Archive | April 2016

A DIFFERENT KIND OF PRESIDENT THEN… 

When Jefferson saw there was no negotiating with Muslims, he formed what is now the Marines (sea going soldiers). These Marines were attached to U. S. Merchant vessels.
 .
When the Muslims attacked U.S. merchant vessels they were repulsed by armed soldiers, but there is more. The Marines followed the Muslims back to their villages and killed every man, woman, and child in the village. It didn’t take long for the Muslims to leave U.S. Merchant vessels alone. English and French merchant vessels started running up our flag when entering the Mediterranean to secure safe travel.
 .
Why the Marine Hymn Contains the Verse “To the Shores of Tripoli”
 .
This is very interesting and a must read piece of our history. It points out where we may be heading.
 .
Most Americans are unaware of the fact that over two hundred years ago the United States had declared war on Islam and Thomas Jefferson led the charge!
 .
At the height of the 18th century, Muslim pirates (the “Barbary Pirates”) were the terror of the Mediterranean and a large area of the North Atlantic.
 .
They attacked every ship in sight, and held the crews for exorbitant ransoms. Those taken hostage were subjected to barbaric treatment and wrote heart-breaking letters home, begging their government and family members to pay whatever their Mohammedan captors demanded.
.
These extortionists of high seas represented the North African Islamic nations of Tripoli, Tunis, Morocco, and Algiers – collectively referred to as the Barbary Coast – and presented a dangerous and unprovoked threat to the new American Republic.
 .
Before the Revolutionary War, U.S. merchant ships had been under the protection of Great Britain. When the U.S. declared its independence and entered into war, the ships of the United States were protected by France. However, once the war was won, America had to protect its own fleets.
 .
Thus, the birth of the U.S. Navy.  Beginning in 1784, 17 years before he would become President, Thomas Jefferson became America’s Minister to France. That same year, U.S. Congress sought to appease its Muslim adversaries by following in the footsteps of European nations who paid bribes to the Barbary States rather than engaging them in war.
 .
 In July of 1785, Algerian pirates captured American ships, and the Dye of Algiers demanded an unheard-of ransom of $60,000. It was a plain and simple case of extortion, and Thomas Jefferson was vehemently opposed to any further payments. Instead, he proposed to Congress the formation of a coalition of allied nations who together could force the Islamic states into peace. A disinterested Congress decided to pay the ransom.
 .
In 1786, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams met with Tripoli’s ambassador to Great Britain to ask by what right his nation attacked American ships and enslaved American citizens, and why Muslims held so much hostility towards America, a nation with which they had no previous contacts.
 .
The two future Presidents reported that Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja had answered that Islam “was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Qur’an that all nations who would not acknowledge their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every “Mussel man” (Muslim) who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise.”
 .
Despite this stunning admission of premeditated violence on non-Muslim nations, as well as the objections of many notable American leaders, including George Washington, who warned that caving in was both wrong and would only further embolden the enemy, for the following fifteen years the American government paid the Muslims millions of dollars for the safe passage of American ships or the return of American hostages. The payments in ransom and tribute amounted to over 20 percent of the United States government annual revenues in 1800.
 .
Jefferson was disgusted. Shortly after his being sworn in as the third President of the United States in 1801, the  Pasha of Tripoli sent him a note demanding the immediate payment of $225,000  plus $25,000 a year for every year forthcoming. That changed everything.
 .
Jefferson let the Pasha know, in no uncertain terms, what he could do with his demand. The Pasha responded by cutting down the flagpole at the American consulate and declared war on the United States. Tunis, Morocco, and Algiers immediately followed suit.  Jefferson, until now, had been against America raising a naval force for anything beyond coastal defense, but, having watched his nation be cowed by Islamic thuggery for long enough, decided that it was finally time to meet force with force.
 .
He dispatched a squadron of frigates to the Mediterranean and taught the Muslim nations of the Barbary Coast a lesson he hoped they would never forget. Congress authorized Jefferson to empower U.S. ships to seize all vessels and goods of the Pasha of Tripoli and to “cause to be done all other acts of precaution or hostility as the state of war would justify”.
 .
When Algiers and Tunis, who were both accustomed to American cowardice and acquiescence, saw the newly independent United States had both the will and the right to strike back, they quickly abandoned their allegiance to Tripoli. The war with Tripoli lasted for four more years, and raged up again in 1815. The bravery of the U.S. Marine Corps  in these wars led to the line “to the shores of Tripoli” in the Marine Hymn,  and they would forever be known as “leathernecks” for the leather collars of  their uniforms, designed to prevent their heads from being cut off by the  Muslim scimitars when boarding enemy ships.
 .
Islam, and what its Barbary followers justified doing in the name of their prophet and their god, disturbed Jefferson quite deeply.
 .
America had a tradition of religious tolerance. In fact Jefferson, himself, had co-authored the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, but fundamentalist Islam was like no other religion the world had ever seen. A religion based on supremacy, whose holy book not only condoned but mandated violence against unbelievers, was unacceptable to him. His greatest fear was that someday this brand of Islam would return and pose an even greater threat to the United States.
 .
This should concern every American.  That Muslims have brought about women-only classes and swimming times at taxpayer-funded universities and public pools; that Christians, Jews, and  Hindus have been banned from serving on juries where Muslim defendants are  being judged; Piggy banks and Porky Pig tissue dispensers have been banned from workplaces because they offend Islamist sensibilities; ice cream has been discontinued at certain Burger King locations because the picture on the wrapper looks similar to the Arabic script for Allah; public schools are  pulling pork from their menus; on and on and on and  on…
 .
It’s death by a thousand cuts, or inch-by-inch as some refer to it, and most Americans have no idea that this battle is being waged every day across America. By not fighting back, by allowing groups to obfuscate what is really happening, and not insisting that the Islamists adapt to our own culture, the United States is cutting its own throat with a politically correct knife, and helping to further the Islamists agenda.
 .
Sadly, it appears that today America’s leaders would rather be politically correct than victorious!
 .
Same story with most Western nations!

