Obama Administration Bans Knowledge of Islam

Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, a Judith Friedman Rosen Writing Fellow at the Middle East Forum and a CBN News contributor. He is the author of Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s New War on Christians (2013) and The Al Qaeda Reader (2007). 


Pages: 1 2

The Obama administration’s censoring of photographs of the late Osama bin Laden, lest they “offend” Muslims, is one thing; but what about censoring words, especially those pivotal to U.S. security?

Weeks earlier, the Daily Caller revealed that “the Obama administration was pulling back all training materials used for the law enforcement and national security communities, in order to eliminate all references to Islam that some Muslim groups have claimed are offensive.”

The move comes after complaints from advocacy organizations including the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and others identified as Muslim Brotherhood front groups in the 2004 Holy Land Foundation terror fundraising trial.  In a Wednesday Los Angeles Times op-ed, Muslim PublicAffairs Council (MPAC) president Salam al-Marayati threatened the FBI with a total cutoff of cooperation between American Muslims and law enforcement if the agency failed to revise its law enforcement training materials.  Maintaining the training materials in their current state “will undermine the relationship between law enforcement and the Muslim American community,” al-Marayati wrote.  Multiple online sources detail MPAC’s close alignment with CAIR.  In his op-ed, Al-Marayati demanded that the Justice Department and the FBI “issue a clear and unequivocal apology to the Muslim American community” and “establish a thorough and transparent vetting process in selecting its trainers and materials.”

Accordingly, after discussing the matter with Attorney General Eric Holder, Dwight C. Holton said “I want to be perfectly clear about this: training materials that portray Islam as a religion of violence or with a tendency towards violence are wrong, they are offensive, and they are contrary to everything that this president, this attorney general and Department of Justice stands for.  They will not be tolerated.”

Even before these Muslim complaints and threats, President Obama alluded to censoring words when he said soon after taking office: “Words matter … because one of the ways we’re going to win this struggle [“war on terror”] is through the battle of [Muslims’] hearts and minds” (followed by oddities like commissioning NASA to make Muslims “feel good” about themselves).

As if there were not already a lamentable lack of study concerning Muslim war doctrine in the curriculum of American military studies—including in the Pentagon and U.S. Army War College—the administration’s more aggressive censorship program will only exacerbate matters.  Last year’s QDR, a strategic document, does not mention anything remotely related to Islam—even as it stresses climate change, which it sees as an “accelerant of instability and conflict” around the world.

Pages: 1 2

  • Larry

    So during WWII, according to this lot, the Allies should never have referred to Nazis, Nazism, the SS, the Germany army, submarine warfare, the Blitz, etc, etc.

    The Obama administration is committing treason in plain view of the entire world.

    • WildJew

      Let's be clear, George W. Bush (a man I voted for) started all this nonsense only days after 9/11 attacks.

      Bush: "The terrorists practice a fringe form of Islamic extremism that has been rejected by Muslim scholars and the vast majority of Muslim clerics; a fringe movement that perverts the peaceful teachings of Islam…..The terrorists are traitors to their own faith, trying, in effect, to hijack Islam itself…."

      "We respect (the Muslim) faith. It's practiced freely by many millions of Americans and by millions more in countries that America counts as friends. Its teachings are good and peaceful, and those who commit evil in the name of Allah blaspheme the name of Allah…."

      WASHINGTON, Oct. 23 (2000) /PRNewswire/ —

      "The American Muslim Political Coordinating Council Political Action Committee (AMPCC-PAC) today announced its endorsement of George W. Bush for president, citing his outreach to the Muslim community and his stand on the issue of secret evidence. (AMPCC-PAC is an affiliated PAC of the American Muslim Political Coordinating Council. AMPCC AMPCC American Muslim Political Coordination Council members include American Muslim Alliance, American Muslim Council, Council on American-Islamic Relations. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is an advocacy group for Muslims in North America; its professed goals are to "enhanc[e] understanding of Islam, promot[e] justice and empower American Muslims….."

      Sadly, there was no criticism of Bush from the political right — for eight long years there was silence — and if there was, it was negligible. Sadly, publications like this one circled the wagons around Bush even as Bush repeatedly lied about the enemy and undermined our nation's security. Is it any wonder many Americans were left in the dark about Islam? Is it any wonder Americans (many) voted for this dangerous Muslim-born president, November 2008?

