Friday, November 30, 2018


 A new video shows a trans activist at a city council meeting advocating "grooming" the next generation of children. Faith Goldy joins Alex to expose the leftist agenda to destroy America and the west by destroying the family.




republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

If wrecking American sovereignty, lowering wages, and increasing the public welfare load aren’t reasons enough to oppose the influx of migrant invaders sitting in Tijuana, here is another: At least 30 percent of them are sick with communicable diseases they might spread to Americans in schools, hospitals, welfare and employment offices, and other public places.
And by “sick,” officials in Mexico don’t mean the common cold. They mean serious disease.
Some of the migrants are turning around and heading home after months of traveling through Mexico, as The New American reported today. But with a third of the 6,000 or so in Tijuana coughing and breaking out in blisters, now is not the time for the Trump administration to weaken.
AIDS, TB, and Chickenpox
That’s because the diseases many of the migrants carry are deadly — or can be.
“Out of 6,000 migrants currently residing in the city, over a third of them (2,267) are being treated for health-related issues,” Fox News reported.
So far, officials have confirmed three cases of tuberculosis, four cases of AIDS, and four separate cases of chickenpox, the network reported.
Even worse, they’ve also brought in bugs. Real bugs. At least 101, Fox reported, carry lice and “skin infections.”
That means the migrants might well start a typhus epidemic or bring in chagas disease.
According to the Centers for Disease Control, the body louse is the vector for the typhus bacterium, Rickettsia prowazekii.
“Epidemic typhus is spread to people through contact with infected body lice,” CDC says. It noted the disease is uncommon these days, although “epidemic typhus was responsible for millions of deaths in previous centuries.” But cases continue to occur, in areas where extreme overcrowding is common and body lice can travel from one person to another.”
The Benito Juarez Sports Complex, where the migrants are housed, is one such overcrowded area: 6,000 are packed into an area meant for 1,000.
Chagas is another of the many benefits the migrants might bring. And unlike louse-borne typhus, chagas is not rare. It’s epidemic in Latin America.
Blood-scuking triatomine bugs cause the disease:
These blood-sucking bugs get infected by biting an infected animal or person. Once infected, the bugs pass T. cruzi parasites in their feces. The bugs are found in houses made from materials such as mud, adobe, straw, and palm thatch. During the day, the bugs hide in crevices in the walls and roofs. During the night, when the inhabitants are sleeping, the bugs emerge. Because they tend to feed on people’s faces, triatomine bugs are also known as “kissing bugs.”
Some eight million people in Mexico, Central America, and South America have it, and most don’t know it.
Officials also worry about a hepatitis outbreak because of the filth in the Benito Juarez Sports Complex. “The location also has only 35 portable bathrooms,” Fox reported. “A sign reading ‘No Spitting’ was put up, as coughing and spitting by migrants are rampant in the shelter.”
Multi-Drug Resistant TB
Particularly worrisome is how many of the migrants carry a particularly virulent form of TB that is resistant to multiple antibiotics. Frightening data appeared in a paper published last year by the National Center for Biotechnology Information.
It reported that 37,684 immigrants with TB entered the United States between 2005 and 2009. The most, 24.1 percent, or 9,098, came from Mexico. Another 1,154, or 3.1 percent, came from Guatemala, while 853, or 2.3 percent, came from Honduras, where the migrant invasion began.
But that’s TB generally. Of more concern are the multi-drug resistant cases that came in: 482. Again, Mexico accounted for most of those: 66 or 13.7 percent. Fourteen Guatemalans had the disease, accounting for about three percent. None, apparently, came from Honduras.
MDR TB is a pressing concern, CDC reports, because “it is resistant to ... the two most potent TB drugs ... used to treat all persons with TB.”
Another 2,000 migrants are headed for Tijuana. They will pack the sports complex even tighter. If the 33-percent figure for sick migrants in Tijuana now holds true for those on the way, the town will be faced with another 660 very sick people.
Question: Is the United States expected to permit the entry of nearly 3,000 sick people, and if so, who will pay to treat their myriad diseases?


