Islamisering bezig aan een rampzalig scenario

[Stanley]

Islamisering bezig aan een rampzalig scenario
Door Roderick Veelo op donderdag 13 februari 2020


De islam in Nederland radicaliseert. Met financiële en personele hulp uit de Saoedi-Arabië, Koeweit en Qatar nemen salafisten en leden van het Moslim Broederschap gematigde moskeeën over. En in een gevaarlijk hoog tempo ook.

Dat weten we mede dankzij onderzoek van Nieuwsuur en NRC Handelsblad. Maar de Tweede Kamer zoekt deze weken - in een aantal hoorzittingen - naar bedragen en meereizend onheil.

De eerste verhoren tonen een rampzalig scenario. Volgens directeur Schoof van de AIVD probeert een nieuwe generatie jonge salafisten in Nederland met professionele methoden grip te krijgen op moskeeën en scholen. Ondersteund door miljoenen oliedollars en imams uit de Golfstaten.

De extremisten schrijven en spreken goed Nederlands, ze kennen het rechtssysteem en streven naar een parallelle samenleving waarin de regels van de Nederlandse rechtsstaat niet gelden. De indoctrinatie begint al bij kinderen tussen de 0 en de 4 jaar. Aldus de AIVD.

Om de goedgelovigheid van de open samenleving niet te beschadigen, maken de radicale moslims gebruik van - wat Schoof noemt - façadepolitiek. Oftewel: naar buiten toe gematigd opereren en extremisme afkeuren, maar intern de gemeenschap een orthodoxe onverzoenlijke leer opleggen.

Die onverzoenlijkheid toont zich in de goedkeuring van geweld tegen homo's en het verbieden van omgang met mensen van een ander geloof. Gematigde moslims lijden hier het meest onder.

Intimidatie en het opleggen van leefregels en kledingvoorschriften moeten individuele keuzes aan banden leggen en een integratie in deze samenleving tot een minimum begrenzen.

Zo worden moslims in Nederland in steeds grotere getale geïsoleerd en hen wordt bijgebracht dat zij niet de Nederlandse wetten en regels behoren te respecteren, maar uitsluitend die van het opperwezen. Orthodoxe dwang die de Golfstaten met de financiering deze kant op sturen. Want wie betaalt bepaalt.

Volgens Schoof vormen de salafisten en moslimsbroeders in Nederland op termijn een serieuze bedreiging voor de rechtsstaat.

De verhoren van deze parlementaire commissie hebben tot nu toe weinig nieuws opgeleverd, maar het feitenrelaas blijft indrukwekkend. Niet alleen omdat de getuigen onder ede staan - en dus de waarheid moeten spreken - maar juist ook omdat de financiering van het extremistisch, anti-Westers en anti-democratisch gedachtegoed vanuit de Golfstaten al zo lang gaande is.

Blijkbaar bewandelen de salafisten en moslimbroeders wegen waar hun plannen geen strobreed in de weg worden gelegd.

Ten eerste is er natuurlijk de vrijheid van godsdienst. Een Westerse uitvinding waar de geldschieters thuis niets van moeten weten, maar die hen hier alle ruimte biedt, om hun onverdraagzaamheid aan de man te brengen.

Dan is er de bescherming van het woord 'islamofobie'. Terreurdeskundige Ronald Sandee deze week voor de onderzoekscommissie: "Islamofobie is iets dat in de media wordt gebracht en gehouden door organisaties als het Moslim Broederschap. Ze worden ermee serieus genomen als partners in bijvoorbeeld Brussel. Ze krijgen toegang tot allerlei EU-organen, omdat ze zich zo sterk profileren met de islamofobie-industrie."

'Islamofobie' als industrie. Zo worden tegenwerking en islamkritiek bestempeld als een racisme-variant. Daardoor is de islam bij ons inmiddels het enige gedachtegoed dat de facto boven elke kritiek verheven is. Met kritiek op de islam loopt iemand levensgevaar of riskeert vervolging wegens haatzaaien. Dat hebben de militanten en hun geldschieters uit de Golf-regio toch maar mooi voor elkaar.

Maar dit alles lukt niet zonder de hulptroepen, die bereid zijn hun eigen vrijheid en die van anderen op te geven, om de militante islam van dienst te zijn. Elke totalitaire dreiging heeft zijn 'nuttige idioten'.

Dat zijn de mensen die in 2006 Ayaan Hirsi Ali uit Nederland verjaagd hebben, omdat ze de islam ter discussie durfde te stellen. Met een moed die te groot is voor een land waar de laaghartigheid op televisie wordt uitgenodigd om Hirsi Ali nog een trap na te geven.

Dat zijn de mensen die promovenda Machteld Zee achter haar aan kreeg, naar aanleiding van haar proefschrift over de sharia-rechtbanken in Groot-Brittannië. Zee schreef in 2016 al wat de Tweede Kamer-commissie de afgelopen dagen nog maar eens te horen kreeg van AIVD-baas Dick Schoof. Namelijk dat er een plan zit achter de islamisering van de Europese moslims. Een plan en heel veel geld.

Academici bij de Universiteit van Amsterdam probeerden een debat in de kiem te smoren met verdachtmakingen aan het adres van Zee en deden haar bevindingen af als xenofobie. Excuses van Annelies Moors (UvA) en Martijn Dekker (UvA) aan Machteld Zee zouden op hun plaats zijn.

De hulptroepen - in naam progressief maar heimelijk verliefd op de militante islam - zien we ook in actie tegen de Pakistaans-Nederlandse vrouwenrechtenactiviste Shirin Musa. Haar postercampagne voor vrije partnerkeuze stuitte op bezwaren van D66 en de PvdA. De partijen waren bang dat deze vrijheid slecht zou vallen bij de imams in Nederland.

En dan zijn er nog de nuttige bestuurders die zich in de luren laten leggen door de façadepolitiek van de islamisten. Zo wist Jozias van Aartsen als burgemeester van Den Haag zijn gemeente op het hart te drukken, dat salafisme 'absoluut niks met de politieke islam te maken heeft'.

En burgemeester Halsema geeft in Amsterdam - ondanks een verbod - ruim baan aan de denigrerende kledingeisen voor vrouwen. Voorschriften die ook zijn meegereisd met de oliedollars uit de Golfregio.

De hamvraag is: wat gaan de Tweede Kamer, het kabinet en de lokale bestuurders doen tegen deze ernstige ontwikkeling. Ik maak mij geen illusies. Moslims staan onder druk van extremisten en worden in de steek gelaten door het leger van laffe wegkijkers.

Bovendien heeft het kabinet jarenlang de buitenlandse financiering van moskeeën geheim gehouden. Handelsrelaties zijn nou eenmaal belangrijker dan het ontsporen van een grote religieuze minderheid.

RTLZ

[sjun]

The Challenge of Dawa: Political Islam as Ideology and Movement, and How to Counter It


Ayaan Hirsi Ali on the West, Dawa, and Islam

[sjun]

WAKE UP EU! 4 Stages of Islamic Conquest! Road to the Future European Caliphate!

[sjun]

Geert Wilders' L.A. speech: 'How to thwart Islamic conquest' at American Freedom Alliance


The 3 Stages of JIHAD

[hans van de mortel]

Geert Wilders' L.A. speech: 'How to thwart Islamic conquest' at American Freedom Alliance

Goeie speech. Dat kunnen we hem wel toevertrouwen. Trouwens prachtige outfit, staat hem perfect.

Wat ik zo jammer vind aan Wilders is niet dat hij heeft ingeboet aan zijn overtuigingskracht, maar dat hij tegenwoordig (niet in deze video van drie jaar geleden) veel te vaak zijn tong op een verkeerde manier gebruikt. Ik beweer niet dat hij een gladde tong heeft - integendeel, ik heb hem nog nooit op een onwaarheid kunnen betrappen - maar hij laat zijn tong te vaak en opvallend zichtbaar in zijn rechterwang in de rondte circuleren. Uitermate irritant en het maakt de indruk dat hij onzeker is. Ik vergeet steeds hem hier attent op te maken. Dat moet ik dan vandaag maar eens doen.

[sjun]

Soms kan Geert Wilders zelfs profetisch uit de hoek komen.

