair comment. But then: "Mr Frum has to understand that it is Muslims who determine what is objectionable to their religion, not he dictating it to them," added Mr Khalfan. "And since he cites Salman Rushdie, he should know by now the fatal consequences resulting from ignoring this fact."

Can you believe it? For most of the last fifteen months, while I've been here playing The National Post's Mister Islamophobe, that milquetoast Frum has been sitting in the White House, presumably cranking out all the President's dopey "Islam is peace" speeches. He's back in the Post for barely a fortnight and already he's got his own fatwa? Thanks a bunch, you ingrate Nepean Islamists! Where did I go right?

Well, Mr Khalfan has now "clarified" his original letter on the page opposite. He doesn't want to kill David Frum. He just wants David to be aware of how easy it is to provoke other people into killing him.

When Isioma Daniel asserted that Muhammad would have taken Miss World as his wife, she was correct to the extent that the Prophet seems to have had an eye for the ladies. But that wasn't really her point. Her point was more basic, and it was this: Hey, lighten up, Muslims!

Muslims responded by going nuts, rampaging through the streets, pulling Christian women and children from cars and burning them to the cheers of the mob. By the end of it all, the dead numbered 500. So no, Miss Daniel, Muslims won't lighten up, but they'll light you up, if they ever catch up with you. (I'm in favour of Izzy offering the poor gal a job at the Post, by the way.)

These days, we're all citing Salman Rushdie, but at the time - February 14th 1989 - most of us didn't appreciate the significance of the event. It marked the first time the Ayatollah Khomeini had claimed explicitly extra-territorial authority. Why he chose an obscure and for most of us unreadable English novel for his expeditionary foray is unclear, but the results must have heartened him tremendously.

Rushdie had not set out to offend Muslims: None of the London reviewers found anything controversial in the book. When British Muslims and their co-religionists around the world burnt copies of The Satanic Verses in the streets, BBC arts bores - including our own Michael Ignatieff - held innumerable discussions on the awful "symbolism" of this assault on "ideas." But it wasn't symbolic at all: they burned the book because nothing else was to hand. If his wife or kid had swung by, they'd have gladly burned them instead. Overseas, they made do with translators and publishers. Rushdie's precious lit crit crowd mostly opposed the fatwa on the grounds of artistic expression rather than as a broader defence of western liberties.

In the Fifties and Sixties, Nasserism attempted to import Soviet socialism to the Middle East: it never really took. A generation later, the Ayatollah came up with a better wheeze: export Islamism to a culturally defeatist West. Everything that has become pathetically familiar to us since September 11th was present in the Rushdie affair:

First, the silence of the "moderate Muslims": a few Islamic scholars pointed out that the Ayatollah had no authority to issue the fatwa; they quickly shut up when the consequences of not doing so became apparent.

Second, the squeamishness of the establishment: Rushdie was infuriated when the Archbishop of Canterbury lapsed into root-cause mode. "I well understand the devout Muslims' reaction, wounded by what they hold most dear and would themselves die for," said His Grace. Rushdie replied tersely: "There is only one person around here who is in any danger of dying."

Roy Hattersley, the Labour Party's deputy leader, attempted to split the difference by arguing that, while he of course supported freedom of speech, perhaps "in the interests of race relations" it would be better not to bring out a paperback edition. He was in favour of artistic freedom, but only in hard covers - and certainly, when it comes to soft spines, Lord Hattersley knows whereof he speaks.

His colleague, Gerald Kaufman, attacked critics of British Muslims: "What I cannot accept is the implication that it is somehow anti-democratic and un-British for Mr Rushdie's writings to be the object of criticism on religious, as distinct from literary, grounds." Mr Kaufman said this a few days after large numbers of British Muslims had marched through English cities openly calling for Rushdie to be killed. In the last few months, several readers have e-mailed me with their memories of those marches. One man in Bradford remembers asking a West Yorkshire police officer why "Muslim community leaders" weren't being arrested for incitement to murder. The officer said they'd been told to play it cool. The cries for blood got more raucous. My correspondent asked his question again. The police officer told him to "F**k off, or I'll arrest you."

