Outlawing the Truth About the Coming Islamic Storm

Sonia Bailley, writing for American Thinker, points out a confluence of anniversaries that may explain why the FBI and law enforcement are on such high alert:

A perfect Islamic storm looming large on the horizon

The perfect storm of events for an Islamic terror attack is brewing for July 4th this year. The Obama administration and Western leaders are failing to report the truth about Islam and the significance of this date. It was on the 17th of Ramadan, which just happens to precisely coincide this year with America’s Independence Day, that the greatest and most significant battle in Islamic history took place: the Battle of Badr in 624 AD. This battle marked the first significant victory for Islam, as well as the beginning of Mohammed’s reign of terror.

Dates are significant for Islamic terrorists. The date of September 11 was chosen by Islamic terrorists to inflict a horrible carnage on the West because in Islam, that day is remembered as a day of humiliation and defeat: in 1683, the Islamic armies were defeated at the gates of Vienna, and in 1697, they met their final defeat at Belgrade.

If ever there was a date to be remembered and commemorated in Islam, it’s the 17th of Ramadan. What makes this battle so special to most Muslims is its spiritual significance. The Koran discusses how Allah and his angels helped the early Muslims win the battle. This is most certainly a date that the Islamic State holds close to the heart, especially since Mohammed’s victory solidified his position as ruler of the first Islamic State in Medina. It is a date to be memorialized, underscored by its anniversary on the U.S.’s Independence Day, in ways jihadists know best.

The 17th of Ramadan was the time when Mohammed mandated the killing of captives in battle, and this action is emulated by the Islamic State, as Mohammed is considered the ideal model in Islam for mankind to follow. It was the time when a simple preacher morphed into a vengeful warlord, eliminating all Jewish tribes once living in Saudi Arabia and changing the way of life for people living in the Arabian Peninsula (now Saudi Arabia) and afterward Asia. It is a date that Westerners should be made aware of and become familiar with.


As Stephen Coughlin writes, “the nature of today’s jihadist enemies can only be understood within the context of their declared strategic doctrine to dominate the world. Just as we ignored Mein Kampf ‘to our great detriment’ prior to World War II, so we are on the verge of suffering a similar fate today.” The ironically dual anniversary of July 4 and the Battle of Badr representing two antithetical ideologies is looming large. Be informed. Be prepared.

Read the rest at American Thinker.

The same author has posted another piece today (a slightly different version of which was also published at American Thinker). Ms. Bailley’s latest article helps explain why Americans are not permitted to learn the truth about Islamic law or the doctrine of Jihad, and are thus more vulnerable to violent attacks this Fourth of July (or any other day):

Leftist and Islamic Policymakers Outlaw the Truth
by Sonia Bailley

No need to worry, the recent Ramadan triple slaughter fest in Tunisia, France and Kuwait has nothing to do with Islam. There is no linkage between Islam and terrorism, and the word Islamic need not be used to describe the terrorists because their murderous and barbaric ideology has nothing to do with Islam. Islam is, after all, a religion of peace that is being hijacked, perverted and distorted by only a small percentage of savage extremists.

Welcome to the false narrative that Western leaders, mainstream media outlets, and academic elites are enforcing on civil society to help shape the public’s perception of Islam so that it is always presented in a positive light. Any form of expression that reflects badly on Islam is in violation of Islamic law, which forbids any criticism of Islam, even when that criticism expresses the truth. Stories that are reported according to this narrative need not have anything to do with factual accuracy or truth. Both the 2009 Fort Hood massacre in Texas and the beheading in Vaughan Foods in Oklahoma last September were reported as workplace violence and not Islamic terrorism.

With the aid of leftist and Islamic policymakers shaping the course of international relations and security policies, that false narrative is finding its way into international policy to destroy the West’s hard-won, cherished core values. Realities and facts that might tarnish Islam’s name are deemed hate speech and becoming lost through censorship. The 57-state Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), which is the world’s largest security-oriented intergovernmental organization that happens to be rooted in communism, and the 57-state Organization of the Islamic Cooperation (OIC), which is the most influential and largest Muslim organization in the world pushing to criminalize any criticism of Islam, are two such policymakers who are influencing world leaders and the news media.

Most Western world leaders are bleating the same empty platitudes about the recent Ramadan terrorist attacks in Tunisia, France and Kuwait, carefully avoiding the word “Islam.” UK Prime Minister David Cameron explained to the media that Islam is a religion of peace, and that the terrorists who “do these things…do it in the name of a twisted and perverted ideology.” When asked if it’s right to say that the recent Ramadan attacks have nothing to do with Islam, UK Home Secretary Theresa May responded to BBC’s Andrew Marr in the positive, “that it has nothing to do with Islam. Islam is a peaceful religion,” and that the terror attacks are “about a perversion of Islam.”

Instead of issuing travel warnings not to vacation in Islamic countries especially during Ramadan, the Islamic “sacred” month of feasting — a month rife with bloodshed and battle since Islam’s inception, when armed raids on Meccan trade caravans and bloody battles were waged by Mohammed and his followers (including the 1973 Yom Kippur War on the 10th of Ramadan), not to mention the ISIS Ramadan message that jihad is ten times more obligatory during Ramadan, and that those who die will be rewarded by Allah ten times more than during the rest of the year — Western leaders like Cameron continue to nourish the official politically correct narrative of Islam being a religion of peace not linked to terrorism.

The twisted and perverted ideology to which both Cameron and May refer pervades pages and pages of the Koran and other Islamic doctrine, inspiring jihadists and religious Muslims to “do these things,” including operating child sex slave grooming gangs throughout Europe, especially in the UK, to rape, pimp, torture and sometimes kill non-Muslim underage schoolgirls. The Koran itself contains over 100 verses promoting violence against non-Muslims who, to this very day, remain victims of the verse.

What lies at the heart of Islam is an antipathy towards non-Muslims, as well as a deeply-entrenched duty and commandment from Allah to wage Jihad and eventually subjugate non-Muslims worldwide to Islamic rule in the name of Allah. Massive street prayer is one form of subjugation conducted only to intimidate and Islamize Western society, to remind non-Muslims who’s really in control. Similarly, forcing non-Muslims in their own countries, in the UK for example, to eat halal slaughtered meat — an utterly inhumane and barbaric Islamic practice, not to mention a multi-billion dollar industry controlled by Muslim Brotherhood organizations that fund jihad worldwide — when only a mere 5% of the UK population is Muslim, and when the Koran specifically exempts its followers from eating halal if it’s not available, is another way to subjugate non-Muslims.

People are becoming sitting duck targets for Islamic terrorists in Western countries and abroad because of the little-known but powerful world policymakers like the OSCE and OIC who influence world leaders to kowtow to Islamic interests. Western leaders fail to convey an accurate picture and understanding of what is really going on in the world because it might reflect badly on Islam, and they don’t want to appear “Islamophobic” for fear of more terrorist attacks. By failing to report the truth, they are denying citizens the opportunity to take appropriate action that could save their lives when faced with something that could be considered a threat, such as a beach vacation in an Islamic country over Ramadan.

The dead European tourists in Tunisia might still be here today had there been an undistorted flow of information to warn them that warfare and killing in the name of Islam are encouraged during the month of Ramadan. Furthermore, people might choose to avoid Islamic countries at all times if they were aware that these countries rely upon the most non-liberal draconian and barbaric Islamic or sharia-based corporal punishments imaginable.

The anti-blasphemy narrative pushed by the highly influential but little-known OIC, which speaks on behalf of over 1.5 billion Muslims worldwide, not only silences any expression considered to be offensive and insulting to Islam, but punishes the offenders, as Mohammed did to his dissenters and insulters. They were either condemned to hell or killed. Because Muslims consider Mohammed as the ideal model for mankind to follow, many Islamic countries such as Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Iran, have also made blasphemy subject to the death penalty with their anti-blasphemy laws.

It is this anti-blasphemy law that the OIC is striving to legally enforce on the world in order to curtail speech and expression when it comes to Islam — not so much for religious compliance as for the global subjugation of non-Muslims to Islam. Since 2005, the OIC has been pushing relentlessly for a UN blasphemy resolution (Resolution 16/18 passed in 2011) to silence so-called Islamophobia — a term deliberately coined and marketed in the 1990s by the International Institute of Islamic Thought, one of the thousands of Muslim Brotherhood front groups worldwide, to drive public discourse and policy. However, the OIC’s top priority is to globally criminalize any criticism of Islam, and it is working with the Muslim Brotherhood to accomplish this. Ten years later, in 2015, telling the truth about Islam has become a crime in some European countries.

The highly influential yet little-known OSCE that is rooted in fighting communism, is supposed to protect and promote civil liberties. Instead, it is negotiating them away by capitulating to the OIC narrative of the Muslim Brotherhood, whose stated goal from the 1990s is to destroy Western civilization from within. Its goal of global domination is to be accomplished not through violence, at least not yet, but rather through the slow infiltration of Western government, military, judicial and academic institutions.

So far, there has been practically no opposition from any Western administration in power, only cooperation from world leaders, government officials, and leftist policymakers. In fact, the cooperation from Western leaders with OSCE and OIC policymakers has been so great, that the U.S. co-sponsored Resolution 16/18 with Pakistan, and helped usher it through in 2011, despite this resolution being a direct assault on the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

At an OSCE May session in Vienna (on how the media can help prevent violent radicalization that leads to terrorism), OSCE panelist Leila Ghandi, producer and TV show host on the most popular Moroccan TV channel (2MTV) that is over 60% government-owned, maintained that the truth or facts about “a community” can sometimes constitute hate speech when those facts are offensive and therefore should not be said. The panelist’s words echo those of the new OIC Secretary General, Iyad Amin Madani, who tweeted earlier this year following the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attack in Paris, that “freedom of speech must not become a hate speech and must not offend others.” In other words, truth about Islam is designated as hate speech.

Furthermore, OSCE panelist Victor Khroul, correspondent for Rossiya Segodnya, a Russian state-owned international news agency, questions why the mainstream media throughout the world still refer to the “self-proclaimed self-established state in the Middle East” as the Islamic State. His words echo those of Madani, who proclaimed last year that the Islamic State has no connection with Islam. Khroul claims it’s a mistake for these people to be called Muslim and their state Islamic, which only “confuses the audience with this correlation with Islam.” He maintains that it’s still possible “to find other words to describe this so-called state and its activity,” discounting the facts that Islamic State is what ISIS named itself and its state, and that ISIS clearly credits its motivation to Islam and its acts to Allah. The name Islamic State does not have to be rectified because it accurately reflects reality, defines the organization in question, and is therefore a correct term that would sit well in the world of Confucius and his doctrine on rectifying names.

Major Stephen Coughlin, an attorney, former U.S. Army intelligence officer, and the Pentagon’s leading expert on Islamic law and jihad (until he was dismissed in 2008 for linking Islam with terrorism with his Red Pill Briefings), stresses the urgency of defining the enemy as he defines himself: “you cannot target what you will not define…if I can’t use the concepts of Jihad that Al-Qaeda say they rely on, then I can’t understand what they are going to do.”

The author of Catastrophic Failure: Blindfolding America in the Face of Jihad, Coughlin attended the OSCE May session and responded to the OSCE jargon as follows:

“Once you decide that facts on the ground as they present themselves, can be considered hate speech, this is no longer about truth…you are subordinating facts that the public has a right to know when they formulate their decisions, and replacing them with narratives to keep them from coming to the understanding of events that can be articulated and verified. That can never be considered hate speech. We’re not talking about speech at all. We’re talking about brazen disinformation.”

Rather than disseminate vital information to the public that can save lives, Western world leaders are betraying their citizens by submitting to the OSCE and OIC narrative of outlawing any criticism of Islam and rendering truth illegal. Reassuring citizens that Islam is a religion of peace merely renders them incapacitated from exercising sound judgment, crippling their ability to make the right decision in the face of potential harm.

While global institutions and national security policies are being shaped, and compromised, by highly influential but ill-known world organizations such as the OSCE and OIC, it’s critical that citizens get to know who those policymakers really are, and become more engaged in public affairs and the political process in order to arrest the Islamization process of the West… before it’s too late to reverse.

8 thoughts on “Outlawing the Truth About the Coming Islamic Storm

  1. It is written that Satan is the (self-appointed) god of the world. This statement is becoming increasingly true as Satan is working overtime to make himself and his manner of governance increasingly pervasive in the affairs of this world. Wholesale anarchy followed by tyranny can be the only consequence. God help us one and all.

  2. It seems to be rarely acknowledged that the false narrative on Islam isn’t just objectionable because it is dishonest and represents a grossly offensive exercise in propagandizing the masses, it is objectionable because it has very real and sometimes lethal consequences.

    The Brits killed in Sousse, Tunisia were not warned by their government of a heightened risk of danger if they travelled to a Muslim country during Ramadan. A breach of the duty of care of a government towards its citizens. If they had have been they may not have travelled to Tunisia; thus they would still be alive. More generally the budget-conscious Brits who go to places like Sousse – it is not the choice of the rich – may decide it is never worth saving 100 pounds on a package tour to a Tunisian or Moroccan beach resort and instead go to Spanish or Greek one.

