The Pope, Peace and Islamic Fundamentalists

by A. Z. Mohamed • October 1, 2017 at 5:00 am

Islamist terrorists in Egypt bombed Coptic churches and killed dozens of innocent people on Palm Sunday, and Saudi Arabia, which finances and hosts the Muslim World League (MWL), is the global purveyor of extremist Wahhabism. More importantly, it sends a signal to persecuted Christians and moderate Muslims that they really have nowhere to turn. In his attempt at appeasing Muslims, then, the Pope is actually emboldening the "arsonists," not the "firefighters."
Perhaps the Pope is unaware of the nature of the MWL and Al-Azhar. If so, here is a brief description of each:
"MWL has a long history of ties to, and financial support for, Islamic extremists, terrorist operatives, and terrorist organizations including Hamas, the Abu Sayyaf Group, al-Ittihaad al-Islami, the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, Jemaat-al-Islamiyya, and al Qaeda.... MWL has often provided a platform for hateful, inflammatory rhetoric directed against Jews and the state of Israel." — Discover the Networks.
"Any Muslim can kill an apostate and eat him, as well kill infidel warriors even if they are young or female and they can also be eaten, because they are not granted any protection.." — Al-Azhar book for high school students; 2015 investigative report conducted by the Egyptian newspaper El-Youn el-Sabi.

Pope Francis speaks with Sheik Ahmed el-Tayyib, Grand Imam of Cairo's al-Azhar University, at the Vatican on May 23, 2016. (Image source: RT video screenshot)

After a visit to the Vatican on September 20, a delegation of the Muslim World League (MWL), an international NGO based in, and funded by, Saudi Arabia, lauded Pope Francis for his past statements rejecting the link between Islam and violence. During their "historic meeting," MWL Secretary-General Muhammad Abdul-Kareem Al-Issa and the Pope exchanged gifts and reportedly vowed to enhance cooperation "in all areas to achieve common goals, notably the spread of peace and harmony."

The next day, the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue and the WML held an "informal meeting... during which it was repeated that:

Continue Reading Article

What is Behind the Refusal to Stand for the Anthem?

by Jonathan S. Tobin • October 1, 2017 at 4:30 am

If there is a declining number of Americans who demonstrate patriotism, it may spring from the fact that few have ever served their nation in any capacity.
Public education in the post-Vietnam era, as well as textbooks often developed with the "help" of dubious sources, have also emphasized America's flaws while undermining the sense that it is a place worth defending.
It is worth wondering if the battles over the anthem are more the natural outcome of a popular culture that no longer teaches Western values or requires either a draft or any kind of national service.

Alejandro Villanueva of the Pittsburgh Steelers chose to stand and salute in sight of fans during the playing of the national anthem on September 24 in Chicago, while the rest of his teammates stayed in their locker room. Villanueva was apparently quickly shamed by his team into expressing regret. (Photo by Joe Robbins/Getty Images)

The debate about whether football players should stand for the national anthem moved to the center of the national conversation last month. On Sunday, September 24, scores of National Football League players, knelt, sat or stayed in the locker room while the Star-Spangled Banner was played. What used to be a rote exercise that began all sports events suddenly became seen as an indicator of sympathy for the Black Lives Matter movement or antipathy for President Donald J. Trump.

The most telling moment in the controversy, however, may have come a day later, when one NFL player felt compelled to apologize. The contrarian was not one of those allegedly protesting the nation's perceived shortcomings. It was, instead, a player who stood at attention and with his hand over his heart while the anthem was played.

Continue Reading Article

Kurdish Referendum: What is the Lowdown?

by Amir Taheri • October 1, 2017 at 4:00 am

A woman casts her referendum vote at a voting station on September 25, 2017 in Erbil, Iraq. (Photo by Chris McGrath/Getty Images)

Despite many efforts to stop or postpone it, the Iraqi Kurdistan referendum has become a fait accompli and must be taken into account in shaping future developments, and Iraqi Kurdistan Region President Masoud Barzani (also known as "Kak Masoud" -- "Brother Masoud" in Kurdish), the man who orchestrated the exercise, must be as pleased as Punch.

In contemplating the future, it is important to know exactly what we are talking about. Supporters of the referendum have pinned their flag to two concepts: independence and self-determination.

They say Iraqi Kurds want independence. However, like all other Iraqis, Iraqi Kurds already live in a country that is recognized as independent and a full-member of the United Nations.

Continue Reading Article