Thank you Gates of Vienna
1. Clare Lopez on “The Great Purge”
(I believe that it was actually Robert Mueller who did this great purge of islamic references from any potential terror investigation. This was revealed in an interview we did with Brad Johnson last month)
2. British people react nearly appropriately to the conviction of Tommy Robinson for causing distress to muslim rape gangs of British little girls, who forced them into sex slavery and torture, by asking them how they felt about their verdict.
I must agree with these protestors. It actually is the police. As they have known about these rape gangs and done less than nothing, often returning the victim to the abusers when they get the courage to run away and report it.
Five former heads of Scotland Yard have called for a public inquiry into the state of policing in Britain as they warned the drug and knife crime epidemic has plunged the country into lawlessness.
In a letter to The Times, the former commissioners said forces’ resources have been “drained to dangerously low levels” meaning that victims of crime now have “perilously low expectations”.
They wrote: “The reduction of police and support staff by more than 30,000, the virtual destruction of neighbourhood policing and the inadvisable undermining of lawful police powers such as stop and search have taken their toll.”
Theresa May is heavily criticised in the letter, and the five former senior officers each condemned the “emasculation of British policing” under her watch as home secretary.
Sir Mark Rowley, former head of counter-terrorism, is one of the five to have signed the letter. He told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that Police and Crime Commissioners should be abolished and the 43 police forces in England and Wales should be merged.
(This may seem a day or two out of date, but it shows how this trial appeared to be more political than legal. It takes selective enforcement to a whole new level when charges can seemingly be invented as needs be)
5. Interview with Tommy Robinson on his conviction.
I think by now it should be obvious to all who are paying attention to the OSCE, which is nearly no one, that it is yet another supranational organization which started with liberal intentions but has been hijacked by leftists and postmodernists and now seeks to achieve the exact opposite of its foundational goals.
Clare reminds them of that.
This is Clare Lopez’s presentation at the OSCE, the European body that seeks to criminalize criticism of Islam as hate speech, today in Warsaw.
According to those watching the conference via live stream, this odd set of remarks by the Turkish delegate was a response to Clare’s presentation, as well as the rest of the interventions by Center for Security Policy personnel.
The latest article on the highly unusual events that have followed the publication of Diana West’s book from Front Page to Gatestone. Please click here to read the whole article on one page.
As mentioned here Tuesday night, an article by Clare Lopez was published earlier that day at the Gatestone Institute’s website and then immediately removed. Since Ms. Lopez had referred favorably in her article to Diana West’s book American Betrayal, and since Ms. West recently had anathema pronounced against her for that same book, it seemed that there might be a connection between the two events.
And indeed there was. Our suspicions were correct.
I just received this information from a source close to Clare Lopez:
In late August 2013, Clare Lopez, then a Senior Fellow at the Gatestone Institute, submitted an article for publication at the Gatestone Institute’s website. It was entitled “Recognizing the Wrong People”, and drew on the U.S. government’s 1933 formal diplomatic recognition of the USSR as described in Diana West’s book American Betrayal to form an analogy with the U.S.’s present day recognition and/or support of other fundamentally-anti-American entities, such as the AQ/MB-dominated rebel and opposition forces in places like Egypt, Libya, and Syria.
As with all of Ms. Lopez’ previous articles, this one was well-received by Gatestone’s editor, Nina Rosenwald, who praised it as “so far-sighted.” The article was duly published the morning of Tuesday 3 September 2013 at Gatestone and was sent out to an email list of subscribers. Sometime shortly after that, however, it was pulled from the website, with no notice or explanation.
Word spread quickly as regular Gatestone readers realized something odd had happened.
H/T EDL Buck
The Department of Justice appears poised to move one step closer to enforcement of Islamic law on slander and blasphemy in America by threatening prosecution of citizens who exercise their First Amendment rights to free speech—if such speech dares to criticize Islam.
Bill Killian, a top Department of Justice (DOJ) official and the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee, is scheduled to headline an event on June 4, 2013 entitled, “Public Disclosure in a Diverse Society” that’s sponsored by the American Muslim Advisory Council of Tennessee. The stated purpose of the meeting, according to the local Tullahoma News, is “increasing awareness and understanding that American Muslims are not the terrorists some have made them out to be in social media and other circles.”
Of course, the timing for the event would seem particularly ill-chosen in the wake of recent jihadist attacks and plots at the Boston Marathon (April 15, 2013), in the Iran-al-Qaeda plot against the Canadian Via Rail (April 2013) and the slaughter of British soldier, Lee Rigby, on a Woolwich, London street to the Islamic cry of, “Allahu Akbar!”
Nonetheless, based on statements made by the DOJ’s Killian to the Tullahoma News, online postings that describe truthfully how authoritative texts and teachings of Islam inspire jihadis to acts of violence, may henceforth be considered violations of federal civil rights laws. If such statements, however truthful, or apparently even original Islamic scriptural texts, are considered “inflammatory” by the FBI’s Muslim advisors, Killian wants American citizens to know “what federal laws are in effect and what the consequences are.”
This is a chilling and very direct threat to the First Amendment guarantee of the right to free speech. Even though the First Amendment also guarantees of freedom of religion, it does not limit critical discussion (“inflammatory” or otherwise) by private citizens of any ideological, legal, political or religious belief system, including Islam.