Leatherneck Blogger

Posts Tagged ‘Refugee Resettlement

Why Radical Islam Is the Baby Boomers’ Fault

with one comment

By Elliot Friedland
Clarion Project
December 7, 2017

Millenials get a bad rap for being lazy entitled snowflakes who can’t take criticism or do a hard day’s labor. We also are criticized for pandering to Islamist sensibilities out of our misplaced desire for political correctness. Well, hold my avocado toast, old timer, because I need to explain some things to you.

This is your fault.

No, not you specifically (don’t get cranky), but the fault of baby boomers in the aggregate. You’re the generation that’s held power since the late ’60s (sorry Gen X, you never quite rocked the boat enough to get attention). Don’t get upset you didn’t know any better. You just weren’t paying attention and now we’re here, with terrorist attacks a possibility anywhere and at any time.

So here’s how the baby boomers set us up for radical Islam.

1.You Made the Saudis Rich by Buying All Their Oil

Since the 1970s, the government of Saudi Arabia has been spending money like a sailor on shore leave to fund extremism around the world. It’s estimated they’ve spent somewhere in the region of $100 billion funding their ultraconservative brand of Islam worldwide — paying for schools, mosques and extremist literature. All that money to support ideas that women are worth less than men, that gay people and apostates should be killed, etc.

But where did they get the money? Boomers gave it to them. Your thirsty little cars guzzled the stuff down like there was no tomorrow and you made no effort to invest in different sources of power.

By contrast, millenials have a significantly lower rate of car ownership than previous generations and are far more likely to support alternative sources of energy.

2.You Propped Up Extremists to Screw the Communists

Ronald Reagan armed and trained jihadi fighters in Afghanistan to get the Soviets out. Reagan also gave three billion in economic assistance and two billion in military aid to dictator General Zia Ul-Haq’s Pakistan. This is a regime that suspended elections and actively promoted Islamist groups such as Jamaat I-Islami, which is actively opposed to democracy. Pakistan’s Internal Security Agency (ISI) still supports the Taliban.

The accounts have been improperly audited and the Islamist-affiliated Pakistani government largely embezzled American largesse. Zia Ul-Haq is the dictator who aligned himself with extremist groups and promoted an extremist version of Pakistan that prior to him had not existed, including purging the universities of liberal- and Western-aligned elements.

Without the actions of Zia Ul-Haq, Pakistan would not be in the dire, Islamist controlled situation it is today. Who supported this? Boomers.

3.You Invented Political Correctness

If you’re worried about all the safe spaces and not being able to tell the truth about the ideology of Islamism, don’t look at millenials, look in the mirror.

Left-wing professors began preaching post-modern doctrines of cultural relativism in the 1970s. The upshot of those ideas is that it’s morally wrong for any group to uphold its values as better. And that given the history of power dynamics between Western and non-Western groups, it is doubly wrong for a Western group to hold its values as better than any given non-Western group.

The idea that Westerners ought to feel supremely guilty for the sins of the 19th and early 20th centuries are not millenial notions, they are boomer ideas.

Millenials are impacted by radical Islam in a big way. But that doesn’t mean the factors driving it are our fault. On the contrary, we inherited this world from earlier generations. Boomers set it up like this.

Radical Islam is on you.

Obama: “We had no evidence that Pakistani government was aware of Osama bin Laden’s presence in Abbottabad”

with one comment

By Robert Spencer
Jihad Watch
December 2, 2017

Pull my other leg, Barack. He lived down the street from the nation’s foremost military academy. If Pakistani authorities didn’t know he was there, they are incompetent beyond redemption. But why are you still covering for them at this late date?

“Pakistan was not aware of Osama bin Laden’s presence in Abbottabad: Obama,” Pakistan Today, December 1, 2017:

NEW DELHI: Former United States president Barack Obama said that there is no evidence that the Pakistan government was aware of the presence of al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad, Pakistan.

He said this while addressing the 15th Hindustan Times Leadership Summit at Hyatt Regency in New Delhi.

“We had no evidence that Pakistani government was aware of Osama bin Laden’s presence in Abbottabad,” he said. “We obviously looked at it.”

US Special Forces killed Osama Bin Laden and four others in a covert US raid, on a compound located near the Pakistan Military Academy Kakul in Abbottabad on May 2, 2011. An aide of Osama purchased the land measuring seven kanals in 2004 and a three-story building was constructed over more than three kanals of the plot in Bilal town.

Ever since the raid took place there was much speculation whether bin Laden had Pakistan state support to keep hiding in the compound. However, documents seized from Bin Laden’s compound did not show sufficient evidence of any probable support from the establishment.

Egyptian lawyer: It’s a man’s ‘national duty’ to rape women who wear ripped jeans

with one comment

By Rick Moran
American Thinker
November 2, 2017

Oh, those crazy Muslim men!  What will they say next?

An Egyptian lawyer, appearing on a popular satellite news program, told a panel debating a new law on prostitution in Egypt that it is the “patriotic duty” of men to sexually harass and a “national duty” to rape women who wear revealing clothing.

New York Post:

An Egyptian lawyer has sparked outrage after saying women who wear ripped jeans deserve to be sexually harassed and raped.

Nabih al-Wahsh, a prominent conservative in Egypt, said raping women who wear ripped jeans is a man’s “national duty”, adding that girls who show parts of their body by wearing such clothes are inviting men to harass them.

His disgusting comments were made during a TV talk show called “Infrad” on satellite channel Al-Assema.

The panel were debating a draft law on prostitution and “inciting debauchery” when Wahsh made the jaw-dropping comments.

During the heated debate, Wahsh said: “Are you happy when you see a girl walking down the street with half of her behind showing?”

He added: “I say that when a girl walks about like that, it is a patriotic duty to sexually harass her and a national duty to rape her.”

His controversial remarks prompted fury across the country and Egypt’s National Council for Women announced it plans to file a complaint to the attorney general against Wahsh and the TV channel.

The council said it had also filed a complaint to the Supreme Council for Media Regulation and urged media outlets not to invite controversial figures who make remarks that incite violence against women.

The lawyer has apparently been paying attention to U.S. TV and how politicians shamelessly deny they said what they clearly said:

Wahsh later said his comments were a call to demand stricter punishment for sexual harassment.

He added: “Girls must respect themselves so others respect them. Protecting morals is more important than protecting borders.”

So urging men to sexually harass and rape women is actually a way to “demand stricter punishment for sexual harassment”?  Sheesh.

While the various women’s groups and Westernized media heavily criticized the lawyer, what do you think the reaction to his words were in the suks and mosques across the rest of Egypt?

Recall that the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt received a majority of votes in the last relatively free election.  So I think it safe to say the lawyer’s sentiments would meet with the approval of a solid majority of Egyptian men, who view women little better than cattle and, in some ways, worse.

Egypt’s president, General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, has made it clear he wants to secularize the country.  But after centuries of control by radical clergy, he faces an uphill battle to bring Egypt into the 21st century.

Why do terrorists yell ‘Allahu akbar’ when they attack?

with one comment

By James Arlandson
American Thinker
November 3, 2017

It’s not complicated, except for our overpaid intellectual news media betters and the punditocracy.

For example, Huffington Post contributor Carol Kuruvilla informs us that the phrase is used in Muslim prayers and affirms the supremacy of God.  She even points out that American Christians use it, though in English.  Her main point: It’s harmless.

All this is true, except the misleading statement about Christians.  The problem with her analysis is that it overlooks an additional reason for its use: warfare.

It’s in the hadith.  In this one, Khaibar (or Khaybar) was a Jewish settlement.

Narrated ‘Abdul ‘Aziz: Anas said, ‘When Allah’s Apostle invaded Khaibar, we offered the Fajr prayer there yearly in the morning) when it was still dark. The Prophet rode and Abu Talha rode too and I was riding behind Abu Talha. The Prophet passed through the lane of Khaibar quickly and my knee was touching the thigh of the Prophet . He uncovered his thigh and I saw the whiteness of the thigh of the Prophet. When he entered the town, he said, ‘Allahu Akbar! Khaibar is ruined. Whenever we approach near a (hostile) nation (to fight) then evil will be the morning of those who have been warned.’ He repeated this thrice. The people came out for their jobs and some of them said, ‘Muhammad (has come).’ (Some of our companions added, “With his army.”) We conquered Khaibar, took the captives, and the booty was collected. (Bukhari 1, no. 367)

It’s difficult to be clearer than that. Muhammad used the expression to instill terror in the Jews of Khaibar and to announce his arrival.  As the hadith says, he conquered the town (or it surrendered).  Ruin will be inflicted on the town or the nation that is warned of impending battle when the people hear “Allahu akbar!”  The rest of the hadith goes on to say Muhammad enslaved the most beautiful woman, manumitted her, and “married” her.

So yes, Muslims use the phrase during prayers, but terrorists also follow Muhammad’s example.  One more reason why this man’s religion must be left behind.

James Arlandson’s website is Live as Free People, where he has posted Twenty-five reasons to leave IslamRescuing Noah’s ark from the flood of science, and Christianity is fastest growing religion in world.


The Happy, Harmless Quran

leave a comment »

By James Arlandson
American Thinker
November 16, 2017

What’s all the fuss about? If only we threw off our secular ignorance, religious ignorance and fearful ignorance, then we could interpret the Quran wisely and rationally; then we could reach this conclusion: “The religion of the Quran is a religion of peace.”

So says Garry Wills on p. 140 in his book What the Quran Meant: And Why It Matters.


But we can skip over his first three chapters on the three kinds of ignorance mentioned above. It seems no challenge can be rational, by definition, since peace and good will dominate the Quran, and it is actually misunderstood by the ignorant. The rest of his book is intended to correct the hysterics.

Instead, let’s analyze chapter 7 on peace, chapter 8 on jihad, chapter 9 on shariah, and chapters 11-13 on women’s issues.

Chapter 7

Apparently the Quran extols an almost global family of believing Jews, Christians, and Muslims, living in harmony and tolerance. Great for Western utopians, as leftists tend to be.

However, he neglects to mention Muhammad’s atrocities against the Jews, when he ordered 900 men and pubescent boys to be slaughtered and the women and girls to be enslaved, after he conquered them outside Medina, which the Quran approves of (33:26-27). Was the atrocity a one-off? Islamic history says Jews and Christians suffered death and persecution and second-class treatment, as Muslims waged aggressive and unprovoked jihad for centuries. (See chapter 8, next).

The Quran calls Jews “apes and pigs” (7:166, 2:65, and 5:60). One could place those verses in their historical context to soften the extreme rhetoric, but for centuries now they have opened the door to deep prejudice.

As for apostasy, he casually brushes aside its punishment by equating biblical Christianity with quranic Islam, not mentioning the fact that the first generations of Christians never executed anyone for leaving the faith (nor does the New Testament order this), while Muhammad and his earliest caliphs certainly did, on the authority of the Quran and his example.

Chapter 8

As for jihad, it is clear that he does not understand the chronology of the Medinan chapters, for he repeats this tiresome stock misinterpretation: “The Quran never advocates war as a means of religious conversion, since ‘there is no compulsion in religion’ (2:256)” (p. 132). However, that verse was written when Muhammad first arrived in Medina and was weak. But as soon as he grew in military might, he compelled all sorts of people to convert or die (polytheists), or convert or die or pay a second-class citizen tax (Christians and Jews) in 9:29. (A prejudicial tax based on religion does not even squeak by as tolerant, one more contradiction of his utopian chapter 7.)

Further, he omits an adequate discussion of qital, which exclusively means war, slaughter, and killing. In light of that, his long analysis of 2:191-94 (an early Medinan passage) overlooks one key clause about fighting for the Kabah shrine back in Mecca: “Fight [qital] until… worship is devoted to God.” Clearly Muhammad says here that he would never let the Meccans rest until he made it a place devoted (only) to Allah. And in fact that is what he did from 623 until 630, when he finally conquered Mecca with 10,000 jihadists and kicked out or killed the unclean polytheists (9:28).

The most egregious oversight in his book, as noted, is the missing analysis of Quran 9:29, which is an open-ended call to qital inside and outside of Arabia. Ever since Islam’s prophet marched north with 20,000 jihadists to Tabuk in late 630 to fight the Byzantines, who never showed up, Muslims have been waging the same aggressive jihad/qital for over 460 years before the pope called the first crusade. Wills should know this; instead he seems to assume that Muslims peacefully acquired the lands they now hold, and the crusaders unjustly picked on them. Yet 9:29, reflecting the Tabuk jihad, set the institutional genetic code from then until now.

Chapter 9

This chapter on shariah is better because he discusses the harsh punishments in the Quran, but the Old Testament is worse, he is quick to point out to justify the Quran, an ineffective, distracting ploy.

Further, he is wrong to believe that only the Islamic State imposed them. Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Nigeria, for example, have done so and still do. Various websites like Amnesty International and Jihad Watch (which Wills sniffs at) keep track of them.

And no, it is not wise to allow any part of shariah into our legal system. Numerous harmless religious laws, like washing or praying five times a day, are irrelevant to the law, except to protect these practices. But the Quran’s punishments and domestic and commercial laws, for example, are out of date and must not be allowed in the West (or anywhere else).

Chapters 11-13

His three chapters on women’s issues are actually very solid in most places, like divorce and the few verses that respect womankind. Maybe the Muslim feminists whom he lists can indeed make something of those positive verses. However, the problem is not the abstract positive verses, but the concrete oppressive ones.

His discussion on wife beating, for example, is thorough, except his odd comment about a husband using a tooth stick to strike his wife. “I think a modern Muslim who threatened his wife with a toothbrush might become guilty of killing her — with laughter” (p. 189). In the seventh century tooth sticks could be long and inflict injury. And why be so cavalier about a husband raising his hand against his wife, at all?

Many traditions indeed report through Aisha herself that she was betrothed to Muhammad at six and the “wedding” was consummated at nine, immediately afterwards. So Wills is wrong to plead ignorance about her age at consummation (p. 186, note 3). Unsurprisingly, he does not bring up 65:4, which assumesprepubescent girls are fair game.

To wrap up, since Wills takes many shots at the Bible, as Western scholars delight to do (though none or hardly any shots at the Quran), here is a thought experiment: If everyone on the planet were to follow the teachings of the four Gospels and epistles to their fullest, the world would be much better off, such as no more wars, no legal mutilations, love for womankind and humanity generally, and a lot of grace.

Following the Quran to its fullest would produce these results, to name a few: too many bruises and not enough equal legal rights for womankind; no religious freedom to critique Islam and Muhammad; no grace (a missing doctrine in the legalistic Quran); legal floggings and mutilations; jihad/qital might not cease (Muslims still wage war on Muslims).

Rather, Wills reassures us that the troublesome verses in the Quran are simply misunderstood and just fine as they are or maybe after minor interpretational adjustments.

But we are not the ones who are ignorant of what it really says. The fault lies not in our “confusion,” but in the Quran itself, whose extreme verses are clear enough.

Ironically, too often he is the one who seems ignorant of unfavorable evidence in the Quran, so his short book comes across mostly as a condescending and shallow exercise in special pleading and unfounded puffing.

No need to buy his book.

James Arlandson’s website is Live as Free People, where he has posted Thirty shariah lawsTen shariah laws that oppress women.

Imam Tawhidi: ‘The American Government Will Regret Dealing With Linda Sarsour’

with 2 comments

Albawaba News
November 5, 2017

In the light of the truck attack in New York, Al Bawaba News asked Imam Tawhidi if the Mayor of New York should be held in some part responsible for the threat level in the city.

According to his Twitter page, the Australian Imam warned Mayor De Blasio of “extremist (Wahabist) fundamental teachings” in a letter dated February 2016.

Mohammad Tawhidi is a public figure of Iraqi origin, born in Iran but living in Australia. He is Muslim but it has been claimed that some of his ideas are anti-Muslim, in example that halal certification threatens the Australian way of life and that Palestine is a Jewish land.

Mayor De Blasio’s office was a direct contributor to controversial activist Linda Sarsour’s former project, the Arab American Association of New York, through the New York Mayor’s Fund.

Linda Sarsour is a left-wing social and political commentator whose comments on Islamic identity, gender and race have been accused by some of serving to drive a wedge between Muslim communities and Middle America.

In July 2016, Sarsour was invited to give an address to the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) which typified American citizens that voted for Donald Trump as “fascists”, “white supremists” and “Islamophobes.”

“I hope that […] when we stand up to those who oppress our communities that Allah accepts from us that as a form of jihad. That we are struggling against tyrants and rulers not only abroad in the Middle East or in the other side of the world, but here in these United States of America where you have fascists and white supremacists and Islamophobes reigning in the White House.” 



Her comments were later taken out of context by right-wing social media outlets, which accused her of calling for a violent “jihad” in America.

In an email to Al Bawaba, Imam Tawhidi suggested that the support for Sarsour from the American Left could backfire:

“I believe that there will come a time where American government officials will regret dealing with Linda Sarsour. Her loyalty belongs to her Islamic Authorities, not the USA.”


© 2000 – 2017 Al Bawaba (www.albawaba.com)

NYT Columnist Gets Torched For Pushing Gun Control Talking Points After NYC Terror Attack

with 2 comments

By Matt Vespa
November 1, 2017

Nicholas Kristof stepped on a rake last night—and it wasn’t pretty. The New York Times columnist decided to go there on gun control when it was wholly unnecessary to do so. On Tuesday, 29-year-old Sayfullo Habibullaevic Saipov drove a rented Home Depot pickup truck through a bike path in lower Manhattan and plowed through bystanders and cyclists. Eight people are dead, close to dozen more injured and you’re going to give New York a pat on the back for having strict gun laws. This was possibly in response to Saipov exiting his truck holding fake guns. He was obviously trying to commit suicide by cop, but martyrdom was denied; the NYPD shot him but he’s alive (via CBS News):

Police and witnesses say a man deliberately drove a rented truck onto a busy bicycle path near the World Trade Center in lower Manhattan, killing eight people and injuring at least 12 others, then emerged from the vehicle screaming and brandishing imitation firearms before being shot by police. The suspect was wounded and taken into custody.

“This was an act of terror, and a particularly cowardly act of terror aimed at innocent civilians,” Mayor Bill de Blasio said about the attack — the deadliest act of terror in New York City since 9/11. He called it “a very painful day in our city.”

“Today there was a loss of innocent life in lower Manhattan,” NYPD commissioner James O’Neill said at a Tuesday press conference.

Law enforcement sources identified the suspect to CBS News as Sayfullo Habibullaevic Saipov, a 29-year-old truck driver who has lived in Tampa, Florida, and New Jersey. He came to the U.S. in 2010 from Uzbekistan.

In the aftermath of the attack, Kristof tweeted, “The NYC terrorist had a pellet gun and a paintball gun. Good thing that in NYC he couldn’t buy assault rifles, or the toll would be higher.” Dude, are you kidding me? First, yes—let’s breathe a sigh of relief that he didn’t use a gun. It’s not like he used a motor vehicle or anything (my Lord). Second, terrorists and criminals don’t follow the law (obviously), and Saipov wasn’t from New York, so what does strict gun laws have anything do with this incident? Did Kristof even read the Associated Press or any other news report prior to sending this tone-deaf tweet? If he didn’t, then it’s still inexcusable. This was a terrorist attack; it’s not the time to hold a study hall on gun control, man. Kristof got torched—and rightfully so. And the liberal media wonders why they’re not trusted. You think Kristof would’ve stopped commenting on gun policy after his misfire on the Las Vegas shooting.

Hypocritical radical Leftist Democrats

with one comment

Since when can the radical Leftist Democrats lecture the president on making politicizing statements concerning tragic events?

Within twenty-four hours of a mass shooting on October 1, 2017, in Las Vegas, Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) was on the floor of the US Senate calling for legislation to usurp the “rights” of Americans “to bear arms” protected by the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights:



On November 1, 2017, Sayfullo Saipov (a Muslim Uzbekistan national immigrant) killed eight people and injured eleven more by running them down with a truck on a bike path in New York City.

Now, Charles Schumer believes that he has the moral authority to lecture the president for using a tragedy to politicize a terrorist event. I think NOT!



Where is your leadership, Charles Schumer! Why are you not calling for a review of Section 203 (c) (provides for a class of immigrants known as “diversity immigrants,” from countries with historically low rates of immigration to the United States) of Senator Edward Kennedy’s (D-MA) Immigration Act of 1990?

You can’t have it both ways!

Left Wing Oakland Radicals Worked With ISIS, New Book Reports

with one comment

By Timothy Meads
October 29, 2017

Former Editor in Chief of the New York Times Magazine Edward Klein has a new book that will be released tomorrow October 30th. In All Out War: The Plot to Destroy TrumpKlein reveals an FBI investigation proving coordination between American college campus far left radicals and Islamic terrorists from groups such as ISIS and Al Qaeda.

What started as a secret investigation in to the “resistance” movement spurred by college socialists and anarchists in response to Trump’s political rise, led to the discovery of what the FBI is calling the “the greatest challenge to law enforcement since the Weather Underground and the Black Panther Party.”

“There is clearly overwhelming evidence that there are growing ties between U.S. radicals and the Islamic State, as well as several [ISIS] offshoots and splinter groups,’ stated the FBI field report, which was delivered to Acting Director Andrew McCabe on July 11, 2017, and which is being published for the first time in (his) new book All Out War: The Plot to Destroy Trump.

Last summer the FBI began investigating international radical groups such as ANTIFA and other anarchist groups. However, activity from organizations in Oakland piqued the interest of authorities.

Klein’s book details the revelations.

“Now that the bureau has determined they have followers in the radical U.S. resistance movement in the United States, it is clear there will be additional violence in the attacks on law enforcement and U.S. institutions, including banks.

“Ties between three key leaders of the Oakland group [names redacted] met in Hamburg with a leader of the AQAP [Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula] and the AQIM [Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb],’ the report continued. ‘The leader from AQAP is an Egyptian-born male [name redacted] who is known to be in charge of finances and recruiting for the group.

“There is evidence from informants that he is helping the Oakland group acquire the weapons they are seeking, primarily bomb making equipment and toxic chemicals and gasses.

“One of the men from Oakland traveled to Syria to meet with ISIS; the purpose was for training in tactics, but was thought to be primarily a bonding visit to discuss possible massive disruptive attacks in the U.S.

“While in Hamburg, several of the Oakland-based criminals were photographed throwing Molotov cocktails and wielding iron bars, which have been their weapons of choice, though they are almost certainly on the verge of upping the caliber of their weaponry for use in the U.S.

“Despite having their faces covered by masks, they were positively identified.

“This group and their connections with the radical Islamic groups must be disrupted and destroyed.”

Klein also claims that under Barack Obama’s watch, anti-American groups were able to coordinate and foment insurrection because these groups were largely ignored by the FBI during his administration.

“The FBI is really playing catchup ball, because the Obama administration refused to give the bureau the resources it needed to effectively infiltrate and surveil the radical groups on college campuses,’ the source continued.

“Any talk of a connection between radical Islam—a phrase the Obama people wouldn’t even use—and American extremists was pretty much laughed off. [Former Attorney General] Loretta Lynch would have blown a gasket if she heard that the FBI was surveilling so-called college political organizations.

“All that has changed under the Trump administration. Everyone’s aware that the resistance movement, with its effort to get rid of Trump by any means necessary, has created fertile soil for ISIS and al Qaeda to establish a beachhead in America.”

In other words, the far left and radical Islam are united in their hate for the American way of life. They are willing to work together and to be violent to accomplish their goals.

This is nothing new. As mentioned in the FBI report, since the 1960s, radical liberal, anarchist, and socialist groups have regularly used violence as a means to their collective end; the destruction of the United States and implementation of communism or socialism.

The aforementioned group “Weather Underground” is probably the most well known left-wing domestic terrorism organization in the history of the United States. That group was founded by Bill Ayers. Ayers, alongside his girlfriend and several other colleagues, utilized homemade bombs to target American institutions of law enforcement. They successfully detonated several bombs at places such as the Pentagon, the U.S. Capitol, and a wide range of police stations. His group never killed anybody, but not for lack of trying. They wanted to place explosives at a Fort Dix Army dance, but were stopped by the feds. But, due to a legal misstep by the FBI, Ayers was never charged with domestic terrorism. In fact, Ayers is an unrepentant anti-American, Anti-capitalist. In 2000, he told the New York Times that he did not regret the violent actions his group took. “I don’t regret setting bombs…I don’t feel we did enough.”