[hans van de mortel]

Soms kan Geert Wilders zelfs profetisch uit de hoek komen.

Zijn gevoel voor humor en timing is ongeëvenaard. Heerlijke man.

[Mahalingam]

Why Islamism became woke BY Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Extremists are using progressive rhetoric to fool the West

Following ISIS’s demise, Islamists around the world have been forced to radically reassess their strategy against the West. Dashing the utopian hopes of its sympathisers, the fall of the Caliphate has set back the Islamist cause for decades. Just as when many Communists became disillusioned once their ideology had been implemented in the Soviet Union, ISIS’s barbarity can no longer be ignored.

True, even in 2021, some groups such as the resurgent Taliban and Boko Haram — to say nothing of the Iranian regime — remain committed to a type of Islamist militancy that includes an emphasis on violence, with all the human suffering that entails. But for the most part, jihadist militancy has proved unpopular among Muslims, often inviting a violent counter-reaction. Its promise of an Islamist dream state has lost its appeal.

Yet Islamists in the West appear to have found a possible solution that sidesteps, at least for now, the use of explicit violence. The core of this alternative strategy is to focus as much as possible on dawa.

Nearly 20 years after 9/11, Westerners still remain unfamiliar with dawa. In theory, the term simply refers to the call to Islam, a kind of invitation; Westerners would recognise it as part of a proselytising mission. In practice, however, Islamists rely on dawa as a comprehensive propaganda, PR and brainwashing system designed to make all Muslims embrace an Islamist programme while converting as many non-Muslims as possible.

Among Western analysts, dawa — which became a tool of the Muslim Brotherhood in the 20th century — has traditionally received far less attention than militant jihad, though observers have emphasised its importance in the “humanitarian” activities of Hamas.

In Unveiled, the ex-Muslim Yasmine Mohammed compellingly describes her difficult marriage to the Egyptian jihadist Essam Marzouk. Yasmine commented on the rivalry that exists between jihadists (such as her ex-husband) and ostensibly “non-violent” Islamists:

“The truth is that Essam hated the [Muslim] Brotherhood: he thought Islamists were a bunch of pansies. He was actually aligned with a more militant group in Egypt called Al Jihad, who were the Egyptian wing of Al Qaeda. Both Islamists and jihadis have the same goal — to spread Islam — but they have different methods. Islamists want to do this through passive means such as politics, immigration and childbirth.”

This important point is often lost on politicians in Western countries. For no matter what misguided retired CIA officials may claim, groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood are neither moderate organisations nor pluralist partners in civil society. Islamist groups are certainly not likely to prevent the radicalisation of young Muslims. Instead, as one observer noted more than a decade ago, “the history of the Brotherhood movement shows, in fact, that it has operated by and large not as a firewall against jihadism, but as a fertile incubator of radical ideas in a variety of locales”.

In a cynical way, Islamists achieve far more through dawa than when they confine themselves to simply blowing things up and stabbing people to death. The threat is not as obvious. Jihad and the use of violence tend to provoke an immediate response. With dawa, on the other hand, it is possible to talk about charity, spirituality and religion — and then compare it to normal religious proselytising missions. In a free society, what reasonable person would take issue with that?

But dawa is also about building networks: local, regional and international. In The Call, Krithika Varagur revealed both the enormous global scale and opaque nature of these efforts. Saudi Arabia, in particular, has channelled billions of dollars into dawa — with much of it directed into the US.

In the West, these regimes are not given much thought, nor is the Islamist infrastructure in the United States. Nonetheless, Islamism is spreading within Western institutions, and it’s largely thanks to an unlikely alliance: dawa has recognised the alluring power of “woke”, and has started to adopt the language of civil rights and multiculturalism.

Of course, this is not an entirely American phenomenon, but the energy in our progressive movement has taken this cooperation one step further. In France, by contrast, “Islamo-gauchisme” (Islamo-Leftism) is much more likely to be correctly identified as a threat to the model of universal, secular and republican citizenship. In Britain, it remains less prominent, confined to fringe politicians such as George Galloway, who believes that “the progressive movement around the world and the Muslims have the same enemies”.

Yet as historian Daniel Pipes has noted, the relationship between Islamism and extreme Leftism is nothing new. In 2007, Oskar Lafontaine, former chairman of Germany’s Social Democratic party, noted: “Islam depends on community, which places it in opposition to extreme individualism, which threatens to fail in the West. [In addition,] the devout Muslim is required to share his wealth with others. The Leftist also wants to see the strong help the weak.”

But the internal tension between “wokeism” and Islamism is never far away. Just look at Al Jazeera, which uploads documentaries about transgender rights on to its social media channel, while broadcasting sermons suggesting husbands should beat their wives on its Arabic station.

Nevertheless, the two movements do share objectives. Both are anti-West and anti-American. Both have a critical attitude towards “capitalism” based on individualism. True, the Islamists have been around for much longer. But Islamist ideologues are willing to co-operate with non-Muslim Leftists as long as it serves their purposes.

To their credit, some on the Left refuse to countenance Islamism, as they become increasingly aware of the contradiction between supporting universal human rights (including women’s rights) and the demands of Islamists. In France, for example, the centre-Left former Prime Minister Manuel Valls courageously denounced Islamo-Leftism without the least hesitation.

In the United States, however, such vocal opposition from the Left is increasingly rare. Indeed, at the 2019 Netroots Nation conference — America’s “largest annual conference for progressives” — multiple panel discussions and training sessions reflected the Islamist agenda, frequently coalescing around a critique of Israel while neglecting the toxic role played by Hamas in perpetuating the conflict. Meanwhile, Linda Sarsour, a feminist organiser and co-chair of the “Women’s March”, has made her support for Islamism more explicit: “You’ll know when you’re living under Shariah law if suddenly all your loans and credit cards become interest-free. Sounds nice, doesn’t it?”

In government, too, Islamism’s capture of progressivism has become increasingly clear. Turkey’s Islamist President Erdogan might lead one of the world’s most brutal and repressive regimes, but that hasn’t stopped Ilhan Omar, the Democratic congresswoman from Minnesota, from expressing support for him. No doubt she was inspired by Erdogan last year when he proclaimed that “social justice is in our book”, and that “Turkey is the biggest opportunity for western countries in the fight against xenophobia, Islamophobia, cultural racism and extremism”.

Erdogan, in effect, was explicitly using progressive rhetoric. It’s a move that’s since been mirrored in Iran. The Tehran Times ­— which describes itself as “a loud voice of the Islamic Revolution” — recently attacked former US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo for his “deep-rooted Islamophobia”. And in March, Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif “lauded the determination of Islamic countries to address Islamophobia as one of the main challenges facing the Islamic Ummah [community in the West]”. Islamists, in other words, are becoming skilled at wrapping themselves in a mantle of woke words, while engaging in systematic brutality and repression within their own countries.

To this new alliance between Islamism and progressive rhetoric, there is no simple response. Dawa, by its very nature, is inherently more difficult to fight than jihad. But those who believe, as I do, in a free, open, pluralist society need to be aware of the nature and magnitude of this new challenge. After two decades of fighting Islamist terrorism, we have a new and more subtle foe to contend with. Wokeism has long been regarded as a dangerous phenomenon — but only now are we starting to see why.

https://unherd.com/2021/07/why-islamism-became-woke/

[sjun]

Onder andere Tariq Ramadan en zijn GroenLinke facilitators in bijvoorbeeld Rotterdam waren daar een exponent van.

[Mahalingam]

[Hans v d Mortel sr]

Islam is een ziekte die zich niet laat uitroeien overtuigen van het goede.

[Mahalingam]

5Pillars
@5Pillarsuk
The prominent California-based preacher, Shaykh Uthman ibn Farooq, was stabbed earlier today at a dawah stall. He is believed to be in a stable condition and is out of hospital.

The perpetrator allegedly targeted Shaykh Uthman because of his dawah activities.
Image

Echt bloed of of tomatensap? Je weet dat nooit met lieden die dawah plegen.

Earlier this year, Uthman Ibn Farooq told the world he had been stabbed in downtown San Diego by a man shouting anti-Muslim slurs at him. Uthman, who posted video of the confrontation prior to the alleged stabbing, said he had filed a complaint with the police and that an assailant had been arrested. The San Diego Police Department has no record of a report on file and says no arrest has been made in relation to the alleged attack.

Het was inderdaad tomatensap.

Did a Muslim Preacher in San Diego Stage a Hate Crime against Himself?

In March 2022, a prominent Muslim preacher, Uthman Ibn Farooq, told the world he had been stabbed in downtown San Diego by a man shouting anti-Muslim slurs at him. He recorded the incident as it happened and subsequently posted the video to social media, garnering sympathy from his thousands of Muslim followers and leaving many wondering if they’d be the next victim of an “Islamophobic” hate-crime.

Within hours, news of the alleged attack spread far and wide beyond San Diego. In the UK, the Muslim news organization 5Pillars offered their sympathies to Uthman and condemnations for the attacker. The story even made headlines in Muslim news outlets as far away as Nigeria and South Africa. Uthman’s own video of the incident has, to date, been viewed nearly half a million times, and a number of other prominent Muslim YouTubers have covered the incident including Eddie Deen, whose YouTube channel has more than 537,000 subscribers.

Soon after the attack, Uthman stated he had filed a report of the attack with the San Diego police. After an apparent months-long search, Farooq revealed in September that the alleged attacker had finally been caught and arrested.

In the minds of his supporters, the saga, which attracted a significant amount of attention, likely confirmed Uthman’s reputation as a tough and confrontational street preacher known for his verbal face-offs with Christians, Jews, and Hindus documented in hundreds of videos on his YouTube channel.

News of the stabbing was first reported in a March 23 tweet by the Muslim news outlet 5Pillars UK. The tweet included a photo Uthman took of himself in his car, bloodied by an apparent stab wound on his lower abdomen. The tweet mentioned that Uthman was stabbed at a public dawah stall and that he was targeted because of his frequent public proselytizing of Islam. His supporters were quick to offer sympathies, while others lamented the perceived double standards and hypocrisy of Western media for not reporting on this hate crime.

There’s just one problem. There is little, if any, evidence to indicate that this alleged “Islamophobic” hate crime against Uthman ever took place. Repeated inquiries to the San Diego police indicate that no report about the stabbing was ever filed and that no arrest has been made.

Spoiler! :

The next day, Uthman’s Islamic non-profit organization, One Message Foundation, posted the video of the encounter that he had taken on his phone on its YouTube channel. The video shows a white male in a baseball cap and a disposable face mask aggressively approaching Uthman’s car and shouting at him.

“I’ve seen your videos, man!” he said. “You’re a (expletive) terrorist! (Expletive) you and your Muslim (expletive)!”
image4.pngThe footage of a confrontation posted by Uthman Ibn Farooq on YouTube includes this image of the alleged attacker. (YouTube screenshot.)

In the video, Uthman is heard responding: “you think I’m scared of you?” The recording abruptly ends when he drops his phone. Viewers are left to conclude that Uthman subsequently exited his vehicle to physically confront the man shouting at him.

The March 24th video ends with a message to Uthman’s supporters in which he assures them that he has filed a police report and that detectives have the attacker’s weapon and his face, and that he will not get away with it. The video also shows bandages on Uthman’s lower abdomen, and he tells his viewers that he is totally fine after having been checked out of the emergency room.

The very next day after the Uthman posted the video, the San Diego Union Tribune reported the attack in a story published under the headline “Local Muslim Imam says in viral video that he was attacked by man who called him a terrorist.”

According to the article, the San Diego Police Department could not provide details as to when or where the incident occurred, but that the SDPD was aware of the video and had been in touch with Uthman.

Lieutenant Adam Sharki told the San Diego Tribune in a statement that SDPD “takes reports of hate crimes very seriously” and that “anyone with information about this incident is asked to call police or Crime Stoppers.”

The San Diego chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) condemned “this apparently bias-motivated attack on Sheikh Uthman and pray for his full recovery.”

“Hate rhetoric can quickly turn into a hate crime causing harm to life and property, the local CAIR chapter stated. “We call on members of the public to offer any information they have about this attack and for city officials to take immediate action to ensure public safety for all minority communities.”