And, most important of all, the Rushdie affair should have taught us that there's nothing to negotiate. Mohammed Siddiqui wrote to The Independent from a Yorkshire mosque to endorse the fatwa by citing Sura 5 verses 33-34:

The punishment of those who wage war against God and His Apostle, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land, is execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the hereafter. Except for those who repent before they fall into your power. In that case know that God is oft-forgiving, most merciful.

Rushdie seems to have got the wrong end of the stick on this. He suddenly turned up on a Muslim radio station in West London one night and told his interviewer he'd converted to Islam. Marvelous religion, couldn't be happier, praise be to Allah and all that. The Ayatollah said terrific, now you won't suffer such heavy punishment in the hereafter. But we're still gonna kill you.

Some of us drew from the Rushdie affair a different lesson than Mr Khalfan: As bad as the fatwa was, the inability of the establishment to defend coherently Western values was worse. All those British Muslims who called openly for Rushdie's death are still around, more powerful and with more followers.

Mr Khalfan is being disingenuous. When was the last time a mob of Jews or Christians or Buddhists tore children from cars and burned them to death? A while back, I saw Terrence McNally's ghastly Broadway jerk-off, Corpus Christi, in which a gay Jesus rhapsodizes about the joys of anal intercourse with Judas. The play was an abomination, and deserves all the abuse discriminating theatregoers can heap upon it. But oddly enough, I didn't feel an urge to slaughter perfect strangers, to ram a schoolbus, drag the little moppets from it, douse them in gasoline, and get my matchbook out.

When Mr Khalfan says that irresponsible journalists "risk provoking individuals who cannot control their spiritual emotions and cause the death of innocent people," he's being far more objectionable about Muslims than me, Frum and that Nigerian woman rolled into one; he's being more imperialist than any old-school Colonial Officer: He's saying Muslims are wogs, savages, they know no better, what do you expect? You've gotta be careful around them, the slightest thing could set 'em off. Might be a novel, might be a beauty contest.

Sorry, it's not a good enough answer. If that Nigerian mob are really no more than "pious Muslims," then pious Muslims should be ashamed. Pious Muslims can follow the murder-inciters of Bradford, the suicide-bombers of the West Bank and the depraved killers of northern Nigeria on their descent into barbarism. Or they can wake up and save their religion. Mr Khalfan's sophistry won't cut it.

Feminist meet Muslim

Mark Steyn - Lutey Tunes

Mark Steyn flays Jonathan Capehart of the Washington Post until there's no more flesh on the bones of his pretensions.

At any rate, Capehart is eager to dispel the notion that symphonies are the work of tub-thumping white nationalists like Mozart and Mahler. Get a clue, losers:

Those symphonies Trump says "We write" (ahem) would be real lame without the influence of the Middle East and Muslims. According to Salim al-Hassani, chairman of the Foundation for Science, Technology and Civilization and editor of "1001 Inventions," which chronicles "the enduring legacy of Muslim civilization," told CNN years ago that the lute, musical scales and the ancestor of the violin are all part of that legacy.

So Beethoven's Eroica, Brahms' Fourth, Tchaikovsky's Sixth would be "real lame" without "the influence of the Middle East and Muslims".

So says a senior writer in the establishment newspaper of America's capital. On the basis of what? A lone reference to the umpteenth lavishly-funded straw-clutching special-pleading Islamofest created to explain why the casual observer is entirely wrong to conclude that the Muslim world is culturally moribund and entirely irrelevant to the planet's artistic, scientific and economic progress (with the single solitary exception of oil that they require foreigners to get out of the ground for them). The casual observers who've come away with that unfortunate and ignorant misapprehension include, inter alia, a fellow I quoted in America Alone:

In the words of Dr. Mahathir Mohammed, the former prime minister of Malaysia, one of the least worst Muslim nations in the world, "We produce practically nothing on our own, we can do almost nothing for ourselves, we cannot even manage our wealth."

But pay no attention to Dr Mahathir. What does he know about Islam's achievements compared to a senior columnist at The Washington Post? Sure, they may not have done anything much for a millennium or so, but we all know that everything in your world would be "real lame" without Islam. How stupid is Trump? He doesn't even know that, without Islam, we'd be in a lute-free world!

