RUTHFULLY YOURS

**UPDATE** Following tremendous backlash, Milo Yiannopoulos’ Twitter account has been restored.

Original story:

Conservative commentator and Breitbart Tech editor Milo Yiannopoulos has been suspended from Twitter ahead of a planned press conference in Orlando, Florida.

The timing of this suspension cannot be ignored. Yiannopoulos was planning to give a press conference today near the Pulse dance club in Orlando, the target of a deadly Muslim terrorist attack that left over 100 dead or wounded. The event is still scheduled to take place, outside the Christ Church Of Orlando at 2pm EDT. Full details for those wishing to attend can be found at the bottom of this article.

It comes as a number of other figures, great and small, have been censored on social media for being too outspoken about the threat of Islam in the wake of the shootings. Islam critic Pamela Geller was suspended on Facebook. A games developer who called for the surveillance of radical mosques was suspended on Twitter. Masses of users discussing the shooting were censored on Reddit. Jim Hoft, aka “The Gateway Pundit,” another gay conservative activists who recently called on LGBT people to acknowledge the homophobia of Islam and “come home to the Republican party,” was suspended on YouTube.

And now Milo Yiannopoulos has been censored on Twitter. The pattern is clear.

“America has to make a very simple choice here. This is not a question of fine distinctions politicians and our media make between Islam and radical Islamist terrorists, really it’s all the same thing, there is a structural problem with Islam, most of them don’t like gays very much. This isn’t news to anyone except our media.” said Milo yesterday on the Todd Shapiro show. Perhaps it is Milos outspoken opinion on this subject that has had him removed from Twitters already restrictive platform.

It is not yet entirely clear why Milo has been suspended but it is unsurprising that this has happened mere days after Milo tweeted his condemnation of Islamic culture and it’s opinions of homosexuals. Yiannopoulos has been highly outspoken in his condemnation of Islam following the Orlando attacks, and recently wrote a viral article slamming the left for “choosing Islam over gays.”

Battle has been joined in a war that — fought right — promises to realign American politics. Leading environmental activist Bill McKibben says that economic growth is a problem to be “solved.” The economy has grown too large. A new trajectory is needed, a managed descent for relatively graceful decline, McKibben argues in his 2010 book Eaarth: Making a Life on a Tough New Planet. While Democrats are in hock to radical environmentalism, Steve Moore and Kathleen Hartnett White’s Fueling Freedom, perhaps the most important book of this otherwise dismal election yea​r, provides the ideas around which Republicans can unite and regroup.

“Never before have the rulers of a society intentionally driven it backwards to scarcer, more expensive, and less efficient energy,” Moore and Hartnett White write at the start of Fueling Freedom. There’s no letup in the rest of the book’s 252 pages. Modern economic growth is the “greatest surprise in economic history.” The authors demonstrate how industrialization is inseparable from access to abundant fossil fuels — first coal and then petroleum and other hydrocarbons. The good news is that cheap energy is here to stay, “as long as government doesn’t outlaw it.”

They fell global-warming catastrophism with a series of swift, sharp blows. “How can a ‘greenhouse effect’ reduce food production?” they ask. As recently as 2008, when oil briefly went over $150 a barrel, peak oil was the rage. Today, the world is drowning in oil. Technology is outpacing depletion. America has twice the reserves it had in 1950 and has produced nearly ten times as much oil as government surveys said there was.

Moore and Hartnett White quote Robert Zubrin, who notes in Merchants of Despair that leftists used to claim that human activity must be limited because the resources are limited and will run out. Zubrin observes that leftists now insist that it’s not the resources themselves that are limited but the rights to use those resources. This new variant is morally worse than its previous incarnation. It is one thing to urge people to use less of something because it’s believed to be in short supply. It’s another to knowingly make people poorer and restrict their freedom to pursue prosperity and a better life — which is what we’d do by permanently locking up potential hydrocarbon wealth.

https://www.nas.org/articles/the_disappearing_continent

Editor’s Note: What follows is the digital publication of an important new NAS study: a critique of the College Board’s new Advanced Placement European history standards. Two years ago NAS’s critique of the College Board’s dramatically revised U.S. History Standards touched off a national debate. That debate led the College Board in 2015 to revise those standards again. NAS’s critique also prompted a movement to develop a competing set of standards and tests to provide American schools an alternative to the College Board’s monopoly.

What the College Board did to American history it has now done to European history: erase and contort. Much of the European past goes missing in the new AP European History Course and Exam Description, as it is officially called. Columbus is absent, and Churchill is reduced to a single prompt. The College Board tells the story of European history as the triumph of secular progressivism, and shunts to the margins the continent’s centuries-long rise to political freedom and prosperity.

