Why Aren't We Hearing More About This?

Hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil

Z's post today reminded me of this February 5, 2016 article, which I've cited numerous times in comments but possibly not in the body of a blog post: DHS ordered me to scrub records of Muslims with terror ties.

In a national address on June 14, 2016, Barack Hussein Obama evinced more ire directed at Donald Trump than toward the murderous jihadists who slaughtered 49 people and wounded many others in Orlando's Pulse Nightclub on June 12, 2016.

Meanwhile: ISIS propaganda video exploits Orlando nightclub murders and calls for more attacks on US.

The scream from Poltergeist (1982):

Willful Blindness

(with thanks to commenter Anonymous here at IBA)

Click on the graphic to enlarge it:

Flashback to February 2016: DHS ordered me to scrub records of Muslims with terror ties.

The Words Which Must Not Be Uttered

1984's Newspeak in 2016

From WH Censors French President Saying ‘ISLAMIST Terrorism’:

The White House website has censored a video of French Pres. Francois Hollande saying that “Islamist terrorism” is at the “roots of terrorism.”

The White House briefly pulled video of a press event on terrorism with Pres. Obama, and when it reappeared on the WhiteHouse.gov website and YouTube, the audio of Hollande’s translator goes silent, beginning with the words “Islamist terrorism,” then begins again at the end of his sentence.

Even the audio of Hollande saying the words “Islamist terrorism” in French have, apparently, been edited from the video.

According to the official White House transcript of Hollande’s remarks, Hollande refers to “Islamist terrorism.” The audio of the bold text in brackets is missing from the video – the only point in the video [where] the audio is absent

Here's the video, with Hollande's comment censored:


The translation of the words which disappeared from the audio translation of the video:

Islamist terrorism, is in Syria and in Iraq. We therefore have to act both in Syria and in Iraq, and this is what we're doing within the framework of the coalition.

Curt Schilling And Islam

On August 25 2015, Major League Baseball star Curt Schilling posted the Tweet below, which he deleted after approximately ten minutes and for which he apologized:

Because Schilling posted the above, ESPN pulled Schilling from the network's Little League World Series assignment.

Additional reading...Curt Schilling and the Death of Free Speech: He told the truth. He apologized. It still wasn’t enough.

Islamphobia Defined

From the Daily Lobo (March 6, 2015):

In the wake of recent attacks targeting Muslims on American college campuses and around the world, ASUNM unanimously passed a cautionary resolution at Wednesday’s meeting urging UNM administration to state their opposition to Islamophobia.

Sen. Udell Calzadillas Chavez, who introduced Resolution 6S, said there is a widespread culture of fear and ignorance that perpetuates violence against Muslims. The purpose of the resolution is to provoke better understanding of Islam in the UNM community.

“This is a proactive approach to events in the United States and around the world,” he said.

Citing domestic attacks against Islam such as the February killing of three Muslim students at the University of North Carolina and a Molotov cocktail being thrown at the Albuquerque Islamic Center last year, as well as the continuing fight against ISIS in the Middle East, the legislation states that UNM “should stand strong in opposition of Islamophobia and related hate crimes.”

The document defined Islamophobia as “dislike or prejudice against Islam or Muslims, especially as a political force.”

Ihsan Wadud-Rodriguez, a senior Psychology major and Muslim student, said prejudice is often driven by inaccurate and uninformed presumptions about Muslims and the religion they practice.

“Islam has been unfairly confounded with cultural practices,” Wadud-Rodriguez said. “Those very cultural practices which are not supported by Americans are also not supported by Islam. There’s no contradiction: I don’t experience any self-discrepancy between my American values and Islamic values.”...

Additional information at Pamela Geller's site, which as hacked again yesterday and was offline for at least five hours. Pamela reminds us that Nonie Darwish was made unwelcome at the University of New Mexico back in 2012.

The seats of higher learning have become hotbeds of indoctrination and brainwashing.

Obama White House: Moral Responsibility To Abrogate The First Amendment

The end of journalistic and blogging anti-jihad?  Daily Caller article in its entirety (emphases mine)....

White House: Obama Will Fight Media To Stop Anti-Jihad Articles

President Barack Obama has a moral responsibility to push back on the nation’s journalism community when it is planning to publish anti-jihadi articles that might cause a jihadi attack against the nation’s defenses forces, the White House’s press secretary said Jan. 12.

“The president … will not now be shy about expressing a view or taking the steps that are necessary to try to advocate for the safety and security of our men and women in uniform” whenever journalists’ work may provoke jihadist attacks, spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters at the White House’s daily briefing.

The unprecedented reversal of Americans’ civil-military relations, and of the president’s duty to protect the First Amendment, was pushed by Earnest as he tried to excuse the administration’s opposition in 2012 to the publication of anti-jihadi cartoons by the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo.

The White House voiced its objections in 2012 after the magazine’s office were burned by jihadis, followings its publication of anti-jihadi cartoons.

Earnest’s defense of tho 2012 objections came just five days after the magazine’s office was attacked by additional jihadis. Eight journalists, two policeman and a visitor were murdered by two French-born Muslims who objected to the magazine’s criticism of Islam’s final prophet.

In 2012, “there was a genuine concern that the publication of some of those materials could put Americans abroad at risk, including American soldiers at risk,” Earnest said.

“That is something that the commander in chief takes very seriously,” he added, before saying that “the president and his spokesman was not then and will not now be shy about expressing a view or taking the steps that are necessary to try to advocate for the safety and security of our men and women in uniform.”

In December, Congress approved and the president signed a $585 billion defense budget to train and equip soldiers, marines, sailors and airmen to defend Americans — including journalists — from foreign threats. The nation’s media industry does not have a defense budget to protect soldiers.

Earnest tried to rationalize the president’s opposition to the publication of anti-jihadist materials as a moral duty.

Whenever journalists consider publishing materials disliked by jihadis, “I think there are a couple of absolutes,” he told the reporters.

The first is “that the publication of any kind of material in no way justifies any act of violence, let alone an act of violence that we saw on the scale in Paris,” he said.

The second absolute is the president’s duty to lobby editors and reporters against publishing anti-jihadi information, he said. ”And there is — this president, as the commander in chief, believes strongly in the responsibility that he has to advocate for our men and women in uniform, particularly if it’s going to make them safer,” Earnest said.

He repeated the two-fisted formulation a moment later. ”What won’t change is our view that that freedom of expression in no way justifies an act of violence against the person who expressed a view. And the president considers the safety and security of our men and women in uniform to be something worth fighting for,” he said.

Throughout the press conference, Earnest repeatedly said the media would be able to decide on its own whether to publish pictures, articles or facts that could prompt another murderous jihad attack by Muslim against journalists.

But he did not say that his government has a constitutional and moral duty to use the nation’s huge military to protect journalists from armed jihadis, but instead hinted strongly that journalists should submit to jihadi threats.

“I think that there are any number of reasons that [U.S.] media organizations have made a decision not to reprint the cartoons” after the January attack, he said. “In some cases, maybe they were concerned about their physical safety. In other cases, they were exercising some judgment in a different way. So we certainly would leave it to media organizations to make a decision like this.”

“What I’m saying is that individual news organizations have to assess that risk for themselves,” he said. “I think the point in the mind of the president and certainly everybody here at the White House is that that is a question that should be answered by journalists.”

“I’m confident in saying that for the vast majority of media organizations, that [fear is] not the only factor. But I would readily concede that it is one in the minds of many of those news executives. But again, that is a decision for all of them to make,” he said.

Obama’s willingness to pressure media outlets, to quit defending First Amendment rights and also to mollify jihadis, reflects Obama’s overall policy of minimizing conflict with militant Islam.

Throughout his presidency, Obama has tried to shift the public’s focus away from the jihadi threat toward his domestic priorities.

He also repeatedly praised Islam and Muslims, and criticized criticism of Islam. “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam,” he told a worldwide TV audience during a September 2012 speech at the United Nations.

“As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam,” he declared in a 2009 speech in Cairo. “It was Islam — at places like Al-Azhar [seminary] — that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe’s Renaissance and Enlightenment,” he claimed.

Obama ha also tried to elevate the status of Islam in the West. “As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam,” he told his audience in Cairo. “It was Islam — at places like Al-Azhar — that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe’s Renaissance and Enlightenment. … I also know that Islam has always been a part of America’s story.”

To reduce the public’s focus on jihadis, Obama has even named the jihadi threat as a non-specific issue of “violent extremism,” and has repeatedly said jihadis have no connection with Islam. “Those who have studied and practiced this religion would tell you — Islam is a peaceful religion. … [Violent acts are] entirely inconsistent with the basic principles of that peaceful religion,” Earnest said Jan. 12.

