Monday, February 10, 2014

“Islamophobia” in academia

/ Jihad Watch

islamophobia1The aptly-named Hatem “Hate ‘em” Bazian’s manipulative propaganda course at UC Berkeley in “Islamophobia,” in which he forces his students to adopt his agenda of demonizing opponents of jihad terror instead of allowing them to evaluate the value of his targets’ work for themselves, recalls a similar course taught a few years back at Colgate University by Omid Safi, an Islamic supremacist pseudo-academic who is now at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. I dared to challenge Safi’s smear of me as an “Islamophobe” — a propagandistic neologism designed to intimidate people into thinking that it is “hateful” and “bigoted” to oppose jihad terror: I offered to come to the class where Safi was defaming me in order to engage in discussion and debate with him and his students. Safi declined, all the while hurling the usual insults that come as natural to Islamic supremacists as breathing. Later this bent, twisted, hate-filled and diabolically insecure little man actually falsely claimed that I threatened to kill him and his family, while peddling soothing nonsense to the easy marks at the Huffington Post about respecting other people.

“Islamophobia” courses are apparently increasingly common on university campuses. Just this week I received two queries from students who are studying “Islamophobia.” One girl wrote (spelling and grammar as in the original):
Dear Jihad Watch, I am a Year 12 Student from Sydney, NSW who would greatly appreciate your kind assistance in a Personal Interest Project (PIP) for the subject of Society and Culture. My chosen topic sparks in me a deep interest although before I begin my primary research, I must ensure there is sufficient secondary information to support or disprove my own. So far, it seems lacking so I write to ask: Am on the right track and do you recommend any beneficial resources or contacts? My investigation is the “Perceptions held in Australia about Islam” where I look into both “Islamophobia” and the general reluctance to support or acknowledge Muslim adherents assimilating into Australian Culture. The PIP requires a cross-cultural comparison where two aspects of some sort must be considered, for e.g. female vs. male perceptions held about Islam. This is where my inspiration came in, due to personal experience. Growing up from a Christian, Middle-Eastern background, I witnessed most family members disapproving of Islam and it’s followers due to their experiences of conflict with the religion and it’s people in the middle east, before migrating. Although “Islamophobia” is quite instilled in Australian society, I found from informally questioning other middle-easterners that they too seemed more intolerant than the rest of Australian society. I’d like to investigate for both Middle-Eastern born Australian migrants (non Muslims) and Australian born citizens- -    What exactly are their perceptions on Islam and it’s adherents? -     How these perceptions were formed. Here, a focus will be on historical and political events and media representation, for e.g. September 11, as well personal experiences with Muslim adherents. I hypothesise that Australian- born citizens will have their perceptions formed by media influence while Middle-Eastern born Australian migrants will have perceptions largely due to personal experience with Muslims in the Middle East. Such information is attainable through primary research methodologies and there is sufficient amount of information on what Australian’s perceive Muslims. My main struggle has been finding sufficient information on Non-Muslim Middle- Easterner’s perceptions on Muslim adherents and their relationship with one another in the Middle- East, whether from a couple of decades ago to present. Although my search for secondary information continues, I am extremely hopeful that you are able to recommend resources or contacts which may enable me to carry through with this project. I highly appreciate your time taken to read this letter. Thank you.
I responded:
Thanks for writing. I do not believe in “Islamophobia.” It is a propaganda neologism designed to intimidate people into thinking that there is something wrong with resisting jihad terror. Listen to the experiences of your family and other Middle Eastern Christians, and heed them. Best of luck. RS

The latest round of the IRS scandal, in which Tea Party and conservative groups have been selectively targeted for harassment by our tax collection agency, is now unfolding.

This comes in the form of proposed new rules from the IRS regarding the operation of organizations falling under the 501c4 provision of the tax code.

These are organizations whose purpose is to promote “social welfare” and therefore their income is tax-free.

Because promoting a cause or agenda in our free and democratic country cannot be isolated from political activity associated with that agenda, such activity is permitted by 501c4 organizations, as long as politics does not become its main purpose.

These are the rules of the game that have existed since 1959.

But now the IRS wants to change the game.

The new rules they propose expand the definition of “candidate related activity” so broadly – to include voter education campaigns and grass roots lobbying campaigns – and to forbid even the mention of a candidate in any context 30 days before a primary or 60 days before a general election – that it will make it impossible for these organizations to function.

The IRS would like us to believe they are just trying to clear up some rules that are too vague regarding how these organizations are permitted to operate.

But can it be an accident that these new rules come in the midst of the current scandal in which an IRS official, Lois Lerner, admitted that Tea Party groups were being targeted for harassment?

It was revealed this week at a House committee hearing, at which new IRS commissioner John Koskinen testified, that an email was found from an IRS official indicating intent to scrutinize 501c4 organizations.

How much of this was generated by inappropriate politicized activity within the IRS and to what extent it relates to the IRS taking guidance from higher authority – like the White House – remains to be seen.

It does defy common sense to conclude that the White House has not been involved in this.

IRS activity in pursuit of non-profit organizations escalated in 2010.

It so happens that early 2010 the Supreme Court ruled, in the case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, that the ban on independent political expenditures by corporations violated the free speech provisions in the first amendment of the constitution.

And it so happens funding escalated into 501c4 organizations after the Supreme Court lifted this ban. And it so happens a good deal of this activity has been Tea Party related activity.

After the Citizens United decision, the president himself weighed in, expressing his outrage about the decision, indicating his intent to “develop a forceful response to this decision.”

To the dismay of our president and those with political agendas at the IRS, our constitution permits free speech and allows corporations to use funds to express a political viewpoint. So the IRS is now trying to render inoperative the vehicles that often receive and use those funds - 501c4 organizations.

It is not an accident that if we look around the world, the one thing that uniformly characterizes un-free nations is lack of free speech.

Those that love political power hate those who want to question their power and who want to inform citizens and provide a different point of view.

This is what the current IRS scandal is about. IRS officials, whose job it is to collect taxes, have abused their power to harass those whose politics they do not like. And this is what the current attempt to shut down 501c4 organizations by rewriting long standing rules by which they operate is about.

Free flow of information and free speech is the oxygen of a free society. Every freedom loving American should vigorously push back against this abuse of power by the IRS to stifle free speech.
From a solely material perspective, which is the only perspective that the government ought to consider, there is nothing wrong in our body politic that can’t be made at least a little better with more jobs.

But of course, as we learned last week, the Obama administration, Harry Reid and the rest of the secular rabble known as the progressive left don't want more jobs. For them jobs are a nuisance, jobs are a hindrance, jobs are the enemy.

“The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) on Tuesday said that the Affordable Care Act will contribute to the equivalent of 2 million workers out of the labor market by 2017,” reports Yahoo’s Business Insider, “as employees work fewer hours or decide to drop out of the labor force entirely.”

"CBO projections during the health care reform debate seemed to significantly underestimate the negative impact of Obamacare," says Senator Pat Roberts of Kansas, "and because of those projections, supporters were able to jam it through by one vote. Everybody knows about that vote.

And now the American people have to pick up the tab on the CBO's errors....Was this political? Were the books cooked? CBO needs to take responsibility for the differences between their projections and the most recent updates."

The crux of the issue is that Americans will have to work fewer hours to keep their healthcare and welfare benefits. By the reckoning of the CBO it's the equivalent of losing 2.3 million jobs or more. Democrats are celebrating the reduction, noting that it will give workers more free time.

Because that's what unhappy people need: more free time.

With due respect to Harry Reid, Barack Obama, the CBO and other great priests of the Do-Nothing State, providing more leisure time for people to pursue hobbies like, oh, protesting Broadway Joe’s fur coat, occupying houses they didn’t pay for, or erecting a monument to Satan in Oklahoma City, might not be the best way to find our way out of the crisis of confidence that these priests have put us in

Idle hands, as they say, are the Devil’s playground.

“According to the Divine decree of our grandfather Adam,” wrote Peter the Great in 1696, “we are eating our bread in the sweat of our face.” Peter at the time was engaged in building a great fleet of ships, personally wielding an axe as a ship’s carpenter.

That’s one of the various reasons the tall, energetic czar was considered great.

Oh, think of what a website he would build.

Or an Olympics he would run.

Not so with government today.

And while I’m generally OK with the government not doing their job—or better yet any job really-- I think that they ought to at least let us do our jobs.

And that is the rub, isn’t it?

The government that can’t run our housing sector, the banking business, the healthcare system, the CIA, EPA, insurance or even a loan program to private businesses, now wants to have more responsibility for doing much more that amounts to nothing at all, while telling us all to do nothing too.

And it's not just with Obamacare policies either that they are killing productivity. Now they want to hike the minimum wage to make rising "productivity"-- the thing we need to see wages increase-- a thing of the past.

That's what the proposal by Obama to hike the minimum wage actually amounts to: higher costs for the same productivity; or to put it this way: doing nothing for more cost.

That’s like saying you can keep the insurance plan that you like, it will just cost more, with a higher deductible and a different doctor.

You’ll bleed the same when the needle pricks though.

See? Same. Exact. Plan.


So let’s just agree that the minimum wage plan amounts to Obamacare for the economy by other means. If you like your job, you can keep your job, except that it will be a different job, working for someone else and you’ll have a long wait on the unemployment line to go through first before you reap the benefit, especially if you are unemployed already.

Because a minimum wage hike will mostly affect the people who are least likely to be able find employment right now.

And they’ll bleed exactly the same when the needle pricks.

See? Same. Exact. Job. That is, no job at all.

All economies run on the creation and maintenance of jobs.

You want more people to have health insurance? Provide more jobs.

You want to cut our deficit? Provide more jobs.

You want increase taxes? Provide more jobs.

You want to start to stabilize the Social Security Trust Fund? Provide more jobs.

Jobs will not, in fact, solve every problem that we have in the country.

But nothing looks quite as bad if the economy is creating jobs.

Things would look brighter, more productive that way.

And, oh... that must be their problem with it. Because from where I sit, I really think this administration-- and his party-- does believe that jobs are a nuisance, jobs are a hindrance, jobs are the enemy.

They're a new god, sending us out of the new Garden of Eden. And telling us to mill about and try to look busy. They'll take care of everything else.

Now...about that website...

Iranian warships close at hand and Obama does and says nothing
By: Diane Sori

“Iran’s military fleet is approaching the United States’ maritime borders, and this move has a message.” 
Commander of Iran’s Northern Navy Fleet Admiral Afshin Rezayee Haddad

NOT good folks NOT good at all.

It sure seems like Barack HUSSEIN Obama and his side-kick John 'Swiftboat' Kerry think that a deal made with the devil is better than NO deal at all. The problem is that a deal...any deal...made with Iran will always come back to haunt you...or in the case haunt the United States of America.

The traitorous duo who think they are the brokers of peace but who in reality are the harbingers of war...with their allegiances on the side of the sees that Iran...the 'so-called' new moderate sending warships dangerously close to our maritime borders off our Eastern seaboard, while at the same time Iranian TV is airing a video of a simulated bombing of Tel Aviv and a U.S. aircraft carrier*...and what is said or done about this...NOT a thing.

So thanks to Barack HUSSEIN Obama's placating of and bowing down to the enemy the enemy is now a bit too close for comfort and has shown us proof positive of their true intentions...intentions 'We the People' and Benjamin Netanyahu knew all along but intentions Obama so obviously condones.

Claiming the ships carry 30 navy academy cadets on a training mission in addition to the regular crew...coupled with them being on an 'unspecified' military mission (according to Iranian State TV)...should send chills down the spine of every American for 'unspecified' could mean anything from simple naval maneuvers to an act of terrorism, and still Obama and his minions remain silent.

And with Iran claiming the deployment of a (Sabalan) destroyer and a (Khark) logistic helicopter carrier is nothing but a response to U.S. naval deployments near its own coastlines (the U.S. Navy’s 5th fleet is based in nearby Bahrain... based in NOT just hanging around for a few months), why then are they remaining in place for just three months and then returning home.

I'll give you one scenario and it's NOT pretty. While one of our Ohio class or Seawolf submarines could easily take the Iranian ships out if the need arose, a time element is still involved in their arrival as the actions I am about to suggest could happen in a blink of an eye before we could even get there or even know about it. Seriously folks and this is NO joke for you all know I am NO conspiracy theorist...I would be more than a bit alarmed if over the next three months as those Iranian ships are positioned just beyond our maritime borders if high levels of toxic substances are 'suddenly' found in our seafood catches or if major unnatural amounts of dead sea life start washing up on our shores...both equating to the testing of water-delivered biological weapons. 

Or...and this might seem a bit far-fetched to some but I put NOTHING...absolutely NOTHING... passed the Iranians...if suddenly an undersea explosion is picked in an undersea test of a nuclear weapon for the time frame that Netanyahu laid out for Iran to have a nuclear weapon has more than passed, and Obama's dilly-dallying around with that farce of a Geneva agreement has given them even more time to secure such a weapon...a weapon that needs to be tested...and where better to test it than at the gateway to what they still refer to as 'The Great Satan.'

Now if the above scenarios are NOT the case consider that both Russia and Iran have the same geopolitical view in controlling the flow of oil...and that issue of oil with the mega-dollars involved has tied both countries together on strategic, energy-related, and regional issues. And that means regional issues that include needing Syria for both their end purposes. For Putin it means NEVER allowing Obama to remove Bashar al-Assad from office for in doing so the Muslim Brotherhood would take control in what was once secular-dominated Syria, and then he would lose Russia's much needed naval facility at Tartus (which is the last Russian military facility outside the former Soviet Union). Also remember that Putin is currently cracking down on NOT only the Muslim Brotherhood but also on islam and its followers in Russia as well.

And Iran's take on this is that both governments view the developments in Syria as a precursor of a redistribution of power in a new Middle East, hopefully free of both Israeli and America interests. And with both counties considering themselves to be pivotal power players in determining who controls the Middle East, and with both countries seeing the U.S. as standing in the way of their quest for power, Iran is more than willing to partner with Russia and do Russia's bidding if need be.

Remember also that Russia has a bit of payback to give the U.S. for Ronald Reagan's ending of the Cold War that led to the demise of the once powerful Soviet Union. And what better way than to flex what muscle they have left than to have America's enemy positioned at their door so to speak. Now add into the mix Barack HUSSEIN Obama and his Arab Spring gone horribly wrong, and the U.S. and Russia again find themselves on opposing sides. And with Obama most likely still pissed off that Putin derailed his Syrian war plans...plans that fit the Saudi and Muslim Brotherhood agendas quite well...agendas which Obama supports and Putin is against...and you have the makings of the Cold War reignited.

And important to note is that while Iran wants an islamic caliphate in Syria, they dare NOT cross their current Russian monetary and military benefactors. So while Iranian officials are playing games with their newly initiated...with fingers crossed behind their backs of course...charm offensive both across the Middle East and Europe, they are doing so with the hopes that those very countries will look away as they continue in the quest to become a nuclear power.

So by sending warships close to our border Iran is doing so on two at Putin's bidding to help stop Obama from supplying even more guns and weapons to the Syrian rebels who could possibly oust al-Assad if given enough U.S. firepower, as well as to bolster their own goal of becoming a nuclear power and Middle East power broker...a power broker that could very well see to it that Israel is NO longer on the map.

And as you can see none of my scenarios bodes well for our beloved America, but with Barack HUSSEIN Obama the steward of our country what would you expect. Sadly, for now at least, the days of a strong U.S. president are over...a U.S. president who our enemies feared yet respected. Ronald Reagan made nations tremble in fear of his words and George W. Bush had the respect of Putin, but we all know that NO world leader has any respect for or fear of the words or actions of Barack HUSSEIN Obama...a man who leads from behind if and when he leads at all. And when he does lead it's always to lead America in the wrong direction...and Vladimir Putin, Hassan Rouhani, and 'We the People' know that to be the very sad truth, and now the actions of a new embolden Iran prove that point all to well.