This is a map of the refugee centers in Germany. Would you be concerned if it was your country?
Talk about Trojan horse invasion. Sadly Germany may be beyond saving.
Google deleted this map showing refugee housing centers in Germany. However, a zoomable refugee Google map can still be found in the web archive.
The Mainstream Media claims the censorship serves to prevent terrorist attacks on refugee centers 1 2. It is more likely that the censorship serves to hide the enormousness of the refugee center business from shocked Germans. Near refugee centers crime soars, and housing values plummet.
|Ali and Habib are beggars. They beg in different areas of London …
Habib begs just as long as Ali does, but only collects £2 to £3 every day.
Ali brings home a suitcase FULL of £10 notes, drives a Mercedes, lives in a mortgage-free house and has a lot of money to spend.
Habib asks Ali :- ‘I work just as long and hard as you do but how is it that you bring home a suitcase full of £10 notes every day?’
Ali says, ‘Look at your sign, what does it say’?
Habib’s sign reads ‘I have no work, a wife and 6 kids to support’.
Ali says No wonder you only get £2- £3
Habib says… ‘So what does your sign say’?
Ali shows Habib his sign…. It reads, ‘I only need another £10 to move back to Pakistan’.
“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.
Charitable institutions (like The Clinton Foundation), as Judge Jeanine Pirro has stated publicly, often serve as a slush fund for those whose name the institution bears. Pirro called the Clintons’ foundation nothing more than a “money laundering operation used as a slush fund.” Now, it seems, Senator John McCain (R-AZ) and his institution are coming under fire for contributions it has been receiving from the Rothschild family, a controversial global mining company, and the Royal Family of Saudi Arabia.
Accusations of financial impropriety first arose back in 2008, when The Guardian first ran the story. McCain was traveling through the UK, and made a stop at London’s Spencer House, where Judicial Watch, noted Washington watchdog organization, objected to the fundraiser luncheon hosted by the Rothschilds. “The question is whether or not the Rothschilds paid for the event, the venue, the catering, or any other related costs,” asked Judicial Watch’s president Tom Fitton. McCain wasn’t successful in defeating President Obama in the election. Yet while his campaign for president is a thing of the past, McCain’s ties to the Rothschilds and others is present day subject matter. Wikileaks has made certain the issue will not go away.
The organization committed to governmental transparency revealed just how close of a relationship McCain has with the Rothschilds. “Close Hillary Clinton friend Lynn Forester de Rothschild (Economist publisher) is a trustee of the Saudi-funded John McCain Institute,” Wikileaks’ tweet reads. And guess what. They’re right again. A quick check of the McCain Institute’s Board of Trustees finds a photo of Ms. Rothschild, as well as her bio.
Since June 2002, Lady de Rothschild has been the Chief Executive of E.L. Rothschild LLC, a private investment company with investments in media, asset management, information technology, agriculture and real estate worldwide. Holdings include The Economist Group (UK), Bronfman/E.L.Rothschild, real estate and financial instruments. Lady de Rothschild has been a director of The Estee Lauder Companies since December 2000 and The Economist Newspaper Limited (member of the Audit Committee) since October 2002 .
Close Hillary Clinton friend Lynn Forester de Rothschild (Economist publisher) is a trustee of the Saudi funded John McCain Institute.
— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) February 27, 2017
Also worth noting is the list of donors who’ve given $100,000 or more to the senator from Arizona’s institute hosted by Arizona State University. A quick glance reveals at least one branch of the Rothschild family is on the list. “The Eranda Rothschild Foundation – Sir Evelyn and Lynn Forester de Rothschild,” is listed on the institute’s website as a significant donor. Also listed as a donor is the highly controversial Phoenix-based mining company Freeport-McMoRan, whose gold and copper mining operations in West Papua, Indonesia are said to have brought poverty and genocide to the indigenous population.
“Indigenous tribes such as the Kamoro and the Amungme claim their communities have been racked with poverty, disease, oppression and environmental degradation since the mine began operations in 1973,” writes The Guardian. Since the discovery of gold, and the alleged fraudulent handover of control to the Indonesian government in 1969, the country’s Muslim transmigration plan has resettled militant Muslims who have been systematically killing the Christian Kamoro and Amungme. The resulting genocide has been going on for nearly five decades with very little international attention given to the extermination taking place, often referred to as the “silent genocide”.
Last, but certainly not least, in the list of controversial donors to The McCain Institute, is the Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia. Yes. That’s right. The country with one of the worst human rights abuse records on the planet is a major donor to senator’s institute. According to Amnesty International, the country where it’s a crime to play a guitar in public, is one of the worst countries to live it one wishes to engage in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
The authorities severely curtailed the rights to freedom of expression, association and assembly, detaining and imprisoning critics, human rights defenders and minority rights activists on vaguely worded charges. Torture and other ill-treatment of detainees remained common, particularly during interrogation, and courts continued to accept torture-tainted “confessions” to convict defendants in unfair trials. Women faced discrimination in both law and practice and were inadequately protected against sexual and other violence. The authorities continued to arrest, detain and deport irregular migrants. Courts imposed many death sentences, including for non-violent crimes and against juvenile offenders; scores of executions were carried out. Coalition forces led by Saudi Arabia committed serious violations of international law, including war crimes, in Yemen.
An unconfirmed document, found on IMGUR, reportedly shows the foundation, in 2014, received $1,000,000 from the Saudis and $300,000 from The Eranda Rothschild foundation. And while receiving funds, from organizations one might not agree with politically, is not a crime, keeping those funds may speak volumes about where Sen. McCain’s allegiances ultimately belong.
One only has to think back to 2001, when the World Trade Center was destroyed, allegedly by Saudi terrorist hijackers, to remember when the New York mayor chose to give back funds he received and considered to be insulting. Rudi Giuliani gave back a check for 10 million dollars to the Saudi Royal Family, a gesture which drew bipartisan praise.
Likewise, the Rothschild family reportedly controls half of the world’s banks. The elitist banking family who has made its fortunes creating paper currency, and lending money at high interest rates, crippling the U.S. economy is seen by many as an enemy of the people. Former U.S. Congressman Ron Paul once said they help control the Federal Reserve, and hand-select all appointments to government committee positions. But it’s still anyone’s guess if the Rothschilds’ man in Washington is John McCain. At any rate, he doesn’t seem to have a litmus test as to from whom he will receive money.
Sounds like a Muslim ban, I’m sure Liberals will be outraged and CNN will be reporting this soon. (they won’t)
RIYADH — About 39,000 Pakistanis have been deported from the Kingdom in the past four months for violating the rules of residence and work, according to informed security sources.
The sources also said the involvement of a number of Pakistani nationals in some terrorist actions orchestrated by Daesh, the so called IS, is a cause of public and societal worry.
They said a number of Pakistanis were held in the crimes of drug trafficking, thefts, forgery and physical assault.
Against this backdrop, Abdullah Al-Sadoun, chairman of the security committee of the Shoura Council, called for thoroughly scrutinizing the Pakistanis before they are recruited for work in the Kingdom.
He asked for more closer coordination with the concerned authorities in Pakistan to thoroughly check those coming to work in the Kingdom due to the involvement of a number of Pakistanis in security issues.
Sadoun said the political and religious inclinations of the Pakistanis coming to work in the Kingdom should be known to both sides before they are recruited for work in the Kingdom.
“Pakistan itself is plagued with terrorism due to its close proximity with Afghanistan. The Taliban extremist movement was itself born in Pakistan,» he said.
Meanwhile, according to Nafithat Tawasul (communications window) of the Interior Ministry, they are 82 Pakistani suspects of terror and security issues who are currently held in intelligence prisons.
According to the window, as many as 15 Pakistanis, including a woman, were nabbed following the recent terrorist operations in Al-Harazat and Al-Naseem districts in Jeddah.
The ministry recalled that last Ramadan, Abdullah Ghulzar Khan, a Pakistani, exploded himself at the car park of Dr. Soliman Fakheeh Hospital near the US consulate in Jeddah.
He lived in the Kingdom for 12 years with his wife and her parents. He had arrived in the country with a private driver’s visa.
Last year, the security forces had foiled a terrorist operation in which two Pakistanis, a Syrian and a Sudanese were held for plotting to explode Al-Jawhara Stadium in Jeddah where more than 60,000 spectators were gathered to watch a soccer match between the national teams of the Kingdom and the United Arab Emirates.
The terrorists were using a booby trapped truck loaded with 400 kg of explosives
University of California’s Berkeley campus, once the sight of iconic protests in favor of free speech in the 1960s, became embroiled in controversy last week after violent protests last Wednesday night shut down an event where controversial Breitbart editor Milo Yiannopolous was set to speak. A few hours before the event was set to start, groups of those in opposition to Milo began destroying property and their acts became increasingly more destructive over time. Numerous videos, posted on social media and captured by local news stations, also showed incidents where some of the protestors, apparently belonging to the anti-fascists or antifa movement, were beating people with flag poles and other objects. At least one man was beaten unconscious. As the violence began to spiral out of control, the event was ultimately canceled but not before over $100,000 in damages were done to UC Berkeley’s campus. Following the event, antifa groups took to social media to declare “war” on those with opposing views along with promises to “dismantle the state.”
