• Why Jihad Watch?
  • About Robert Spencer and Staff Writers
  • FAQ
  • Books
  • Muhammad
  • Islam 101
  • Privacy

Jihad Watch

Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

Red Pill for Catholics

Dec 8, 2016 3:10 pm By Mary A. Nicholas

Interreligious Dialogue

Beneficial Catholic-Muslim dialogue requires a firm grasp of history and the other parties’ language. Participants have a duty to truth, not political correctness, as well as a duty of diligence and conscientious care for their own flock.

Moreover, since the discovery of The Muslim Brotherhood’s 1991 Explanatory Memorandum: On the General Strategic Goal for the Group, which details its strategy of penetration of Western organizations for the ultimate goal of establishing a global Islamic state (their words), dialogue necessitates prudence. According to Vatican II’s Nostra Aetate: “The Church, therefore, urges her sons to enter with prudence and charity into discussion and collaboration with members of other religions.”

Analysis of the Explanatory Memorandum led former Pentagon analyst Stephen Coughlin to give this advice: “When conducting [interfaith] outreach with organizations identified as being a party to the ‘strategic goals’ identified in the Memorandum, the gain/loss assessment of associating with them should be undertaken in light of their clearly stated hostile intent…To undertake outreach…without knowledge of their objectives is to run the extreme risk of strategic manipulation….”

The Brotherhood’s goal is “a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers.” The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in Egypt in 1928 by Hasan al-Banna, who coined the term “Industry of Death,” claiming that for a nation that perfects death and knows how to die, Allah gives rewards in both this world and the next.

Interreligious dialogue has been built on the rotting sands of cultural Marxism. In fact, a case could be made that cultural Marxism with its political correctness is the first stage in dhimmitude. The path to shariah in the U.S. is being built on these same sands, using Gramsci as a model, as Lafif Lakhdar, an Islamic scholar, acknowledged:

The Muslim Brotherhood implement the strategy of Gramsci. Gramsci was an Italian philosopher. When he was in prison he believed that the working class could not gain political rule, unless it gained cultural rule. In other words, they should spread their culture among the public, by the means of education and the media everywhere…

Against this background, what is the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB)’s Catholic-Muslim outreach?

Back in 1993, the USCCB discussed its commitment to dialogue for “eradicating misunderstanding and for the pursuit of common values,” saying that the bishops and Muslim leaders “reject terrorism-religion link,” thereby prematurely fulfilling the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC)’s goal of making “Islamophobia” a criminal offense and limiting the freedom of speech. They advised people to “contact Abdurahman Alamoudi” for further information. Under Hillary Clinton, Alamoudi became an “Islamic Affairs Advisor” and had great influence at the White House, Pentagon, and State Department. He also began the American Muslim Armed Forces and Veterans Affairs Council, vetting Muslim chaplains for service in the U.S. Armed Forces, including al-Qaeda cleric Anwar al-Awlaki. A public supporter of the terrorist organizations Hamas and Hizballah, he was convicted in an al-Qaeda assassination plot to kill the Saudi crown prince, and is now in federal prison.

The 2003 Mid-Atlantic Dialogue focused on the war on terror and its impact on Muslims. Co-sponsor of the dialogue was “the Islamic Circle of North America.”(ICNA), cited in the Explanatory Memorandum as one of the “organizations of our friends,” i.e., allies in jihad. Another communiqué from the USCCB said that additional dialogues were “co-planned with the American Muslim Council.” Founded by Alamoudi, the American Muslim Council was at the time “the premier, mainstream Muslim group in Washington.”

In 2006, the USCCB issued “Revelation: Catholic and Muslim Perspectives,” which said:

Through dialogue and improved cooperation, Muslims and Catholics can develop a just and peaceful society in the spirit of the teachings of the Gospel and the Qur’an. Both Jesus and Muhammed loved and cared for all whom they met, especially the poor and oppressed; their teachings and example call for solidarity with the poor, oppressed, homeless, hungry, and needy in today’s world.

No historical sources were given for the USCCB’s statement that “Muhammed loved and cared for all” whom he met. On the contrary, historical sources have documented that Muhammed had a disciplined and specific means of spreading Islam. St. Thomas Aquinas, “the Angelic Doctor,” who was distinguished for his synthesis of faith and reason, Summa Contra Gentiles, noted that Islam was “spread by the sword,” not love or rational argumentation. He concluded: “It is thus clear that those who place any faith in his words believe foolishly.” Is the USCCB attempting to say that the spirits of the Bible and the Qur’an are similar? This is not only against reason, but also distorts Christ’s message and is an attempt at syncretism.

Dr. Sayyid M. Syeed was part of a delegation that greeted Pope Benedict in 2008. He is National Director of the Office for Interfaith & Community Alliances for the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), which was named an “unindicted co-conspirator” in the Holy Land Foundation trial. A naturalized American citizen from Pakistan, he was a board member of the Dar al-Hijrah mosque in Falls Church, Va. Congregants have included Omar Abu Ali (al Qaeda), and Nawaf al-Hazmi and Hani Hanjour, who crashed Flight 77 into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. The mosque’s phone number was found in the Hamburg apartment of Mohamed Atta.

Syeed admitted: “Our job is to change the Constitution of America.” He didn’t add that shari’ah would take its place, but that is what his audience would understand.

The FBI chart “Muslim Brotherhood in North America. FBI Certified Terrorist Network in Our Schools and Communities” shows both ISNA and ICNA as part of the Muslim Brotherhood network.

Da’wah

A 2014 Midwest Muslim-Catholic Dialogue discussed missionary activity by Muslims and Catholics. Sayyid Syeed presided. The NCCB’s announcement read: “Midwest Muslim-Catholic Dialogue Reflects on…Mission and Da’wah in the United States.”

It is stunning that the NCCB would place the word “mission” in the same line as “da’wah.” The unspoken message is that mission and da’wah have comparable meanings. In the Catholic Church, mission is associated with spreading Christ’s message, in accord with his words: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you…” (Mt. 28:19-20).

Coughlin, a Catholic attorney and expert on Islamic law, as well as part of the Intelligence directorate of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, points out that da’wah should be thought of not as an invitation to Islam, but as “preparation for jihad.” Did the U.S. bishops mean to say that mission and preparation for jihad are equivalent? Coughlin noted that national security personnel have made similar mistakes with language, stemming from a misunderstanding of an Islamic point of law or term of art and engaging in an “erroneous mirror-imaging of what might appear to be a similar concept in Christianity or Judaism.” (Coughlin, Steven, Catastrophic Failure Blindfolding America in the Face of Jihad, (Washington: Center for Security Policy, 2015), p, 128).

A USCCB document, “Understanding Islam for Catholic Educators,” is meant to serve as an “introduction for Catholic educators who are tasked with teaching the rudiments of Islam to secondary school students and parish leaders responsible for general adult religious education programs. Though ‘Christians do not accord Muhammad the same status as the biblical prophets,’ they ‘may regard him as a prophetic figure on such issues as charity and the protection of the poor, widows and orphans.’”

There is no evidence that Muhammad was under the extraordinary influence of God, and many of his sayings are contrary to what Catholics hold to be the word of God. In the face of ISIS atrocities that they justify by invoking the Qur’an and Muhammad’s example, including crucifixions (cf. Qur’an 5:33), saying that Muhammad was a prophetic figure on such issues of charity and protection of the poor, widows and orphans, violates the law of non-contradiction.

The Qur’an states that Jews and Christians should be given the chance to submit to Islamic hegemony and pay a special tax, the jizyah, in return for the freedom to practice their religions. Those words meant this to Christians in Mosul: “Choose one of these: Islam, the sword, al-Jiziya (tax) or till Saturday to flee.”

Strategic deception

Deception—known under the broad term taqiyya, is a fundamental concept in Islam. Dr. Sami Mukaram, the foremost expert on taqiyya, said: “Taqiyya in order to dupe the enemy is permissible….using deceit as a religious and political weapon…they are allowed to lie about the nature of Islam in order to further their political goals, namely world conquest.”

According to Qur’an commentator Ibn Kathir, “believers are allowed to show friendship outwardly, but never inwardly” to disbelievers. Kathir added: “we smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.” For example, Muslims believe it is a great sin to acknowledge Christmas (since doing so validates Christianity, a different message than Islam).

What is the truth?

Faced with an abundance of evidence online and in the stark realities from New York to San Bernardino, Fort Hood and Orlando, what is the truth about Islam? The truth is that there is genocide of Christians in the Middle East by Islamic jihadists actiong in accord with Islamic teaching.  The truth for faithful Catholics and for the USCCB is that their fellow priest, 85-year-old Fr. Jacques Hamel, was killed in France by Islamic jihadis — for his faith. The truth is that this baby was targeted because he had been baptized. The truth is that Christians have been decapitated because of their faith, not for the color of their skin, sex, or nationality. All, even the babies, were killed for being Christian.

Dialogue cannot exist in a vacuum divorced from evidence, testimony from survivors, and reason. The truth is that we are engaged in a war. The Christians in the Middle East are being attacked by military regimes and jihad terrorist groups. In the U.S., we are fighting spiritual warfare against the shari’ah agenda of the Muslim Brotherhood and the political correctness that covers for that agenda. But make no mistake: the destruction of the Christian faith is for jihadis the ultimate aim of this war:

[Striking terror in the hearts of an enemy] is basically related to the strength or weakness of the human soul.  It can be instilled only if the opponent’s Faith is destroyed.  Psychological dislocation is temporary; spiritual dislocation is permanent. … To instill terror into the hearts of the enemy, it is essential, in the ultimate analysis, to dislocate his Faith.  An invincible Faith is immune to terror.  A weak Faith offers inroads to terror. (Malik, S. K., Quranic Concept of War)

Why is the Church in the U.S. selectively silent in the U.S. about the genocide of the Middle East Christians, our newest martyrs? The clergy from the Middle East have asked:

  • Father Douglas al Bazi, an Iraqi Catholic parish priest, who has scars from torture during his kidnapping, made a forceful intervention at Rimini on Islam. “There are many people who keep on telling us that ISIS has nothing to do with Mohammedanism. That is a lie and they make that statement with no evidence to support their untruthful utterance. In actual fact, all the evidence without exception – let me repeat that with greater emphasis on one word: ALL the evidence without exception – firmly and beyond doubt proves that ISIS is a perfectly valid expression of Mohammedan beliefs.”
  • In 2016, the Syrian Archbishop of Aleppo asked, “Why Are Your Bishops Silent?”: “Because the bishops are like you, raised in political correctness. But Jesus was never politically correct, he was politically just!”
  • Cardinal Burke is one of the few who has spoken up.

Mary A. Nicholas is the author of a biography on Bella V. Dodd, and has written for American Thinker, Canada Free Press, and Homiletic and Pastoral Review. She taught for two years in Saudi Arabia, and has a degree in medicine and a master’s degree in theology from the John Paul II Institute. The title Red Pill is taken from Major Steven Coughlin’s famous “Red Pill Briefs.”

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Follow me on Facebook

Filed Under: Catholic Church, Featured, willful ignorance Tagged With: Explanatory Memorandum


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Comments

  1. Wellington says

    Dec 8, 2016 at 3:28 pm

    This article by Mary A. Nicholas should be read by every Catholic, for that matter by every Christian, though of course it won’t be and thus Islam’s greatest ally, i.e., ignorance of Islam, will come through for Islam again.

    • John C. Barile says

      Dec 8, 2016 at 7:45 pm

      Yes.

    • EYESOPEN says

      Dec 8, 2016 at 9:14 pm

      Agree Wellington. This article is excellent.

    • Kay says

      Dec 8, 2016 at 9:36 pm

      I agree.
      This is ultimately a spiritual battle. The political correctness that continues in our churches, even after the election, is serving to weaken faith . . . or perhaps it is separating sheep and goats?

    • Tom says

      Dec 9, 2016 at 8:28 am

      I was raised Roman Catholic so I think I can intelligently speak about the Church. Catholicism is spiraling down the drain as the world moves towards secularism. Add to that the past pediphile problems and the reluctance of men and women to join the ranks of priests/brothers and nuns, you clearly have a diminishing and ultimately failing organization. South America and Mexico is the new hope region for the Catholic Church, hence the reason for the new Pope.

      Recently, the Pope had the chance to galvanize Catholics and recruit an entire new generation of followers, if he had stood up to the societal cancer of Islam, especially after the beheading of a Catholic priest with a hacksaw. Instead he turned the other cheek and capitulated to the terrorist religion.

