DHS May Ban “Religiously-Charged” Terms Jihad, Sharia to Avert “Us versus Them” in Anti-Terror Programs

words-Large

JUDICIAL WATCH

 

Four years after the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) purged anti-terrorism training material determined to be offensive to Muslims, its umbrella agency, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), may eliminate divisive Islamic terms like “jihad” and “sharia” in government programs targeting radicalization among youth.

It’s political correctness run amok and the Obama administration has played a central role in promoting it by caving in to the demands of various Muslim rights groups. In this latest case a Homeland Security Advisory Council is recommending that, to avoid “us versus them” when discussing extremism, certain “religiously-charged” terminology must be avoided. This includes using “American Muslim” rather than “Muslim American” and rejecting religious, legal and cultural terms like jihad, sharia, takfir and umma. Jihad is the holy war that propels Islamic terrorism. Sharia is the authoritarian doctrine that inspires Islamists-including the world’s most violent groups such as Al Qaeda-and their jihadism. Takfir and umma are Arabic terms that mean apostasy and Muslim community.

Continue reading

A Congressional Overture to Censorship

Family Security Matters

Stephen Coughlin alerted me to a House Resolution introduced on December 17th, H.Res.569, “Condemning violence, bigotry, and hateful rhetoric towards Muslims in the United States.114th Congress (2015-2016).”  As of this writing, the country remains clueless about this development.

The resolution was introduced by Virginia Democrat Donald S. Beyer, and sponsored by Frank Pallone, a New Jersey Democrat, and endorsed by seventy-one other Representatives, most of them Democrats, and possibly a sprinkling of Republicans. The resolution has gone into committee, but one can predict with confidence that it will emerge virtually unscathed and unaltered. After all, the “victims” are Muslims, and the House wishes to put it in the record that certain of its members are against hurting anyone’s feelings.

Continue reading

Mayor Told to Apologize or Resign After He Said This About Obama

Hagen

 

Independent Sentinel

Mayor Bruce Hagen of Superior, Wisconsin has been asked to either apologize or resign after a comment he made on a Facebook photo of Michelle Obama. He called him a “Muslim” who has destroyed the “fabric of American democracy.”

“Unbelievable! She and her Muslim partner have destroyed the fabric of Democracy that was so very hard fought for,” he wrote, a local Fox News affiliate reported.

City councilor Graham Garfield said a recall for Mr. Hagen is not out of the question, but it would be left up to the public.

Think about that. Mayor Hagen offered an opinion and some, probably leftists, want to destroy his career.

Mayor Hagen thought the same thing.

“Do we still have freedom of speech in the country? Sometimes I kind of forget,” he told Fox.

He’s not apologizing or resigning. He’s in his first term and won his last term with 55% of the vote.

Hagen said he holds the office in high regard but not Obama.

The city councilors demand he apologize.

“I’m not saying he’s done anything criminal, but he’s certainly put his leadership capabilities in question,” said one.

The councilor felt the mention of “Muslim” was derogatory. He also believes the mayor has to be nonpartisan – that’s a first for me.

I don’t remember anyone calling for heads to roll when George Bush was called a monkey or a murderer.

Currently, the page, which is not an official page, is completely private. It’s not been mentioned anywhere if it was at the time.

What do you think?

Are they going to make it illegal to tell the truth about Islam?

Are they going to make it illegal to tell the truth about Islam?

What about Free Speech? You know. the First Amendment to the US Constitution.

413795304_obama_shreds_constitution_answer_1_xlarge

 

via e-mail

John Quincy Adams on Islam

In the seventh century of the Christian era, a wandering Arab of the lineage of Hagar, the Egyptian, combining the powers of transcendent genius, with the preternatural energy of a fanatic, and the fraudulent spirit of an impostor, proclaimed himself as a messenger from Heaven, and spread desolation and delusion over an extensive portion of the earth. Adopting from the sublime conception of the Mosaic law, the doctrine of one omnipotent God; he connected indissolubly with it, the audacious falsehood, that he was himself his prophet and apostle. Adopting from the new Revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust, by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion. He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST: TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE.

