This Union Leader article is a particularly noxious example of how law enforcement authorities and the establishment media treat charges that a mosque may be teaching jihad and Islamic supremacism. As always, instead of investigating the charges and reporting on them accurately, they shoot the messenger.
“On a scale of 1 -10, with 10 being the most extreme, I rate this mosque a 10,” wrote David Gaubatz, who says he travels extensively investigating mosques. He says he visited Manchester’s Islamic center on June 30.
ISNH Chairman Mohammed Ewiess said these unsubstantiated charges are “full of lies” and have spread distrust of his community.
The Union Leader offers no details of why Gaubatz gave the mosque this rating. All it tells us is that the mosque chairman said these “unsubstantiated charges” (what were the charges?) were “full of lies” and that he claimed victim status (why? Have racist, redneck yahoos targeted his community? Probably not).
The Union Leader doesn’t bother to mention, and probably didn’t bother to find out, that four separate studies since 1999 all found that 80% of U.S. mosques were teaching jihad, Islamic supremacism, and hatred and contempt for Jews and Christians. There are no countervailing studies that challenge these results. In 1998, Sheikh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani, a Sufi Muslim leader, visited 114 mosques in the United States. Then he gave testimony before a State Department Open Forum in January 1999, and asserted that 80% of American mosques taught the “extremist ideology.” Then there was the Center for Religious Freedom’s 2005 study, and the Mapping Sharia Project’s 2008 study. Each independently showed that upwards of 80% of mosques in America were preaching hatred of Jews and Christians and the necessity ultimately to impose Islamic rule.
In the summer of 2011 came another study showing that only 19% of mosques in U.S. don’t teach jihad violence and/or Islamic supremacism. Specifically: “A random survey of 100 representative mosques in the U.S. was conducted to measure the correlation between Sharia adherence and dogma calling for violence against non-believers. Of the 100 mosques surveyed, 51% had texts on site rated as severely advocating violence; 30% had texts rated as moderately advocating violence; and 19% had no violent texts at all. Mosques that presented as Sharia adherent were more likely to feature violence-positive texts on site than were their non-Sharia-adherent counterparts. In 84.5% of the mosques, the imam recommended studying violence-positive texts. The leadership at Sharia-adherent mosques was more likely to recommend that a worshiper study violence-positive texts than leadership at non-Sharia-adherent mosques. Fifty-eight percent of the mosques invited guest imams known to promote violent jihad. The leadership of mosques that featured violence-positive literature was more likely to invite guest imams who were known to promote violent jihad than was the leadership of mosques that did not feature violence-positive literature on mosque premises.” That means that around 1,700 mosques in the U.S. are preaching hatred of infidels and justifying violence against them.
None of that is in the Union Leader article. All we get is this:
Manchester Police Chief Nick Willard said his detective embedded in the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force has no information that corroborates Gaubatz’s claims.
“What he wrote in this piece of paper is slanderous. I do not believe the mosque is a hotbed for terrorism. I don’t trust this gentleman’s research. I think he is trying to sell a book,” Willard said.
“I think the guy is a crackpot and I don’t believe we have those issues in this city.”
So Willard invokes the FBI’s JTTF. He doesn’t mention, and probably doesn’t know, that the FBI is forbidden to study anything involving Islam in connection with terrorism, and so it wouldn’t know the danger signs to look for in a mosque even if those danger signs stabbed them with a four-foot sword while screaming “Allahu akbar.” Willard offers an argument from authority, the weakest of all arguments, in invoking the JTTF, without establishing that the JTTF is competent in this area. He then offers an ad hominem attack on Gaubatz, asserting (with what evidence?) that Gaubatz is just trying to sell a book and is a “crackpot.” This is a classic example of “‘Shut up!,’ he explained,” and lends credence to Gaubatz’s claims: clearly the Manchester Police Department doesn’t even want to consider the possibility that there may be problems with this mosque. So if there really are, what then?
