Taking the Jihad Temperature - A Gathering Storm Special Series – DISINFORMATION Part 5

If you throw a frog into boiling water, he will jump out. If you put it in cold water and slowly turn up the heat, he will not notice the rise in temperature and will eventually boil. 

The Islamists are boiling our frog and though this blog and hundreds like it record almost daily the rise in the Jihad temperature, unless we see how far and fast the temperature has risen, we will not know how far along our boiling has progressed. 

So, the Gathering Storm will be posting only once a week but these weekly posts will take the Jihadist temperature by looking back at news and events over the last two years. Over the next several weeks in the areas of intimidation, infiltration, disinformation and those appeasers and apologists who either knowingly or unknowingly advance the Jihad agenda, the Gathering Storm will show how far our frog has been boiled. 

By seeing the boiling water around us, we can see how far the boiling has progressed. 

The good news is that we are noticing that the water is getting warmer. There is a glimmer of awareness here - a glimmer of hope there. But we have a long way to go. 

Here’s this week’s look back at the rising Jihad temperature of DISINFORMATION !! And remember – this is just a sampling of Jihadist Disinformation. More to follow.

Storm Track Disinformation: Civil Rights Is A Form of Critizing Islam

Please remove all breakable objects in your immediate surroundings before reading this.

Done? Good. Here it goes.

There exist a concerted attempt to undermine Islam and Muslims, in Malaysia, today. This structured effort is being generated from outside Malaysia and if unchecked, will lead to further instability with regards to the acceptance and sensitivities of Malaysian Muslim majority towards conversion outside Islam.

In a recent landmark case where Lina Joy wished to omit the word “Islam” from her MyKad, no longer depicting her faith in Islam, the Chief Justice of Malaysia ruled that “one cannot embrace or leave religion according to one’s whims and fancies”.

It was seen as people taking advantage of the case for their own narrow quest. Some say it was an attempt to test the system which protected the interests of the predominant Malay Muslim majority. The case attracted a lot of NGOs from abroad, hiding under the veil of universal values such as human rights.

Now, we can’t have that! How dare the world hold Islam to the concept of universal human rights? How dare they! But why stop at government issued identity cards as excuses for establishing human rights. What’s that saying. If you find yourself in hole – stop digging.

However, the structured effort still continue. Some of them tried to re-define and narrowly interpret Islam and/or the covenants and conventions that Islam stood for, for ill intent and skewed reasons. The Ministry of Internal Security recently banned 37 titles of books contained elements that will demean Islam, from the Malaysian perspective.

Another once moderate Muslim nation falls under the control of the Islamists.

Syariah Chief Judge Datuk Sheikh Ghazali Abdul Rahman said the decision meant that only the syariah court could judge cases involving Islam and apostates. "The decision cements the court as the authority on Islam in the country. If other courts were allowed to interject in Islamic cases, that would make the syariah court’s role redundant," he said.

Yep. Secular governments are redundant. Don’t need them. But there is some good news coming from that part of the world – and Muslims don’t like it one bit.

The Howard government recently outdid its Western masters in the war on terror, announcing that it would begin banning and restricting materials that it deemed to be promoting ‘terrorism’.

The announcement alarmed activists who are already worried about the way in which Canberra is living up to its status as deputy sheriff for the US. It is common knowledge that the latest book-banning move did not target works bearing titles such as “How To Make A Bomb”. Nor did it mean removing books praising Hizbullah – the kind of book that could not have made it into the Australian bookshelves anyway, thanks to the intensely Islamophobic campaign being championed by a tiny, but vocal and powerful, segment of the country.

It’s called self-defense and cultural protection. Australia gets it and see the danger of anything that smacks of Islamic fundamentalism and won’t be intimidated by Islamist propaganda claiming their rights are being violated.

We can learn a lot from the Aussies.