Between these two religions, thus contrasted in their characters, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. That war is yet flagrant; nor can it cease but by the extinction of that imposture, which has been permitted by Providence to prolong the degeneracy of man. While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men. The hand of Ishmael will be against every man, and every man’s hand against him. It is, indeed, amongst the mysterious dealings of God, that this delusion should have been suffered for so many ages, and during so many generations of human kind, to prevail over the doctrines of the meek and peaceful and benevolent Jesus (Blunt, 1830, 29:269, capitals in orig.).

Divine Human Rights vs. Marxist Human Rights

Family Security Matters

RONALD R. CHERRY, MD

The United States was founded on the principle of Divine human rights which are endowed to all individuals equally by their Creator.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness…”  Thomas Jefferson

This Judeo-Christian concept provides for unalienable human rights that are distributed equally among all people because, from before birth, God views all individuals as His equally loved and valued children, made in His image. Since all individuals possess infinite and therefore equal value in the eyes of their Creator, all equally possess Divine human rights. Divine human rights are also Natural human rights – self-evident, rational and moral – and thus represent both the law of nature and nature’s God.

Continue reading

‘Innocence of Muslims’ should have stayed on YouTube, court rules

25a46-download

 

The Hill

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday ruled YouTube should not have been forced to remove a controversial film mocking the Prophet Muhammad due to copyright concerns.

A majority of the 11-judge panel reversed a decision from last year, when a three-judge panel sided with an actress who said she was duped into appearing in the film and had called for a preliminary injunction to remove it.

The circuit court ruled that the previous ruling was unwarranted and infringed on the First Amendment.

Continue reading

Media Sides With Garland Terrorists Against Freedom of Speech

Star_Wars_Chess_Muslims

 

Moonbattery

The battle lines are clear. On one side you have patriotic Americans peacefully upholding our fundamental right of free expression. On the other you have Islamic savages who employ violence to deny that right. Whose side does the establishment media take? The Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest in Garland, Texas has provided the answer:

Through implication, a variety of respected [sic] reporting outlets spent whole paragraphs outlining the conditions that might have inspired two radicalized Muslims to shoot up this event and wound a security guard.

The AP made note of the history of provocative acts in which Geller and her organization have engaged during their campaign of opposition to murderous Islamist extremism:

When a Chicago-based nonprofit held a January fundraiser in Garland designed to help Muslims combat negative depictions of their faith, Geller spearheaded about 1,000 picketers at the event.

One chanted: “Go back to your own countries! We don’t want you here!” Others held signs with messages such as, “Insult those who behead others,” an apparent reference to recent beheadings by the militant group Islamic State.

In The Daily Mail, AP reporters contributed to a photo spread outlining Geller’s “long history of hatred.”

“The AFDI is listed as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center, a watchdog organization that describes Geller as ‘prone to publicizing preposterous claims, such as President Obama being the ‘love child’ of Malcolm X, and once suggested that recent U.S. Supreme Court appointee Elena Kagen, who is Jewish, supports Nazi ideology,’” that report read.

This isn’t the first time an organization listed as a “hate group” by the SPLC was attacked by gun-wielding maniacs, but you don’t see many media outlets looking into the climate of murderous violence inspired by this liberal advocacy group.

Any organization suspected of harboring opinions to the right of Sheila Jackson Lee’s latest grunts is eligible to be listed as a “hate group” by the ultra-leftists at the grossly irresponsible Southern Poverty Law Center.

If your opinion of the human race can withstand a sharp downward plunge, check out McClatchy’s almost unbelievably vile coverage of the terror attack, which suggests that Pamela Geller should be arrested for offending the terrorists. I’m serious.

At least Fox News will choose the Constitution over the Koran, right? Wrong:

Pamela Geller is one of last public figures left in this country who deserves to call herself an American. Willfully stupid recreant dhimmis like Martha MacCallum belong in burkas and will eventually find their way into them.

A poll finds that 58% of US Moslems believe it should be illegal to criticize Islam, which would require the repeal of the First Amendment. I suspect the actual number is much higher. Among journalists, who as liberals instinctively side with America’s enemies, I am sure it is higher.

Since you won’t see it from the establishment media despite its crucial relevance to the story, here again is the winning cartoon:

you-cant-draw-me

Even Martha MacCallum could grasp the point if she tried.