An Open Letter to Bruce Springsteen and His Band

Dear Bruce,
As a resident of North Carolina since 2003, I read with interest that you decided to cancel your April 10th concert in Greensboro because of HB2, the Public Facilities Privacy and Security Act.

.
In your statement, you explained that, in your view, the bill is “an attempt by people who cannot stand the progress our country has made in recognizing the human rights of all of our citizens to overturn that progress.”

.
You added that it was time for you and your band “to show solidarity for those freedom fighters” (speaking of transgender activists), and you ended your statement with these powerful words: “Some things are more important than a rock show and this fight against prejudice and bigotry which is happening as I writeis one of them. It is the strongest means I have for raising my voice in opposition to those who continue to push us backward instead of forward.”
.
I also read that your guitarist Steven Van Zandt, has likened HB2 to an “evil virus” that is spreading through the United States in the form of similar legislation.
.
These are strong words, and they represent strong convictions.
.
So let me first commend you and your band members for putting your principles before your livelihood, even to the disappointment of your North Carolina fans.
.
I have read that you regretted not performing at the 1985 Live Aid concert in Wembley, and perhaps this is your way of saying, “I do care, and I’m here to make a difference.”
.
Whatever your motivation, I admire anyone who puts morality before money.
.
My question to you and your band is simply this: In boycotting North Carolina and siding against HB2, did you really side with morality? Are you truly standing with “freedom fighters”?
.
I’m assuming you read HB2 for yourself and you’re not just listening to media reports attacking the bill or, worse still, getting your talking points from biased lobbyist groups like the Human Rights Campaign.
.
So please allow me to ask you some questions.
.
First, how do you know if someone is really “transgender” or not? Is it determined entirely by how they feel about themselves? If so, do you think that it might be hard to make laws based entirely on how people feel? Did you ever stop to consider that?
.
Second, what’s the difference between someone with “gender dysphoria” (or, as it used to be called, “gender identity disorder”) and someone, say, with schizophrenia or “multiple personality disorder” or some other psychological condition? In other words, if a man is a biological and chromosomal male but believes he is a woman, is he actually a woman, or does he have a psychological disorder?
.
If he does have a psychological disorder, should we try to treat that disorder or should we celebrate that disorder? And is it right to call biological males who feel they are women and biological women who feel they are men “freedom fighters”? Perhaps that’s not the best use of the term.
.
If you are deeply offended that I would dare suggest that many transgender individuals are dealing with a psychological disorder, could you kindly point me to the definitive scientific literature that explains that these biological males are actually females and these biological females are actually males?
.
I’m not saying they don’t deserve compassion.
.
To the contrary, I’m saying that’s exactly what they deserve: compassion, not celebration.
.
But perhaps I’m being too abstract here, so let’s get really practical.
.
Let’s say that a 6′ 4″ male who used to play professional football and who has secretly agonized over his gender identity for years finally determines that he must be true to himself and live as a woman.
.
Do you think it might be traumatic for a little girl using the library bathroom to see this big man walk into her room wearing a dress and a wig? Should we take her feelings into account, or is she not important? What if that was your granddaughter? Would you care if she was traumatized? And when you speak of “the human rights of all of our citizens” does that include little girls like this?
.
I understand that this gentleman will have difficulties should he decide to dress and live as a woman, but that is still a choice he is making, and it is not fair to impose his struggles on innocent little children, is it?
.
And what if this same man, whom we’ll assume is not a sexual predator, wants to share the YMCA locker room with your wife and daughter, standing there in his underwear as they come out of the shower stalls wrapped in towels. Is this fair to them?
.
Let’s take this one step further.
.
If any man who claims to be a woman can use women’s bathrooms and locker rooms, then how do we keep the sexual predators out? I’ve asked people to watch this short video, giving examples of male heterosexual predators who donned women’s clothing to get into the ladies’ rooms, and I’d encourage you to watch it too.
.
Without HB2, rapists and voyeurs and paedophiles would have free access to our women and daughters in the safety of their own bathrooms and locker rooms.
.
Since you don’t like HB2 indeed, your guitarist called it an “evil virus”what’s your plan to keep the predators out? How can we tell the difference between a “genuine” transgender person and a sexual predator? Since everyone knows you as “The Boss,” what would you do to keep the ladies and children safe?
.
And one final question.
.
When you booked the concert in Greenboro, the laws in North Carolina were just as they are today: In public facilities, people had to use the bathrooms and locker rooms that corresponded to their biological sex.
.
Why, then, did you agree to come in the first place? Why cancel the concert when things today are just what they were six months ago?
.
Again, I appreciate your sincerity, but I question your judgment.
.
In your zeal to do what is right, you have actually done what is wrong.

 

Peace Treaties That Don’t Bring Peace

Israelis of a certain age have a saying which translates from Hebrew as, “We’ve already seen that movie.” It’s the approximate equivalent of, “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.”
.