      • jacob

        If my memory serves me right, right after becoming President, OBAMA
        ordered removed the word "terrorist" when referring to the Muslim
        terrorists and since, they are called "insurgents" or "freedom fighters"
        by our abject media…
        As to GWB, I can't forget that at the very evening of the 9/11 horror, he
        went on TV to claim that "ISLAM IS A RELIGION OF PEACE"…
        With his deep knowledge of international politics, he forgot to learn or
        if he knew, he conveniently swept it under the rug, that Islam is a religion
        of the peace of the cemeteries and graveyards for all infidels, specially
        Jews….

    • al Kidya

      That about sums it up, yes!

      This is a form of treason.
      Obama is, in effect, inviting the Nazis to set up shop inside our country.
      Devout Muslims will never be citizens of the US. Rather, if they have their way, we will become citizens of Dar al Islam.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Accordingly, after discussing the matter with Attorney General Eric Holder, Dwight C. Holton said “I want to be perfectly clear about this: training materials that portray Islam as a religion of violence or with a tendency towards violence are wrong, they are offensive, and they are contrary to everything that this president, this attorney general and Department of Justice stands for.  They will not be tolerated.”

    To hell with the truth. How come no toothless Republicans are trying to impeach any of these moronic moonbats? I mean if this isn't an open and shut case of treason and gross incompetence at the same time, then nothing is. Could it be that the feckless Republican Party has morphed into the second coming of the Dhimmicrat Party? Where are the Republican candidates running for President on this issue? Oh, that's right, they are as blinded by PC multiculturalism every bit as bad as the Dhimmicrats. Indeed, our federal government today and both major political parties have been so corrupted that I don't even recognize them. Indeed, if we had operated the way we do today during the height of the Cold War, we would all be working on a collective farm as slave labor today.

    It's pretty pathetic, we should be debating outlawing Islam and banning and reversing mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage ASAP, not only because it is in reality non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad, as Muslims never ever migrate to the West or anywhere else for that matter to assimilate and integrate, but instead to eventually subjugate and dominate to make Islam supreme via demographic conquest.

    Not to mention that thanks to a 50 percent increase in the size, scope, and power of the federal government in response to the 9/11 jihad attack and to also continue accommodating mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage, our national debt today is exploding through the roof, and it's exploding so that we can continue accommodating mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage, and never mind that the fact that the invasive Patriot Act, the humongous Department of Homeland Security, the extremely intrusive TSA, and the gargantuan and completely incompetent National Intelligence Directorate do nothing whatsoever to make us safer other than creating a false sense of security so that we can continue accommodating mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage and go bankrupt at the same time.

    Indeed, we are on the verge of implementing draconian cuts on our military budget that will inevitably swing the door wide open for the forces of totalitarianism to become dominant in the world all to continue accommodating mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage. Indeed, when we talk about how mentally incompetent the delusional Euroloons are today, well the truth is they don't hold a candle to how suicidal and stupid the US federal government is.

    We are being sold down the river to Islamic masters and sooner or later those elitist politicians must be held accountable and made to pay.

    –continue below

    • WildJew

      Toothless Republicans:

      Asked by Dan Gilgoff of U.S. News & World Report if his repeated references to "jihad" in a speech at the Heritage Foundation this week characterized Islam in sinister terms, Mitt Romney surprised Gilgoff with this reply:

      "I didn't refer to Islam at all, or to any other religion for that matter. I spoke about three major threats America faces on a long term basis. Jihadism is one of them, and that is not Islam. If you want my views on Islam, it's quite straightforward. Islam is one of the world's great religions and the great majority of people in Islam want peace for themselves and peace with their maker. They want to raise families and have a bright future.

      "There is, however, a movement in the world known as jihadism. They call themselves jihadists and I use the same term…."

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Never use the terms “jihadist” or “mujahideen” in conversation to describe the terrorists.

    Actually, the terms ”jihadist” and “mujahideen” are the correct terms to use. As jihad is holy fighting in the cause of Allah against non-Muslim unbelievers to make Islam supreme and unlike terrorism can be both violent and non-violent. While terrorism, on the other hand, which as its name implies is always only violent, is a product of Western civilization only, and can be for any number of political causes. Indeed, terrorism in the Islamic world is considered to be un-Islamic and therefore blasphemous. Moreover, blasphemy, like apostasy, is also a capital offense under Sharia.

    A mujahed, a holy warrior, is a positive characterization in the context of a just war.

    That's true. However, a just war in Islam is holy fighting in the cause of Allah against non-Muslim unbelievers to make Islam supreme.

    Calling our enemies jihadis and their movement a global jihad unintentionally legitimizes their actions [emphasis added].

    Whether it legitimizes their actions or not, it is nevertheless true. Therefore, these imbeciles must be held to account and impeached for gross dereliction of duty.