Storm Track Disinformation: CAIR’s Blatantly Insane About SANE

In a response to an Insight Magazine article on a new project by the Society of Americans for National Existence (SANE) called Mapping Shari’a in America, CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations and "unindicted co-conspirator" in a plot to fund the terrorist group Hamas) called SANE a ‘hate group” and accused them of advocating "adherence to Islam" be punishable by 20 years in prison.

If you read the Insight article you will see that nothing is further from the truth. CAIR is blatantly lying and spewing propaganda now that there is a project in the works that will reveal the rue nature of the Islamist infiltration – which CAIR supports – of many of the mosques in North America.

But before we get to disproving the lie, if you listened to the Gathering Storm Radio Show last week, we had David Yerushalmi, SANE President and Founder, as a guest. He made it very clear that SANE was NOT against the religion of Islam but the socio-political arm of the ideology called Islamism – Shari’a Law. Yerushalmi made two very important points.

First, if Muslims personally practice just the 5 pillars of Islam, there is no threat of Islam to the non-Muslims and moderate Muslim world. None of the 5 pillars of Islam demands that Muslim adhere to Shari’a Law. From the SANE response to CAIR.

“Shari’a” shall be defined as any set of rules, precepts, instructions, or edicts which emanate directly or indirectly from the god of Allah or the prophet Mohammed and which include directly or indirectly the encouragement of any person to support in any way the abrogation, destruction, or violation of the US Constitution or the destruction of the national existence of the United States of America. Any rule, precept, instruction, or edict arising from the extant rulings of any of the five authoritative schools of Islamic jurisprudence (the Hanafi, the Maliki, the Shafi'i, the Hanbali, or the Ja’afariya school or fiqh) are prima facie Shari’a without any further evidentiary showing.

So, did SANE say that "adherence to Islam" be punishable by 20 years in prison?

CAIR found SANE’s SANE Immigration Proposal, which calls for the outlawing of “Adherence to Islam”, outrageous. the definition of “Adherence to Islam” is defined carefully as follows:

“Adherence to Islam” shall be defined as any act, including any written or oral declaration, in support of Shari’a or in furtherance of the imposition of Shari’a within any territory of the United States of America. “Territory of the United States of America” shall be defined as any territory under the civilian or military control or governance of personnel acting for and on behalf of the US Government.

It’s not Islam that SANE is warning us about, but the ideology of Islamism which had as it’s final objective the imposition of Shari’a on the world. It's the adherence to Islamism that should carry the penalty of 20 years in prison. But of course, CAIR sees no distinction between Islam and Islamism because that's what they support.

Now, if CAIR wants to take the position that Islamic Law or Shari’a does not in any way seek to establish a worldwide Caliphate and that all of the legal decisions by the major Islamic schools of thought are simply false, we would be more than happy to challenge them to a debate.

But first, in order to prove their bona fides, we would ask them to go to Saudi Arabia or Islamabad or Beirut or Baghdad or Amman or Cairo and stand in the public square and begin announcing that Islamic Law rejects the political ideology that the world must submit to the will of Allah via adherence to Shari’a. Once they have done that, we will have won the debate by default for they would have been slaughtered on the spot by the Shari’a faithful who would murder them for being infidels.

Sounds like a good way to me to settle the debate one way or the other.

CAIR’s agenda if quite clear and their attack on SANE shows where their hearts and minds really lie - supporting the Islamafication of America.

Storm Track Disinformation: How the UN Will Fight Terrorism

UN wants to bridge Islam-West divide. The same UN that can’t bring itself to define terrorism let alone confront it. The UN High Representative for the Alliance of Civilizations Jorge Sampaio has outlined four components to bridge the divide between Islam and the Western world.

Sampaio told reporters at the UN headquarters in New York late Thursday that the four components, as presented to the organisation's Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, are education, the media, youth and migration.

It’s the same old wishy washy Kumbaya pap so fond of by the liberal left. Promote dialogue and understanding (Can we talk?) and forging collective political will to address the world's imbalances (It’s the West’s fault).

But the UN does propose a ‘rapid-response’ mechanism to combat terrorism. A military response? Nope. A media response.

"The media consists of the most powerful means to promote knowledge about other cultures, understanding and mutual respect," he said, adding that migration is "a natural bridge between diverse communities". According to a statement issued by the Alliance, the plan sets out a range of projects and initiatives which the alliance will support and help develop over the next two years.

They include a media fund to promote productions developed across cultural, religious and or national lines, a youth employment center aimed at increasing work opportunities for young people in the Middle East, and a project aimed at expanding international student exchange programmes. In addition, the alliance stated it will establish a "rapid response media-based mechanism" to provide platforms for constructive debate during times of increased tensions around cross-cultural issues.

Talk, talk, talk and even more talk. Respond to terrorism incidents with words? And not one word about the ideological threat itself - Islamism. If the UN will not identify the true enemy to civilization, how on earth can it combat it?

The Alliance of Civilizations was created in 2005 through the initiative of Spain and Turkey and under UN auspices to try to tackle fear and suspicion, bridge divides and overcome prejudices and polarisations between Islam and the West.

How nice. Spain who surrendered to the terrorists after the bombings in Madrid and Turkey who is in a life or death struggle with a rising Islamist faction that seeks to turn the clock back on Turkey 100 years.

But there are those that not bamboozle by this UN tom-foolery. They know the real reason for terrorism in the Muslim world and know how to deal with it - and from an Arab no less.

"In an article titled "How the Arabs Explain the Terror Phenomenon" in the Qatari daily Al-Raya, Al-Ansari criticized the ways in which the Arab world denies and ignores the phenomenon of terrorism, and refuted the political and socio-economic arguments justifying it.

"Why has the terrorist violence increased? And why has it reached a level of such madness and barbarism? Why aren't we managing to deal with it and handle it? Why is there a rise in terror operations targeting innocents?

"In my view, the [answer] lies in our inability to explain the phenomenon of terrorism, and to break it down into its structural internal causes and into the environmental elements that support its existence. [This inability] emanates from the following three main causes that are common in the Arab arena as explanations for terrorism:

"The first is the discourse of denial... that is, exonerating Muslims from [any] accusation of [perpetrating] terror operations, and [instead] accusing their enemies - usually the Mossad and U.S. intelligence. An extensive sector of prominent clerics, intellectual elites, and the masses are still convinced that 9/11 was a Mossad or U.S. intelligence operation...

"The second cause is the discourse of defensiveness, as manifested in repeated statements that terrorism has no religion, homeland or nationality, but is a transient virus that is alien [to the Arab world] - or that Islam is innocent [of terrorism].

"The third cause is the discourse of justification, which is extremely common in the religious and media outlets. This discourse tries to link terrorism with political factors, international conflicts or internal socio-economic factors - saying that terrorism is the outcome of political repression by some regimes that strangle freedoms and are hostile to democracy or that terrorism is a response to American and Western injustices, to the policy of discrimination [against Muslims], to the blind pro-Israel bias, and to the global conspiracy against the Muslims…

Now there’s a man that gets it!

"There are also those who excuse terrorism because of unemployment and poverty, or use as an excuse the spread of corruption, permissiveness, women's adorning themselves in public, [and women's] attaining political rights and being appointed to senior positions, which is considered perverse in the eyes of those [who excuse terrorism]."

The UN should stop listening to the elitists in Europe and America and pay attention to what’s being said by Muslims who get it.

Storm Track Disinformation: The Islamic Fantasy and the Reality

Three recent articles caught my attention today on Muslims and Islam which shows the disconnect between reality and those that live in a fantasy land.

First, from Todd’s Hammer.

Tariq Ramadan, the Swiss-Egyptian muslim, recently denied a visa to live in the United States while he was a visiting professor, wrote a piece for the Guardian last week in which he argued that Britons should stop looking at British Muslims for the answers to violence and start examining their own liberal values. He argues that integration is not the answer and that Muslim violence is the fault of the actions of the majority in Britain and elsewhere in Europe and America.