For all the publicity the alleged attack generated, there appears to be no administrative record of Uthman reporting it to the police.
Screen Shot 2022-10-13 at 6.53.04 PM.png
The hate crime database maintained by the San Diego Police Department does not include information about any attacks taking place on March 23, 2022 on Market Street in San Diego, the date and location of an alleged confrontation between Uthman Ibn Farooq and an unknown assailant. (Screenshot.)

No record of the incident exists in a publicly accessible database of hate-crimes maintained by the police department.

With no luck searching through San Diego’s hate-crimes database for any additional information about the incident, FWI reached out to the SDPD’s records department to request any police reports or incident notes regarding the March, 23, 2022 attack.

Initially, the request was denied due to insufficient information with the SDPD requiring a police report number, or a location of the incident to process the query. According to the Tribune’s reporting, the SDPD was unable to determine a time or a location of the incident.

But after thoroughly reviewing the footage posted by Uthman, the location of the incident can apparently be identified from rapid still frames of the video shown below.
image6.png
image3.png
image7.png
image8.png
Screenshots from the video posted by Uthman Ibn Farooq appear to include a billboard that is located on a building adjacent to 1606 Market Street in San Diego.


The location of the incident appears to be a gas station located at 1606 Market Street in San Diego. A query based on this information was re-submitted to the SDPD on September 6, 2022, which also turned back inconclusive. An email from the police department reads as follows:

“Good afternoon,

Thank you for your message. After a diligent search using the location and amended date of March 23, 2022 provided, the San Diego Police Department has no responsive records.

Kind regards.”

After the request to SDPD yielded no results, FWI reached out to Lieutenant Adam Sharki, the spokesperson for the SDPD who was quoted in the earlier Tribunal article. In an email dated September 22nd, 2022, Lt. Sharki stated that Uthman had not filed a report to the San Diego Police Department after the incident.
image1.png

On September 9, Farooq had appeared on a podcast by the Green Lane Mosque in the UK, during which he provided additional details pertaining to the incident. He began by mentioning that – contrary to the initial reporting by 5Pillars UK – the incident occurred while Uthman was on his way out from the dentist’s office, and not while he was at a public dawah booth.

“I knew as a Muslim in America, if it goes down to it they’re gonna blame me. So I started recording,” he recalls before then going on to describe the altercation.

“I toss my phone, we get into it. Alhamdulillah, I was able to get some good hits but as you can see he didn’t touch me… and he was taller than me!” he boasted. “Instinctually, I grabbed his right hand, and during this struggle, he grabbed the knife. But Alhamdulillah, I was holding his hand, so he wasn’t able to get a good stab – just a slice. I didn’t feel any pain. […] I grabbed his hand with two hands, and I started twisting his wrists until he dropped [the knife]. When he dropped it, I went to get the knife and he ran away like [a] coward.”

After describing his victory over the “Islamophobic” attacker, Uthman reported that the perpetrator had been caught and arrested:

“Alhamdulillah, the surprise that I haven’t told anybody is that he’s been arrested, and he went to jail. I’ve got the email and the thing from the police with the charges […] I’ve given his knife to the police and they have his fingerprints,” he told the Green Lane podcast.

Following the new developments from Uthman, FWI reached out once again to SDPD Lt. Adam Sharki on October 9th and asked him if the department could corroborate Farooq’s claims that his attacker has been arrested, and if possible, to provide any details pertaining to the arrest.
IMG_7114.jpg

Lt. Sharki responded minutes later and told us that in order for an arrest to be made, there would first need to be a crime report, and since Farooq never made a police report, the SDPD could not possibly have made any arrests in relation to the incident.

“If someone had been stabbed and reported it to SDPD, there would be an SDPD crime case,” he said. “My understanding is there is no crime case. Regarding an arrest, a person could not be arrested for a stabbing which was not reported/documented in a crime case. Hope this helps.”

FWI reached out to Uthman for comment, asking if he would be willing to release any documents he received from the police or if he could provide any additional details about the attacker, the arrest, or the incident as a whole, but he did not respond to any of our requests by phone, email or social media.

https://islamism.news/2022/10/16/did-a- ... t-himself/