Who knew? When CAIR was named by the Feds as an unindicted co-conspirator in that terrorism-funding case, it was no doubt because the FBI wiretappers eavesdropped on the planning meeting for the CAIR Symphony Orchestra and misunderstood when the imam said, "Where have you stashed the lute?"

The evidence for this is - to put it politely - wafer-thin. Insofar as the lute has anything to do with Islam at all, it derives from the pre-Islamic east - like the one I saw in the British Museum a couple of years back from Mesopotamia, circa 3,000 BC. Then Mohammed showed up and that was the day the music died: Drove my camel to the wadi, but the wadi was dry.

You would think that after this verbal drubbing  that Capehart would find another job under an assumed name after hiding his true identity, but you would be wrong.

Up to 100 girls may have had their genitals cut in Michigan

Forget it, it's an old Muslim custom.

A federal prosecutor dropped a bombshell in court Wednesday, telling a federal judge that the government estimates that as many as 100 girls may have had their genitals cut at the hands of a local doctor and her cohorts.

...

The government believes the three defendants, all members of a local Indian-Muslim sect, subjected numerous girls to genital cutting procedures over a 12-year period. To date, the government says it has identified eight victims -- including the two Minnesota girls -- though Woodward said the government estimates there could be as many as 100 victims. She said that's a conservative estimate, and that it's based on Dr. Attar's alleged admission to authorities that he let Nagarwala use his clinic up to six times a year to treat children for genital rashes.

Ann Coulter on "FAKE HATE"

Forget fake news; the real issue is fake "hate.”

Has there been one (1) documented hate crime committed by white people against any hue in the Rainbow Coalition since Nov. 8? That's out of the 9,456,723 hate crimes alleged by America's leading hate group, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

The SPLC is to "hate" what Rolling Stone is to rape. It is the biggest peddler of fantasies since Walt Disney.

I've read through dozens of SPLC "hate crimes" and they are all lies. The Muslim girls in particular seem to be very spirited liars.

Since the election, there have been vivid stories from across the nation of Trump supporters tearing off Muslim girls' hijabs -- at the University of Michigan (since retracted), Louisiana State University (also retracted), San Diego State University (that too was retracted), the New York City subway (again: retracted), and the University of New Mexico (no witnesses, won't reveal attacker's name or report the incident for investigation).

The main take-away from all these stories is: We sure have taken in a lot of Muslims! They seem to have trouble assimilating to American laws about not committing mass murder, but the good news is, when it comes to America's culture of victimhood, they assimilate like fish to water!

This isn't mass psychogenic illness, like when cheerleaders at the same high school all develop tics. It's not even the Salem witch trials. At least the Salem witch-hunters believed in witches. The Muslim hoaxers are lying, and they know they're lying.

...

The greatest fear of Muslims these days is that they won't be home when the "Today" show calls and will miss the opportunity to regale credulous hosts with stories about their victimization at the hands of white American men (whose great-grandparents are buried here).

The left has gone so insane that the SPLC, the main propagator of fake hate crimes, is the media's go-to expert on hate. SPLC spokesmen appear on TV and defame all the people they hate: whites, Christians, Trump supporters, cops, frat boys and so on.

The SPLC is like the cult awareness groups taken over by Scientologists. Terrified parents would call for help in rescuing their kids from Scientology and be told, No, Scientology is not a cult.

Read the whole thing.

Why a is academia such a hellhole of foul mouthed bigots?

A professor at Georgetown University went into an unbelievable foul-mouthed meltdown that lasted 31 days after a Muslim ex-colleague said she voted for Donald Trump.

"professor" C. Christine Fair

C Christine Fair, an associate professor at the Center for Peace and Security Studies, was incensed after Asra Q Nomani, 'lifelong liberal', wrote an article about voting for Donald Trump as a Muslim immigrant.

In her Washington Post article, Nomani said she was motivated by a distaste for Obama's edging around using the phrase 'Islamic extremism', the cost of Obamacare and what she saw as Obama's failure to help poor and rural Americans.