In his 12,200-word essay, The Disappearing Continent, NAS Director of Communications David Randall (Ph.D., History, Rutgers University, 2005; specializing in early modern European history) traces the pattern of exclusions and inclusions in these standards, which are already shaping high school curricula across the country. The Disappearing Continent is the first extended examination of the College Board’s European history initiative. We hope to inspire others to join us in the effort to challenge the new standards—to improve them if possible and to replace them if necessary.

David Randall is director of communications at the National Association of Scholars. He writes on early modern European history and has taught European history survey courses.

On CNN and Fox News, one politician after another professed to be “shocked” by the massacre in Orlando. “Who would have expected such a thing?” people kept asking. Actually, I’ve been expecting just such a thing for years. The only shock was that it took this long for some jihadist to go after a gay establishment.

Islamic law, after all, is crystal clear on homosexuality, though the various schools of sharia prescribe a range of penalties: one calls for death by stoning; another demands that the transgressor be thrown from a high place; a third says to drop a building on him. In Iran, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Sudan, Yemen, Mauritania, Pakistan, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, as well as in parts of Nigeria, Somalia, Syria and Iraq, homosexuality is indeed punishable by death.

Nor do Muslims magically change their views on the subject when they move to the West. As long ago as 2005, the head of the Netherlands’ leading gay rights group said that, owing to the growth of Islam in Amsterdam, tolerance of gay people was “slipping away like sand through the fingers”; over the last 10 or 15 years, Dutch gays have fled the cities in droves to escape Muslim gay-bashing. In Norway, several high-profile Muslims have refused publicly to oppose executing gays, and when challenged on their views have gone on the offensive, demanding respect for orthodox Muslim beliefs. This past April, a poll established that 52 percent of British Muslims want homosexuality banned.

Many on the left (and some on the right, too) refuse to face these facts. In 2004, when gay activist Peter Tatchell urged London’s then-mayor Ken Livingstone to rescind an invitation to Koranic scholar Yusuf al-Qaradawi—who supports the death penalty for gays—Livingstone issued a report calling Qaradawi a liberal and Tatchell a racist.

Yes, there are self-identified Muslims who harbor no antigay prejudice; I suspect that more than a few of them are actually apostates who—aware that Islam considers apostasy, too, a capital crime—choose to keep quiet about their infidel status. Some gays who were born into Islam claim that they’ve worked out for themselves a version of their faith not inconsistent with their homosexuality; good luck to them, but they’re in a tiny minority. Whenever a Muslim commits some atrocity, we’re reminded that the world contains some 1.5 billion Muslims, the great majority of them tolerant, peace-loving, etc.; the fact is that the great majority of those 1.5 billion Muslims also belong to varieties of Islam that preach contempt for, and severe punishment of, homosexuals.

There are many threads to the horror in Orlando.

Most disturbing is the serial inability of the Obama administration — in this case as after the attacks at Fort Hood and in Boston and San Bernardino — even to name the culprits as radical Islamists. Major Hasan shouts “Allahu akbar!” and Omar Mateen calls 911 in mediis interfectis to boast of his ISIS affiliation — and yet the administration can still not utter the name of the catalyst of their attacks: radical Islam. It is hard to envision any clearer Islamist self-identification, other than name tags and uniforms. The Obama team seems to fear the unwelcome public responses to these repeated terrorist operations rather than seeing them as requisites for changing policies to prevent their recurrence.

On receiving news of the attack, Obama almost immediately called for greater tolerance for the LGBT community — as if American society, rather than jihadism and the cultural homophobia so characteristic of the Middle East, had fueled the attack; or as if Mateen had not phoned in his ISIS affiliation. Obama strained to find vocabulary equivalent to “workplace violence” and was reduced to suggesting that the Orlando club was a nexus for gay solidarity and thus a target of endemic LGBT hatred, a half- but only half-right summation. Why is Obama’s first reaction always to find perceived fault within American society rather than with radical Islamism, an ideology certainly at odds with all progressive notions of gay rights, feminism, and religious tolerance?

In Obama’s view, it appears, the problem was a dearth of the community-organizing spirit, not of anti-terrorist measures. And then he channeled the gun-control narrative — forgetting apparently that the Islamist security officer Mateen had passed the requisite background checks to get his guns (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?), and that the Boston massacre, the beheading in Oklahoma, and the stabbings at UC Merced had nothing to do with firearms, and that the strictest firearms legislation in the world did little to prevent Islamist terrorism in Belgium and France. Obama, both ideologically and temperamentally, apparently is not up to the task of putting the security of American citizens at a higher priority than his preconceived multicultural ideas of Middle Eastern “difference” and his domestic agendas. Or perhaps he believes, as do many, that there is no practicable way to prevent these sorts of radical-Islamist killers from murdering Americans. Banning knives, box-cutters, pressure cookers, ball-bearings, and all guns will not stop the Tsarnaevs and Mateens of the world, although holding accountable authorities who ignore warning signals about radical Islamists might.

The late Taher Jaber al-Alwani (d. March, 2016), trained at Al-Azhar University, founded in 973 C.E., and Sunni Islam’s most prestigious religious teaching institution since the mid-13th century, till now. Receiving his Ph.D in Islamic Law from Al-Azhar in 1973, al-Alwani subsequently taught Islamic Law at the Imam Muhammad b. Saud University in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Al-Alwani participated in the founding of the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT) in the United States in 1981. He was also a founding member of the Council of the Muslim World League in Mecca, a member of the international Organization of Islamic Cooperation Islamic Fiqh [Islamic Jurisprudence] Academy in Jeddah, since 1987, and President of the Fiqh Council of North America from 1988, till his recent death. In short, al-Alwani was a highly trained, greatly respected, mainstream Muslim authority on Islamic Law, internationally, and within the US.

Al-Alwani’s June 18, 2003 “fatwa” on homosexuality—an Islamic “legal” ruling per Islam’s theo-political totalitarian “legal” system, the Sharia, merits careful consideration in the wake of pious Muslim jihadist Omar Marteen’s mass murderous attack on an Orlando gay night club early yesterday, Sunday, June 12, 2016.

Citing precedent from the Koran itself, and the most trusted hadith or “traditions” of Muhammad, Islam’s prophet, and human behavior prototype, al-Alwani makes plain homosexuality is a “moral atrocity,” punishable by death in the corporeal world, and eternal torment in the hereafter.

[I]t should be clear that homosexuality is sinful and shameful. In Islamic terminology it is called ‘Al-Fahsha’ or an atrocious and obscene act. Islam teaches that believers should neither do the obscene acts, nor in any way indulge in their propagation. Allah says, “Those who love (to see) obscenity published broadcast among the Believers will have a grievous Penalty in this life and in the Hereafter: Allah knows, and you know not.” (Al-Nur [chapter 24]: 19)

Last Wednesday it was Tel Aviv, and only a few days later it was Orlando when Muslim hotheads came to kill.

Everything about it was the same, except that in one place, Israel, the world blamed it on the victims.

“It’s the occupation.” Thus spoke voices from among the Palestinian Arabs beginning with Mahmoud Abbas.

No wait. He also said that “both sides” share the blame.

The Left agreed. From CNN, from the BBC, from The New York Times, from TheWashington Post, from the leftist mayor of Tel Aviv and others, we heard that the Tel Aviv killer was “enraged” because of the “occupation” — to have us believe that this particular Muslim Arab murderer was NOT under the influence of mandatory Jihad.

He was not crazed by calls from the mosques to slaughter nonbelievers.

Nope. He got up one morning and said to himself, what troubles me today? Ah, yes. The occupation.

So who is occupying Orlando, U.S.A?

Must be the same reason that caused the atrocity in Orlando, the occupation…the good old convenient occupation.

Therefore, at any moment we should be hearing about a “peace process” to “bring both sides together.”

From that logic, the United States must be prepared to make “painful concessions” for the sake of peace and security. Orlando must be divided.

After all, what’s good for Tel Aviv must be just as good for Orlando. In their eyes we are all equal, equally guilty for occupying Muslim territory.

We are all infidels, only under different skies.

To Jihadist Islam everything belongs to them and we are all targets. BDS thinks so and on nearly every campus they won’t let anyone forget.

They use every beer hall tactic available to stomp home the message.

The FBI is on the job and the rest of our law enforcement officers are likewise on alert for more of the same. They are monitoring Jihadist terror cells in every state throughout the U.S.A. We are not at the end of this war against Islamic terrorism, which is not “workplace violence,” Mr. President.

We are at the beginning as I’ve been prophesying since this book went to print.

It’s Islamic Terrorism and the 72 virgins awaiting a job well done.
Nor is it generic terrorism, like the kind that keeps killing people in Chicago. No, it’s Islamic Terrorism and the 72 virgins awaiting a job well done.

That’s the imperative that’s got these people “enraged.”

Our cops can’t keep up with them because as soon as they’ve got the ones in the house squared and tabulated, here’s what happens: Obama brings more of them into our homes, and by the boatload from Syria and elsewhere. Hillary keeps asking for more. There are not enough minarets to satisfy her.

She likewise won’t say what IS is. Nor will Bernie, and from a leading spokesman on the Radical Left, something else is bothering him. Immediately after the event, The New Yorker’s David Remnick took to the pages of his own magazine to express his outrage…not against Radical Islam, but against Donald Trump.

Radical Islam is too hot to handle. For Radical Leftists like Remnick, Trump is a far more convenient target. He barks, but he won’t bite.

When Israel displays so-called “liberal progressive values” to people intent on attacking our state and killing Jews the direct and immediate result is Palestinian Arab terror and the murder of Israelis.

When the Israeli government lifted restrictions on Palestinians as a gesture during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan Palestinian Arabs, particularly those belonging to Hamas, exploited the gesture by disguising themselves, arming themselves, traveling into the heart of Tel Aviv, perhaps the most liberal progressive city in Israel, to kill and injure Israelis, including many who have supported their cause.

When the terrorists entered the busy Sarona entertainment center they entered the soft underbelly of Israel and mingled with the part of Israeli society who have bought into the notion that Israel should not“occupy” the Palestinians, that it is wrong to “oppress” them. In other words, they have adopted the language of the Palestinians without understanding that, by living in Israel, according to the killers and those who motivated them, they are illegally occupying Palestine, even if they live in Tel Aviv.

These Israelis, including Ron Huldai, the mayor of Tel Aviv, think that the terror outrage was a result of “Israeli occupation.” They have blinded themselves to the fact that both side of the Palestinian Arab political divide look on Israel as “Palestinian occupied territory.”

To the Palestinian Arab leadership, both Hamas and the Palestinian Authority, there is no such thing as an Israeli Arab. They are, in their language “Palestinians of the Interior” or “Palestinians of “48” symbolizing the Arabs that remained when five Arab armies invaded the nascent Jewish state of Israel in 1948 in order to destroy it.

That is why Mahmoud Abbas, the undemocratic Chairman of the Palestinian Authority, elected to a four year term nine years ago, cannot, and will not, recognize Israel as the Jewish state. To do so would put an end to the final solution of the Jewish problem in the Middle East, namely the establishment of a Palestine on all the land they desire. Accepting a Palestinian state on what are called “1967 lines” is simply a temporary stage on the way to completing the task of eliminating Israel.

Just look at Palestinian maps, read what they are teaching their children. Their “Palestine” includes Jaffa, Haifa, Acre and the Galilee. They have even turned the wandering Bedouin of the Negev into Palestinians.

Islamists hate Jews, gays, Christians – and the world ignores this at its peril.

This resistant and malignant infection of hate is able to evolve and poison human beings generation after generation.

One of its most virulent infestations of Islamic Jew-hatred today takes the form of the so-called Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) scourge, which targets the only true and vibrant democracy – Israel – in the hellish Muslim dominated Middle East.

The areas of the world, which are perpetrating hideous crimes against humanity, are ignored by the myrmidons who support the anti-Jewish bigotry and prejudice of BDS.

For the indoctrinated supporters of BDS, there is no apparent interest whatsoever in the horrors taking place daily in N. Korea, Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Mali, Guinea-Bissau or in so many of the countries that make up the 197 members of the United Nations.

For the BDS rabble only the Jewish state is the target. Proof, if ever it was needed, that BDS is primarily and demonically anti-Jewish.

Ask the BDS supporters about the continuing illegal occupation and ethnic cleansing of the native Greek population of northern Cyprus by Turkey, or the decades of illegal occupation of Tibet by Communist China,and they remain ignorant of or deathly silent about those crimes against humanity, thus exposing their deplorable hypocrisy.

The worst mass shooting ever on American soil has now transpired in Orlando, Florida. Omar Mateen, a Muslim who had pledged allegiance to the Islamic State, opened fire at the Pulse gay nightclub on Saturday night, murdering at least fifty people and wounded another 53. With the issue of Islam’s teachings about homosexuality now confronting a shocked world, we are re-running Jamie Glazov’s article “Boys of the Taliban,” from Frontpage’s Jan 1, 2007 issue, to help shed light on a taboo pathology that underlies the structures of Islam — and that serves as one of the primary ingredients of Islamic rage and terror. The article has been edited and updated.

*Just recently, the Taliban issued a new set of 30 rules to its fighters.

Many of the instructions were to be expected: rule No. 25 commands the murder of teachers if a warning and a beating does not dissuade them from teaching. No. 26 outlines the exquisite delicacy of burning schools and destroying anything that aid organizations might undertake — such as the building of a new road, school or clinic. The essence of the other rules are easily left to the imagination, basically involving what Islamic Jihad is all about: vile hate, death and destruction.

But there is a curious rule that the Western media has typically ignored. Rule No. 19 instructs that Taliban fighters must not take young boys without facial hair into their private quarters.

Aside from the question of what is permitted if a young boy does have facial hair, this new Taliban commandment brings light to a taboo pathology that underlies the structures of Islam. And it is crucial to deconstruct the meaning of this rule — and the horrid reality that it represents — because it serves as a gateway to understanding some of the primary ingredients of Islamic rage and terror.