    The U.S. government needs to worry less about which words appease Muslims and worry more about providing its intelligence community—not to mention its own citizenry—with accurate knowledge concerning the nature of the threat.

    It's never going to happen and the reason it will never happen is because our federal government, including our intelligence departments and military have been transformed from organizations that were once focused on merit and qualifications, but are now focused instead on diversity and could care less about merit and qualifications. Indeed, until someone figures out how to break that monopoly, then nothing will ever change.

    Who might be “radicalizing” them?

    No one. ALL MAINSTREAM ORTHODOX MUSLIMS are radicalized cradle to grave. Actually, the notion that somehow so-called radical Muslims like Awlaki can radicalize so-called moderate Muslims over the Internet and turn them into vicious foaming at the mouth Muslims hollering Allahu Akbar and murdering infidels overnight is a false political correct myth. The truth is ALL MAINSTREAM ORTHODOX MUSLIMS are jihadists. A few of them are violent jihadists, while most of them are non-violent jihadists, and the few that are not jihadists are not Muslims at all but instead blasphemous apostates that per the dictates of Islam must be executed.

    • Paul of Alexandria

      This is one of the best analyses I've seen. It is critical to realize that in their own eyes, the jihadi's are following strict Islamic teaching. All of these calls to "modernize" or "moderate" Islam are attempts to draw Islam away from its core teachings.

    • Freedom John

      You're right about the correct names to call these cowardly terrorists. Besides just calling them a POS covers too many groups including the DOJ and the Obama debacle.

    • Stan Lee

      I suggest that all are "mainstream orthodox Muslim" or they are apostates.
      The Koran doesn't allow for various degrees of practicing Islam. It is not the "Religion of Peace" described by our ridiculous politicians. It is radical and meant to be, Only by Muslim standards is it considered not radical. But, in this case we must be the judges of whether we think it's radical. Who are these spineless politicians to manipulate us?
      While Judeo-Christians do practice variations of their faiths, not so in Islam.
      They do what the Koran directs either by violence or support of same against the "Infidels." It is not a minor issue for them, it is life itself.
      We non-Muslims spend too much time imagining they possess the capability of assimilation and tolerance to our various religious rites. They don't!
      They are what they are and they find that to be their natural characteristic. They will be accommodating as a minority, but once they have multiplied past minority status, all bets are off! In the interim, the most radical of them will still go ahead and take action as directed.

  • WildJew

    Where are our Republican leaders? Here they are:

    Asked by Dan Gilgoff of U.S. News & World Report if his repeated references to "jihad" in a speech at the Heritage Foundation this week characterized Islam in sinister terms, Mitt Romney surprised Gilgoff with this reply:

    "I didn't refer to Islam at all, or to any other religion for that matter. I spoke about three major threats America faces on a long term basis. Jihadism is one of them, and that is not Islam. If you want my views on Islam, it's quite straightforward. Islam is one of the world's great religions and the great majority of people in Islam want peace for themselves and peace with their maker. They want to raise families and have a bright future.

    "There is, however, a movement in the world known as jihadism. They call themselves jihadists and I use the same term…."

    • ObamaYoMoma

      In reality, fairness, and as sad as it may be, Romney's position on Islam is the same exact position of all Republican candidates currently running for the Republican Party nomination. In fact, Romney's position is the official Republican Party position brought to you by GWB. Of course, that is also the official position of Fox News, which is the news network for the RINO establishment Republicans, and if anyone has the audacity to express a correct position on Islam, they would surely be ruthlessly vilified and demonized as Islamophobes by Fox News together with the so-called MSM, as they are only very slightly to the right of the so-called MSM. Indeed, nobody was and still is a bigger cheerleader for the Bush administration than Fox News, and never mind the fact that the Bush administration morphed the Republican Party into the second coming of the Dhimmicrat Party and was only slightly less incompetent than the current Obama administration.

      • WildJew

        I have learned from first-hand experience (as a caller on talk radio) what you say is right. Part of fault lies at the feet of our so-called experts and scholars. R. Spencer – though I've had my differences with him – is at least honest about Islam; that its texts and teachings promote violence, as did its founder. Daniel Pipes, Andrew MaCarthy and others want to make this distinction between "Islamists" and Muslims, between political Islam and "authentic" (largely peaceful) Islam, etc. Consequently radio talk show hosts parrot this nonsense. Rush Limbaugh still uses Bush's "war on terrorism" rhetoric. I don't know what 'mainstream' scholar on Islam does not utilize this Islam vs. Islamist dichotomy. Even Brigitte Gabriel employs the term "radical" Islam which ostensibly is something very different from authentic or historic Islam. I try to challenge her chapter leaders. It's no use and as you say, Fox also tries to tow the politically correct line.

      • Stan Lee

        I have news for Mitt, who spends too damned much time covering his rear end, "Jihad" is Islam, Islam is "Jihad." WTH is this thing he's setting up which he calls "Jihadism?" Throw an "ism" on any word and another subject is contrived via the clumsy splitting of hairs!
        I try to avoid references to the man as a "Flipper," so I'll just call him a "deflector."
        I wonder, had Newt Gingrich been approached on such a subject, whether he would have been more direct and therefore not so evasive?
        Mitt does have a problem though, in that he's aware and sensitive of the common derisive comments to his Mormon faith. His stature in the USA should have put him past that monkey on his back by now.
        But certainly, he should be able to sort out the difference between Mormon church attendance & devotion and Muslim terrorism and/or support of it?
        I don't think he'd lose many votes for being honest, unless he's worried about votes from Detroit or Cedar Rapids. He won't get them anyway.

        • ObamaYoMoma

          Dude…you shouldn't drink and post at the same time, as your posts are so convoluted that they don't make sense and I'm not about to give myself brain damage trying to read them much less make sense of them. Thus, lay off the juice.

  • Robert Laity

    The danhgers of Islam are common knowledge, "Caliph" Obama is a TRAITOR: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUaGe63Aqv4

  • StephenD

    Great comments all. You should know, there are plenty of clear and free thinking Law Enforcement and Intel folks in the Federal ranks that take these mandates with a grain of salt. Just because they remove the info from the training does not mean the agents themselves would hesitate to gather the info for themselves. Of course, it would be much better to be sanctioned by the authorities in their efforts but regardless, the agents aren't likely to put themselves at risk because some bureaucrat said they should. Just hope for a positive result in 2012 so we can reverse this nightmare.

  • voted against carter

    ' TAQIYYA '
    Do your own research about it if you don't know what this means.

    i s l a m IS EVIL. PERIOD.

    i s l a m strives for world domination.

    The q u r a n commands m u s l i m s to exercise jihad.

    The q u e r n commands muslims to establish s h a r i a h law.

    The q u e r n commands m u s l i m s to impose i s l a m on the entire world.

    i s l a m is NOT a religion, it IS a totalitarian ideology.

    i s l a m IS and has remained a death cult from its beginnings.

    i s l a m wants to dominate all aspects of life, from the cradle to the grave.

    s h a r i a h law is a law that controls every detail of life in a i s l a m i c society.

    From civic- and family law to criminal law.

    It determines how one should eat, dress and even use the toilet.

    Oppression of women is good, drinking alcohol is bad.

    The core of the q u r a n is the call to j i h a d.

    J i h a d means a lot of things and is a r a b i c for battle.

    i s l a m means submission, there cannot be any mistake about its goal.

    i s l a m and freedom, i s l a m and democracy are not compatible.

    They are opposite values.

    m o h a m e d 's "wife" was six years old.

    That makes m o h a m e d a P E D O P H I L E!!!

    And you want to base a "R e l i g i o n" on this a z s -holes rantings?

    Are you INSANE?

    I STAND with Israel

    • SomeoneWhoUnder

      Mary was 12 years old when she got pregnant with Jesus. Is the Holy Ghost a pedo? No, that's the age when girls got married back in a day. Matter of fact, Mary got married to Joseph when she was 9. Same as Mohammad to Aisha.

      Christianity also strives for world domination. That is why the hardliners Christians in America call to nuke Iran. Called to invade Iraq. Called to invade Afghanistan. Pakistan. Palestine, etc. Christians are imposing their Christianity on others as much as Muslims are. However, Christians don't want to impose their laws, they just want to kill as much "evil" Muslims as they can before their Messiah descends in Israel. The place where most American Christians will kill themselves to defend. Even if Israel was on the wrong side.

      Sharia Law is not only in Islam. It is also in Christianity and Judaism. "Sharia Law" means, "The Way". It is a set of codes of how a Muslim should act. Also could be used for governmental purposes. Sharia Law of Christianity? Believing that Jesus died for your sins is your Sharia. Coptic Christians forbid divorce because they say this is "Allahs Sharia". Yes, Arab Christians and Arab Jews call God "Allah". Republicans forcing their homosexual laws on the rest of the US is imposing Christianity Sharia.

      Secularism has defeated Christianity, and that is why Christianity is not a "totalitarian ideology" anymore. In the past, the Pope always commanded what to do and not to do. He imposed his will on everyone. Even on the Arabs who lived in Jerusalem, when the Christian Crusades murdered, raped and killed every living inhabitant in Jerusalem. Including animals, infants, women, Christian Arabs and Arab Jews.