It came to mind after seeing the most recent full-page ad in the New York Times that was sponsored by advocates of a Palestinian state. At the top was photo of Jimmy Carter, Menachem Begin, and Anwar Sadat, next to the headline, “Israel Made Peace With Egypt — and Got Peace.” That was followed by a photo of Bill Clinton, Yitzhak Rabin, and King Hussein, next to the words, “Israel Made Peace with Jordan — and Got Peace.”
.
Those two were followed by a third headline, “If Israel Makes Peace with the Palestinians, It Will Also Get Peace.”
.
I wonder how many readers of the New York Times will realize why there was no photo next to that third headline.
.
There should have been a photo, of course. If the sponsors of the ad — the S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace — had been honest, they would have displayed the photo of Bill Clinton, Yasser Arafat, and Yitzhak Rabin at the signing of the Oslo Accords on the White House lawn in September 1993.
.
But printing that photo would have undermined the ad’s central message. The entire purpose of the ad was to blame Israel for the absence of peace. The ad sought to convince the public that Israel has it in its power to make peace or not. All Israel supposedly has to do is “make peace,” and, voila, “It Will Get Peace.”
.
Showing the photo from 1993 would remind the public that Israel already made peace with the Palestinians — and it didn’t get peace in return. To put it another way: acknowledging the historical record interferes with the campaign to pressure Israel into making even more concessions to the Palestinians.
.
It’s also important to address the myth that Israel “got peace” as a result of its treaties with Egypt and Jordan. It didn’t.
.
In the 1979 treaty with Egypt, Israel surrendered the entire Sinai Peninsula. It gave up a huge strategic buffer zone; and it gave up oil fields that supplied a significant portion of Israel’s energy needs. In return, Egypt promised to educate its people to sincerely accept the idea of peace with the Jewish state.
.
But that’s not what happened. What Israel received in exchange for the Sinai was a long extension of the cease-fire with Egypt that had been in place since the end of the 1973 Yom Kippur War. I am not revisiting the question of whether that was a good trade-off for Israel.
.
I am only pointing out that today, 37 years after the treaty, large numbers of Egyptians remain hostile to Israel. Note that when Egypt recently held democratic elections, the fanatically anti-Israel Muslim Brotherhood was voted into power. Fortunately, the generals who overthrew the Muslim Brotherhood have chosen to preserve the ongoing cease-fire with Israel. But that’s a far cry from a genuine, deeply rooted peace.
.
Likewise, it wasn’t the treaty with Jordan that “got peace.” Israel has had a cease-fire on its border with Jordan since the end of the 1967 Six-Day War. King Hussein, and his son and successor King Abdullah, understand that Israel could crush them if they try to make war against the Jewish state.
.
So they have preferred to hold their fire. The 1994 treaty merely codified the existing situation on the ground. The Jordanian masses, however, have not been educated to embrace peace, which is why we periodically read about large numbers of Jordanian parliament members adopting extreme anti-Israel resolutions.
.
And that, by the way, is the same reason that the Oslo Accords did not produce peace with the Palestinians. Israel made all the concessions that it promised, and more. It withdrew from the areas in Judea and Samaria where 98 percent of the Palestinians live. It withdrew from all of Gaza. It stopped building new settlements in the territories back when Yitzhak Rabin was prime minister.
.
In exchange, the Palestinians promised peace. The Oslo Accords prohibit the Palestinian Authority (PA) from engaging in “hostile propaganda.” But as we know, the PA engages in hostile propaganda every single day. Instead of educating Palestinian children for peace, it educates them — and trains them — for war against Israel.
.
The folks at the S. Daniel Abraham Center can’t fool us. What they call “making peace” with the Palestinians now — that is, giving them a state — will not bring peace. How do we know? Because “making peace” with them in 1993 — when Rabin permitted the creation of the PA regime, which is already close to being a de-facto state — did not bring peace.
.
