DONATE

Showing posts with label Garland Attack. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Garland Attack. Show all posts

Saturday, June 13, 2015

Fjordman & Clarion Project Defend Free Speech


Intro by John R. Houk
© June 13, 2015

In light of Muslims who believe in the words of the Quran and the model of Islam’s considered perfect man, some ISIS inspired terrorists attacked a Mo cartoon contest and other Muslims plotted the beheading of Pamela Geller – one of the promoters of the Mo-contest in Garland Texas.

I found two articles – one an essay and the other a news report – highlighting Muslim intolerance of Free Speech that is much more volatile outside of the USA.

Fjordman addresses Muslims who jihad against cartoonists because Islam tells Muslims to avenge insults to Islam, Mohammed or Allah. The Clarion Project reports on Iranian political cartoonist Atena Farghandani who was imprisoned for satirizing Iranian lawmakers for penalizing birth control among both males and females.

JRH 6/13/15
***********************
The Cartoon Jihad Continues

By Fjordman
June 2, 2015

Originally Gates of Vienna
May 28, 2015 10:43pm

On February 14-15, 2015, Copenhagen, Denmark was hit by two closely related terror attacks in the space of a few hours. The first one hit a debate meeting about free speech and religion. The second targeted a synagogue and a local Jewish community. The presumed perpetrator of these twin attacks, the militant Muslim Omar El-Hussein of Palestinian Arab heritage, was eventually shot and killed during a confrontation with the police.

Some early reports suggested that Omar El-Hussein was a “lone wolf” terrorist. This is highly questionable. It was probably he who fired the actual shots that killed two men and wounded several others. Yet that does not mean that he acted in total isolation.

Within a few weeks, five young Muslim men had been formally charged with aiding the gunman Omar in his attacks, either by providing him with equipment he used or by trying to get rid of equipment for him.

Omar the terrorist certainly was not alone with his Islamic beliefs. Originally a violent criminal rather than a religious Jihadist, he seems to have become radicalized during his stay in prison. He apparently shared a prison cell with a supporter of the Islamic State (ISIS).

Assertions have been made by media sources that the terrorist may have visited a radical Copenhagen mosque preaching hatred of jews just one day before his attacks. These claims remain uncertain. What is clear is that his acts were motivated by commonly held Islamic beliefs, inspired, by Islamic texts.

To some Muslims, Omar the murderer is a “great hero” who deserves “a place in paradise.” Hundreds of people attended his funeral. Not all of them were relatives. Some of those who were present probably attended Omar’s funeral not in spite of, but because of the fact that he was a terrorist and murderer. A few radical Muslims admitted this openly.

It is interesting to notice that Omar El-Hussein was a petty criminal before becoming a terrorist. It seems as if the step from violent crime to violent Jihad is not always that big. As I have observed in some of my previous essays, looting and stealing the property of non-Muslims has been part of Jihad from the very beginning. In fact, so much of the behavior of Muhammad himself and the earliest Muslims could be deemed criminal that it is difficult to know where crime ends and Jihad begins.

Muslims make up a vastly disproportionate number of prison inmates in countries such as France and Britain. Some Muslims become further radicalized in jail, while some violent criminals convert to Islam behind bars. The Danish psychologist Nicolai Sennels has worked with criminal Muslims. He noticed that they rarely feel any sense of remorse for the crimes they have committed. Instead, they see themselves as victims of outside forces, scheming infidels or the will of Allah. Muslims are never guilty of anything. They are always victims.

Jyllands-Posten is one of the largest newspapers in Denmark. On September 30, 2005, it published a series of drawings of Islam’s founder and alleged prophet Mohammed. I was one of the very first people to write about this case in English. Already in October 2005, I was posting essays in support of Jyllands-Posten and free speech at my old blog.

Yet it took several months before the case really exploded on the international scene. Ahmad Akkari is a former radical Muslim. In late 2005, he traveled along with several others in Muslim countries to whip up anger over the Danish Mohammed cartoons. Unfortunately, this succeeded. In 2013-2014, Akkari publicly apologized to the Danish nation and distanced himself from his previous actions.

By early 2006, protests against the Danish Mohammed cartoons were becoming huge and violent in multiple Muslim countries. Several Islamic terror plots to massacre the staff of Jyllands-Posten have later been exposed and prevented. Some of the cartoonists have received death threats. One of the Danish artists, Kurt Westergaard, has been attacked by a militant Muslim in his own home. He managed to hide in a panic room and survived.

Kurt Westergaard and Lars Vilks

A decade after the Jyllands-Posten Mohammed cartoons controversy, the Jihad against artists and writers continues. It claimed new victims in Paris on January 7, 2015, when two armed militant Muslims brutally massacred the staff of the French satirical weekly newspaper Charlie Hebdo. The Jihadist terrorists killed 12 people because the magazine had published satirical cartoons showing Mohammed. An amateur video of the assailants’ subsequent gunfight with the police showed the men shouting: “We have avenged the Prophet Muhammad. We have killed Charlie Hebdo!” This was followed by attacks against Jewish targets in Paris.

