YouTube's New ADL Thought Police Punish Conservatives While Giving Far-Left Extremists A Pass

YouTube recently teamed up with the ultra-liberal Anti Defamation League (ADL) for their "Trusted Flaggers Program" to determine what people should and shouldn"t be allowed to watch, as we continue the march towards a nanny state supported by the technocratic left.

Originally organized to combat anti-Semitism, the ADL - with it"s Soros-linked National director who last worked in the Obama admin, now spouts hyperbolic propaganda against conservatives - while failing to apply the same nebulous standards to the left. For example, their recent push to lump all Trump supporters in with white supremacists, while insulating progressives from far-left organizations such as the anti-Semitic black nationalist hate group New Black Panthers, and the increasingly violent Antifa.

Of late, the ADL has published hit-pieces on several conservatives, including Mike Cernovich, Jack Posobiec, Gavin McInnes, and Lucian Wintrich - offering little to no evidence of any actual wrongdoing aside from milquetoast "thought crimes" deemed beyond the pale by their mollycoddled staff. Shouldn"t liberal bigots Linda Sarsour, Luke Kuhn, the New Black Panthers, and the horse-stabbers of Antifa receive the same treatment for their actual advocacy and participation in violence towards those they disagree with?

And now, the liberal propagandist group has been given free reign to censor content on YouTube - such as politically incorrect University of Toronto professor Jordan B. Peterson, who found himself locked out of his YouTube account yesterday with no explanation (Peterson has since regained access).

To that end, Far Left Watch is out with a another report on more selective Orwellian bias from the ADL... 

reprinted with permission

----

On Tuesday, August 1st, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) issued a press release announcing that they have become a “select contributing member of YouTube’s Trusted Flagger program, created in 2012 to enable organizations to notify the platform of content that violates their community guidelines.” It goes on to say:

“The fight against terrorist use of online resources and cyberhate has become one of the most daunting challenges in modern history,” said Jonathan A. Greenblatt, ADL CEO. “Google has been a leader in this area from the beginning. The reality is extremists and terrorists continue to migrate to and exploit various other social media platforms. We hope that those platforms can learn from and emulate what YouTube is doing to proactively identify and remove extremist content.”

What criteria does the ADL use to define “extremism”? Their Center On Extremism (COE) provides this overview of their efforts but does not discuss the process that they use to distinguish “extremism” or “hate” from protected speech:

ADL’s Center on Extremism is the agency’s research and investigative arm, and a clearinghouse of valuable, up-to-the minute information about extremism of all types—from white supremacists to Islamic extremists.

This announcement is especially concerning considering their recent profile on the Alt-Lite and Alt-Right that lumped in several popular mainstream conservatives with actual neo-nazis and white supremacists.  As a response, many prominent conservative personalities took to Twitter and YouTube to criticize the ADL’s hypocrisy and point out how they broadly apply terms like “extremist”, “racist”, “bigot”, etc. to people who simply advocate for conservative political positions. So far, much of the focus has been on the people and organizations that the ADL has labeled as extremists. I want to instead highlight a few violent far left organization that they have not reported on.

Redneck Revolt

We recently reported on the far left militia group, Redneck Revolt. They are a self described “above ground militant formation” founded in June of 2016 that claims to have 30+ vetted branches nationwide. Since their inception, Redneck Revolt has been very busy recruiting at gun shows and community events, advocating for class war, contributing to the far left anarchist website It’s Going Down, and conducting armed anti-Trump demonstrations. But what’s most alarming are the resources they provide on their website. They promote several PDFs that endorse “armed struggle” and even offer a 36 page “Mini-Manual Of The Urban Guerrilla” (bottom right of resource page) which pictures left-wing militants using RPGs and outlines tactics for guerrilla warfare including sections on “sabotage”, “kidnapping”, “executions”, “armed propaganda”, and “terrorism”.

Has Redneck Revolt been labeled an extremist organization by the ADL? Has a lengthy profile on their members been circulated through legacy media? Should they worry their YouTube content will be removed as part of YouTube’s Trusted Flagger program? Well, according to the ADL, the answer is no.

Red Guards Austin

Red Guards Austin is an autonomous Marxist-Leninist-Maoist collective based in Austin, TX. Their website contains multiple reports on their confrontational and often armed demonstrations:

They also openly advocate for violent revolution against capitalism:

“we must seriously take up the task not only of self-defense on the personal and community level, but we must also struggle to unite all genuine antifascists behind the necessity of revolution.  Revolution means the long fight for communism and nothing less.”

I’ll ask the same questions. Has this organization been labeled an extremist hate group by the ADL? Has a lengthy profile on their members been circulated through legacy media? Should they worry their YouTube content will be removed as part of YouTube’s Trusted Flagger program? The answer again is a resounding no.