At the last Manchester Board of Aldermen meeting, when former Ward 2 Republican State Rep. Greg Salts brought Gaubatz’s report to their attention, several rose in protest of it.
“Personally this hate talk has no place in this city, that’s just my opinion,” said Alderman Chairman Patrick Long.
Alderman-at-Large Dan O’Neil said having this read aloud gave it too much legitimacy.
“There is no need in the city of Manchester for hatred,” O’Neil said. “I know this board won’t stand for it; our citizens won’t stand for it.”
Long and O’Neil ought to be ashamed of themselves, if they still have that capacity, and ought to be voted out of office at the earliest possible opportunity. It is not “hatred” to raise legitimate concerns about what is taught in mosques, given the survey information above, as well as the fact that 80% of mosques in the U.S. are Saudi-funded, and the reality of Islam’s teachings on jihad, the rights of women, Jews, etc. To smear Gaubatz as spreading hate without any investigation of his specific assertions about the mosque is to do what they claim he is doing.
“He stokes the flames of fear, but he does so through hatred, bigotry and intolerance,” Willard said of Gaubatz.
“His islamophobia has no place in our country and certainly no place in the fine city of Manchester that embraces diversity of all levels to include freedom of religion.”
“Islamophobia” is a propaganda term designed to intimidate people into fearing to oppose jihad terror. Willard’s statement here is a classic example of how it works. What if Gaubatz’s claims about the mosque are true, and this is the response he is getting? In the future, people will be afraid to speak up about what they may see going on in mosques, for fear of incurring charges of “hatred” and “Islamophobia.”
But Chief Willard needs to be put on notice: if Gaubatz’s charges are true, and you waved them away just by defaming him, then when it becomes clear that he was right, the responsibility for the devastation in Manchester will be on your head.
“N.H. mosque defended after extremism claim,” by Kevin Landrigan, New Hampshire Union Leader, August 26, 2017:
MANCHESTER – Inside the second floor of a nondescript, office space in a South Willow Street strip mall here, 300 men of diverse cultures and one faith stand, squat and kneel in unison Friday afternoon while their religious leader counsels the flock of the Islamic Society of New Hampshire.
“The way we do it is with action and kindness, promoting goodness and love,” said Imam Sherif Shabaka.
“We have to show ourselves; let our neighbors know they are safe around us.”
But one author, who claims to have a dossier about this holy place maintains the temporary mosque is anything but a safe haven and his explosive report touched off plenty of push back from many quarters in Manchester.
“On a scale of 1 -10, with 10 being the most extreme, I rate this mosque a 10,” wrote David Gaubatz, who says he travels extensively investigating mosques. He says he visited Manchester’s Islamic center on June 30.
ISNH Chairman Mohammed Ewiess said these unsubstantiated charges are “full of lies” and have spread distrust of his community.
“When people insist and go the extra mile to harm you in this sneaky way, why do I have to defend myself when all I do is come and pray, I pay taxes, I am a good businessman,” Ewiess said.
Manchester Police Chief Nick Willard said his detective embedded in the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force has no information that corroborates Gaubatz’s claims.
“What he wrote in this piece of paper is slanderous. I do not believe the mosque is a hotbed for terrorism. I don’t trust this gentleman’s research. I think he is trying to sell a book,” Willard said.
“I think the guy is a crackpot and I don’t believe we have those issues in this city.”
‘Hate talk has no place’
Gaubatz is the author of “Muslim Mafia,” an undercover story in 2009 about the Council on Islamic Relations that ended up in a protracted lawsuit and a judge’s order that he turn back over to the court thousands of documents he had obtained.
During a telephone interview, Gaubatz said he’s worked in the Middle East since 1978, has visited more than 280 mosques here and that many of those mosques get a 1 or 2 rating from him.
He also claimed Manchester’s mosque is more extreme than others.
At the last Manchester Board of Aldermen meeting, when former Ward 2 Republican State Rep. Greg Salts brought Gaubatz’s report to their attention, several rose in protest of it.
