The terrorists opened fire on children outside of the Ansarudeen School, outside of Maiduguri, the capital of the northern Nigerian state of Borno.

According to the British Independent:

A spokesman for Boko Haram said the group claimed responsibility for the attack, confirming it was done to punish youngsters for assisting the army.

Ibrahim Mohammed, a student who witnessed the attack, said: “I saw five students sitting the exams killed on the spot… Four others were killed as they were entering the school premises.”

Hospital workers confirmed that the bodies of nine children, still in their uniforms, had been taken to the mortuary in Maiduguri.

Read the rest of the story at the Independent.

In Sweden, five Muslim teenagers were sentenced to 100 hours of “community service” for the gang rape of a 15-year-old girl. And, they had to pay a fine of $8,500 each to the victim. Big deal.

The liberal Swedish court decided that this was sufficient punishment for the horrible crime against this unfortunate girl. The judge felt that the boys had also suffered punishment by having their pictures and personal details posted on the Internet. Oh, really? They should have been jailed for the next decade for their crime.

Where’s the outcry about this from leftist feminist groups? Do you hear crickets chirping?

Oh, and then there’s the recent horrific beheading of a boy by “Syrian Rebels” – the ones Obama and John McCain want to arm so they can overthrow Syrian President Bashar Assad. Caution: The video is extremely graphic and shows the hideous nature of the Islamic terrorists in Syria. These “rebels” then execute two women.

Has the National Organization for Women spoken out about these horrific Islamic crimes against women?

No, of course not. One of NOW’s leaders, Jerin Arifa, calls herself a “Muslim feminist” and is co-chair of the Young Feminist Task Force. Arifa believes that “Islamophobia, Homophobia and Anti-Choice Terrorism” serve a common goal of oppression of women.

According to Arifa:

Islam gave women the right to own property centuries before the Western world. And while the U.S. has yet to elect a female president, certain Muslim nations, like Pakistan and Bangladesh, have already done so. Virtually every religion has been twisted to serve misogyny — like the Catholic Church, which admitted to forcing nuns who were raped by priests to have abortions — so why single out Islam as an anti-woman institution? My secular husband and I have been visiting the Islamic Cultural Center of New York, whose Imam has argued for women’s rights using verses of the Quran — noting that Islam does NOT give husbands the right to hit their wives, and allows wives just as many rights as their husbands.

This is the NOW “Muslim feminist” response to the brutal oppression of women by Islamists.

The spy network was established in 2009 when Obama operatives contacted liberal pastors to convince them to help identify those who have anti-Obama viewpoints. Pastors were asked to watch those who spoke about gun ownership or the Tea Party.

It is likely that Obama operatives also infiltrated churches to spy on those citizens considered to be enemies of the Obama Administration.

Homeland Security internal memos reveal that anyone who is a Christian, pro-life, pro-gun, pro-Constitution or pro-Bible is to be considered a “potential home grown terrorist.”

While this spy program is going on to target conservative Christians, Obama has put spying in mosques off limits. The FBI can apparently spy on Baptists but not on Muslims for fear of “offending” potential Islamic terrorists and terrorist breeding grounds.

Yes, as we all know, we must be on the lookout for young Baptist boys and girls who are members of that dreaded potential terrorist group known as AWANA or who may attend Vacation Bible School – another well-known terrorist training camp.

Read more at: Exclusive: Obama snoops allegedly infiltrate Christian churches – National Conservative | Examiner.com; Obama snoops part 2: infiltrate, target, harass churches – National Conservative | Examiner.com; Obama Restricts Spying In Mosques While Spying Everywhere Else – Investors.com; FBI Censors Islam Materials To Avoid Offending Muslims

Wajeha Al-Huweidar

Reprinted from MEMRI

On June 15, 2013, following a one-year trial, Saudi women’s rights activists Wajeha Al-Huweidar and Fawzia Al-’Uyouni were convicted of inciting a wife against her husband and of trying to smuggle her and her children out of Saudi Arabia. They were sentenced to 10 months’ imprisonment followed by a two-year ban on leaving the country.[1]

The two were arrested by the Saudi authorities in June 2011 on the grounds that they had tried to kidnap Nathalie Morin – a French Canadian living in Saudi Arabia – and her three children and to smuggle them into the Canadian embassy in Riyadh.

Morin, who is married to a Saudi, Sa’eed Al-Shahrani, and has been living in the kingdom for eight years, has a Twitter account and a YouTube channel on which she posts videos and testimonies about her life in Saudi Arabia. In some of these posts, she wrote that she and her family were in extreme financial distress, that her husband was abusing her, and that she wished to return to Canada but that Saudi authorities had been preventing her from leaving the country with her family since 2006.

Throughout their investigation and trial, Al-Huweidar and Al-’Uyouni denied trying to kidnap Morin or to smuggle her out of the country, and claimed that they had been arrested while trying to bring food and water to Morin and her children who were imprisoned inside their house. They also emphasized that Morin speaks no Arabic, which makes the claim that they tried to incite her very dubious.

In a communiqué they issued following their sentencing, Al-Huweidar and Al-’Uyouni stated that they had been convicted despite the absence of any evidence against them and despite the fact that the judge had refused to question Morin throughout the six trial hearings. They promised to appeal the sentence, and added that the entire affair was a conspiracy meant to hobble them and curb their humanitarian activity. They wrote: “These harsh sentences that have been imposed on us will not prevent us from pursuing [the cause that is] dictated by our Muslim faith and our humanitarian and moral duty – [namely] to help the oppressed, the deprived, and the needy, and to protect the rights of women in our country, in all domains, including their right to social, political, and employment empowerment, and her right to drive.”[2]

In response to the sentence, Nathalie Morin (aka Umm Sameer) wrote in English on her blog: “Firstly, I would like to say I am sorry for what’s happening to Madam Wajeha Al Huweidar and her friend who tried to help me.  I have nothing to do with that! I never wanted to run away or to do any illegal things. I’m just a woman, a mother and a wife who fights for her survival since eight years.  We have been on many periods of time without food and drinkable water. Actually, right now we’re eating only bread, dates and undrinkable water from our sink since May 6th.

“I live in Saudi Arabia since March 5th 2005 without any protection and any help from anyone. Saudi authorities hate me for some unknown reasons and Canadian government doesn’t do anything to help or protect me. They would like me to abandon my children. I live under governmental pressure since eight years. Nobody help me and no one comes to visit me. I cannot help myself and I have no any right in Saudi Arabia. My children are hungry and I cannot do anything to feed them. I’m fighting to get freedom, justice and fairness for my family including myself. I’m asking the Government of Canada to help my family to return to Canada immediately.”[3]

Read the rest of the story at MEMRI.

Investor’s Business Daily has clearly described who the terrorist groups are in Syria and how Obama is arming them.

Obama is sending aid to the Supreme Military Command, run by Gen. Salim Idris, a man who has openly expressed hatred for Israel.

In addition, the Syrian Islamic Front and the Syrian Liberation Front are both Islamist. Ten out of the 12 identified “rebel” groups are Islamist.

According to Investor’s Business Daily, the most powerful “rebel” group is Jabhat al-Nusra, with 7,000 terrorist fighters. This group has sworn allegiance to Al Qaeda and its goal is a totalitarian Islamic Caliphate in the Middle East.

Why is Obama arming the terrorists who are responsible for 9/11? Why arm our enemies when we know they will use those weapons against us and against Israel when they have the opportunity?

Read more at Investor’s Business Daily.

Obama’s press office released a statement recently that any amendment protecting religious liberty in the military “would require the Armed Forces to accommodate, except in cases of military necessity, ‘actions and speech’ reflecting the ‘conscience, moral principles, or religious beliefs of the member.”

According to Obama, permitting religious liberty in the military would have a “significant adverse effect on good order, discipline, morale, and mission accomplishment.”

Obama is objecting to an amendment proposed by Rep. John Fleming (R-LA) and amendments by Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Senator Mike Lee of Utah. Fleming’s amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act would expand protection of the rights of conscience to members of the Armed Forces and to Chaplains. (Senator Cruz is a GING-PAC endorsed legislator.)

The Cruz/Lee amendment will strengthen existing law that protects the rights of conscience and protect troops who express the religious faith. They will not be subject to retaliation or face discrimination because of their religious views.

It also instructs the Defense Department Inspector General to investigate reports of religious discrimination against troops who are sharing their faith.

As Senator Cruz has stated: “Freedom of religious expression is vital to our military culture, and I am deeply concerned by recent reports that servicemen and women have been prevented from exercising this fundamental Constitutional right. No soldier should fear a court martial for expressing his or her faith or made to fear negative reprisals for reporting threats to their freedom to worship God.  The men and women of the military risk their lives every day to protect our Constitutional rights, and they should not be forced to surrender their religious liberty to do so.”

Following the president’s announcement that we will provide small arms and ammunition to the rebels fighting Bashar al-Assad in Syria, Senator John McCain has intensified his drumbeat for war and demanded even more extensive U.S. involvement, particularly a no-fly zone. But McCain has not indicated any awareness of the risks and complications of such an escalation.

Senator John McCain with bearded jihadists. McCain entered Syria illegally to show support for the these terrorists.

McCain’s argument is the typical one made by “responsibility to protect” internationalists like Samantha Power, Obama’s new U.N. ambassador, whom McCain supported despite her record of anti-Israel animus and doubts about America’s worthiness. But we can’t stand by and watch Assad slaughter his people, the interventionists claim. Except we have stood by on numerous occasions, in Congo, Sudan, and Rwanda, to name just a few venues of slaughter. We are standing by right now as Christians in the Middle East are being murdered, assaulted, harassed, and cleansed from lands that have been Christian for two millennia. We are standing by as al-Qaeda in Iraq slaughters its political and sectarian rivals, and we will for sure be standing by in Afghanistan when the Taliban slaughter even more enemies after we depart in 2014.

The lofty notion of “responsibility to protect” is a fraud, for the fact is we can’t protect every victim of global violence and oppression. This means that our national interests and security can be the only reasons for an armed intervention.

Of course, McCain et al. argue that our interests are at risk, and that providing weapons or even a no-fly zone offers little danger to our soldiers. An Assad victory, so the argument goes, will also be a victory for Iran and its proxies like Hezbollah. But Iran’s real achievement will be the possession of nuclear weapons, which will change the geostrategic calculus in the Middle East much more than Assad’s holding on to power. If we’re concerned about Iran, then, we should be focusing on the regime’s nuclear weapons program, which day by day relentlessly progresses to fulfillment. It’s not Iran’s proxies we should worry about, but Iran.

Nor should the apparent ease with which the U.S.––excuse me, NATO––toppled the Gaddafi regime fool us into thinking we can do the same in Syria. The odds of civilian casualties, for example, will be much greater in Syria if we attack Assad’s air defense system. Once the videos of dead children amidst the rubble hit the international media, how long will all those “allies” still be in our corner? And what about Assad’s stockpiles of chemical weapons? What if he responds by unleashing them against his enemies? And will Russia simply stand by while we bomb its ally’s assets that it provided to them? Perhaps Putin will decide to send the promised S-300 missiles after all. There are all sorts of risks and contingencies, and unless we have a plan to deal with them that puts all our assets on the table, including ground troops, we could make the situation even worse. Read the rest at FrontPageMag

West… has… no… Coherent… Response… To … Putin

As the leaders of western nations remain mired in a toxic tank of group think that says Syria’s Bashar al-Assad must go and that if you disagree, you’re a heartless and ridiculous twit who doesn’t know anything, Russian President Vladimir Putin explained that it’s the rebels who are making Assad’s supporters heartless – by eating them in front of video cameras. What do these geniuses of elitist western thought come back with? Well, nothing, really.

The seven words underlined below represent a “Bingo” moment for Putin.

Via U.K. Guardian:

A diplomatic breakthrough on the Syrian civil war at the G8 summit in Northern Ireland appeared unlikely when the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, chastised the west for considering arming Syrian rebels, saying they ate human organs. He said Russia by contrast was arming the legitimate government of Syria.

Speaking after a difficult meeting with Putin in Downing Street, David Cameron claimed both men were in agreement on the need to end the human catastrophe of the civil war. But there was little to suggest the two men made progress on how to convene a fresh Syrian peace conference in Geneva, let alone who should attend, or its agenda.

President Vladimir Putin

In icy exchanges at a press conference, Putin said: “You will not deny that one does not really need to support the people who not only kill their enemies, but open up their bodies, eat their intestines in front of the public and cameras. Are these the people you want to support? Is it them who you want to supply with weapons? Then this probably has little relation to humanitarian values that have been preached in Europe for hundreds of years.”

Putin’s remarks will find an echo on the Conservative benches, where there is strong resistance to arming the Syrian opposition. Cameron has argued that it is possible to arm the pluralist democratic elements of the opposition, and he too wants to drive al-Qaida from Syria.

The Russian President – regardless of what you think of him – was spot on about that humanitarian part. So, if as Putin says, arming the Syrian rebels is not about humanitarian concerns, what is it about?

The simple answer is: Resurrecting the Ottoman Empire and re-establishing an Islamic caliphate. Assad is a nationalist. The rebels want to erase Syria’s borders and have the land absorbed by the same forces behind the Arab Spring. Western leaders are willingly ceding their own power.

Putin presented facts about what the Syrian rebels are doing while Cameron’s argument is that by arming al-Qaida in Syria, al-Qaida can be driven from Syria, which makes as much sense as the infamous line about ‘leading from behind’. Cameron’s position is not only incoherent; it’s irresponsible and completely belies his stated concern for human rights. Yet, western group think labels as idiots, those who don’t want Assad gone? Perhaps Mr. Cameron’s new clothes have a conspicuous resemblance to underwear.

Speaking of leading from behind, the guy leading the pro-Muslim Brotherhood, western, group think wagon is playing a very influential role relative to Cameron’s stance:

The talks (with) Putin followed a decision by President Barack Obama’s administration to arm rebels trying to overthrow President Bashar al-Assad after the US said it had obtained proof that the Syrian government had used chemical weapons. Some of the proof was provided by British scientists at Porton Down, and Cameron has now accused Assad of committing war crimes.

Perhaps if ever a case could be made for using chemical weapons, it might include an enemy that eats the organs of its victims for video cameras. Despite this, the only proof we’ve seen that chemical weapons have been used in Syria shows that it was Syrian rebels who used them. Another red flag in this regard is that if Assad used chemical weapons, the death toll would likely be so large that we would have video footage for the whole world to see.

That we don’t should be a cause for pause, not more group think.

Speaking of Cameron, yes, he must consider strongly the position of any U.S. administration when setting foreign policy but that doesn’t mean he should accept it blindly and at all costs. Perhaps Cameron should dust off the bust of Sir Winston Churchill that Obama sent back to the U.K. in 2009 (despite White House attempts by Dan Pfeiffer – the guy who said the president’s whereabouts during the Benghazi attacks was “irrelevant” – to debunk this charge, it has been confirmed). Considering what Churchill wrote about Islam, Cameron might be well served to read it:

“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live… No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.” – Sir Winston Churchill (The River War, first edition, Vol. II, pages248-50 (London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1899).

Nonetheless, it appears that western emperors are being led from behind from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue down an untenable path… and without clothes.

ADDIS ABABA, ETHIOPIA (BosNewsLife)– Ethiopia has detained two Christian men on charges of “crimes against Islam” in a move that rights activists said was influenced by “radical Muslims”, BosNewsLife learned Saturday, June 15.

In late March, local police reportedly detained Alemlayehu Legese, a student at Dodola Mekane Yesus Bible School, for admitting to owning literature that “discussed the history of Islam from a Christian perspective.”

Advocacy group International Christian Concern (ICC), which has contacts in the area, said the arrest came after a Muslim employee at a local shop saw the book and reported him.

Legese remained behind bars Saturday, June 15, with police reportedly saying it was meant to “cool down the anger of local Muslims.”

Fellow believer Tamirat Woldegiorgis, a Christian living in Moyale Town, was detained May 25, after being accused by Muslims of writing “Jesus is Lord in a student’s notebook, according to ICC investigators.

EARLIER PRISON TERM

Woldegiorgis was already detained for 22 months, from 2010 to 2012, by local police for “crimes against Islam”, though no such crime exists in the country’s penal code, ICC said.

He was released on June 5 after paying a bail of $5,319, according to trial observers. There was concern over the plight of Legese, with ICC saying he has been held for several months as “police officers treated this incident as if it were a terrorist attack.”

ICC’s Regional Manager for Africa, William Stark, said he was concerned that authorities violate the Ethiopian Constitution and the country’s laws protecting freedom of religion. “Both Tamirat Woldegiorgis and Alemlayehu Legese are being denied that right and have reported being terrorized by their captors because of their Christian faith,” he added

“These Christian men are being unlawfully punished for ‘crimes against Islam’ as interpreted by local police who are being influenced by radical pressures or ideologies.”

It comes amid wider concerns over the spread of Islamic extremism in Africa. Officials did not immediately comment on when and if Legese will be released and future legal steps against the devoted Christians.

(BosNewsLife, the first truly independent news agency covering persecuted Christians, is ‘Breaking the News for Compassionate Professionals’ since 2004).

From WND.COM

by William Murray Email | Archive

William J. Murray is the chairman of the Washington, D.C.-based Religious Freedom Coalition and the author of seven books including “My Life Without God,” which chronicles his early life in the home of destructive atheist and Marxist leader Madalyn Murray O’Hair. Having lived the Marxist and the Ayn Rand lifestyle, he has a unique perspective on religion and politics.