According to Nomani, on November 22, 12 days after her article was published, Fair began a sustained period of abuse on Twitter and Facebook.

In a letter of complaint to the university, Nomani said that Fair told her 'F**K YOU, GO TO HELL', and called her a 'wench', a 'fraud' and a 'fame-mongering clown show'.

Nomani added that Fair had called her 'chutiya,' or 'the equivalent of a "f**ker" in my native Urdu', and 'bevkuf', another Urdu word meaning 'idiot'.

What is revealing about this and other rants by college professors is that they appear to have no idea that these foul mouthed, and very public, expressions of hate at anyone on the Right wrong.  This appears to be the "new normal" in academia.  

Years of political correctness and Left-wing indoctrination have made violence - verbal and physical - acceptable on too many college campuses as long as the victims are to the Right of the enforcers.  These are the Commissars of the uniculture that rules the campus.  

What Yasmin Seweid’s Pretty Little Lies Reveal About ‘Fake News’ Media Hypocrisy

Since Donald Trump’s election night victory and at the direction of Hillary Clinton campaign operatives, social media users have been scolded and warned over the scourge of “fake news” from supposedly respected journalistic outlets, on the web and on network television. Clinton herself, just last week, even blamed her election loss partly on the dangerous spread of fake news.

So enter the curious case of Yasmin Seweid, the 18 year old New York City college student whose story of being harassed and assaulted by three Donald Trump supporters on a subway train went viral. This came on the heels of reports — many exaggerated — a so-called “surge” in Trump-fueled, hate-filled activity.

Protests were held at Grand Central station, where Seweid reported her assault to police shortly after saying she exited the train to get away from her attackers. Several mainstream news outlets, including CBS, NBC, Buzzfeed, Yahoo and Slate among others, picked up on the story and ran with it gleefully.

“Drunk Men Yelling ‘Donald Trump’ Attempt To Remove Woman’s Hijab On NYC Subway” declared the headline at Buzzfeed. “NY Subway Riders Stand By as Three Men Verbally Assault Muslim Teenager” was Slate’s headline, which Yahoo echoed with “Three Drunks on Train Harass Woman in Hijab, Commuters Do Nothing.” CBS News stated “Muslim teen verbally attacked on NYC subway”. Gothamist, a local NYC news site and one of the first outlets to pick up on the alleged incident, stated “Men Screaming ‘Donald Trump’ Attacked Woman Wearing Hijab On The Subway”. The New York Daily News featured the incident on its front page, professing “Attacked Because I’m Muslim” and she was interviewed by CBSNY local that night.

Seweid then posted a statement on her Facebook page (which has since been deleted) saying, “Three white racists ripped the straps off my bag & attempted to yank my hijab off my head. They yelled such disgusting slurs at me, I was so helpless and felt defenseless.” Seweid went on to blame other passengers on her subway: “It breaks my heart that so many individuals choose to be bystanders while watching me get harassed verbally and physically by these disgusting pigs. Trump America is real and I witnessed it first hand last night!”

To reputable news outlets, Yasmin Seweid, an attractive young Muslim girl, was a prime example of how hate in Donald Trump’s America has spread and manifested itself (even into progressively liberal enclaves such as New York City!)

The only problem is that the incident Seweid reported, and that these outlets ran with, didn’t happen. As reported by DNA Info, Seweid eventually confessed to fabricating the incident and lying to New York police investigating. There were troubles with her account from the start. NYC subway surveillance footage only showed one person matching a description Seweid gave following her off a train and she could not outright describe the suspects when pressed. Furthermore, Seweid went missing for two days last week and was finally found with a bag of clothes. The family’s only comment was that it was a personal matter they were handling.

Shortly after her return home, Seweid’s Facebook page, along with the post recalling the incident was deleted. Her Youtube and Twitter accounts remain live but dormant.

The larger issue at work here is not Seweid. She’s a teenager who, for reasons yet unknown, fabricated a hate crime and will now face real legal consequences for doing so. She may be confused, she may have trouble at home or socially. Nobody knows and that information will likely reveal itself in time as she is forced to face charges in court and opprobrium in her community, which she’s no doubt damaged and hurt by making real accounts of targeted religious hate and assaults harder to report.