      I am no longer a practicing Catholic as I attended Catholic school for ten long, hard, extremely disciplined years and came to despise the nuns and brothers. If you are not familiar, nuns [women] and brothers [men] teach school but cannot perform Mass. So I am one of the many disenfranchised Catholics that no longer support the church and also as evidenced by my posting here, equally despise Islam.

      The Pope has a chance to bring me, and many like me back into the fold. All the Church needs to do is to become the beacon of hope for America and denounce the abomination that is Islam and the Muslim society.

      Bishops, here is your wake up call. I hope you are listening.

      • Bart says

        Dec 9, 2016 at 10:47 am

        Think about what you are saying. Read the New Testament – there were wolves among the sheep from the very beginning (remember Judas?). Read St. Paul’s and St. Peter’s letters.
        We just happen to be living in a time when an alarming number of priests, bishops, cardinals (and the current Pope) are immoral and/or don’t really believe what they say they believe.
        If there was a widespread scandal among mathematicians, would you stop believing 2+2=4?
        The fact that there are evil, faithless, spineless men in powerful positions in the Church cannot alter the Truth (despite their best efforts).
        Get back to Mass – study Church history pre-1960. That is what brought me back after being a lapsed Catholic for more than 20 years.

        • Malcolm (SouthAfria) says

          Dec 9, 2016 at 12:30 pm

          Have to agree with you.

          The reality is that the human person has fault lines, there is no perfect Church, as the reformation itself, is a living and at the same time, a corroding proof of this, even though I consider them as separated brothers . However there is a true Church, created by Jesus.

          If the standard of participation in the Catholic Church, were on the human person and not on the spiritual truth, my position could be similar to those on the outside rather than inside.

          Spineless or those who have the conviction to the truth, like weeds in the wind, are no better those corrupt clergy or religious, we tend to criticize.

          So Bart, welcome back, you are courageous, Catholics are borne for combat, we have to do this for the rest of our lives, we fight for truth and you have spoken.

      • Kepha says

        Dec 9, 2016 at 6:39 pm

        Tom, what do you think of Jesus Christ? I got wounded by a theological liberal Protestant church when I was young, but I am humbly thankful to a merciful God who let me realize that the church is not and never has been the same thing as Jesus Christ (an insight at the heart of traditional Protestantism).

        There are lots of Christians who think this way:

        When we are taught that God is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, we cannot accept as “prophetic” a book that accuses us of worship God, Jesus, and Mary.

        When we see that the whole witness of the Bible is that we are brought to God through mediation and sacrifice (which culminates in the work of Jesus Christ for us), we cannot accept as “prophetic” a religion that thinks that denying the crucifixion and actual death of the Messiah thereby somehow honors him. After all, if Jesus did not really die for us, he could not have been resurrected, either.

        When we have been taught that the weapons of our warfare are spiritual, we cannot accept as “prophetic” a religion that glorifies all aggressive warfare done in its name.

        While we disagree theologically with our Jewish neighbors, we see them as victims of false witness when the Qur’an says they confess Ezra as the Son of God as we Christians confess Jesus.

        Some of us “dialogue” with Muslims, but make it a point to affirm the sufficiency of the Old and New Testaments, that Jesus Christ is truly God incarnate, and that he truly paid the wages of sin for us on the cross and was actually raised from the dead (where Muhammad, by his own followers’ admission, remains).

        I hope your disappointment with the Roman church does not mean a rejection of the Gospel.

    • awake says

      Dec 9, 2016 at 10:24 am

      Agreed.

    • A Harris USA says

      Dec 9, 2016 at 4:25 pm

      Wellington, the fact is that that POPE so called, has abandoned his flock… I left the Roman Church, I am very much a Catholic, but now worship at an Orthodox Church. They KNOW what Islam is, and they do not like it. It is the devil’s own evil vessel, as I was told by a Orthodox priest.. Then I knew, where my worship time and energy would be spent….. Good-bye Roman church, you have said good-bye to the faith of our fathers………..

      • gravenimage says

        Dec 9, 2016 at 5:54 pm

        A Harris, you have made this claim before–but the fact is that the Catholic Church is not the only one involved in appeasement of Islam. This is also a problem with many Protestants, and despite your apparent belief, it is a problem with the Orthodox Church, as well:

        “West should learn from Russia to accept Muslim refugees – Patriarch Kirill”

        http://www.interfax-religion.com/?act=news&div=12354

        The sad fact is that no denomination is free from dhimmitude.

        Of course, there are good people in every denomination, as well–so if you are more comfortable with Orthodoxy, well and good. But if you are hoping for a consistent stand against Islam, I’m afraid you are–at this point, at least–out of luck.

  2. Stephanie says

    Dec 8, 2016 at 3:36 pm

    ‘… May Allah destroy them’ (Jews & Christians) https://quran.com/9/29-33

    • Stephanie says

      Dec 8, 2016 at 3:36 pm

      9:30

  3. Tradiguy says

    Dec 8, 2016 at 3:46 pm

    The Vatican 2 church is NOT the Catholic Church! Vatican 2 is the religious arm of the New World Order! The real Catholic Church was driven into the catacombs in 1968 when the rot started and the ‘smoke of Satan ‘ entered the Vatican. -. Bergolio is not a pope !! He is not even a Catholic let alone a ‘Pope’ He is a heretic and Catholics only have to know their faith and check some of the heretical and downright disgusting things he has said to prove it to themselves! But they don’t want to or can’t be bothered. Alex Jones tells it how it is about this creature- the truth comes from unexpected places they say!! This ecumenical crap with Muslims is just another misleading and utterly suicidal move by this man. He cares nothing for Christian life. Again, just check what he HASNT done and you’ll get your answer. Now his latest disgusting spew about coprafagia etc. What does this man have to do to prove he is of Satan not of God and we wonder why the world is in such a state? The continual holy sacrifice of the mass which kept evil at bay stopped to the greater extent in ’68 – now it has free range. The Catholic Church does exist and can be found but at the moment we have no Pope. He is leading the faithful into the biggest trap in history as indeed the New World Order is. He needs to be thrown out as an imposter and replaced with the religious equivalent of Trump who will revitalise the church and reinstall the holy orders as they should be but who in the hierarchy has the faith and strength to do it after being dummed down for 50yrs? God is in charge and God will use the Muslim to punish us for our apostasy. It’s already started!!

    • Wellington says

      Dec 8, 2016 at 5:10 pm

      Alex Jones does stumble into the truth some times but, in the final analysis, he’s a nut job. I hope you realize he’s a 9/11 Truther,, thinks the government was behind the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995 and also believes the moon landings by NASA are fake.

      As for what you said about the current Pope, he’s not some kind of anti-Pope as you stated, he’s “merely” a fool. Occasionally you do get a fool as Pope. Not very often but occasionally. Unfortunately, the Catholic world has one now.

      As for the New World Order crap, give that a rest too. No need for conspiracy theories when a simple explanation will do, for instance that a sorry-ass portion of mankind, including some who attain great power even though well educated, are, effectively, useful idiots. Pope Francis, the current PMs of the UK and Canada, Chancellor Merkel and Obama come to mind here.

      Think Occam’s razor, will ya’. Give it a shot.

      • Tradiguy says

        Dec 8, 2016 at 5:54 pm

        Wellington, you are of course entitled to your opinion but your comment regarding AJ being a ‘nut job’ I must protest. It’s a fact now proven and indeed admitted by some left wing media and doubters like yourself that not only has Alex proved his opponents liars but most of what he has said in the past has already come true!! So you don’t believe that the Free masons have a plan to enslave the world and destroy the Catholic Church? That’s a pity because it’s there for anyone who wishes to open their eyes and see. It is documented and the New World Order is a real threat to mankind and is real. If they, ( the NWO) can put people to sleep then they will- it serves their purpose nicely. If you think this creature in the Vatican is just ‘foolish’ then you do so if it makes you feel safer but don’t be surprised when the future shows you different. A Muslim ( an infidel) helping to serve a mass in the Vatican is a total slap in the face for our Lord. Oh yes! It has happened! I am a Brit and what the American People have done is seismic- AJ is being attacked continuously- that shows me he must be doing something right. Try to listen to him and his guests- it might just be that you will think about what he is saying and everything he does say can be proved unlike the mainstream media who are just a bunch of self serving cretins and liars. Their mantra is’ Why let the truth interfere with a good story!!’

        • Tradiguy says

          Dec 8, 2016 at 5:58 pm

          Oh and by the way, 9/11 was an inside job- again-all the proof is there if you want to find it

        • Angemon says

          Dec 12, 2016 at 6:57 am

          tradiguy posted:

          “Oh and by the way, 9/11 was an inside job- again-all the proof is there if you want to find it”

          Answer me this then: what did the American government had to win by staging 9/11?

        • gravenimage says

          Dec 8, 2016 at 6:12 pm

          Tradiguy wrote:

          Oh and by the way, 9/11 was an inside job- again-all the proof is there if you want to find it
          ………………………….

          Just another twit who would rather believe that his own government is murdering its citizens than that Jihad is a threat.

          Is George Bush–or Mossad, or the Illuminati, or what have you–also responsible for all 29,854 Jihad terror attacks, all over the world, just since 9/11? How plausible is that?

          And why would Muslims all over the world support Jihad terror, if it were really being promulgated by Israel or the Free Masons?

        • Wellington says

          Dec 8, 2016 at 7:45 pm

          Free Masons in addition to the New World Order? Seek help fast, Tradiguy, although I think you are probably beyond repair.

          And nuts likes you don’t help the cause of Jihad Watch. Indeed, you are a hindrance. Oh, I support your right to post your nutty stuff but I sure wish you would choose another site than JW to do so.

        • Oliver says

          Dec 9, 2016 at 9:10 pm

          Tradiguy–The Free Masons are A FRATERNAL ORGANIZATION. AND THEY SUPPORT THEIR MEMBERS ( AS BEST THEY CAN) AND THEIR COMMUNITIES.

          They beleive in One Supreme Being. They have no interest in running the world.

          Past members included George Washington ( who was sworn in as President on a Masonic Bible); President Harry Truman; I beleive Benjamin Franklin; and (I beleive) at least one of the Presidents Roosevelt.

          Plus other notables in politics; the arts and religion. In the US and in Europe, as well as in Asia, Israel and other regions of the world.

          The Shriners, a branch of Free Masonry, has hospitals-for burned children and crippled children. NO CHARGE TO THE FAMILIES- AND THERE IS NO DISCRIMINATION BASED ON GENDER; RELIGION OR COLOR.

          ( My father was a Mason, as was my brother and myself; and most of my uncles. My father was alo a Shriner, and got -that I knew of-AT LEAST ONE NEGRO-NOW AFRICAN AMERICAN- CHILD-INTO A SHRINERS HOSPITAL. The family had no money and no insurance. Not an issue. the child was admitted; given top care- and THE SHRINERS PAID FOR THE FAMILY TO VISIT- WHILE THE CHILD WAS IN THE HOSPITAL- TRANSPORTATION; ACCOMMODATIONS AND FOOD.

          No charge

          I agree with Wellington.

      • Angemon says

        Dec 8, 2016 at 6:06 pm

        Infowars/Prison Planet pick up stuff that the MSM wouldn’t touch with a 10-ft pole, I’ll give them that. They are, however, hopelessly undermined by their insistence on an overarching narrative invariably involving globalists/illuminati conspiracies, so pretty much every analysis they make ends up being slanted on a very marked direction, and genuine news are often presented in such a way that completely detracts from whatever merits they would possess if presented in an unbiased way (or, at least, as little biased as humanely possible). Inflammatory click-bait titles that end up not describing what’s in the article is par for the course in this age of Internet, but presenting analyses and opinions as facts is simply a capital sin in news reporting, and the reason why the trust in the MSM is in an all-time low in the US.

        • Chris says

          Dec 8, 2016 at 7:02 pm

          I agree. I believe those entities have great potential to act as a corrective measure, despite AJ’s obsession with guns and tyrannical government. I like the fact that they have almost no filter, but at the same time I think they need to change their speech and remove some of the emotionalism. Some of the younger ones need to tone down their arrogance. As you say all this can undermine what they’re trying to do. I’m not a CT, however, I do think that the US gov has the moral capacity to kill it’s own citizens (even on a large scale). I haven’t looked into these theories myself. Rabbit holes are very time consuming. I put it in the realm of possibility.

        • gravenimage says

          Dec 8, 2016 at 7:53 pm

          I would never say that these loons don’t have the right to spew their stuff–of course they do. We also have to right to counter their bs.

      • Peggy says

        Dec 8, 2016 at 8:07 pm

        We can all look at the same evidence and come to different conclusions. This doesn’t mean that some of us a fools (you haven’t said that at all) and some see it all as it is.
        I don’t think that Alex Jones is a nut job at all. He has been taken out of context and his words completely distorted by some media to make him look that way.

        I do believe that 9/11 was Muslim executed but I also believe that the government had a part in it as well. There is no explanation why all the planes were grounded immediately but some were allowed to leave and those carried Saudies who had connection to Bin Laden.
        FBI should have interrogated them and investigated fully but they were the only people allowed to leave the country. It’s a big why?
        Experts have spoken about the way the buildings were brought down and Trump who has expert knowledge of how building are designed and how they can be brought down has doubts about the official explanation.
        We already know that Clintons and Obamas are in colluding with the Saudis.
        I can’t make a definitive conclusion here but I do believe that there is a lot more to this and only in about 60 or 70 years when documents are declassified will be find out more.

        Every government has bumped off their own for various reasons. As far as thousands of other terror attacks around the world of course Jihadists are working on their own but in the case of 9/11 I am not dismissing the possibility that they had help.

        • Wellington says

          Dec 8, 2016 at 8:21 pm

          The {US} government had a part in 9/11 as well? Oh Peggy, please. Crap assessments like this constitute loon material and one knows this or should know it. Might as well think that there was a conspiracy to kill JFK, RFK or MLK. But wait, millions do, which is pathetic

          While you’re at it, don’t forget that American planes were lined up in strict order at Pearl Harbor on December 7,1941, thus making them far more vulnerable to easy destruction, and this too helps confirm that FDR knew about the PH attack before it happened. Right.

        • gravenimage says

          Dec 8, 2016 at 9:29 pm

          Peggy wrote:

          We can all look at the same evidence and come to different conclusions. This doesn’t mean that some of us a fools (you haven’t said that at all) and some see it all as it is.
          I don’t think that Alex Jones is a nut job at all. He has been taken out of context and his words completely distorted by some media to make him look that way.
          ……………………………..

          I’ve read Alex Jones’ own words, and seen videos of him. There is no “distortion” in this. His views on 9/11 are abundantly clear.

          More:

          I do believe that 9/11 was Muslim executed but I also believe that the government had a part in it as well.
          ……………………………..

          Oh, good grief. If you believe that America and George Bush are behind Jihad terror attacks, then why are you even here at Jihad Watch?

          More:

          Experts have spoken about the way the buildings were brought down and Trump who has expert knowledge of how building are designed and how they can be brought down has doubts about the official explanation.
          ……………………………..

          I’m afraid this is off base. Here’s what Trump had to say on the subject:

          “Donald Trump on 9/11: ‘You Will Find Out Who Really Knocked Down The World Trade Center'”

          http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/02/17/trump_you_will_find_out_who_really_knocked_down_the_world_trade_center_secret_papers_may_blame_saudis.html

          “…it wasn’t the Iraqis, you will find out who really knocked down the World Trade Center. Because they have papers in there that are very secret, you may find it’s the Saudis, okay?”

          The idea that Trump is here saying that the US brought down the towers and murdered her own people is completely mistaken–he is talking about which nationality of Muslim Jihadists were behind 9/11.

          His focus on the Saudis is likely correct–there is abundant evidence along these lines, much of which has also been covered here at Jihad Watch.

          More:

          Every government has bumped off their own for various reasons.
          ……………………………..

          Right–that “evil West”. Why take Muslims at their word, when it is some much more likely that George Bush had the “filthy Infidels” slaughtered? sarc/off

          If you believe that our own culture is no better than that of Islam, then why do you even care who wins?

          More:

          As far as thousands of other terror attacks around the world of course Jihadists are working on their own but in the case of 9/11 I am not dismissing the possibility that they had help.
          ……………………………..

          If the “evil West” was behind the granddaddy of all Jihad terror attacks, then why would they balk at London, or Paris, or Orlando, or Nice, or San Bernardino?

          Do you just consider the Americans evil, or do you think that other Western governments are in on Jihad attacks? What about your own Australia? Are they in on it, too?

          Peggy, I’ve always had a certain respect for your views, but this is just really disturbing.

        • Angemon says

          Dec 9, 2016 at 5:20 am

          Peggy posted:

          “I do believe that 9/11 was Muslim executed but I also believe that the government had a part in it as well.”

          Benghazi. DNC leaks. MSM and the Democratic party. The sugar-coating of the Iranian deal. All things that happened in the last 5 or so years. All things for which evidence was brought up by investigation and whistle-blowers or uncovered by the sheer arrogance of the perpetrators. 9/11 was over 15 years ago. Where are the whistle-blowers and the Freudian slips of those involved in an alleged conspiracy that would require a huge number of people on all levels?

          “FBI should have interrogated them and investigated fully but they were the only people allowed to leave the country. It’s a big why?”

          A bigger, blatantly obvious, “why” that apparently eludes you is “why didn’t they leave before the attack if they were connected to it?”

          “Experts”

          Whom, exactly?

        • Oliver says

          Dec 9, 2016 at 9:20 pm

          The government of Iran ( I don’t recall if it was the Ayatollah or the nut job who was the PM) said that 911 was a joint effort of the Mossad/Israeli Government/CIA/American Government.

          (This was BEFORE Bin Laden was killed).

          He, and others in Al Queida blasted the Iranians and all others, CLAIMING/PROCLAIMING- THAT THEY — AND THEY ALONE- DID IT).

          As to the Saudis leaving- that was the Bin laden family. Why is a good question. I mentioned it once or twice on a JW post.
          This is in reply to Peggy

      • Peggy says

        Dec 8, 2016 at 8:58 pm

        Wellington says

        December 8, 2016 at 8:21 pm

        The {US} government had a part in 9/11 as well? Oh Peggy, please. Crap assessments like this constitute loon material and one knows this or should know it. Might as well think that there was a conspiracy to kill JFK, RFK or MLK. But wait, millions do, which is pathetic
        ===================
        Maybe, I didn’t say anything for sure because I don’t know but there are many unanswered questions and many people who have sound knowledge of the way building come down have opinions.
        I am just not prepared to dismiss the other side of the argument so quickly.

        • gravenimage says

          Dec 8, 2016 at 9:50 pm

          Peggy wrote:

          I am just not prepared to dismiss the other side of the argument so quickly.
          …………………….

          Then are you also willing to entertain the idea that Mossad was behind 9/11, and that all of the Jews working in the World Trade Center got a call on the “Jew phone” and stayed home that day? That is a popular “theory”, as well.

          What about the idea that George Bush pulled off 9/11 to “make Islam look bad”, and go and start a war to steal Muslim oil? That’s a fave, as well.

          How about the idea that it was done to (somehow) raise the price of stocks for American and United Airlines? How about the idea that Larry Silverstein pulled off 9/11 to cover his supposedly immanent bankruptcy, and just threw in the attack on the Pentagon as a swerve? Or the idea that Israel was behind it, just because the Jooooos are so perfidious?

          Those are all sides of the “argument”, as well.

        • Wellington says

          Dec 8, 2016 at 9:55 pm

          “I am just not prepared to dismiss the other side of the argument so quickly.”

          I am.

          Ditto for who killed JFK, whether FDR knew about Pearl Harbor in advance, Princess Diana’s death, the Oklahoma City bombing, RFK’s death, the Orlando massacre, the San Bernardino massacre, Napoleon’s death, O.J. Simpson’s wife’s murder, et al.

          You know, Peggy, in the law, beyond a reasonable doubt (brd) does NOT mean no doubt. It means exactly what it says—–beyond a reasonable doubt. Doubting beyond what is rational is counter-productive even though high theory allows such, invariably off the mark, and readily conducive to one allowing the built-in crap detector they were born with to become terribly rusty.

          Would be great if you would learn this. Would be great if many others did too.

        • Tradiguy says

          Dec 9, 2016 at 3:51 am

          Peggy, I think it’s really sweet that Wellington and gravenimage think it’s impossible that the government wouldn’t kill their own population. That’s something I would love to believe but I am faced with massive evidence to the contrary. The globalists are using the jihadis as there armed arm and they are the useful idiots- when their job is done, they will be disposed of. This scumbad Bergolio is the religious arm of the same organisation! They are on the same side. This is about building a New World Order. It was designed and started well over 100 yrs ago and it is only recently that the populous has started to wake up. Of course, when you have no argument it’s the default position of these people to question your sanity. That’s such an easy tactic to use. Or of course suggest you go somewhere else because they don’t want to hear and can’t handle it!! Well, I again say the evidence is there. The plumes of white smoke (thermite) from the buildings below the collapsing floors. The 45 degree cuts with molten metal around them on the main beams ?? and please don’t tell me that was the fire- that would not melt steel or even weaken it. The reports of floors in both buildings being closed off months before the strike and security being placed on them whilst ‘refurb’ work was carried out- every 2 floors – ( why not every floor?) the sound of drilling etc. I agree with W and GI that it’s so big an accusation that it cannot be possible! If you are going to tell a lie, then tell a massive one so people can’t believe that people, who are supposed to be there to protect you are actually your worst enemy! They are happy in their warm fluffy world where the bad guys are against the good guys and it’s impossible that the ‘the good guys’ couldn’t possibly be satanic and treacherous. An open mind is the start to true freedom.

        • Angemon says

          Dec 9, 2016 at 5:38 am

          Tradiguy posted:

          “Peggy, I think it’s really sweet that Wellington and gravenimage think it’s impossible that the government wouldn’t kill their own population.”

          Basing your reply on an assumption of what your opponents allegedly think is a really amazing way to start a rebuttal, isn’t it?

          “Of course, when you have no argument it’s the default position of these people to question your sanity.”

          Or run your mouth off a bout what they allegedly think. Try asking GI and Wellington what they think about, for example, the Holocaust, or the mass murders in the Soviet Union and China, or if the death penalty exists in the US. Go on – I suspect you’ll find their answer surprising. No, I’m certain of it – I’m certain they won’t deny governments kill their own citizens.

          “An open mind is the start to true freedom.”

          Is your mind open to the possibility that there’s no conspiracy or government involvement behind 9/11? Or that there’s no such thing as the “NWO”?

        • Angemon says

          Dec 9, 2016 at 5:21 am

          Peggy posted:

          “Maybe, I didn’t say anything for sure because I don’t know”

          And yet, despite not knowing, you seemingly will never, ever entertain the idea that the government may not have had any part in it. Way to keep an open mind…

        • gravenimage says

          Dec 9, 2016 at 7:00 pm

          Tradiguy wrote:

          Peggy, I think it’s really sweet that Wellington and gravenimage think it’s impossible that the government wouldn’t kill their own population.
          ……………………………….

          Neither I nor Wellington are uncritical of the West–including our own governments–when it is called for.

          But believing democracy to be superior to Islam is *not* naive–it is a big part of the reason that I am in this fight–not just to oppose the sanguinary horror of Islam, but to *defend* our own civilized values.

          The fact is that democracies *don’t* mass slaughter their own people in “Night of the Long Knives” type plots. As flawed as they can be, this is not something they stoop to.

          More:

          That’s something I would love to believe but I am faced with massive evidence to the contrary. The globalists are using the jihadis as there armed arm and they are the useful idiots- when their job is done, they will be disposed of.
          ……………………………….

          We’ve heard this before–the idea that Islam is not really a problem–the poor Muslims are just being used by the evil Western elite.

          The problem is that this is ridiculous–Islam has been a conquering creed since its earliest days.

          More:

          Of course, when you have no argument it’s the default position of these people to question your sanity. That’s such an easy tactic to use.
          ……………………………….

          Questioning someone’s reasoning is not the same, necessarily, as questioning their sanity.

          More:

          Or of course suggest you go somewhere else because they don’t want to hear and can’t handle it!!
          ……………………………….

          This is, of course, a mischaracterization of what I said. I was wondering why someone who did not consider Jihad an actual threat would even be here at Jihad Watch. That is quite different from suggesting that that person leave.

          And there are plenty of conspiracy theories out there–including many that completely discount the threat of Jihad. The idea that Anti-Jihadists “can’t handle it” is just silly.

          More:

          please don’t tell me that was the fire- that would not melt steel or even weaken it.
          ……………………………….

          I’m afraid your belief that steel cannot be melted by fire is entirely mistaken.

          More:

          I agree with W and GI that it’s so big an accusation that it cannot be possible! If you are going to tell a lie, then tell a massive one so people can’t believe that people, who are supposed to be there to protect you are actually your worst enemy!
          ……………………………….

          We’ve heard this before. But by this “reasoning”, and *anything* that is hard to believe must, ipso facto, be true.

          What if I were to assert that the NORAD Santa tracker were not a lark, but an actual tracking of Santa, and that Santa was actually an evil alien who planned to conquer us one Christmas Eve? And that, further, not only NORAD but every weather station and Doppler Radar operator was in on it, but was just being paid off by the secret evil entity at the North Pole?

          That would be pretty hard to believe–would that make it true?

          More:

          They are happy in their warm fluffy world where the bad guys are against the good guys and it’s impossible that the ‘the good guys’ couldn’t possibly be satanic and treacherous.
          ……………………………….

          What could be warmer and fluffier than grasping the threat of Jihad? If we merely wanted to feel safe and secure, why wouldn’t we be in denial over Islamic violence, as well?

          More:

          An open mind is the start to true freedom.
          ……………………………….

          One’s mind can be so “open” that one’s brain may fall out, I’m afraid.

          There is ample evidence to there being a Jihad threat–we see evidence of this almost every time we turn on the news, and it is backed up by Jihadists, Muslim clerics, and the texts and tenets of Islam, and the history of Dar-al-Islam.

          Not so much with the idea of the Illuminati taking down the WTC to make Islam look bad.

          And what about that evil Santa thing?

        • Oliver says

          Dec 9, 2016 at 9:27 pm

          To Gravenimage:

          Zim, the Israeli shipping line) (I don’t know if still around, but were in 2001) had offices in The WTC.

          They ( Zim) was transferring much of their shipping to the south (I believe one of the Carolina’s) AND THE WTC was going to raise their rent, as their lease(s) were running out. So, they decided, they might as well go and move to the Carolina’s, where the bulk of their business was to be. Their NY office staff was relatively small. The top people went to check office space there- where they would be moving, and the rest of the staff (possibly 3 or 4 people) took the day (or days) off. That was ” evidence’ that Mossad?IDF was behind the attack.

          I had a friend, a person I had known for about a decade, who was killed in the 911 attacks. So, it was kind of sort of personal to me.

        • gravenimage says

          Dec 10, 2016 at 10:02 pm

          Thanks, Oliver. Yes, had heard the story about Zim, and this may have been what the “no Jews in the WTC” was based on. But I believe the antisemitic Muslim rumors began almost immediately.

          They are, of course, absurd. I have read the entire list of those murdered that day–as well as having attended two memorial reading of the names–and the names of many of the victims are clearly Jewish. There are probably a lot of victims who were Jewish who didn’t have traditionally Jewish names, as well.

          I’m so sorry that you lost someone who you had known for a long time, Oliver. 9/11 was a terrible blow to so many.

      • Kepha says

        Dec 9, 2016 at 6:49 pm

        Wellington, I’m a Protestant who doesn’t mind being called “fundamentalist”, and I believe wholeheartedly that the Feds got their man in McVeigh re the Oklahoma bombings, that they really did land on the moon, and that 9/11 was no inside job (I worked for the government for a while; and not even its most deranged officers would so waste American lives and property at home–especially when they know that the only secret America can keep is the academic record of its supposedly “most brilliant president ever”).

        What this era has revealed to anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear is that there are nutters all over the place, whether in traditional religions, secularist movements (I don’t think Van Jones was ever famous for his devotion to any long-standing tradition), or whatever. It’s one of the unhappy fruits of our fallen nature.

        However, I will add that seeing this Pope, I am humbly grateful to Almighty God that I have been neither RC, nor Episcopalian, for that matter. The true head of the Church is the Lord Jesus Christ (as the Westminster Confession and Catechisms of the 1640’s tell us), not some Renaissance Italian prince, and his vicar, as far as I can tell from John 12-16 (and the rest of the New Testament) is the Holy Spirit.

        May God keep you and others here for a day of grace.

    • gravenimage says

      Dec 8, 2016 at 5:57 pm

      This anti-Catholic screed is absurd. It is not just Catholics who are in denial over the threat of Islam, but many Protestant and Orthodox Christians, as well–along with many Jews, secularists, and people of other faiths.

      As for Alex Jones, as Wellington notes, he is a 9/11 Truther. In “Loose Change”, he asserts that 9/11 was a “false flag” operation pulled off by our own government. He is no Anti-Jihadist.

      • Tradiguy says

        Dec 8, 2016 at 6:12 pm

        Again, if it makes you feel nice to believe that the Trade towers were knocked down by 1 plane striking each tower then there is no amount of logical argument that will change your mind. Buildings so massively strong that they were designed to withstand MULTIPLE strikes by aircraft. No building built with steel where it has caught fire has EVER collapsed. molten steel pouring from the buildings which could not have been caused by the fire, the reports by police and firemen of explosions in the towers before they collapsed – And of course there was building 7- not touched but came down- again in its own footprint!! Funny that the records for ENRON, the biggest fraud ever committed, were kept in that building- ‘THERE ARE NONE SO BLIND AS THOSE WHO DO NOT WISH TO SEE’

        • gravenimage says

          Dec 8, 2016 at 6:37 pm

          For technical points, all one need do is read Popular Mechanics edition on the subject.

          But more to the point, there are many–even now–who find the prospect of being under attack from Muslims so terrifying that they would rather attribute it to their own government.

        • eduardo odraude says

          Dec 8, 2016 at 7:04 pm

          Tradiguy, read the book by Popular Mechanics on the various — and often contradictory — conspiracy theories about 9/11. Then when you can answer all their detailed investigations, come back and tell us your illogical BS.

        • Wellington says

          Dec 8, 2016 at 7:50 pm

          I second here what gravenimage and eduardo have stated. Read the Popular Mechanics piece in its entirety and then still try to conclude that anyone but those 19 Arab Muslim monsters perpetrated what happened on that very dark day in American history, 100% courtesy of the worst religion ever created by man.

          Get real. Grow up. Or go away.

      • Peggy says

        Dec 8, 2016 at 7:34 pm

        Actually, I have watched a lot of his videos and he is definitely Anti-Jihadist.
        Here is just one example but there are many.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXfym3Mf5-A

        He mainly concentrates on NWO but Islam is part of that. He is not like Robert or Pamela who devotes a lot of time exposing Islam but he certainly hates it.

        Many things he talks about make sense. He is very much informed so I wouldn’t dismiss him quickly.

        • gravenimage says

          Dec 8, 2016 at 8:02 pm

          Yes, Peggy, Alex Jones has said that Islam is violent and intolerant.

          But this is more than undermined by his appearing to believe that Jihad is waged by the American government to make Islam look bad.

          Never mind that this actually makes no sense. Alex Jones is not really rational enough to educate anyone about the threat of Islam.

      • Kepha says

        Dec 9, 2016 at 6:50 pm

        I’m with you and Wellington on this, Graven.

        • gravenimage says

          Dec 9, 2016 at 7:04 pm

          Thank you, Kepha.

    • Oliver says

      Dec 8, 2016 at 7:01 pm

      I went to a Catholic (Jesuit) University at the time of Vatican 2.

      ECUMENICISM IS NOT–REPEAT NOT– THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND ITS RELATIONS WITH RELIGIONS OTHER THAN PROTESTANT CHURCHES.

      Vatican Two does not ( and wasn’t t about) Catholics and their relationship with Hindus, Buddhists, Jes, Muslims, Shinto’s, and any religion EXCEPT PROTESTANT.

      This was reinforced by the priests who taught there, in classes and seminars.

      (I am not Catholic).

      The Catholic/Muslim dialogue has nothing to do with Vatican 2.

      Vatican 2 was more an attempt ( besides building bridges to other Christian churches) make the RCC MORE RELEVANT to the Catholics. (The liturgy in the native tongue rather than Latin; Rock and folk music masses, etc).

      if it succeeded, and was/is good or not, is not the issue. (here, anyhow)

      • gravenimage says

        Dec 8, 2016 at 7:19 pm

        True.

    • Champ says

      Dec 8, 2016 at 8:46 pm

      The Vatican 2 church is NOT the Catholic Church! Vatican 2 is the religious arm of the New World Order!

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      Mentioning “the New World Order” is not only off-topic, but a complete distraction to the *real* enemy we all face: islam & company!

      • Tradiguy says

        Dec 9, 2016 at 5:55 am

        I agree but my point is that the Vatican 2 church is encouraging Islam! That IS the point. Bergolio and all his henchman are the problem.

    • particolor says

      Dec 9, 2016 at 4:30 am

      The Foot Kissing did it for me !!

  4. Angemon says

    Dec 8, 2016 at 4:34 pm

    The path to shariah in the U.S. is being built on these same sands, using Gramsci as a model, as Lafif Lakhdar, an Islamic scholar, acknowledged:

    The Muslim Brotherhood implement the strategy of Gramsci. Gramsci was an Italian philosopher. When he was in prison he believed that the working class could not gain political rule, unless it gained cultural rule. In other words, they should spread their culture among the public, by the means of education and the media everywhere…

    Or, as the late Breitbart used to say, “Politics is downwind from culture”.

  5. Michael Copeland says

    Dec 8, 2016 at 5:06 pm

    “There is no evidence that Muhammad was under the extraordinary influence of God”.

    “I have fabricated things against God”, Mohammed said,
    “and have imputed to Him words which He has not spoken”.

    History of at-Tabari, Volume 6, page 111
    http://www.answeringmuslims.com/2016/11/the-deuteronomy-deductions-why-moses.html

  6. 762x51FMJ says

    Dec 8, 2016 at 5:34 pm

    The Doctrina Jacobi (or ‘Teaching of Jacob’), is a 7th century Greek Christian polemical tract written sometime between 634-640 AD. The text provides one of the earliest external accounts of Islam.

    When the candidatus was killed by the Saracens, I was at Caesarea and I set off by boat to Sykamina. People were saying “the candidatus has been killed,” and we Jews were overjoyed. And they were saying that the prophet had appeared, coming with the Saracens, and that he was proclaiming the advent of the anointed one, the Christ who was to come. I, having arrived at Sykamina, stopped by a certain old man well-versed in scriptures, and I said to him: “What can you tell me about the prophet who has appeared with the Saracens?” He replied, groaning deeply: “He is false, for the prophets do not come armed with a sword. Truly they are works of anarchy being committed today and I fear that the first Christ to come, whom the Christians worship, was the one sent by God and we instead are preparing to receive the Antichrist. Indeed, Isaiah said that the Jews would retain a perverted and hardened heart until all the earth should be devastated. But you go, master Abraham, and find out about the prophet who has appeared.” So I, Abraham, inquired and heard from those who had met him that there was no truth to be found in the so-called prophet, only the shedding of men’s blood. He says also that he has the keys of paradise, which is incredible.

    • gravenimage says

      Dec 8, 2016 at 6:05 pm

      Good post.

    • eduardo odraude says

      Dec 8, 2016 at 7:10 pm

      Wow. It really was the same story back in the beginning. Nice quote.

    • Chris says

      Dec 8, 2016 at 7:14 pm

      Yes. Excellent. Every Christian should be familiar with church history, especially islam. Once a person does this, they’ll realise that ISIS are acting in complete accordance with the Quran. Although many Immams reject the caliphate, this is to be expected. This is precisely what happened with the 4 rightly guided caliphs immediately following Mohammed. Disagreement and bloodshed followed. That’s the nature of Islam. It’s a militant, self-contradictory religion.

      • gravenimage says

        Dec 8, 2016 at 7:23 pm

        I would only add that this history is important for every Infidel to know–not just Christians.

        • Chris says

          Dec 8, 2016 at 8:00 pm

          Very true. Not sure why I only mentioned believers. Good call.

        • gravenimage says

          Dec 8, 2016 at 8:04 pm

          No problem, Chris. 🙂

    • Kepha says

      Dec 9, 2016 at 6:52 pm

      What’s the origin of this document, and has it been subjected to serious critical examination?

      • gravenimage says

        Dec 9, 2016 at 7:13 pm

        Kepha, the “Doctrina Jacobi” does appear to be authentic, from Byzantine sources and dating from about 640 AD, just a few years after the “Prophet’s” death.

        It is quite anti-Jewish, and in that way is rather disturbing. But it is very interesting in providing one of the earliest non-Muslim glimpses of Islam, and it seems to fit very well with what we know of early, conquering Islam.

  7. gravenimage says

    Dec 8, 2016 at 6:04 pm

    Good article from Mary Nicholas.

    Unfortunately, many “interfaith” Catholics understand little about Islam and the threat it presents to us.

    By the way, for those not familiar, the reference to the “Red Pill” comes from the film trilogy “The Matrix”.

    From the films, the term “Red Pill” has come to mean the sometimes painful truth of reality, while “Blue Pill” means the ‘blissful’ ignorance of denial.

    • Tradiguy says

      Dec 8, 2016 at 6:14 pm

      Thank you for that. Seems most prefer blue pills! .

      • gravenimage says

        Dec 8, 2016 at 6:38 pm

        Thank you.

  8. somehistory says

    Dec 8, 2016 at 6:28 pm

    “collaboration ”

    In other words, “Partaking of the table of demons”…which the apostle Paul said was something Christians should not do. And which is common sense not to do.

    Jesus said, “Do not give what is holy to dogs.”

    Revelation 13

  9. eduardo odraude says

    Dec 8, 2016 at 7:01 pm

    Excellent article, but should be divided up into a few parts so it doesn’t disappear so quickly. Seems a pity to write such a long article only to have it disappear after a day or two.

  10. Peggy says

    Dec 8, 2016 at 7:23 pm

    “Deception—known under the broad term taqiyya, is a fundamental concept in Islam. Dr. Sami Mukaram, the foremost expert on taqiyya, said: “Taqiyya in order to dupe the enemy is permissible….using deceit as a religious and political weapon…they are allowed to lie about the nature of Islam in order to further their political goals, namely world conquest.”
    ————————————————

    If you have to lie about something then you know it can’t be good. So in order to present Islam in a favourable light they have to lie to us. Doesn’t this tell them that what they are presenting is bad then?
    It baffles me that something this simple goes unnoticed by so many.
    Even children know that if they have to lie about what they did it had to be bad and yet we have 1.6 billion adults and many educated adults still accepting it.

    • Angemon says

      Dec 8, 2016 at 7:33 pm

      Peggy posted:

      “If you have to lie about something then you know it can’t be good.”

      Indeed – why would you lie about something if you knew you were in the right?

    • gravenimage says

      Dec 8, 2016 at 7:45 pm

      Yes–the existence of Taqiyya is very damning of Islam itself.

  11. EYESOPEN says

    Dec 8, 2016 at 9:30 pm

    This is for Wellington, who just so happened to mention Pearl Harbor and FDR. It has nothing to do with this current thread, however, I thought he might want to read a very interesting article:

    http://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/history/item/4740-pearl-harbor-hawaii-was-surprised-fdr-was-not

    FWIW. YMMV.

    • gravenimage says

      Dec 8, 2016 at 9:55 pm

      Why are the conspiracy theorists out in force on this thread? The idea that FDR had those at Pearl Harbor murdered for his own nefarious purposes is just calumny.

      There were concerns–obviously–that Japan was going to strike at some point, but the prevailing wisdom were that individual ships might be vulnerable. I don’t think anyone was serious entertaining a Japanese attack on the homeland–including the president.

      • EYESOPEN says

        Dec 8, 2016 at 10:15 pm

        Knock off the snotty BS graven! I’ve been on JW for a number of years; and frankly, I’m getting a little irritated at all of the clique-ish and petty BS that I have come to see here. I just thought that Wellington might appreciate the article – and what I send for Wellington is none of your damned business. And if you think that facts about what were already known back then are “calumny”, why not try reading the article yourself?

        • gravenimage says

          Dec 8, 2016 at 10:35 pm

          EYESOPEN, I generally highly respect your contributions here, as you well know.

          I am actually quite familiar with the history surrounding Pearl Harbor.

          There is a definite thread in the West that holds that the only real evil comes from the civilized West itself. I believe, in fact, that this is part of the problem that we face in opposing the Jihad threat–that all too many cannot bring themselves to imagine that any threat comes from outside the West itself. I do not consider you part of this, but it is *very* common.

    • Wellington says

      Dec 8, 2016 at 11:03 pm

      EYESOPEN: The article you provided a link to is bunk. The New American publication in which this article can be found is associated with the John Birch Society. This in and of itself discredits it.

      But I will add more. Here is what serious historians know about what FDR knew: In a nutshell, because of FDR’s increasing of restrictions (particularly oil) on Japan because of its ever increasing atrocious behaviors, with the last straw for Roosevelt apparently being the take over of SE Asia from the French (though retaining French administration there) after the fall of France in June of 1940, the American government under FDR concluded that a strike by Japan against America was a distinct possibility, likely in fact. But where this strike would come was unknown. Might be in the Philippines. Could be Guam. And so on. Hawaii was on this “list” but it was felt that if a strike came there it would not be a military one but rather sabotage. That helps explain, as examples, why guns weren’t loaded and planes were lined up in neat formation to guard them better. But it was a military strike and here the Japanese caught everyone by surprise, including FDR. With 20/20 hindsight some have made it look like FDR knew what was going to happen at Pearl Harbor———-but he didn’t. Thus the conspiracy theory that FDR knew in advance that PH was going to be attacked militarily is simply false, as almost all conspiracy theories are.

      One last thing, EYESOPEN. I too have generally respected your comments here at JW but your attack on gravenimage, whom I consider just about the most informed and balanced commenter here at JW, if not THE most informed and balanced commenter here at JW, is uncalled for. I look upon her as a very close ally in the fight against what Islam intends for us all and I respect her highly. I respect no one here at JW more than her. I trust I have made my position here crystal clear. I mean no disrespect to you but I think you owe gravenimage an apology.

      • gravenimage says

        Dec 8, 2016 at 11:44 pm

        Good post re Pearl Harbor, Wellington.

        And thank you so much for your kind comments. I am not asking for an apology from EYESOPEN, though, whom I consider to be a staunch Anti-Jihadist and strong ally here.

      • Noel says

        Dec 9, 2016 at 3:25 am

        Gravenimage and Wellington – Would you please stop being rude to people who don’t agree with you. The tone of JW is being lowered. Thank you Peggy for not losing your politeness.
        Yes, there are a lot of conspiracy theories. Some of them are definitely daft. Unfortunately we can’t all agree on which ones are daft.
        Some conspiracies are real – Islam taking over the world is a conspiracy, and it’s not a theory. I hope we all know that. Let’s stick together and stop calling each other idiots.
        I have a friend who feels as we do about Islam, but he also believes in ‘chem-trails’ which the NWO are using to reduce population. I don’t believe that, but I don’t argue with him about it. Instead we share what we have in common. Divided we fall. Thank you for your time.

        • Angemon says

          Dec 9, 2016 at 5:32 am

          Noel posted:

          “Gravenimage and Wellington – Would you please stop being rude to people who don’t agree with you.”

          “Rude”? Boy, you must have some really thin skin… Anyway, how about, instead, *you* stop being rude to others and quit trying to police what they say or how they express themselves? How about you stop caring about shape or irrelevant alleged “rudeness” and focus on the content instead of trying to act as an overzealous cop billy-clubbing those you deem to be out of line?

          It’s not nice being told what to do, is it?

          “The tone of JW is being lowered.”

          Who set the limits of the “tone” in JW and made you its arbiter?Are you a member of the staff? Why are you swooping in out of nowhere to zoom-in and lock-on to GI’s and Wellington’s alleged “rudeness” when you have muslim apologists going around and saying actual rude, if not outright offensive, stuff to people here? Is it because you don’t really care about that, you’re simply upset because they don’t buy into conspiracy theories? “Burn the heretics”, etc.?

          And why are you engaging in the exact same kind of behaviour as Peggy? You know, virtue-signalling and disguising censorship as good intentions and trying to keep a high “tone”, or “reputation”, or whatever? “Won’t someone think of the tone and reputation of the site”? Why, I just might start there’s a conspiracy going on here…

          https://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/05/boston-marathon-jihad-murderers-mother-non-muslims-will-burn-in-flames-of-an-eternal-and-terrifying-fire-an-otherworldly-flame-inshaallah#comment-1240861

          Peggy says:

          (…)You would think that moderators of this site would do something to stop the abuse coming from people like him but sadly I found out they don’t care and even ridicule you for pointing it out.
          I contacted the site via the link on the right hand side of any page and told them and even posted some of the abusive wording. It was not abuse from Mr Jihadski but from western canadian and the reply I got is really unsettling. Let me post the reply here now. It’s very short and very childish. If Robert Spencer has people like this working for him then his reputation is quickly going to go down.

          Here is the reply from them.

          To: Peggy Cc: marc @ JihadWatch

          I’m not a hall monitor and this isn’t 6th grade. Deal with it or don’t, but don’t come running to daddy for help. I ain’t him.
          ————————————
          This is the quality of Mr Spencer’s staff. I am truly shocked.

          (BTW, that last remark about me starting to believe a conspiracy theory was sarcam)

          Guess what? JW has been up for over 10 years. And one of the values they spread is “freedom of speech”. Your attempts (both you and Peggy) to police speech run counter to it. JW is doing fine without tone cops. I suggest you use your energy for something else.

        • Peggy says

          Dec 9, 2016 at 10:20 am

          Noel, it’s extremely hard not to lose it with people like Angemon. Gravenimage and I do disagree on rare occasions but she has never been rude to me. I do try to reply in a non combative manner if I have a different opinion and really appreciate people who reply to me in kind. We don’t all have to agree on everything but we all should respect other opinions.

          Angemon on the other hand is a nasty piece of work who seems to enjoy his sarcasm and dredges out old posts when you have finally lost it with him to prove how you are no better than him or worse than him.
          Once he has you in his sights he will stalk you forever and have digs at you at every opportunity.

        • Angemon says

          Dec 12, 2016 at 7:25 am

          Peggy posted:

          “Noel, it’s extremely hard not to lose it with people like Angemon.”

          Here’s what Noel wrote:

          Gravenimage and Wellington – Would you please stop being rude to people who don’t agree with you. The tone of JW is being lowered.

          Noel wasn’t “losing it” with me. Noel didn’t even mention me. Funny that you seem to think that was the case. Hold this thought, though.

          “We don’t all have to agree on everything but we all should respect other opinions.”

          Unless, of course, you don’t like what others say, in which case the insults start. Or maybe you just to that to me. All the same – you’re not practising what you preach.

          “Angemon on the other hand is a nasty piece of work who seems to enjoy his sarcasm and dredges out old posts when you have finally lost it with him to prove how you are no better than him or worse than him.”

          Remember when I told you to hold the thought that Noel wasn’t talking about me? For someone who is complaining about me being a “nasty piece of work”, who was it that went well out of her way to insult someone? You, Peggy. It was *you*.

          BTW, funny that your little “expose” posts only target me. Where were you when, for example, that itace muhammad guy was calling Christians smelly and disgusting, or saying blatantly false info such as “the Crusades murdered 20 million muslims”? Good to see that, on a site called “Jihad Watch”, you have your priorities straight. Insulting someone for pointing out that JW has been going strong for over 10 years without a “rudeness police” is seemingly more important to you than replying to someone who seemingly thinks “Jew” is an insult…

          “Once he has you in his sights he will stalk you forever and have digs at you at every opportunity.”

          Lol!!! Better take the meds, sweetheart, and once they kick, please explain how exactly I “stalk” someone on a *public* forum. Even if I was going around replying only to every single post you do on this site and no one else (and I’m not, so don’t even try to go that way), you’d have to prove I wasn’t simply replying to individual posts that just happened to come from you. Not only that, you accuse me of having someone on my “sights” and “have digs” at them at “every opportunity” on a reply to someone that didn’t even mentioned me. Clearly you should be running powerpoint presentations for a living, seeing the amount of projection coming from you…

          I’ll repeat that: you go out of your way to have digs at me while at the same time complaining that I go out of my way to have digs at someone else. Just how hypocrite can you get?

        • gravenimage says

          Dec 9, 2016 at 7:36 pm

          Noel, I am not trying to be rude to people with whom I may have some disagreements. Save for the actual Muslim trolls here, I consider virtually everyone here at Jihad Watch to be an ally.

          We often disagree on some points–especially on tactics in how to face the Jihad threat. I have, in fact, often learned from disagreements here–either to entertain another point of view, or to clarify and defend my initial stance.

          I cannot speak for Wellington, of course, but I believe he feels the same way.

          Commenters at Jihad Watch come from incredibly diverse backgrounds–from six continents; from almost every ethnic background; Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Agnostic, Atheist, Wiccan, and Pagan; born Infidels and Muslim apostates; a range of political ideologies; native English speakers and those for whom English is a second, third, or fourth language; a range of educational backgrounds, from largely self-taught to some college to PhDs, and some very different life experiences.

          What often strikes me is not that there are disagreements here, but that there are so comparatively few of them, and that they are in general so civil.

          I think it is because we are so committed to standing against the existential threat of Islam, and that whatever our differences, that we stand together in the face of this savagery.

      • Kepha says

        Dec 9, 2016 at 6:57 pm

        Also, do not forget that there was a lot of American sympathy for China prior to Pearl Harbor. The Japanese also thought that the US Navy was ultimately a very large and dangerous threat to their plans, and had to be neutralized.

        While I believe firmly that we are all sinners in need of redemption, and Western history amply demonstrates this, I also believe that non-Westerners are also fallen descendants of Old Adam the First (go re-read Pilgrim’s Progress–better yet, Paul) and perfectly capable of vicious skullduggery even without any Western exemplar or guidance.

        • Kepha says

          Dec 9, 2016 at 7:02 pm

          And, while I’m at it, I also have a lot of regard for Gravenimage and Champ.

          I think we need to be a bit careful in these times. The past several years have shown a lot of situations in which the O [mal-]administration has asked us “What will you believe? Us, or your own lying eyes?” We’ve also seen organized science prostitute itself trying to prove there’s a gay gene or that we can be certain that current global warming (a fact) is all our fault (questionable–we still can’t grow crops and raise cattle in SW Greenland, as they could back around A.D. 1000-1100).

          In this environment, lots of conspiracy theories will flourish–especially among those who believe that all humans are fundamentally good, rational, and thinking like middle-class Americans. We should really be more certain that Murphy’s Law and the Peter Principle are fundamental truths of social science!

        • gravenimage says

          Dec 9, 2016 at 7:41 pm

          Thanks, Kepha. I have a great deal of regard for you and for Champ, as well.

          I actually find the Western propensity for considering everyone in the world to be as civilized as is the West rather touching–but there is no doubt that such naivité can be terribly dangerous for us. Trying to apply it to Islam is certainly the gravest mistake.

  12. Mark A says

    Dec 8, 2016 at 9:33 pm

    Excellent article.

    I’m Catholic and I’m dismayed by the constant refrain I hear in and from the Church about Islam being a “religion of peace”, that Islam and Catholicism share the same core beliefs and so on.

    When confronted by Catholics preaching this message I ask them if they have read the Koran. In 9 out of 10 cases, they haven’t but even when I have pointed out Koran passages like Sura 9:29 and explained how Islam applies these verses to Catholics, these people look at me with condescension and tell me I am misunderstanding the Koran’s message.

    I’m glad to see there are at least some Catholics out there who understand the Koran’s message about non-Muslims and are willing to write about it.

    JW, more articles from this author please.

    • gravenimage says

      Dec 8, 2016 at 11:48 pm

      JW, more articles from this author please.
      ………………..

      Agreed.

    • no_one says

      Dec 9, 2016 at 10:27 am

      research the Orthodox christianity. Find out about the holy fire in Jerusalem.

  13. no_one says

    Dec 8, 2016 at 10:51 pm

    RCC is not the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church the creed mentions. The hell will not prevail over the real church. Yet, I hope Christ will accept all people who honestly believe in Him, who put their trust in Him and their hope in Him. After all many are babtized in the name of the Holy Trinity and believe the Gospel. The problem is not the strength of Islam, but the week Christian faith. Western Europe was asleep and now they reap the fruit of it. Many American Christians of all denominations are asleep too. I hope America does not have the plight of Western Europe, but I can only hope. Many American Christians seem to be Christians by habit and that worries me. They don’t pray with faith or don’t seem to. Don’t seem to have any fear of God. I am not sure if they love him and are ready to accept His will. I look st the election. Many Christians are still talking against Trump and the new Testament says that every power is from God. People get the ruler they deserve. The previous pope, Benedict XVI said something not nice about Islam and he is not a pope anymore. The current pope doesn’t seem to take the side of the Christians. There are many child rapes in Europe and this pope is silent. Washing the feet of Muslim refugees was just a show. It still doesn’t make him humble enough to be a leader of the true church. And the true church has one Head, Christ, not a pope. Research the holy fire in Jerusalem and find out when it appears. It is not a hoax. It lights the candles of regular people who stand in the church. When it comes down people see lightnings, but these don’t kill anyone. When a latin emperor was there centuries ago to see it, it didn’t appear until he got out. It was a sign.

  14. No Fear says

    Dec 8, 2016 at 10:53 pm

    That would be an ecumenical matter.

    • no_one says

      Dec 8, 2016 at 11:02 pm

      Ecumenical means unification of Christian churches. The pope wants to be the head of all Christendom. Popes have been doing this for centuries, but people who think Christ is the head of the church and the pope can be at most first among equals, first among bishops of all churches disagree. Decisions can be taken only by a council, not by a pope. Eastern churches do not agree to be with a communion with RCC. Popes have been trying, including by force. And RCC has done many wrong things.

      • No Fear says

        Dec 9, 2016 at 12:39 am

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptd_h0dF7NE

        🙂

  15. no_one says

    Dec 8, 2016 at 10:57 pm

    A religion can have two sources. It is either from God or from the satan. How can light and darkness, heaven and hell come together? Why make deals with something, which is from the devil? This pope doesn’t seem to think along these lines.

  16. Champ says

    Dec 8, 2016 at 11:04 pm

    The Pope is leading his followers down the wrong path, and this effort is part and parcel of the evil Chrislam movement …

    • Champ says

      Dec 8, 2016 at 11:15 pm

      Here’s the long version for those interested in learning more from Shahram Hadian …

      • gravenimage says

        Dec 10, 2016 at 10:23 pm

        You are right about the threat of “Christlam”, Champ.

    • no_one says

      Dec 8, 2016 at 11:22 pm

      The god of Islam is satan.

      • Champ says

        Dec 8, 2016 at 11:31 pm

        Indeed!

  17. Peggy says

    Dec 8, 2016 at 11:11 pm

    gravenimage says

    December 8, 2016 at 9:50 pm

    Peggy wrote:

    I am just not prepared to dismiss the other side of the argument so quickly.
    …………………….

    Then are you also willing to entertain the idea that Mossad was behind 9/11, and that all of the Jews working in the World Trade Center got a call on the “Jew phone” and stayed home that day? That is a popular “theory”, as well.

    What about the idea that George Bush pulled off 9/11 to “make Islam look bad”, and go and start a war to steal Muslim oil? That’s a fave, as well
    ———————————————–
    None of them are MY views. I don’t know what happened and who was involved and I don’t think anyone who wasn’t privy to information which is not in public domain and won’t be until decades have passed and the files are declassified can know anything for sure. We can choose to be neutral about it, have some views and firmly believe what we find in the media. That is everyone’s choice.

    My reason for not accepting the “accepted theory” fully is the fact that there are many unanswered questions.
    For one, the reason for grounding everyone except for the Bin Laden family and other Saudis was never explained. The most important people to detain and investigate were allowed to leave when nobody else was allowed to fly. This is a very important point.
    This is why I am not willing to dismiss the idea that Bush who had a relationship and business dealings with Saudis basically facilitated their exit.
    Second, how can so many planes get so far, especially the one which flew into the Pentagon without anyone noticing any problems. I would expect the Pentagon to be so heavily guarded and the airspace over it and the surrounding area patrolled so well that no unauthorised aircraft would ever get that close without fighter jets intercepting it.

    That wasn’t explained either.

    The fact that the terrorists only had box cutters is also a bit incredible. There are planes full of people and crew and they couldn’t manage to overpower them.

    These are just a few things that don’t seem very credible. There has to be more to it than that. Why aren’t we getting any explanation about how this all could happen.

    So I am just saying that I am not convinced one way or the other. There might be a lot more to this and even a third option, whatever that might be, could reveal itself.
    Please don’t use the phrase “that evil west” against me. I think you know that I don’t think that way. Evil does exist in the west but the west isn’t evil. Most people are good.

    • Angemon says

      Dec 9, 2016 at 5:26 am

      Peggy posted:

      “I don’t know what happened and who was involved”

      Hold that thought.

      “For one, the reason for grounding everyone except for the Bin Laden family and other Saudis was never explained. The most important people to detain and investigate were allowed to leave when nobody else was allowed to fly. This is a very important point.”

      So you don’t know what happened or who was involved but you know who were the most important people to detain. Curious, isn’t it? And apparently, you expected people 15 years ago to know at the time what you “know” today.

      “This is why I am not willing to dismiss the idea that Bush who had a relationship and business dealings with Saudis basically facilitated their exit.”

      Is there any evidence for that? There is, of course, an innocuous and very obvious reason to why Bush may have left foreign VIPs go back to their homeland when his nation was going into lock-down mode because of an hostile attack.

      “I would expect the Pentagon to be so heavily guarded and the airspace over it and the surrounding area patrolled so well that no unauthorised aircraft would ever get that close without fighter jets intercepting it.”

      You would expect? But you said you don’t know what happened, didn’t you? Are you familiar with the American military protocol and security measures? Why, exactly, would the Pentagon be under aerial surveillance 24/7 when American territory wasn’t under attack?

      “The fact that the terrorists only had box cutters is also a bit incredible.”

      Far from it. Lax as security before 9/11 may have been, it would still be hard to bring a gun on board. I suspect the perpetrators – or at least someone working for them – brought box cutters to airflights before doing the deed, to test the security and feasibility of their plan.

      “There are planes full of people and crew and they couldn’t manage to overpower them.”

      Really? You’re puzzled with that? Out of all things you could be scratching your head about you picked that one? How about this scenario: a couple of them snatch up a stewardess, point a couple of box-cutters to her throat and tell everyone that if anyone tries anything funny the stewardess gets it. Then they calm people up with some bogus excuse about wanting to hijack the plane to Hawaii or the Seychelles and that if everyone stays quiet they’ll be fine. Would you act and get the death of the stewardess on your conscience?

      Another scenario: they say they have a bomb on board and that if anyone tries anything they’ll be endangering the plane and themselves and that if everyone just stays quiet they’ll be OK. Next, they say they’re taking the plane back to the airport to issue their demands. Oh, did I say this one was a scenario? Silly me – that was exactly what happened:

      http://edition.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/06/17/911.hijackers/

      Oh, and people *did* fought back – remember flight 93?

      “These are just a few things that don’t seem very credible. ”

      Only if you go out of your way to dismiss all plausible explanations and replace them with conspiracy mongering…

      “ There has to be more to it than that. Why aren’t we getting any explanation about how this all could happen.”

      Didn’t you open up by saying you don’t know what happened? How, come, are you so certain that there has to be more to it?

      • eduardo odraude says

        Dec 9, 2016 at 9:53 am

        A whole book has been written by Popular Mechanics investigating in detail and depth each of dozens and dozens of charges leveled by “9/11 Truthers” and finding they have no real merit if you are open minded, ask all the experts, and refuse to pay attention only to selected facts.

        It seems to be almost impossible for two people to keep a secret — and we are supposed to believe that a lot more than that kept the secret when revealing it could be so rewarding? Phooey.

        There have been some real conspiracies, but they end up getting exposed and acknowledged by all.

        But there is a psychological syndrome — a kind of mania for an explanation that shows everything is under control — that there is an order behind everything, even if a nefarious one — psychologists speak of intolerance for ambiguity — that leads conspiracy theorists to reject every bit of counter-evidence to their theories. That is what happens with the “Truthers” — they switch the subject to another part of the conspiracy theory when you point out all the holes in the part they were just pushing. Point out the holes in the next bit of “evidence” they offer, and they just switch to the next part of their “case.” They are actually impervious to any evidence that does not fit their tidy view. What conspiracy theorists don’t get is that the human world is to a large extent a spontaneous order that coalesces from many different centers. Read the Popular Mechanics book — they expanded the original article into a whole book checking the 9/11 Truther theories.

        • Peggy says

          Dec 9, 2016 at 10:36 am

          Except that I am not accepting anything fully. Both sides have good arguments and since I am not an expert in any field required to prove one way or the other I choose to keep an open mind about it all.
          Does that make me a conspiracy theorist? There are others who are not prepared to fully believe one way or the other.
          There is nothing wrong with not hitching your wagon to any side when you are not prepared to commit to any theory.

