Friday, 11 December 2015

ISLAMOPHOBIA - Pr Tony Hall and Dr. Kevin Barrett - Charlie Hebdo, San Bernandino, Bataclan, ISIS False Flags

False Flag Islamophobia Conference

  False Flag Islamophobia* Conference: Live Stream from Paris on Dec. 12th 

(N.B. From day one I disagree with the use of the term "ISLAMOPHOBIA"!  Only sick people suffer from tat disease and they constitute a small minority!  All the others are simply ignoramuses, BLOODY RACISTS, fanatics or extremists of their own Sects, Tribes, Ideologies or Religions.  BAFS) 


False Flag Islamophobia Conference

Coming Up Saturday, December 12th...To Be Live Streamed
from Paris, France. (this is a 4 Hour live Broadcast)
9 Courageous Scholars will brave the ongoing martial law hysteria in France

Sat. Dec 12th Live Stream from Paris, France

 I WROTE, when this Conference was announced some time ago, that Fascist Zionist France will not allow this Conference as there has never been free speech for REAL MUSLIMS and TRUTH TELLERS in France!  Friday 11.12.2015 BAFS

9 Courageous Scholars will brave the ongoing martial law hysteria in France and will debunk recent false flags including the Paris attack, Charlie Hebdo, the San Bernadino Shooting and other false flags in the news. Do not believe the official story you hear in the mainstream media.
Are false flag attacks attributed to Muslims, actually committed by the enemies of Muslims a major factor behind the spread of Islamophobia? Is ISIS a real Muslim group or a false-flag group created, armed and deployed AGAINST Muslims by the enemies of Islam?

Hosted by Professor Tony Hall and Dr. Kevin Barrett, and featuring contributors to the two books questioning both 2015 Paris attacks: We Are NOT Charlie Hebdo: Free Thinkers Question the French 9/11 and the forthcoming ANOTHER French False Flag? Free Thinkers Question the 11/13 Paris Attacks.

False Flag Islamophobia Conference

Coming Up Saturday, December 12th...To Be Live Streamed
from Paris, France. (this is a 4 Hour live Broadcast)
9:00 am - 1:00 pm Pacific * 12 Noon - 4:00 pm Eastern
6:00 pm - 10:00 pm Paris * 17:00 - 21:00 GMT

No Lies Radio
PO Box 4164
San Leandro, California 94579

Read the VerticalResponse marketing policy. 

Dr. Kevin Barrett, a Ph.D. Arabist-Islamologist, is one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror.

He is Host of Show More

View Latest Posts >>>

Islamophobia is creating a global police state

It's a neocon-fabricated "state of emergency" built on demonizing Muslims

This is what Paris looks like.
This is what Paris looks like.
By Kevin Barrett, Veterans Today Editor, reporting from Paris

Hitler built a German police state by demonizing Jews* (and Slavs, Gypsies, communists, modern artists, and lots of other folks).
Lenin and Stalin built a Russian police state by demonizing “the class enemy.”
Today, neoconservatives and their allies are even more ambitious. They are building a global police state – a totalitarian New World Order – by demonizing Muslims.
That is the obvious takeaway from yesterday’s Islamophobia and Eroding Civil Society conference, held in Paris, France and sponsored by UC-Berkeley’s Center for Race and Gender Islamophobia Research and Documentation Project.
“Islamophobia is the mechanism for police states today – like anti-Semitism in 1930s Europe,” explained conference co-organizer and UC-Berkeley professor Ramon Grosfoguel in his closing speech.
Ironically, the site of the conference – Paris, the City of Lights, world capital of “freedom, equality, and brotherhood,” whose thinkers brought us the Enlightenment – is leading the way toward the Global Islamophobic Police State (GIPS). Using the recent Friday the 13th massacre as their excuse, in the same way Hitler used the Reichstag Fire and Bush used 9/11, French leaders proposed and passed a bill putting the whole country under a State of Emergency that effectively ends liberty and the rule of law.
Today, Paris is a locked-down gulag city, like East Berlin under Communism. The population is brainwashed to live in fear, citizens are encouraged to spy on their neighbors, and peaceful political protest has been summarily banned.
As the Vice News article Surveillance, Paranoia, and Life Under a State of Emergency in France explains, peaceful activists who have never done anything wrong, much less illegal, are being put under house arrest. Life for them has become a nightmare like something out of Franz Kafka:
Police appear to know when (peaceful activist Joel Domenjoud) is planning to leave his apartment because he could see them waiting on the street outside his apartment. ‘From the moment I put on my jacket, they were waiting. The worst part is thinking about if my apartment is being listened to,'” he said.
So how did the UC-Berkeley group manage to hold its Islamophobia conference in this locked-down gulag city, now the world capital of UnFreedom? By flying way, WAY under the radar.
Most academic conferences will tell you who is speaking, where, and when. They put it right on their website. After all, professors and wannabe-professors want this kind of publicity – conference presentations look good on their resumés.
But the Islamophobia and Eroding Civil Society conference is a rare exception. I wasn’t able to get a confirmation of the location, the time, or who would be participating from the organizers. My repeated email inquiries were ignored. Professor Tony Hall (Globalization Studies, University of Lethbridge) got the same non-response.
As a Ph.D. in Arabic with an Islamic Studies focus, I would normally be welcomed at such an event. So would Tony, whose scholarly background is also relevant to the topic.
And considering that my paper proposal was accepted by the Conference organizers, you would think they would tell me when and where to show up.
But my proposal – which focused on the way Muslims have been gagged and prevented from expressing their analysis that the major terror events since 9/11 have been false flags – was retroactively deemed “too hot to handle” by the organizers in the wake of the November 13th apparent false flag operation.
Here is my correspondence with a conference organizer:
Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 7:08 AM,  [name deleted] wrote:
Dear Kevin,
On behalf of the organizing committee for the 3rd Paris Islamophobia Conference, I would like to inform that your paper was selected for the conference.  I would like to extend an invite to you to present your paper at the third annual conference to be held December 11th, 2015.  Please prepare for a 20 minute presentation inclusive of any media or visual materials and we look forward to receiving your final paper in the near future.  Another email will be sent details some hotel options and other relevant logistical issues.
All the best,
[name deleted]

But then came the next big false flag – on Friday the 13th. It was an unlucky day for free speech and free thought.

November 14, 2015 at 1:26 a.m.
Dear Kevin,
I wanted to alert you that due to the development in Paris we will not be able to have the conference in its current format and the whole agenda has shifted.  Please don’t purchase a plane ticket as things are totally on hold with the state of emergency.
-[name deleted]

Dear [name deleted]
I already purchased a non-refundable ticket. See below. I do hope the conference will take place, even if the format shifts, and will be happy to address my paper to the revised format.

Wed., Nov 18, 2015, at 10:20 AM
Dear Kevin,
Due to state of emergency in France and the on-going active operations, the organizing committee is not able to accommodate your paper at this point in time.  Our supporters on the ground are under extreme emergency conditions and the whole program is under stress due to it.  I wish it was different but we are taking the direction from the people impacted directly at this time.
[name deleted]

Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 9:27 AM
Dear [name deleted],
When will you be available for an interview on this? Who else is on the committee?
And when will the committee reimburse me for the plane ticket? …
Your complete transparency and honesty in this matter is expected and appreciated.
November 18, 2015 at 7:01 pm
Dear David,
I will reimburse you from our Berkeley side of the conference and if you can send me the actual invoice so I will put it through to be paid.  I will wait regarding this as we might end-up not having the conference at all due to fast moving circumstances.   Part of the work in Paris involved hosting a community wide meeting with local partners in Saint-Denis, which is the heavily populated area of Muslims and immigrants and we are also waiting to see if his happens.  If you watched the news today the raid on the area killed two and arrested 7 and the community meeting was to be held few blocks from it.
[name deleted]
Subject header: Hope to see you in Paris
Nov. 24
Hello [name deleted]
Just letting you know that University of Lethbridge Globalization Studies professor Anthony Hall and I will be hosting an alternative conference in Paris on 12/12: .
So don’t worry about refunding my airfare.
Even though we won’t be contributing papers, Tony and I would love to attend the Islamophobia and Eroding Civil Society Conference as audience members. So please do keep me posted on conference plans.
No hard feelings, I appreciate the good work you’re doing within the prescribed limits. Here’s hoping that some day you and others will get fed up and break free from those limits.
As the date approached, I repeatedly asked for details about where and what time the conference would take place. No response.
So I flew in to Paris on Thursday the 11th. Around 9:30 a.m. on Friday the 12th, I “just showed up” at the address listed on the website, hoping the conference hadn’t been moved, locked down by the gendarmes, or blown up by “ISIS” in another false flag operation.
Fortunately none of the above scenarios materialized. I simply strolled into the venue – a pleasant Parisian bookstore – and took my place among the assembled throng of Islamophobia Studies specialists. The organizers favored me with nervous glances of recognition.
The first panel discussion began with “The Muslim minority to justify the end of democracy.” Midway through the second or third presentation, heads turned as Tariq Ramadan – the world’s most famous “Muslim French intellectual” even though he’s Swiss and teaches at Oxford – made his entrance. (Ramadan is living proof that no matter how reasonable and moderate and pro-Western and pro-democracy a Muslim tries to be, they will be hounded and demonized by Zionist defamation specialists. Just look at the poor guy’s Wikipedia page!)
The panel focused on various ways that Western Muslims have been confined to “spaces of exclusion” and rendered non-subjects, deprived of real existence in the collective consciousness, endlessly talked about (as scary, scary threats) but never listened to or acknowledged as citizens and equals. During the Q&A I raised my hand and asked:
“I’d like to hear if any of you in your research have encountered one of the most important ‘spaces of exclusion,’ which is the mainstream Western society’s refusal to listen to what Muslims really think about 9/11 and the other big so-called ‘Islamic terror’ events. Polls show that most Muslims believe 9/11 was an inside job. Likewise with the post-9/11 follow-up events, including the recent ones in Paris. In my own experience, virtually nobody in the Muslim community believes the official story of any of these events. From 2001 through 2003, I the only Muslim in Madison, Wisconsin, as far as I know, who thought there really might have been Muslim hijackers on 9/11. Yet non-Muslims don’t know what Muslims really think. The media censors it. Even the academy censors it. And the evidence suggests the Muslim-majority analysis is right. How have the Muslims you’ve studied dealt with this?”
After some hemming and hawing, as each panelist hoped someone else would answer, the British scholar answered. He said that British Muslims who espouse “conspiracy theories” are put on terror watch lists and threatened with “deradicalization programs.” Yet the millions of non-Muslims who watch Loose Change and exhibit exactly the same behavior as the Muslims are ignored. So this, he said, is yet another example of the way Muslims are treated as third-class citizens.
Following that exchange, Tariq Ramadan delivered his keynote address – and made a point of looking me in they eye and saying that he agreed with me: We need to ask questions, and insist on our right to ask questions. For example: Why didn’t the US accept the Taliban’s offer to turn over Bin Laden? Why wasn’t Bin Laden charged with a crime, put on trial, and questioned? Ramadan suggested that “some with an interest in the Middle East are behind the dirty politics here. We have to have the courage to ask questions.”
After his talk, I gave Prof. Ramadan a copy of We Are NOT Charlie Hebdo: Free Thinkers Question the French 9/11.
Ramadan also pointed out that France is becoming a model for the Islamophobic police state–itself a transnational phenomenon–in part because it has the biggest Muslim population of any Western country. The police state, he said, is based on the false claim that “integration is failing.” In fact, Muslims are more integrated than ever. The real problem, he suggested, is that Muslims were becoming too integrated into society.
“The more we settle down in the West, the more they hate us” Ramadan said. But why? Probably because Muslims are becoming normal French citizens and fulfilling their civic duties, such as voting. 1.9 million Muslims voted for Hollande over Sarkozy, Ramadan explained, while Hollande’s margin of victory was 1.6 million. (What Ramadan didn’t say, didn’t need to say, was that – as all who follow French politics know – Sarkozy is an extreme neocon Zionist and it is his people, such as the proven liar and Charlie Hebdo suspect Jeanette Bougrabe, who are stoking Islamophobia.)
Ramadan continued: Another reason that we’re still hearing the lie that “integration is failing,” even though French Muslims are already integrated, is that this discourse is becoming a business.  We keep hearing that “Europe is becoming Eurabia.” Yet the ridiculous urban legends about “London’s Muslim-ruled no-go zones” persist. Why? The real reason, he suggested, is that citizens with Arab/Muslim backgrounds are influencing foreign policy. (Again, the unstated corollary is that the hardcore neocon Zionists are terrified that voting, French-speaking, law-abiding French citizens of Arab/Muslim heritage will undermine French support of Netanyahu and his Greater Israel project.)
So why do so many people hear and believe the ridiculous lies about “Eurabia”?
“We can’t deny or underestimate the role of the media in the whole process.  But we cannot say the media are under control, as in a dictatorship. The question is, who owns the media, who’s going to speak, who’s not going to speak? There is no constructive discourse on islam. It’s a vicious circle. The reality is, Islamophobia makes money.”
It also yields political popularity. “Hollande gained 20 points in the polls from declaring the State of Emergency–just like Bush in the US. The majority of people are happy with it. Public opinion is supporting ‘tough decisions.’”
Ramadan mourned the victims of the recent Paris attacks – as well as other less-celebrated massacres: “I say je suis Paris, but I also say je suis Beirut.” (Subtext: In the West, it seems that the lives of white Parisians are more important than those of brown-skinned Lebanese, judging by the amount of coverage the two terror events drew.)
He also argued against the “dehumanization of young people who want to fight in Syria.” The blanket condemnation of all such people, he said, is a symptom of the “colonial mindset” and its insistence that “some human beings are less human than others.” He added that the recent equation of Salafist Islam with terrorism is unjustified, since the vast majority of Salafists are peaceful; most, including the literalist or so-called fundamentalist ones, are apolitical and law-abiding.
I wish he had discussed where the “ISIS threat” is really coming from. But I suppose if you want to teach at Oxford, you have to tread somewhat delicately in such sensitive areas; mentioning, for example, that the Iraqi government has had to shoot down British planes bringing supplies to ISIS might not sit well with the MI-6 types there.
 There were sixteen presenters at the Conference. Given the under-the-radar aspect of the event, I will assume that many of their identities are national security secrets.
The majority of the presentations offered horrific details illustrating how the Global Islamophobic Police State is demeaning and dehumanizing Muslims – a dry run for demeaning and dehumanizing non-Muslims under ever-encroaching Orwellian authoritarianism. Here are some of the interesting facts I learned (or was reminded of):
Zionist psychopathy: The summer 2014 Gaza massacre brought out widespread sadism, voyeurism, exhibitionism and trophyism among Jewish Israelis. They sold wildly popular T-shirts celebrating the sniper murders of Palestinian children, born and unborn, for which the IDF is notorious. Sadistic captors posed for selfies with bound and blindfolded captives a la Abu Ghaib (where Israeli advisors had created the whole pornographic spectacle). Settlers forced Palestinian children to drink gasoline and burned them to death – then claimed that the Palestinian parents had killed their own children that way, due to their allegedly barbaric nature.  Huge numbers of psychopathic Zionists crowded the hilltops overlooking Gaza, ate popcorn-style watermelon seed snacks, and cheered wildly as Palestinian children were blown to bits and burned to death with white phosphorous.
 “Deradicalization” in the UK: More than 400 kids have been “deradicalized” in programs reminiscent of Stalinist or Maoist indoctrination sessions. If you have brown skin and watch Loose Change on the internet, you’re a potential target.
“Islamic terror” is a hoax: Less than 1% of all terrorist attacks in the EU are attributed to Muslims. Yet the media, egged on by the Islamophobia Industry, consistently ignores or downplays terrorism by non-Muslims while wildly hyping the vanishingly few examples of terrorism attributed to Muslims. (Had it been me, I would have added that all of the spectacular events attributed to Muslims appear to be, or have been proven to be, false flags.)
The Islamophobia Industry: 60 foundations are almost entirely responsible for the billions of dollars paid to public relations (i.e. brainwashing) experts to manufacture Islamophobia. Of those  foundations, 75% also support the criminal Israeli settlements in what is universally acknowledged to be stolen, occupied territory–settlements overrun by genocidal child-killing monsters. So the people forcing Palestinian kids to drink gasoline and then burning them to death are being paid by the same people brainwashing you to hate Muslims. Quelle surprise!
One tense moment came when Professor Tony Hall raised his hand during the Q & A:
This is all very interesting, but I’m not hearing any of you get to the root of why there is all this Islamophobia. There is now a huge literature on the fact that these big terror attacks are contrived. It was 9/11 and all of the subsequent events that have created the wave of Islamophobia. I know it’s not a good career move, but: Why can’t we talk about this? Why can’t we –”
The woman who had been discussing Islamophobia Industry funding cut him off with evident hostility: “That’s not a question. The subject was already discussed.” Another panelist chimed in, saying that people who commit political violence do so for all sorts of reasons, and that it’s demeaning to them to say they are just patsies of intelligence services in false flag plots.
So apparently, at least in some quarters, it’s “Islamophobic” to reveal the truth about the Deep State denizens who orchestrate huge, professionally-executed false flag attacks designed to blame Muslims and incite Islamophobia. As Jim Dean says, you just can’t make this stuff up.
At the end of the conference, Berkeley Professor Hatem Bazian pointed out that the global Islamophobic police state operates worldwide, not just in the West. In fact, he said, it is even worse in many Muslim countries, where the government intelligence services write the sermon for Friday services in mosques – and arrest anyone who delivers a non-police-state-written sermon! Brutal dictatorships in Muslim-majority countries, just like Western countries, are inventing a phantom “Islamic threat” in order to justify their demolitions of liberty.
 Such blatant “Middle Eastern” police state measures, Bazian suggested, are appearing in the West as well. Today, he said, France is sending Muslim religious leaders to Morocco to receive mandatory “tolerance training.” (Morocco is a recovering police state that may have discontinued operations at its CIA-built-funded-and-trained torture center in the Sahara–though the way things are going, the French may force them to re-open it so they can torture French Muslim leaders who question this kind of Orwellian “tolerance.”)
Professor Bazian said Muslims in the West generally react to the horrific wave of abuse by trying too hard to put on a compliant, acceptable face: “Like getting plastic surgery when you’ve been hit in the face, maybe even apologizing, ‘I’m so sorry that my face got in the way of your fist.'” He ended by suggesting that it was today’s war-mongering, freedom-shredding West–not Muslims–that needs to be “de-radicalized.”
I agree. And I would add that the way to de-radicalize the West is by naming and shaming the neoconservative radicals. We need to expose what they have done – 9/11 and the subsequent false flag atrocities – and why they have done it: Not only in service to wars whose primary beneficiary is Israel, but also as a natural and inevitable outgrowth of their ultra-Machievellian, Straussian philosophy.
The Straussian neoconservatives believe that the natural elite – themselves – has the “natural right” to rule through mass murder and big lies. For them, this is the only right that exists. All others are imaginary.
Strauss came to the US in 1937 and declared war on liberal democracy. In the 1960s, Strauss and his handpicked “best students” (mostly Jewish Zionists) stayed up late in extracurricular sessions aimed at devising a way to overthrow liberal democracy in the USA through a 9/11 style event, the American equivalent of Hitler’s Reichstag Fire. This is not a “conspiracy theory”; it is direct testimony from two then-University of Chicago students who were there, saw it happen, and were, even then, horrified. The two witnesses are Stanley Hilton and Professor Francis Boyle.
Likudnik Israeli geopolitics, like neoconservative philosophy, leads directly to 9/11. Netanyahu and his friends have signed a blood oath to never withdraw from the West Bank’s Occupied Territories, according to Alan Hart, who heard about it first hand.
Bibi and his friends are committed to the Greater Israel project and intend to keep killing people and stealing more and more land. They have no interest in any viable two-state solution, no interest in peace. They are planning for a permanent war on the entire Muslim world, which is they only way their Greater Israel can exist. And that permanent war must be waged by the whole West – not just Israel.
Some might say: If 9/11 didn’t exist, the neocon Zionists would have had to invent it.
Well, I’m sorry to tell you: THEY DID INVENT IT.
That’s right.
And the whole series of follow-ups as well.
That’s why there can be no legitimate discussion of Islamophobia that doesn’t consider the issue of false flags – proven and suspected – and then “connect the dots.”
So a huge thank you to everyone who contributed to my GoFundMe campaign that brought me to Paris to attend the Islamophobia and Eroding Civil Society conference.
This evening, I will be hosting an alternative conference that focuses on the false flag issue.
To watch the conference live noon to 4 pm Eastern (or archived) just visit this link:

