UC Irvine Still Enforcing Sharia Law

 

 

Administrators are either clueless about radical Islam’s foothold on campus or determined to create an environment in which supporters of terrorism can thrive. Thak your pick.

 

The University of California-Irvine is a sprawling campus in Orange County. The institution, located between the Santa Ana Mountains and the shore of the Pacific Ocean, is not only home to some of the best minds in science and engineering, but also to some of the most virulent supporters of radical Islam in America – and a school administration bent on capitulating to them.

 

The university’s Muslim Student Union (MSU) holds several annual events, at which members unashamedly voice support for terrorist groups and denounce Israel, America, and the Western world. Past events hosted during the group’s annual anti-Israel week have had titles such as “Hamas: the People’s Choice” and “Israel: The 4th Reich.” Speakers have included Norman Finkelstein, Ward Churchill, and Anna Balzter.

 

This year, from May 7-15, the MSU hosted a series of programs entitled “Never Again? The Palestinian Holocaust.” As they have done in the past, the MSU appropriated ideas of genocide in order to promote their radical ideology.

 

The featured speaker last Thursday, May 15, was Amir Abdel Malik-Ali, a radical imam from Oakland who is all too familiar to UCI students. Malik-Ali frequently engages in anti-Western rhetoric and is a vocal supporter of terrorist groups. Not only has he praised Hamas, Hezbollah, and the mujahadeen in Afghanistan as “Islamic resistance” movements struggling against Western “oppressors,” he has called any scrutiny of these terror groups mere “propaganda.” Following Ali’s speeches to UCI’s MSU, the audiences of keffiyah-wearing Muslim students always repetitively recite the battle cry “Takbir! Allahu Akbar!” This year’s audience was no different.

 

While his rhetoric is lurid and apocalyptic, Malik-Ali’s speech is protected under the First Amendment. What’s alarming is the administration’s willingness to enforce the MSU’s prerogatives on other students who attend their events – hence the application of Sharia law where the Bill of Rights is applicable. For example, while videotaping Malik-Ali’s speech, we were confronted by a school administrator. Dean of Student Services Sally Peterson told us that, on behalf of the male students, we would have to stop filming the female activists, or as she called them “the sisters.” Aware of our rights, we refused her orders and continued covering the event.

 

As we continued our coverage of the festivities, members of the MSU ultimately decided to enforce what appears to be their own principle of just retribution. After Thursday’s event, the MSU walked up and down the main campus road chanting anti-Israel slogans and blocking off the entire walkway for several minutes while police and administrators stood by idly.

 

A male individual, who was filming the hateful procession, had at least three Muslim males charge at him for daring to film as the females from the group walked past. One of the males, a student named Yasser Ahmed who purportedly threw a cinderblock at an FBI vehicle last year, said to the cameraman: “You wanna get jacked! We can go get jacked right now! C’mon Emanuel, we’ve learned a lot about you let’s go! Lets go get jacked, Lets go get jacked!”

 

The UCI police department treated this incident unprofessionally and took no action. The student journalist gave his statement to a UCI police officer and explained how he was assaulted. The officer then went to take statements from the males MSU members. The police would not, however, take statements from those who witnessed the assault against the student journalist. After the police officer took statements, he told the student journalist that one of the males who charged at him had apologized and that nothing more could be done.

 

A Christian preacher on campus, Michael Venyah, also had his rights violated last Thursday. This preacher, who believes that all people must accept Jesus in order to get into heaven, began preaching about the prophet Mohammad and his crimes. Evidently, MSU members didn’t like hearing what he had to say and opted for charging and running into him. This was clearly an incident of assault. The cops present did nothing, and Dean of Judicial Affairs Edgar Dormitorio suggested that Mr. Venyah should leave.

 

Another case of MSU’s vigilantism occurred when a young Jewish female was followed back to her car and surrounded by six members of the MSU. A community member who witnessed the harassment also had her civil rights violated when the Muslim students noticed her. As UC Irvine police offers stood idly by, the Muslim students proceeded to situate themselves on the hood of her car in order to photograph her face, her vehicle identification number, and her license plate. When she later called the police department for answers, they justified the criminal behavior as the culmination of a tit for tat ethnic squabble. Put simply, they justified the need for Muslim students to “vent,” as they were just getting back at the Jews.

 

One group at UC Irvine has monopolized freedom of speech and expression. MSU organizers have taken it upon themselves to restrict the freedoms of others on the university campus and have managed to avoid significant criticism from the administration. Conversely, those who voice concern over MSU’s actions are depicted as stirring up trouble.

 

UCI administrators have not been helpful. Chancellor Robert M. Berdahl of UC Berkeley signed a letter, published in the New York Times, warning against anti-Zionist and anti-Jewish activity on campus. UC Irvine’s then-chancellor, Ralph Cicerone, refused to sign this letter. The current chancellor at UCI has called hate speech “repugnant,” but has refused to specify which group was responsible for hate speech and has been unable to ensure a safe environment during the hateful events hosted by the MSU.

 

The administration at UC Irvine has sent a clear message to the MSU: incitement and harassment against Jews, Israel, and America is acceptable on campus and will not incur consequences.

 

Jonathan Constantine Movroydis, a senior at UCI, is a staff writer for RedCounty.com. Reut Cohen recently graduated from UCI, where she ran a blog to document the ‘anti-Israel,’ anti-Semitic and anti-American incidents on campus.

America for Sale – Must Read!

 

 

America for Sale

Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld and Alyssa A. Lappen

Posted 04/01/2008 ET

 

 

 

As the U.S. and Western markets plummet and the U.S. dollar continues its free fall, sovereign wealth funds (SWF) gobble up prime financial institutions, industries and real estate in the U.S. and the West. Given concerns regarding the political influence of such wealth, the U.S. Treasury, together with Abu Dhabi and Singapore, on March 20 signed an “Agreement on Principles for Sovereign Wealth Fund Investment.”

 

“SWF investment decisions should be based solely on commercial grounds, rather than to advance, directly or indirectly, the geopolitical goals of the controlling government,” according to the joint statement and accompanying policy principles. Feebly attempting to enforce this standard, it declared: “SWFs should make this statement formally as part of their basic investment management policies.”Meanwhile, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) Board of Directors on March 21 endorsed an SWF work agenda to develop — in coordination with them and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) –“a set of voluntary best practices.”

 

The pretense surrounding most international agreements matches the deceitful promotion of Middle Eastern SWF investments and Islamic banking as “ethical and socially responsible.”

 

In fact, “Islamic banking defies the separation between economics and religion,” according to USC King Faisal professor of Islamic Thought Timur Kuran.

 

Globally, SWFs now hold some $2 to $3 trillion and are expected to reach $6 to $10 trillion “within five years.” Incredibly, IMF Monetary and Capital Markets director Jaime Caruana expects the planned “best practices” to “cover issues of public governance, transparency, and accountability principles” and “help ease concerns about SWFs in recipient countries and contribute to an open global monetary and financial system.”

 

High oil prices are responsible for the enormous growth of most SWFs, including those in the Middle East. According to a new the Asian Banker research group, ”the world’s 100 largest Islamic banks have outpaced conventional banks with an annual asset growth rate of 26.7 per cent (nearly $350 billion) in assets.”

 

In addition to huge political and economic influence such wealth carries, and in contrast with IMF wishful thinking, Middle Eastern SWFs also seek to impose the strangulating governance and eventual bondage of Islamic laws — not “ethics” or “social responsibility” as they advertise.

 

Middle East sovereign funds include bans on trade with Israel, despite U.S. laws prohibiting such boycotts and World Trade Organization (WTO) regulations requiring all member nations to allow free trade with each other. Yet, Middle East wealth so dazzles Western governments, including the U.S, that they readily ignore the Islamic nations’ illegal boycott. While these funds for now only target Israeli products, ultimately Western industries and economies will also endure dire effects.

 

The U.K. Trade and Investment (UKTI) website openly notes, “Saudi Arabia imposes no foreign exchange controls and no other restrictions on the repatriation of profits or capital by foreign investors,” except a strict ban “against transactions with Israel.”

 

The UKTI website also warns British businessmen of similar prohibitions in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and Oman, among others, against goods “manufactured in Israel.”

 

The growing U.S. and European financial crisis gives Islamic banking and shari’a finance proponents increasing leverage over Western markets and economics. In reality, their acquisitions of ever-larger stakes in U.S. and Western strategic financial and other assets, amounts to economic warfare against the West.

 

They lure U.S. and Western investors into high-rate sukuk or al-ijara Islamic bonds, which they claim are “alternative” Islamic finance instruments that supposedly avoid usury, but use Western structured finance tools-”some of the most complex ever created.”

 

Shari’a instruments transform liquid, traceable cash flows from interest-bearing debt into illiquid assets. They resemble “portfolio insurance” that caused the 1987 crash, and the mortgage-backed bonds behind the 1994 bond-market bust that eviscerated $1 trillion in value — then some 10% of the U.S. bond market. Those collapses damaged many huge pension funds, municipalities and institutional investors, and killed off several hedge funds.

 

Shari’a economics’ dubious ethical and financial values nevertheless continue attracting Western bankers and academics. In a March 5, 2008 missive to international business leaders, for example, Caux Round Table (CRT) global executive director Stephen B. Young even suggests that Islam Hadhari (“civilizational Islam” based on shari’a law, as promoted by the Muslim Brotherhood) can resolve America’s conflicts with the “Muslim ummah” (nation).

 

Young believes “Islamic Banking would … bring modern forms of private sector led economic development into Muslims societies,” ushering them into the “industrial and post-industrial revolutions,” by constructively blending “rational economic considerations with Qur’anic piety.” Yet he relies on a 2006 script by Malaysia’s Prime Minister Dato’ Seri Abdullah bin Haji Ahmad Badawi.

 

But “Islamic economics is an invented tradition,” writes USC’s Timur Kuran. “Neither classical nor medieval Islamic civilization featured modern style, much less Islamic banks.”

 

Far from developing Islamic and economies, shari’a law has overall retarded them. “To one degree or another, most of today’s 56 predominantly Muslim countries are economically underdeveloped,” Kuran writes.

 

Islamic finance deliberately promotes fundamentalism and anti-Western behavior throughout the Muslim world, rather than suppressing it, he argues. Neither have shari’a finance proponents in the West considered its economic effects — promotion of gender discrimination, replacement of secular law and schools with Islamic law and schools, and its institutional suppression of scientific investigation.

 

In December 2007, Bourse Dubai, the world’s first and largest Islamic equity exchange, bought 20% of NASDAQ, the biggest U.S. electronic stock market, and “rebranded” it as part of Dubai’s company. The Bourse also got NASDAQ’s 28% of the London Stock Exchange (LSE). In addition, Qatar acquired a 24% LSE stake, giving the two Gulf nations control over nearly 52% of the London exchange. On March 15, Iran, which now dominates the leading 100 Islamic banks — followed by Saudi Arabia, Malaysia and the UAE –announced plans to list $90 billion energy holding company on Dubai International Financial Exchange, (DIFX), which is wholly owned by Bourse Dubai.

 

To counter the Shari’a financing takeover of America, the FTSE CSAG Terror-Free Index Series and Conflict Securities Advisory Group, yesterday launched a new index that screens out some 600 companies doing business with Iran, Sudan, Syria and North Korea. The U.S. government designates these states as sponsors of terrorism. However, the major Shari’a finance institutions are in Saudi Arabia, the UAE and other Gulf states  – all funders of radical Islamist and terrorist groups worldwide, and none designated by the U.S. or screened by the new index.

 

The one who pays the piper calls the tune, goes the saying. Considering the strategic purchases of Middle Eastern sovereign wealth funds and the traps built into shari’a financing, the U.S. and the West may soon be dancing to an unfamiliar — and strategically damaging — Islamic tune.Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld is director of the American Center for Democracy (ACD http://www.acdemocracy.org) and member of the Committee on the Present Danger. Alyssa A. Lappen, Senior Fellow at the ACD, is a former editor for Forbes, Corporate Finance, Working Woman and Institutional Investor.

 

 

The New York Post has reported that the Chrysler Building (New York) is now in the happy hands of the Abu Dhabi Investment Council.

TIZR, CAIR, and Deception

 

On Tuesday of this week ACT for America released  a KSTP News story about how the director of TIZA (Tarik ibn Zayad Academy) in Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota, assaulted a KSTP News crew. This story was a main feature on the Wednesday Fox News, “The Factor.” O’Reilly

 

As you may recall, two months ago news stories broke raising questions about TIZA, a tax-funded charter school, impermissibly advancing Islam. TIZA’s director denied all the allegations.

 

This past Monday the Minnesota Department of Education notified TIZA that it must correct two of its practices that do in fact amount to an impermissible advancement of religion in the school.

 

In a totally unrelated story, a movie theater in Irvine, California, canceled a screening of a film depicting convicted terrorist Sami Al-Arian as a modern-day Socrates who has been falsely imprisoned by our government. The theater canceled the event after public pressure was exerted. News reports indicate that the theater was misled as to the purpose of the screening as well as who was behind it.

 

(To read the full story, click here.)

 

According to the special events coordinator for the movie theater, the two women who contacted her to arrange for the screening dubbed it as a “college student film.” What’s more, the theater was never informed that the event would be a fundraiser for Al-Arian’s legal defense fund or that CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) was a co-sponsor.

 

What connects these two seemingly unrelated events (TIZA’s non-compliance with the law and the screening of the anti-American film about Al-Arian) is the lengths to which militant Muslims seem willing to go to deceive people about what they do.

 

TIZA will not allow members of the press into its facility and its director physically assaults a news cameraman. What is TIZA trying to hide? CAIR misleads a movie theater about a movie it wants to show. What is CAIR trying to hide? For those familiar with the Islamic doctrine of taqiyya, it is hard not to conclude that what is going on in instances like these amounts to deliberate deception in order to advance Islam.

 

The other element that connects these two events is a watchful public and press that pushed these deceptions into plain view. It is Thomas Jefferson who deeded us one of the more profound truisms of American history when he wrote, “The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.”

 

One of the compelling reasons for ACT! for America to launch our recent petition drive can be summed up in Jefferson’s words. Two different studies have found materials in nearly 100 different American mosques that include calls to Jihad, or incitement of violence, or calls for the abolition of our constitutional government. We cannot afford to look the other way. We cannot afford wishful thinking that hopes these materials are harmless diatribes.

 

1,400 years of history reveal that the call to Jihad typically leads to violent Jihad. 270 million people have died at the hands of Islamic militancy during those 1,400 years. Entire cultures, conquered by Muslims, no longer exist. Countries like Great Britain are now dealing with large radicalized populations of Muslims in spite of bending over backwards for years trying to accommodate Muslims in their countries.

 

Here in the United States, the freest country in the world with the greatest respect for human rights of any nation in the world, polling data shows that 26% of Muslims under the age of 30 believe suicide bombings are sometimes justified.

 

For the sake of our security and our liberty, we cannot afford to be complacent, and we must not allow ourselves to be deceived. There is simply too much at stake.

 

If you haven’t yet signed our petition calling on Congress to conduct hearings to examine extremist materials in American mosques, please click here to do so today.

Islamofascism – Is the word Inflammatory? See PETITION!

I was troubled by the word “Islamofascist,” that is until I looked a little closer. I thank our San Francisco chapter leader  for this information about the State Department dropping all references  to such words as “Jihadist” and “Islamofascist”, etc. Below is information and A PETITION for YOU to sign. It is going to the US House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. You can elect (check appropriate box) to keep your e-mail address confidential.

THE RIGHT QUESTION:

STOP USING ISLAMOFASCISM?

by Dr. Steve Carol ©Sept. 25, 2006

(featured on the www. at Canada Free Press.com, Sept. 30, 2006, in

the East Valley Tribune, October 3, 2006 – “Senator Has It All Wrong,” as the basis of the Rabbi’s sermon on Yom Kippur, Oct. 2, 2006 at Metropolitan Synagogue, New York and in the Jewish News of Greater Phoenix, Oct. 13, 2006)

On September 12th, Senator Russell Feingold (D-Wis) a once a contender for the 2008 presidential nomination called on President Bush to stop using the term “Islamic fascism” as it harmed the war on terrorism. Specifically Feingold stated: “I call on the president to immediately stop using the phrase ‘Islamic fascism,’ a label that doesn’t make any sense, and certainly doesn’t help our effort to fight terrorism.” That he told this to a delegation of the Arab American Institute, may just be coincidental.

What is of greater concern is that a presidential contender seems not to understand the definition of fascism and its modern variant, Islamofascism (or Islamic fascism). This is not a recent term. It was introduced by French writer Maxine Rodinson to describe the Iranian Revolution of 1978-79.

A quick review of ideology is in order. Different ideologies should be part of any history and government class in the United States. No other type of ideology, (democracy, communism, or despotism) matches what our enemy stands for as does the ideology of fascism. Islamofascism is the Islamic jihadist ideology grafted onto the totalitarian dictatorial system of fascism where the goals of Islam are more important than that of the individual. It seeks to re-create a mythical past. Glorification of war, violence, intimidation, belligerency, superiority over non-believers, anti-Semitism and anti-liberalism are all components of this ideology. An examination of events before and after 9/11 show that the definition is both sound and accurate. The pairing of the two words “Islamic” and “fascism” conveys a precise message: the old fascism is back, but driven by a radical fundamentalist creed of Islam. Who are the Islamofascists? They are the practitioners of militant Islam. Militant Islam contains elements of terrorism, religious fundamentalism, and the exploitation of social and economic injustice. It has ideological fervor, it has global reach, it is ambitious and it has staying power. They seek to re-create the Caliphate that once existed from southern France, to the gates of Vienna, to the plains of India, the steppes of Russia and western China – and then once regaining that, beyond. Islamofascism is now a global threat because certain Arab and Muslim governments have chosen to export it.

Senator Feingold claims the term does not make any sense. Yes, that applies, but not to the term “Islamofascism” but rather to the term he prefers: “terror.” We are not in a war against terror any more than the U.S. was in a war against trenches in World War I, a war against blitzkrieg and kamikaze in World War II and a war against blockade during the Cold War. Trench warfare, blitzkrieg, kamikaze, blockade and terror are all tactics employed in a war. Wars have identifiable enemies and ideologies. Fascism (and its German variant Nazism) during World War II and communism during the Cold War. The hostile ideology that currently seeks to destroy the American way of life, our free and democratic system and values is Islamofascism.

President Bush, has finally used the term “Islamic fascism” to describe the enemy ideology, albeit once. The PC crowd as well as apologists for the Islamofascists, have sought to prevent the use of that term. Continued use of the term “war on terror” clouds the issue, confuses many, and seriously divides our nation. While Americans – Republicans and Democrats, liberals and conservatives – continue to argue about whether or not we should or shouldn’t use the term “Islamofascism” and continue to deal with our Islamofascist enemies with one hand tied behind our back under “Marquis of Queensbury” rules – our enemies sharpen their figurative and literal swords and plan new acts of terror against us. “[Islamic fascism] doesn’t make sense” intones Senator Feingold. On the contrary, both by definition and deed it makes absolute sense. Rather than take the Senator’s suggestion not to use the term, Americans all, should increase their usage of it. As the Chinese general and author, Sun Tzu, advised over 2000 years ago: “Know thy enemy.”

Dr. Steven Carol

Prof. of History (retired)

Official historian on The Middle East Radio Forum www.middleeastradioforum.org

Scottsdale, Arizona

THE PETITION

Don’t passively acquiesce to the curbing of our use of the correct terms to describe our global enemy. During World War II the enemy was properly called “Nazis, fascists, and militarists”; during the Cold War they were properly called “communists.” There is no need to obscure the truth. Take action. Please sign and pass on to all on your mailing list.

THANK YOU

These are internal guidelines by the Department of State. Hoekstra tried to prohibit such nonsense with an amendment in the Intel Committee but failed.

The silent jihad against the west

THURSDAY, MAY 1, 2008
Anyone that cares to learn about what is going on in the world is familiar with active jihad, the “holy war”, conducted with terrorism and directed at the modern world in general and western civilization more specifically. But there is also another form of jihad that is part of the deliberate effort to have Islam replace all concepts of morality and the values held dear by the rest of us. The name of this silent “fifth column” effort is “Sharia Banking”. Unfortunately, Sharia Banking is increasingly accepted by western banking institutions without any real understanding of what the Muslim goal is and what is at stake in the efforts by these institutions to attract more business, profits and money to bail them out of financial messes they brought upon themselves.

Islamic Sharia banking is coming to the United States and other western nations, thanks to global banks such as Citigroup, HSBC, Deutsche Bank, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs. Great Britain is now pledging to become the Islamic banking center of the world. Clearly the headlong rush by all global banks to enter the world of Islamic banking is well underway. Why do western banks seek to participate in Sharia banking; because it gives them a chance to enter the Islamic banking industry which has over $1.5 trillion available today and is growing at a steady and explosive rate of over 15% per year.

The implications for the west, and especially for the United States, are staggeringly destructive. Islamic banking working through global banks is doing for Islam what it could never do on its own: giving legitimacy to Sharia law and infiltrating it into the fabric of western society.

For those not familiar with Sharia Banking; it is a system which creates and sells services and products that are in strict accordance with Sharia law. Sometimes it is referred to in the Islamic culture as “Sharia finance”. It dictates how the practices of banking, investment, bonds, loans, brokerage, etc, are to be conducted.

To insure compliance and to become “Sharia banking” compliant, banks must hire Sharia experts to review and approve each product and practice of the bank. This is known as “halal”, which has been described as “the Muslim equivalent of kosher in Judaism.” There is a shortage of such Sharia experts so there is competition among banks to find such experts to sit on their boards of directors. By having an “expert” involved in banking decisions, this provides the legitimacy to each banking decision because it is made at the director rather management level. However, most of these Sharia experts” are from the radical Wahhabi school of Islam in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere, and they hold views diametrically opposed to the basic values of Western civilization.

The Center for Security has identified some of the Sharia experts sitting on the boards of U.S. financial institutions. The top twenty “advisors” include many with conflicts of interests and anti-trust issues since they sit on boards of many Islamic banks at the same time. The Center for Security identifies a couple of advisors with ties to money-laundering and terrorism:

Yousuf Quaradawi who is prominent in the Muslim Brotherhood, owns two banks himself and has issued statements in support of Palestinian attacks on Israeli citizens and has issued rulings supporting Hamas and Hezbollah jihad attacks against Israel.

Muhammad Yaqui Usami who is a radical cleric and Sharia court judge in Pakistan. He is on the board of organizations that train thousands of Taliban and jihad foot soldiers. But the most heinous thing is his complicity in the murder and suffering of countless innocent Muslims as apostates because they disagreed with his Islamic mandates.

These are the kinds of people advising U.S. banks on how to conduct their business to assure they are “Sharia compliant”.

There are many differences of Sharia banks from orthodox banking. In Sharia banking interest (deemed “usury” regardless of rate or amount) cannot be charged, and investments must not be associated in any way with gambling, drinking alcohol, eating pork, etc. Very importantly, it calls for alms giving, referred to in Islamic parlance as “zakat”.

Zakat demands a tithe of 2.5 percent of revenue be donated to Islamic charity. If western banks follow this rule, it is certain that a portion of this money will end up in the hands of radical Muslims who are sworn to destroy the United States and replace our government with Sharia law.

For those unfamiliar with it, Sharia law is the legal and judicial system of Islam that is brutally imposed on many Islamic countries in the Middle East. It is the embodiment of the totalitarian ideology practiced by the Taliban, Iranian Mullahs and Saudi Wahhabis.

Sharia law is perpetuated by claiming to have its roots in the Koran, but it is actually for the most part based on rulings and dictates made by Islamic scholars and caliphs over several centuries. Non Muslims know Sharia law’s practices of harsh brutality and punishment as well as the total subjugation of women from newspaper articles describing the many rulings handed down by Sharia courts. These actions have shocked the western world; here are a few examples that have been written in various press accounts:

“The December, 2007 “teddy bear” case in Sudan, where a British teacher was sentenced to 40 lashes and a year in jail for allowing her students to name their teddy bear “Mohammad.” Islamic mobs demonstrated in the streets and called for her execution. The November, 2007 case where a 19 year old gang-rape victim in Saudi Arabia received a sentence of 200 lashes for riding in the car with her rapists. In 2006, a 34 year-old mother who was forcibly raped was ultimately tried and convicted of adultery, and was ordered to be stoned to death. Publication of cartoons in Denmark deemed disrespectful of Mohammad which caused endless demonstrations and mayhem, as well as the killing of many people.”

Islam and Sharia law demands total and unquestioned submission. Its followers are told that Sharia law is given by Allah and that whatever befalls them (good or bad) is “Allah’s will.” To question a judgment under Sharia (right or wrong) is to question Islam itself and will only bring harsh punishment. Curiously, by Islamic thinking if a person receives harsh punishment for something they didn’t do is nonetheless acceptable; the rationale being that Allah could and would have prevented it if that had been his will. This fatalistic approach which is contrary to what all other societies believe allows Islamic rulers to get away with virtually any thing they choose to do.

International bankers have long ago proven themselves to be completely amoral when it comes to money. They financed the Bolshevik Revolution in 1918 just as readily as they financially supported Hitler in the 1930’s. Now they are doing the same for the Islamists that want to destroy western civilization just as the communists and Nazis tried unsuccessfully to do before.

Unfortunately the odds of Islamic success are very different than the earlier threats. For one thing there are about 1.5 billion Muslims in the world and Islam is the fastest growing religion in history. Secondly, the spread of Islam is financed by the oil that is extracted from mid-eastern countries and thirdly, Islam has already infiltrated most of the west, especially in Europe. Now Islam has the combined support and encouragement of the entire global banking community.

There is an unholy alliance between Islam and global banking which may be the final nail in the coffin of western civilization in the historic quest for Islamic global domination. Remember that the next time you hear Islamist mobs chant “Death to America” – and don’t take it so lightly.

POSTED BY VINCENT G. GIOIA AT 7:48 AM