This article first appeared inGateStoneInstitute.org.

Where are the articles by moderate Muslims condemning the prominent Muslims who beg Allah to strike infidels with cancer and disease? No practicing Muslim has openly condemned such prayers, or named the sheikhs who urge these brutalities.

The neighbors of the Chechnyan Muslim family whose sons were responsible for the Boston Marathon terror attack said they were stunned by the news and that this nice Muslim family was known for its generosity and kindness. Many Americans often ask, “What about the Muslim family next door? They are really nice people.”

Some of the nicest people I know are Muslims, but that must never blind us from understanding the risk we are taking when we allow the building of hundreds of mosques financed by Saudi Arabia, as well as millions of Muslims to migrate into America at a time of a fierce, if sophisticated, desire by Islamist groups to spread Islam throughout the world, and to radicalize impressionable youths by stoking anger against the Western nations, people and values.

The existence of nice, educated Muslims should also never blind us from seeing the deep problems within the ideology of Islam and its jihadist goals. Muslims themselves admit that Islam is more than a religion – that it is, in fact, a state, legal system and a military institution—with the goal, as one’s holy duty, of bringing Islam to the rest of the world, a desire often enshrined deep in the hearts of Muslims.

Even though our visible problem is with the Muslim jihadists, the so-called “moderate” Muslims have often been silent enablers and defenders, perhaps from inertia, misinformation or fear of reprisals against them, including death threats to them and members of their family should they speak out.

Terrorists could never be as powerful as they are without the prayers, and especially the material support, of Islamic nations, governments and people. A Muslim Egyptian friend — one of the nicest people you will ever meet — visiting in 1994, was crying in front of the television while praying for the people of Chechnya to declare independence from Russia and declare their country an Islamic State ruled by Sharia law.

The critiques of Islam by this author are never written for the purpose of condemning people; naturally, there are good and bad people in every culture. My deep concern springs from the ideology of Islam: it has had such dark implications on Islamic society, forcing many, otherwise perfectly fine people, to enact unthinkable terror, as others stand silently by. Islam is the only religion that requires its followers to kill those who do not believe in Allah, and to take revenge in the name of Allah. In the Quran, holy vengeance and retaliation are commanded for Muslims: “O ye who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you. He who transgresseth after this will have a painful doom.”
 [Koran 2:178]. Or: “We shall take vengeance (Muntaquimun) upon the sinners.” [32:22] The translation of the Arabic word “Muntaquimun” meaning vengeance is often watered down in translation by using the word punishment or retribution instead.

It was frustrating and unsettling to hear the aunt of the two terrorists stating, from Toronto, Canada, that her two nephews were “set up,” and the terrorists’ father, Anzor Tsarnaev, stating in various interviews with ABC and other stations, first that his son should give up peacefully; then that the son who was killed was framed; then that the son who was not killed should tell the truth; then warning that if the US kills his son: “all hell will break loose.”

Having grown up Muslim, I would urge Americans to demand more from the so called “moderate” Muslims, instead of giving them a pass for their silence, which appears a complicit defense of jihad. For too long, with some courageous exceptions, moderate Muslims hear no evil, see no evil and do nothing about it. They stand defiant, behaving as if they were victims, while the cries of Christians suffering under Islam in the Middle East are ignored. (Most Jews were forced out years ago. As the saying in Arabic goes: First the Saturday People, then the Sunday People).

Many moderate Muslims have been insisting that the Boston bombings have “nothing to do with Islam.” They deny there is a problem for apostates fleeing Islam, and do nothing about their arrest, the threats against them or their murder. At least 5,000 reported honor killings happen annually in the name of Allah, but moderate Muslims insist that, too, has nothing to do with Islam, and is a hold-over tribal custom, despite the Sura and verses that are used to justify it [Qur'an (18:65-81], and not only speak out against the practice, but go as far as to threaten those who expose it. Moderate Muslims also have nothing to say to the hundreds of Islamic clerics who curse non-Muslims and encourage jihad from the pulpits of mosques.

Where are the articles by moderate Muslims condemning the prominent Muslims who beg Allah to strike infidels with cancer and disease? The holiest mosques of Mecca blast curses at Jews and Christians over microphones — “Till they pray for death and do not receive it” — and supplicate Allah to make the lives of Christians and Jews “hostage to misery; drape them with endless despair, unrelenting pain and unremitting ailment; fill their lives with sorrow and pain and end their lives in humiliation and oppression.”

No true practicing Muslim, moderate or not, has openly condemned such prayers to pilgrims in Mecca or has named the sheikhs who urge these brutalities. But the majority of moderate Muslims are quick to blame American foreign policy and Israel. If America cooperates with Islamic dictators, Muslims accuse America of empowering dictators; if America removes a Saddam Hussein to give Muslims a chance for freedom, they accuse the US of interfering in their internal affairs.

The day Usama Bin Laden was killed, a friend called from Egypt to say that everyone was in mourning, sad over Bin Laden’s death. Does such a response to the death of a terrorist stem from moderate Islam, radical Islam, or Islam?

Nonie Darwish is the author of “The Devil We Don’t Know” and President of “Former Muslims United.”

What if It’s Not About North Korea?

In his State of the Union address, President Barack Obama proposed raising the minimum wage from $7.25 an hour to $9 an hour. That would be almost a 25 percent increase. Let’s look at the president’s proposal, but before doing so, let’s ask some other economic questions.

Are people responsive to changes in price? For example, if the price of cars rose by 25 percent, would people purchase as many cars? Supposing housing prices rose by 25 percent, what would happen to sales? Those are big-ticket items, but what about smaller-priced items? If a supermarket raised its prices by 25 percent, would people purchase as much? It’s not rocket science to conclude that when prices rise, people adjust their behavior by purchasing less.

It’s almost childish to do so, but I’m going to ask questions about 25 percent price changes in the other way. What responses would people have if the price of cars or housing fell by 25 percent? What would happen to supermarket sales if prices fell by 25 percent? Again, it doesn’t require deep thinking to guess that people would purchase more.

This behavior in economics is known as the first fundamental law of demand. It holds that the higher the price of something the less people will take and that the lower the price the more people will take. There are no known exceptions to the law of demand. Any economist who could prove a real-world exception would probably be a candidate for the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences and other honors.

Dr. Alan Krueger, an economist, is chairman of the president’s Council of Economic Advisers. I wonder whether he advised the president that though people surely would be responsive to 25 percent increases in the prices of other goods and services, they would not be responsive to a 25 percent wage increase. I’d bet the rent money that you couldn’t get Krueger to answer the following statement by saying either true or false: A 25 percent increase in the price of labor would not affect employment. If anything, his evasive response would be that found in a White House memo, reported in The Wall Street Journal’s article titled “The Minority Youth Unemployment Act” (Feb. 15), namely that “a range of economic studies show that modestly raising the minimum wage increases earnings and reduces poverty without measurably reducing employment.” The WSJ article questions that statement: “Note the shifty adverbs, ‘modestly’ and ‘measurably,’ which can paper over a lot of economic damage.” My interpretation of the phrase “without measurably reducing employment” is that only youngsters, mostly black youngsters, would be affected by an increase.

University of California, Irvine economist David Neumark has examined more than 100 major academic studies on the minimum wage. He states that the White House claim “grossly misstates the weight of the evidence.” About 85 percent of the studies “find a negative employment effect on low-skilled workers.” A 1976 American Economic Association survey found that 90 percent of its members agreed that increasing the minimum wage raises unemployment among young and unskilled workers. A 1990 survey found that 80 percent of economists agreed with the statement that increases in the minimum wage cause unemployment among the youth and low-skilled. If you’re looking for a consensus in most fields of study, examine the introductory and intermediate college textbooks in the field. Economics textbooks that mention the minimum wage say that it increases unemployment for the least skilled worker.

As detailed in my recent book “Race and Economics” (2012), during times of gross racial discrimination, black unemployment was lower than white unemployment and blacks were more active in the labor market. For example, in 1948, black teen unemployment was less than white teen unemployment, and black teens were more active in the labor market. Today black teen unemployment is about 40 percent; for whites, it is about 20 percent. The minimum wage law weighs heavily in this devastating picture. Supporters of higher minimum wages want to index it to inflation so as to avoid its periodic examination.

“This is not-so-Great Britain, this is a Muslim area. We are vigilantes implementing Islam upon your own necks.” – Member, Muslim London Patrol

Muslim gangs have been filmed loitering on streets in London and demanding that passersby conform to Islamic Sharia law.

The self-proclaimed vigilantes, who call themselves Muslim London Patrol, are seen in several videos abusing people for drinking alcohol, for showing too much flesh and for being homosexual.

In one three-and-a-half minute video posted on YouTube on January 17, a number of hooded men are seen repeatedly shouting “this is a Muslim area” towards non-Muslim passers-by.

In the footage, which was shot at night on the weekend of January 12/13 on a mobile phone, in what is believed to be Whitechapel in east London, one gang member is seen telling a young woman who is wearing a short skirt, “you cannot dress like that in a Muslim area, this is a Muslim area.”

A few moments later, the vigilantes confront a man carrying a can of beer, telling him “no alcohol is allowed.” They then force him to empty out the contents of the can on the sidewalk. One gang member shouts: “Get him to pour it out, pour it out, Muslim area. Alcohol bad. This is a Muslim area. This area is a Muslim area. No drink in this area.” He continues: “What this is, is a Muslim Patrol. We are Muslims and we patrol the area. Forbidden … evil. Alcohol is evil. No alcohol. Yes? Have a good day.”

A few moments later, the vigilantes accost a woman who, referring to the imposition of Sharia law in the neighborhood exclaims, “I cannot believe it!” The Muslims respond: “We do not care if you believe it or not.”

At another point, one gang member admonishes another gang member not to allow non-Muslims to pass along the sidewalk in front of a mosque. He shouts: “You need to control this area and forbid these people from dressing like this and exposing themselves outside the mosque.” A few moments later, a gang member accosts two non-Muslims who are passing by. “Remove yourself away from the mosque. Go away now. This is a Muslim area. Muslim patrol. Muslim patrol. Move away from the mosque.”

Another Muslim then shouts: “This is democracy, this is freedom, this is secularism, move away from the mosque. We clearly need Islam. Go away and don’t come back. Don’t come back. Keep your mouth closed.”

Next the men then accost a woman passerby. “We do not respect dolls who disobey God, we don’t respect them.” The woman, stunned, responds, “I am so appalled.” The men reply: “We don’t care if you are appalled at all.” She says: “This is Great Britain.” The men reply: “This is not-so-Great Britain, this is a Muslim area. We are vigilantes implementing Islam upon your own necks.”

In another video, Muslims are seen harassing a man they perceive to be a homosexual. They aggressively pursue the man and shout at him, “Hello mate, don’t you know this is a Muslim area. Why are you dressed like that for.” The man responds: “Why are you bothering me.” The Muslims respond: “You are walking in a Muslim area dressed like a fag, mate. You need to get out of here.” Clearly terrified, the man responds, “I am getting out of here.” The Muslims respond, “Get out of here quicker then. You’re dirty mate. Admit you’re dirty. You’re gay, mate. Get out of here, you bloody fag.”

The vigilante video follows another clip in which Muslim vigilantes protest against advertisements for push-up bras by High Street retailer H&M. In the three minute video they say: “The Muslims have taken it upon themselves to command the good and forbid the evil and cover up these naked people.” They then show a number of advertisements for the product which have been sprayed over and also film themselves pouring petrol over one advertisement and setting it on fire.

In a fourth video, uploaded onto YouTube on January 23, one day after two gang members were arrested by London police, members of Muslim London Patrol are defiant. As the video opens, men are heard shouting, “Allah is the greatest! Islam is here, whether you like it or not. We are here! We are here!” What we need is Islam! What we need is Sharia!”

The video continues: “We are the Muslim Patrol. We are in north London, we are in south London, in east London and west London. We command good and forbid evil. Islam is here in London. [Prime Minister] David Cameron, Mr. Police Officer, whether you like it or not, we will command good and forbid evil. You will never get us. You can go to hell! This is not a Christian country. To hell with Christianity. Isa [Jesus] was a messenger of Allah. Muslim Patrol will never die. Allah is great! Allah is great! We are coming!”

In a January 23 interview with the online newspaper International Business Times, Anjem Choudary, a radical preacher who has long called for Sharia law to be implemented in Britain and other European countries, defended the gang, saying Muslims are simply trying to rid London of prostitution and drunkenness.

According to Choudary, “The practice of Muslims going out and forbidding evil is not new. There is a prevalence of prostitution and drunkenness in London and the police are not dealing with it. The problem is so widespread that I’m not surprised more Muslims are not taking it into their hands. The area [Whitechapel] is a Muslim area so for them to say these things are not allowed is correct. They should be commended for their actions.”

He added: “This is a wake-up call for society to ask ‘where are we headed?’ There is a clash between Islam and liberal democracy in hotspots areas of London.”

Choudary has previously led a campaign, known as the Islamic Emirates Project, to turn twelve British cities — including what he calls “Londonistan” — into independent Islamic states. The so-called Islamic Emirates would function as autonomous enclaves, ruled by Islamic Sharia law, and operated entirely outside British jurisprudence.

For Original Article, click here

Western journalists, funders and decision-makers need to know that there are many truths being hidden from their eyes and ears.

The truth sometimes hurts; that is why the Palestinian Authority has been working hard to prevent the outside world from hearing about many occurrences that reflect negatively on its leaders or people.

In recent years, the Palestinian Authority leadership, often with the help of the mainstream media in the US and EU, has been successful in its effort to divert all attention only toward Israel.

Following are examples of some of the inconvenient truths that the Palestinian leadership in the West Bank do not want others to know about:

- Over 100 senior PLO and Fatah officials hold Israeli-issued VIP cards that grant them various privileges denied to most Palestinians. Among these privileges is the freedom to enter Israel and travel abroad at any time they wish. This privileging has existed since the signing of the Oslo Accords between Israel and the PLO in 1993.

- Out of the 600 Christians from the Gaza Strip who arrived in the West Bank in the past two weeks to celebrate Christmas, dozens have asked to move to Israel because they no longer feel comfortable living under the Palestinian Authority and Hamas.

- Dozens of Christian families from east Jerusalem have moved to Jewish neighborhoods in the the city because they too no longer feel comfortable living among Muslims.

- Palestinian Authority security forces in the West Bank continue to summon and arrest political opponents, journalists and bloggers who dare to criticize the Palestinian leadership.

- The Palestinian Authority government, which has been complaining about a severe financial crisis for the past few months, just cancelled outstanding electricity debts for Palestinians in the West Bank. Palestinians pay their bills to the Arab Jerusalem Electric Company, which buys electricity from the Israeli Electric Company; the Palestinians have not been paying their electricity bills and many have been stealing electricity from their Arab company.

- Tens of thousands of Palestinian Authority civil servants in the Gaza Strip receive salaries to stay at home and not work. The practice has been in effect since Hamas seized control over the Gaza Strip in 2007. According to Fatah spokesman Ahmed Assaf, the Palestinian Authority, which is funded mostly by American and European taxpayer money, spends around $120 million each month on the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip.

- Mahmoud Abbas’s ruling Fatah faction has allocated more than one million dollars for celebrations marking the 48th anniversary of the “launching of the revolution” — a reference to the first armed attack carried out by Fatah against Israel.

- Despite the calls for an economic boycott of Israel, more than 40,000 Palestinians have received permits to work in Israel. Moreover, another 15,000 Palestinians continue to work in Jewish settlements in spite of an official ban.

- Top PLO and Fatah officials continue to do their shopping in Israeli-owned businesses both in the West Bank and Israel. Last week, for example, a member of the PLO Executive Committee and his family were spotted shopping in Jerusalem’s Malha mall. Of course, the PLO official did not forget to bring along his private driver and maid.

- The wife of a senior PLO official recently spent $20,000 for dental treatment in Tel Aviv at a time when there is no shortage of renowned Palestinian dentists in Ramallah, Bethlehem and Nablus.

These are only some of the inconvenient truths that the Palestinian Authority does not want the outside world to know. Palestinian journalists often avoid reporting about such issues out of concern for their safety or for “ideological” reasons. These journalists have been taught that it is forbidden to hang out the dirty laundry.

Western journalists, funders and decision-makers who deal with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict need to know that there are many truths being completely ignored or hidden from their eyes and ears.

For Original Article, click here