If you are wondering what happened to his girlfriend that he co-founded Weather Underground with, well, she died during a bomb cooking experiment gone wrong. Ayers later married Bernadhine Dorn, who was also a member of the domestic terror group. Bill Ayers is also infamous for acting as quasi-mentor to President Barack Obama. Obama launched his political career from Ayers house in 1995.

In 2013, I had an opportunity to protest and speak with Bill Ayers after my college invited him to speak in an academic setting. Ayers now works as an educational reformer and  is a professor of education theory at the University of Illinois in Chicago. He was at my school to speak to our education department and education majors. Myself and several other Conservatives were rightfully outraged that our college had invited him in the first place. But rather than shout him down as current college students do to voices they disagree with, we printed flyers and passed out pamphlets informing students he was. We also gained a few hundred signatures to show our dissatisfaction. It was rather successful. I was somehow blessed with a largely conservative student body where I attended. But, this led to an opportunity to speak with the man.

I asked him if he had any remorse for his actions. Ayers did not. He even seemed adamant that he was morally correct to place the explosives. “The United States was illegally killings thousands of Vietnamese each week, what would you do in that situation,” I remember him telling me.

Ayers also told me that his goal was, and still is, the destruction of capitalism and the United States. But, as an activist, he realized he could be more effective in the educational realm. At the end our conversation, Ayers asked if there was a place to get coffee nearby. “Boy, I hate capitalism but love Starbucks,” he remarked.

This anecdote is important, because as Klein’s book shows, modern college left wing radicals are following in Ayers’ footsteps and are undoubtedly inspired by him. They are just as violent, just as committed, and unless are stopped by the FBI, will continue to try and fundamentally change the USA by whatever means necessary.

Michigan: Muslim mother who forced daughter to undergo FGM wants her ankle monitor removed, irritates her skin

with one comment

By Robert Spencer
Jihad Watch
October 27, 2017

Her daughter’s skin was irritated, too.


“Mother charged with forcing daughter to undergo female genital mutilation in first case of its kind in the US wants wants her ankle monitor removed because it irritates her skin,” by Regina F. Graham, Dailymail.com, October 26, 2017 (thanks to RN):

A Michigan mother charged with forcing her daughter to undergo genital mutilation wants her ankle monitor removed claiming that it irritates her skin, according to court documents filed in the case by her attorney on Tuesday.

The Oakland County mother, who has not been publicly named to protect the identity of her minor daughter, has requested for a judge to approve that the device to be removed from her ankle, the Detroit Free Press reported.

In the documents filed by her attorney, Brian Legghio, the woman argues that the ankle monitor ‘serves no practical purpose and there is no reason to continue wearing it for the next eight months.’

She added that the device ‘can never be removed — even while showering, bathing and sleeping,’ that it is ‘physically uncomfortable and causes irritation to the skin,’ and that it is ‘unnecessarily intrusive’.

Her attorney wrote: ‘It’s visual presence and it’s intermittent beeping requires (her) to explain to her 8-year-old and 5-year-old children why their mother must wear an electronic bracelet on her ankle.’

He stressed that his client had ‘no prior criminal record whatsoever’ and that she does not pose a threat to the community.

He described the woman as a stay-at-home mother who cares for her family daily while taking her children to school events and attending prayer at her local mosque.

Prosecutors have not commented on her request.

The mother’s case also involves eight defendants, including two doctors, a physician’s wife and four other mothers.

They are all accused of participating in subjecting young girls to genital mutilation as part of a religious practice within their Indian Muslim sect – the Dawoodi Bohra.

According to members of the religious group, the common age for the procedure to be performed on girls is seven.

Authorities and prosecutors believe that an estimated 100 girls had been subjected to the shocking procedure at a Livonia clinic over the last 12 years.

This is the first genital mutilation case in America after it came to light back in April when Dr. Jumana Nagarwala was indicted.

Nagarwala had worked as an emergency room physician at Henry Ford before she was terminated.

She allegedly performed the procedure on two Michigan girls and two Minnesota girls at the Livonia clinic where the owner, Dr. Fakuruddin Attar and his wife, Farida Attar, have also been charged in the case.

All of the defendants are members of the Dawoodi Bohra. The trial will begin in June for the case….

%d bloggers like this: