Far right members from organisations in Germany, Sweden and the UK attended a meeting in the European Parliament on 9 July at which literature was sold to attendees.
While one keynote speaker described how “The pansy left are auditioning to be the Muslim’s prison b*tch” and said the mainstream media represented “a threat to life and liberty.”
The same speaker stated: “A society which becomes more Muslim becomes less everything else.”
There was a surprise for Members of the European Parliament this morning when a secret meeting of Europe’s far right was held in the parliament. The meeting, listed as Non Inscrit Meeting, and not appearing on the usual schedules, was a gathering of Islamaphobes and included as guest speaker, Tommy Robinson, leader of the English Defence League (EDL), and used the name of International Civil Liberties Alliance as a cover.
Robinson, looking sweaty and nervous, claimed that Luton was the centre of a plot by the Islamic world to bring Britain under their authority.
The EDL has been in decline recently, with smaller crowds at their more infrequent demonstrations and a series of splits. Robinson was speaking as Deputy Leader of the British Freedom Party, whose leader couldn’t make the gathering. The party is believed to have less than 200 paying members.
Richard Howitt MEP who has criticised attempts to form different European ‘defence leagues’ by the EDL using their Facebook page said about today’s meeting:
“This is yet one more failed attempt by the EDL to find European partners as they just cannot spread their roots in the UK.
“In the same way Nick Griffin and the BNP tried to use the European Parliament as a spring board and failed abysmally, the EDL will find they are badly out-of-their-depth.
“I have written to the President of the European Parliament to complain about the use of our facilities to raise funds for such hate organisations and to investigate whether other meetings are planned.”
Spencer and Ilk are at it again, this time it is the stealth jihad of Muslim TSA agents…
Geller, Spencer, Schlussel, Muslims, and the TSA
by Sheila Musaji (TheAmericanMuslim.org)
Pamela Geller goes farther and farther off the deep end every day. Today she posted an article Close Down the TSA! on the American Thinker site.
Her current outrage was set off by an incident at JFK Airport. A screener (who happened to be Muslim) did not notice that his metal detector was not plugged in, and due to that error, passengers had to be recalled to go through screening again, the terminal had to be shut down, and planes recalled.
This was certainly a major error and possibly a sign of an incompetent employee. That this could happen should require an investigation and re-evaluation of procedures.
If the screener is incompetent, then he should be fired. If screeners are not being properly investigated, trained, and supervised, then systems should be re-assessed to ensure that such a mistake won’t happen again. If there is any evidence at all that this individual purposefully left the machine unplugged, then he should be arrested, tried, and if convicted given the maximum jail time possible.
There is never just one person at screening stations, especially at such a large airport, which means that none of the other TSA employees noticed this issue either.
Geller seems to have personal information about what happened. She says
A Muslim TSA screener, Alija Abdul Majed, left his screener unplugged for hours. This was no accident. This was a dry run. Majed, said the Post, failed “to realize that alert lights never flashed once as streams of passengers filed through the dead detector.” Yeah, right. We have devout Muslim screeners screening for devout Muslims? This defines insanity.
Debbie Schlussel, another member of the Islamophobia echo chamber also commented on this incident, saying
What’s more believable is that he knew exactly what was going on and that he probably deliberately unplugged it, himself. He probably also tipped off some jihadist buddies of his to go through Lane No. 1 in Terminal 7. … This was no accident or coincidence.
Geller and Schlussel have appointed themselves the judge and the jury, and due to their pathological hatred of Islam and Muslims found not only the TSA screener responsible for the incident guilty – but found all Muslims guilty. Not surprising, since they see jihad plots everywhere, and are responsible for most of the what everyone “knows” false claims about Islam and Muslims that they use their echo chamber to magnify.
Since when has the purpose of TSA screening been to screen for “devout Muslims”? Since when has simply being Muslim been a reason that you shouldn’t be trusted to work for the TSA, or that you are automatically to be considered not only suspect, but guilty of any crime?