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Beginning in 1977, the United Nations has observed the "International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People" every year on November 29th. This is the date in 1947 when the UN General Assembly approved its partition resolution envisaging the establishment of two states – an independent state of Palestine and an independent Jewish state of Israel. The Palestinians and their surrounding Arab neighbors rejected the original two-state solution with their usual response - violence. The creators of the Jewish state, on the other hand, were willing to accept the partition compromise. Israel subsequently offered the Palestinians a succession of opportunities for their own state, which the Palestinian leadership has repeatedly rejected. Nevertheless, the Palestinians, with a lot of help from their friends, have managed to turn the United Nations into their propaganda arm. The highlight every year is the UN’s treatment of the November 29th anniversary of its own original two-state General Assembly partition resolution as, to quote former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, a “day of mourning and a day of grief.”  To assuage its grief, the UN General Assembly passes annually a series of blatantly one-sided anti-Israel resolutions, which have deliberately overlooked decades of Palestinian terrorism aimed at killing civilians.
Fiery anti-Israel speeches precede the votes. The UN-sponsored pro-Palestinian forum known as the UN Committee for the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People gets things started at least a day in advance. This year, not content with leaving it to the Palestinians’ friends among the member states to make their case, the committee invited Marc Lamont Hill, a CNN commentator, to the anti-Israel hatefest. CNN called Marc Lamont Hill “one of the leading intellectual voices in the country.” This  “intellectual” advocated the use of violence if necessary as a legitimate form of “resistance.” He supported the anti-Semitic Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions campaign against Israel and the so-called “right of return.”  He voiced the words that Palestinians have regularly used to call for the end of the Jewish state: "a free Palestine from the river to the sea." When criticized afterwards for using dog-whistle language appealing to the anti-Semitic destroy Israel crowd, Hill did not apologize. He argued that the “river to sea” expression is “a phrase used by many factions, ideologies, movements, and politicians. My reference to 'river to the sea' was not a call to destroy anything or anyone. It was a call for justice, both in Israel and in the West Bank/Gaza.” CNN was not buying Hill's lame explanation, nor should anyone else who knows anything about the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Most likely responding to public backlash than acting on principle, CNN announced that “Marc Lamont Hill is no longer under contract with CNN.”
The good news this year is that for the first time the UN member states will not just be asked to vote on the usual anti-Israel resolutions to mark the anniversary of the General Assembly partition resolution. As a result of an initiative promoted by the Trump administration, they will also have to decide whether to approve a separate draft resolution condemning Hamas for repeatedly firing rockets into Israel and for inciting violence that put “civilians at risk.” The draft resolution also demands that “Hamas cease all provocative actions and violent activity.” The administration, led by U.S. Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley, has reportedly been negotiating the final text of the resolution with other member states, which may require some tinkering while leaving the core condemnation of Hamas intact. There is a particular focus on obtaining European Union support. Hamas is on the 28-member EU bloc's terrorism blacklist, which the European Court of Justice has upheld.
Israel's Ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, who has been working with Ambassador Haley on the anti-Hamas resolution, is cautiously optimistic that there will be enough votes to approve it by majority vote. That vote could occur by this Monday. However, even if the resolution does not pass this time, Ambassador Danon considers the process itself, forcing the member states to take a stand on Hamas terrorism, a win-win. “The fact that now people are talking about Hamas, and that the Palestinian Authority – we all know about its relations with Hamas – is sweating to explain why they are suddenly in favor of Hamas, means we have already won,” he said.
Past attempts by Nikki Haley to have the UN Security Council and General Assembly condemn Hamas violence have been thwarted by procedural obstacles invoked by the Palestinians’ enablers. This time, however, a straight up-and-down vote approving the U.S. sponsored draft resolution by majority vote is a distinct possibility, especially if the European nations do not weasel out of doing the right thing. Hamas is apparently getting nervous that it may no longer be able to count on the UN entirely for kid-glove treatment. Thus, it has suddenly decided to launch a diplomatic offensive at the UN and invoke “international law” to justify its campaign of terrorism against civilians.
Like the criminal who murdered his parents and then pleads for mercy on the grounds that he is now an orphan, Hamas is reported to have sent a letter to the UN General Assembly President, Maria Fernanda Spinosa, condemning the U.S. initiative. Ismail Haniyeh, the head of Hamas' political bureau, wrote in his letter that “We reiterate the right of our people to defend themselves and to resist the occupation, by all available means, including armed resistance, guaranteed by the international law.” He added that Hamas would "greatly count on the members of the UN General Assembly [to] stand by international legitimacy in support for the right of peoples to defend themselves and thwart these aggressive American endeavors."
According to the twisted logic of the terrorist Hamas leadership, “the right of peoples to defend themselves” includes the launch of thousands of rockets aimed deliberately at civilian populations in Israel and the use of Palestinian women and children as human shields. In response to the Hamas letter, Israel's Ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, vowed that “Israel and the United States will continue to mobilize the countries of the world into a united front against the terrorism that Hamas engages in on behalf of Iran."
Hamas forcibly took control of Gaza in 2007 from Fatah, the party loyal to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. Fatah had exercised control in Gaza from the completion of Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 until Fatah's ejection in 2007. Fast forward to 2018. Hamas and the Palestinian Authority have still not reconciled, undermining any reasonable claim of Palestinian readiness for genuine statehood. Abbas has demanded that Hamas give up its weapons as a condition for reconciliation. “I won’t accept the reproduction of the Hezbollah experience in Lebanon” in Gaza, Abbas said last year. He has also used economic leverage to squeeze Hamas, at the expense of the Gazan people.
Despite Abbas’s in-fighting with Hamas for control over Gaza and any future Palestinian state, he has hypocritically decided to show solidarity with Hamas at the United Nations. His Palestinian Authority has conducted its own campaign against the proposed General Assembly resolution condemning Hamas’ violence. This hypocrisy puts a lie to any notion that Abbas has any interest in compromising to negotiate a workable two-state solution under which Israel and an independent Palestinian state can live side by side securely in peace.
During the opening debate in the General Assembly on the anti-Israel resolutions, Israeli Ambassador Danon turned to the Palestinians and set out three conditions that would lead to a new era in the region: "Recognize Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people; stop the terrorist payments and incitements; and choose a leadership that is committed to the Palestinian people. Only when these conditions materialize can we continue forward in the region."
Abbas has no intention of meeting any of these reasonable conditions for a durable peace. He would rather use Hamas to violently provoke an Israeli military response that Abbas can then exploit at the United Nations for propaganda purposes, portraying the Palestinians as innocent victims of a brutal occupying power. Too often, the UN has played by Abbas’s rules. Hopefully, Nikki Haley will succeed in taking an important step forward to change those rules.