          I don’t begrudge anyone who has a firm belief that 9/11 was fully Islamic job and those towers can be brought down in that way. I don’t call them stupid. Obviously they heard and saw enough for them to be convinced. Not everyone is the same and some just can’t reach any conclusion and are prepared to think seriously about both sides of argument. Should these people be ridiculed and called names?

    • gravenimage says

      Dec 9, 2016 at 9:44 pm

      Thanks for your reply, Peggy. You wrote:

      My reason for not accepting the “accepted theory” fully is the fact that there are many unanswered questions.
      For one, the reason for grounding everyone except for the Bin Laden family and other Saudis was never explained. The most important people to detain and investigate were allowed to leave when nobody else was allowed to fly. This is a very important point.
      ………………………….

      George Bush was not nearly as stupid as he was often made out to be, but emotionally I think he is a pretty simple man. He considered the Saudis his buddies, and believe that they would be embarrassed and inconvenienced, so he he allowed them to leave.

      This was *deeply* foolish even at the time, and given all of the evidence pointing to Saudi involvement in 9/11 that has since been unearthed has proven to be even more so. I am not defending this cronyism, but don’t think it was anything more nefarious than that.

      More:

      This is why I am not willing to dismiss the idea that Bush who had a relationship and business dealings with Saudis basically facilitated their exit.
      ………………………….

      Bush definitely did–that is no secret.

      More:

      Second, how can so many planes get so far, especially the one which flew into the Pentagon without anyone noticing any problems. I would expect the Pentagon to be so heavily guarded and the airspace over it and the surrounding area patrolled so well that no unauthorised aircraft would ever get that close without fighter jets intercepting it.

      That wasn’t explained either.
      ………………………….

      Problems were noticed almost immediately–this is amply documented–the question was what to do about it. The military was loathe to shoot down airplanes filled with civilian passengers, for obvious reasons.

      More:

      The fact that the terrorists only had box cutters is also a bit incredible. There are planes full of people and crew and they couldn’t manage to overpower them.
      ………………………….

      Passengers on hijacked planes were counseled not to resist, because the hijackers would likely let them go after negotiations. This was the prevailing wisdom at the time, and the Jihadists themselves told passengers that they would not be harmed if they followed directions.

      It was only on Flight 93, after passengers learned the fate of the first two hijacked planes, that passengers and crew fought back. They were, in fact, able to prevent that plane from reaching its target. This probably would not have been the case if the hijackers had been armed with weaponry like firearms.

      More:

      These are just a few things that don’t seem very credible. There has to be more to it than that. Why aren’t we
      getting any explanation about how this all could happen.’
      ………………………….

      I can see how the specter of Muslims hijacking planes would be frightening–hence the idea that there must be more to it.

      Is it plausible that a single Jihad driver could mow down and murder over 80 people in Nice? That a single Jihadist could murder almost 50 people at a nightclub in Orlando? That a handful of Jihadists could terrorize all of Paris?

      We are peaceful and civilized people. It often just takes a a few savages to wreck havoc.

      More:

      So I am just saying that I am not convinced one way or the other. There might be a lot more to this and even a third option, whatever that might be, could reveal itself.
      Please don’t use the phrase “that evil west” against me. I think you know that I don’t think that way. Evil does exist in the west but the west isn’t evil. Most people are good.
      ………………………….

      If the US government plotted 9/11 and slaughtered her own citizens and then cynically pinned it on innocent scapegoats, then the West–or aspects of her government, in any case–really would be evil.

      • Tradiguy says

        Dec 12, 2016 at 7:38 am

        The Pentagon? It must have been a different sort of plane that I know of- one without wings or engines! None were found! As for the question What would the US government get out of staging 9/11? My goodness! I can’t imagine!

        • Angemon says

          Dec 12, 2016 at 7:45 am

          tradiguy posted:

          “The Pentagon? It must have been a different sort of plane that I know of- one without wings or engines! None were found! ”

          Let’s pretend that was the case: why, then, go through with the story about an airplane crashing into the Pentagon? Why not simply reveal whatever method you think they used and say “the terrorists attacked the Pentagon in such and such fashion”? Why go thorough a convolutely complicated conspiracy without even providing the most basic of evidence to back it with? Didn’t “they” think someone would eventually say “wait, where are the engines and wings”?

          “As for the question What would the US government get out of staging 9/11? My goodness! I can’t imagine!”

          Try, anyway. And how does Khalid Sheikh Mohammed fit in your narrative?

        • Tradiguy says

          Dec 12, 2016 at 8:13 am

          Have you ever heard of hiding the truth in plain sight? Many have asked the very question you are asking now. Why aren’t there any wings or plane debris?? Another question- Why did our BBC announce the destruction of building 7 several minutes before it happened? You see, my contention is this. If you can’t believe one little part of it, you can’t believe any of it. It only takes a pinhole to destroy the whole balloon.

        • Angemon says

          Dec 22, 2016 at 1:54 pm

          Tradiguy posted:

          “Have you ever heard of hiding the truth in plain sight? Many have asked the very question you are asking now.”

          So why is it that you don’t have an answer for it?

          “It only takes a pinhole to destroy the whole balloon.”

          But not a plane to destroy a building, apparently…

  18. Michael Richmond says

    Dec 9, 2016 at 1:06 am

    Please provide the link for this website in your story.

    “The Muslim Brotherhood’s 1991 Explanatory Memorandum: On the General Strategic Goal for the Group”

    • Cecilia Ellis says

      Dec 9, 2016 at 10:41 am

      Michael, A 32-page PDF file copy of the Explanatory Memorandum, in both Arabic and English, can be downloaded at the following link:

      https://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/20.pdf

      Note: The English translation begins on page 16.

      • gravenimage says

        Dec 9, 2016 at 10:04 pm

        Thanks for the link, Cecilia.

  19. TH says

    Dec 9, 2016 at 4:14 am

    Let us hope that President-elect Triump.when he gets into the White House will declare the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates terrorist organization. I believe that Senator Ted Cruz has a bill proposed to this effect and it is stopped due to Obama. All that is needed is that the State Department declare t a terrorist group. Since Western Civilization is a creation of the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages, it is essential that Church leaders get it right as regards jihad.

  20. FYI says

    Dec 9, 2016 at 9:19 am

    Pope francis appears to be afflicted by the tragic delusion that moslems and Christians believe in the same God.
    Let me show you why this is false.One would expect even a Jesuit to be able to easily differentiate between the two opposing versions:”allah”(koranic) versus GOD(Biblical).
    In the koran there are clear statements that utterly deny Christ’s Redemptive mission:-
    surah 4:157{the denial of the Crucifixion and Passion of Christ}
    surah 3:55{the denial of the Resurrection of Christ}
    According to the koran Jesus was nothing but a sort of token prophet.If islam was a movie,Jesus would
    be listed way,way,down in the end credits as “carpenter guy from Nazareth” while the great polygamous prophet gets top billing.In other words the whole point of Christ’s redemptive mission is ignored and denied.

    This PROVES that the islamic belief is both a rejection and a denial of the Christian concept of God.
    In other words “allah”/mahomet/koran is the denial and rejection of Christ(and therefore God if Jesus is the Son of God)
    So logically :-
    the islamic “allah” is NOT THE SAME AS the biblical revelation of GOD.
    Since “allah”/mahomet also appear to make statements in the koran that are totally at odds with God’s commandments(“slay the unbeliever” in k2:191 being the obvious one and a clear violation of the sixth
    commandment which mahomet seems to have have missed …)then it further proves that “allah” is not
    even remotely in agreement with the Biblical,Judeo-Christian concept of God.
    So “allah”(who rejects Christ) is OBVIOUSLY NOT THE SAME AS the Biblical version of GOD.
    And yet the great Jesuit genius francis doesn’t see that.

    • somehistory says

      Dec 9, 2016 at 9:47 am

      The Apostle Paul said that satan, “the god of this system of things, has blinded the minds of the unbelievers so that the glorious good news about the Christ, might not shine through.” (2 Cor.4:4)

      This fits perfectly with your sound arguments.

      If islam were a movie, Christ would be listed as “un-credited” in the IMDb.
      The false prophet would be listed as writer, producer,director,murderer, rapist, liar, …

  21. SAKOVKT says

    Dec 9, 2016 at 9:28 am

    Yes, Antonio Gramsci was the originator of “cultural Marxism”.

    He died in prison after his arrest under Mussolini, who knew all too well what Italian socialists were up to, at the time.

    One of days, the entire Western World is going to have to re-assess Fascism if it ever wants to understand its current predicaments.

    This isn’t to say that the “Holocaust Deniers” have it right.

    But it is to say, that Progressives are just as wrong.

  22. Peggy says

    Dec 9, 2016 at 9:48 am

    Angemon says

    December 9, 2016 at 5:21 am

    Peggy posted:

    “Maybe, I didn’t say anything for sure because I don’t know”

    And yet, despite not knowing, you seemingly will never, ever entertain the idea that the government may not have had any part in it. Way to keep an open mind…
    ====================
    The fact that I am not discounting anything proves that I am keeping an open mind. Can’t say the same for you.

  23. Peggy says

    Dec 9, 2016 at 9:55 am

    Angemon said:

    You would expect? But you said you don’t know what happened, didn’t you? Are you familiar with the American military protocol and security measures? Why, exactly, would the Pentagon be under aerial surveillance 24/7 when American territory wasn’t under attack?
    =============================
    You really don’t know what you are talking about.
    No, I am not familiar with American military protocol but a building such as the Pentagon would of course be secured and yes that would involve surveillance. Do you honestly think that important buildings like that are only guarded if there is an attack? If you do then you must be very silly indeed.
    You try flying a plane into that airspace and see what happens.
    I don’t have to be familiar with security measures and most people will never know how exactly those buildings are guarded but a reasonable person can assume that they are well protected and the airspace around is also well guarded.

    • Angemon says

      Dec 12, 2016 at 7:04 am

      Peggy posted:

      “You really don’t know what you are talking about.”

      Since you opened with that, I expect you to “educate” me and explain what exactly I don’t know and where and how what I wrote was wrong. Let’ see how that turns out…

      “No, I am not familiar with American military protocol”

      OK, so we’re on the same level then – you accused me of not knowing what I was talking about (without, of course, offering a specific detail or correction), and yet, by your own admission, you have no grounds to correct me on that issue.

      “but”

      And there it is – you’re one of them “but-heads”. “I don’t know such and such, but“. All that “but” signifies is that what you said so far about not knowing American military protocol is rendered null and void – because you’re about to talk as if you have the knowledge you just stated you don’t.

      “a building such as the Pentagon would of course be secured”

      I would assume so, yes. You know what law enforcement says about terrorism, right? How law enforcement is always on the lookout for yesterday’s attack while the terrorists are planning a different method to use tomorrow?

      “and yes that would involve surveillance.”

      Again, I would assume so, yes.

      “Do you honestly think that important buildings like that are only guarded if there is an attack? If you do then you must be very silly indeed.”

      Nice way to try to ascribe me words. Did I say something that’s even remotely similar to that? Of course I didn’t.

      “You try flying a plane into that airspace and see what happens.”

      You mean, 15-something years after 9/11? Are the security protocols the same as before 9/11?

      “I don’t have to be familiar with security measures and most people will never know how exactly those buildings are guarded but a reasonable person can assume that they are well protected and the airspace around is also well guarded.”

      A reasonable person can assume different security measures in different circumstances. For example, prior to 9/11, when probably no one would think anyone would use a plane as a weapon, and after 9/11. Or when a country is in peace and under attack and in a state of emergency. A reasonable person would assume that the immediate response to a plane entering restricted airspace in a time of peace is to radio it and tell the pilot to move away. A reasonable person would also assume that the time it takes to distinguish between a plane inadvertently going off-course and a plane purposely going to crash into a specific building may not be enough to take the more adequate measures, especially back when probably no one would believe someone would try to use a plane as a weapon.

      A reasonable person would assume that. You seemingly didn’t. What does that tells me about you? Oh, and for all your bluster about me not knowing what I was talking about, you didn’t correct anything I wrote. What was that all about?

      Anyway, seeing how you only took offence at the suggestion that pre-9/11 airspace security protocols might be less strict than current one, I take it you have no objections to the other possible explanations I gave for your queries?

  24. Peggy says

    Dec 9, 2016 at 10:06 am

    Angemon said:

    Guess what? JW has been up for over 10 years. And one of the values they spread is “freedom of speech”. Your attempts (both you and Peggy) to police speech run counter to it. JW is doing fine without tone cops. I suggest you use your energy for something else.
    ========================
    Wow what a hypocrite.