But that claim of a peaceful Islam was repeatedly coupled with Obama’s policy of pressuring journalists not to anger aggressive Muslim believers. ”I will say that there have been occasions … where the administration will make clear our point of view on some of those assessments based on the need to protect the American people and to protect our men and women in uniform,” Earnest said.

“I wouldn’t rule out making those kinds of expressions again,” he added.

Infidels, care to look into your crystal ball and tell us what you see therein?

Islam The Fastest Growing Religion In The UK

(hat tip to Mark Alexander of A New Dark Age Is Dawning)

Note the dancing and happy Muslims, particularly in the first minute or so. See how wonderful Islam is?


Frankly, I see no ability to stop the West's slide into the abyss.

The statistics in the video should alarm every lover of Western civilization.

But Westerners are gullible. They love those dancing and happy Muslims.

Washington Post Lies About Islam

Today, I stumbled across this, originally published on February 3, 2014:

COMMENTARY: Blasphemy charges pervert Islam’s teachings

...Regarding free speech, the Quran recognizes and protects free speech and expression in more than 40 instances....

[...]

Muhammad established the Charter of Medina, a secular constitution between Muslims and Jews. The charter ensured equality, universal religious freedom, and free speech for all Medina’s residents.

Islam limits free speech on the same premise that the U.S. Supreme Court has also banned the utterance of inflammatory speech. Punishment is warranted if an individual threatens the state due his advocacy of terrorism or incitement to pre-emptive war. It is upon this premise that citizens were punished in Muhammad’s time — be they Muslim or Jewish. At least 15 European nations have laws punishing certain types of blasphemy — something Islam’s original sources do not have....

The same kind of CRAP that is published in almost every history book used in the United States and throughout the West.

I note that the article, written by an Ahmadiyya Muslim, garnered few comments.

Not all commenters were fooled by the article. One commenter stated:

...The Washington Post in publishing this half-informed article here, is wittingly or unwittingly, propagandizing for Muslims in true "NewSpeak".

Silencing Voices

(hat tip to Jihad Watch)

CAIR/ISNA spokeswoman:

Media in the US is very gullible...If you have something to say, especially as a Muslim, they'll come running to you. Take advantage of that!

Video, which includes a panel with two anti-Islamist Muslims:

Obama's DOJ and Islamophilia: "Social Media Posts" (that means Blogs, Facebook, etc.) Telling the Truth About Islam May Violate Civil Rights

BUMPED TO THE TOP FOR NOW - SCROLL DOWN FOR NEWER POSTS

This is not a surprise, but it is a clear and present danger to our freedom (dated May 30, 2013):

DOJ: Social Media Posts Trashing Muslims May Violate Civil Rights

In its latest effort to protect followers of Islam in the U.S. the Obama Justice Department warns against using social media to spread information considered inflammatory against Muslims, threatening that it could constitute a violation of civil rights....

[...]

The area’s top federal prosecutor, Bill Killian, will address a topic that most Americans are likely unfamiliar with, even those well versed on the Constitution; that federal civil rights laws can actually be violated by those who post inflammatory documents aimed at Muslims on social media. “This is an educational effort with civil rights laws as they play into freedom of religion and exercising freedom of religion,” Killian says in the local news story. “This is also to inform the public what federal laws are in effect and what the consequences are.”

The DOJ political appointee adds in the article that the upcoming presentation will also focus on Muslim culture with a special emphasis on the fact that the religion is no different from others, even though some in the faith have committed terrorist acts, Christians have done the same....

Go read the rest HERE. Now.

So, what are we to do about this, an issue of supreme importance. What the DOJ is trying to do strikes at the heart of Freedom of Speech!

Ace of Spades asks, "Has Obama Repealed the Clear and Present Danger Doctrine"?

A Bit Of Advice

For those of you who have children or other family members in the education system right now....

Find out exactly what is being taught in classrooms next week about the Boston jihadists. 

Ask a few questions.

I think that you might hear words such as the following:

“Poor Chechens! They’ve been so oppressed!"

"Chechens are freedom fighters who have been pushed so far that many are now extremists."

"We need to understand these people more. We need to sympathize with them."

"We all know Muslims.  What nice people they are!"

"Islam is not the problem and has nothing to do with what happened in Boston."

"Islam means peace."

Crime And Punishment In The UK

If the following is accurate, Eurabia is in full bloom: