HijackCoexistCoexist sticker featured on car hijacked by Muslim bomberIn support of the farfetched theory that the Muslim terrorists were Muslim terrorists is Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s YouTube Channel. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev had three named playlists. One was called “Islam”, one was called “Terrorists” and one was called “Timur Mucuraev”.
We Will Dedicate Our Lives to the Jihad is the Timur Mucuraev song that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev added to his playlist.
Infidels rule the earth/for the faithful life is torture
From above the duty calls you/to fight boldly in the way of Allah
Forget sorrow and take in eternity/The bright road of Jihad waits for you
Paradise’s rivers softly chime/The 72 virgins lovingly whisper
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s Favorite Song: “We Will Dedicate Our Lives to the Jihad


 The Tsarneavs need not have been sleepers. It is enough that they were Muslims. Like so many others, they were ticking time bombs who could at any moment decide that the Jersey Shore lifestyle so many Muslim youth adopt in the West isn’t enough for them and turn to Islam. And that is almost certainly what finally happened.
Islam carries its own transnational patriotism with it. It merges with a hundred ethnic nationalisms, like Chechen terrorism, but it links together Sunni Muslims everywhere. Its message is of a better world under Islamic rule.
Muslims who admire the Jihadis in Afghanistan, Syria, Chechnya, Mali, Israel, Thailand and a hundred other places eventually either want to join in or help out.
Dzhokar Tsarneav and Tamerlan Tsarneav were Islamic patriots. They believed in a world ruled under Islam. That is a belief that was born with Islam and predates any local conflicts with Russia. It’s a religious war and it’s a national war. It’s Muslim patriotism for a fatherland that encompasses a world of slaves under the dead boot of their prophet.
The Tsarneav brothers probably weren’t sleepers. We’re the ones who are sleeping.

Islam is the Ultimate Sleeper Cell


“Why would Chechen refugees, who’ve been locked for nearly two decades in a bitter, violent conflict against the Russian government, harbor such anger against the United States that they’d want to carry out a terrorist attack at the Boston Marathon?” Politico asks.
“The answer is far from obvious,” it concludes.
Media Still Wondering What Possible Motive Muslim Terrorists Could Have for Killing Americans


Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the 26-year-old killed in a wild shootout with police, was a legal U.S. resident who nevertheless could have been removed from the country after a 2009 domestic violence conviction, according to a Judicial Watch source. That means the Obama administration missed an opportunity to deport Tsarnaev but evidently didn’t feel he represented a big enough threat.”

Did Obama Failure to Enforce Immigration Laws Cause Boston Bombings?


“Other survivors told how screaming teenage girls were dragged into rooms adjoining the gymnasium where they were being held and raped by their Chechen captors who chillingly made a video film of their appalling exploits. They said children were forced to drink their own urine and eat the petals off the flowers they had brought their teachers after nearly three days without food or water in the stifling hot gym.

These are the types of savage monsters who could place a bomb next to an 8-year-old boy.

Beslan has come to America and it should be a wake up call.


The bombers could have been from Chechnya or Mali or Bosnia or Iraq or Egypt or Afghanistan or any Muslim country where Islamists are active. And that’s most Muslim countries, especially after the Arab Spring.

America had nothing to do with the conflict in Chechnya. That didn’t stop Dzhokar Tsarneav and Tamerlan Tsarneav from carrying out the mass murder of Americans.

Islamism is Transnational. You cannot solve it locally. The situation in Israel has proven that. Giving in to territorial demands always fails because a transnational movement wants more than a few miles here and there. They want a regional and then a global Caliphate.

The Issue is Not Chechnya, It’s Islamic Terrorism


In The Republic, Plato argued that philosophers must be made kings for the ideal city-state to be born. In the pages of The New Republic, Cass Sunstein argues for the benevolent paternalism of the nanny state and its philosopher-kings. It’s an old Sunstein theme and the one that brought him to the attention of politicians who dearly love to imagine themselves in the roles of those philosopher-kings. One of those politicians, Barack Obama, even made Sunstein his Regulatory Czar.

“Do people’s choices always promote their welfare?” Sunstein inquires. The answer is naturally in the negative. “We can be tempted by emotional appeals. Sometimes we do not take steps that would make our lives go a lot better.”

And that’s all well and good, but why is Cass Sunstein immune to these forces of human nature? What power imbues him with the godlike knowledge to sit in a lavish office nudging people all day without being tempted by emotional appeals?

Cass Sunstein Discovers his Inner Philosopher-King


This was never about a sensible debate or common sense measures. It was about using a crisis to divide Americans, to turn wives against husbands, children against their parents and brother against brother.

Observers are calling it a political defeat for Obama, but it smacked of another political stunt. Obama was as happy to lose as he would have been to win because while gun control was one of the purposes of the entire farce, the other was to spread divisiveness and attack his political opponents.

Obama may have lost the first battle, but it’s part of a war that is based on terrorizing suburbanites into believing that their children are about to be murdered in school because the NRA has too much control over politics and the Republicans won’t pass some “sensible common-sense” gun-control measures.

Obama’s Gun Control Meltdown


John Liu is still under investigation for campaign finance fraud after raising sizable amounts of money from fake donors.  Two of his fundraisers are on trial and he may face criminal charges. Liu is left-wing, has been accused by some in the Chinatown community of being an agent of Communist China, and has obsessively focused on outreach to Muslims. While Comptroller, he even suggested helping fund the Ground Zero mosque.

Bill de Blasio is even more left-wing than Liu. He is the most left-wing candidate in the race. He describes himself as a progressive reformer, quotes Che and pushes a straight class warfare program.

Just to make Weiner seem normal, Bill de Blasio’s wife wrote a 1979 article, “I am a Lesbian”, but then married de Blasio while working as a speechwriter for David Dinkins. Their son has a giant Afro, because apparently for them the 70s never ended.

Why Weiner Ranking Second in the Dem Primary is a Good Thing


When John Atta Mills, the President of Ghana, died last year, then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton personally led the delegation to his funeral along with such figures as Johnnie Carson, the Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, General Carter F. Ham, the Commander of the United States Africa Command and Grant T. Harris, Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for African Affairs.  But under Barack Obama, what Ghana gets, the United Kingdom does not. Instead the US delegation to the Thatcher funeral looks a lot like the US delegation to the Chavez funeral. Two former secretaries of state friendly to Thatcher and several congressmen who agreed with her views, including Michelle Bachmann.  Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper is coming. Barack Obama obviously is not. Neither is any high ranking member of his government. As at Chavez’s funeral, the highest ranking Federal official will be the charge d’affaires at the American embassy. It’s hard to get any lower profile than that.

Obama Snubs Thatcher Funeral


Destroying America is big these days. Everyone wants to do it. Including retired UN bigwigs. Sure Obama is doing it pretty quickly, but what if we put the Destroy America bulldozer in gear and just rammed it forward while spouting absolutely insane ideas?  To answer that question we have this proposal from the former director of the United Nations Population Division to make America the most populous country in the world.  Sure you might be asking yourself, “Wait a minute. Is that a good thing. Why do we want to be the most populous country in the world?” But that’s because you’re a backward conservative who has not yet evolved into an understanding that a total welfare state based on dividing the food we don’t have based on voter blocs is the only way to make America great.

Former UN Population Director has Great Plan for Destroying America


The EU has spent £2.3 million on the previously unpublicised “Mediadem” project to “reclaim a free and independent media”. In a “policy brief” co-authored by its lead British researcher, Rachael Craufurd Smith, Mediadem says it is “simplistic” to “see state influence [over the press] as inherently stifling”. She said that Mediadem’s recommendations were about “helping to protect the press from inappropriate commercial pressures and potential political pressures”. “People should not see this as being a threat.”  Mediadem is only one of at least five concerted and coordinated initiatives being pursued by Brussels to increase its powers over the media dramatically. Last June he spoke at an event in Brussels organised by the “Centre for Media Freedom and Media Pluralism,” a third new EU-funded project for “media accountability” established last year and based at the European University Institute in Florence.

EU Covertly Spending Millions on Front Groups to Take Over the Press


One of the UK’s leading Islamic organisations has warned that plans to revise the school history curriculum risk ignoring the Muslim contribution to western civilisation – an omission that will only foster alienation.

There can be no better example of that contribution than the Muslim slaver raids on coastal towns in Europe from 1500 to 1800 resulting in the enslavement of one million Europeans.

The inhabitants were taken completely by surprise. More than 200 armed corsairs landed in the Cove, torching the thatched roofs of the houses and carrying off with them ‘young and old out of their beds’. Moving on to the main village, the pirates took more captives before musket fire and the beating of a drum alerted the remaining villagers and persuaded Reis to end the raid. By that time more than 100 men, women and children had been taken. They were herded back to the ships, which bore them away from the coves of West Cork to the slave markets of North Africa.

In July 1625, a raiding party of corsairs landed at Mount’s Bay in Cornwall, and swept into the parish church where the locals were worshipping. Sixty men, women and children were abducted and carried onto the corsairs’ boats. Looe, a small Cornish port, was also attacked, though its inhabitants had tried to hide or flee. 80 men were taken and the village was burned.

Muslims Complain British History Curriculum Doesn’t Teach About Muslim Contribution” to UK



While the GOP sleepwalks toward amnesty, there are a few voices pushing back. Mickey Kaus’ blogging has been invaluable. Rich Lowry had a good piece on Schumer taking Rubio to the cleaners. And Ann Coulter ruthlessly gets to the point and unties the entire package of absurdities.

Rubio keeps trotting out the canard about the bounty of taxes we’re going to collect from millions more minimum-wage workers when illegals are legalized, stoutly asserting: “In order to keep this legal status, you must be gainfully employed and you must be paying taxes.”

It’s as if he’s talking to someone who has never been to America and is unfamiliar with its tax system.

By “paying taxes,” Rubio means “filing a tax return and getting a payment back from the government in the form of the earned income tax credit.” Another term for what Rubio calls “paying taxes” is “receiving welfare” — which newly legalized illegals will start receiving right away under Rubio’s plan. The only tax they’ll pay is the same tax they pay now: sales tax.

But, incomprehensibly, Rubio swore up and down that the newly legalized illegal immigrants won’t get government benefits: “And then they don’t qualify for any federal benefits. This is an important point. No federal benefits, no food stamps, no welfare, no Obamacare.”

How on Earth does Rubio plan to enforce this “important point”?

Just three weeks ago, the U.S. Senate voted down a proposal to prevent illegal immigrants from receiving benefits under Obamacare. At the time, Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez sneered at Republicans opposing Obamacare for illegals, saying, “This is not a great way to try to do your outreach to the Hispanic and immigrant community.”

Forcing Republicans to spend the next two decades arguing that poor Hispanic children shouldn’t have access to government benefits like health care and food programs sounds like a terrific way to win over the Hispanic vote!

Is it going to be easier or harder for Republicans to deny welfare to 20 million newly legalized illegal aliens than it is for them to simply say that people who have broken our laws should not be on a fast-track to citizenship?

Coulter is right of course. The premise that you can combine a sellout under pressure with any kind of enforcement or red line is ridiculous.

In California — which will be America if Rubio’s plan goes through — 82 percent of households headed by an illegal immigrant are on welfare, as are 61 percent of households headed by legal immigrants, according to the March 2011 Current Population Survey by the Center for Immigration Studies.

If you think Republicans are Hispandering now, wait until the children of 20 million illegal aliens start to vote. Rubio’s amnesty isn’t just bad for America, it’s the end of America.

If you’re running for the border, then you’re not in any position to take a stand. Not now. Not then.


Thus, for example, a strong black identity was forged in the face of genuine oppression, and is kept alive by fanning fears of racism. Likewise the distinctive gay identity, which may lose its distinctiveness in another decade or two, if current trends in general public attitudes toward homosexuality continue.

Some largely white ethnic or religious populations–Armenians, Jews, Mormons–have identities forged out of similar adversity. But because being white has never been a source of insecurity, whites as a whole, at least in America, have no such racial identity. That means being white is not a constraint in the formation of one’s political identity the way being black is.

Thus today’s insight: To be white in America is to have the privilege of being able to define one’s political identity in terms of one’s own superiority, whether real or imagined, over other members of one’s own race.

James Taranto is talking about the obsession of white liberals with white privilege being itself a form of white privilege. This might actually be an insight that some of these folks would actually welcome because it fits into their endless cycle of privilege worldview.

But to fit in with what Taranto is saying, whiteness has been made into a source of insecurity. People are being taught to see themselves as white and to be consciousness of their whiteness. This perversely has been the great liberal project recently. To make majorities feel like majorities. But imposing racial consciousness is likely to end up having the opposite of the intended effect. Spreading racial consciousness as racial insecurity is not going to achieve either stability or tolerance. Instead it’s going to be destructive in much the same way that it is in minorities.


From RNC honcho Reince Priebus, from the senator from Swing-State Central Rob Portman, and even from the great Charles Murray, the same mournful dirge echoes through the cavernous emptiness of the Republican big tent: Give it up, losers — give it up on illegal immigration, gay marriage, abortion, and maybe Americans under 30, 50, whatever, will consider voting for you, or at any rate consider finding you marginally less repellent.

Charles Murray told conservatives his own children would never consider voting Republican because “they consider the party to be run by anti-abortion, anti-gay, religious nuts.” Leaving aside the question of whether this is an accurate characterization or a glowing tribute to the sterling work of the Democratic party’s courtiers in the media, suppose the GOP’s “anti-abortion, anti-gay, religious nuts” were to become pro-abortion, pro-gay, secular, non–clinically insane. My bet is they would still lose.

In Britain, the Conservative prime minister, David Cameron, has been eager to demonstrate that his Tories are not the “nasty,” “ugly” right-wingers of Mrs. Thatcher’s day. As part of his “detoxification” strategy, he decided he needed an issue that would serve as a kind of Sister Souljah on steroids, and enable him to break not just with a small faction but with a majority of his base. So he legislated gay marriage in the teeth of massive party-wide opposition. His calculation was that if enough conservatives can be persuaded to hate you, the urbane, cosmopolitan, metrosexual elite will accept you as one of their own and give you a better press. Which in turn will persuade enough of their followers to vote for you to compensate for however many of your reviled base decide to stay home.

Accommodationists seem to believe that immigration amnesty and “marriage equality” are the last towels they’ll ever have to throw in. But in the liberal bathhouse there’ll always be a new towel-snapper along in a minute. Free contraceptives . . . Abandonment of religious liberty . . . Single-payer health care . . .

So many trains, already lining up to leave the station.

Mark Steyn via American Digest


Fayyad was nothing more than a Western delusion, like Arab peace with Israel.  Fayyad didn’t have a chance of leading the Palestinians because he never personally killed a Jew. And the Palestinians only accept murderers as their leaders. But the fact that he never killed a Jew personally didn’t render Fayyad a partner for Israel.

Fayyad dutifully used donor funds to pay the salaries of terrorists in Judea, Samaria and Gaza every month.

He led the Palestinian branch of the boycott, divestment and sanctions war against Israel. He made working for Israelis and buying Israeli goods criminal offenses. Fayyad personally led raids into private homes to inspect people’s refrigerators to see if they had Israeli cottage cheese on their shelves. He organized and attended bonfires where they burned Israeli goods.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but this is not the sort of behavior you would expect a peace partner to engage in.

The Americans who insist on mourning Fayyad’s departure refuse to accept the obvious fact that Palestinian aspirations for statehood are a cheap, shoddy, for-export-only Arab product. The Palestinians don’t want a state. They want to destroy Israel.  

Caroline Glick on, among other things, the Fayyad delusion.


And before I, once again and for the umpteenth time, start banging my by now tired and worn drum on the issue, let me, also once again, point out why I am not in any way pulling any of the following out of my posterior: I was, once, of the left. Not just “flirting with the ideas” or “curiously studying their customs and quaint habits”, but “red scarf wearing true believer.”

Yes, I hang my head in shame over my youthful ignorance, but I got better. And I try to atone for it by passing on what I’ve learned to those who weren’t as dumb as I and therefore have not the first fucking clue as to what they think they’re up against. Without much success, as the past five years have shown, most of the time — when I get a response at all — it’s along the lines of “lalalala I can’t hear you” or “sure, but our lefties are diff’runt.”

They’re not. That’s the whole point of the left. On the left, nobody’s diff’runt or they’re not on the left anymore. Utter one, even a slight little minor one, heresy against the leftist catechism and we will make you a non-person. Just ask Bob Woodward who, we believe, was once quite the left’s hero for bringing down that horrible man, Richard Nixon. One act of heresy against the Dogma of the Cult of Obama, and he was a doddering old retarded fool and sellout, ready for the glue factory.


And that was not an aberration. That is how it works on the left. Again I say it: Because I KNOW it personally. Heck, I’ve been a part of the drum circle myself, reflexively and instantly “forgetting” people who were heroes yesterday but capitalist traitor scum the next who had suddenly never done a worthwhile thing in their lives. After a while it becomes habit. It’s not even difficult anymore.

Which Is What His Imperial Majesty Has Been Trying to Tell Everybody For Years Now

 Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam. He is completing a book on the international challenges America faces in the 21st century. He blogs at Sultan Knish.