      Your definition of Freedom only fits your view of freedom. Is having sex in public freedom? You don't see it as so because your culture doesn't see it that way. As we all know, American culture is heavily influenced by Christianity and that is why having sex in public is not acceptable. Ask the nudest, and they will tell you they should be "free" of doing that. The definition of Freedom in Islam, is freedom with what Allah has allowed them to do. Same exact way you think of freedom, but instead of Allah, its your culture.

      If Islam is a death cult, there wouldn't be Christians living the Arab world for so long. How many Muslims do you know that their ancestors lived in the west? None, why? Because the Christian society wouldn't accept them back in the day. False accusing of random women of witchcraft, stoning homosexuals, salving the black Muslims, killing the "infidels". Christianity is not any better.

      Jihad doesn't mean battle, it means "struggle". Wikipedia it. Now shut up and go to the nearest mosque and ask for some guidance about Islam instead of listening to Jihad Watch and Bare Naked Islam. Thank you, and have a nice day.

  • Celestine

    "Muslim PublicAffairs Council (MPAC) president Salam al-Marayati threatened the FBI with a total cutoff of cooperation between American Muslims and law enforcement if the agency failed to revise its law enforcement training materials."

    Doesn't that just fry your eggs. I don't like your use of language so I'll not help you apprehend those in my community who want to murder innocents in your community. Hey muslims, if you are offended by the government's use of words (and you are always offended at something), write a letter to the editor, post a blog, buy a legislator, rent-a-mob. Express your concern the American way. But don't tell me that if I don't watch my words you are going to make terror more likely by your lack of cooperation, because that makes me mad and likely to be politically incorrect big time.

    • jacob

      And on top of this, shouldn't we be entitled to ask the FBI to state publicly what
      kind of "cooperation" was it getting from the Muslims, for their organization to
      threaten to cut off their "cooperation" unless the "offensive" issues were purged
      from the FBI's instruction manuals, fact backed by our innefable President and
      his no less innefable DOJ ???
      And there are people still believing ISLAM is a religion of peace ????
      What I still can't understand is why do we have to bend over backwards for them
      like we were those who sent for them and not the way around ??
      Perhaps our President was born a Muslim but I don't believe he has the right to
      ram down our throats that we must comply with everything Muslims ask for….
      OR DO WE ????

      • johnnywoods

        I say "Screw them and the camels they rode in on".

  • ASG

    What ever happened to just calling it the way you see it. These comments that Islam is not an institution of hate and destruction can only be two things, naivety, or blatant collaboration. Knowing our President’s upbringing I can only come to the conclusion of the later.

  • tagalog

    This commentary says, "In a Wednesday Los Angeles Times op-ed, Muslim PublicAffairs Council (MPAC) president Salam al-Marayati threatened the FBI with a total cutoff of cooperation between American Muslims and law enforcement if the agency failed to revise its law enforcement training materials. "

    How can Salam al-Marayati realistically expect that American Muslims can be ordered to refuse to cooperate with law enforcement if the FBI doesn't change its training materials? Is there some broad and powerful hold that Islam has over all American Muslims? Do we need to pay more attention to this? I mean, there are many, many posts on many, many web sites that warn us of extensive Muslim control of this type. It sounded up to now like the old worries about Presidential candidates who were Catholics having dual loyalties. Up to this moment, I for one have always considered it overheated and paranoid, but now I wonder…

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Conservatives need to organize and form an anti-jihad movement as an adjunct to the tea-party movement and start holding public rallies to garner attention to bring publicity to this issue. I can hear the so-called MSM, Fox News, and the RINO establishment Republicans already vilifying us as racist Islamophobes. Nevertheless, unless conservatives form an anti-jihad movement to garner public attention on what Islam really is, then Islam is a Religion of Peace™ being hijacked by a tiny minority of radicals will remain the dominant paradigm and official Republican Party position forever.

  • mrbean

    The Denocrats under Clinton had no trouble having the films of American soldiers mutilated bodies being dragged through the streets of Mogadishu by chimpout Muslims after Clinton cut-and-run -nor of the two American soldiers gorribly tortured and mutilated on Iraq by some Iraq Sunnis in a village. Had this latter occurred in Vietnam with my Marines platoon not even the dogs would get out alive and no one would have said anything!

  • John J. James

    Western civilization should have awakened to this evil menace in 1928 when the terrorists started building up steam. Now tolerance and P.C. dictate the course of action. We are doomed. In a few centuries, all the westerners will have their throats sliced open at the gutter.

    Shame on us for being so naive, so lazy and so stupid.

    It’s already too late. Kill yourself now, so at least you can die in a dignified way.

  • V. Sand

    As a reminder, all uneducated Westerners need to educate themselves…before it's too late. Read these two books on the subject of Islam:

    1-WHY WE WANT TO KILL YOU by WALID SHOEBAT (Ex-terrorsit turned Christian and US Citizen) &
    2-THE LOOMING TOWER – ROAD TO 9/11 by LAWRENCE WRIGHT

    Surely then you will realize the grave predicament we are in. Western civilization is doomed. 100% doomed. It may take hundreds if not 1000 years, but they will win in the end, unless you smarten up – RIGHT NOW!

    • DonVito

      Your 100% Right, I'm going out and getting those books tomorow. We Need to STAND UP, and ORGANIZE NOW!!!!!!!!!!

  • alan g

    Maybe the authorities should only call out those Muslims who threaten other religions. That should narrow down the Muslims blasphemers of peace to just all of the imams and their followers. That is only about a tenth of all Muslims. Its only 100 million people.
    I think that, that is what we have been saying all along.

  • LindaRivera

    Banning knowledge of Islam is precisely what Muslims who seek the conquest of America and the Free World would do. In order to take over a country, the citizens must be DECEIVED and lulled into a FALSE sense of security. This is precisely what the Obama Administration is doing, DECEIVING and lulling Americans into a FALSE sense of security. It is TREASON.

    Americans have NEVER been in such great danger of losing their safety, freedom and human rights.

    Council on American-Islamic Relations: "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth." – Omar Ahmad (CAIR co-founder).

    September 27, 2006. Suicide bombers follow Quran, concludes Pentagon briefing.
    Addressing a youth session at the 1999 Islamic Association for Palestine's annual convention in Chicago, CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) founder Omar Ahmad praised suicide bombers who "kill themselves for Islam," http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ART

    • V. Sand

      Yes, the Koran says to lie and cheat to win over the infidels…we are so stupid it's a disgrace.

  • 080

    Whether Islam is a religion of peace or war can be argued by those who like those sort of things. Such arguments are besides the point anyway. The fact is that the Ayatollah Khomeini was a heretic and was seen as such by the vast majority of Muslims. So the argument should revolve around the question as to whether Khomeiniism is a religion of peace or war.

  • LindaRivera

    U.S. leaders immorally ALLOW Muslim terrorist training camps in America. There are many. Google: Muslim terrorist training camps in America.

    Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick and the Imam http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUYIHRRaPmA&fe

    Muslim Terrorist Training Camps in America – Feb 16, 2009 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr8FexoNO1M

    It is extremely OMINOUS that when you google,
    youtube + Concentration camps in America
    you will discover there are many. WAKE UP America! The concentrations camps have NOT been built for Muslim terrorists!

  • LindaRivera

    To 080 – Takiyya!

    Islamic terrorists carried out more than 18,072 deadly terror attacks since 9/11.

    Muslims in America and Muslims in countries around the world celebrated the savage 9/11 murder of 3,000 innocents. THOUSANDS of INHUMAN Palestinian Authority Muslims celebrated in the streets with great joy and delight over the suffering and cruel mass murders of our cherished 3,000. PA Muslims danced in the streets, passed out candy and fired into the air. WE WILL NEVER FORGET.

  • FriendofGaryCooper

    And meanwhile, a 17-year old Jewish boy was recently stabbed by a Muslim; in a wadi that separates Ramot, a northern suburb of Jerusalem, with a Muslim community called Beit Iksa. This is an example of how the release of 1,027 terrorists from Israeli jails has emboldened Muslims living in Israel. Violence like this will surely result here in America, if we don't know the enemy, or can't call them what they are.

  • Arnie

    When are people going to wake up and tell it like it is? Barak Obama seeks to destroy America…please dont whine about it like he does not know what he is doing or this is just ignorance–This is all intentional, this is communism/marxism at work attempting to bring down America through lies and smoke and mirrors. I fear a time is coming where the deception will have run its course so thouroughly in this country that our only salvation is if God in His mercy intervenes to save us from the enemies that are planted within. We certainly dont have the ability to save ourselves.

  • SamLowerySF

    F islam

  • James G. Borden

    Why are my comments being deleted?

  • James G. Borden

    Even on this website Freedom of Speech is thrown in the toilet by the administrator.

  • James G. Borden

    This website should be renamed the Nazi FrontPage Mag.