Truly divisive individuals are left alone
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

YouTube is still hosting content by race hate supremacists David Duke and Louis Farrakhan months after it permanently banned Alex Jones.
As part of the coordinated Big Tech purge targeting Infowars, Jones’ YouTube channel, which had over 2 million subscribers at the time, was completely removed by Google-owned YouTube back in August.
Even videos uploaded by other users which briefly feature Jones are still being removed, with the radio host having been completely de-personned by the corporate giant.
However, the video platform is still hosting content from proven race hate hustlers Duke and Farrakhan.
David Duke is an open white supremacist, an anti-Semite, a Holocaust denier and a former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan. Duke was credited with having “paved the way” for the alt-right movement. He also attended the far-right ‘Unite the Right’ rally in Charlottesville at which an alt-right terrorist rammed his car into a group of protesters, killing one.
Farrakhan is leader of the notorious Nation of Islam, which is listed as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Farrakhan has made numerous racist, anti-Semitic and homophobic statements, including his belief that white people are a “race of devils” created by an evil scientist.
He has also compared Jews to “termites” and stated, “Satanic Jews have infected the whole world with poison and deceit,” while expressing support for terrorist group Hezbollah.
The Nation of Islam leader also previously called on God to “wipe this country (America) from the face of the earth.”
This kind of rhetoric is freely available on YouTube, where Farrakhan’s speeches are uploaded on an almost weekly basis.
Duke’s YouTube activity has dwindled over the last couple of years, but he still has 85,000 subscribers and scores of video uploads with titles like CNN Goldman Sachs & the Zio Matrix and The Dynamics of the Jewish Elite.
We are not calling for Duke or Farrakhan to be removed from YouTube because we believe that even highly offensive and controversial speech should be protected.
However, the double standard illustrates how Big Tech only targets those with an effective and unifying message.
The left has no problem with actual extremists, since their openly divisive message can be exploited for political grist. Both Duke and Farrakhan are extremely divisive and therefore are left alone.
Meanwhile, someone like Jones, who is actually trying to promote a unifying, all inclusive message around the ideals of western culture and freedom, has been permanently deleted.
In a related issue, changes to YouTube’s search algorithm (the second largest in the world) have helped corporate media dominate independent creators.
Even when searching directly for a particular video with the exact title, a search on anything related to news brings up a wall of CNN, CBS and NBC.
YouTube literally broke their own search engine just so they could help the corporate media supplant its competition.



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Minnesota Democrat Representative Ilhan Omar is one of the first two Muslim women elected to Congress. She “lauded Jewish-Muslim cooperation in combating bigotry,” while stating that “like members of the Jewish community, I know how it feels to be hated because of my religious beliefs.”
Omar is not hated for her religious beliefs.
She is looked upon with suspicion and disgust because of her views, which are rooted in those beliefs. It is highly insulting to Jews for her to compare herself with them. Jews experience anti-Semitism purely for being Jewish. The Islamic states surrounding Israel have tried repeatedly to obliterate it since 1948 and still aim to do so solely because it is the Jewish state. Since obliterating Israel has not proved possible, the next step for Islamic supremacists has been to try to delegitimize the Jewish state through boycotts, divestments and sanctions (BDS). The BDS movement is based on the lie that Israel is oppressing the Palestinians, when Israel is merely trying to protect itself and its citizens and live in peace.
The record of Ilhan Omar leaves much to be desired. She has accused Israel of “evil doings” when Israel launched an aerial campaign to defend itself against Hamas rocket attacks from Gaza. She has also accused Israel of hypnotizing the world, adding: “May Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel.” Omar also supports BDS. In fact, Omar has “fought to make sure people’s right to support it [BDS] isn’t criminalised,” making her the “first member of Congress to publicly support the BDS movement.” She also has close ties with Hamas-linked CAIR — which did fundraising for her political campaign.
Now Omar is deceptively saying: “Like members of the Jewish community, I know how it feels to be hated because of my religious beliefs.” 
No. She is opposed for her hateful actions.

“Ilhan Omar lauds Jewish-Muslim cooperation in fighting bigotry”, Jewish Telegraphic Agency, November 27, 2018:
WASHINGTON (JTA) — Ilhan Omar, a Minnesota Democrat and one of the first two Muslim women elected to Congress, lauded Jewish-Muslim cooperation in combating bigotry.
“Like members of the Jewish community, I know how it feels to be hated because of my religious beliefs,” Omar, who has stirred controversy in the Jewish community for attacks on Israel and suggesting she backed the boycott movement against the Jewish state, wrote Monday in an op-ed for the Minneapolis Star Tribune. “But we know that we are stronger when we stand united against bigotry and hate.”
Omar, until now a state lawmaker, has come under fire for calling Israel an “apartheid regime” and for saying it had “hypnotized the world” to ignore its “evil” treatment of Palestinians.
Her op-ed notes a spike in reports of hate crimes on Muslims and Jews, and last month’s massacre at a synagogue complex in Pittsburgh.
She cited instances where the communities stood up for each other.
Muslim organizations “raised more than $200,000 to support the victims and their families from the Tree of Life Synagogue,” she said. “I remember how, less than two years ago, Jewish Americans stood with their Muslim-American neighbors against the administration’s cruel travel ban. Eighteen rabbis were arrested as they protested the ban outside Trump Tower in New York.”
Omar correlated the spike in hate attacks, reported by the FBI, to Donald Trump’s presidency.
“The culture of intolerance spread by President Donald Trump has clearly emboldened racist individuals to acts of violence,” she said…. 
Speaking of Hate, Rep.-elect Ilhan Omar Promotes It
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

