web analytics
December 28, 2014 / 6 Tevet, 5775
 
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘CAIR’

Noted Author Reading The Jewish Press Detained at JFK

Thursday, February 6th, 2014

Perhaps it is a coincidence that it happened to be The Jewish Press that caught the attention of security officials at John F. Kennedy Airport in New York on Wednesday afternoon, Feb. 5, but that fact certainly caught the attention of The Jewish Press reporters.

Phyllis Chesler, one of the doyennes of the feminist movement, professor emerita of psychology and women’s studies at CUNY, ardent Zionist, and author, most recently of An American Bride in Kabul, which won the National Jewish Book Award for memoir this year, was traveling from New York to Florida Wednesday afternoon.

Chesler’s flight was delayed due to the ice storm. Still, she felt somewhat lucky, as most of the flights were cancelled.

As she waited, Chesler pulled out the latest edition of The Jewish Press, which she had with her.

Chesler noticed that as soon as she took out the paper, one of the security agents looked at her sharply. He came over and asked to see her newspaper. After looking at the cover, the agent then took The Jewish Press and brought it over to another security agent. The two agents then had a discussion, apparently about the newspaper and about Chesler. She was then told to open her luggage, which the agents proceeded to search.

While Chesler’s luggage was being rifled through and she was being interrogated, she noticed another woman stride unmolested past her and the security agents, and disappear on through to her destination.

The woman who sailed through without being stopped was dressed in a niqab. The niqab is an Islamic head covering which covers a woman’s entire face except for the eyes.

niqab.jpg Chesler recounted that she saw no one in security ask this other woman – whose face was impossible to see – to lift her veil so that they might check her facial features against her identifying documents. The unidentifiable woman went right past security, no questions asked.

Chesler’s interrogation ended after the security agents found nothing more dangerous than a water bottle.

The episode was relatively brief, but it reveals a great deal about who security agents at JFK airport think is dangerous and from what they are protecting Americans.

The issue is not that the Jew was the one who was stopped and the Muslim was the one who sailed through security.

The issue is that merely the word Jewish on a newspaper was sufficient to draw the agents’ attention and suspicion, while someone whose identity was impossible to discern, who could be hiding who knows what, was ignored by security – security! professionals.

Had the situation been reversed, there is little question that the Committee on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), would be up in arms. So would the American Civil Liberties Union and probably half a dozen Jewish organizations. But in this real life situation, a Jewish woman was stopped as a potential security threat in an airport in New York because she was reading a Jewish newspaper.

Will anyone be up in arms?

 

Boston Bomber Implicated in 9/11/11 Triple Murder, including 2 Jews

Thursday, October 24th, 2013

As The Jewish Press reported six months ago, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the older brother implicated in the Boston Marathon Bombings may well have been involved in what had been an unsolved triple murder case which also took place in the Boston area.

And what The Jewish Press noted, but which had not yet been widely discussed, is that not only did Tamerlan Tsarnaev know all three of the young men whose throats were slashed open, but that the murders occurred on September 11, 2011, exactly ten years to the day after the Islamist assault on America which resulted in the murder of innocent thousands.

Well, now we have a piece of real evidence linking Tsarnaev to the triple murder.

“According to Todashev, Tamerlan Tsarnaev participated in the Waltham homicides,” federal prosecutors said in a court filing, though they did not elaborate.

According to federal prosecutors in the criminal case against the Dzokhar Tsarnaev, the younger, sole surviving suspect in the Boston Marathon Bombings, a friend of the older brother Tamerlan, Ibragim Todashev, said that Tamerlan “participated in the Waltham homicides.”

Todashev had been a person of interest connected to the Tsarnaevs whom federal authorities were pursuing, but on the day he was interrogated by an FBI agent, he was shot and killed.  That death remains under investigation.

The information became public this week because Dzokhar’s lawyers filed a motion to compel the release of evidence in the possession of the prosecution, including information about the Waltham triple murders. Prosecutors opposed the motion.

Erik Weissman, 31 of Waltham, Raphael Terek, 37, of Waltham and Brendan Mess, 25, of Waltham were murdered on September 11, 2011. Terek and Weissman were Jewish, and Weissman was a graduate of Brandeis University, a Jewish-affiliated school also located in Waltham.At the time of the murders, authorities seemed quick to dismiss the gruesome murder as a drug-deal gone bad, but the fact that there was no sign of forced entry and that more than $7000 worth of marijuana was spread around the three bodies belied this tack.

No one seemed to even notice that the murders took place on the tenth anniversary of the September 11th attacks.

But after the Tsarnaevs were identified as suspects in the Marathon bombings, people who noted at the time of the murders that Tamerlan, who had been very close with one of the three murder victims, never showed up for the funeral or any memorial service, and people began to talk.

Although there has been speculation before that Todashev named Tamerlan Tsarnaev as having been involved in the Waltham triple murder, the documents filed in court this week provided the first official evidence.

Todashev’s death at the hands of an FBI agent who had been interrogating him initially resulted in an outpouring of sympathy for the slain Chechen former wrestler.  However, a former live-in girlfriend’s complaints of abuse by U.S. authorities clashed with the mourning by someone claiming to be Todashev’s widow who had remained overseas during Todashev’s tenure in the U.S.

Of course, there are advocates for people involved in all kinds of unpleasant business. The Florida branch of the Council for American-Islamic Relations, CAIR, requested the US Department of Justice open an investigation into the allegations of civil rights violations and abuse by the FBI of Todashev’s friends.

Can’t Say Terrorism, Can’t Say War on Terror, Islamist Now a No-No

Saturday, April 6th, 2013

It seems to have started during the spring of 2009, when Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano first appeared in her new role at a congressional hearing.

Some close listeners of her testimony realized that while Napolitano was head of the U.S. government’s cabinet-level department created specifically in response to the terrorist attacks against this country on September 11, 2001, the word “terrorism” never crossed her lips.

The English online version of the German newspaper Der Spiegel interviewed Napolitano shortly after her maiden congressional speech, and asked her about that glaring inconsistency.

Napolitano explained that by substituting the phrase “man-made disaster” for “terrorism,” the Obama administration was demonstrating “that we want to move away from the politics of fear.”

In the four years since the word “terrorism” was dropped from the play list, several other terms or words have been placed on the “no speak list.”

For example, during the George W. Bush administration the U.S. was fighting something called “the war on terror.”  But “terror” and “war” are both such negative terms that the Obama administration gave it the heave-ho,  replacing it with “overseas contingency operations.”

This week a new change in parlance was introduced.  Although the U.S. government is not responsible for this change, it will have at least as enormous an impact on how we speak as if it were ordered from the White House, probably even greater.

The Associated Press Stylebook is an extensive compilation of standardized terminology, abbreviations, capitalizations and other information journalists use to convey information.  It is the most widely-used resource for journalists, and therefore the way in which it chooses to define words or concepts has an enormous ripple effect on the public’s understanding of many subtle and not so subtle issues.  The Stylebook also plays a major role in determining when, whether and how new words or concepts enter the general lexicon.

For example, in the 2010 edition of the AP Stylebook, a new section was added on social media, for the first time addressing how “Twitter” and “Facebook” can be used by journalists and therefore how it will be introduced to consumers of news.  That new section also was responsible for officially transforming the word website from a two-word phrase to one word.

From a report in Politico on Friday, April 6, we learned there’s more change afoot.  While there has already been some discussion of the change in reference to “illegal aliens” to “undocumented workers,” another change has thus far received less attention.  This changed has been traced directly to campaigning by the Council on American-Islamic Relations against the use of a term it described as pejorative.

In a January CAIR press release, the organization which describes itself as a Muslim civil rights group, but which government officials have described as a front-group for Hamas, was unhappy with the way the AP Stylebook defined “Islamist.”

The AP added the term “Islamist” to its Stylebook in 2012.  The term was defined:

Islamist—Supporter of government in accord with the laws of Islam. Those who view the Quran as a political model encompass a wide range of Muslims, from mainstream politicians to militants known as jihadi.

CAIR found that definition objectionable, and urged the AP to drop the term from its Stylebook.

The AP went even further.

Although “Islamist” is still a defined term in the AP Stylebook, reporters are now admonished not to use it to mean something objectionable.  The entry for “Islamist” now reads, with emphasis added by Politico:

An advocate or supporter of a political movement that favors reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam. Do not use as a synonym for Islamic fighters, militants, extremists or radicals, who may or may not be Islamists. Where possible, be specific and use the name of militant affiliations: al-Qaida-linked, Hezbollah, Taliban, etc. Those who view the Quran as a political model encompass a wide range of Muslims, from mainstream politicians to militants known as jihadi.

CAIR issued a press release Friday, April 5, welcoming the change by AP, and calling the Stylebook revision a “step in the right direction.”

NPR’s Jihad

Sunday, March 10th, 2013

NPR is hard at work using our taxpayer dollars to advance the propaganda of jihadists. The Goebbels-style ad campaign of Hamas-CAIR is getting enormous support from an outrageously compromised NPR. You can put a happy child’s face on mass murder, but it’s still mass murder.

DC ad jihad

Our campaign (right) makes the point that minimizing jihad (by CAIR) is minimizing mass murder and cultural annihilation.

NPR’s Monique Parsons goes overboard in her fervor to please Hamas in America (CAIR). She hits the ground running in her first sentence about “an advertising battle going on over the Arabic term jihad.” It’s not that “Arabic” is wrong. But it’s misleading. Jihad is a religious mandate, and it’s an Islamic term, it is a religious term. Arabic is the language of Islam.

Parsons at NPR says our ads “present jihadists as violent.” Uh, no, they are violent. They are killing non-Muslims and more secular Muslims at mind numbing speed. Counter jihad blogs cover the mass slaughter, subjugation, oppression and misogyny every day from Nigeria to Thailand, Ethiopia to Bangladesh, Egypt to Zanzibar, Mali, Malaysia, Iran, et al.

Parsons goes on to make the segment about the duel meaning of jihad. Tell that to the hundreds of millions of victims of jihadi wars, land appropriations, cultural annihilations and enslavements. The sick slave mentality of the media is vomit-inducing.

Parsons happily goes along with Hamas-CAIR’s ruse of using women and children as human shields, as a prop for jihad. The tragic irony here is that countless women and children are victims of the jihadists war on innocent civilians. The horror. Here again we see the poisonous fruit of the left’s primitive motives — they work only off emotion and not reason. Parson feels and thus acts, despite the body count.

Parsons never mentions CAIR’s un-indicted co-conspirator status in the largest Hamas funding trial in our nation’s history or that the US government named them a Muslim Brotherhood proxy in that same criminal court case. Many members of their leadership are serving jail time for terror related offenses, but in Parsons’s way of thinking (I should say feeling), this is clearly unrelated to a news story on jihad. Got that?

But this is another reason why our ads are so effective. These ads expose the grotesque bias of a media aligned with the jihad force. This may get reporters in with their leftist peers and compromised editors, but the millions of Americans and freedom lovers abroad think these tools are idiots. They know. The tens of thousands who showed up at our ground zero mosque protests know. The millions of Americans who opposed it and support anti-sharia laws know.

Listen to the NPR radio report here or read it here. It could have been written by Qaradawi himself.

Visit Atlas Shrugs

Islam in the United States

Wednesday, February 13th, 2013

John Walker Lindh is a citizen of the United States who was born in Washington, D.C. in the year 1981. Lindh was not born a MuslimHe converted when he was 16 years old and then traveled to Yemen in order to learn Arabic. In 2000, he traveled to Afghanistan and underwent an educational and training course in al-Farouq, an al-Qaeda training camp. He made contact with the organization of Mujahadeen in Pakistan, and was caught in 2001 in Afghanistan serving as a jihadist with the Taliban. He was convicted of fighting for an illegal organization and sentenced to twenty years in the Terre Haute prison in the state of Indiana.

In prison, Lindh continued to preach to his fellow prisoners and exhort them to be persistent in their jihad against the United States and the jihad to enforce Muslim Shari’a law on all of humanity. As a result, the prison authorities limited his participation in public prayer to only one time per week, on Friday. He appealed to the court, demanding to be allowed to participate in public prayer five times a day. The judge of the federal court, Jane Magnus-Stinson, found – contrary to the opinion of the prison authorities – that despite the fact that Lindh does not recognize the legality of the American court or the authority of her honor the judge, he nevertheless has the right to pray in public and to meet with his comrades five times every day, even if it means that the prison must beef up its security arrangements in order to accommodate his wishes.

This is not an isolated case. The United States has been driven for the past several years by “political correctness,” which censors any reference to a person’s faith, even if this faith instigates him to wage holy war against the United States. According to this approach, if someone claims that the United States is the “little Satan,”  Americans must accept this characterization as correct and legitimate, and if the American is uncomfortable with this, he should do some soul searching to ascertain the reason that caused the Other – who is clearly miserable, hungry and neglected because of the crimes of the United States – to regard him as Satan.

Political correctness is what dictates conduct in the highest echelons of leadership in the United States: most citizens of the country consider it to be unacceptable to say that President Obama comes from a Muslim family, and believe that it is not legitimate to refer  to Obama’s religion in any way. This is why the campaign against Obama that was based on this fact failed to prevent him from being re-elected.

The federal investigative bodies have also been seized by American political correctness; and two years ago, in keeping with instructions  from above, training programs for the FBI agents and other investigative agencies were changed, so that today, an interrogator is forbidden to relate to the religion or beliefs of someone under investigation, even if his faith or beliefs actually incite him  to murderous jihad against the state. Authorities of the state forbid the use of the expression “Islamic terror,” and laundered expressions such as “ideological violence” must be used instead.

The slaughter that  Major Nidal Malik Hasan perpetrated against his comrades at the Fort Hood base in Texas in order to prevent them from going to Afghanistan, is described by the authorities as “workplace violence.” For the adherents of political correctness, the fact that Hasan was in contact with Anwar Awlaki, the Yemeni-American terrorist who was subsequently eliminated, does not contradict the theory of political correctness that characterizes Islam as a religion of peace and love, hugs and kisses. “Islam” – so they believe – is based on the Arabic word “salam,” which means “peace,” because the superficiality that characterizes the American media discourages people from looking it up and discovering that the real meaning of the word “Islam” is “surrender” or “submission.”

Together with an American colleague, an attorney by the name of David Yerushalmi, I published an article about two years ago, “Shari’a and Violence in Mosques of the United States.”  This article is based on analysis of data and material that was collected in approximately one hundred mosques across the United States. Included in this material are two interesting pamphlets, in clear English. One is “40 Hadiths on Jihad” (a hadith is part of the Islamic oral tradition that relates to the sayings and actions of the Prophet Muhammad). This and this booklet is a song of praise to jihad, to the jihadist and to his reward in the world to come. Jihad in this booklet is not against illness, poverty, neglect and corruption, and not even against the evil inclination, but against anyone who is not Muslim, and implicitly, every American who does not convert to Islam.

Big Media’s Big Love On #MyJihad (Video)

Wednesday, February 6th, 2013

Watch this long and silly CNN piece with no connection to reality at all, or to the 270 million victims of jihadi wars, land appropriations and enslavement. Why didn’t the silly reporter ask Nihad Awad about his attendance with the annihilationist Ahmadinejad at the OIC sharia summit in Cairo this week?

The media’s love affair with the Hamas-CAIR #myjihad campaign continues unabated. The New York Daily News ran this lengthy puff piece on this insulting and bizarre propaganda program — no mention of my jihad in getting #myjihad campaign up in Chicago, San Francisco and DC. Chicago caved (because those fascists had to respect my First Amendment rights), San Francisco is still deciding and DC is demanding our ads have a disclaimer, while the Hamas-CAIR ads do not. That is discrimination.

Look at this NY Daily News piece. They run every Hamas-CAIR ad in the series but not one of our campaign on the real jihad.

War of words: Muslim activists trying to wrestle ‘jihad’ away from extremists and critics 

The ‘My Jihad’ campaign portrays jihad as a personal, internal struggle to become better people. But the movement, sponsored by Chicago’s chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, has inspired a counter-campaign to connect the word to violence and terrorism. Carol Kuruvilla / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

Visit Atlas Shrugs.

Hotel Owner who Kicked Jews Out Hosting Anti-Jihadists

Friday, January 25th, 2013

In 2012 the Jewish Press reported on the successful lawsuit against the Muslim owner of a swanky Santa Monica hotel who, while exclaiming, “Get the [expletive deleted] Jews out of my pool,” had her employees do just that.  The plaintiffs had been at the hotel at a fundraiser they hosted for a pro-Israel organization, the Friends of the Israel Defense Forces (FIDF).

The jury found the hotel and its owner, Tehmina Adaya, had committed “particularly reprehensible” acts of discrimination against the plaintiffs, and specifically, that Adaya had acted with “malice, oppression and fraud,” slapping her with punitive damages.

When word got out about what Adaya had done to the FIDF volunteers, members of  the Los Angeles office of the ZOA planned a protest in front of the hotel.  Adaya met that public relations protest by sending an underling to promise the activists she would host an event for them at her expense within a year in exchange for cancelling the protest.  They accepted the offer and called off the protest.

When the trial ended and the jury returned its verdict finding that Adaya had discriminated against Jews, she and the ZOA group issued their agreed-upon statements.  In hers, Adaya said she was opposed to anti-Semitism.  Adaya also claimed she had not done any of the things she had been accused of, or had been found liable for.  The ZOA LA statement included, “we believe that her statement exhibits the Jewish value of teshuva, repentance.”

As Miles Lozano, the Shangri-La public relations manager told the Jewish Press at the time, “the steps Adaya is taking are intended to address the Shangri-La’s public relations issues, whereas the court case dealt only with the legal issues.”

Adaya is still working with a bifurcated plan: on the legal front, she has appealed the ruling by the jury that she committed particularly reprehensible acts of discrimination against Jews, and at the same time, she is footing the bill for an event which is now a fundraiser for the new organization of the former ZOA director, Orit Arfa (Arfa was fired by the ZOA in the fall).  Strikingly, that event is headlining two of the world’s most renown and controversial anti-Jihadi activists, Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs.com, and Robert Spencer, of Jihadwatch.com.

Geller garnered a great deal of attention over the past several months by running a series of ads in New York City, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C. transit systems which state: “In any war between the civilized man and the savage, choose civilized man.  Support Israel. Defeat Jihad.” Muslim groups such as Council on American-Islamic Relations, Islamic Society of North America, Muslim Public Affairs Council and others were outraged and pushed back hard.  In September, Mona Eltahawy, an Egyptian-American activist, was arrested for vandalizing one of Geller’s posters in New York.

When asked how she felt about being hosted by someone who had engaged in such reprehensible acts of discrimination against Jews, Geller told the Jewish Press,

“The public renunciation by Adaya of one of the most egregious and monstrous acts of anti-Semitism in modern times is something to celebrate.  She is underwriting the cost of a gala costume ball honoring two of America’s leading critics of Islamic anti-Semitism, and at a Purim event, perhaps this is Haman avenged!  ‘Cause it’s the same hate, different era.”

When one of the plaintiffs in the case against the hotel was asked about the Shangri-La Purim party, the response was not as enthusiastic.  The plaintiff told the Jewish Press that she and the other plaintiffs found the response to Adaya and the Shangri-La Hotel by some in the pro-Israel community to be “deeply disappointing.”  Why?  The plaintiff gave several reasons:

First, despite what the ZOA director wrote at the time, there was no teshuva by Adaya – she is still claiming not to have done anything wrong and everyone knows the steps for teshuva are first, acknowledgement that one acted wrongly, and second, apologizing to the one wronged.  To this day Adaya and her hotel have not apologized to the plaintiffs.  But second, given that the FIDF was the wronged party, why isn’t Adaya having a fundraiser for the FIDF?  Instead, the Purim Gala is to help promote a new organization created by the former ZOA employee who falsely claimed Adaya had done teshuva.

There are other ways to divine the sincerity of Adaya’s gesture.  Court papers filed by her new attorneys on January 7, offered several reasons to justify Adaya being given a new trial.  Much emphasis was placed on the “fact” that one of the jurors hid that she was Jewish.  According to the filed papers, Adaya is claiming that one of the jurors “failed to disclose her religious background, Jewish,” during the jury selection process.  Two problems with that: there’s no legal bar to a Jewish juror sitting on a case about anti-Semitic discrimination, and Adaya’s lawyers never asked the juror whether she was Jewish during the jury selection process.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/news/anti-semitic-shangri-la-owner-hosting-top-jihadi-fighters/2013/01/25/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: