Wolves in Sheep's Clothing

Muslim politicians in the Western world come in two general varieties: those rare ones who are candid about their desire to transform the West in accordance with the dictates of their faith, and those, far greater in number, who prefer to disguise that ambition. The first category includes people like Abdirizak Waberi, a Swedish MP turned Islamic school principal who has actually admitted he believes in “banning music and dancing, prohibiting boys and girls from socializing, and allowing men to beat their four wives with sticks when they became disobedient,” and Brussels city councilman Redouane Ahrouch, who openly advocates for sharia government and recently called for a separation of the sexes on that city’s public transport.

In the second category are Rotterdam mayor Ahmed Aboutaleb, who while striving to pose as a progressive allows his mask to slip now and then (recently, he told an interviewer that “every Muslim is a bit of a salafist”), and London mayor Sadiq Khan, another faux liberal who has, in fact, ordered police to put less emphasis on monitoring potential terrorists and more emphasis on harassing Islam critics. And let’s not forget Minnesota’s (and the DNC’s) own Keith Ellison, who poses as a standard-issue Democrat but belonged for a decade to the Nation of Islam, speaks at CAIR events, and has ties to several pro-terrorist, anti-Semitic groups.

Also belonging to the latter category is Somali-born Bashe Musse, a Norwegian Labor Party politician who has been a member of the Oslo City Council since 2011. During the last couple of weeks he’s been making headlines because of a Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation (NRK) report on “dumping.” What’s dumping? Like honor killing and female genital mutilation, it’s a common practice in Europe’s Muslims communities. Instead of sending their kids to regular neighborhood schools, many Muslim parents in Europe send their children off to madrasses – Koran schools – in the countries from which they, the parents, emigrated. The children stay in these schools for years at a time, memorizing the Islamic holy book while their agemates back in Europe learn math, science, and literature.

“Dumping” is eyebrow-raising for more than one reason. Many of these kids’ parents were allowed into Europe in the first place because they professed to be refugees from oppression in their homelands. The fact that they’re shipping their kids off to schools in those same countries gives the lie to those claims. The parents also often maintain that they’re proud to be French, Swedish, or whatever, and that they’re striving to assimilate into their adopted nations. But the whole point of sending these kids to madrasses in the Muslim world is to shield them from what the parents consider the baleful influence of Western civilization.

Last year, NRK produced, as noted, a report on Somali madrasses in which children from Norway have been enrolled. Many viewers considered the revelations eye-popping. In fact it was old news. In a 2004 study, Out of Sight, Out of Mind, Norway’s Human Rights Service (HRS) documented, in extraordinary and devastating detail, the grim reality of daily life in these institutions, where the conditions are almost always primitive and where the atmosphere is less that of a First World school than of a Third World prison. NRK’s report, which contained interviews with children living in Norway who had attended the Somali madrasses, confirmed HRS’s findings: at those “schools,” the children had been tied up, whipped, beaten, and subjected to other sorts of brutal treatment that would ordinarily be considered torture.

Which brings us to Bashe Musse, who in addition to being an Oslo city councilman is also the official chief spokesperson for Norway’s Somali community, the largest non-Western immigrant group in the country. After NRK’s report aired last year, he claimed to be shocked by its contents. But on May 29 of this year, NRK reported that in an interview aired on Somali TV, Musse had dismissed the children’s testimony about the madrasses and regretted that such lies, as he called them, had been “sold to the Norwegian people” by the Norwegian media, which he characterized as “one-sided.”

When confronted by NRK with a transcript of his comments to Somali TV, Musse insisted that the person who had translated his words from Somali into Norwegian had fouled up, entirely misrepresenting his views. NRK thereupon engaged the services of another translator, whose product was essentially identical to that of the first translator. It then presented the transcript to various government officials. Frode Jacobsen, head of the Oslo Labor Party, said he was “surprised and shocked” by Musse’s “double communication,” which he described as “very unfortunate.” Norway’s Minister of Integration, Jan Tore Sanner, also expressed concern, but did not call for any action against Musse. The Progress Party’s immigration spokesman, Jon Helgheim, went quite a bit further, scorning Musse as “a wolf in sheep’s clothing” and urging that the Labour Party discipline him in some way. But as far as I have been able to determine, no one in a position of power has demanded Musse’s resignation or removal from the City Council.