    You go around attacking people who dare to say anything positive about Russia, or dare to have a different opinion to yours and you whinge when someone pulls you up on things like that.
    Guess what sunshine, others have the right to their opinions without being told they are trolls, paid foreign infiltrators, or ridiculed.
    You are the one who starts on everyone and when you get as good as you give you complain and bring back pieces of posts from ages ago which only tell part of a story.
    You don’t bring back posts from people who used bad language, bullied and attacked people and drove them to complain to moderators.

    Not long ago Marc had to get involved when you just kept going on and on and on like a Duracell bunny.
    You are the biggest bully on this site which means you should be the last person to complain about anyone being rude.

    • Wellington says

      Dec 11, 2016 at 10:46 pm

      With respect, Peggy, I have never found Angemon to be a bully. Rather, I have found him to be a person with a ruthless (and razor sharp) pursuit of the truth, which I think is not only admirable but necessary in any time and especially in our time. Some of what Angemon states here at JW may appear to be bullying to some, but it has never come across that way to me.

      I admire him a lot. Just for the record and all that.

      • Angemon says

        Dec 12, 2016 at 7:30 am

        Thank you, Wellington 🙂

    • Tradiguy says

      Dec 12, 2016 at 3:33 am

      Good post Peggy. I have not been on here long and have already sorted those that can’t stand another opinion. I will not be rude, objectionable or troll like. All I ask is for people to look at the evidence with an open mind. The one question I asked I note has never been answered- ” Why did Building 7 collapse as in a controlled demolition?” I’m still waiting for an answer. Why? I believe folk don’t want to stare down the Rabbit hole- it might be a bit too filthy down there. JW is an amazing breath of fresh air where the truth, however unpalatable, is examined and expressed. I have no objection to an alternative opinion, I just wish some could express it a little more gracefully.

      • Angemon says

        Dec 12, 2016 at 7:38 am

        tradiguy posted:

        “I have not been on here long and have already sorted those that can’t stand another opinion. (…) All I ask is for people to look at the evidence with an open mind. ”

        The irony is not dripping here, it’s flowing like the Victoria Falls. Can you stand the “opinion” that 9/11 was NOT an inside job?

        The one question I asked I note has never been answered- ” Why did Building 7 collapse as in a controlled demolition?

        You didn’t ask that question up until now. Anyway, Building 7 was damaged by debris from the Twin Towers, wasn’t it? Caught fire and everything. My turn now: how does Khalid Sheikh Mohammed fit in your little narrative that the American government was behind 9/11? I’m asking because of this recent article:

        https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/11/911-mastermind-credits-george-w-bush-with-preventing-more-jihad-attacks-in-us

        But perhaps the most riveting part of the book is what KSM told Mitchell about what inspired al-Qaeda to attack the United States — and the U.S. response he expected. (…) He also said he thought we would treat 9/11 as a law enforcement matter, just as we had the bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania and the USS Cole in Yemen — arresting some operatives and firing a few missiles into empty tents, but otherwise leaving him free to plan the next attack.

        “Then he looked at me and said, ‘How was I supposed to know that cowboy George Bush would announce he wanted us ‘dead or alive’ and then invade Afghanistan to hunt us down?’” Mitchell writes. “KSM explained that if the United States had treated 9/11 like a law enforcement matter, he would have had time to launch a second wave of attacks.” He was not able to do so because al-Qaeda was stunned “by the ferocity and swiftness of George W. Bush’s response.”

        • Tradiguy says

          Dec 12, 2016 at 7:50 am

          Building 7 wasn’t touched by debris. It didn’t catch fire and then you have Silverstein who had taken insurance out for billions shortly before the event saying “we decided to pull the building” – an expression used in demolition! I’ll leave it with you or I’ll be accused of being mentally sub normal again. With the relatively small amount of damage the planes caused ( and the word here is ‘relatively ‘ ) I would argue that every skyscraper in America is in danger of falling down. In fact, with natural events such as hurricanes and storms applying far greater forces on buildings I would give this advice- Keep away from those buildings guys!

        • Angemon says

          Dec 22, 2016 at 1:53 pm

          Tradiguy posted:

          “Building 7 wasn’t touched by debris. It didn’t catch fire”

          I guess the video and photos must be faked then – part of the conspiracy, am I right?

          “and then you have Silverstein who had taken insurance out for billions shortly before the event saying “we decided to pull the building” – an expression used in demolition!”

          Even if that is true, it’s circumstantial evidence, at best.I guess your “scepticism” goes out the window when it comes to something you believe in…

          “With the relatively small amount of damage the planes caused ( and the word here is ‘relatively ‘ ) I would argue that every skyscraper in America is in danger of falling down. In fact, with natural events such as hurricanes and storms applying far greater forces on buildings I would give this advice- Keep away from those buildings guys!”

          Yes, because hurricanes and storms crash into buildings and set them on fire all the time…

    • Angemon says

      Dec 12, 2016 at 7:13 am

      Peggy posted:

      “Wow what a hypocrite.”

      Let me guess: you’re not going to actually prove I’m a hypocrite, are you? You’re not going to point to posts of mine and say “you’re here saying such and such but in this other instance you’re doing the exact opposite”, are you? You’re just going to fling insults around, like a monkey with its feces.

      “You go around attacking people who dare to say anything positive about Russia,”

      By which you mean that I rightfully criticize Russia when and/or where criticism is warranted. Oh, and for someone who accused me of always bringing up Russia no matter what, way to bring up Russia for no apparent reason.

      Answer me this: if someone were to say that Russia is colonizing the moon, created the cure for cancer and AIDS and has the best living standards in the world, and I asked evidence for any of that, would you describe that as me “attacking people who dare to say anything positive about Russia”?

      “or dare to have a different opinion to yours”

      Because, apparently, I’m not allowed to express myself or have different “opinions” – if someone says something I disagree with, or something that is demonstrably false, I’m supposed to shut up and not defend my case. Just me, no one else. Nice little set of standards you got there…

      “and you whinge when someone pulls you up on things like that.”

      Says the brat who implied I was lying after I accurately pointed out something you wrote… Anyway, citation needed. What do you mean by “thing like that”? That when I see someone who is not a member of the site staff trying to act as such I call them out? Remember, you called me a hypocrite, so I expect you to point to specific events and posts to back your claims.

      “Guess what sunshine, others have the right to their opinions without being told they are trolls, paid foreign infiltrators, or ridiculed.”

      Says a user who has tried to ridicule me, implied I was lying after I accurately pointed out something you wrote, etc. Funny wording – “others have the right to such and such” – apparently, those rights are not extended to me and, as such, me pointing out that Noel is not the rudeness police warrant and justify this libellous smear piece… This brings up what today is a hot issue: “hate speech is not protected speech”. Which is exactly what you’re arguing for in this case – that there are thing users here – well, seemingly just me – shouldn’t say to others – well, seemingly just you.

      How are you any different, in nature, from the leftards who try to silence dissenting thought by accusing them of engaging in “hate speech”? What do you feel you’re allowed to fling unsubstantiated insults at me but I can’t call you a troll for doing so?

      “You are the one who starts on everyone”

      Rubbish. I don’t even reply to most people here. Why the dramatic hyperbole? How old are you, 15?

      “and when you get as good as you give you complain and bring back pieces of posts from ages ago which only tell part of a story.”

      You mean, after you chastise me for saying or doing something that you then go on to do, I point out you’re a hypocrite? Because, from my experience, that’s usually the kind of even that triggers a response of “when you get as good as you give” from you – for example, you complain about my allegedly crude language, then you use cruder language and when asked about it you try to excuse yourself with something along the limes of “you’re getting as good as you give, so shut up“.

      The issue is not me “getting as good as I give”, the issue is that you go out of your way to chastise me for doing something, or speaking in a certain language, as if it were a matter of principle to you, the implication being that you would never, ever do such a thing, and then you go and do the same, only to excuse yourself with “well, you’re doing it too”. That, my dear, is hypocrisy. If you’re going to use crude language, do it. If you’re not going to use crude language, then don’t, and then you can get on your high horse and ride it to the top of the moral high ground. You can’t have it both ways, though.

      “You don’t bring back posts from people who used bad language, bullied and attacked people and drove them to complain to moderators.”

      Who exactly complained about moderators about me? Who made you the arbiter of what constitutes “bullying” or an “attack”? What exactly did the moderators say in those alleged cases? Oh, and didn’t you just complain about me bringing “back pieces of posts from ages ago which only tell part of a story“? At least I bring something I can point out to instead of doing like you and making libellous assertions that require taking you at face value. And seeing how you tried to discredit me as a liar after I accurately pointed out something you wrote…

      “Not long ago Marc had to get involved when you just kept going on and on and on like a Duracell bunny.”

      Again: didn’t you just complain about me bringing “back pieces of posts from ages ago which only tell part of a story“? At least I bring something I can point out to instead of doing like you and making libellous assertions that require taking you at face value. Please point to this alleged event. All I remember is you badgering marc in public (you could have simply emailed him) to try to get a special status where I wouldn’t be able to reply to your posts. You dragging marc into your little drama-fest is not the same as marc having to get involved, is it?

      So, what instance are you referring to where marc allegedly had to get involved? Please link to the incident in question.

      “You are the biggest bully on this site”

      Says the crybully.

      “which means you should be the last person to complain about anyone being rude.”

      Rubbish. Regardless of whether I’m a bully or not, I have the same right as everyone else here to complain about rudeness. Unlike others here, though, I don’t go around telling people they are being rude and need to stop posting, nor do I go around contacting site staff and whining about coarse language. Funny how you leave that out. And it seems you have a reading/comprehension issue: I’m not the one trying to act as tone/rudeness police, I’m merely criticizing someone who tried to act as such.

      Finally, Peggy, I’ll point out that I was not addressing you, I was replying to Noel. For someone who goes well out of her way to signal virtue by saying you don’t reply to posts of mine (with the later added-on caveat of “unless I reply to you first”), you’re transgressing your own made up rules. Way to go… And, of course, if you had your way, I wouldn’t be able to defend myself from this vicious piece of libel of you, because it required me to reply to you when you were not addressing me directly – you would be free to say whatever you wanted about me and I wouldn’t be able to do anything about it.

FacebookYoutubeTwitterLog in

Subscribe to the Jihad Watch Daily Digest

You will receive a daily mailing containing links to the stories posted at Jihad Watch in the last 24 hours.
Enter your email address to subscribe.

Please wait...

Thank you for signing up!
If you are forwarding to a friend, please remove the unsubscribe buttons first, as they my accidentally click it.

Subscribe to all Jihad Watch posts

You will receive immediate notification.
Enter your email address to subscribe.
Note: This may be up to 15 emails a day.

Donate to JihadWatch
FrontPage Mag

Search Site

Translate

The Team

Robert Spencer in FrontPageMag
Robert Spencer in PJ Media

Articles at Jihad Watch by
Robert Spencer
Hugh Fitzgerald
Christine Douglass-Williams
Andrew Harrod
Jamie Glazov
Daniel Greenfield

Contact Us

Terror Attacks Since 9/11

Archives

  • 2020
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2019
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2018
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2017
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2016
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2015
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2014
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2013
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2012
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2011
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2010
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2009
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2008
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2007
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2006
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2005
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2004
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2003
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • March

All Categories

You Might Like

Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Recent Comments

  • Michael Copeland on New study reveals that Muslim religiosity strongly linked to hatred towards the West
  • Michael Copeland on New study reveals that Muslim religiosity strongly linked to hatred towards the West
  • Westman on New study reveals that Muslim religiosity strongly linked to hatred towards the West
  • gravenimage on Erdogan: ‘Turks must defend the rights of Jerusalem, even with their lives’ for ‘the honor of the Islamic nation’
  • gravenimage on Erdogan: ‘Turks must defend the rights of Jerusalem, even with their lives’ for ‘the honor of the Islamic nation’

Popular Categories

dhimmitude Sharia Jihad in the U.S ISIS / Islamic State / ISIL Iran Free Speech

Robert Spencer FaceBook Page

Robert Spencer Twitter

Robert Spencer twitter

Robert Spencer YouTube Channel

Books by Robert Spencer

Jihad Watch® is a registered trademark of Robert Spencer in the United States and/or other countries - Site Developed and Managed by Free Speech Defense

Content copyright Jihad Watch, Jihad Watch claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to their respective owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and you do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.

Our mailing address is: David Horowitz Freedom Center, P.O. Box 55089, Sherman Oaks, CA 91499-1964

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.