In her Minneapolis Star Tribune op-ed on the FBI’s just released 2017 Hate Crimes Report, Minnesota Rep.-elect Ilhan Omar presents herself as a sort of apostle of love.  Omar decries the increase in reported hate crimes.  However, she immediately attributes this increase to President Trump.  As Omar puts it in her first paragraph: "The culture of intolerance spread by President Donald Trump has clearly emboldened racist individuals to acts of violence.”  Something tells me that Omar’s message of love is a thinly disguised invitation to hate — to hate President Trump and his supporters, anyway. 
Omar notes the increase in anti-religious hate crimes committed against Jews (up 37 percent) as well as the fact that Jews have been the foremost target of hate crimes since the FBI started keeping these statistics. But Omar doesn’t ask who is committing those crimes.
However, it isn’t long before she steps forward as a victim herself: "Like members of the Jewish community, I know how it feels to be hated because of my religious beliefs. Almost one in five hate crimes committed last year was motivated by religious bias, with 18.1 percent committed against Muslims — well above the historical averages before President Trump's election.”
Omar habitually portrays herself as a victim.  It’s an irritating tic.  But she has not been the victim of any reported hate crime.  A young refugee to the United States from Somalia, Omar was elected to Congress at the age of 36.  This achievement must make her one of 
 the most fortunate citizens of the United States.  Her claim to victimhood represents the new style of American assimilation.
It might have been generous of Omar to note that the number of reported anti-Islam hate crimes actually decreased from the last year of the Obama administration (307 in 2016) to the first year of the Trump administration (273 in 2017).  Perhaps President Trump deserves credit for spreading the love.
Yet one wonders if her column isn’t an example of what Trump calls fake news.  While the FBI report shows the stated increase in reported hate crimes, it also notes in the first paragraph of its press release: "Although the numbers increased last year, so did the number of law enforcement agencies reporting hate crime data — with approximately 1,000 additional agencies contributing information.”
This raises the obvious question of whether the reported increase derives from the increase in the number of agencies reporting data.  Omar has no genuine interest in that possibility.  She doesn’t even see the issue, let alone raise it.  Her interest is entirely argumentative and political.
Omar quickly finishes with the 2017 report and moves on to the administration’s allegedly cruel “travel ban.”  She invokes the specter of “Islamophobia.”  According to Omar, "Islamophobia and anti-Semitism are two sides of the same bigoted coin.”
Well, I doubt it.  “Islamophobia” is a concept fervently promoted since 2000 by the Organization of the Islamic Conference.  It seeks to stigmatize expressions of disapproval of Islam as irrational manifestations of fear and prejudice.  Implicitly it seeks to make us afraid to talk about perfectly reasonable fears.  Having become the home of some 100,000 Somali immigrants over the past 25 years, Minnesota badly needs to make room for honest discussion of the costs and benefits of continued immigration.
At my synagogue in St. Paul, we first hired off-duty police officers to stand guard during Saturday and Sunday school hours shortly after 9/11.  We didn’t worry much about mass murder before then.
And despite her self-portrait as an apostle of love, Omar is a proponent of the anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions movement. She is, to put it bluntly, an Islamist hater of Israel. In a 2014 tweet during Israel’s hostilities with Hamas, for example, Omar prayed for “Allah to awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel.” In a May 31 tweet this year, she referred to Israel as an “apartheid regime.”
This comparison is a calumny of Israel, which draws no distinctions based on race. Israel has proudly rescued black Jews and offered them refuge. In addition, Israeli Arabs — an ethnic minority in the Jewish state — are afforded equal civil rights. They enjoy the right to vote in elections. They exercise rights of speech and religion. They have access to a robust free press. They serve in the Knesset and in the judiciary. They are the freest Arabs in the Middle East. Though Omar purports to distinguish between the Jewish state and the Jewish people, the true ground of her animus against Israel is necessarily anti-Semitic.

Omar soft-pedaled her support for BDS during her appearance before a large Democratic audience at Beth El Synagogue in St. Louis Park the week before the competitive Democratic primary on Aug. 14, though she has proudly reiterated it since her election.  During the campaign the Star Tribune kept her support of BDS a deep secret to voters who get their news from the paper.  Although she holds herself out today in the Star Tribune an apostle of love, Ilhan Omar is an enthusiastic trader in one side of a bigoted coin.
Scott W. Johnson is a Minneapolis attorney and a contributor to

 Investigative reporter takes the information war into the third dimension

Laura Loomer reports from Twitter headquarters in NYC to protest her recent ban from the platform.
Loomer has handcuffed herself to the front door of Twitter HQ to protest internet censorship of conservatives.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
 Update: Laura Loomer had been taken into custody. Police had cut the handcuffs and, according to a citizen-journalist, she was taken to a police precinct. She discusses what happened below:
 "Far-right activist Laura Loomer handcuffed herself to Twitter's New York City headquarters for about two hours on Thursday afternoon to protest the company's banning her from the social media platform, then asked police to remove her. Loomer attached herself to the building's front door, blocking the entrance to the building in Manhattan's Chelsea neighborhood in a protest that was livestreamed on Periscope, which began at about 3:45 p.m. ET. The video stream showed Loomer wearing on her chest a yellow Star of David such as many European Jews were forced to wear during the Holocaust, and a sweatshirt that read on the back, "#STOPTHEBIAS." Twitter closed the conservative firebrand's account a week ago after she posted a tweet criticizing Minnesota Rep.-elect Ilhan Omar, a Democrat, and her Muslim faith, calling Omar "anti Jewish" and pro-Sharia law. At one point Thursday, Loomer yelled through the doors of Twitter's building, telling its employees that they worked for an "evil" company. She also yelled to a group of people who stood across the street, "They don't want you guys to know the truth." "I am not going to stand by as people like Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg [try to] silence the voices of millions of conservatives," Loomer said. She asserted that Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey banned her as a "Jewish conservative journalist," a phrase she yelled repeatedly while chained to the building. Twitter released a statement during her protest, saying, "We have notified the relevant authorities who are responding. The account holder was suspended for violating our policies. We apply the Twitter Rules impartially and not based on ideology..."

Posted by Infowars LIVE
 Live Exclusive: Laura Loomer Explains The Twitter Protests That Got Her Cameraman’s Finger Cut Off
 Embedded video
employee tries to knock down someone who was standing on a ladder by aggressively pushing on the door. Then he put his hands on by ripping away her sign from her hands she was using in protest. So... this is ok?


Have you read the book yet? Get The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS here.

Here is the transcript, from FrontPage:
Editor’s note: Below are the video and transcript of remarks given by Robert Spencer at the David Horowitz Freedom Center’s 2018 Restoration Weekend. The event was held Nov. 15th-18th at the Breakers Hotel in Palm Beach, Florida.
Thank you very much, and yes indeed, The History of Jihad is the first book that chronicles the entirety of the phenomenon of jihad for 1,400 years. Not just the jihad against Europe, although that’s very much a part of the book, but also the jihad against India and the jihad elsewhere, also tying in the fact that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is itself a jihad, and of course, the people who struck us on 9/11 were motivated by the exact same ideology that has motivated the jihad conquests of the distant past and is still with us very much today. Of course, one of the reasons why anybody is interested in reading history or studying history is because of the old adage “Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” More to the point, really, is that if you do not learn from your mistakes, you keep making the same mistakes again and again and again. That’s U.S. foreign policy today, because of, in large part, a lack of awareness and understanding of the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat and of a complete lack of knowledge of the history of jihad. So I thought this morning very briefly I’d give you three lessons from history that could have a very great impact on foreign policy today in the United States, were there to be sanity in the State Department, which, of course, I know is at a premium.
Now, the first one is that nowhere in history, and this is something to bear in mind when you’re thinking about the case of Jamal Khashoggi, who is, of course, the sainted and martyred journalist who was killed by the Saudis. He was actually a pro-Al Qaeda Muslim Brotherhood operative who was killed by the Saudis, so there are no good guys in that story. But in light of it, it is important to remember that when you look through and examine and study the history of Islam for 1,400 years, there has never been a lasting alliance between a Muslim state and a non‑Muslim state. It would be nice if there had been. There were some sort-term alliances of convenience, but that’s another problem as well.
For example, John VI Kantakouzenos was a Byzantine emperor in the middle of the 14th century. There was a claimant to the Byzantine imperial throne who disputed his claim, so he asked his pal, the Ottoman sultan, to help him by sending some armies into Europe to fight against the rival claimant. Very fruitful alliance for John VI Kantakouzenos, except that the Ottomans entered Europe. They have not left yet. The Turks still control the area around what was known as the City of Adrianople. That is their claim to be part of the European Union, which they are still pushing. More to the point, the Ottomans never gave up trying to destroy the Byzantine Empire, even though they had made various alliances with not just John VI, but other Byzantine emperors.
The Byzantine emperors were not thinking about the reality of the jihad imperative, that an Islamic state that is avowedly an Islamic state and is dedicated to Islamic principles is going to be aware of the Islamic imperative to wage war against unbelievers, and to conquer and subjugate them. It may well make use of those unbelievers at various points for its own advantage, but it will never be friends with those unbelievers. As a matter of, there’s a famous passage in the Koran that says, “Do not take Jews and Christians as your friends.” This has often been dismissed by Islamic apologists, who say that doesn’t mean that any individual Muslim won’t be your pal. That it means that an Islamic state must not ally with a non-Muslim state. Well, okay, that’s a lesson in itself as well.
So when we consider Saudi Arabia, Saudi Arabia finds the United States useful. The United States finds Saudi Arabia useful. President Trump may have some very good reasons right now to maintain the alliance with Saudi Arabia because of his predecessor’s disastrous policies that empowered and enabled and strengthened the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Another lesson from history is that Sunnis and Shia hate each other. They hate infidels more, but they do hate each other, and have been waging jihad against each other for 1,400 years, as well as against infidels. So the Saudis and the Iranians will never be friends. They will always be rivals. They will always be at odds. So when Iran was so strengthened and it used the billions that Obama showered upon it to finance Hezbollah and Hamas and Islamic jihad and even Al Qaeda and the Taliban, then the President is right to try to keep the Saudis on our side and make sure that they stand as a bulwark against Iran. Otherwise, Iranian power could directly threaten the survival of the free world. The Saudis, however, are not a benign thing. I think that anybody who might have been carried away and thought that Mohammad bin Salman was a genuine reformer ought to have been awakened by the fact that not only was Khashoggi killed, but he’s not the only journalist who the Saudis have recently killed. Mohammad bin Salman has also imprisoned the activists who called for women to be able to drive. So you see, he allowed women to drive, then he arrested everybody who wanted it.
Now, why would he do that? You see, it’s crazy, but he’s not nuts. What he’s doing is trying to present Saudi Arabia as a more benign nation to encourage foreign investment, especially when the long-term trends for oil prices are going down. Then he can attract business into Saudi Arabia, but that doesn’t mean that he wants any dissenters of any kind or any challenges of any kind to the rule of the House of Saud.
That brings me to the second lesson from Islamic history. There has never been a Western-style secular republic that was based on Islamic principles. Now, that is very carefully worded, because Turkey, of course, was a Western-style secular republic up until quite recently. You might have thought it still was, but actually Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the president of Turkey, has been very systematically and persistently dismantling Kemalist secularism and restoring Turkey as an Islamic state. One of the ways he did that was to decapitate the military, which had always been the guardians of Turkish secularism. Now, talking about learning the lessons of history, consider this. Secularism was imposed upon Turkey; it was never a ground up, ground roots movement. Talk about astroturfing, it’s an excellent example of it.