“Personally this hate talk has no place in this city, that’s just my opinion,” said Alderman Chairman Patrick Long.
Alderman-at-Large Dan O’Neil said having this read aloud gave it too much legitimacy.
“There is no need in the city of Manchester for hatred,” O’Neil said. “I know this board won’t stand for it; our citizens won’t stand for it.”
Gaubatz said he’s not surprised Manchester police and others would reject his work.
“I get that same reaction a lot of the time. They don’t want to admit they have a problem in their area and it took an outsider to find it and identify it,” Gaubatz said.
ISNH President Ewiess questions if Gaubatz ever really came here.
“I do not think this guy physically visited our mosque. We are always there, the imam is there, the board members go there daily. I do not know when he went or how or who he spoke to if he did,” Ewiess said….
Chief Willard agreed these attacks must be answered.
“He stokes the flames of fear, but he does so through hatred, bigotry and intolerance,” Willard said of Gaubatz.
“His islamophobia has no place in our country and certainly no place in the fine city of Manchester that embraces diversity of all levels to include freedom of religion.”
Emilie Green says
Good sign of a whitewash in progress – no comments allowed to the story.
In EVERY youtube video from CAIR comments are ALWAYS disabled.
Greyhound Fancier says
Keep your heads in the sand, Manchester City Council.
Guy Forester says
I do not think it is sand.
John Forbes says
Has ISLAMOPHOBIA now entered the Legal System as a bookable offence? IF so This will be the end of FREE SPEECH in this state at least !
Remember that the Muslim Brotherhood & People like HOOPER of C.A.I.R are determined to push ISLAM & SHARIA clauses into US areas to destroy democracy from the inside !
ISLAMOPHOBIA is the beginning of serious Blasphemy laws ! INQUISITION USA ???
As the MUSLIM % grows the character changes from the calls for MINORITY RIGHTS & PROTECTION to one demanding SUBSERVIENCE & Special & Exclusive rights above others !
What is frightening is that so few seem to understand & in the Governments the Brotherhood seems to have lEFTIST allies who support the Actions as well !
Nannette says
Alderman Chairman Patrick Long prefers to have people killed by terrorism in his city than to hear criticism of jihadism.
dumbledoresarmy says
It seems that he would rather that Muslims murder infidels in the street, than that Muslims hear any public criticism or questioning of the goodness, perfection, and right-to-Rule of Islam and Muslims. He has internalised the Quranic dictum – “persecution [translation: ‘persecution’ = ANY act or word of Infidels that is deemed offensive, by Muslims] is worse than slaughter [of infidels, by Muslims].”
Oliver says
Re. New Hampshire. Pres. Trump mentioned and the Wall Street Journal had a story and editorial about the drug addiction there.
So perhaps the police chief and citycouncil members are just stoned
dumbledoresarmy says
Might be interesting to do a bit of digging and find out whether the Mohammedans in New Hampshire – not excluding the mohammedans associated with this particular mosque! – are involved in any way with the importation and/ or manufacture and sale / pushing of illegal drugs. Hezbollah, after all, makes a LOT of its money from the drug trade.
In Australia, the *minute* that Mohammedans from the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon arrived in force in the late 1970s early 1980s, they started bringing in heroin and soon they were up to their *ears* in the illegal drug scene – smuggling the stuff in, or manufacturing it here, and selling it. As well as other kinds of criminal activity such as ‘car rebirthing’. Within a decade or so, the NSW police force had had to create “The Middle Eastern Organised Crime Squad” and it is one of the largest and busiest arms of the police force in that state.. .and the VAST majority of perps that they manage to catch, are Mohammedans.
John A. Marre says
New Hampshire was once a great place, and a refuge from the madness that’s all around us. Looks like there are no more places left to go to escape.
