|ANTIFA and ISIS dress in all black. The Paramilitary Fascists for Mussolini did the same thing, they were even nicknamed the ‘Blackshirts‘.
Coincidence? I think not!
The Distinctive Fashion Sense Of Savages
|ANTIFA and ISIS dress in all black. The Paramilitary Fascists for Mussolini did the same thing, they were even nicknamed the ‘Blackshirts‘.
Coincidence? I think not!
The Distinctive Fashion Sense Of Savages
Who are the White Helmets? This is a question that everyone should be asking themselves.
The White Helmets – here are a few facts that you need to know. Share this with your family and friends who rely on the Western Mainstream Media:
• The name “Syria Civil Defence” was stolen from the legitimate Syrian organization of the same name. The authentic Syria Civil Defence was founded in 1953 and is a founding member of the International Civil Defense Organization (1958).
• The name “White Helmets” was inappropriately taken from the legitimate Argentinian relief organization Cascos Blancos / White Helmets. In 2014, Cascos Blancos / White Helmets was honored at the United Nations for 20 years of international humanitarian assistance.
• The NATO White Helmets are primarily a media campaign to support the ‘regime change’ goals of the USA and allies. After being founded by security contractor James LeMesurier, the group was “branded” as the White Helmets in 2014 by a marketing company called “The Syria Campaign” managed out of New York by non-Syrians such as Anna Nolan. “The Syria Campaign” was itself “incubated” by another marketing company named “Purpose”.
• The White Helmets claim to be “neutral, impartial and humanitarian” and to “serve all the people of Syria” is untrue. In reality, they only work in areas controlled by the violent opposition, primarily terrorists associated with Nusra/AlQaeda (recently renamed Jabhat Fath al Sham).
• The White Helmets claim to be unarmed is untrue. There are photos which show their members carrying arms and celebrating Nusra/AlQaeda military victories.
• The White Helmets claim to be apolitical and non-aligned is untrue. In reality they actively promote and lobby for US/NATO intervention in violation of the norms of authentic humanitarian work.
• The Right Livelihood description that “Syria Civil Defence” saved over 60,000 people and “support in the provision of medical services to nearly 7 million people” is untrue. In reality the zones controlled by terrorists in Syria have few civilians remaining. That is why we see “cat” video/media stunts featuring the White Helmets.
• The NATO White Helmets actually undermine and detract from the work of authentic organizations such as the REAL Syria Civil Defence and Syrian Arab Red Crescent.
• The recent Netflix movie about the White Helmets is not a documentary; it is a self promotional advertisement. The directors never set foot in Syria. The Syrian video, real or staged, was provided by the White Helmets themselves. From the beginning scenes showing a White Helmet actor telling his little boy not to give mommy a hard time until the end, the video is contrived and manipulative. The video was produced by a commercial marketing company Violet Films/Ultra Violet Consulting which advertises its services as “social media management”, “crowd building” and “campaign implementation”.
The true face of the White Helmets:
“Seven Steps of Highly Effective Manipulators” Origins of the White Helmets
The REAL White Helmets awarded for 20 years work
The REAL Syria Civil Defence
Who are the Syria White Helmets?
White Helmets Deceive Right Livelihood and CodePink
White Helmets cat video showing terrorist zone with no civilians. “The homeowners abandoned this district and its kittens.” How fake does it get?
White Helmets are caught staging rescue only to claim they were making a mannequin challenge video.
A CIA document from the early 1980s details a US plan to destroy Syria — in much the same way the United States has been doing for the last few years.
Geostrategically crucial Syria has been at the center of a decades-long plot by the United States to depose the sovereign government and install one supportive of goals in the Middle East must be revisited — and quickly — before the beating of war drums drowns out the truth of our government’s recently-espoused mission.
President Donald Trump has repeatedly castigated President Bashar al-Assad for ordering a gruesome mass killing of civilians with chemical weapons in Khan Sheikhoun. This accusation sparked a bolstering of support for the Syrian regime from both Moscow and Tehran.
“Syria at present has a hammerlock on US interests both in Lebanon and in the Gulf — through closure of Iraq’s pipeline thereby threatening Iraqi internationalization of the war. The US should consider sharply escalating the pressures against Assad through covertly orchestrating simultaneous military threats against Syria from three border states hostile to Syria: Iraq, Israel and Turkey.”
While the preceding bears the names of leaders and nations familiar to current headlines, that assessment, cogently titled, “Bringing Real Muscle to Bear Against Syria,” from former CIA officer Graham Fuller in actuality discusses Syria under Assad’s predecessor — his father, Hafez al-Assad — and is dated September 14, 1983, amid the Iran-Iraq War.
As the six-page document continues,
With Iraq seeking to enjoin support internationally in the war, the U.S. had to scramble to prevent the shutdown of a pipeline — a dilemma Fuller suggests could be alleviated through a change in narrative to present Syria as a more deviant enemy than even Iran. That, alone, would have changed the face of the war bearing the names of the two principal adversaries — Sunni majority, Iraq, and Syria-allied, Shi’a, Iran.
“The US should consider urging Iraq to take the war to the other key source of its predicament: Syria.”
Further, he continued,
“The US should consider sharply escalating the pressures against Assad [Sr.] through covertly orchestrating simultaneous military threats against Syria from three border states hostile to Syria: Iraq, Israel and Turkey. Iraq, perceived to be increasingly desperate in the Gulf war, would undertake limited military (air) operations against Syria with the sole goal of opening the pipeline. Although opening war on a second front against Syria poses considerable risk to Iraq, Syria would also face a two-front war since it is already heavily engaged in the Bekaa, on the Golan and in maintaining control over a hostile and restive population inside Syria.
“Israel would simultaneously raise tensions along Syria’s Lebanon front without actually going to war. Turkey, angered by Syrian support to Armenian terrorism, to Iraqi Kurds on Turkey’s Kurdish border areas and to Turkish terrorists operating out of northern Syria, has often considered launching unilateral military operations against terrorist camps in northern Syria. Virtually all Arab states would have sympathy for Iraq.
“Faced with three belligerent fronts, Assad would probably be forced to abandon his policy of closure of the pipeline. Such a concession would relieve the economic pressure on Iraq, and perhaps force Iran to reconsider bringing the war to an end. It would be a sharpening blow to Syria’s prestige and could effect the equation of forces in Lebanon.”
In context, then-President Ronald Reagan faced pressure both to insert military power in Lebanon — a theater of stated neutrality for the U.S. — and to prohibit actual military assistance in the fraught regional entanglement.
That is, until a suicide bomber decimated a U.S. Marines barracks encamped at an airport in Beirut, killing hundreds — just one month subsequent to the date on Fuller’s Syria action plan.
“The October 23, 1983, suicide truck bombing of the Marine barracks at the Beirut International Airport would kill 241 U.S. military personnel; simultaneously, another suicide bomber killed fifty-eight French servicemen of the MNF several kilometers away. (Two weeks later, yet another truck bomb exploded in the Israeli military headquarters in Tyre, killing sixty.) A FBI forensics assessment called the Marine barracks bombing the ‘biggest non-nuclear explosion since World War II.’ According to a Pentagon commission formed to investigate the attack, it was ‘tantamount to an act of war using the medium of terrorism.’ Within weeks, the CIA determined that ‘the bombings…of the United States and French MNF headquarters were carried out by Shia radicals, armed, trained, and directed by Syria and Iran.’”
That the CIA — master meddler in the affairs of sovereign nations — determined fault for the bombings rested with Syria and Iran left both plausibly responsible, with public perception largely following suit.
That a situation eerily similar — in behind-the-scenes string-pulling and long-term U.S. commitment to deposing an Assad from rule in Syria — appears to be playing out nearly three-and-a-half decades later, bellows resoundingly on failures of interventionist foreign policy.
Or, perhaps, its successes.
“Such a threat must be primarily military in nature. At present there are three relatively hostile elements around Syria’s borders: Israel, Iraq and Turkey. Consideration must be given to orchestrating a credible military threat against Syria in order to induce at least some moderate change in its policies,” Fuller explained in the document.
“This paper proposes serious examination of the use of all three states – acting independently – to exert the necessary threat. Use of any one state in isolation cannot create such a credible threat.”
Syria is now a landmine for the Trump administration — as it has been in varying intensity for a lengthy succession of presidents before.
A child in Great Britain is now more likely to be a Muslim than Christian.
The Muslim invasion of England seems to have been a big success. Great Britain is only a couple of generations away from complete eradication of the locals. Mathematics says, Prince Charles won’t be King, just some guy in a mosque.
There are more Muslim children than Christian growing up in Birmingham, figures show.
The statistics, extracted from the 2011 Census, give an insight into the fast pace of demographic change across Britain.
They pinpoint several parts of the country where traditional religious beliefs are being eclipsed for the first time.
Statistics from the 2011 Census show more Muslim children than Christian growing up in Birmingham.
In England’s second city of Birmingham, of 278,623 youngsters, 97,099 were registered as Muslim compared with 93,828 as Christian. The rest were of other faiths such as Hindu or Jewish, or none.
A similar trend can be seen in the cities of Bradford and Leicester, the towns of Luton, in Bedfordshire, and Slough in Berkshire, as well as the London boroughs Newham, Redbridge and Tower Hamlets, where nearly two-thirds of children are Islamic.
|Three years ago, the Obama administration was celebrating that they had completely removed chemical weapons from Syria. Obama drew that Red Line and the Syrians and everybody else realized the bad actor they were dealing with, and they cowered in fear, and they did remove 100% of their chemical weapons. Wrong… Trump just removed them!
It is now clear that Obama and everyone in his administration lied to the American people when they said that 100 PERCENT of Syria’s chemical weapons were removed.
Obama was the one in bed with Russia all along. The Trump Russia narrative has been destroyed!
WATCH: Video Shows Obama Administration Bragging About Removing ‘100 Percent’ of Chemical Weapons From Syria
Hillary said this yesterday. Is somebody still leaking to her?
In January, Susan Rice Assured NPR the Obama Admin Removed Chemical Weapons From Syria
The Chemical attack in Syria has all the hallmarks of a false flag
The White Helmets, an al-Qaeda affiliated group funded by George Soros and the British government, have reportedly staged another chemical weapon attack on civilians in the Syrian city of Khan Shaykhun to lay blame on the Syrian government.
The White Helmets filmed much of the footage being released on the chemical attack. They have also been known to stage “rescue” videos in the past. However, this time it appears children were indeed killed in the making of this “media campaign.”