What happened was this. Kemal Ataturk, after World War I, though he was unique in the Islamic world, unique in Islamic history, in saying the reason why our country is in the dumpster right now is because of Islam. So if we’re going to proper, we need to imitate the nations that have prospered, and that’s the West. So we’re going to limit the power of political Islam and imitate the West. This is the only time this has happened in Islamic history, and he established secular Turkey on that basis. What he did was very popular at the time in Constantinople and Ankara, the two largest cities in Turkey, and not popular at all in the countryside. There were several times before Erdogan was elected that other people who wanted to restore Islamic law were elected to positions of power in Turkey. Every time that happened, the military would topple them from power. So the military preserved Turkey as a Western-style secular republic for the large part of the 20th century. Then what happened?
Early in the 21st century, there were very large indications that there was going to be another military coup in Turkey. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice warned the Turkish military that the United States was the guardian of democracy and would not accept any military coup in Turkey. Because of that now, Turkey has become not an ally of the United States, but a rapidly re‑Islamizing nation that directly aided ISIS. John Kerry went to Turkey a few years ago when he was Secretary of State and he said, “Could you please stop buying ISIS oil?,” and they refused. Erdogan is famous for having allowed thousands of foreign jihadis to cross through Turkey into the ISIS domains in Iraq and Syria. They would say, “You have to fight ISIS. You’re in NATO. You have to do something about this.” He would say okay, and bomb the Kurds. He never fought ISIS, because he wanted to co-opt their caliphate into his own restored caliphate. But since in the State Department they don’t know what a caliphate is, they don’t know anything about history, and they don’t what the pillars of Turkish secularism were, they set this up. They made this happen. That’s what is a classic example of not knowing the past and thus repeating the same mistakes, and being condemned to repeat the same misery all over again.
The third lesson from Islamic history is that there’s never been a shortage of non‑Muslims who are willing to help the jihad. There have always been plenty of them, and it never works out for them. Take, for example, the conquest of Spain. All of us in the room here know probably that Spain was conquered by Islamic armies staring in the year 711. They had the whole country conquered by 718 and they ruled it for 700 years until they themselves were – this is one of the few times this has happened in history — pushed out of Spain, and by 1492 Spain was an entirely Christian nation, as it had been before the conquest. But fewer people know how the conquest came about.
What happened was there was a Christian leader, Count Julian of Ceuta. Ceuta is in what is now Morocco, and it’s still a Spanish possession. Many of you are no doubt aware that Ceuta and Melilla are two enclaves that are in Morocco, in North Africa, but they’re part of Spain. Right now, they’re being overrun by migrants from Africa, who go and climb the fence in Ceuta, and then they’re in Europe even though they’re not. They’re in North Africa. They’re in Spain, and so they are entitled to all the guarantees of protection that the European Union is giving to the migrants. But Count Julian of Ceuta, long ago, he sent his daughter to the court of King Roderick, the Visigothic king of Spain, in order to have her educated. But King Roderick, the Visigothic king of Spain, treated interns rather like Bill Clinton did. So Count Julian was enraged and appalled when he heard what had happened. So he went to his friend Tarek ibn Ziyad, who was the leader of the local Muslim region of Morocco right next to Ceuta. He said, “I’ll help you get across the strait,” because this is what had stymied the Muslims. They had boats, but every time they set sail across the Strait of Gibraltar, then they would find that the Spanish would put their defenses up, because they would see them coming. They weren’t moving all that fast in those days.
So Count Julian gave them his boats, so that when the Spanish who were manning the defenses saw them coming they thought, “Oh that’s our friend Count Julian,” and they did not put up their defenses or have the army ready. So Tarek ibn Ziyad got to Spain and he decamped his army, and then he had ordered the boats burned, which I think was rather ungracious of him, since they were a loaner. But what he was saying was, “We’re here to stay. We’re going to stay here. We’re going to conquer this place or we’re going to die here, but we’re not going back,” and he conquered Spain courtesy of County Julian. Interestingly enough, a few years back there was a big controversy some of you may recall in Minneapolis, about a charter school, a public school that got public funds but was essentially a madrassa, an Islamic school. It got public funds and was a public school, but they had Qur’an study. They had prayers during school time, and so on. People got wind of this. There was a controversy. Ultimately, the school was shut down although it started right back up again, but that’s another story. The controversy was raging all this time, I was puzzled because nobody ever in any of the coverage that I ever saw about the controversy, nobody ever stopped to ask, “Wait, a minute, who is this Tarek ibn Ziyad that the school is named for? Why is it called Tarek ibn Ziyad Academy?” Tarek ibn Ziyad, remember, was the Muslim conqueror of Spain who burned the boats. Probably anybody in Minneapolis who ever gave it a moment’s thought, thought that he was some Muslim John Dewey or something, some sort of great educator. But in reality, he was the great conqueror of Spain, the guy who burned the boats and said, “We’re here to conquer or die.”
Now, why do you think a Muslim school in Minneapolis would call itself Tarek ibn Ziyad Academy? What could be the lesson there? What do you think they were trying to say? But of course, nobody knows who Tarek ibn Ziyad was, and so nobody thought to ponder the significance of the name. Now in any case, Count Julian was by no means alone in his sponsorship of the Islamic jihad and his aid for its advance. There have been numerous non‑Muslims who have been similarly helpful to the jihad cause throughout history.
Another primary example came in Arabia at the end of the 18th century and along into the middle of the 19th. At that time, Arabia was nominally under the control of the Ottoman Empire. But there came to be a revivalist movement in Arabia at that time, and there was a gentleman who claimed to be the great Muslim reformer. A lot of people say, “We have to put our hopes on Islamic reform and we can hope that Islamic reform will happen, and then all our troubles will be over.” Well, I got news for you. Islamic reform has already happened. It happened it started in the middle part of the 18th century in Arabia. This guy said the Ottomans had added all these things into Islam. He was going to strip them out and get back to the basics. He personally stoned an adulteress to death and showed how eager he was in doing so to enforce Islamic law. He got a wide following because he did that. He gained the aid of a local chieftain in Arabia, and they began to make war against the Ottomans and the other Arab chieftains in the area.
In the middle of the 19th century, this man’s movement — it became known as the Wahhabi movement because his name was Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab and the chieftain who helped him was Ibn Saud who, of course, later became recognized as founder of the Saudi clan which today rules Saudi Arabia. But they were just one of a number rival Arab chieftains at the time, and Muslim preachers who were vying for control of Arabia and all fighting the Ottomans, but they got noticed by the British. The British thought, “Hey, we want to fight the Ottomans. We can use these guys,” and it seemed like a good idea, right? Because the Ottoman Empire is the global caliphate, which is the foremost exponent of offensive and aggressive jihad. So the British started paying money to the Wahhabis in the middle of the 19th century. They sponsored the Saudis to create Saudi Arabia after World War I. They actually decided who was going to be in power in Arabia and gave Jordan to the loser. The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan — the Hashemites are not from that area. They’re Arabs, Arabians, but they lost the struggle with the Saudis, and so they got Jordan as a consolation prize. The Saudis, meanwhile, struck oil in 1938, and they used their billions to finance this virulent and violent understanding of Islam that Wahhab had originated. They spread it all around the world in areas where a cultural form of Islam had become a little bit more benign. So it’s really courtesy of the British that we have the revival of global jihad and the creation of jihad terrorist groups in the middle of the 20th century, because had it not been for the British, the Saudis would never have been much of anything and then they would never have been the beneficiaries of the oil strike, and never would have been able to finance the global jihad today. So I think we owe the British government a great debt of gratitude for that.
In any case, I hope that this has briefly made it clear why it’s so important to understand history and particularly this very, very untraveled bit of history, the history of jihad, which I think is one of the most crucial stories of all human history and one of the least known. So this is one of the reasons why I wrote the book. I’m hoping that there will be a genuine change in the public discussion as a result of some of the things that are made clear in the book, that will in turn themselves make clear that a great deal of our foreign and also domestic policy is based on false assumptions, wrong assumptions, wishful thinking and outright fantasy. Thank you very much.
Audience member:
Do you have time for one question?
Okay.  We have time for one question, ladies and gentleman.  We can auction it to the highest bidder and fundraise.
Hi, thank you for being here. I’m currently at university, and professors all love to talk about the Islamic golden age and how it was rational and they saved the Renaissance and all these types of things. Were those people adhering to Islamic belief? Were they ignoring it, or am I being lied to as a student?
Yes, yes and yes. The fact is that the Islamic golden age was part real and part fiction. There were great Islamic empires and there were Islamic philosophers, and there was a time when there was peace between Jews, Christians, and Muslims particularly in Spain. However, the time that there was peace between Jews, Christians, and Muslims in Spain was only when the Jews and Christians knew their place, accepted their second-class status, and submitted to the hegemony of the Muslims. When, as a matter of fact, in the year 1066, the local Muslim leader in Granada appointed a Jew as the vizier of the city. Now, this was because he knew this guy and they were friends. Human nature is everywhere the same. Sometimes people ignore laws, but the law is that a non-Muslim must not have authority over a Muslim. So the people were incited, and I described this in the book. The people were incited by a poet who wrote a poem about how terrible it was that the Jews were ruling over them. They were incited to riot. It was a terrible pogrom, and 4,000 people were murdered. This was because the people knew that a Jew must not hold authority over a Muslim. That was wonderful, tolerant Muslim Spain. That’s just one example of many that I could give you.
The inventions, the great innovations, a lot of that is just sheer nonsense. It also begs the further question, when people talk about all the wonderful things — like I hear that 100 years before Copernicus, some Muslim astronomer discovered the same thing that Copernicus did, that the sun doesn’t revolve around the earth, wasn’t that it? Then you’ve just got to wonder, well, okay. Well, that led to a great deal of innovation and further discovery in Europe, what happened in the Islamic world? The great Islamic philosophers, they did influence Aquinas, and they had a great deal to do with the Enlightenment and the Renaissance in Europe, but in Islam, you only know Averroes and Avicenna and a few other others, because after that they were declared heretical. There was Al-Ghazali, who was himself a great philosopher, and wrote The Incoherence of the Philosophers, saying that the philosophers contradict the Qur’an and must be killed. That had a bit of a chilling effect on Islamic philosophy.
What you have also nowadays, because there’s such an apologetic effort to sell Islam to the West, you have a lot of people saying, “The first hospital was in Baghdad under the Umayyad Caliphate.” Well, in the first place, the first hospital was many years before that, but in reality the hospital in Baghdad was run by Christians and Jews who were under Islamic rule, so that’s not really something that’s to the credit of Islam and on and on and on.
Nowadays there’s a tremendous public relations effort to rewrite history, to manipulate people into thinking. For example, Akbar Ahmed is a professor at American University, and he’s written a book called Journey into Europe, that he actually recommends a new al-Andalus for Europe, which is essentially saying he wants Europe to be conquered by Islam. He presents that as this wonderful golden age that your professors tell you about, but in reality al-Andalus was nowhere any of us would want to live, and if we did, we would suffer to a great degree. So knowing history is good. It’s being used as a weapon today to manipulate you to accept public policies of nowadays. So it’s very important to be informed. Thanks very much.


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
 (Friday Church News Notes, November 30, 2018,,, 866-295-4143) - The following is excerpted from “China Mandates Surveillance as Religious Persecution Rises,” an interview with Bob Fu, The Stream, Nov. 14, 2018: “President Xi Jinping considers Christians one of the greatest threats to his power. Underground churches are listed as one of the ‘new black five’ national security threats in China. It’s new under this president for churches to be classified as a national security threat. The government-sanctioned churches that are allowed to exist right now have unique restrictions. Each church has to install a facial-recognition camera in front of the pulpit. The purpose is to identify certain people in the congregation. Many classes of people are banned from entering into any church. These include young people under 18 years old, college students, doctors or medical professionals, civil servants, military members and educators. If they’re found, immediately their boss or a government official will be speaking with them. These are huge ramifications right now. It really began after President Xi Jinping took office in 2012. He is now nicknamed ‘Emperor Xi’ since he successfully removed his term limits in March of this year. When he took power, the mass forced demolition of crosses started in Zhejiang province. That area is called the Jerusalem of China. ... These are government-sanctioned churches. The house churches do not have buildings or a cross. ... On February 1 of this year, a new law called ‘Regulations on the Administration of Religious Affairs’ took effect. Things have become dramatically even worse. Bible-burning campaigns are happening across China. ... China is perhaps the world’s most sophisticated surveillance police state. It’s beyond anything the U.S. does. Some of these efforts are aided by greedy American companies. ... Apple decided to remove all virtual private networks from Apple Stores across China. They have a segregated Chinese version of the Apple iCloud. Supposedly this China iCloud is still part of Apple, offering iTunes content. But it’s totally controlled by the Chinese government. Cisco and Google are similar. China has the most cameras in the whole world, on every street corner. These facial recognition cameras are part of their dynamic monitoring system. They can follow you anywhere. If you drive a car, they can quickly track your license plate. If you buy a train or bus ticket, as soon as you swipe your card, you are classified. I noted how China has five categories of dangerous people. Now China is also building the world’s largest so-called ‘social credit’ system. If you get a traffic ticket, then one point of morality is deducted. If you are found in the underground church, your social score is essentially zero. You lose your right to buy airplane tickets. Last week, I was in South Korea attending a house church leadership conference. But 240 out of 300 church leaders were blocked in Chinese airports, even including Hong Kong, and declared as national security threats. They were not allowed to board the flight when they checked in to Customs.”BEIJING DEBUTS PLAN TO MONITOR BEHAVIOR OF EVERY RESIDENT  
(Friday Church News Notes, November 30, 2018,,, 866-295-4143) - The following is excerpted from “Beijing Debuts,”, Nov. 23, 2018: “Beijing plans to reward and punish its residents based on data that will be collected from various departments monitoring citizens’ social behavior, according to a detailed ‘action plan’ posted on Monday to the city’s municipal website. By the beginning of 2020, the announcement declares, China’s capital city will have all residents officially locked into the permanent surveillance program, part of a broader effort to have every Chinese citizen rated on a ‘social credit system’ decreeing what public services a person can use based on their obedience to laws and loyalty to the communist regime. The government will use the data collected to assess citizens’ behavior to decide if an individual is law-abiding and ‘trustworthy’ to the Communist Party. Residents who behave properly in the eyes of the Chinese government will receive high credit scores, while residents who misbehave will receive low scores, causing them to lead more difficult lives.Efforts will be made to build a market supervision mechanism with corporate credit as the core,’ states Beijing’s municipal website, adding that it will explore the implementation of what it calls ‘the personal integrity project,’ which will utilize residents’ credit scores for ‘market access, public services, tourism,’ and ‘fields such as entrepreneurship and job hunting.’ Higher scores can also open the ‘green channel,’ which will expedite residents’ applications for higher quality ‘education and medical resources.’Those who violate the law and lose trust will pay a heavy price,’ adds the government website, stating that it will ‘improve the blacklist system’ and that residents will find themselves ‘limited everywhere, and difficult to move’ if they are deemed untrustworthy by the Communists in control.”