But since Donald Trump’s election, social media users have been bombarded by a finger wagging media about a flood of fake news and misinformation spreading online which, the media claims. But the media isn’t taking a long hard look at themselves and asking how and why “fake news” has gained the audience it has. With little to no discretion and all too eager to push anti-Trump narratives, these news organizations hit the publish button on Seweid’s story with little to no hedging that, at that point, all they had was her account. And its faith in the story dies hard. When Buzzfeed published the story of Seweid’s arrest on Wednesday, the headline read “Woman Arrested For Allegedly Making Up Story of NY Subway Attack by Trump Supporters”, carrying more skepticism in the fact that she was arrested for fabricating the story, than Buzzfeed gave to its original report.

These editors, apparently not convinced that Donald Trump provides enough real life clickbait content, rushed off to prove their desired narrative of rampant Islamophobia and hate crimes. If newsroom editors want to lament the spread of fake news, perhaps they can start with how they and their journalists handled the Yasmin Seweid case. Likewise with rape victims in the viral media cases of Emma Sulkowicz, the University of Virginia Greek system or Duke Lacrosse, all this does is undermine their own narratives and most importantly real victims.

Maybe mainstream news outlets and networks will figure this out sometime into President Donald Trump’s second term.

SHE MADE IT UP: NYPD Arrests Muslim Girl Who Claimed Attack by Trump Supporters

If it were not for hoaxes, there would be no "fake news" of anti Muslim attacks.

The 18-year-old Seweid caused quite the media stir with her sensationalized account of Trump supporters attacking her on the subway. She claimed three men attempted to pull off her hijab while calling her a terrorist and yelling Trump’s name. All this happened, she said, while New Yorkers sat idly by and watched her get assaulted.

The many media outlet’s initial reporting of the fake hate crime did not include qualifiers like “alleged” and “claimed.” Instead they reported the hoax crime as a fact like with Buzzfeed’s story, “Drunk Men Yelling “Donald Trump” Attempt To Remove Woman’s Hijab On NYC Subway.”

Let's ask Mr. Khan about this

Terrorist butchering stuns UK...
1 woman killed, 5 injured...
'I heard scream, then I saw blood'... 

LONDON TERROR: US woman dead and five injured in mass stabbings rampage in Russell Square

A TEENAGER has been arrested on suspicion of murder after a woman was stabbed to death and five people injured in an attack in central London, with police saying "terror cannot be ruled out".

Two men, allegedly of Middle Eastern descent, were seen acting suspiciously outside the hotel after the incident, according to witnesses.

A 35-year-old witness, who wished to remain anonymous, told Express.co.uk: “I saw two men of Middle Eastern descent acting suspiciously outside the Imperial Hotel, on Southampton Row.

“One man made off on a motorbike down the wrong side of the road with the other man heading in a different direction.”

Hours after the attack Islamic State (ISIS) jihadis started spreading the news through messaging app, Telegram, as they shared photos and updates on the attack.

The incident came just hours after more armed police were deployed to the capital's streets following several terror attacks in Europe over the past month.

The Virginian Pilot strikes out again

The Virginian Pilot’s headline above the story about the Baton Rouge cop killer was: 

“Ex-Marine who killed three officers stalked police, officials say.”

Denial, as they say, is not a river in Egypt.  It’s killing people.

Gavin Long, the killer, is a black separatist, a former member of the Nation of Islam and railed against the police, “crackers,” and several other ethnic groups in his Facebook account.  His belief system is no secret.  His identity as an ex-Marine is far down the list of things that are important to know about him.  But not to the people who work for the Virginian Pilot. 

How about this headline: “Facebook user who killed three police officers …”  Or how about “Cracker hater who killed three police officers …”

It’s of a piece with the decision of many in the press to describe the murders in Nice several days ago as the work of a truck rather than a man named Mohammed screaming Allahu Akbar as he ran over his victims.