I guess he means the liberal values of personal freedom and the rights of the individual? Or the right to live the life you seem fit as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else? But he may be referring the values of sex, greed and violence that our splendid comrades in 'Follywood' trot acroos movie screens and TV to the world as our basic human values. But just because perdsonal freedom leads too many time license doesn't mean personal freedoms should be scapped becasue it offends someone's sensibilities.

In response, David Goodhart, editor of Prospect and longtime defender of Ramadan against his alarmist critics, takes the European-Muslim intellectual to task for falling into simplistic clichés, victimhood, and misplaced identification. Goodhart acknowledges the difficulties faced by strangers (i.e., minorities) in any culture, as humans tend to distrust the unknown, but argues that British Muslims enjoy a degree of freedom and prosperity unknown to them virtually anywhere else in the world, including in Islamic states. He further argues that Ramadan falls into tired habits of mind that see muslims as perpetual victims and refuses to take responsibility for its own actions.

That’s calling a spade a spade.

In all, it’s a great pair of readings and raises some of the most important questions of our time about multiculturalism, religious pluralism, and democracy.

Next, the fantasy from the New Culture Forum.

Alisdair Palmer has an excellent piece in the Sunday Telegraph on the report by the Commission on Integration and Cohesion into 'the dissemination of extremist ideologies' in Britain:

You search in vain for insights into the nature and dissemination of extremist ideologies, let alone for any form of practical solution to the dangers those ideologies present. There is just a lot of blather about the definitions of integration and cohesion, the difficulty of achieving either of them in practice, and the complexity of the various government agencies supposed to be involved in promoting them.

La-la-la is about the sum of it. Some of the commissions' recommendations are almost touching in their naivete. For example, they suggest that newly arrived immigrants be given "Welcome Packs" that explain the limits of acceptable behaviour in Britain. A spokesman for the commission suggested that "the packs may say that we like to queue at the post office and we don't really like spitting in the street". There is nothing about how, in Britain, one of our "core values" is that we're not too keen on a father who, in order to protect what he believes is his family's "honour", garottes, smothers or stabs his daughter 23 times because she wants to choose her own husband; that we do not believe that a son who is homosexual should be murdered; or that Jews are pigs, Christians are cross-worshippers, and Hindus deserve death.

The commissioners decided to create a fantasy Britain, one in which there aren't any significant differences in the ways different groups believe it is acceptable to behave. Its vision of happily co-existing cultures whose problems mostly stem from the fact that they are not given the right help by Government officials, has about as much in common with the reality of community conflict in Britain as the films the Soviet Union used to make about the paradise of plenty created by communism.

In one way, you can't blame the commission for that: the fantasy has been the basis of our collective response to mass immigration for at least the past 30 years, and probably longer. So, for example, the police have expended a great deal of effort to ensure that they did not recognise "honour killings" when they came across them. Dead women murdered for daring to have a relationship not approved by their family have been categorised as "suicides" or "stranger murders", but not as what they are, which is victims of the patriarchal culture in which they were raised. La la la.

Now here’s the reality.

A new study by the US Institute for Peace (USIP) of polling data from fourteen different Muslim countries finds that support for a role for Islam in politics strongly correlates with more likely support for terrorism. This statistical analysis is certain to draw protests from the usual propagandists of radical Islam in the US, even though the USIP can hardly be considered a neo-conservative institution.

Ever since recent release last month of the Pew poll on American Muslim attitudes, the Islamist propagandists and their media establishment allies have been working feverishly to avoid the implications of those findings by citing another study purportedly showing Americans more in favor of attacks on civilians than Muslims in the US and around the world, claims rebutted in my American Thinker article last week, "Lies, Damned Lies, and CAIR's Statistics".

But now the USIP poll reveals the true nature of the connection between Political Islam (the attempt at imposing Sharia law on a society) and the tactics of the militant jihadists.