They can leave photos of Oslo out of a newspaper ad, but they can’t change the historical record. We’ve already seen that movie.

 

Important Freedom Of Religion Cases Lose On Appeal

Are you ready to lose your job or be dismissed from school for your faith?
.

Christianity is being challenged at all levels to conform and compromise to the will of the majority.  North Carolina is experiencing political and corporate pressure for upholding a Godly standard, but so are everyday Christians at school and work.
.
Two important cases were recently rejected on appeal as Christians fought for the right to share their faith and hold to Biblical convictions in the United Kingdom.
.
Felix Ngole, a Christian studying to be a social worker at the University of Sheffield, has lost his appeal against expulsion after he was dismissed from the school earlier this year for posting on his Facebook page messages in favor of Biblical marriage.
.
Felix was advised that his Facebook post “may have caused offence to some individuals” and had “transgressed boundaries which are not deemed appropriate for someone entering the social work profession.”
.
Following additional meetings, the Sheffield committee concluded that Ngole’s beliefs would negatively affect his “ability to carry out a role as a social worker,”.
.
In his defense, Ngole commented that “Like every other student at university, I use social media to communicate and express personal views. In my Facebook posts in question, I simply expressed support for the Biblical view of marriage and sexuality.”
.
Ngole appealed the ruling however the appeals office has defended the ruling and Ngole remains suspended from the school.
.
In a similar fashion, Victoria Wasteney, an occupational therapist working at the St. John Howard Center in London was suspended after her co-worker accused her of trying to convert her to Christianity.
.
Victoria had developed a friendship with her colleague Enya Nawaz, and in the course of time explored topics of faith and belief with her friend.  During those conversations she had offered to pray with her colleague, invited her to church and gave her a book about Christianity.
.
These actions led to an investigation which concluded she was guilty of “harassment” and was wrong to pray with her co-worker, invite her to church and give her a book about her faith and was subsequently suspend from her job for 9 months.
.
Wasteney was granted permission to appeal the decision, but now a judge has agreed that Wasteney’s employer was right to discipline her.
.
“What the court clearly failed to do was to say how, in today’s politically correct world, any Christian can even enter into a conversation with a fellow employee on the subject of religion and not, potentially, later end up in an employment tribunal,” Wasteney said in a statement.
.
These cases should shock Christians yet there has been very little outcry.  Will Christians be banned from educational institutions for holding to beliefs that “cause offense” to others. Will we have our speech monitored at work to make sure we don’t share personal information about our faith that could make others uncomfortable?
.
Educational institutions should be safe place where people can explore and challenge views without fear of retribution.  Unfortunately the trend is to make sure no one is offended and thus free speech is being crushed at an alarming rate.  Christians will no doubt find their views among the politically incorrect and should not be surprised if Felix Ngole is but the first of many to be banished for not holding to “proper beliefs”
.
Ngole himself warns of the dangers arising from his case: “My case raises all sorts of legal questions as to whether Christians can any longer hold traditional biblical and moral beliefs and still enter mainstream professions such as social work, medicine, teaching and law in this country.”
.
Wasteney also sees a double standard being applied and doubts had the situation been reversed any of this would have happened.  She believes the NHS singled her out for discipline because Christianity is so disrespected.
.
Wasteney points out that “previously a Christian worship service that I set up for patients was closed down, but accommodation for Muslims to practice their faith wholly facilitated and encouraged.” 
 .
And that’s what is increasingly happening within British institutions. A Christian will be discriminated against for supporting heterosexual marriage, whilst a follower of a religion thats founder raped his child bride will be encouraged. 