On May 3, 2015, two Muslims attempted an attack in Garland, Texas on an exhibit featuring cartoons depicting Muhammad. Fortunately, the police killed the Jihadists before they could carry out a massacre. The event was organized by the group American Defense Freedom Initiative, led by the conservative Islam-critical writers Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer. It was attended by the Dutch politician Geert Wilders. Bosch Fawstin, a former Muslim, won the contest for the best Mohammed cartoon.

This attack did not trigger the same mass media sympathy as the attack on the left-wing magazine Charlie Hebdo had done a few months earlier. Some accused Geller, Spencer and Wilders of having provoked this Islamic terror attack. Even alleged conservatives such as the businessman Donald Trump, or Bill O’Reilly from Fox News, denounced Geller and Spencer.

It is widely believed that the Swedish artist Lars Vilks was the primary target of the terror attack at the Krudttønden cultural center in Copenhagen on February 14, 2015. He had been an artist and art historian for many years. But then Professor Vilks decided to draw some cartoons of a man who may or may not have lived in the seventh century AD. As a result, militant Muslims want to murder him. Vilks has to be protected by armed police even when he visits the bathroom. He is now virtually a refugee in his own country.

Since the Copenhagen attacks, Vilks has now also been evacuated from his former home in southern Sweden. In the spring of 2015, a few journalists were able to meet him in a mobile home on a Swedish field. They were guarded by dozens of armed policemen and dogs, with a helicopter standing by. It was deemed too unsafe to meet Vilks anywhere else, so they settled for a caravan. Åsa Linderborg, a former Communist activist and now columnist at the left-leaning daily Aftonbladet, was present at this meeting. Linderborg questions how much the security surrounding Vilks costs, or should cost. There is obviously some security around the royal family and senior members of the government. Yet the most threatened person in all of Sweden today is not the King or the Prime Minister. It is a mild-mannered and polite professor of art history.

I have been fortunate enough to meet Lars Vilks several times. He immediately struck me as a very pleasant man, friendly to virtually everybody he meets. He is highly intelligent and educated. Yet he has none of the snobbishness you sometimes see in artists. Like Raoul Wallenberg before him, he is doing his best to save his nation’s honor in a dark age. And like Wallenberg before him, Vilks is paying a heavy price for doing so.

Meanwhile, every day Sweden lets in more Muslim immigrants who could potentially attack Islam-critics or others. The influx of asylum seekers is so large that the country barely has enough housing for all of them. At the same time, the understaffed police force can hardly keep up with the rise of foreign mafias and public gang shootings. A single Swedish city, Gothenburg, has produced more Jihadists fighting for the Islamic State than all of Italy, and a number comparable to that of the entire USA.

The Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is one of the most brutal groups on the entire planet. They routinely engage in suicide bombings, mass beheadings, massacres of civilians, mass rape and open slave auctions. This savagery seems to attract a disturbing number of Muslims. It certainly does not repel them. One observer in Britain warned that the barbaric Jihadists of the Islamic State have become “pop idols,” similar to what The Beatles were decades ago: “The boys want to be like them and the girls want to be with them.”

In the 1960s, British youngsters were singing songs written by John Lennon and Paul McCartney of the English rock band The Beatles. Today, “British” youngsters are cheering for beheadings and Jihadist massacres. What a difference fifty years and a lot of demographic replacement makes. This transformation proceeded even faster elsewhere. Sweden went from Abba to Allah in less than four decades.

In response to this, Swedish authorities have engaged in very controversial policies of providing returning ISIS Jihadists with generous support from state institutions, including housing. Meanwhile, a decent, kind and honorable man such as Lars Vilks is homeless in Sweden, due to credible death threats from Jihadists.

Such is the state of freedom of speech today. The Jihad continues. Unfortunately, so does the appeasement.
_________________
Iran Sentences Political Cartoonist to 12.5 Years in Prison

Atena Farghandani  - Iranian political cartoonist

June 3, 2015

Yet, “according to our laws, activities on social networks on the Internet are not recognized as crimes," said the cartoonist's lawyer.

An Iranian cartoonist and civil rights activist was sentenced to 12.5 years in prison by a revolutionary court in Tehran.  Atena Farghandani, 28, was arrested last August for drawing a political cartoon and speaking out against a law drafted last March that would severely restrict birth control for both men and women.

The cartoon portrayed legislators as animals casting their votes on the legislation.

Speaking to the International Campaign for Human Rights, Faraghdani’s lawyer, Mohammad Moghimi, said that the sentence violated Iran’s new Islamic Penal Code, Article 134, which states that when there are multiple charges, the maximum sentence allowed is that of the punishment of the most severe crime.


In Faraghdani’s case, the charge of “assembly and collusion against national security” was the most severe crime with which the cartoonist was charged. The maximum sentence allowable for such a crime in Iran is 7.5 years.

“We have 20 days to appeal, and we hope this ruling will be overturned by the Appeals Court,” said Moghimi.

“According to our laws, activities on social networks on the Internet are not recognized as crimes," Moghimi added. “Additionally, Article 8 of the Iranian Constitution expresses that it is upon everyone to ‘prevent vice and promote virtue,’ and this is a two-way responsibility both the nation and the state have vis-à-vis each other.”

The Faraghdani trial was presided over by Judge Salavati. The International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran describes Salavti as “a notorious judge who is consistently handpicked to preside over ‘national security’ cases that security and intelligence organizations bring against political and civil activists, because of the harsh and maximum sentences he imposes.”

Salavati is also the judge presiding over the trial of the Washington Post reporter Jason Rezaian.

Farghandani’s lawyer noted that in addition to sharing her cartoon and government criticism on Facebook, evidence against Farghandani included her visits with families of political prisoners and protesters who were killed at the Kharizak Police Detention Center in 2009, following the presidential election.

Farghandani was originally taken to Gharchak prison for four months where she said she was beaten and interrogated for up to nine hours a day.

During a brief release in December, she posted a video in Persian detailing her inhumane treatment and was rearrested. Close to two months later, Farghandani went on a hunger strike and suffered a heart attack. She has been kept in solitary confinement in the notorious Evin since that time.
__________________________
The Cartoon Jihad Continues


This blog is usually published in Danish.

If the PayPal link above doesn’t work go to the bottom of this post and look for the “Donate to Fjordman” button to donate via Gates of Vienna.
__________________________
Iran Sentences Political Cartoonist to 12.5 Years in Prison

Copyright © 2015 Clarion Project, Inc. All rights reserved.


Saturday, May 9, 2015

ACLJ - Mr. President, Name the Enemy

Islam a Totalitarian Political Party

John R. Houk
© May 9, 2015

The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) has been running a petition campaign called “Mr. President, Name the Enemy”. The last time I checked the campaign was just over 90,000 signatures. Now I realize such petition campaigns are typically fund raising programs. But eh … In this case I am pleased that nearly ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND Americans have expressed their displeasure that President Barack Hussein Obama REFUSES to acknowledge America’s most current national enemy at the very least is the Islam interpreted in its purist form called Radical Islam by those who believe that there are Moderate Muslims who don’t believe the Quran is the express word of Allah.

Cartoonist Gary Varvel: ISIS self portrait

So this is what I’m going to do to encourage people to bring those signatures way over 100K, I going to cross post two ACLJ posts about the ISIS-Garland attack on American Free Speech followed by the wording of the petition. Then click on petition link I’ll provide at the end (or click HERE if you want to forego the actually pertinent information).

After you sign you will be taken to the typical donation page. It is not necessary to donate for your petition signature to count. NONETHELESS, the ACLJ is a very good Christian Civil Rights activist organization to support.

JRH 5/9/15
****************************
Jihad Struck Texas But Will the Obama Administration Continue to Bury Its Head in the Sand

May 5, 2015

Jihad struck Texas last night.  It’s just the latest skirmish in a global radical Islamic assault on free speech – on freedom.

It’s a war.  ISIS, Boko Haram, Al Shabaab, and al Qaeda are just a few of the named brigades in this radical Islamic jihadist army.

The two Islamic terrorists who opened fire on a free speech art exhibit in Texas are merely the latest casualties in this war.  But they are a reminder of who the enemy is.

These radical Islamists are clear on who their enemy is.  To them, free speech is the enemy.  Islamic radicals made this clear through their murderous rampage at Charlie Hebdo in Paris and the free speech exhibit in Texas.  To them, Christians are the enemy, evidenced by the mass murders, propaganda beheadings, and vile statements carried out by ISIS, Boko Haram and other terrorist groups.

The terrorists who attacked free speech in Texas last night made it clear what their goal was, what they were fighting for, and who their enemy is.  One tweeted just moments before the attack.

Sharia is Light Tweet

That twitter account has now been suspended, but it contained a litany of jihadists tweets, pro-ISIS retweets, and radical Islamic propaganda.

In short, to the jihadists, we are the enemy.  They have named their enemy. And by doing so they have inspired the Tsarnaev brothers, the Texas attack, Nidal Hasan, and many others to carry out deadly terrorist attacks throughout America.

Yet the Obama Administration still only references these as “extremists.”  President Obama time and time again refuses to acknowledge that these vicious and targeted attacks on freedom are carried out by one ideologically bonded group of people – radical Islamists, jihadists.  Last night was no exception, as the White House has merely referred to the jihadist attack on free speech in Texas as “an act of violence.”