Related Posts:

* I am sorry, but this is not exact.  BAFS

Written by Wendy Gittleson on December 9, 2015
Donald Trump first jumped onto the GOP presidential stage with the stance that immigrants from Latin America are rapists. That’s since died down a bit, although certainly not in the minds of Latin Americans, so Trump, trying to stay relevant, is preaching just shy of ethnic cleansing.
At least two high-profile Muslims, Muhammad Ali and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, both spoke out on Trump’s ugly rhetoric on Wednesday.
Most recently, Trump is under fire for saying he would prevent Muslims from entering the country if he was President.
Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on,” a campaign press release said.

Trump, who has previously called for surveillance against mosques and said he was open to establishing a database for all Muslims living in the U.S., made his latest controversial call in a news release. His message comes in the wake of a deadly mass shooting in San Bernardino, California, by suspected ISIS sympathizers and the day after President Barack Obama asked the country not to “turn against one another” out of fear.

Source: CNN

The President, while not addressing Trump specifically, said:

‘Muslim Americans are our friends and our neighbors are coworkers, our sports heroes. And yes, they are our men and women in uniform who are willing to die in defense of our country,’ the president said, speaking from the Oval Office. ‘We have to remember that.’
To which Trump tweeted:

Sports star and Muslim Kareem Abdul-Jabbar had some pretty harsh words for Trump in an op-ed in Time Magazine.

The terrorist campaign against American ideals is winning. Fear is rampant. Gun sales are soaring. Hate crimes are increasing. Bearded hipsters are being mistaken for Muslims. And 83 percent of voters believe a large-scale terrorist attack is likely here in the near future. Some Americans are now so afraid that they are willing to trade in the sacred beliefs that define America for some vague promises of security from the very people who are spreading the terror. “Go ahead and burn the Constitution — just don’t hurt me at the mall.” That’s how effective this terrorism is.
I’m not talking about ISIS. I’m talking about Donald Trump.
This is not hyperbole. Not a metaphor. Webster defines terrorism as “the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal; the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion.”
If violence can be an abstraction — and it can; that’s what a threat is — the Trump campaign meets this definition. Thus, Trump is ISIS’s greatest triumph: the perfect Manchurian Candidate who, instead of offering specific and realistic policies, preys on the fears of the public, doing ISIS’s job for them. Even fellow Republican Jeb Bush acknowledged Trump’s goal is “to manipulate people’s angst and fears.”
Even more significant, though, are Wednesday’s words from Trump’s real life friend who also happens to be a Muslim sports hero: Muhammad Ali. In a press statement, Ali said:

“I am a Muslim and there is nothing Islamic about killing innocent people in Paris, San Bernardino, or anywhere else in the world,” Ali wrote in a statement provided to NBC News on Wednesday. “True Muslims know that the ruthless violence of so called Islamic Jihadists goes against the very tenets of our religion.”
Ali continued: “Speaking as someone who has never been accused of political correctness, I believe that our political leaders should use their position to bring understanding about the religion of Islam and clarify that these misguided murderers have perverted people’s views on what Islam really is.”
Source: Huffington Post
If you noticed that Ali’s statement is a bit more patient and that he stopped short of calling Trump a “terrorist,” it’s because Ali and Trump are friends, at least they were.
Featured image via Twitter.


almassari <>

The Rise of the American-Muslim Totalitarian State

Muslim-Americans are living in a totalitarian police state with worsening harassment, profiling, and surveillance. The United States’ government may claim liberty and justice for all; however, in practice, towards Muslims, it exhibits all four major characteristics of a totalitarian state: a war on terror that targets Muslims abroad, a totalitarian police state at home, public executions by drones and gulags outside the rule of law, and a strong reliance on propaganda and political demagoguery.
The hallmark of fascism was state oppression of certain targeted non-privileged groups. Today, Muslims are bearing the brunt of America’s totalitarian police state.
Despite FBI records showing that since 9/11, Muslims have committed far less domestic terror attacks than white supremacists, it is the American-Muslim community that is under unprecedented levels of surveillance and government intrusion. Muslims in America are unquestionably experiencing a fascist system of surveillance, operating at the same level that East Germans faced under the Stasi spy agency. Researcher, Arun Kundnani, has shown how the FBI has one counterterrorism spy for every 94 Muslims in the U.S., which approaches Stasi’s ratio of one spy for every 66 citizens.
Clearly racism, as much as oil, fuels the War on Terror. White Christians rarely have to worry that an undercover agent or informant has infiltrated their churches, student organizations or neighborhoods. The simple fact that U.S. law enforcement has not infiltrated and spied on conservative Christian communities to disrupt violent rightwing extremism, which is the biggest terrorism threat in America, confirms what Muslims in American know in their bones: to worship Allah is to be suspect.
Federal judges recently ruled that suspicion-less surveillance of Muslims is permissible under the U.S. Constitution. The NYPD has admitted that Mosques, student groups, restaurants, even grade schools, have all been under surveillance. By rapidly increasing both government policies of secrecy and surveillance, Mr. Obama’s government is increasing its power to watch its citizens, while diminishing its citizens’ power to watch their government.
The threat of homegrown Islamic terrorism has been largely manufactured, so that the so-called War on Terror can promote multi-billion dollar, corporate-sponsored militarism abroad and the erosion of two hundred-year-old civil liberties at home.
Muslim-Americans are not only facing increasing oppression from the state, but they are also facing growing prejudice from their fellow countrymen, as hate crimes and civil liberty violations against Muslims continue to precipitously rise.
A recent Pew Forum Poll established that Muslims are by far the most disliked minority in America. According to FBI statistics, anti-Muslim hate crimes soared by an astounding 50 percent last year. Muslims constitute 1 percent of the U.S. population, but they are 13 percent of the victims of religious-based hate crimes. Islamophobia and xenophobia now seem as American as apple pie. Intolerance of Muslims is often inverted, depicting Muslim customs as an insult to Western customs.
One major aspect of American totalitarianism, shared by fascist regimes, is the nation’s enormous military budget. In 1933, Nazi Germany’s military spending was 2 percent of their national income; by 1940, it was 44 percent.
Today, America spends more on her military than the rest of the world combined. America has expanded its military into having 662 foreign military bases, according to the Department of Defense’s 2010 Base Structure Report. The War on Terror has cost $6 trillion, the equivalent of $75,000 for every American household, calculates Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government.
Another hallmark of totalitarianism is the creation of a prison system outside the rule of law that is largely designed to imprison and torture one minority group. The Guantanamo Bay gulag is unquestionably a crime against humanity. There is unlimited cruelty in a system that seems to be unable to free the innocent and unable to punish the guilty.
In April 24, 1934, a People’s Court, just like Guantanamo was established, which also bypassed the judicial system: prisoners were held indefinitely in isolation and were tortured and subjected to show trials. The People’s Court was signed into law by Adolf Hitler.
In 2007, a politician who was vehemently against the human rights abuses at Guantanamo Bay, explained what he would do about the torture camp if he ever became President:
“When I am President, I will close Guantanamo. It is a moral outrage, a blight upon America’s conscience. It is the location of so many of the worst constitutional abuses in recent years. From inception, Guantanamo was a laboratory for unlawful military interrogation, detention, and trials.”
The politician who uttered these words was Senator Barack Obama. Ironically, under President Obama’s tenure, conditions for Guantanamo detainees, from both a physical and legal standpoint, have become markedly worse.
Public executions are perhaps one of the most overt and odious symbols of totalitarianism. In totalitarian Spain, under General Franco, mass public executions were the norm, and were often carried out in bullrings or with band music and onlookers dancing in the victims’ blood. With Hitler and Mussolini supplying arms to Franco, some 200,000 men and women were publically executed during the war and bombed from overhead.
Nowadays, drones are the ultimate totalitarian technology. Washington both uses drones for what amount to public extra-judicial executions of Muslims abroad, and for spying on American Muslims at home.
Most Americans believe that drones are targeted and therefore humane. Nothing could be further from the truth. By all accounts, drones have killed more children than terrorists. According to a new report from The Intercept, nearly 90 percent of people killed in drone strikes in Afghanistan are civilians.
By 2018, some privacy experts believe law enforcement will likely control over 35,000 drones that the government will use to monitor Americans from the skies.
Integral to the rise of the America Muslim Totalitarian State is propaganda. Sheldon Wolin has poignantly pointed out that, whereas the production of propaganda was crudely centralized in Nazi Germany, in the United States, it is left to highly concentrated media corporations, thus maintaining the illusion of a “free press”.
The American propaganda machine is highly sophisticated. It does not rely upon the radio addresses, speeches, and leaflets disseminated by the Nazi Ministry of Propaganda and Public Enlightenment, nor does it rely on the crude censorship or harassment of free press ordered by a Politburo. The propaganda of America’s “one percent” is subtle yet pervasive; it relies not only on government diktats but also on the mass media, art, pop culture and Hollywood.
American cinema and music have always been a remarkably effective means of whipping up xenophobic wartime sentiment. For example, the highest grossing war film in history, American Sniper, and President Obama’s favorite television show, Homeland, both engage in an overly broad generalization of Islam, and depict Muslims and terrorists in a way that is indicative of widespread Islamophobia in American culture.
The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee reported a spike in Islamophobia and hate crimes after the release of American Sniper, which culminated in the recent slaying of three young Muslims in North Carolina, who were shot in the head sniper execution style. American Islamophobia operates in the service of American militarism and American militarism abroad, and in turn, ratchets up Islamophobia against minorities at home.
The media determines our language, our language shapes our thoughts, and our thoughts determine our actions. Language is the fulcrum of a society’s perception. Whosoever controls the public’s language, controls the public’s perception.
The corporate elites who sit on media editorial boards control said language. In 1983, fifty companies owned ninety percent of U.S. media. Today, only six media giants control a staggering ninety percent of what the American public listens to, reads, and watches. “Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play,” once remarked Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Germany’s Minister of Propaganda.
For Muslim-Americans the media’s Orwellian totalitarian language is clear: Drones are Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Torture is Enhanced Interrogation. Occupation is Liberation.
Donald Trump’s recent call to ban Muslims from entry into the U.S. is not without precedent. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 effectively banned all Chinese immigration to the US. This racist law remained in place for five decades and required all Chinese to carry identification certificates or face deportation. When Trump endorsed identification cards to be worn at all times by American Muslims, his popularity jumped almost 3 percentage points. If Donald Trump’s policies are viewed by Americans as odious and un-American, then why has he consistently gained popularity after every anti-Muslim outburst?
America’s history is stock full of totalitarianism and popularized, irrational fear of “the other”. It began when the settler pioneers feared Native Americans and united against them by slaughtering millions in order to quell that fear. As settlers began to unite around a common identity they feared the British Monarchy and rebelled against it. Americans then fought against Mexico, France and various other countries for vast land control. Five hundred documented revolts on slave ships and the fact that plantation owners were greatly outnumbered by slaves, cemented the role of fear that perpetuated slavery for centuries. With greater fear comes greater violence, and with greater violence comes a greater need to justify that violence by ratcheting up the fear.
After the attacks on Pearl Harbor, Japanese Americans were forced into interment camps on American soil. Vietnamese Americans were then targets of xenophobia in America during the Vietnam War, and then there was the “Red Scare”, which targeted Russian-Americans throughout the Cold War.
From the ashes of the Soviet Union arose the terrorists from the oil-rich Middle East, who became America’s new number one enemy and so the legacy of American xenophobia continues. Today, as the deliberately unending war on terror rumbles on abroad, Muslim, Arab, and Sikh Americans fear that they are living in a totalitarian state.

Garikai Chengu is a scholar at Harvard University. Contact him on


Please share widely!


زوروا صفحات حزب التجديد الإسلامي في فيسبوك:
Visit the Facebook page of The Islamic Renewal Party
ALSO: On Google+
& LinkedIn: (Muhammad Al-Massari)
تابعونا على قناة حزب التجديد الإسلامي بتطبيق تيليجرام:
)هذه المشاركة آمنة، في غاية الأمان(
Telegram is very secure and superior to e-mail


Zemmour condamné pour provocation à la haine envers les musulmans

Dans une interview, le polémiste avait déclaré que les musulmans avaient le Coran pour code civil et formaient un "peuple dans le peuple". (Ce n'est pas provoquer la haine, ces propos???)

Publié le - Modifié le | Le
Dans l'interview, Éric Zemmour déclarait que « les musulmans vivent entre eux, dans les banlieues. Les Français  ont été obligés de s'en aller ».
Dans l'interview, Éric Zemmour déclarait que « les musulmans vivent entre eux, dans les banlieues. Les Français ont été obligés de s'en aller ». © BALTEL/SIPA

Le polémiste Éric Zemmour a été condamné jeudi à 3 000 euros d'amende pour provocation à la haine envers les musulmans, pour des propos au journal italien Corriere Della Sera en octobre 2014. Il y déclarait notamment que les musulmans "ont leur code civil, c'est le Coran", qu'ils "vivent entre eux, dans les banlieues. Les Français ont été obligés de s'en aller." Le parquet avait requis 10 000 euros d'amende. "Je pense que nous nous dirigeons vers le chaos. Cette situation de peuple dans le peuple, des musulmans dans le peuple français, nous conduira au chaos et à la guerre civile", ajoutait-il : "Des millions de personnes vivent ici, en France, mais ne veulent pas vivre à la française."

Éric Zemmour faisait alors la promotion de son livre Le Suicide français. Lors de l'audience devant le tribunal correctionnel de Paris, le polémiste avait soutenu qu'il parlait de "musulmans en banlieue qui s'organisent et qui", selon lui, "sont en voie de sécession". Ces propos "stigmatisants", "sans nuance" visaient "l'ensemble de la communauté musulmane", avait estimé la procureur Annabelle Philippe dans son réquisitoire. Le tribunal a eu la même appréciation, car à "aucun endroit de l'interview" il ne réduit son propos à "une fraction seulement" des musulmans. L'ensemble du propos de Zemmour "repose sur un postulat éminemment clivant" : "que la communauté musulmane s'opposerait, par essence et par culture, aux Français ou au peuple français", pour les juges. "Sous couvert de relater une évolution inéluctable, Éric Zemmour propose en réalité à ses lecteurs la seule option susceptible à ses yeux d'éviter la guerre civile", "un départ organisé et forcé de France de la communauté musulmane dans son entier". Le tribunal étrille la "sémantique à la fois guerrière et catastrophiste", qui dénote chez lui "le passage conceptuel d'une réalité probable à une solution à la fois crédible et souhaitable".

Un discours "dangereux"

"Les propos tenus par Éric Zemmour avant les attentats sont aujourd'hui partagés par une large partie de ceux qui s'expriment", a réagi son avocat, Me Olivier Pardo, qui va faire appel. "Je ne peux que constater l'acharnement dont fait l'objet Éric Zemmour", a-t-il ajouté. Le polémiste a en outre été condamné à verser, selon les cas, 1 ou 1 000 euros de dommages et intérêts à des associations parties civiles, auxquels s'ajoutent les frais de justice, soit au total 13 003 euros. Le jugement "reconnaît une nouvelle fois qu'Éric Zemmour est un propagateur de haine", a estimé Me Sabrina Goldman, avocate de la Licra (Ligue internationale contre le racisme et l'antisémitisme). "Son discours est d'autant plus dangereux qu'il se fait le chantre du parler vrai, il prétend dire la vérité alors qu'il ne fait que dire la haine", a-t-elle déclaré. Le président de SOS Racisme, Dominique Sopo, s'est félicité que la justice ait rappelé que "la liberté d'expression" n'est pas "la liberté de propager la haine". "On peut se demander une fois de plus comment il peut avoir une telle position d'autorité dans les médias", a-t-il dit.

Éric Zemmour a déjà été condamné en 2011 pour provocation à la haine, après avoir déclaré à la télévision que "la plupart des trafiquants sont noirs et arabes, c'est comme ça, c'est un fait". Plus récemment, le 22 septembre, il a été relaxé après avoir évoqué dans une chronique des "bandes" d'étrangers "qui dévalisent, violentent ou dépouillent", mais le parquet a fait appel. Dans ce dossier, le procès en appel est prévu le 6 avril.

"Ce facho de raciste d' Éric Zemmour, qui n'a 
même pas une tête de Gaulois, ne fait que 
répéter ce que les médias, les politiciens
 haineux et les bloggeurs écrivent et hurlent 
au quotidien!  Cette condamnation est une 






Muslim engineer kidnapped his female 

colleague and raped her for five days 'to 

convince her to convert to Islam'

  • Engineer Syen Emad Hasan, 30, proposed to woman who cannot be named
  • 27-year-old woman turned him down, moved to Dubai for work in August
  • Returned to confront him when he threatened to upload 'obscene images'
  • Hasan then locked her up in his bathroom and 'brutalised her', police said

An Indian man has been accused of kidnapping and raping a female colleague for five days to force her to convert to Islam.
Engineer Syen Emad Hasan, 30, proposed to the 27-year-old woman but she rejected him and said her family would not allow 'an inter-religious marriage', police said.
He harassed her until she cut short a work trip to Dubai. When she returned home to confront Hasan, he abducted her, locked her up at his house and took away her phone.

Engineer Syen Emad Hasan (pictured), 30, proposed to the 27-year-old woman but she rejected him and said her family would not allow 'an inter-religious marriage'
Engineer Syen Emad Hasan (pictured), 30, proposed to the 27-year-old woman but she rejected him and said her family would not allow 'an inter-religious marriage'
Hasan and the woman, who has not been named, worked together at a Dell computer repairs shop in Gachibowli, Hyderabad.
When she left the company and moved to Dubai in August, he 'continued to torture her on social media', police said.
'The woman told us she was forced to talk to Hasan as he showed her photos and videos of them together in Hyderabad, and threatened to send them to her father, said Inspector Ravinder.
He added: 'He [Hasan] also demanded that she send inappropriate photos of her.'
When she returned home to Hyderabad to confront him, he snatched her away to his flat in the al-Hasanath colony, Indian Express reported.
'He took three days’ leave and brutalised and sexually assaulted her,' said an officer of Hyderabad's 'She Team', a police unit tasked with investigating sexual assault.
They added: 'He threatened to continue doing so until she agreed to marry him after converting to Islam. He even threatened to set her on fire and strangle her.

Hasan and the woman, who has not been named, worked together at a Dell computer repairs shop in Gachibowli, Hyderabad (file photo of Hyderabad)
Hasan and the woman, who has not been named, worked together at a Dell computer repairs shop in Gachibowli, Hyderabad (file photo of Hyderabad)
'He took away her phone, passwords of her e-mail, Facebook, and started using them in her name. She was denied access to anybody.'
After four days of captivity, the woman managed to get onto Facebook when Hasan was out and messaged her friend.
Her friend contacted her brother in the south western city of Karnataka, who made the 280 mile journey to Hyderabad and alerted the police.
Police found the woman locked in a bathroom in a state of shock with severe injuries to her head and face.
'Hasan said they were lovers, but the woman appears very scared in his presence,’ the 'She Team' official said. 
Photos and videos of the woman were found on his mobile phone and laptop.

(Article de propagande mensongère et raciste partagée par les proches: Ludo Fontaine, Linda Labonté, Alexandrine de Senneville, Gino David Visenjoux, et Nthabiseng Ralethohlane.)

"La France est ce que les fanatiques exècrent : une bouteille de vin entre amis"

Le commentaire d'un lecteur du "New York Times" fait le tour du monde. Il résume en quelques mots l'esprit français frappé en plein cœur par Daesh.|By Le

une bouteille de vin entre amis"

Le commentaire d'un lecteur du "New York Times" fait le tour du monde. Il résume en quelques mots l'esprit français frappé en plein cœur par Daesh.

Publié le | Le
Photo d'illustration.
Photo d'illustration. © Raphye Alexius

La France représente tout ce que les fanatiques religieux (Musulmans???) détestent au plus haut point : la joie de vivre sur terre d'une myriade de petites manières : une tasse de café et un croissant au beurre, de belles femmes libres de sourire en minijupe dans les rues, l'odeur du pain chaud (ou encore) une bouteille de vin partagé entre amis ». Rapidement, le commentaire d'un lecteur du New York Times a fait le tour de la planète. Il se trouve après un article du quotidien américain sur les attentats de Paris du vendredi 13 novembre. "Nous savons que vous rirez de nouveau, que vous chanterez de nouveau, et ferez l'amour et crierez, car aimer la vie fait partie de votre essence. Voici le texte en intégralité et en version originale. Enjoy !


"France embodies everything religious zealots everywhere hate: enjoyment of life here on earth in a myriad little ways: a fragrant cup of coffee and buttery croissant in the morning, beautiful women in short dresses smiling freely on the street, the smell of warm bread, a bottle of wine shared with friends, a dab of perfume, children playing in the Luxembourg Gardens, the right not to believe in any god, not to worry about calories, to flirt and smoke and enjoy sex outside of marriage, to take vacations, to read any book you want, to go to school for free, to play, to laugh, to argue, to make fun of prelates and politicians alike, to leave worrying about the afterlife to the dead.

No country does life on earth better than the French.

Paris, we love you. We cry for you. You are mourning tonight, and we with you. We know you will laugh again, and sing again, and make love, and heal, because loving life is your essence. The forces of darkness will ebb. They will lose. They always do."

Consultez notre dossier : Spécial attentats de Paris






From the London Independent propaganda 


The enemy within? Fear of Islam: Britain's new disease

Suspicion of the Muslim community has found its way into mainstream society &ndash; and nobody seems to care. By Peter Oborne