Though this “protest” was undoubtedly disturbing, the aftermath has arguably been more so. Emboldened by the events at UC Berkeley, antifa groups elsewhere gathered at NYU to disrupt the scheduled talk of another conservative figure, Gavin McInnes – co-founder of Vice News and host and commentator at the Rebel Media. While police were able to prevent the same destruction of property and violence that had taken place at Berkeley, protestors infiltrated the event and McInnes himself ended up being pepper sprayed and attacked. Antifa members have also taken to making threats against alternative media reporters in the days since the riots at Berkeley. In one case, Cassandra Fairbanks of We Are Change – a media outlet that is neither liberal nor conservative in the traditional sense – as well as her young daughter were threatened on Twitter by the Arizona Antifa Front.
Despite the chilling effect this is likely to have on the expression of conservative viewpoints on college campuses – and potentially elsewhere – the media as well as many politicians and public figures have either condoned the violence or publicly supported it. Major publications such as the New York Times hardly even mentioned the violence, only choosing to reference “self-described anarchists clad in face masks and spoiling for a fight.” The LA Times adopted the same strategy, focusing on free speech issues and Yiannopolous’ political views and most controversial statements while avoiding any discussion of the violence. Liberal-leaning outlets, such as the Daily Kos, took it a step further, characterizing the incident as one where one of Trump’s “little Breitbart friends had a bad night.” In addition to “mainstream” media, some politicians even expressly praised the riots such as Florida Congresswoman Val Demings who called the events at Berkeley “a beautiful sight.”
In addition to praising or condoning the violence, some mainstream outlets used the opportunity to blame conservatives and the right wing for the protests. For instance, CNN ran the headline “Milo Yiannopolous is trying to convince colleges that hate speech is cool” following the riots even though Milo did not even speak that evening save for a response to the rioting posted on his YouTube channel.
CNN argued that Milo was promoting “hate speech” for the following past statements:
In his campus talks, Yiannopoulos spares few targets. He’s gone after Black Lives Matter activists and has argued rape culture on campuses doesn’t exist. He portrays white males as victims and views social justice as a form of cancer. He has said people become feminists because they are “deeply physically unattractive.”
Though these opinions may be unpopular (especially on college campuses), they don’t necessarily constitute expressly racist, anti-semitic, or fascist ideas – though they do largely consist of critiques (albeit often crude ones) of left-leaning movements. The accusations of Nazism or white supremacy regarding Milo also seem out of place considering that he is Jewish, an immigrant, homosexual, and strongly prefers the romantic company of African-American men.
However, some went even further – accusing conservatives and Breitbart News of actually orchestrating the riots despite the clear evidence that the violent protestors identified as part of the far-left “antifa” movement. For instance, Political commentator, UC Berkeley professor, and former Secretary of Labor under Clinton Robert Reich postulated that “Yiannopolous and Breitbart were in cahoots with the agitators, in order to lay the groundwork for a Trump crackdown on universities and their federal funding.” The “crackdown” to which Reich refers is based off of a tweet from President Trump that essentially warned Berkeley to protect free speech following the riots or face the possibility of a loss of federal funding. In an interview with CNN, Reich reiterated this scenario, saying that he “wouldn’t bet against it.”
Clearly, this disproportionate, and frankly dishonest, characterization of the events is ultimately creating a consensus among the viewers of these media outlets that violent “protests” are acceptable – that is, at least, as long as those being attacked are conservative. Whether this is intentional or not is up for debate, but its ultimate effect is not. Violence in lieu of responsible political discourse is never favorable and condoning it for one group but not the other is the most dangerous type of partisanship the media and public figures can practice. All evidence seems to suggest that the mainstream media is quickly becoming weaponized.
If conservatives were the ones violently “protesting” liberal-leaning speakers, there is no denying that the media and political response would be immediate and devastating. Yet now, the media and political establishment seem content to let some elements of the political left in the United States transform into the very thing they are claiming to fight against – fascists – with complete impunity. Indeed, Winston Churchill predicted this decades ago, saying that “The fascists of the future will call themselves anti-fascists.” Will Americans be able to see past these attempts to divide us and pit us against one another? We can only hope, but turning off the television news seems like a logical first step.
Germans are fed up just like the Italians and the rest of Europe at the rate of Muslim immigration into their nations.
Watch as Germans take to the streets to protest the Muslim migrants Angela Merkel and her leftists government continue to bring into Germany.
Here’s an explanation for Islamic terrorism that’s never suggested. A never-spoken-about problem with Muslims is their inbreeding as a result of their long and deeply ingrained practice of marrying first cousins — a practice that has been prohibited in the Judeo-Christian tradition since the days of Moses.
Given the new wave of Muslim attacks in Europe, it is worth revisiting a 2010 report by Nicolai Sennels. His investigation, published on PJ Media, has some difficult truths to admit. They may not be politically correct, but they are facts nevertheless.
Massive inbreeding among Muslims has been going on since their prophet allowed first-cousin marriages more than 50 generations (1,400 years) ago. For many Muslims, therefore, intermarriage is regarded as being part of their religion. In many Muslim communities, it is a source of social status to marry one’s daughter or son to his or her cousin. Intermarriage also ensures that wealth is kept within the family. Islam’s strict authoritarianism plays a large role as well: keeping daughters and sons close gives families more power to control and decide their choices and lifestyles.
Today, 70 percent of all Pakistanis are inbred and in Turkey the amount is between 25-30 percent (Jyllands-Posten, 27/2 2009 “More stillbirths among immigrants“). A rough estimate reveals that close to half of everybody living in the Arab world is inbred. A large percentage of the parents that are blood related come from families where intermarriage has been a tradition for generations.
A BBC investigation in Britain several years ago revealed that at least 55% of the Pakistani community in Britain was married to a first cousin. The Times of India affirmed that “this is thought to be linked to the probability that a British Pakistani family is at least 13 times more likely than the general population to have children with recessive genetic disorders.”
The BBC’s research also discovered that while British Pakistanis accounted for just 3.4% of all births in Britain, they accounted for 30% of all British children with recessive disorders and a higher rate of infant mortality. It is not a surprise, therefore, that, in response to this evidence, a Labour Party MP has called for a ban on first-cousin marriage.
Medical evidence shows that one of the negative consequences of inbreeding is a 100 percent increase in the risk of stillbirths. One study comparing Norwegians and Pakistanis shows the risk that the child dies during labor increases by 50 percent. The risk of death due to autosomal recessive disorders — e.g., cystic fibrosis and spinal muscular atrophy — is 18 times higher. Risk of death due to malformations is 10 times higher. Mental health is also at risk: the probability of depression is higher in communities where consanguine marriages are also high. The closer the blood relative, the higher the risk of mental and physical retardation and schizophrenic illness.
And then there are the findings on intelligence. Research shows that if one’s parents are cousins, intelligence goes down 10-16 IQ points. The risk of having an IQ lower than 70 (criterion for being “retarded”) increases 400 percent among children from cousin marriages. An academic paper published in the Indian National Science Academy found that “the onset of various social profiles like visual fixation, social smile, sound seizures, oral expression and hand-grasping are significantly delayed among the new-born inbred babies.” Another study found that Indian Muslim school boys whose parents were first cousins tested significantly lower than boys whose parents were unrelated in a non-verbal test on intelligence.
It is estimated that one third of all handicapped people in Copenhagen have a foreign background. Sixty four percent of school children in Denmark with Arabic parents are illiterate after 10 years in the Danish school system. The same study concludes that in reading ability, mathematics, and science, the pattern is the same: “The bilingual (largely Muslim) immigrants’ skills are exceedingly poor compared to their Danish
These problems within Islam bring many detriments to Western countries. Expenses related to mentally and physically handicapped Muslim immigrants, for instance, severely drain the budgets and resources of our societies. Look at Denmark, for example: one-third of the budget for the country’s schools is spent on children with special needs. Muslim children are grossly over represented among these children. More than half of all children in schools for children with mental and physical handicaps in Copenhagen are foreigners — of whom Muslims are by far the largest group. One study concludes that “foreigners inbreeding costs our municipalities millions” because of the many handicapped children and adults.
It still haven’t been determined what caused it. Seems odd after all these weeks that we haven’t heard anything.
The Obama Administration has mastered controlling the narrative with “shiny objects” that rely on the principles of distraction, outrage and misdirection. Are the American people being manipulated again?
Was it an act of terrorism? One thing we learned from the Benghazi cover up, you can’t trust the Obama Administration or Democrats this close to the election. Any act of terrorism will hurt Hillary’s chances.
The National Transportation Safety Board released a statement Saturday relaying the status of the ongoing investigation into the train crash that happened Thursday morning in Hoboken, New Jersey.
NTSB Investigators have interviewed Thomas Gallagher, the engineer that operated train 1416 prior to and during the crash, but will not be releasing any summaries of the interviews until they are all completed.
While the event recorder from the trailing locomotive has been retrieved, investigators are still unable to gain access to the front of the train which has prohibited them from obtaining the forward locomotive’s camera and event data.
The rear event recorder is now at the recorder’s manufacturer as there was an issue downloading the data. NTSB officials are overseeing the manufacturer’s efforts to retrieve information from the recorder.
After a walking inspection, officials have found nothing wrong with the track or signals that might have contributed to the crash that killed one person and injured 114.