ISLAMIC TERRORISM, THE USA, AND THE PALESTINIAN ISSUE

by retired Ambassador Yoram Ettinger
According to President Obama’s worldview the Palestinian issue is a principal Muslim concern and a major source of Muslim animation and frustration, which has fueled regional violence, intensifying Islamic terrorism.
However, irrespective of Obama’s far-reaching gestures to the Palestinian Authority, the number of Muslim terrorist cells in the US has increased, as have Islamic terrorist attacks on the US mainland, such as in San Bernardino (2015), Boston (2013), Times Square (2010), Ft. Hood, Texas (2009), Little Rock, Arkansas (2009), Dallas, Texas (2009), etc.
Moreover, in 1983, while President Reagan brutally pressured Israel to end its offensive against the PLO in Lebanon and withdraw to the international border, Islamic car bombs blew up the US embassy and the Marines’ headquarters in Beirut, murdering 300 US Marines.

In 1998 and 2000, while President Clinton pressured Israel to make dramatic concessions to the Palestinians, and made Arafat a frequent foreign visitor to the White House, Islamic car bombs hit the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, murdering 300 persons, and Islamic terrorists hit the “USS Cole” at the port of Aden, murdering 17 US sailors. Furthermore, “September 11” was planned while President Clinton pressured Israel to repartition Jerusalem, retreat to the pre-1967 lines and accept a limited version of the Palestinian “claim of return” to the pre-1967 area of Israel.

President Obama was right when declaring in June, 2009, at Cairo University: “Islam has always been part of America’s story.” Indeed, Islamic (Barbary) terrorism targeted US ships between 1776 and the beginning of the 19th century. John Quincy Adams, the sixth US president (1825-1929), researched the causes of anti-US Islamic terrorism, concluding that the core cause was Islam’s endemic hostility toward the “infidel” as expressed in the Quran.
The US is the role-model of democracy and civil liberties, and therefore, it is perceived as a lethal threat by repressive, rogue, anti-democratic Muslim regimes, which have terrorized their own people and other Muslim communities since the 7th century. They, also, consider the US to be the most effective hurdle on their way to regional and global domination. US prominence has made America the chief scapegoat, blamed by rogue Muslim regimes for their own social, economic and moral failures.
Islamic terrorists believe that their victory over the USSR, in Afghanistan, caused the disintegration of the Soviet Union. They are convinced that defeating the USA would be easier, in view of recent US retreats from Vietnam (1973), Iran (1979), Lebanon (1983), Somalia (1993) and Libya (2012), and the expected evacuation of Iraq and Afghanistan. Islamic terrorists assume that the US policy-makers and public tend to cave under intensified terrorism – increasingly on the US mainland – which will, therefore, trigger further US retreats.
Islamic terrorists have been emboldened by President Obama’s and CIA Director John Brennan’s claims – in defiance of 1,400 year old Islamic terrorism, Islamic tyranny and the absence of intra-Muslim peaceful coexistence – that there is no Islamic terrorism, since Islam promotes peace; that there is no Jihadist terrorism, since Jihad purifies the soul; that the US should engage rogue regimes diplomatically rather than militarily; that the Muslim Brotherhood (the largest transnational Islamic terrorist organization) is not a terrorist organization; that there is no military solution to terrorism; that terrorism should be contained rather than defeated; and that terrorist acts may be defined as “workplace violence,” etc. Thus, wrong US assumptions have produced wrong US policies and failed battle tactics.
According to the late Prof. Fuad Ajami one of the leading Middle East scientists in recent years: “The sad truth is that the terror will continue – and continue to test the patience of an America that insists on its innocence and its distance from the feuds and passions of the Middle East….