  • http://www.stockimagecentral.com stock images

    Hello there! I know this is kinda off topic nevertheless I’d figured I’d ask. Would you be interested in trading links or maybe guest authoring a blog article or vice-versa? My blog covers a lot of the same topics as yours and I believe we could greatly benefit from each other. If you might be interested feel free to shoot me an email. I look forward to hearing from you! Terrific blog by the way!

  • WildJew

    You're right but Allen West is a minority in our party and I'm not sure he is welcome within the ranks of the party's leadership because of his outspokenness on Islam and Jihad. The Broward County Republican move, while commendable, keep in mind Joe Kaufman (a frequent contributor to this site in the past) has influence within that Executive Committee. CAIR activist, Nezar Hamze has repeatedly and aggressively confronted Congressman West at public forums.

    And you are also right, Democrats are in near total sympathy (if not total sympathy) with Islam's cause. Look who the titular head of the Democratic party is; a dangerous Muslim-born president.

    But the problem is this moral blindness, obtuseness, what have you on the part of Republicans and conservatives when it comes to holding our GOP leaders accountable. See what I posted above about Bush. Republicans circled the wagons around Bush and his traitorous lies about Islam for seven long years post 9/11. Limbaugh, Hannity, etc., all carried water for Bush and his lies about Islam. After Bush was sworn in, January 2001, leading up to the September attacks, there were terrible suicide / homicide bombings in Israel, on buses, restaurants, etc. It was anguishing watching (listening to) Bush and his subordinates condemn Israel (Ariel Sharon) for his tepid responses to this bloody terrorism. Consequently, Bush's apologetics toward Islam came as no surprise.

    Then we learn Bush and his father have had this long-term lucrative financial relationship with the Saudis and Bush covered for his Saudi friends after the attacks. Who on the right spoke out? I'm thinking Paul Sperry, author of "Infiltration: How Muslim Spies and Subversives have Penetrated Washington." Chapter 27 is entitled, "Undue Influence at the White House." Perry quotes: "George W. Bush was elected president of the United States of America because of the Muslim vote. That's right, the Muslim vote." (GOP strategist Grover Norquist, founder of the Islamic Institute after the 2000 elections.) Norquist was referring to the Florida vote where, having met Islamic Jihad Professor Sami Al-Arian, the professor worked Florida's mosques for Bush.

    When counter-jihadists like Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller and others exposed Governor Rick Perry's close relationship with the Muslim community in Texas, with Aga Khan, his close association with Grover Norquist, the Perry – Khan curriculum in Texas public schools which is a white wash of Islam and its history, there was furious condemnations from the right; from Erick Erickson's Red State and from other conservatives including Frank Gaffney's people. Even Andrew Bostom came to Rick Perry's defense! Herman Cain, after a few clumsy remarks about communities having the right to ban mosques – goes to a Muslim Brotherhood affiliated mosque and issues an apology to American Muslims whom he said he did not intend to offend. He did this in the presence of a Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated imam. What was the Republican response? Silence. Then we have Ann Coulter pushing this despicable pro-ground zero mosque, "this Shariah stuff is a bunch of crap," governor of New Jersey, Chris Christie. Republicans refuse to hold our leaders to a higher standard. Instead we circle the wagons around bad behavior and lies. It is very sad.

    We can do much better.

  • Stan Lee

    We will find most Democrat and Republican politicians straddling the fence together, speaking out of both sides of their mouths, trying to have it all both ways.
    Who does one trust? Answer: Actually none!
    It's always a matter of electing the lesser of the evils.
    Lest we forget, the Democrat Party has been hijacked by Commies and Socialists. It features union corruption and a large "entitlement" segment of voters.
    The Republican Party is involved in an internal struggle between its "establishment" and the Republicans they fear most, the really (not fake) Conservative Republican faction.
    We all must decide which Party we'll support in the coming days; the struggling Democrats, or the struggling Republicans. Both Parties have quite well defined themselves by now.

  • WildJew

    Again, you are right. The same, I believe holds true for Michele Bachmann. When asked about the riots in France by Muslim youths, she said, "Not all cultures are equal. Not all values are equal…" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nP4hYkfwuTY

    But where are Bachmann and Santorum in the polls? What are Republicans thinking. Limbaugh was pushing Palin for months, hoping she would get in the race but he said NOTHING about, or in defense of Bachmann who WAS in the race taking the hits from the leftist media day by day. Where was Limbaugh? Silent. The day before yesterday, finally Mark Steyn (sitting in for Limbaugh) said he likes Bachmann, out of all the candidates. Same holds true for Glenn Beck. But a woman (who is more of a "man" than the men in the race) cannot be elected president; not yet. Fine but at least she should have been considered as a possible VP. Limbaugh, the one who supported Bush's Dubai Ports buyout, where is he? I listen to him every day hoping he would exhibit some moral courage on the scourge of Islam. NOTHING. Why?

    The only voices in the nation alerting the public about the dangers of Islam are conservative/Republicans, true, but where is the rank and file? Why do they circle the wagons around candidates and Republican politicians who lie about Islam? Why do Republicans support exceptionally flawed candidates and politicians? Why don't we hold our people to a higher standard. You aren't excusing this behavior, are you?

  • WildJew

    Right. But Republicans and conservative activists aren't waging war on particular (troubling) Republicans in the primaries. Governor Rick Perry, who I mentioned below, is a case in point. When Spencer, Geller and others wrote about his troubling ties with Islam and apologists for Islam, there was a furious reaction from conservative activists. I also wrote about Chris Christie. NO way should this man even be considered, yet he is! This bodes ill for the future of our party if this is the way Republican and conservative activists behave.

    I watched this nonsense for eight long years (especially the years following the 9/11 attacks) with George W. Bush. It was very instructive Chezwick. It is not that Bush wasn't "initiated about Islam." I believe he deliberately lied. Come on! You can't make the case that an ordinary citizen like me could get the scoop on the religion of Islam within weeks or months of the September attacks and an American president can't? Surely you do not believe Bush didn't have access to reliable information on Islam like you and me. Are you? The leader of the free world DID NOT KNOW? Poor guy was in the dark? He simply could not define the enemy that attacked us?

    But that's not the half of it. Republicans and conservatives carried his water even as he repeatedly lied about Islam, lied about his Saudi friends who were and are up to their necks furthering the global jihad and he lied about Israel who he (Bush) insisted (illegally) occupy Muslim land. Bush became the first American president to make the establishment of a Muslim-enemy state in Israel a "formal goal of U.S. policy." Remember arch-terrorist Abbas? Remember Bush called this jihadist a man of peace, a man of vision? What was that about? What did you say then? You are a good writer. What did you write?

  • WildJew

    It is indeed a choice between the lesser of the evils. I never thought the day would come, that I would say it but we've never had such a dangerous man in the White House as this one. Even Clinton (as much of a low life as he was and is), at least he is an American. And I am not talking about citizenship. Still, I believe we can and should do much better. I am watching Herman Cain. I like Cain on a lot of his stated positions, notwithstanding apparent his lack of education on foreign policy. But you'd think these many accusations would cause conservatives to at least pause and reflect. A little circumspection? After all, the hallmark of conservatism is caution, is it not? But no I listened to caller after caller excoriate Mark Steyn who was sitting in for Limbaugh a couple of days back because he questioned both Cain's and Gingrich's bona fides. This is what my party has come to? In that regard, how are we any better than the Democrats who will tolerate no criticism of their leftist leaders? Of course I would vote for either of these two over Obama but that's not the point. We can't even have a discussion within the movement. No debate. No scrutiny is allowed, otherwise "you are playing into the hands of the Democrats." Nonsense Chezwick!

  • WildJew

    Your defense of Bush, seems a bit like conservatives who continue to defend Herman Cain, but Cain unlike Bush is not a traitor to my knowledge. If what you believe about Bush being the most pro-Israel president is truly your heart-felt position, it is difficult to believe a you are man of faith, whether a Christian or a Jew. A Christian believer would not do to Israel what this phony self-professed born-again Christian, G. W. Bush did to Israel. Nor would a true Christian or an observant Jew defend Bush.

  • johnnywoods

    That`s me the"anti-democrat". I like that term.

  • WildJew

    Why is it harsh? Would you agree, an American president who is considered "pro-Israel" is relative? Relative to Obama (who I believe has a deep-seated antipathy for Israel), Bush might be considered "pro-Israel," but make no mistake about it, George W. Bush and his surrogates, Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, etc., put inordinate pressure on Israel to retreat from Jewish land.
    Bush altered our national party platform to reflect his evil vision for Israel's dismemberment. Bush made it clear, he (a self-professed Christian) believes Israel illegally "occupies" Muslim land. Keep in mind, this Christian hypocrite knows (as most Christians know) God gave the land of Israel to Abraham, Isaac and to Jacob and their descendants "forever." Who is this phony, this hypocrite-traitor to say otherwise? Why do you defend this low-life lover of our enemies who became the first American president in history to make a Muslim-terror state in Israel's heartland a "formal goal of U.S. policy? I am non-nonplussed.