None of this is surprising. Back in 2010, Geller’s partner, Robert Spencer objected to a Muslim woman in a hijab working for the TSA, and Geller provided the photo of the woman for Spencers article claiming that the TSA worker’s scarf an “Islamic Supremacist dare”?. Here is what I said about their claims at that time
Only greasy Islamophobes would object to a hijabbed, observant Muslim TSA worker, right? After all, to object would be to assume that all Muslims are jihad terrorists or jihad terrorist sympathizers, and that is the very definition of “Islamophobia,” now, isn’t it? We should be applauding the prospect of a devout Muslim who has dedicated her time to protecting Americans by working at the TSA, right?
Actually, yes, only greasy Islamophobes would object based solely on an individuals religion, just as only greasy anti-Semites would object to a TSA worker wearing a yarmulke.
He then talks about the possibilities for “jihadis” to “infiltrate the TSA” to “to place operatives in strategic positions”. He sees this Muslim woman wearing a scarf
as a symbol of the TSA forcing “non-Muslim air passengers to place their safety in the hands of people who clearly hold the same belief-system as did those who made all these security procedures necessary in the first place.”
Actually, the terrorists responsible for 9/11 held a very different set of beliefs than most Muslims. Unless Spencer has evidence about this particular Muslim woman then he is saying that all observant Muslims are actually dangerous criminals. This is bigotry! If Spencer does have evidence about this particular woman, then he needs to meet with his local FBI agent and turn that evidence over.
He then comes to this disgusting conclusion
A hijabbed TSA worker is the personification of a dare: Islamic supremacists are daring the TSA to question her about her belief-system, thereby acknowledging that that belief-system has something to do with terror and violence. The TSA almost certainly did not dare to do so: it is virtually inconceivable that the woman pictured, as well as other hijabbed TSA workers and airport personnel, were ever questioned in any attempt to determine how closely their view coincided with those of Osama bin Laden. To have done so would have been “Islamophobic,” and would have invited protests from the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).
And so the TSA hires observant Muslims without making any effort at all to determine whether or not they are jihadist infiltrators.
Hiring any observant Muslim who wears a hijab is to give in to “Islamic supremacists”? The hijab itself is “the personification of a dare” by “Islamic supremacists”. The TSA doesn’t screen it’s workers? The “TSA hires observant Muslims without making any effort at all to determine whether or not they are jihadist infiltrators.”?
That last claim really concerns me. Muslims, like all other Americans, place our trust in agencies like the TSA to keep us safe. If Spencer has evidence that they are not doing their job, then he should immediately take that evidence to the FBI.
Monica Nunes a former councillor with Geert Wilder PVV was an active member on the neo-Nazi Stormfront website. She claims she was on the site to try and persuade Nazis away from their racism, however she had no qualms in bashing Muslims in her comments:
A former councillor for the anti-immigration PVV in Noord Holland has close ties to the neo-nazi group Stormfront and submitted 2,200 items to the organisation’s website, the Noord-Hollands Dagblad reported on Friday.
Monica Nunes is one of three provincial councillors who left the PVV earlier this year to go it alone.
In her writings on the site, which ended around three years ago, Nunes says all Muslims should be sent back to their country of origin and “Jews have a good nose for money”, the paper said. Nunes used the name Doubt while active on the site. Her role was uncovered by anti-facist research group Kaftka.
In a statement Nunes said she had been a member of the Stormfront website, but with the aim of persuading other members to think differently.
“I might have been stupid to join a debate with these nazis,” she said. “But I argued against their most insane racial theories and always defended the Jewish community and existence of Israel.”
Nunes’ comments on Stormfront included the following, which gives an indication of her motives for joining the PVV: “I wish we had a leader who would expel Muslims from the country, back to their country of origin. I don’t want to smash or kill these people. I just want them to go away …. far away.”
Leeds Crown Court heard how Daniel Smith had 167 previous convictions before he was locked up for 10 further offences today.
The 39-year-old was not present for his sentencing because he was taken back to Armley prison from the court at lunchtime after destroying two toilets in the court cells.
Smith pleaded guilty to charges of burglary, common assault, possessing an offensive weapon and making threats to kill at a hearing in May.
Today, the court heard how on August 26 last year, Smith hurled racist abuse at a family living near him in Victoria Road, Thornhill Lees. He attacked their front door with a knife and eventually broke it down. When inside the house, he threatened to kill the occupants before he was forced back outside.
Sentencing, Judge Guy Kearl QC, said: “They were very real threats, the victims believed, being confronted in their house by a man who they believed was going to kill them.”
Smith was sentenced to nine years in prison and given a restraining order banning him from having any contact with family or entering Victoria Road.
Robert Spencer cannot let any opportunity go by to find a way to make a negative statement about Islam and Muslims. Today, he used the occasion of the celebration of OUR nation’s Independence Day, the 4th of July to find a way to target American Muslims rather than to simply express his patriotism.
In his article, he lists four freedoms that “we” must defend. In his commentary on what “we” must defend against, he uses only examples that he thinks represent Muslim attitudes at variance with the Constitution, and most of the examples he gives are from other countries, and from ancient texts. According to the worldview Spencer is promoting, Muslims are anti-Constitution, anti-American, and untrustworthy and disloyal citizens. It is clear that the “we” he refers to does not include Muslims. He doesn’t mention any other individuals or groups who might pose a threat to our Constitution. He also doesn’t mention any positive contributions of Muslims toward defending the Constitution and our freedoms.
— 1. Freedom of religion, and non-establishment of religion. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” — First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
— 2. Freedom of speech “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…” — First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
— 3. Equality of rights before the law “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” — Declaration of Independence
— 4. Governments deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…” — Declaration of Independence
1. Freedom of religion, and non-establishment of religion. American Muslim Academics/Scholars/Imams/Professionals issued a statement upholding the Freedom of Faith and the Freedom to Change one’s Faith. And, many Muslims have spoken out about this issue. See Apostasy and Freedom of Faith in Islam which includes a collection of articles.
2. Freedom of speech. American and Canadian Muslims issued a Defense of Freedom of Speech. This statement specifically states that We uphold the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Both protect freedom of religion and speech, because both protections are fundamental to defending minorities from the whims of the majority.
3. Equality of rights before the law, and 4. Governments deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. See below.
Remember JihadWatch zombieEric Allen Bell (real name Eric Edborg), the failed D level-movie producer who moved to Murfreesboro, Tennessee and decided to make a documentary about the concerted anti-Mosque campaign by local conspiracy theorists and religious wing-nuts? During the time Bell was filming his documentary he used to constantly email us, asking us to publish his writings and advertise his documentary, his articles were usually so terrible that we averred. There was always something strange about Bell, and this strangeness manifested itself when Bell joined the ranks of the JihadWatch looniverse.
When Bell’s documentary failed to achieve the payback he had hoped for, (he expected to make money off of the venture, just like he does from his GlobalOne.tv site, a new-age spiritual hodge-podge with adverts from psychics) he turned to funding from the Islamophobia movement.
His fortunes in this regard gained some momentum, he became fast friends with Robert Spencer, who tried to plug him into the Islamophobia network the best he could. Unfortunately for Bell, because he is ignorant about most things (especially Islam and Muslims), and because he is an opportunistic charlatan his gamble on bigotry failed.
Bell was so distraught after the humiliation that he remarked, “may be time to take a sabbatical from my jihad against jihad”.
Bell’s short sabbatical is over, he is back to his “jihad” against Muslims, he believes that his humiliation has subsided and people have forgotten that he doesn’t really know much about…well…much.
He’s been busy marketing himself as a “liberal” turned counter-jihadist who stands firmly against the religious freedom of Muslims in Murfreesboro. That’s how he is selling himself now, as a former PC Liberal who has “awakened” to the the threat of Islam. In this regard Bell received attention on the usual run-of-the-mill right wing sites, as well as in USA Today and the Huffington Post. The comments on the aforementioned stories about Bell were quite blistering, essentially cementing him as a micro-version of a flip-flopping Mitt Romney, who doesn’t know his ass from his mouth.
Bell, undeterred by such humiliation is going whole hog, believing in the Hollywood myth that any publicity is good publicity. In this vein Bell’s hit the gold, he finally made it…to the Eric Bolling Show on Fox News:
Fox News’ Eric Bolling continued his campaign against American Muslims today, endorsing the views of a filmmaker who claimed Islam is “the worst, most deadly idea in the history of the world.”
Bolling’s guest was Eric Bell, a filmmaker who produced a documentary on a mosque in Murfreesboro, Tennessee.
Bell claimed he originally saw “the Muslim community as victims” and that he had an “inclination to stick up for them.” Bell further claimed that after doing “some serious research about Islam” he found that Islam is “a radical, savage religion” and “the worst, most deadliest idea in the history of the world.” According to the Huffington Post, Bell said in a different interview that “the biggest threat to human rights is Islam.” Not only did Bolling not push back on Bell’s inflammatory rhetoric, he responded to Bell by saying he would “[l]ove to have you back and maybe expand on it a little bit more.”
At the end of the program, Bolling replayed the worst of Bell’s anti-Islam comments and announced that he would return the next day for another interview, hyping Bell as someone who “told the truth about radical Islam.” But during his interview, Bell did not limit his attacks to “radical Islam,” he attacked the religion itself. Bell attacked Islam’s prophet Mohammed before claiming Islam “is a radical, savage religion” and called it “the worst, most deadliest idea in the history of the world”:
BOLLING: What is actually happening? I only have a couple of seconds. Tell me what you found.
BELL: I found that there’s a man who raped a 9-year-old girl, who owned slaves, who killed his critics, who beheaded a tribe full of Jews named Muhammad who is the highest moral example in Islam for 1.6 billion people. And that this is a radical, savage religion. The people aren’t all radical, thank god. But the religion is the worst, most deadliest idea in the history of the world. And we need to make sure that we keep a close eye on it in this country.
Bolling’s endorsement of Bell’s views came just days after a resident of Texas was indicted for “threatening to use violence” against the Murfreesboro mosque. In addition, The New York Times reported that the construction site of the mosque “has been repeatedly vandalized” and construction equipment at the site “has been set on fire.” Other mosques around the country have also been subjected to vandalism and arson. But it should come as no surprise that Bolling endorsed Bell’s extreme anti-Muslim comments, as he has a history of extreme, anti-Muslim comments himself.
Sensational, misleading headlines are a favorite tactic in the looniverse, and the notion Arabs in Michigan are “stoning” Christians is bound to attract attention.
Drama aside, there were some young people hurling water bottles and pop cans at some ”protesters” who were clearly their to provoke a reaction. Even some of the articles on the right wing site, The Blaze, leaned toward more honest reporting:
SCREAMING ANTI-ISLAM PROTESTERS TAUNT MUSLIMS WITH PIG’S HEAD: ‘YOU’RE GOING TO MELT IN THE FIRES OF HELL!’
If you‘re looking to spread God’s love, it’s probably not a good idea to show up to the Arab International Festival in Dearborn, Michigan, with a pig‘s head on a stick and signs telling Muslims that they’re poised to burn in hell. Yet this is exactly what happened over the weekend when some Christians from an anti-Islam group showed up at the event and confronted Muslim adherents with some unwelcome messages.
One of the protesters yelled, “You’re going to burn in hell,” among other sentiments. The signs the individuals held were less-than-covert in their messaging as well. One read, “Islam is a religion of blood and murder” and another said “Muhammad is a…liar, false prophet, murder, child molesting pervert.” Clearly, those in attendance weren’t there to play nice.
Among the most tense moments during the Friday showdown occurred when some of the Arab Americans present at the conference began throwing water bottles and pop cans. Some of the attendees chanted “Allah-U-Akbar,” which translates to “God is the greatest.” The Christians responded with, “Jesus Akbar.” Most of the protesters who engaged in this debate were from an anti-Islam group called “Bible Believers.”