Three years ago, four young suicide bombers caused carnage in London. (LIARS!) Their aim was not just to kill and maim. There was also a long-term strategic purpose: to sow suspicion and divide Britain between Muslims and the rest. (LIARS!) They are succeeding. (LIARS!)
In Britain today, there is a deepening distrust between mainstream society and ever more isolated Muslim communities. A culture of contempt and violence is emerging on our streets.
Sarfraz Sarwar is a pillar of the Muslim community in Basildon, Essex. He is constantly abused and attacked, and the prayer centre he used has been burnt to the ground.
Mr Sarwar, who has six children and whose wife is matron of an old people's home, is a patently decent man. His only crime is his religious faith. He and his fellow worshippers now meet in secret to evade detection, and the attacks that would follow.
The first abuse that Mr Sarwar's family suffered was in October 2001 – just after the 9/11 attacks – when pigs' trotters were left outside their door, the walls of their house were covered with graffiti and two front windows were broken.
Since then, the family has suffered many attacks, including a failed fire-bombing. In February, the tyres of Mr Sarwar's new car were slashed; in March his windows were broken again. He has now installed CCTV cameras, replaced his wooden back door with one made of steel and erected higher fences.
An investigation for Channel 4's Dispatches programme discovered many violent episodes and attacks on Muslims, with very few reported; those that do get almost no publicity.
Last week, Martyn Gilleard, a Nazi sympathiser in East Yorkshire, was jailed for 16 years. Police found four nail bombs, bullets, swords, axes and knives in his flat. Gilleard had been preparing for a war against Muslims. In a note at his flat he had written, "I am sick and tired of hearing nationalists talking of killing Muslims, blowing up mosques and fighting back only to see these acts of resistance fail. The time has come to stop the talking and start to act."
The Gilleard case went all but unreported. Had a Muslim been found with an arsenal of weapons and planning violent assaults, it would have been a far bigger story.
There is a reason for this blindness in the media. The systematic demonisation of Muslims has become an important part of the central narrative of the British political and media class; it is so entrenched, so much part of normal discussion, that almost nobody notices. Protests go unheard and unnoticed.
Why? Britain's Muslim immigrants are mainly poor, isolated and alienated from mainstream society. Many are a different colour. As a community, British Muslims are relatively powerless. There are few Muslim MPs, there has never been a Muslim cabinet minister, no mainstream newspaper is owned by a Muslim and, as far as we are aware, only one national newspaper has a regular Muslim columnist on its comment pages, Yasmin Alibhai-Brown of The Independent.
Surveys show Muslims have the highest rate of unemployment, the poorest health, the most disability and fewest educational qualifications of any faith group in the country. This means they are vulnerable, rendering them open to ignorant and hostile commentary from mainstream figures.
Islamophobia – defined in 1997 by the landmark report from the Runnymede Trust as "an outlook or world-view involving an unfounded dread and dislike of Muslims, which results in practices of exclusion and discrimination" – can be encountered in the best circles: among our most famous novelists, among newspaper columnists, and in the Church of England.
Its appeal is wide-ranging. "I am an Islamophobe," the Guardian columnist Polly Toynbee wrote in The Independent nearly 10 years ago. "Islamophobia?" the Sunday Times columnist Rod Liddle asks rhetorically in the title of a recent speech, "Count me in". Imagine Liddle declaring: "Anti-Semitism? Count me in", or Toynbee claiming she was "an anti-Semite and proud of it".
Anti-Semitism is recognised as an evil, noxious creed, and its adherents are barred from mainstream society and respectable organs of opinion. Not so Islamophobia.
Its practitioners say Islamophobia cannot be regarded as the same as anti-Semitism because the former is hatred of an ideology or a religion, not Muslims themselves. This means there is no social, political or cultural protection for Muslims: as far as the British political, media and literary establishment is concerned the normal rules of engagement are suspended.
"There is a definite urge; don't you have it?", the author Martin Amis told Ginny Dougary of The Times: "The Muslim community will have to suffer until it gets its house in order. Not letting them travel. Deportation; further down the road. Curtailing of freedoms. Strip-searching people who look like they're from the Middle East or Pakistan. Discriminatory stuff, until it hurts the whole community and they start getting tough with their children." Here, Amis is doing much more than insulting Muslims. He is using the foul and barbarous language of fascism. Yet his books continue to sell, and his work continues to be celebrated.
And we found the language of Islamophobic columnists such as Toynbee, Liddle, or novelists such as Amis, duplicated by the British National Party and its growing band of supporters.
All over Europe, parties of the far right have been dropping their traditional hostility to minorities such as Jews and homosexuals; in Britain, the BNP has come to realise that anti-Semitism and anti-black campaigning won't work if they are serious about electoral success.
To move to mainstream respectability, they need an issue that allows them to exploit people's fears about immigrants and Britain's ethnic minority communities without being branded racist extremists.
They have found it. Since 9/11, and particularly 7/7, the BNP has gone all out to tap a rich vein of anti-Muslim sentiment. The party's leader, Nick Griffin, has described Islam as a "wicked, vicious faith" and has tried to distance himself and the party from its anti-Semitic past. Party members are now rebuked for discussing the Holocaust and told to focus on terrorism, the evils of Islam, and scare stories of Britain becoming an Islamic state.
Griffin's strategy has been inspired by the press. He said: "We bang on about Islam. Why? Because to the ordinary public out there it's the thing they can understand. It's the thing the newspaper editors sell newspapers with."
Last month, we visited Stoke-on-Trent, a BNP heartland with nine BNP councillors, a council second only to Barking and Dagenham in far-right representation. The party has made this progress in large part by mounting a vicious anti-Muslim campaign. Stoke has one of the lowest employment rates in the country since the pottery industry collapsed. The BNP has tried to link this decline to Muslim immigration.
Other campaigns have focused on planning issues over mosques, a flashpoint elsewhere too. The BNP accuses the Labour council of cutting special deals with Muslim groups in exchange for support. Wherever we explored tension between Muslims and the local community we tended to discover the BNP was present, fanning discontent.
Many categories of immigrants and foreigners have been singled out for hatred and opprobrium by mainstream society because they were felt to be threats to British identity. At times, these despised categories have included Catholics, Jews, French and Germans; gays were held to subvert decency and normality until the 1980s, blacks until the 1970s, and Jews for centuries. Now this outcast role has fallen to Muslims. And it is the perception that Muslims receive special treatment that fuels the most resentment. When we investigated clashes at a Muslim dairy in Windsor, we found the perception that police had failed to investigate what seemed to be a racist attack by Asian youths on a local woman played a powerful role in fanning resentments.
But by the same token we believe that Muslims should be given the same protection as other minority groups from insults or ignorant abuse. This protection is not available. Ordinary Muslim families are virtually a silenced minority.
We should all feel ashamed about the way we treat Muslims, in the media, in our politics, and on our streets. We do not treat Muslims with the tolerance, decency and fairness that we often like to boast is the British way. We urgently need to change our public culture.

Peter Oborne's Dispatches film, "It Shouldn't Happen to a Muslim", will be screened on Channel 4 at 8pm on Monday. The pamphlet Muslims Under Siege, by Peter Oborne and James Jones, is published next week by Democratic Audit

No comments:

Post a Comment