A terrible wind was now blowing throughout the realm of Islam. Americans were caught there at a time when a large fight was breaking out – a fight for the soul and historic direction of that society…. Caught between the frightened privilege, on the one side, and the militant wrath, on the other. And, America was inevitably on the side of the privilege…. The distant superpower was turned into a demon…. Decades of oil wealth and promise in the Moslem world was ending in failure and defeat.

When the inevitable scapegoating came, America was the best kind of scapegoat….This amorphous world took America on the only way it could – with terror…. In reality, to talk of a peace process that would end this wave of terror is naïve. If Americans can be sure of anything, they can be sure of this: Nothing would inflame the passions of extremists more than a major American diplomatic initiative….

No US diplomatic scheme would spare America the fury of those bent upon eradicating its presence in the Middle East. It is a false reading of Islam to say that terror springs from the impasse between Israelis and Palestinians…. It does not advance Israeli-Palestinian peace to pretend that it would solve a problem larger than their conflict….”

Is it realistic to assume that rogue Muslim regimes, which have employed terrorism – systematically and deliberately – since the 7th century, in order to settle intra-Muslim conflicts with fellow “believers,” would not employ terrorism in order to settle their conflicts with the USA, “the big, arrogant, infidel Satan”?!
Islamic terrorism constitutes a clear and present danger to the USA and the Free World, irrespective of the Arab-Israeli conflict, independent of the Palestinian issue and regardless of Israel’s policies or the very existence of the Jewish State, which is only “the little Satan” as far as Muslim rogue regimes and terrorists are concerned.
David Hocking
HFT Connect

The President’s Party Endorses Stabbings Where’s The Outrage?

BY STEPHEN M. FLATOW/JNS.ORG

 