The current report in question, "Correlates of Public Support for Terrorism in the Muslim World" by Ethan Bueno de Mesquita of Washington University in St. Louis, also examines data gathered by the Pew Research Center and finds a broad range of opinions and attitudes in the Muslim world.

The standout finding of the USIP study is that support for an increased role for Islam in politics is correlated with greater support for the use of terrorism, even in countries that already adhere to political Islam. The USIP study also busts the bubble of radical Islamic apologists who claim that support for terrorism is driven by people living under Islamic dictatorships. What the data shows is that dissatisfaction with Islam's role in internal politics has very little correlation to attitudes on terror.

Perhaps even more important, the data shows that in these countries the perceived threat to Islam posed by the government plays virtually no role at all in support for terrorism.

This new study also shatters the myth of the supposedly peaceful Muslim world advanced recently by CAIR, ISNA and the Orwellian-named Terror Free America. If these organizations are really concerned about combating terror and improving American-Islamic relations, this study clearly demonstrates that they had better start working on the Islamic side of the equation.

Poverty, lack of employment opportunities, social injustice, Israel, Iraq – none of these drive terrorism. It’s the ideology of Islamism that is the threat and it should be sought out and destroyed wherever and whenever it is found.

Storm Track Disinformation: A Fine Retort To A Useful Idiot

The useful idiots on the Left like to use the argument of moral equivalency to support their position. The Islamist appeasers and apologist have learned well from their leftist tutors and use it whenever they can to divert attention from their barbarism.

Here is a perfect retort to such blather.

According to today's New York Sun, Harvard professor Jessica Stern told a New York audience yesterday that criticism of Muslim clerics for not condemning Muslim violence was unwarranted.

"I've heard a lot of bashing of Muslim clerics for not stepping up to the plate and condemning extremist violence," she said. "But Catholic priests are not stepping up to condemn those who kill abortion doctors...[and] rabbis are not condemning the violent settlers' movement."

The silence of Muslim clerics in the face of Muslim violence is well- known. But when it comes to killing abortionists, the Catholic clergy have an impeccable record. It should be noted, too, that as the New York Sun pointed out today, rabbis everywhere condemned Yigal Amir's 1995 assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin-the very incident that Stern cited as an example of Jewish silence.

Just this week, a report of Muslim violence against Iraqi Christians was released. The study, Incipient Genocide, describes in detail 'the deaths of Christian children--including babies-- laypeople, priests and nuns who were burned, beaten or blown up in car bombs throughout the past few years.' Moreover, Christian girls are being raped and having nitric acid thrown in their faces for not wearing veils. And the Muslim silence is deafening.

The forced moral equivalency of the Left is in itself immoral. But that’s the tactics of the Left used to silence those who bring to the world’s attention the barbarism of the jihadists.

Storm Track Disinformation: Democracy – Islamic Style

Randy Wyrick in an opinion piece at the Vail Trail pondered whether Islam and democracy can co-exit. His conclusion: it’s already working in – guess where? Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia is holding its first municipal elections. King Fahd is promising to “broaden popular participation in the political process.” It’s raising eyebrows in the conservative kingdom and elsewhere across the Arab world. King Fahd is said to be a fan of constitutional monarchies and sees these municipal elections as a baby step in that direction.

So, can Islam and democracy play nicely together?

As Ronald Reagan would say “There they go again”.

The fuzzy headed thinkers on both the Left and Right believe that democracy is some kind of silver bullet that once installed will automatically create a society of personal freedoms and civil rights. Of course history shows better. Democratic elections in Palestine, Lebanon, and 1930s Germany both produced an erosion then a abrogation of personal freedoms and civil rights. Hamas, Hezbollah and the Nazis used the democratic mandate to impose a tyrannical form of government on its peoples.

Saudi Arabia as a beacon of democracy in the Muslim world? Such a ‘democracy’ under Shari law, just as Hamas is doing in Gaza, is happening as we speak. When will the elitist pinheads learn that democracy is no guarantee against tyranny?

Meanwhile the American model of democracy is not looked upon too kindly by religious leaders in the ‘baby democracy’ of Saudi Arabia.

In a lecture that touched on the meaning of jihad, a leading Saudi cleric declared the United States is collapsing and Muslims must patiently await their ultimate victory. Referring to sacred Muslim writings that accompany the Quran, the sheik said, "Whoever is familiar with the Sunna and the Hadith knows that a battle against the enemies of Allah awaits on the horizon, in which the Muslims will be victorious. This is confirmed by the reliable hadiths, as well as by reality."

Jihad is now taking place in Afghanistan, "Palestine," Iraq, Chechnya, Kashmir and the Philippines, he said. Meanwhile, the sheik asserted to his audience, love for America is "now disappearing from the hearts, within America itself and elsewhere, whereas Islam is growing even within America, my brothers."

"Islam is making steady progress in America," Al-Omar said. "Twenty-five thousand people have converted to Islam every year since 9-11, and an even larger figure was mentioned in the New York Times."

The New York Times, that bulwark of objective journalism.

The sheik added: "There is no doubt that it is Islam that will bring peace, and not the U.N., America, Russia, or anyone else."

Behold the Peace of Islam. Latest Offerings from the Religion of Peace.

6/28/07 ( Yala, Thailand ) - Two teenagers are shot to death by Muslim terrorists. 6/28/07 ( Kabul, Afghanistan ) - Two American civilians are killed by a Fedayeen suicide bomber. 6/28/07 ( Mogadishu, Somalia ) - Islamic terrorists target a security convoy along a busy road, killing two members. 6/27/07 ( Mosul, Iraq ) - Two Christians are murdered by Sunni radicals. 6/27/07 ( El-Berde, Somalia ) - Two humanitarian workers, one a doctor, are brutally gunned down. 6/27/07 ( Mogadishu, Somalia ) - Two civilians are killed when Muslim terrorists toss a grenade into a market.

Gag me with a spoon.

Storm Track Disinformation: "9/11 Was a Wake-up Call for Young Muslims"

So said a 24-year-old Muslim program scheduler at a broadcasting company in London. You would assume that wake-up call was a call to rise up against the fanatics of her faith who routinely murder innocent people day in and day out around the world. Or that ‘small minority’ of jihadists who have hijacked their religion. Wouldn’t you? I mean wouldn’t that be the rationale response?

But instead of wailing against those who have hijacked her religion, she saw 9/11 as a wake-up call to her faith.

Some who wear the niqab, particularly younger women who have taken it up recently, concede that it is a frontal expression of Islamic identity, which they have embraced since Sept. 11, 2001, as a form of rebellion against the policies of the Blair government in Iraq and at home.

"For me it is not just a piece of clothing, it's an act of faith, it's solidarity," said a 24-year-old program scheduler at a broadcasting company in London, who would allow only her last name, Al Shaikh, to be printed, saying she wanted to protect her privacy. "9/11 was a wake-up call for young Muslims," she said.

Now imagine a Japanese-American putting on a Kimono and wearing it through the streets of America  on December 8^th 1941. her reason?  "For me it is not just a piece of clothing, it's an act of faith, it's solidarity,"

Meanwhile even with blatant examples of Muslim beliefs as this, Europe and America has hit the snooze button and with the help of liberal appeasers and apologists have gone back to sleep.

Those are examples of the rising Jihad temperature of for this week. When seen in groups like this, the slow boil becomes obvious.

Next week a look back at the rising Jihad temperature of Islamist appeasement!!

Get a FREE TRIAL COPY of the The Gathering Storm eBook which includes the Forward by Walid Shoebat, Introduction, and first 50 pages of The Gathering Storm eBook. And sign up for my free WEEKLY STORM REPORT and receive a synopsis of the most important weekly news revealing the intimidation, infiltration and disinformation tactics used to soften-up the non-Muslim world for domination.