Islam’s promoters are everwhere now, and are working actively to change the face of America from lukewarm Christian, to fervent Muslim.
somehistory says
So they don’t investigate to see if what he wrote was true or not. They just take the side of those who belong to an organization that is known world-wide to host terrorists, promote terror, preach hatred, advocate the rape of small children, etc.
Look a snake in the fangs and then say it is hateful to claim that it will bite. Not the brightest bulbs and they are the ones making important decisions for the entire community.
It’s a win for the wild beast from satan.
traci94 says
Why are all these people in such a rush to label Gaubatz as Islamophobic and a hater? They won’t even consider the possibility that his testimony could be true.
Ren says
It is crazy! We have to get rid of “islamophobia”.
mortimer says
Bring on the court case. David Gaubatz will be able to lay out his evidence in a leisurely manner and DEMOLISH the mosque ideologically.
mortimer says
David Gaubatz and investigators like him are doing an invaluable service in exposing WARLIKE MUSLIM TEACHERS so that the authorities can prosecute them.
The FBI should be doing what private investigators are doing by monitoring mosques’ teachings.
What most law enforcement agents do NOT know is that Islam has a doctrine of HATRED and WARFARE directed against non-Muslim disbelievers (kufaar in Arabic).
Muslims ‘HATE’ the kufaar ‘for the sake of Allah’ and fight them until they become Muslims… as long as it takes. The holy warfare against dirty KAFIRS goes on as long as it takes.
Wellington says
“Hate talk has no place.”
Well, OK then, time to accurately characterize Islam as one of the greatest hate systems of all time.
But that’s not going to happen, now is it?
WorkingClassPost says
Just what is going on?
This is an assessment of a particular mosk, not an attack on islam or muslims, so where does the accusation of hate and islamofobia come from?
Anyone working within the legal system knows that such an accusation needs to be investigated, period.
Judgements are for judges and/or juries, so what part of ‘due process’ don’t these twits understand?
Wellington says
I know New Hampshire quite well. With the exception of Pennsylvania I know no state better. So all this saddens me greatly. The Live Free Or Die state, which motto of said state is my favorite of all fifty, will NEVER be better served where freedom is concerned by Islam.
No way. No how. Never.
God, Islam poisons everything it touches. In this instance, it’s New Hampshire. Islam is, a la Ataturk, the ravings of an immoral seventh-century Bedouin, it is a rotting corpse that poisons our lives.
Right now it poisoning New Hampshire. And many other places.
Ashley says
With the exception of Pennsylvania I know no state better.
_________________
In the hopes of giving some levity to this post, here’s hoping you are a Prates/Steelers fan!
Guy Forester says
I have read books that went into great detail regarding the 1993 WTC and 9/11 WTC attacks. The warning signs were there. The investigators that sought diligently to show the connections, show the dangers, and alert everyone were systematically removed or blocked in their efforts.
Add to this Phil Haney’s story regarding the why and how he was pushed out of investigating the threats from the adherents of the religion we dare not name. He was required to destroy all of his data and research that showed the who, what, where, and why.
I used to think Assange and Snowden were wrong and criminals. Now, not so sure. What other important info is lurking out there that shows ineptitude, willful ignorance, and probably even collusion?
Trump needs to quit his @#!% tweeting and get some people in there to clean house. These stupid rules that prevent investigators from following leads based upon religion are just as bad as creating some based solely upon religion. Does anyone think the MSM, ACLU, and CAIR would object if a radical Hindu, Jewish, or Christian sect started teaching active warfare against other religions or the US got targeted and investigated by the FBI?
Lydia says
In their world, there is no such thing as decrying islamic terrorism that is a fact, there is only ‘islamophobia’ and truth denial.
Matthieu Baudin says
“…instead of investigating the charges and reporting on them accurately, they shoot the messenger…”
They don’t take any responsibility for selective inaction. So Militant controlled Mosques continue to cause trouble and promote the ideals of terrorists in New Hampshire while across the Atlantic the ‘child sex grooming gangs’ operated with near impunity instead of being crushed.
dumbledoresarmy says
From the article – “At the last Manchester Board of Aldermen meeting, when former Ward 2 Republican State Rep. Greg Salts brought Gaubatz’s report to their attention, several rose in protest of it.