No, the headline doesn’t refer to America’s president.
I’m referring to the president of the Palestinian Authority (PA), Mahmoud Abbas. But let’s keep President Barack Obama’s party, the Democrats, in mind as we examine the latest developments involving Abbas and his Fatah party.
.
Established in 1964 — long before there were any settlements or “occupied territories” — Fatah has long been the largest faction of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), and it carried out many of the PLO’s most notorious terrorist massacres.
.
The 1972 Munich Olympics massacre was perpetrated by Fatah (using the fake name “Black September”). The 1978 Coastal Road Massacre of 37 innocent civilians, including the niece of a US senator, was carried out by Fatah. So were many, many other infamous atrocities.
.
Yasser Arafat was chairman of both Fatah and the PLO; Abbas was his second in command with the nom de guerre of Abu Mazen. In a personal conversation with me, the late Yitzhak Rabin told me that Abbas was one of the terrorists surrounding Arafat. Since Arafat’s death, Abbas has been the leader of Fatah, the PLO, and the PA.
.
The U.S. State Department claimed after the signing of the 1993 Oslo Accords that Fatah has become “moderate,” and it was removed from the official U.S. list of terrorist groups. But Fatah’s Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade has continued to carry out terrorism against Israelis to this day. Moreover, the official Fatah emblem still shows a map of all of Israel (not just the disputed territories) as “Palestine,” criss-crossed by hands holding rifles. Some “moderates” they are!
.
How has Abbas’s Fatah responded to the current wave of Palestinian stabbings of Israelis? By glorifying the stabbers and urging other Arabs to carry out knife attacks, too.
.
Think about that for a moment. Fatah is the party of the head of the PA. In other words, it is the Palestinian equivalent of what the Democratic party is in the US — the party of the head of the government. Can you imagine the reaction if the Democratic party publicly endorsed murdering civilians?
.
Here are a few samples of what Fatah has been saying about the terrorists and the stabbings:
.
On March 27, the official Fatah Twitter account posts an illustration of a large knife, with the skyline of Jerusalem on it, above the slogan, “Israel is forcing the young Palestinians to follow this path to Jerusalem.”
.
On March 9, Fatah’s Facebook page posts an image of a huge hand holding a knife over a map of all of Israel. On the arm are the words “The Heroic Martyr”; the map is labeled “Bashar Masalha” — the name of the terrorist who recently stabbed to death an American tourist, Taylor Force.
.
Also on March 9, photos of three terrorists are posted on the Fatah Facebook page, over the slogan, “Happy are the Martyrs.” The three are the aforementioned Bashar Masalha; Fuad Kassab Al-Tamimi, who shot attacked and wounded two Israelis in Jerusalem the previous day; and Abd Al-Rahman Raddad, who stabbed an Israeli in Petach Tikva the previous day.
.
On March 8, the Fatah Facebook page posted this about Masalha, Al-Tamimi, and Raddad: “O the pride of all O the pride of all of the young Palestinians, may your blood remain a source of true honor for the homeland for which you sacrificed all — even your precious lives. We promise you that your blood will continue to be a torch that illuminates our path, until we achieve what you died for as Martyrs. Your blood has taught us a lesson in the school of life.”
.
These are just three samples of an enormous number of similar Fatah declarations, which have been exposed and translated by Palestinian Media Watch.
.
Now think about Fatah’s declarations in American terms. Imagine if the Democratic party’s Facebook page called the San Bernardino mass-murderers “the pride of all young Americans.”  Imagine if Democratic party leaders hailed Dylann Roof (who carried out the South Carolina church massacre) as “the Martyr,” and promised “that your blood will continue to be a torch that illuminates our path.”
.
At a bare minimum, surely President Obama would have that Facebook page dismantled and would fire any party officials who praised the murderers.
.
Mahmoud Abbas, by contrast, has not penalized a single Fatah official for glorifying and inciting the stabbers. On the contrary, he himself has repeatedly praised the stabbers, has sent condolences to the families of stabbers who were killed in the act, and has even characterized the attacks as “a peaceful popular uprising.”
.
The Palestinians should be held to the same moral standards as everyone else. To suggest that they “can’t help it” and therefore should be excused when they behave like this is, frankly, racist. There is nothing in their DNA that compels them to be murderers or inciters. Their president’s party should be judged by the exact same standards and criteria that we judge the American president’s party.
.
Where is the outrage from those who pressure Israel to make concessions to those who honor and praise terrorists?

.

Are you outraged by this situation? You should be because your taxes are being given to support Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah terrorists. Billions have been gifted to them in various aid packages despite our governments knowledge that large portions of that aid goes toward the support of terrorism through propaganda that promotes hatred in schools, weapons, and reward payments to terrorists and their families.
.
Don’t just wring your hands. Don’t just pray. Write to your politicians. Demand they stop funding terrorism.

ISIS in Europe: How Deep is the “Gray Zone”?

BY GIULIO MEOTTI/GATESTONE INSTITUTE

 

In the 1970s and ’80s, Europe was terrorized by a war declared by Communist armed groups, such as the Germany’s Baader Meinhof or Italy’s Red Brigades. Terrorists seemed determined to undermine democracy and capitalism.
.

They targeted dozens of journalists, public officials, professors, economists and politicians, and in Italy in 1978, even kidnapped and executed Italy’s former prime minister, Aldo Moro.
.
The big question then was: “How deep is the ‘gray zone’?” — the sympathizers of terrorism in the industrial factories, labor unions and universities.
.
In the last year, the Islamic State’s henchmen slaughtered hundreds of Europeans and Westerners. Their last assault, in Brussels, struck at the heart of the West: the postmodern mecca of NATO and the European Union.
.
We should now answer the same question: How deep is the “gray zone” of the Islamic State in Europe?
.
Peggy Noonan recently tried to give an answer in the Wall Street Journal:
.
“There are said to be 1.6 billion Muslims in the world. … Let’s say only 10% of the 1.6 billion harbor feelings of grievance toward ‘the West’, or desire to expunge the infidel, or hope to re-establish the caliphate. That 10% is 160 million people. Let’s say of that group only 10% would be inclined toward jihad. That’s 16 million. Assume that of that group only 10% really means it would really become jihadis or give them aid and sustenance. That’s 1.6 million.”
.
That is a lot.
.
According to a ComRes report commissioned by the BBC, 27% of British Muslims have sympathy for the terrorists who attacked the Charlie Hebdo office in Paris (12 killed). An ICM poll, released by Newsweek, revealed that 16% of French Muslims support ISIS. The number rises to 27% percent for those aged 18-24. In dozens of French schools, the “minute of silence” to commemorate the murdered Charlie Hebdo’s journalists was interrupted by Muslim pupils who protested it.
.
How deep is ISIS’s popularity in Belgium? Very deep. The most accurate study is a report from Voices From the Blogs, which highlights the high degree of pro-ISIS sympathy in Belgium. The report monitored and analyzed more than two million Arabic messages around the world via Twitter, Facebook and blogs regarding ISIS’s actions in the Middle East.
.
The most enthusiastic comments about ISIS come from Qatar at 47%; then Pakistan, at 35%; third overall is Belgium, where 31% of tweets in Arabic on the Islamic State are positive — more than Libya (24%), Oman (25%), Jordan (19%), Saudi Arabia (20%) and Iraq (20%). This shocking data exposes the success of the network and its easy pro-ISIS recruitment in Belgium.
.
In other European countries, after Belgium, Britain is at 24%, Spain 21%, France 20%.
.
In the UK, one in five Muslims have sympathy for the Caliphate. Today more British Muslims join ISIS than the British army.
.
In the Netherlands, a survey conducted by Motivaction shows that the 80% of Dutch Turks see “nothing wrong” in ISIS.
.
Among young European Muslims, support for suicide bombings range from 22% in Germany to 29% in Spain, 35% in Britain and 42% in France, according to a Pew poll.
.
The level of ISIS’s popularity in the Arab world has been exposed by many surveys: the Clarion Project published a report based on multiple sources a March 2015 poll by the Iraqi Independent Institute for Administration and Civil Society Studies, a November 2014 poll by Zogby Research Services, a November 2014 poll by the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies, and an October 2014 poll by the Fikra Forum. The result: 42 million people in the Arab world sympathize with ISIS.
.
After the massacre at Charlie Hebdo, Al-Jazeera conducted a survey asking, “Do you support Isis’s victories?” 81% of respondents voted “yes.”
.
Even if these polls and surveys must be taken with some caution, they all indicate a deep and vibrant “gray zone,” which is feeding the Islamic jihad in Europe and the Middle East. We are talking about millions of Muslims who show sympathy, understanding and affinity with the ideology and goals of ISIS.
.
Anthony Glees, an English scholar of political radicalism, revealed the “gray zone” of Germany’s Baader-Meinhof terror group: “By 1977, the West German Federal Criminal Agency had a terrorist index which contained the names of some 4.7 million suspects and sympathisers, many of them university students.”
.
The terrorist leaders at that time all came from good German families: Andreas Baader was the son of a professor of history, Ulrike Meinhof was the daughter of a museum director and a famous journalist, Gudrun Ensslin was the daughter of an evangelical pastor, Horst Mahler was the son of a judge.
.
The Islamic State today has a much deeper gray zone of sympathizers in the Muslim communities of Europe.
.
If Baader-Meinhof was at war with the “schweine” (bourgeois “pigs”) and targeted specific political figures, the Caliphate’s volunteers are at war with all the “kuffar” (unbelievers). ISIS loyalists target the patrons of restaurants, theaters and stadiums in Paris; a café in Copenhagen which held a debate on freedom of expression and Islam; Western tourists at a resort in Tunisia; commuters at the Maelbeek metro station and passengers at the Brussels airport.
.
For ISIS, it is an eternal war in the name of the prophet. As Graeme Wood explained in “What ISIS Really Wants,” ISIS “hungers for genocide … and it considers itself a harbinger of and headline player in the imminent end of the world.”
.
A book just published in French by Ivan Rioufol, a journalist for the newspaper Le Figaro, eloquently titled “The Coming Civil War,” details the dangers posed by the “apocalyptic ideology” of radical Islam in Europe. How many Muslims will this ISIS virus be able to infect in the vast European “gray zone”? The answer will determine our future.
 .
But the liberals and lefties who dominate the media will still try to convince us that Islam is a religion of peace.