The Great Replacement: An Introductory Course

When I started watching the first of the two videos below, I thought of titling this post “Counterjihad 101”. However, these clips are about so much more than the jihad — they address the instrumentalization of Islamic Jihad in the service of the destruction of traditional Western nation-states. We (and by “we”, I mean all Europeans and the descendants of the European diaspora) are being intentionally subjected to an invasion from the (mostly Muslim) Third World, which will replace us, or dilute us through miscegenation (such a politically incorrect word!) so that we will no longer exist as distinct peoples.

When I encountered the second video, however, I realized how well it dovetails with the first, even though it approaches the topic from a very different angle.

I invite you to watch both of them, and see how they arrive at such similar conclusions from their different perspectives.

N.B.: I don’t know anything about the Scandza Forum, but I assume — based upon some of the people who support it, and the sufferers from the Screaming Nazi Heeber-Jeebers who decry it — that some of the organizers and speakers are “white nationalists” who believe doubleplus ungood things. But I don’t care — what the speaker featured here says is right on the money. I don’t disagree with anything he says.

The first video was recorded when Rasmus Paludan, the founder and leader of the Stram Kurs (Hard Line) party in Denmark, visited Washington DC last month. He interviewed Maj. (ret.) Stephen Coughlin, the author of Catastrophic Failure: Blindfolding America in the Face of Jihad, about what is happening now in Europe and the USA:

The process of settlement is a “Civilization-Jihadist Process” with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.Explanatory Memorandum of the Muslim Brotherhood, 1991

Both men agree that the Jihad is being exploited by the Powers That Be to enforce the Narrative and deconstruct the native populations of Western nations. The discussion presents a useful compare-and-contrast between what is happening in the USA and what is happening in Denmark:

The second video, also recorded last month, shows Mark Collett speaking at the Scandza Forum in Copenhagen:

Beginning from their disparate points of view, all three men arrive at exactly the same place.

Hat tips: For Coughlin-Paludan, Vlad Tepes; for Scandza, WRSA.

The Use of Undefined Terms Gives the State Arbitrary Power to Prosecute Dissent

Today, unlike yesterday — when they were prevented from speaking — members of the Counterjihad Collective were able to get on the roster of speakers at the OSCE “Human Dimension” meeting in Warsaw. Below is the intervention prepared and read by Maj. (ret.) Stephen Coughlin, representing Unconstrained Analytics.

2019 Human Dimension Implementation Meeting
Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe
Working Session No 14 (10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.)
Specifically Selected Topic: Hate Crime — Participating State’s Compliance

OSCE / ODIHR
Warsaw, Poland
24 September 2019

Thank you, madam moderator, ladies and gentlemen.

“Hate Crimes” needs a definition. Let me explain. At a formal OSCE Side Event in Warsaw in 2013, we got the drafters of the “Islamophobia” narrative to acknowledge that the term has no central definition.

In 2017, on the 20th Anniversary of Runnymede’s “Islamophobia — A Challenge for Us All,” Runnymede put out “Islamophobia — Still a Challenge for Us All” where, yet again, it was acknowledged that Islamophobia “still does not have an agreed, published definition” before offering its own definition, “Islamophobia is anti-Muslim racism,” which happens to be the same definition the Organization of Islamic Cooperation promulgated in 2005 when declaring it a “new form of racism.”

In September 2019, the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change issued Designating Hate — New Policy Responses to Stop Hate Crimes that likewise designated Islamophobia a form of racism while also affirming that the term lacks for a definition — all the while seeking its aggressive criminalization. To no-one’s surprise, the Tony Blair report also acknowledges that Hate Crime has no definition.

At a June 2015 OSCE event in Vienna, at an official forum, we got an OSCE panel to admit that saying something known to be true can constitute hate speech — thus seeking the criminalization of speech.

As of May 2019, UN General Secretary António Guterres, in a speech on the “United Nations Strategy and Plan of Action on Hate Speech” called for stepped-up action to prosecute Hate Speech even as the UN officially acknowledged that the term lacks definition.

It is not a coincidence that both Islamophobia and Hate Crimes converge on repurposed Neo-Marxist notions of racism to be arbitrated by unelected diplomats in international forums where the people are cut off from any meaningful participation. Masked in facially neutral language, the energy behind prosecuting these “known-to-lack-definition” attack narratives is chilling.

Of course, as we are constantly reminded, “we all know what it is.” And we do! It is the granting to the state the arbitrary authority to prosecute its citizens for any reason or no reason at all. We will have those definitions after it’s too late to stop the process. When that happens, we will have completed the transition from citizens to subjects.

Continue reading

Pigs and Monkeys and Mossad, Oh My!

David Wood has done us all a favor by shining his ray of sunlight on this dark, demented “thinking”:

And, as he usually does, David lets the Koran hoist itself with its own petard. The shouting imam in New Zealand, blaming Mossad and Zionists for this latest mass killer, is the usual predictable Koranic Kutie. I’ll bet most of us can sing along with him by now.

Meanwhile, The Apostate Prophet tells us what it’s like to grow up in Germany learning his ABCs of hatred against the kuffar. Just so you know its origins.

Are we recycling the 1930s all over again? A place where anti-Semitism is cool, and the anti-Semites are free again to shout the same filth all over again? But only certain haters are given a free pass on foaming at the mouth. Others are so muzzled by political correctness that they live in hiding or under guard — Salman Rushdie and Geert Wilders come to mind.

What is so mind-boggling about that New Zealand imam’s rant is not his “anti-Zionist” tirade, but that New Zealand is so accepting of it. There don’t seem to be (m)any MSM reports on this phenomenon. I’ve been hanging around all day, looking for items. They’re few and far between.

Is there any antidote to this moral rot? We are seeing it ever more openly now, even in the U.K. Parliament and the U.S. Congress. Anti-Semitism is becoming cool among the socialists…

The nutjob who massacred those Muslims in New Zealand is being compared to Breivik. As I said at the time of ABB’s massacres, first in Oslo and later on Utøya island, people in a position of power who sincerely wanted to know the deeper reality behind his Manifesto needed to have a forensic analysis done on his work. Of course, they didn’t want the truth; they wanted the circus they created, so the real authors got away with murder. More murder than they’d planned on perpetrating, perhaps. Their monster had a mind of his own; he got away and then went off-script. They didn’t know ABB didn’t care if he got caught. ABB had plans for his incarceration. Besides, I think they sold him a bill of goods about being the leader of a neo-Nazi movement which would rise up and free him from that court.

Later on, in prison, after Breivik sent out a formal retraction of “his” ideas to the major news media, admitting he’d been a neo-Nazi the whole time, the MSM ignored this plot twist. They liked him stuck in the hardened concrete they’d poured into his place in history so there he would stay, anti-Islamic to the end.

This new nutjob, at the other end of the earth, is even now having the cement poured around him before it’s been determined if he’s sane. Or if he had help with composing his “manifesto”. Nope, they’re setting him in stone, and will carve the narrative to fit their own nefarious needs, Truth be damned. You can bet the annual OIC report on “Islamophobic attacks” will feature this one big time. Usually, all they have to write about is endless accounts of bacon left on the threshold of a mosque or some (easily removed) graffiti. Now they have a story with teeth, and we will hear them growling over it far longer than we heard about 9/11 or 7/7. Don’t you wonder what PR term will come to designate this NZ massacre?

A mass killer is, ipso facto, crazy. It doesn’t matter if he’s legally ‘sane’, he’s still a whackjob. But then, so are those who claim his weapons belong to Mossad also insane. They are not only whackjobs, they’re selling their souls for anti-Semitic ABCs they took in with their mother’s milk.

Evil and unutterably sad.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Oh, I just remembered Trevor Loudon’s website, New Zeal. Find it here. For whatever glitchy reason, my browser doesn’t want to open it. I can say if you scroll down a bit, he’ll have more accurate information than you’re likely to get elsewhere. Please report back — don’t know when I’ll be able to open it.

Hat tip: Vlad

Judge Jeanine Talks to Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Earlier this month Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff appeared on Judge Jeanine Pirro’s show on Fox News. ESW discussed the verdict in the “hate speech” case against her, and how it relates to UN Resolution 16/18 and the Islamic law against slander:

When Muslims accuse someone of slander, they don’t mean what we do when we use the term. This is from Reliance of the Traveller,* Book R. “Holding one’s Tongue”, § 2.0, “Slander (Ghiba),” r2.2:

Slander and talebearing are two of the ugliest and most frequently met with qualities among men, few people being safe from them. I have begun with them because of the widespread need to warn people of them.

[…]

Slander (ghiba) means to mention anything concerning a person that he would dislike…

r2.3:

As for talebearing… it consists of quoting someone’s words to another in a way that worsens relations between them.

As you can see, the factual truth of any given statement is irrelevant; what matters is whether a Muslim would dislike hearing it spoken.

To contribute to Elisabeth’s legal defense fund:

For previous posts on the “hate speech” prosecution of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, see Elisabeth’s Voice: The Archives.

*   In full, ’Umdat al-salik wa ’uddat al-nasik, or The reliance of the traveller and tools of the worshipper. It is commonly referred to as Reliance of the Traveller when cited in English.

The Revised Edition (published 1991, revised 1994) is “The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law ’Umdat al-Salik by Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri (d. 769/1368) in Arabic with Facing English Text, Commentary, and Appendices”, edited and translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller. The publisher is listed as amana publications in Beltsville, Maryland.

This is an authoritative source on Sunni Islamic law, because it is certified as such by Al-Azhar University in Cairo. There is no higher authority on Sunni Islamic doctrine than Al-Azhar; it is the closest equivalent to the Vatican that can be found in Islam.
 

The OIC’s Long-Term Plan for the Conquest of Europe

Jean-Frédéric Poisson is a former member of the French National Assembly and president of the Christian Democrat party. He has recently written a book entitled L’Islam à la conquête de l’Occident: La stratégie dévoilée (“Islam on the conquest of the West: A veiled strategy”).

In the following video from Sud Radio, Mr. Poisson discusses a paper published in 2000 by ISESCO (Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) called “The Strategy for Islamic Cultural Action outside the Islamic World”.

Many thanks to Ava Lon for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

Continue reading

The OIC Tries to Stop Geert Wilders’ Motoon Contest

The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is — surprise, surprise — protesting Geert Wilders’ planned Mohammed Cartoon contest, which will be held later this year in the building housing the Lower Chamber (Tweede Kamer) of the Dutch parliament.

Here’s the OIC press release that came out earlier today:

OIC Strongly Condemns the Statement of a Dutch MP vowing to hold Cartoon Competition of the Prophet Mohamed Peace be upon Him

Date: 24/07/2018

The Organization of Islamic Cooperation has strongly condemned the statement made by the Dutch parliament member Geert Wilders vowing to hold a cartoon competition of the Prophet peace be upon Him, at the end of this year.

The Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Dr. Yousef bin Ahmed Al-Othaimeen expressed his deep concern over this provocative contest, which is arousing further incitement and sowing the seeds of hatred among the various followers of religions.

HE Dr. Al-Othaimeen affirmed that as the entire world is facing religious extremism and terrorism and needs peace, dialogue and tolerance, it is time to set up internationally binding legal instruments to prevent incitement, racism and discrimination, religious hatred and respect [sic] for all religions. Freedom of expression does not mean insulting the feelings of others; an attitude which cuts against the universal principle of respect for religions.

Notice that this document is far more than a complaint: it is a call to action, a reminder that the West must implement Resolution 16/18 and criminalize Islamic blasphemy. When it says, “it is time to set up internationally binding legal instruments to prevent incitement, racism and discrimination, religious hatred and respect [sic] for all religions,” the OIC means it wants a new United Nations resolution requiring all member states to pass laws in their national legislatures that criminalize insults against Islam and the Grand PBUH. And since the OIC now owns a controlling share of the UN, such a resolution is more than likely.

Justin Trudeau will be eager to obey, as will Angela Merkel, and probably Emmanuel Macron as well. If Hillary Clinton were president, she’d no doubt be trying to push the appropriate bill through Congress. But Donald Trump and UN Ambassador Nikki Haley have clearly indicated that they won’t allow any of the multiculti tripe from the UN to be pushed down America’s throat, so we citizens of the Great Satan have a short breathing space before we join the sharia-lovers in Europe and Canada.

In response to the OIC’s announcement, Parliamentary questions were presented by PVV MPs Geert Wilders and Raymond de Roon to the Minister of Foreign Affairs about the OIC’s condemnation of the contest:

Continue reading

The End Times of Albion: Timeline — First Period, 1945-1983

The essay below by Seneca III is the latest in the “End Times of Albion” series.
Previously: Part 1, Part 2.

Timeline — First Period, 1945-1983

The End Times of Albion, Part 3

by Seneca III

This analysis began two months ago when the Telford story broke overnight on 10th/11th March. The original intention was to dig deep into the underbelly of that forty-year atrocity and extract from the quagmire of reportage and the local historical record some idea as to how the mass rape, sexual trafficking, torture and brutal abuse of hundreds, possibly thousands, of white girl children there could come about and be ignored or brushed under the political carpet by so many for so long.

What it has uncovered is a nationwide, indeed Europe-wide, state of affairs that is a complex, mind-numbing web of subtle treachery and political ambition dating back to the 1920’s. This web grew slowly in the shadows during the long period of its gestation and has evolved into a tapestry of confusion, collusion, concealment, obfuscation and Marxist-Socialist indoctrination from which mendacious Western establishments created the warp and weft of the Grand Conspiracy that has brought us to this defining place and time.

In conclusion, Telford was neither a singularity, an accident nor an aberration; it is the end result of a multinational, century-long operation formulated with the objective of changing the course of Anglo-European and global history, and which is now rapidly approaching its apogee.

Thus, the emergence into full public view of the Telford abomination should come as no surprise to an informed though now cowed and multiculturally brainwashed indigenous population at large. It is but another demonstration of our journey down the road to perdition exemplified by the application of well-oiled group-think indoctrination through the enforced silence of the native victim groups and their communities via draconian hate crime laws ordained at the highest levels of government.

It is axiomatic that few history-changing events ever happen in temporal isolation, nor rarely in a single geographic location; there is always a chain of subtle, interconnected and barely noticeable precursors, the first faint ripples in the fabric of the structural ethos of a race, culture, nation, tribe or alliance which tend to disappear below the perceptual horizon of the body politic as a whole as it goes about its busy existence. Then, slowly, these ripples become deep rents and increase in frequency and severity until they reach a point where even the most inattentive eye can see that they portend a collapse from within and/or destruction from without.

Such a time is now upon us, and events in the timeline below and those to follow illustrate the connections between consecutive and parallel stages of the process. The ‘Grand Scheme of Things’ is being implemented through the mass importation of violent third-world, low IQ, feral predators with the intention of hastening the end of Western intellectual, moral and cultural strengths through the internal repression of long-heritage citizens and their consequent regressive mongrelisation. The ultimate objective is the elimination of the Caucasian blood line.

On the 18th of April the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on British Muslims launched their “appeal for evidence” Monday, describing “Islamophobia” as a form of “group based hatred or hostility” comparable to racism.

Their letter does not acknowledge there might be rational reasons to have reservations about rising levels of radical Islam and the growing influence of Islam in the West generally.

The call for submissions also only mentions free speech concerns at the end, in passing, describing them as “questions possibly outside the scope of this report”.

They aim to develop a definition of Islamophobia that can be “widely accepted by Muslim communities, political parties, and the Government”, the document adds.

Baroness Warsi, the parliamentary group’s treasurer and one of its four elected officers, tweeted: “To effectively challenge #Islamophobia we must comprehensively define it.”

(Breitbart London, 24th April)

If you don’t live on this benighted Island, then try to understand this — wherever you are, you are next if you are not already enriched, for here over a million girl children have been drugged, raped, tortured and impregnated and still more are in the process (The Halifax sequel will break soon unless our beloved establishment, as is their wont, manage to bury it).

Caveats: Links, quotations and citations are kept to an absolute minimum for reasons of space and simplification of comprehension, but interested readers are encouraged to undertake their own, deeper research using dated elements in the timeline as a starting point. Apart from needing to keep this analysis as short as possible and within the scope of a blog, I have not included mention of two World Wars and most of the semi-major and minor conflicts that have taken place within the timeline. I have done this on the assumption that the majority not mentioned categorise either as direct consequences of the Globalisation Project rather than as
initiators, are either unconnected or of relatively minor importance.

The same thinking particularly applies to WW II and the period that saw the end of European and East Asian Colonial Empires and the rise of new ones. Both trends, especially the Partition of India in 1949, can be traced back with various degrees of certitude to WW II and the Cold War which followed and are deserving of a case study of their own for which I do not have the space or time here.

General Timeline of Deconstruction

1920’s to the present — The birth and evolution of the ‘Racism’, (embryonic) ‘Political Correctness’, ‘Diversity’, ‘Multiculturalism’ and ‘Affirmative Action’ behavioral imperatives and the first implementations of a strategy to infiltrate and suborn Western educational establishments — in essence, the battle for our minds and those of our children.

Also, contributions from the ‘Frankfurt School’, the ‘Cloward-Piven Strategy’ (1966), the ‘Coudenhove-Kalergi Plan’ (C-K was the author or the subject of 37 major publications spread over the period 1922-1972), Saul D. Alinsky’s ‘Rules for Radicals’ (1971) and Common Purpose (1989).

Collectively the clever manipulation of the ‘Mea Culpa!’ Syndrome utilised as a Marxist-Socialist revolutionary tool.

First Critical Period — De-colonisation and the rise of globalism

1945 to 1947 — Post-War reorganization across Europe. Immigration to the UK from the nascent Commonwealth begins in earnest.

1947 — The Partition of India, which resulted in the creation of two independent dominions, India and Pakistan, and the subsequent emergence of modern Bangladesh as an independent nation in 1971 after breaking away and achieving independence from Pakistan in the Bangladesh Liberation War.

1947 — The All-Party Group for World Governance, previously the All-Party Group for World Government, was founded by a British Labour Party politician, Henry Charles Usborne (16 January 1909 — 16 March 1996). At its peak, it had over 200 members from the House of Commons and the House of Lords.


Henry Charles Usborne, Clement Edward Davies, Gilbert McAllister, Mary Tibaldi Chiesa

1947 onwards — The rate of ‘Commonwealth’ occupation of the UK from backward areas of Bangladesh and Pakistan such as Azad, Kashmir and Punjab increases. Today those areas are rich in new, grandiose villas with driveways full of expensive cars purchased with monies, predominantly benefit handouts, tribally repatriated from the UK. Meanwhile, their encampments in the occupied territories of the UK and Europe turn out a never-ending stream of parasites, common criminals, rapists, bombers, propagandists and general duty jihadis.

Continue reading

The OIC’s Long March Through American Institutions

The following report by our D.C. correspondent Frontinus concerns the use of foreign money by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) to buy American public opinion and change government policy. There’s no secret about what the OIC is doing — they planned it at their annual conference last December, and posted a policy paper (PDF) with the details. It’s a blatant, in-your-face operation.

Frontinus’ report is designed as a game plan for grassroots organizations and think tanks to use to expose and counter the subversion of American journalists and our public officials

The OIC’s Long March Through Western Institutions

by Frontinus

The Tactic:

In late December 2016, the OIC announced plans to pay American and European journalists and influential political leaders in order to change government policies based on OIC instructions and coordination.

This isn’t against the law in the United States, but anyone taking the OIC funds — a journalist or an influential person — should register as a foreign agent under the U.S. Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). These three criteria are required:

1)   Foreign money,
2)   foreign instructions, and
3)   an intent to influence public opinion and change policy to align with foreign interests.
 

— for an organization or individual to have to register as a foreign agent under FARA. And, given the OIC’s statements in the linked document (also excerpted below), they are indeed in place.

We just don’t know who in the U.S. is taking the money to do the OIC’s bidding. Which brings us to…

The Asks:

1.   For the media and other advocates for the OIC’s policy positions: Journalists, and political leaders probably won’t announce that they have been paid by the OIC. But when they clearly ARE writing and advocating for OIC positions, we can ask them outright if they’ve accepted money from the OIC, either directly or indirectly — and demand that they register as Foreign Agents, if they have in fact been paid.
2.   For Congress: Let Congressmen know that the OIC has announced it’s going to do exactly what the FARA legislation was written to cover: it’s a foreign entity purchasing influence and journalists in order to change US opinion and government policies. FARA has come up in the news recently, with the failures by both Paul Manafort and Tony Podesta to register as foreign agents. The State Department needs to demand that the OIC provide lists of any American citizens it is paying, and how much, so that the FARA office can implement the FARA legislation. And of course, the FARA office needs much stronger congressional oversight.
 

Background:

On December 21, 2016 in Jeddah Saudi Arabia, the OIC held the 11th Session of the Islamic Conference of Information Ministers, titled “Session of the New Media to Counter Terrorism and Islamophobia”. The goal of the meeting was to develop the “OIC Media Strategy in Countering Islamophobia and its Implementation Mechanisms.” The document is here. It’s only ten pages long, and various sections may be useful for organizations dedicated to opposing Islamization.

As always with OIC documents, the English can be a bit odd — presumably badly translated from the Arabic.

Somewhat arbitrarily, I quote the following bits, starting with the Long Term Goals (emphasis added):

III. Long Term Goals:

1.   To call media professionals to develop, articulate and implement voluntary codes of conduct to counter Islamophobia. The OIC and its Member States should be vocal in calling media professionals to use the power they have with responsibly through accurate reporting.
2.   To assess successful media campaigns with a view to understanding the strong factors to be replicated and review the unsuccessful ones for avoiding the weak contents and procedures.
3.   To engage with western governments in creating awareness against the dangers of Islamophobia by addressing the responsibility of media on the issue.
 

The Actions are also worth noting — Page 2:

Continue reading

Deborah Weiss: M-103, Resolution 16/18, and the OIC’s War on Free Speech in the West

Deborah Weiss is an attorney and a writer who specializes in free speech issues, especially the issue of sharia. She has published articles at FrontPage Magazine, American Thinker, The Weekly Standard, The Washington Times, and NRO, among other places.

Ms. Weiss was the opening speaker on September 10 in Toronto at the conference “M-103: Islamophobia Cure or Sharia Trap?” sponsored by Canadian Citizens For Charter Rights And Freedoms.

The video below shows Ms. Weiss’ speech, followed by a Q&A. Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for uploading this clip:

The Mother of All Misdirections

Below is the latest from the Sharia TipSheet. See the original article for links, videos, and graphics.

The Mother of All Misdirections — U.S. Counterterrorism Training Still Hostage to Radical Islamist Thought

Will the Trump administration bring back counterterrorism training materials that focus on radical Islam? The Sharia TipSheet will stay on this story until the answer is clear. FOIA litigation is anticipated. To be continued…

On November 5, 2009 about 1:30 p.m. local time, Army psychiatrist Maj. Nidal Hasan entered a building at Ft. Hood, shouted “Allahu Akbar” and opened fire with a laser-sighted weapon. He fanned his weapon, spraying bullets, before taking aim at individual soldiers. Two people charged him but were killed; a third was injured. Hasan moved outside the building where he shot down a police officer and targeted fleeing soldiers. Another police officer stopped Hasan with five shots as Hasan was reaching for a new clip. Hasan killed 13 and wounded more than 30 in his 10-minute shooting rampage. Seven victims were shot in the back. There was so much blood on the floor in the building that nurses had trouble reaching the wounded. The Obama administration called it an act of ‘workplace violence’ but, at his trial, Hasan told the court he was defending the Taliban against the U.S. military.

Army personnel who worked with Hasan knew he was a “ticking time bomb”. He had given presentations supporting the killing of non-Muslims, defending Osama Bin Laden, and justifying suicide bombers. He announced that Islam took precedence over the U.S. Constitution (which he had sworn to defend). He stated on multiple occasions that Muslims in the military could kill other service members. The Army did not rebuke him but instead gave him credit toward his academic requirements for his views.

These are some of the findings of a Senate Homeland Security Committee report — “A Ticking Time Bomb: Counterterrorism Lessons from the U.S. Government’s Failure to Prevent the Fort Hood Attack” (February 3, 2011) (pp. 27-31). The report cited the Defense Department’s “failure to address violent Islamist extremism by its name” and predicted “[i]t will be more difficult for the military to develop effective approaches to countering violent Islamist extremism if the identity and nature of the enemy cannot be labeled accurately.” (p. 48)

The report went on to recommend:

that the FBI should produce in-depth analysis of the ideology of violent Islamist extremism, the factors that make that ideology appealing to individuals (including U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents), and what ideological indicators or warning signs show that the individual is weighing or accepting the ideology. Our review also leads us to believe that the FBI also should provide sufficient training to its agents including: (1) ideological indicators or warning signs of violent Islamist extremism to serve as an operational reference guide, and (2) the difference between violent Islamist extremism and the peaceful practice of Islam. (p. 77)

Violent Islamist Extremism. Name the enemy. Understand the ideology. Develop more effective training. But just a few short months after the Ft. Hood report, the Obama administration would actually turn and go in the opposite direction — throwing out training materials directed at violent Islamist extremism, obfuscating the Islamist threat by cloaking it with other threats, and bringing in new materials and trainers to teach a Muslim Brotherhood-approved concoction called “Countering Violent Extremism” (CVE). CVE, which is still in place, takes the focus off of violent Islamist extremism, diluting it to nothingness with vague talk of extremist threats in general, as if the actions of the 9/11 hijackers and animal rights activists are somehow equivalent.

What Difference, At This Point, Does It Make?

The switcheroo from standard threat assessment to CVE has had a number of disastrous consequences:

Continue reading

Using the SPLC and Private Corporations to Crack Down on “Hate”

We’ve reported numerous times in the past on the campaign by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) targeting “hate” groups in the USA, with an eye towards shutting them down. Even though the SPLC is a private organization, and absolutely opaque in its methodology, it is widely cited in the media and used by various governmental agencies at both federal and state levels.

The SPLC’s list of hate groups was prominently featured by CNN after the violence in Charlottesville, and various organizations are now feeling the heat as a result. Our D.C. correspondent Frontinus sends the following brief overview of what’s happening, including proposed action by Congress.

Using the SPLC and private corporations to crack down on “Hate”

By Frontinus

The efforts of the SPLC are bearing fruit inside the Beltway in the form of congressional action.

Note the resolution (JUST a resolution, unfunded, not a mandate but a legislature “marker”) S.Res. 118 that passed the Senate. A similar version was proposed in the House (House Resolution 257) requiring federal investigations of “hate incidents”, not just “hate crimes”. A small possibility does exist that it could pass even in the House, given the campaign being waged this summer (unlikely, but Republicans tend to be timid bunnies). There’s an article on it at Gatestone.

See also a real BILL (with House and Senate versions): HR1566 and S.662, which were reported to committee but not yet voted on; they’re not as likely to pass this session. This formulation is much stronger and more closely aligned with the SPLC/Google campaign. Quite operational in detail.

Keep an eye on this, or at least on its framing of the strategy. And combine these two (the Resolution, the Bill) to get a better idea of the two- to four-year plan to install a legal framework that would, in fact, implement UN Resolution16/18 in its most draconian interpretation.

The Charlottesville violence, as messaged by media and both Democrat and Republican leaders, will certainly help in herding a media/political consensus to pass either the Resolution or the Bill. President Trump will be pressured to sign the Bill if it passes — or if he doesn’t, he’ll be tarred as “pro-Nazi”, and candidates in 2018 will be tarred as white supremacists/pro-haters, etc. etc. etc.

One should see all these efforts as a systematic and integrated campaign. In addition to the Resolution and Bill outlined above, the campaign includes:

1.   The directed violence enabled by the Charlottesville and Virginia State Police and the ensuing planned media and political campaign accusing Trump and his supporters as Nazis (note that mainstream Republicans are part of this campaign, and almost no one in Congress is opposing it).
2.   Various SPLC efforts with Google and Guidestar, to use the SPLC list for discouraging donors (Guidestar) and lowering the search rankings (Google) for organizations;
3.   The SPLC effort with Google and ProPublica (and many others, including AJ+, Al Jazeera) on “hate incidents”, data-mining from anecdotal data (not just “hate crimes”);
4.   The SPLC effort with ProPublica to go after vendors (IT hosts, DNS, as well as transaction processing such as PayPal and credit card companies) doing business with SPLC-listed groups.
5.   Other stuff I’ve either forgotten or haven’t found. Readers should add more items to the campaign tactics list if they know of them.
 

This is a fight for territory in the information warfare battlespace. The Left understands they can’t win in the political battlespace in the USA, and they realize that his use of social media helped Trump in 2016. So the Left needs to control the information warfare battlespace, which is run by private companies — who can decide the applicability of terms of service in whatever manner they choose, under our First Amendment, to banish any organization or citizen from their companies on the internet.

It’s a smart plan. As usual, conservatives and libertarians still don’t know what’s hitting them, much less what lies ahead.

APPENDIX — The core text of HR1566:

A BILL

To provide incentives for hate crime reporting, grants for State-run hate crime hotlines, a Federal private right of action for victims of hate crimes, and additional penalties for individuals convicted under the Matthew Shephard [sic] and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1.

Short title

This Act may be cited as the “National Opposition to Hate, Assault, and Threats to Equality Act of 2017” or “NO HATE Act”.

SEC. 2.

Findings

Congress finds the following:

(1)   The incidence of violence motivated by the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim, known as hate crimes or crimes motivated by bias, poses a serious national problem.
(2)   Such violence disrupts the tranquility and safety of communities and is deeply divisive.
(3)   A prominent characteristic of a violent crime motivated by bias is that it not only devastates the actual victim and the family and friends of the victim, but also frequently ravages the community sharing the traits that caused the victim to be selected.
(4)   According to data obtained by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the incidence of such violence increased in 2015, the most recent year for which data is available, in comparison to prior years.
(5)   The Hate Crimes Statistics Act (Public Law 101—275; 28 U.S.C. 534 note) and the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act (division E of Public Law 111—84; 123 Stat. 2835) have enabled Federal authorities to understand and, where appropriate, investigate and prosecute hate crimes.
(6)   However, a complete understanding of the national problem posed by hate crimes is hindered by incomplete data from Federal, State, and local jurisdictions obtained through the Uniform Crime Reports program authorized under section 534 of title 28, United States Code, and administered by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
(7)   Increased implementation of the National Incident-Based Reporting System will enable the Federal Bureau of Investigation to obtain more detailed and accurate information on many crimes, including violence motivated by the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim.
(8)   State-run hotlines that direct victims or witnesses of hate crimes to law enforcement or local support services will allow State and local law enforcement agencies, as well as local community-based service providers, to understand hate crimes more fully and to act accordingly.
(9)   A Federal private right of action provides an additional option of recourse for individuals who are targeted for violence based on actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability.
(10)   Many perpetrators of crimes motivated by bias may benefit from educational programming or volunteer service conducted in conjunction with, under the guidance of, or with the input of the community targeted by the hate crime.
(11)   Federal financial assistance with regard to certain violent crimes motivated by bias enables Federal, State, and local authorities to work together as partners in the investigation and prosecution of such crimes.
(12)   The problem of crimes motivated by bias is sufficiently serious, widespread, and interstate in nature as to warrant Federal financial assistance to States and local jurisdictions.
 

No Need to Define “Islamophobia” — Just Criminalize It

Last night we posted a report by the Counterjihad Collective on an EMISCO side event at this year’s OSCE/HDIM conference in Warsaw. Below is a follow-up intervention by Stephen Coughlin of Unconstrained Analytics, describing the frightening absurdities he heard at yesterday’s side event.

Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for uploading this video:

For links to previous articles about the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, see the OSCE Archives.

EMISCO and the Ongoing Push Against “Islamophobia” by the OSCE

The following report was written by the Counterjihad Collective after several members attended an EMISCO side event today at the OSCE/HDIM conference in Warsaw.

This morning’s side event “The Consequences of Islamophobic Discourse in the European Political Parties” was hosted by EMISCO and chaired by Bashy Quraishy, the General Secretary of EMISCO (European Muslim Initiative for Social Cohesion). the panel was top-heavy with speakers giving country reports on Islamophobia in Europe.. The presentations seemed forced and overloaded in the sense that little time was able to be allotted for questions.

The forum was structured so that the closing statements, given by Bülent Şenay, were delivered after the question-and-answer period to ensure a final word. The panel seemed defensive, with panel members making strident statements about various political parties, labeling them as “racist” and “Islamophobic”. Building on narratives emphasized in 2014, their efforts were aimed at escalating the Islamophobia rhetoric in the guise of racism and gender, with all of the women appearing in head coverings, amid a constant reference to the wearing of headscarves. Also of note was a peculiar omission: the materials associated with side event did not provide the names of the briefers.

Because EMISCO and the Turkish complement were force to acknowledge that the term “Islamophobia” lacks a definition, this question was presented again in this forum. The other question concerned the definition of “new form of racism not based on skin color” and “manifestations of racism” as well. The panel did not answer the question on racism. Quraishy answered that Islamophobia was not about reasonable disagreements. In his closing remarks, however, Bülent Şenay became visibly agitated, went off his prepared notes (he said) and forcefully declared that our asking the question was both Islamophobic and ridiculous because “we all know what it means” and hence “I won’t define it.” He went on to insist, however, that “we must define Islamophobia as a crime.” Of course, defining Islamophobia is an issue because criminalizing an activity that lacks a definition is a serious civil rights and verges on the criminalization of thought.

Continue reading

Stephen Coughlin: Suppressing “Hate Speech” Means Suppressing Free Speech

The Human Dimension* Implementation Meeting of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) convened for its second week in Warsaw. A team from the transatlantic Counterjihad is there to take part in the proceedings.

Stephen Coughlin, representing Unconstrained Analytics, gave the following intervention this afternoon. Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for uploading this video:

*   The OSCE’s “Human Dimension” project gives governments and NGOs the opportunity to send representatives to discuss policies and initiatives of interest to all the member states of the OSCE. In the last few years it has been mostly co-opted by Muslim groups under the guidance of the OIC.
 

For links to previous articles about the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, see the OSCE Archives.