In short, President Obama refuses to name the enemy.  And the consequences build every day.

The contrast could not be more stark.

The jihadists are crystal clear about their enemy.  Tens of thousands of radical Islamists have flocked to join ISIS and other terrorist groups – including attempts by at least one of the militants who carried out last night’s attack.  At the same time, America’s response to jihad, under President Obama’s (lack of) leadership, has weakened the cause of freedom.

This must end.  America must demand accountability from our leaders.  We the people must demand that our next President (and there are a lot of people vying for the job right now) is willing to name our enemy and committed to defeating them wherever they train, plot, and carry out jihad.

America must never back down.  We must never surrender our First Amendment freedoms.  The local authorities in Texas showed the resolve that we must all exhibit.

Free speech, even speech you and I might disagree with, must be protected.  But now it’s time for America’s leaders to speak out – to name the enemy – and engage the jihadists on the battlefields they are creating.  The only way to stop the threat of terror is to overwhelmingly defeat the jihadists who inspire it.

This article is crossposted on Red State.

++++
Radical Islam In Conflict With Free Speech

May 7, 2015

A terrorist attack took place in Garland, Texas, this week in response to a free speech conference that took issue with the Islamic prohibition against creating images of the Prophet Muhammad. The event awarded a financial prize to the person who drew the best cartoon of Muhammad.

The terrorist attack (ISIS has taken credit for it) points out the stark difference between the American view of speech that offends some people and the radical Muslim’s view of such speech. We allow it; they don’t.

Americans have broad free speech rights. Our rights, however, are not unlimited. For example, we cannot falsely shout fire in a crowded theater to cause a panic. (This statement is often wrongly uttered by failing to include the word falsely; of course, we can shout fire in a crowded theater that is on fire.)

The main idea behind our free speech rights is to allow an array of speech that is robust. Our free speech rights allow us the room to decide whether to say something (or hold a free speech conference) that is provocative. Our freedom allows for satire and debate, which allows ideas to be explored, and, possibly, allows for minds to be changed.

Deciding to engage in such speech at a particular time and place comes down to prudence and effectiveness. Such restrictions are not imposed by the First Amendment, just by a person’s sensibilities. Whether we like it or not, our First Amendment allows a group the freedom to hold a conference that may be considered blasphemous.

In contrast, sharia (the moral code and religious law of Islam) does not allow the same freedoms as does our First Amendment. It is restrictive. It allows little, if any, room for self-expression, satire, or dissent from orthodoxy. The consequences for holding a free speech conference, such as the one in Garland, under sharia are severe. The punishments for blasphemy include imprisonment, flogging, and death.

The terrorist attack over cartoons about Muhammad illustrates the extreme views of the radical Muslim. No one likes to see his religion blasphemed, but the proper response to blasphemy is debate, boycott, prayer, or protest—not killing those with whom you disagree to silence the speech you do not like.

+++++++++++
Mr. President, Name the Enemy

Here’s what the Obama Administration believes:

The Taliban aren’t terrorists.

ISIS—the Islamic State—isn’t Islamic.

America isn’t at war with radical Muslims, merely with “extremists.”

It’s hard to believe, but the Obama Administration is afraid to name our enemies.

This makes no sense.

The Muslim world knows the Taliban are terrorists. The Muslim world knows ISIS is Islamic.

It’s time for the truth. It’s time to level with the American people. At the ACLJ, we speak the truth. We name the enemy. Why can’t the President?

Mr. President, Name the Enemy

President Obama,

By refusing to name the enemy, you’re choosing weakness over strength. By refusing to name the enemy, you’re hiding the true threat from the American people. Speak the truth and name the enemy. Americans deserve the truth.


_______________________
Mr. President, Name the Enemy
John R. Houk
© May 9, 2015
_____________________
Jihad Struck Texas But Will the Obama Administration Continue to Bury Its Head in the Sand

Radical Islam In Conflict With Free Speech

Mr. President, Name the Enemy

American Center for Law and Justice | Washington D.C. | Copyright © 2015, ACLJ

About the American Center for Law and Justice

Founded in 1990 with the mandate to protect religious and constitutional freedoms, the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) engages legal, legislative, and cultural issues by implementing an effective strategy of advocacy, education, and litigation that includes representing clients before the Supreme Court of the United States and international tribunals around the globe.

As ACLJ Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow continued to build his legal and legislative team, the ACLJ experienced tremendous success in litigating cases at all levels of the judiciary – from the federal district court level to the Supreme Court of the United States.

Over the last two decades, Sekulow has appeared before the Supreme Court of the United States on numerous occasions, successfully arguing precedent-setting cases before the high Court: Protecting the … READ THE REST