“Personally this hate talk has no place in this city, that’s just my opinion,” said Alderman Chairman Patrick Long.
“Alderman-at-Large Dan O’Neil said having this [report] read aloud gave it too much legitimacy.
“There is no need in the city of Manchester for hatred,” O’Neil said. “I know this board won’t stand for it; our citizens won’t stand for it.”…
“…Chief Willard agreed these attacks must be answered.
“He stokes the flames of fear, but he does so through hatred, bigotry and intolerance,” Willard said of Gaubatz.
“His islamophobia has no place in our country and certainly no place in the fine city of Manchester that embraces diversity of all levels to include freedom of religion.”END QUOTE.
Let’s translate some of those statements, shall we?
(1) “Personally this hate talk has no place in this city, that’s just my opinion”.
Translation – “How dare anybody criticise Islam in this city!”
(2) “…There is no need in the city of Manchester for hatred,”
Translation: “How dare anybody in this city criticise Islam!”
(3)” He stokes the flames of fear, but he does so through hatred, bigotry and intolerance,” Willard said of Gaubatz.”
Translation – “He’s a blasphemer! He *dares* to warn Infidels that Muslims are taught to hate, despise and attack them!”
“His islamophobia has no place in our country and certainly no place in the fine city of Manchester that embraces diversity of all levels to include freedom of religion.”
Translation: “He must not be allowed to warn anyone in our country or in our city that there is such a thing as a global Jihad waged against all Infidels. The Islamisation of Manchester, its steady reduction – by a combination of deception and main force – to an Islamic monoculture, must proceed without impediment”.
Whether they themselves would acknowledge it or not, the *implications* of what they have said boils down to what I have set down as a ‘translation’.
dumbledoresarmy says
Of course, there is one small glimmer of hope in the article. The assembled dhimmis and jihad-enablers were only able to expose the extent of their islamopandering, by the fact that someone at that Council meeting had *read the report*.
“At the last Manchester Board of Aldermen meeting, when former Ward 2 Republican State Rep. Greg Salts brought Gaubatz’s report to their attention, several rose in protest of it…”.
If Mr Salts brought it to the attention of the meeting of Aldermen, because he was taking it seriously and indeed *believed* Gaubatz’s warning, then Mr Salts is to be commended.
Could New Hampshire jihadwatchers please get in touch with Mr Salts and find out where he stands?
Did he bring that report to the meeting because he disagreed with its findings – and intended to set off the responses that ensued – or … because he *agreed* with its findings, was concerned, and felt it incumbent upon himself to *warn* the city what was going on in this sinister little mosque??
If the latter – if he is to some extent Islamoaware – then he will need *support and encouragement*.
Phil Copson says
“He stokes the flames of fear….. through hatred, bigotry and intolerance,” Willard said of Gaubatz.
“His islamophobia has….no place in the fine city of Manchester that embraces diversity of all levels to include freedom of religion.” – Police Chief Nick Willard
“….this hate talk has no place in this city…” Alderman Chairman Patrick Long
“There is no need in the city of Manchester for hatred,” Alderman-at-large Dan O’Neil
“full of lies.” – ISNH Chairman Mohammed Ewiess.
By accusing Gaubatz of “hate talk” and “Islamophobia”, Willard, Long, and O’Neill plainly intend the listener to understand that Gaubatz is lying in his account of what is preached – (at least Eweiss comes out and says it) – from previous experience, Gaubatz knew that his report would be dismissed in this way – so what steps did he take to provide proof ? – any recordings or witnesses ?
It would be nice to think of Gaubatz being able to sue these unlovely, craven people for slander/libel, but I doubt he has the funds. If he’s sure of his ground, maybe he should challenge them to sue him ?
Phil Copson says
“His islamophobia has….no place in the fine city of Manchester that embraces diversity of all levels to include freedom of religion.” – Police Chief Nick Willard
PS – Gaubatz, of course, doesn’t appear to have said a word to indicate that he regards Manchester as anything other than a “fine city”, or disputed it’s commitment to “diversity” and “freedom of religion”; for the pompous, shifty Willard to make these comments, just shows that he is trying to deflect attention from the actual matter at hand, and further smear Gaubatz.
Willard’s obvious view that “freedom of religion” excuses criminal activity in the form of inciting hatred and violence, shows that he has totally surrendered and is unfit for public office.
Kathlaleena says
I live in NH and only 35 minutes from this mosque and let me tell you this!!!! It scares the hell out of me!!!
politicalqrm says
I live in NH. Manchester is a city that has the dregs of society. Shootings, intense drug use are rampant.. I don’t go there if I don’t have to..
Gaubatz was telling the truth and the truth makes him a “hater”? How insane…
Kay says
Why hasn’t the ban on the FBI knowing about Islam been lifted? This is one of the reasons our current President took office.
Eagle Nest says
Does anyone know about the Wahhabist ideology — an austere form of Islam that insists on literal interpretation of the Quran and views those who disagree as enemies.” A practicing Muslim is unfit to be an American citizen. A good practicing Muslim knows the Koran, Sharia Law and the Hadith all require complete submission to Islam, which is antithetical to the US government, the Constitution, and the Republic. All Muslims who attest that the Koran is their life’s guiding principal subscribe to submission to Islam and its form of government and no other. The freedom of speech should allow the truth to come out as an education for the American people to see and hopefully understand the Muslim threat to the American people and the American core beliefs. Think twice before inviting a Muslim into your heart and the community. The Muslim agenda is to push the Sharia Law on the American people and make demands that allow only the Muslims to be above the American law. This is part of the Muslim creed. Look around the world, the Mosques teach only hate for the non-believers of Islam. Chief Willard is naive or has decided to join the Muslim propaganda machine perpetuated by CAIR, the Muslim Brotherhood and Keith Ellison. Legislation will pass and this fake religion will leave this country as a well known hate cult of the American culture and the American core beliefs as the enemy of the American people.
Watchman says
Several years ago in Manchester, Imam Siraj Wahhaj to invited to speak at a fundraiser. He was an unindicted co-conspirator from the first WTC bombing. As an imam in NYC, he invited Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman (the bling sheik) to his mosque to speak calling him “a respected scholar.” Well, the blind sheik is in jail for his role in the WTC bombing. Saraj has numerous controversial things he has said including,”I have a vision in America, Muslims owning property all over, Muslim businesses, factories, halal meat, supermarkets, all these buildings owned by Muslims. Can you see the vision, can you see the Newark International Airport and a John Kennedy Airport and La Guradia having Muslim fleets of planes, Muslim pilots. Can you see our trucks rolling down the highways, Muslim names. Can you imagine walking down the streets of Teaneck, [New Jersey]: three Muslim high schools, five Muslim junior-high schools, fifteen public schools. Can you see the vision, can you see young women walking down the street of Newark, New Jersey, with long flowing hijab and long dresses. Can you see the vision of an area … controlled by the Muslims?” And Imam Siraj Wahaj, an African-American convert to Islam, and a prominent cleric and scholar of Islam in the United States was quoted as saying the following in 1992, in reference to the supposed opening of a gay mosque in Toronto: “I would burn down the masjid (mosque) myself, if I could.” And, Siraj Wahaj, a U.S. black convert to Islam declared in the recent past that “if only Muslims were clever politically, they could take over the United States and replace its constitutional govt. with a caliphate. If we were united and strong, he said, we would elect our own emir and give allegiance to him. Take my word if 8 million Muslims unite in America, the country will come to us.”
Bill Shackelford says
President Trump, rarely able to articulate what his intuition tells him, is a bit like President Reagan: neither fared particularly well in debate, both sensed evil/