In the video, below, a man — purportedly part of the group — can be heard yelling, “You’re going to go straight to hell you little dirtbag, wicked heathen.” Then, he continued screaming at the the Arab attendees, claiming that they have “a religion of hate” and that God is going to “melt” them “one day in hell” (at another point he says, “You’re going to melt in the fires of hell forever!”).
Alan Noble sheds light on how the events were manipulated, and demonstrates once again that many stories that go viral in the looniverse can’t stand up to even rudimentary scrutiny. (H/T: CriticalDragon1177)
Earlier this year I wrote a excruciatingly detailed feature article describing how Wretched TV had deceptively edited footage of some Christian streetpreachers at the Arabfest in Dearborn Michigan in order to portray the Muslims in attendance as violent, bloodthirsty foreigners. I pointed out that the “Christian” preachers were led by Ruban Israel, a notorious street preacher (who was and is not supported by or connected to Wretched TV) who went to the festival specifically to agitate and incite the Muslims. If you look at unedited footage of the event, it’s clear that the “Christians” were inciting Muslims to hate, which, of course, never justifies violence, but it does explain why it happens.
I bring this up because it’s happened again. Ruben Israel returned this year to the Arab Festival and once again incited the festival goers to scream and yell and throw trash. Although Wretched TV did not report the story this year, it was picked up by The Blaze, American Vision, American Thinker, FrontPage Magazine, and other, smaller conservative websites.
Each of these reports has included and cited a YouTube video edited by The United West, a group “dedicated to defending and advancing Western Civilization against the kinetic and cultural onslaught of Shariah Islam.” Good journalism would demand that these sites check their source and consider possible biases, but, for whatever reason, these conservative news sites report on the event as if it the video was an accurate representation of what occurred. But it was not. Not at all. Here’s United West’s video:
I wish I had the time and energy to point out every deceptive edit in this video and all the manipulative ways in which this event was reported on, but I don’t. So here’s a short list, and if you’re interested in seeing more, watch the unedited, hour long YouTube video of the incident. Watch carefully. It looks a lot different if you’re paying attention.
1. The United West video (See here) and many of the reports on this incident either claim or insinuate that the police did nothing to stop the kids from throwing trash at Ruben and his friends.
However, in the unedited video, you can see the police interviene once, twice (note the police dragging a kid off at this point–something none of the articles mention), thrice, fourse [sic] (note that this appears to be another arrest or citation? Again, never mentioned in any of the reports I listed), and I’m not going to bother looking for more examples.
Bottom line: the video lies/misrepresents the truth and each of these reports, either in ignorance (in which case they are examples of bad journalism) or knowingly repeats this lie or fails to challenge it (in the case of The Blaze).
2. Muslim adults repeatedly work to calm down and stop the kids from yelling and throwing trash. In fact, one, apparently, Muslim man stands in front of the Christians, protecting them from the angry crowd. Does this mean Islam is a religion of peace? Nope, it just means that this man (as well as many others in the video) wanted to prevent violence from happening. Does the fact that the “mob” of kids threw trash and possibly a piece of concrete mean that Islam is a religion of violence? Nope, it just means that some kids got offended and angry.
If we want to discuss whether or not Islam is inherently violent, we need to look for evidence elsewhere.
4. As you watch the video it is clear that the police helped protect the Christians when they could. Could they have done a better job? Perhaps. It’s not clear from the video how many people were in attendance (I believe it was around 100k) or how many officers were available to help out. But it is clear that those officers did in fact intervene and protect the Christians several times.
5. It is also clear that this group of Christians was almost entirely focused on angering these Muslims, forcing the police to protect them after they had incited violence, and complaining over and over again about their rights and how they were being persecuted. What on earth does this have to do with lovingly sharing the Gospel to lost people? How is a preoccupation with asserting your rights honoring to God?