Several children appear in the videos suffocating from an unknown chemical substance, while others appear to have unexplained head injuries. It is known 250 people were kidnapped by Al-Qaeda last week from the nearby city of Hama, which is the same number as the current body count of wounded and killed civilians.
In another “coincidence,” a Pakistani British doctor who at the time of the attack was taking interview requests instead of helping the injured who were flooding in, and additionally received gas masks from a British organization three days prior to the attack.
The doctor, Shajul Islam, is being used as a source by US and UK media, despite facing terror charges for kidnapping and torturing two British journalists in Syria and being struck off the medical register. The organization responsible for sending him equipment is under fire for using donations meant for refugees.
In another suspicious event, the White Helmets operating in the same quarry near the attack received sarin-protective respirator suits one month before the attack, even though the Syrian government no longer possesses sarin.
The al-Qaeda-linked rebels have claimed the chemical was sarin gas used by the Syrian government; however, the OPCW has confirmed Syria no longer has chemical weapons and completely dismantled their stockpiles in 2013.
In contrast, the rebels have not gotten rid of the chemical weapons at their disposal.
According to award-winning journalist Seymour Hersch, intelligence reports show the rebels smuggled in chemical weapons from Libya through Turkey with the approval of Hillary Clinton.
In 2013, so-called moderate rebels had filmed themselves killing rabbits with gas and threatening to kill religious minorities. ISIS is also known to be in possession of chemical weapons having conducted attacks on Syrian forces in Deir Ezzor.
However weaponized, sarin would have killed or at least injured unprotected first responders. Sarin can be absorbed through skin and requires a full body suit; however, the White Helmets appeared to wear only masks and no gloves while they handled exposed victims. Others in the vicinity appear not to be wearing a mask at all and are yet unaffected.
Weaponized sarin is a Weapon of Mass Destruction (WMD) capable of killing thousands. If sarin was indeed used, it must have been a weak, non-weaponized form.
Unsurprisingly, the mainstream media and neo-con politicians have been quick to regurgitate the al-Qaeda-linked rebels version of the events before any investigation takes place.
In response to the allegations, the Syrian Military and the Russian Ministry of Defense denied any involvement in the attack.
NATO governments are unhappy with the Trump administration’s recent statements that they no longer see regime change in Syria as a priority. In response to this, British Prime Minister Theresa May made a statement that Britain was still fully committed to regime change in Syria. The UK and France may have seen a staged chemical attack as an opportunity to push Trump into war with Syria.
The chemical attack came at the same time as another media attack was occurring against the Syrian government, which claimed that Syrian hospitals were in fact secret torture “slaughterhouses.”
The last chemical attack false flag attack occurred in 2013, where the Syrian Army was accused of using the WMD on the same day the Syrian government had invited weapon inspectors into Damascus, which resulted in Syria giving up its chemical weapons.
WATCH: Video Shows Obama Administration Bragging About Removing ‘100 Percent’ of Chemical Weapons From Syria
In the near future neocons may accuse Syria of failing to give up all chemical weapons, in spite of assurances by the OPCW. This is what happened to Iraq in 2003, which was invaded despite surrendering their chemical weapons in the 1990s.
No one questions how the Syrian government could possible use a weapon it doesn’t have, nor what motive it could possibly possess.
For the moment however, the narrative being pushed by neo-cons is “Trump should do what Obama failed to do, bomb Syria for al-Qaeda” and it seems that narrative is winning.
“Strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is their destination.” ~ Quran 9:73
Have you heard that Islam is a peaceful religion because most Muslims live peacefully and only a “tiny minority of extremists” practice violence? That’s like saying that White supremacy must be perfectly fine since only a tiny minority of racists ever hurt anyone. Neither does it explain why religious violence is largely endemic to Islam, despite the tremendous persecution of religious minorities in Muslim countries.
In truth, even a tiny minority of “1%” of Muslims worldwide translates to 15 million believers – which is hardly an insignificant number. However, the “minority” of Muslims who approve of terrorists, their goals, or their means of achieving them is much greater than this. In fact, it isn’t even a true minority in some cases, depending on how goals and targets are defined.
The following polls convey what Muslims say are their attitudes toward terrorism, al-Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, the 9/11 attacks, violence in defense of Islam, Sharia, honor killings, and matters concerning assimilation in Western society. The results are all the more astonishing because most of the polls were conducted by organizations with an obvious interest in “discovering” agreeable statistics that downplay any cause for concern.
(These links have been compiled over the years and some may be currently inactive.)
For more information see: The Religion of Peace
ICM Poll: 20% of British Muslims sympathize with 7/7 bombers
NOP Research: 1 in 4 British Muslims say 7/7 bombings were justified
Channel Four (2006): 31% of younger British Muslims say 7/7 bombings were justified compared to 14% of those over 45.
People-Press: 31% of Turks support suicide attacks against Westerners in Iraq.
YNet: One third of Palestinians (32%) supported the slaughter of a Jewish family, including the children:
World Public Opinion: 83% of Egyptians approve of attacks on American troops. 26% of Indonesians approve of attacks on American troops. 26% of Pakistanis approve of attacks on American troops. 68% of Moroccans approve of attacks on American troops. 90% of Palestinians approve of attacks on American troops. 72% of Jordanians approve of attacks on American troops. 52% of Turks approve of some or most groups that attack Americans (39% oppose) A minority of Muslims disagreed entirely with terror attacks on American troops. About half of those opposed to attacking Americans were sympathetic with al-Qaeda’s attitude toward the U.S.
World Public Opinion (2009): 30% of Palestinians support attacks on American civilians working in Muslim countries. 24% support the murder of Americans on U.S. soil. Only 74% of Turks and 55% of Pakistanis disapprove of terror attacks against civilians on U.S. soil.
Pew Research (2010): 55% of Jordanians have a positive view of Hezbollah 30% of Egyptians have a positive view of Hezbollah 45% of Nigerian Muslims have a positive view of Hezbollah (26% negative) 43% of Indonesians have a positive view of Hezbollah (30% negative) http://pewglobal.org/2010/12/02/muslims-around-the-world-divided-on-hamas-and-hezbollah/
Pew Research (2010): 60% of Jordanians have a positive view of Hamas (34% negative). 49% of Egyptians have a positive view of Hamas (48% negative) 49% of Nigerian Muslims have a positive view of Hamas (25% negative) 39% of Indonesians have a positive view of Hamas (33% negative) http://pewglobal.org/2010/12/02/muslims-around-the-world-divided-on-hamas-and-hezbollah/
Pew Research (2010): 15% of Indonesians believe suicide bombings are often or sometimes justified. 34% of Nigerian Muslims believe suicide bombings are often or sometimes justified. http://pewglobal.org/2010/12/02/muslims-around-the-world-divided-on-hamas-and-hezbollah/
16% of young Muslims in Belgium state terrorism is “acceptable”.
Populus Poll (2006): 12% of young Muslims in Britain (and 12% overall) believe that suicide attacks against civilians in Britain can be justified. 1 in 4 support suicide attacks against British troops.
Pew Research (2007): 26% of younger Muslims in America believe suicide bombings are justified. 35% of young Muslims in Britain believe suicide bombings are justified (24% overall). 42% of young Muslims in France believe suicide bombings are justified (35% overall). 22% of young Muslims in Germany believe suicide bombings are justified.(13% overall). 29% of young Muslims in Spain believe suicide bombings are justified.(25% overall).
Pew Research (2011): 8% of Muslims in America believe suicide bombings are often or sometimes justified (81% never). 28% of Egyptian Muslims believe suicide bombings are often or sometimes justified (38% never).
Pew Research (2007): Muslim-Americans who identify more strongly with their religion are three times more likely to feel that suicide bombings are justified
27% of British Muslims do not support the deportation of Islamic extremists preaching violence and hate.
Federation of Student Islamic Societies: About 1 in 5 Muslim students in Britain (18%) would not report a fellow Muslim planning a terror attack.
ICM Poll: 25% of British Muslims disagree that a Muslim has an obligation to report terrorists to police.
Populus Poll (2006): 16% of British Muslims believe suicide attacks against Israelis are justified. 37% believe Jews in Britain are a “legitimate target”.
World Public Opinion: Majorities in Egypt (63%) and Libya (61%) supported the 9/11/2012 attacks against American embassies, including Benghazi.
Pew Research (2013): At least 1 in 4 Muslims do not reject violence against civilians (study did not distinguish between those who believe it is partially justified and never justified).
Pew Research (2013): 15% of Muslims in Turkey support suicide bombings (also 11% in Kosovo, 26% in Malaysia and 26% in Bangladesh).
PCPO (2014): 89% of Palestinians support Hamas and other terrorists firing rockets at Israeli civilians.
Pew Research (2013): Only 57% of Muslims worldwide disapprove of al-Qaeda. Only 51% disapprove of the Taliban. 13% support both groups and 1 in 4 refuse to say.
BBC Radio (2015): 45% of British Muslims agree that clerics preaching violence against the West represent “mainstream Islam”.
Palestinian Center for Political Research (2015): 74% of Palestinians support Hamas terror attacks.
Pew Research (2014): 47% of Bangladeshi Muslims says suicide bombings and violence are justified to “defend Islam”. 1 in 4 believed the same in Tanzania and Egypt. 1 in 5 Muslims in the ‘moderate’ countries of Turkey and Malaysia.
The Polling Company CSP Poll (2015): 19% of Muslim-Americans say that violence is justified in order to make Sharia the law in the United States (66% disagree).
The Polling Company CSP Poll (2015): 25% of Muslim-Americans say that violence against Americans in the United States is justified as part of the “global Jihad (64% disagree).
The Sun (2015: Following Nov. 2015 attacks in Paris, 1 in 4 young Muslims in Britain (and 1 in 5 overall) said they sympathize with those who fight for ISIS.
ICM (2016): 2 in 3 Muslims in Britain would not report terror plot to police.
See also: http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muslim_Statistics_(Terrorism) for further statistics on Islamic terror.
Pew Research (2007): 5% of American Muslims have a favorable view of al-Qaeda (27% can’t make up their minds). Only 58% reject al-Qaeda outright.
Pew Research (2011): 5% of American Muslims have a favorable view of al-Qaeda (14% can’t make up their minds).
Pew Research (2011): 1 in 10 native-born Muslim-Americans have a favorable view of al-Qaeda.
al-Jazeera (2006): 49.9% of Muslims polled support Osama bin Laden
Pew Research: 59% of Indonesians support Osama bin Laden in 2003 41% of Indonesians support Osama bin Laden in 2007 56% of Jordanians support Osama bin Laden in 2003
Pew Global: 51% of Palestinians support Osama bin Laden 54% of Muslim Nigerians Support Osama bin Laden
MacDonald Laurier Institute: 35% of Canadian Muslims would not repudiate al-Qaeda
World Public Opinion: Muslim majorities agree with the al-Qaeda goal of Islamic law. Muslim majorities agree with al-Qaeda goal of keeping Western values out of Islamic countries; (Egypt: 88%; Indonesia 76%; Pakistan 60%; Morocco 64%)
ICM Poll: 13% of Muslim in Britain support al-Qaeda attacks on America.
World Public Opinion: Attitude toward Osama bin Laden: Egypt: 44% positive, 17% negative, and 25% mixed feelings Indonesia: 14% positive, 26% negative, 21% mixed feelings (39% did not answer) Pakistan: 25% positive, 15% negative, 26% mixed feelings (34% did not answer) Morocco: 27% positive, 21% negative, 26% mixed feelings Jordanians, Palestinians, Turks and Azerbaijanis. Jordanians combined for: 27% positive, 20 percent negative, and 27 percent mixed feelings. (Palestinians 56% positive, 20% negative, 22 percent mixed feelings).
Pew Research (2010): 49% of Nigerian Muslims have favorable view of al-Qaeda (34% unfavorable) 23% of Indonesians have favorable view of al-Qaeda (56% unfavorable) 34% of Jordanians have favorable view of al-Qaeda 25% of Indonesians have “confidence” in Osama bin Laden (59% had confidence in 2003) 1 in 5 Egyptians have “confidence” in Osama bin Laden
Pew Research (2011): 22% of Indonesians have a favorable view of al-Qaeda (21% unfavorable)
Gallup: 51% of Pakistanis grieve Osama bin Laden (only 11% happy over death) 44% of Pakistanis viewed Osama bin Laden as a martyr (only 28% as an oulaw)
Zogby International 2011: “Majorities in all six countries said they viewed the United States less favorably following the killing of the Al-Qaeda head [Osama bin Laden] in Pakistan”
Populus Survey: 18% of British Muslims would be proud or indifferent if a family member joined al-Qaeda.
Policy Exchange (2006): 7% Muslims in Britain admire al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups.
Informal poll of Saudis in August 2014 shows 92% agree that Islamic State (ISIS) “conforms to the values of Islam and Islamic law.”
Hurriyet Daily News / Metropoll (2015): 20% of Turks support the slaughter of Charlie Hebdo staffers and cartoonists.
al-Jazeera Poll (2015): 81% of respondents support the Islamic State (ISIS).
The Polling Company CSP Poll (2015): 33% of Muslim-Americans say al-Qaeda beliefs are Islamic or correct. (49% disagree)
The Polling Company CSP Poll (2015): 38% of Muslim-Americans say Islamic State (ISIS) beliefs are Islamic or correct. (43% disagree)
ICM (Mirror) Poll 2015: 1.5 Million British Muslims support the Islamic State, about half the total population.
Clarion Project Study (2015): 11.5% of Arabs support ISIS, or about 42 million.
Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (2015): Two-thirds of Palestinians support the stabbing of Israeli civilians.
Social Trends Survey (2016): 21% of Turks says ISIS ‘represents Islam”; 10% would not categorize it as a terrorist organization.
ICM (2014): 16% of all French Muslims support ISIS, including 27% of those aged 18-24.
al-Jazeera Website Survey (2015): 81% of respondents approve of “regional conquests: by ISIS.
al-Arabiya: 36% of Arabs polled said the 9/11 attacks were morally justified; 38% disagreed; 26% Unsure
Gallup: 38.6% of Muslims believe 9/11 attacks were justified (7% “fully”, 6.5% “mostly”, 23.1% “partially”)
Pew Research (2011): Large majorities of Muslims believe in 9/11 conspiracy
Jakarta Post (2006): 40% of Indonesians approve of violence in defense of Islam.
Pew Global: 68% of Palestinian Muslims say suicide attacks against civilians in defense of Islam are justified. 43% of Nigerian Muslims say suicide attacks against civilians in defense of Islam are justified. 38% of Lebanese Muslims say suicide attacks against civilians in defense of Islam are justified. 15% of Egyptian Muslims say suicide attacks against civilians in defense of Islam are justified. 13% of Indonesian Muslims say suicide attacks against civilians in defense of Islam are justified. 12% of Jordanian Muslims say suicide attacks against civilians in defense of Islam are justified. 7% of Muslim Israelis say suicide attacks against civilians in defense of Islam are justified.
http://cnsnews.com/node/53865 (Pew Global Attitudes Project September, 2009)
Center for Social Cohesion: One Third of British Muslim students support killing for Islam (Wikileaks cable)
Policy Exchange: One third of British Muslims believe anyone who leaves Islam should be killed
NOP Research: 78% of British Muslims support punishing the publishers of Muhammad cartoons;
NOP Research: Hardcore Islamists comprise 9% of Britain’s Muslim population; Another 29% would “aggressively defend” Islam;
Pew Research (2010): 84% of Egyptian Muslims support the death penalty for leaving Islam 86% of Jordanian Muslims support the death penalty for leaving Islam 30% of Indonesian Muslims support the death penalty for leaving Islam 76% of Pakistanis support death the penalty for leaving Islam 51% of Nigerian Muslims support the death penalty for leaving Islam
ICM Poll: 11% of British Muslims find violence for religious or political ends acceptable.
BBC (2007): 36% of younger Muslims in the UK believe a Muslim should be killed for converting to another religion (19% of those over 55 agree).
Terrorism Research Institute Study: 51% of mosques in the U.S. have texts on site rated as severely advocating violence; 30% have texts rated as moderately advocating violence; and 19% have no violent texts at all.
Pew Research (2013): 76% of South Asian Muslims and 56% of Egyptians advocate killing anyone who leaves the Islamic religion.
Pew Research (2013): 19% of Muslim Americans believe suicide bombings in defense of Islam are at least partially justified (global average is 28% in countries surveyed).
Pew Research (2013): 39% of Muslims in Malaysia say suicide bombings “justified” in defense of Islam (only 58% say ‘never’).
Die Presse (2013): 1 in 5 Muslims in Austria believe that anyone wanting to leave Islam should be killed.
Motivaction Survey (2014): 80% of young Dutch Muslims see nothing wrong with Holy War against non-believers. Most verbalized support for pro-Islamic State fighters.
BBC (2015): Following the Charlie Hebdo attacks, 27% of British Muslims openly support violence against cartoonists. Another 8% would not say, meaning that only 2 of 3 surveyed would say that the killings were not justified.
The Polling Company CSP Poll (2015): 24% of Muslim-Americans say that violence is justified against those who “offend Islam” (60% disagree).
The Polling Company CSP Poll (2015): 29% of Muslim-Americans agree that violence against those who insult Muhammad or the Quran is acceptable (61% disagree).
Pew Research (2015): 40% of Palestinians, 39% in Afghanistan, 29% in Egypt and 26% of Muslims in Bangladesh agree that violence against civilians in defense of Islam is sometimes justified.
Pew Research (2011): 8% of Muslims in America says suicide bombings and other violence against civilians in defense of Islam is sometimes or often justified. 81% say it is never justified.
Arab Observatory of Religions and Freedom (2016) Only 39% in Egypt condemn religious extremism.
83% of Pakistanis support stoning adulterers 78% of Pakistanis support killing apostates
Center for Social Cohesion: 40% of British Muslim students want Sharia
ICM Poll: 40% of British Muslims want Sharia in the UK
GfK NOP: 28% of British Muslims want Britain to be an Islamic state
NOP Research: 68% of British Muslims support the arrest and prosecution of anyone who insults Islam;
MacDonald Laurier Institute: 62% of Muslims want Sharia in Canada (15% say make it mandatory)
BBC (2007): 28% of Muslims in the UK prefer Sharia (37% for those younger).
World Public Opinion: 81% of Egyptians want strict Sharia imposed in every Islamic country 76% of Pakistanis want strict Sharia imposed in every Islamic country 49% (plurality) of Indonesians want strict Sharia imposed in every Islamic country 76% of Moroccans want strict Sharia imposed in every Islamic country
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/feb09/STARTII_Feb09_rpt.pdf World Public Opinion: 64% of Egyptians said it was “very important for the government” to “apply traditional punishments for crimes such as stoning adulterers.”
Pew Research (2010): 77% of Egyptian Muslims favor floggings and amputation 58% of Jordanian Muslims favor floggings and amputation 36% of Indonesian Muslims favor floggings and amputation 82% of Pakistanis favor floggings and amputation 65% of Nigerian Muslims favor floggings and amputation
Pew Research (2010): 82% of Egyptian Muslims favor stoning adulterers 70% of Jordanian Muslims favor stoning adulterers 42% of Indonesian Muslims favor stoning adulterers 82% of Pakistanis favor stoning adulterers 56% of Nigerian Muslims favor stoning adulterers
Pew Research (2013): 72% of Indonesians want Sharia to be law of the land
Pew Research (2013): 81% of South Asian Muslims and 57% of Egyptians suport amputating limbs for theft.
Pew Research (2013): According to an interpretation of this study, approximately 45% of Sharia supporters surveyed disagreed with the idea that Islamic law should apply only to Muslims.
Economist (Pew 2013): 74% who favor Islamic law in Egypt say it should apply to non-Muslims as well.
WZB Berlin Social Science Center: 65% of Muslims in Europe say Sharia is more important than the law of the country they live in.
FPO (2014): 43% of Islamic teachers in Austria openly advocate Sharia law over democracy.
The Polling Company CSP Poll (2015): 33% of Muslim-Americans say that Sharia should be supreme to the US Constitution (43% disagree).
The Polling Company CSP Poll (2015): 51% of Muslim-Americans say that Muslims should have the choice of being judged by Sharia courts rather than courts of the United States (39% disagree).http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/150612-CSP-Polling-Company-Nationwide-Online-Survey-of-Muslims-Topline-Poll-Data.pdf
2015 (Jyllands Posten): 77% of Muslims in Denmark believe the Quran’s instructions should be ‘fully appied’.
2015 (Jyllands Postn): Only 53% of Danish Muslims believe Danish law should be based on the consitution and not the Quran.
ICM Poll (2016): 23% of British Muslim support the introduction of Sharia in the UK “instead of British Law”
ICM Poll (2016): 21% of British Muslims decline to condemn stoning adulterers (5% openly support them).
Pew Research (2016): A majority of Muslims in 10 countries favor basing laws on the Quran (inc. Pakistan, Pal. Auth, Malaysia, Jordan, Senegal, Nigeria, Indonesia, Lebanon and Turkey). Educated Muslims also favored Sharia, including 55% in ‘secular Turkey’.
Arab Observatory of Religions and Freedom (2016): 79% of Libyans believe Sharia should be the sole source of legislation, as do 63% in Algeria and 60% in Morocco.
Turkish Ministry of Education: 1 in 4 Turks Support Honor Killings
Civitas: 1 in 3 Muslims in the UK strongly agree that a wife should be forced to obey her husband’s bidding
BBC Poll: 1 in 10 British Muslims support killing a family member over “dishonor”.
Middle East Quarterly: 91 percent of honor killings are committed by Muslims worldwide.
95% of honor killings in the West are perpetrated by Muslim fathers and brothers or their proxies.
A survey of Muslim women in Paris suburbs found that three-quarters of them wear their masks out of fear – including fear of violence.
1 in 5 young British Muslims agree that ‘honor’ violence is acceptable.
Pew Research (2013): Large majorities of Muslims favor Sharia. Among those who do, stoning women for adultery is favored by 89% in Pakistanis, 85% in Afghanistan, 81% in Egypt, 67% in Jordan, ~50% in ‘moderate’ Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand, 58% in Iraq, 44% in Tunisia, 29% in Turkey, and 26% in Russia.
Pew Research (2013): Honor killing the woman for sex outside of marriage is favored over honor killing the man in almost every Islamic country. Over half of Muslims surveyed believed that honor killings over sex were at least partially justified.
(2013) Jordanian teens support honor killing.
Pew Research (2011): 40% of Pakistanis says that killing a woman for family honor is often or sometimes justified.
Muslims have highest claimed disability rates in the UK (24% of men, 21% of women)
Pakistani Muslims in the UK are four times more likely to be unemployed than Hindus. Indian Muslims are twice as likely to be unemployed as Indian Hindus.
Policy Exchange: 1 in 4 Muslims in the UK have never heard of the Holocaust; Only 34% of British Muslims believe the Holocaust ever happened.
Policy Exchange: 51% of British Muslims believe a woman cannot marry a non-Muslim Only 51% believe a Muslim woman may marry without a guardian’s consent
Policy Exchange: Up to 52% of British Muslims believe a Muslim man is entitled to up to four wives
Policy Exchange: 61% of British Muslims want homosexuality punished
NOP Research: 62% of British Muslims do not believe in the protection of free speech; Only 3% adopt a “consistently pro-freedom of speech line”
ICM Poll: 58% of British Muslims believe insulting Islam should result in criminal prosecution
Pew Global (2006): Only 7% of British Muslims think of themselves as British first (81% say ‘Muslim’ rather than ‘Briton’)
Policy Exchange (2006): 31% Muslims in Britain identify more with Muslims in other countries than with non-Muslim Brits.
BBC (2007) 74% of young Muslims prefer women wear the veil (compared to 28% of those over 55).
Die Welt (2012): 46% of Muslims in Germany hope there will eventually be more Muslims than Christians in Germany.
Ipsos MORI: Muslims are 3 times as likely as Christians to believe that their religion is the only way.
Pew Research (2011): Muslim-Americans four times more likely to say that women should not work outside the home.
Pew Research (2007): 26% of Muslim-Americans want to be distinct (43% support assimilation)
Pew Research (2011): 20% of Muslim-Americans want to be distinct (56% support assimilation)
Pew Research (2011): 49% of Muslim-Americans say they are “Muslim first” (26% American first)
Pew Research (2011): 21% of Muslim-Americans say there is a fair to great amount of support for Islamic extremism in their community.
ICM Poll: 11% of British Muslims find violence for political ends acceptablehttp://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2005/07/more-survey-research-from-a-british-islamist
Wenzel Strategies (2012): 58% of Muslim-Americans believe criticism of Islam or Muhammad is not protected free speech under the First Amendment. 45% believe mockers of Islam should face criminal charges (38% said they should not). 12% of Muslim-Americans believe blaspheming Islam should be punishable by death. 43% of Muslim-Americans believe people of other faiths have no right to evangelize Muslims. 32% of Muslims in America believe that Sharia should be the supreme law of the land.
Pew Research (2013): “At least half’ of Muslims surveyed believed polygamy is morally acceptable. “Muslims in most countries surveyed say that a wife should always obey her husband.” (including 93% in Indonesia and 65% in Turkey). Only 32% of Muslims in Indonesia say a woman should have the right to divorce her husband (22% in Egypt, 26% in Pakistan and 60% in Russia).
Die Presse (2013): 1 in 3 Muslims in Austria say it is not possible to be a European and a Muslim. 22% oppose democracy
WZB Berlin Social Science Center: 45% of Muslims in Europe say Jews cannot be trusted.
Vancouver Sun (2015): 42% of Canadian Muslims agree that Islam is “irreconcilable” with the West.
Anti-Defamation League (2015): 55% of Muslims in Europe are anti-Semitic – approximately three times higher than Europeans in general.
Middle East Forum (2015): Muslims comprise less than 1% of the population in the United States but 9% of prison inmates.
Middle East Forum (2015): Muslims in France comprise 12% of the population, but 70% of prisoners.
Middle East Forum (2015): Muslims in the Netherlands comprise 4% of the population but 20% of prisoners. Muslims in France comprise 10% of the population, but 70% of prisoners.
2016 (Sun News): Muslims comprise 5% of population in Britain but 20% of High Security inmates
ICM Poll (2016): 31% of British Muslims believe polygamy is acceptable. 18% believe homosexuality should remain legal.
35% of prisoners in Belgium are Muslim, compared with 6% of the general population.
©2002 – 2016 www.TheReligionofPeace.Com
A Muslim woman whines: I don’t feel safe in the United States wearing a headscarf with Trump as President.
Problem solved… Go back to your own country where they’ll stone you to death for not wearing it!
|Just one more thing on the London “Lone Wolf” terror attack.
After the London “Lone Wolf” terrorist attack government officials have arrested at least eight other “Lone Wolves” who had conspired with the original “Lone Wolf” in planning the “Lone Wolf” attack.
Even though all involved are Muslims, you can be assured, the “Lone Wolf” attack has nothing at all to do with Islam… just like the other 1000 plus “Lone Wolf” attacks by Muslims, completely unassociated with Islam.
Five people employed by members of the House of Representatives remain under criminal investigation for unauthorized access to Congressional computers. Former DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz employed at least one of those under investigation.
The criminal investigation into the five, which includes three brothers and a wife of one of the men, started late last year, as reported by Politico in February. The group is being investigated by US Capitol Police over allegations that they removed equipment from over 20 members’ offices, as well as having run a procurement scheme to buy equipment and then overcharge the House.
House Speaker Paul Ryan said last week Capitol Police are receiving additional help for the investigation. “I won’t speak to the nature of their investigation, but they’re getting the kind of technical assistance they need to do that, this is under an active criminal investigation, their capabilities are pretty strong but they’re also able to go and get the kind of help they need from other sources,” Ryan said.
The brothers, Abid, Jamal and Imran Awan, worked as shared employees for various members of the House, covering committees relating to intelligence, terrorism and cybersecurity, which included the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on Homeland Security and the Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces of the Armed Services Committee.
Imran’s wife, Hina Alvi, and Rao Abbas, both of whom worked as House IT employees, are also under investigation.
The group were banned from accessing the computers as a result of the investigation but, as of earlier this month, Imran Awan remains as an “technology adviser” to former Democratic National Committee chair, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who was forced to resign in July following revelations that she worked to further Hillary Clinton’s chances of winning the Democratic primary at the expense of Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders.
News of the brothers’ investigation has sparked speculation that it may be tied to the hack of the DNC servers, the contents of which were first released by Guccifer 2.0 and later published on WikiLeaks.
Russian actors have been accused of being behind the hack, which Democrats claim contributed to Clinton’s loss to Donald Trump. There have also been reports that the DNC hack came from an insider.
@Cernovich Can’t blame the Russians for Awan brothers, why is no one talking about them since were investigating leaks!
— JCross (@ccross5882) March 21, 2017
@Cernovich Were Dems really hacked? Looks like they’ll give just about anybody access to their computers. No ? asked.
— Sr Admin Official (@Im_Effin_Dunn) March 20, 2017
@TomFitton What is the actual proof specifically that in fact it was Russia doing hack of DNC because Awan Brothers issue disturbs me
— Cheryl Aschenbrenner (@CherylAschenbr2) March 21, 2017
An email between DNC staffers in April 2016, which was released by WikiLeaks, references a staff member named Imran and how this person has access to the passwords for Wasserman Schultz’s iPad.
Garret Bonosky, deputy director of office of the DNC chair, tells Amy Kroll: “I have to get [this iPad] thing figured out. Need to make sure I have her username and password before I delete and reload the app.”
“I do not have access to her ipad password, but Imran does,” Kroll replies, later writing: “Just spoke to Imran, call me whenever GB and I’ll update you, don’t delete anything yet.”
Another email from the DNC hack, dated December 2016, references Imran once again. Wasserman Schultz’s assistant Rosalyn Kumar tells scheduler Anna Stolitzka: “[Nancy] Pelosi is doing [a] closed door meeting. No staff or anyone allowed. Kaitlyn come to Rayburn room and get her iPad for Imran.”
The brothers were paid high salaries for their work with various House members, above the median salary for Congressional staffers.
Imran, who started working for Wasserman Schultz in 2005, received $164,600 in 2016, with close to $20,000 of that coming from Wasserman Schultz.
Jamal, who started working as a staffer in 2014, was paid $157,350.12 in 2016.
Abid, who started working in 2005, was paid $160,943 in 2016.
Hina Alvi, who was employed as a staffer from February 2007, was paid 168,300 in 2016.
Rao Abbas was paid $85,049 in 2016.
The Daily Caller reports that Imran received $1.2 million in salary since 2010, while Abid and Alvi received over $1 million each.
House Democrats supporting the employees have suggested that the Pakistani nationality of the suspects may have inspired the investigation.