    The above article notes:

    “Furthermore, people might choose to avoid Islamic countries at all times if they were aware that these countries rely upon the most non-liberal draconian and barbaric Islamic or sharia-based corporal punishments imaginable.”

    The author might have added that their criminal justice systems are corrupt and capricious to the core.

    The Indonesian island of Bali has a culture and history that is Hindu, its population is 84% Hindu. This Hindu culture, Bali’s climate and inexpensive accommodation, food and alcohol make it an attractive and inexpensive holiday destination for Westerners, especially Australians. It is, however, part of and ruled by Muslim Indonesia. Bali is part of the never acknowledged as such Javanese empire. The police force and bureaucracy are overwhelmingly if not exclusively Muslim. The 2002 Bali bombings by Islamic terrorists killed 202 people, including 88 Australians (about 30 from my suburb), and injured 209. If the Australian government had permitted open and honest discussion of Islam, many of those holidaying in Bali may have thought twice about what they were risking.

  3. ” When asked if it’s right to say that the recent Ramadan attacks have nothing to do with Islam, UK Home Secretary Theresa May responded … “that it has nothing to do with Islam. Islam is a peaceful religion,” and that the terror attacks are “about a perversion of Islam.” ”

    Gotta ask: So which is it? Are the attacks nothing to do with Islam or are the attacks a perversion of Islam? We can’t have it both ways can we?

    If the attacks are nothing to do with Islam then why are the terrorists always saying they have everything to do with Islam?

    If the attacks are a perversion of Islam, in what way, specifically, do they represent a perversion? Come now, if they are so blatant a perversion it must be almost excruciatingly simple to explain, no?

    The two questions require two different kinds of answers with one answer necessarily cancelling out the other’s rationale. I don’t have a PhD in Logic so I might have this all wrong. But that’s how it seems to me.

    Once we have got our spokesperson to choose the one or the other we can then go onto specifics. They are more likely to choose the “perversion” route. Good. Let’s examine that argument. Ah but then we get into actual real-life Islamic doctrine & history and that constitutes “Hate-Speech” which makes us raaaaaaascists. Somehow. Nobody can elucidate exactly how, it just does. So shut up.

    I might just be chasing a possum up a gum tree here but it seems to me that such a line of respectful questioning would bring a little clarity and advance the cause of rational discussion. Even a tiny gain should be sought.

    What do you think?

    • It’s rather evident to the average person that Islam is either the religion of war, or it’s the religion of peace but that it’s somehow extremely easy to “pervert” it into a religion of war.

      So to the people who insist that it’s a religion of peace that has been perverted, the question should be: why does it seem to be so much easier to “pervert” this one particular religion and why it is this particular one that keeps getting perverted in this manner? Why isn’t poverty and conflict in some place like Burma resulting in a perversion of Buddhism that results in a worldwide Buddhist jihad with “radicalized” Buddhist loan wolf terrorists conducting random attacks?

      Why is there no Ansar al Buddha in India running around beheading the infidel trying to reestablish the Mauryan empire with thousands of radicalized Buddhists flocking to join?

  4. Will some country – any country please – get the ball rolling and officially declare that Islam is a Fascist Ideology and NOT a religion ? Without such an admission and redefinition, most western agencies are paralyzed because they cannot legally deal with it as a subversive political element which it actually is, relying instead on appeasement policies of religious-rights protection.

    Sharia law implementation is a blatant assault on all secular and democratic concepts irrespective of whether it is implemented selectively or universally.

    Will Poland or Hungary please do the world a favour , or perhaps Denmark ?

  5. If people would only take a cursory look at the history of Islam, they would see the same pattern which is emerging in Europe and all other parts of the world where Muslims have migrated to in vast numbers.

    The pattern is this: first the birth rate for Muslims go up. Second, Muslims will demand more concession for their beliefs. Third, they infiltrate local political groups and parties, and even form their own pro-Islamic parties. Fourth, the riots start. Fifth, full armed uprising with outside aid from Riyadh or some other large Muslim communities.

    It looks as if Europe is ready for stage four of this pattern, which should worry all politicians who value democracy, whether they are on the left of the right. Once Islam steps in, there is no more freedom to choose left or right. You only have the choice between narrow and nearly identical interpretations of Islam and nothing more.

Comments are closed.