Lying to infidels, of course, has a name in Arabic – taqiyya – and it is one of the chief weapons of Islam in its eternal conflict with non-believers. Among its more celebrated practitioners is “Euro-Islam” proponent, Oxford professor, accused serial rapist, and current jailbird Tariq Ramadan, who is known to routinely say one thing to Western audiences in French or English and another to Muslim audiences n Arabic. Indeed, Caroline Fourest’s book about him is entitled Brother Tariq: The Doublespeak of Tariq Ramadan. To employ taqiyya, as Musse appears to have done, is to demonstrate definitively that one is not on the side of the West but that one is a double agent – a partisan, a person whose true loyalty lies, shall we say, elsewhere.

Within a few hours of being caught dead to rights on NRK as a practitioner of doublespeak, Musse made an announcement. Did he resign? Of course not. He declared that NRK had represented him to the Norwegian public as a liar and, what’s more, had painted an unflattering picture of Somalia.  Accordingly, he had contacted a lawyer, Arild Humlen, to ascertain what legal rights he had in the matter. 

What makes this story important, needless to say, is that Musse is not an outlier. Far from it. Increasingly, all over the West, Muslims hold elected positions, some of them at a very high level. It is considered to be racist, or at the very least to be in terribly bad taste, to question whether they can be loyal at once to their totalizing, all-encompassing religion and to their officially secular country and its (still) mostly non-Muslim inhabitants. Once those poiticians are caught engaging in taqiyya, of course, there is no further reason for doubt on this score.

Read more from Front Page Magazine…

Sean Hannity has a surprising reaction to MSNBC host’s blog controversy

Fox News host Sean Hannity had a surprising reaction to the controversy around MSNBC host Joy Reid and her past blog posts – he says she deserves a second chance.

Here’s Hannity’s statement

The talk radio and cable news opinion host posted a statement about Reid on his website Friday after recent revelations from her controversial blog website surfaced.

“Over the last few days the conversation surrounding the comments made by TV personalities has dominated the news cycle,” Hannity said in the statement. “We have covered them as well, going over previous tweets, statements and on air opinions. One of these individuals, MSNBC’s Joy Reid, has now apologized for her previous blogs and commentary.”

Reid had first apologized when the posts were uncovered, then blamed a hacker, but recently apologized again without mentioning the dubious hacker when more posts were published.

“It’s good to see Joy (who is no fan of mine) starting to take responsibility for her past remarks,” he continued. “My suggestion is that she follows up with the groups and people who she offended, and learn from all of this. Her apology should be accepted, and she should be given a chance to make it right, and not fired.”

“We have all fallen short”

“Someone needs to take the lead in cable news and stop the ‘crush, fire them, and destroy hosts you may disagree with’ environment,” Hannity added. “I guess as the number one rated host in cable, I’ll start.”

“I am grateful for this microphone and the platform given to me everyday by my audience,” he said. “I am a believer in the freedom of speech for all Americans. I am also a believer in second chances.”

“And as someone who believes in forgiveness,” he concluded, “I have to say, we have all fallen short.”

Crush, fire and destroy

Hannity was referring to the campaign mounted by left-wing organizations to drive his advertisers away over various stories they painted as controversial. One such controversy exploded when Hannity pressed on with a false story about the death of DNC staffer Seth Rich – Fox News later retracted the story and the family has since sued the news network.

Here’s the CNN news video about the story:

Read more from The Blaze…

Air Force Airmen in Charge of Nuclear Weapons were Tripping on LSD

Now this will scare the crap out of you … a group of Air Force airmen responsible for guarding nuclear weapons were heavy into LSD and cocaine. The jaw-dropping revelations just surfaced … and not because the government wanted it known. Turns out one …

Read more from Nuclear Weapons…

WashPo: Possible new leads in Charlie Rose misconduct report

The Washington Post is signaling there may be more revelations about what CBS News knew about claims of inappropriate conduct by former anchor Charlie Rose. In a story published Thursday, newspaper detailed “three occasions over a preiod of 30 years …

Read more from Charlie Rose Misconduct…

Parkland shooting suspect Nikolas Cruz allegedly pointed gun at brother, mother, report says

Nikolas Cruz, the teen accused of killing 17 people during a Florida high school shooting on Feb. 14, reportedly threatened to shoot his brother and mother during separate past incidents. The violent revelations came during an interview with Zachary Cruz …

Read more from Parkland Shooting…

Christopher Wylie Warns Senators: Cambridge Analytica, Steve Bannon Want ‘Culture War’

Cambridge Analytica may technically no longer exist,* but revelations about its conduct before and during the 2016 election continue to raise concerns about how social media can be used to undermine fundamental democratic processes. On Wednesday, Cambridge Analytica whistleblower Christopher Wylie testified before the Senate judiciary committee.

Read more from Ted Cruz…

AEI Tech Scholar Mark Jamison testifies today on Cambridge Analytica and the future of data privacy – AEI – American Enterprise Institute: Freedom, Opportunity, Enterprise

In testimony today at 10:00am before the Senate Judiciary Committee, AEI Visiting Scholar Mark Jamison will discuss regulatory responses to the Cambridge Analytica revelations. He identifies three main points to consider:

  • The activity that led to the current controversy – using Facebook and other social media data in ways that are not transparent to users – is not unusual in modern political activity. Facebook’s rapid growth led it to become a major source of information for political campaigns to use in microtargeting and analytical efforts. That is not to say that it was appropriate for Cambridge Analytica to use data that it apparently was not supposed to have. 
  • Facebook’s problems appear to result from a rapidly changing company allowing its business model to drift from forming communities to serving advertisers and developers, not from a lack of regulation. The company has changed how it serves and uses its subscribers without ensuring that they fully understand Facebook’s evolving roles in their lives. Facebook morphed from a connector of communities to someone that investigates people’s lives, filters their Facebook communications, and annexes nearby communities, such as Instagram and WhatsApp. 
  • New regulations aimed at Facebook’s errors are more likely to protect the business from competition than benefit consumers. The nature of Facebook’s problems show a company losing its focus and creating conflicting roles for itself with respect to its users, but losing focus should not be illegal. New regulations would likely create less competition for large tech companies, resulting in harm to consumers. 

Read the full testimony here.

Read more from American Enterprise Institute…

Ecuador spent how much on covert ops to protect Assange?

Ever since Julian Assange took refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy in London to avoid arrest on a warrant from Sweden, protestors have held regular demonstrations to “FREE ASSANGE!” It turns out that Assange is far from free, according to documents obtained by The Guardian. Ecuador has spent more than five million dollars not just on security for Assange, but also for “covert” operations and intelligence gathering during his stay.

Remind me again of what Wikileaks does:

Ecuador bankrolled a multimillion-dollar spy operation to protect and support Julian Assange in its central London embassy, employing an international security company and undercover agents to monitor his visitors, embassy staff and even the British police, according to documents seen by the Guardian.

Over more than five years, Ecuador put at least $5m (£3.7m) into a secret intelligence budget that protected the WikiLeaks founder while he had visits from Nigel Farage, members of European nationalist groups and individuals linked to the Kremlin. …

Documents show the intelligence programme, called “Operation Guest”, which later became known as “Operation Hotel” – coupled with parallel covert actions – ran up an average cost of at least $66,000 a month for security, intelligence gathering and counter-intelligence to “protect” one of the world’s most high-profile fugitives.

An investigation by the Guardian and Focus Ecuador reveals the operation had the approval of the then Ecuadorian president, Rafael Correa, and the then foreign minister, Ricardo Patiño, according to sources.

That seems a bit off-mission for Wikileaks’ founder, whose main effort has been to expose the intelligence operations of the US and other Western nations. Wikileaks has had little hesitation in sharing highly sensitive information over the objections of officials who argue that its exposure endangers their citizens. Oddly, they don’t seem to apply the same standard when it comes to the protection of their own people. Go figure.

Mostly, though, this reflects much more poorly on Ecuador than on Assange, whose instinct for self-preservation is understandable even if unlaudable. The money went beyond security and even intelligence to public relations. Ecuador spent nearly $200,000 in 2014 alone for media consultants to improve Assange’s image, including the publication of an opinion piece in the Guardian itself, the paper notes.

And what did Ecuador get for its investment in Assange? He hacked their comms in order to get an unfettered access to the Internet, according to the documentation reviewed by the Guardian. Their video surveillance contractors warned Ecuador that Assange was gathering intelligence on Ecuador’s operations out of the embassy too, although Assange does not seem to have bitten the hand that hides him — yet, anyway. Perhaps Assange felt the need for a little insurance, so to speak.

So far, Ecuador hasn’t forced Assange out, so the relationship still seems to be working. What Ecuador gets out of this circus is still difficult to determine, but perhaps they’re concerned about what would get out if they ever give Assange the boot. Maybe it’s better for Ecuador to keep Assange in their own grip at this point.


It’s hardly the first time Ecuador’s been embarrassed on the world stage, of course. Their courts tried defrauding Chevron out of $18 billion a few years ago, only to have it blow up in their faces, not terribly unlike how their Assange asylum has worked out. They got lots of help from Hollywood celebrities, who worked with New York attorney Steve Donziger to support the lawsuit, which was later exposed as a grotesque fraud. Donziger kept a diary, which ended up as evidence in US court proceedings, and the revelations from it are … well, delicious, as Phelim McAleer describes:

My new play exposes how environmentalists carried out the world’s biggest fraud, how the media helped promote the fraud, and how they almost got away with it.

The play, called The $18-Billion Prize, will open at the Phoenix Theater in San Francisco on May 19th and run until June 3rd.

I co-wrote it with Jonathan Leaf and it tells the story of a lawsuit, led by New York lawyer Steven Donziger, against the Chevron oil company. The lawsuit alleged Chevron destroyed the rainforest in Ecuador and poisoned the natives. It was successful, and an Ecuadorian court awarded the plaintiffs a staggering $18 billion. Yes, BILLION. This was the biggest ever award in a civil court, but it was ALSO the biggest fraud in history.

Haven’t heard about it?? Funny. The same media that reported endlessly on the so-called “pollution” went pretty quiet when the case turned out to be a fraud. And a load of Hollywood celebrities who helped promote the fraud have also gone very quiet recently. Yes I’m talking about you Sting, Mia Farrow and Danny Glover.

The play shows how the plaintiffs, led by Donziger, bribed the judge and ghost wrote the judgment that awarded them this massive amount. And they were helped on their fraud by a cheerleading media that reported the allegations as fact but have been silent as the truth was revealed.

The scope of the fraud was enormous and at times farcical. Along with bribing judges, they used ludicrous code words to describe the top secret payments. It was all revealed when a New York court, realizing that something was amiss, ordered Donziger to hand over his files. In those files and diaries, Donziger admitted illegal bribes to judges and court officials as he wondered if he had “done a deal with the devil.”

The play reveals all the incredible details, and we have an amazing cast with Richard Kuhlman directing. He loves the play and has already made some stunning changes and suggestions. It is hilarious in places, revealing the madness and hypocrisy of the celebrities who went to Ecuador to “support the natives.” It turns some of them were secretly paid an absolute fortune, and you will laugh and cry when you see how they behaved when they thought the cameras were switched off. They also didn’t know it was all recorded in his files by Steven Donziger.

Phelim’s still raising money for the effort on IndieGoGo, the crowdfunding site by which he successfully financed the upcoming Gosnell Movie and his first play, Ferguson. If you’re interested in helping to expose the Ecuadorian fraud on Chevron, be sure to kick in what you can — and if you’ll be in San Francisco during that period, get your tickets now at Phelim’s website.

The post Ecuador spent how much on covert ops to protect Assange? appeared first on Hot Air.

Read more from Hot Air…