You will notice that one of the slain men is black, as was the perpetrator. This incident takes us back to 1972 when we saw another spate of police murders by black power separatists and members of the Black Liberation Army.   You remember that in the early 70s a war against police began, a war in which police were gunned down by cold-blooded killers with a racial/political agenda and a convict past. The assailants were members of various black militant groups, mostly offshoots of the Black Panthers, such as the Black Liberation Army (BLA), which specialized in racially-motivated cop killings.  They killed cops, black, white, Asian, it didn't matter.  Just as Jihadists kill the unbeliever, no matter what his or her religion, even other Muslims.  

It was almost inevitable that the furor against police officers that’s been whipped up over the Castile and Sterling deaths would end in some person or persons deciding that killing a cop would be just the thing. Whether Long was crazy or not—and he may have been—and a lone wolf or not, even crazy people can be sparked to violence by an atmosphere of orchestrated hatred. 

A hatred that has been fostered by Obama when he said that Trayvon Martin, shot while trying to batter George Zimmerman to death, could have been his son, if he had a son.   

It was fostered by the a lying, racist, press when they described Michael Brown as a “gentle giant” out for a stroll when he was stalked and brutally shot by a racist cop while his hands were raised shouting “don’t shoot.”  The real story was that Brown was thug who just robbed a grocery store, roughed up its owner, who wrestled for an officer’s gun and was shot while attacking the officer. 

And it continues to be fostered by Team Obama who blames police for the pathology of the black underclass and the press who are desperate to hide the truth by blaming the Marines … or trucks … for the carnage in our streets.

How stupid and vicious do elites think 'we' are?

How stupid and vicious do they think we are? That's a question that I think explains a lot of things about politics and society today — and about this year's unpredictable presidential race.

The "we" in that question are ordinary citizens and the "they" are political and media elites who hold them in contempt. Which they do over and over again by trying to obfuscate and cover up the source and motives of terrorist attacks.

Barack Obama, who refuses to use phrases akin to "Islamist terrorism," is a prime offender, but far from the only one. His predecessor George W. Bush, after the attacks of September 11, made a point of visiting mosques and calling Islam a religion of peace.

Undoubtedly he then feared that many Americans would attack and assault Muslims, real or perceived, and a very few such attacks occurred. But government statistics count far fewer "hate crimes" against Muslims than against Jews.

Nonetheless Obama still behaves as if any suggestion that terrorists shouting "Allahu akbar!" has something to do with Islam will spark massacres and persecution across the country. The American people are seen as a great beast, incapable of reason or cool judgment. Stupid and vicious.

So they must be reminded that they are not morally superior to terrorists. At a national prayer breakfast, Obama felt obliged to remind Americans that Christians attacked Muslims — in the Crusades, 800 years ago.

Others have followed his example. In a press conference earlier this month Philadelphia police officials described how a Muslim dressed in a white religious robe fired multiple rounds at a police officer, "in the name of Islam," as he said after his arrest. You could see it on videotape.

At which point Philadelphia Mayor James Kenney proclaimed, "In no way, shape or form does anyone in this room believe that Islam or the teaching of Islam has anything to do with what you've seen on the screen."

How stupid and vicious does he think we are?

Actually, it's not that hard for ordinary people to keep in mind two different ideas that the elites think they'll find confusing — that most terrorists these days are Muslims, and that most Muslims are not terrorists. We keep similar things in mind every day. For example, we notice that most dangerously aggressive drivers are men, but also that most men are not dangerously aggressive drivers.

Still, dangerous drivers are dangerous. Americans are tired of hearing "Islam is a religion of peace" when for an uncomfortably large minority of Muslims these days it's the opposite. So they have been flocking to Donald Trump when he calls for barring all Muslims from entering the U.S. And conservatives who in another year would upbraid Trump for flunking multiple litmus tests are defending him because he dares to utter forbidden truths.

Americans may be noticing as well how far political correctness has gone in Europe, especially Germany. European and American elites praised Chancellor Angela Merkel for promising to take in 1 million mostly Muslim, mostly male refugees. Why can't America be so generous?

But ordinary people, there and here, have seen how police, municipal and national officials have covered up migrants' behavior on New Year's. Even mass assaults on women in Cologne and other cities, and how print and broadcast media eagerly cooperated. Cellphone cameras told the story which elite media wanted to ignore.

It's a story, as even some Americans notice, that shows the underside of a European multiculturalism that insists that all cultures are morally equal, except ours, which is worse. The result is that authorities don't demand that Muslims respect the rights of women and gays, as in Rotherham, England, where they allowed immigrants to degrade 1,400 women for a decade, lest they be called racist.

Ordinary people can see, when elites allow them to see, that this gets things upside down. Human rights, toleration of those who are different, safety for those who exercise freedom of expression — these are products of the West, not the rest.

The hard question is how far tolerant societies should tolerate the intolerant. Societies value freedom of expression, but not when those include freedom to assault and kill. Societies are ready to welcome others, but not those whose values are discordant with the freedoms they strive to uphold.

Ordinary Americans, I think, have a better sense of how to get these questions right, without dissolving into irrational hatred, than the elites who look down on them as stupid and vicious.

Allah Allows Muslim Men to Rape and Humiliate Non-Muslim Women: Woman Islamic Professor

From the New Indian Times

Suad Saleh, a woman Islamic professor claimed that god had allowed Muslim men to rape Non-muslim women to ‘humiliate’ them.

Saleh, works in the reputed Al-Azhar University in Egypt and made the radical statement during an interview with Al-Hayat TV.

“The female prisoners of wars are ‘those whom you own.’ In order to humiliate them, they become the property of the army commander, or of a Muslim, and he can have sex with them just like he has sex with his wives,” Saleh was quoted according to reports. She even said that enslaving and raping Israeli women is ‘acceptable’ and ‘encouraged’.

Well, there you have it. Rape is practically a Muslim obligation.  This is not some illiterate loony- toon from Arab street.  This is Muslim academia.

The Liberal answer: let's import a whole lot more.

Why libs oppose Bernie's call to have cops investigate campus rapes

We know why liberals do not want cops investigating accusation of rape, because most of them are false.

How do I "know" this?

The Duke lacrosse case.

UVA.

Mattress Girl.

Plus numerous other times women perjured and got away with it. Seldom are cops allowed to investigate because that may lead to perjury charges.

But you must understand, feminists do not care if women are raped. Look at the New Year's Eve rapes of thousands of women because they are white Christians by hordes of Muslim men. The attacks were coordinated and aimed at striking fear in Europeans. It is 700 AD again.

Nary a peep from any American liberals about that real Culture of Rape. It does not push their anti-American, anti-Western agenda.

The European Media & the Cologne Attacks

From a letter to the Irish Times.

Scally’s bizarre use of “groping” is close to the worst imaginable example of PC disinformation from Orwell’s Ministry of Truth. “Groping” is a word better reserved for the awkward and/or unwanted advances of an adolescent teenager in regard to someone roughly his or her own age. Here, instead, we have (if Scally’s sources are to be believed) 30 adult men who organized a premeditated attack on a child—not a “young woman” as Scally mischaracterizes her—a child—a person under 18. (18 is the age of majority in most of Europe, including Germany.) This child was not “groped”—I had fingers at every orifice—she was the victim of sexual assault, rape, and attempted rape by multiple perpetrators. Again, groping generally refers to wanted or unwanted touching or fondling. The victim here did not describe “groping;” she described something far more serious: sexual assault and rape.

If Scally knows the difference between groping and raping, then his usage here publicly victimized the victim a second time, and he also misinformed all his Irish Times readers. On the other hand, if Scally’s command of standard English usage is so poor to the extent that he really does not know the difference, then he should open his eyes, mind, and heart, and speak to his mother, sister, or daughter—someone—anyone—or, he could just buy a standard college-level English dictionary. But either way, whether Scally knows the difference or not, The Irish Times has lost my trust.

Scally assures the reader that the elite German and international mainstream media did not cover-up the Cologne attacks. Who could possibly believe a messenger such as this?

Feminists: We finally found the real rape culture for you

It's not on college campuses, and you are afraid to name it.

The most disturbing thing about the Cologne attacks was the prevalence of sexual assault as a weapon, complete with gangs of Muslim men stalking German women through the streets, yelling obscenities at them and threatening them with sexual violence. Note to Western feminists: we finally found real “rape culture” for you. Unfortunately, it is not found primarily among middle-class American college boys, which is what you were hoping for.

The cringing and craven cowards of the establishment

On the eve of the Charlie Hebdo massacre, Mark Steyn notes (The Ghosts of Charlie Hebdo) that the Western press has pissed its pants in fear of Muslims on Jihad. They were all "JeSuisCharlie" - I am Charlie - but are scared shitless of showing the cartoons that caused the Muslim fanatics to massacre a dozen people, including the bulk of the senior editorial staff.

Instead of sharing the risk, the bigfoot media behaved exactly as they had ten years earlier. At my old London home The Daily Telegraph some gutless pansies decided that their reporting on the story could only be accompanied by carefully blurred images of the late cartoonists' work in order to avoid giving offense - turning Mohammed into a perpetually pixelated prophet, as if (to reprise a gag I did in 2005) poor ol' Mo's entered the witness protection program. Which is in fact the precise opposite of what's going on: cowardly media pixelate Mohammed as a way of fast-tracking themselves into the witness protection program, or so they hope. On TV, one of the few surviving Charlie Hebdo staffers attempted to hold one of the offending covers on screen, only to have the camera lurch away. Around the world, the dead cartoonists' professional colleagues, almost to a man, agreed that the preferred response was some or other limpid, evasive, self-flattering variant of "the pen is mightier than the sword".

Steyn tells us that in the past year a number of editors and writers who showed the courage of their convictions were attacked and are in hiding. The other Brave Sir Robins in the media - free speech warriors all - decided that they could show their courage on their knees and bravely participate in candlelight vigils and march showing their pencils.

And for the rest of the Establishment?

For wee colonial lads like me who've always been taught that England is the crucible of liberty, it is sobering to contemplate what a lonely champion of free speech Douglas Murray is in his native land, where Parliament will shortly debate whether Donald Trump should be banned from setting foot in the country. More tellingly, a week before the Charlie Hebdo massacre, a West Yorkshire man was arrested by Leeds District Police ("Superintendent Mabs Hussein") for tossing a Koran in a toilet and setting it alight. As Australia's Tim Blair noted, in Britain you're free to destroy any book you like. Except one. The state's argument to the Sharia loons is: "You don't need to kill anyone. We'll be your enforcers."

How very culturally polite of them. Because as everyone knows, Muslims are a peaceful people who only have on little quirk, they go absolutely berserk if they see an image of Mohammad. So let's not inflame the peace-loving followers of Islam.  

Oh, and Jews ...

Both Paris and Copenhagen were twofers: the attacks on free speech were followed by attacks on Jews, at a kosher supermarket and a synagogue, respectively. To Obama, this second group of victims were merely a "random" "bunch of folks". Couldda been anyone, but just so happened to be "a bunch of folks" who like kosher food. As I commented:

Bank robbers rob banks because that's where the money is. In Europe, Islamic supremacists shoot up kosher markets, synagogues, Jewish museums and Jewish schools because that's where the Jews are.

I think most of us understand that a huge percentage of Muslims really hate Jews. I have a high degree of tolerance for hate: I spent a lot of time in Northern Ireland during a period when many Catholics and Protestants seriously hated each other, and I came rather to appreciate the way they were entirely upfront about their mutual hatred. The problem here is that in the biggest resurgence of Jew-hate since the Second World War we're not allowed to say who hates Jews.

That's why free speech matters. Without free speech, there are only the official lies - about who's killing Jews in Copenhagen, who's sexually assaulting women in Cologne - and there is nothing to say in response to either except to crank up the old joanna for one more chorus of "Imagine".

What happened on January 7th 2015 was terrible. But our response to it made it more terrible, and emboldened civilization's enemies. With respect to the late Charb, the choice is not between dying standing up or living on our knees - for those who choose to live on their knees will die there, too, cringing and craven.

Feminism in the Islamic world.