It is unclear what criteria the ADL uses to define “extremism” but considering that they include the numbers “11”, “12”, “13”, and “14”, as well as “Pepe the frog memes” in their Online Hate Symbols Database the bar appears to be incredibly low. So why are the violent far left organizations outlined in this article not mentioned by the ADL? Perhaps we should ask them. Please share this article via Twitter, Facebook, etc. and tag the ADL. Maybe they can offer some clarification.

If you have any tips on far left activities please submit them here.

Only 3% Of Germans Think The State Is Reacting Correctly To Extremism

The ferocious street riots during the G20 summit earlier this month in Hamburg have fueled the discussion about political extremism and violence in Germany. One talking point is centered on the question if the state and the police reacted adequately, and how extremism should best be countered in general.

Just days before the summit, German Federal Minister of the Interior, Thomas de Maizière, presented an annual report on extremist activities in Germany. As Statista"s Dyfed Loesche points out, according to the domestic intelligence service (BfV), the overall number of politically motivated offenses is on the rise.

In total, there were 23,555 offenses on the right, 9,389 on the left, and 3,372 offences committed by foreign actors (such as the Kurdish PKK and their sympathisers) in 2016.

You will find more statistics at Statista

According to a recent survey by YouGov, 81 percent of Germans are under the impression that extremism is on the rise too. 78 percent of the respondents thought the state wasn"t on top of the situation. Asked how the state should react, 61 percent thought stricter sentencing would be advisable, 46 percent also thought that extremist parties should be outlawed.

Just 3 percent thought the state was reacting correctly to extremism...

The "Extremism Experts" Who Used To Fear The Right, Are Now Worried About The Left

Authored by Daniel Lang via SHTFplan.com,

For most of the past 30 years, violent extremism has been most closely associated with the far-right in America. The media, the government, and watchdog groups like the SPLC and the Anti-Defamation league have railed against the far-right for a generation, and used scaremongering to convince the masses that conservative rhetoric was becoming more violent, and that right-wing groups pose a serious and growing threat to our society.

Of course, they often neglected to mention that the far-left has a long history of violence, especially when you consider the wave of domestic terror attacks that occurred throughout the 1960’s and 1970’s. Perhaps these institutions should have been paying more attention to the Left, because while they were screaming about right-wing groups all these years, far-left radical groups like BAMN and ANTIFA have been riding under the radar.

However, “extremism experts” are finally starting to take note. Vice News recently interviewed Brian Levin, a former member of the NYPD who studies domestic extremism. He started focusing his efforts on the Left when he attended a public KKK rally last year to study the group, but found himself protecting one of the Klansman from a violent member of ANTIFA. “At that point,” he revealed “I said we have something coalescing on the hard left.”

The evidence is so far largely anecdotal. Levin says that since December 2015, he’s documented nearly two-dozen episodes in California where political events turned violent because of agitation on both sides, something he says he hardly ever saw before.

Now, there are violent clashes on college campuses involving groups like Antifa, the anti-fascist group, taking on the alt-right; and aggressive anti-Trump rallies attended by members of the Redneck Revolt, a new pro-minority, anti-supremacist group that encourages its members to train with rifles.

Online, hard leftists increasingly discuss politics in dire terms, and rationalize violence as a necessity -  even the true inheritor of traditional progressive activism. (Or, in the case of the “Punch a Nazi” meme, a fun game.)

And Levin isn’t alone. Other watchdog groups that typically focused their attention on the Right, are now taking a second look at far-left radicals.

“I think we’re in a time when we can’t ignore the extremism from the Left,” said Oren Segal, the director of the Center on Extremism, an arm of the Anti-Defamation League.

Over the past few months, the ADL, which hosts regular seminars on homegrown extremism for law enforcement officials, has begun warning of the rising threat posed by far-left groups, most recently at a seminar just this past Sunday.

“When we have anti-fascist counterprotests - not that they are the same as white supremacists - that can ratchet up the violence at these events, and it means we can see people who are violent on their own be attracted to that,” Segal said. “I hate to say it, but it feels inevitable.”

The fact that Vice, a very liberal media outlet, is wincing at the sight of violence among liberals, is very telling. The fact that these organizations are taking a look at the Left speaks volumes. Liberals can’t ignore or encourage this behavior any longer, because even the groups that are typically hyperventilating about conservatives, are beginning to admit that there’s a problem on the Left.

And that problem has wider implications. As leftist rhetoric and actions become more violent, and as the police in urban areas fail to rein in leftist counter-protesters time and time again, it won’t be long before right-wing protesters begin to retaliate. You can’t expect anyone, regardless of their political beliefs, to keep taking it on the nose indefinitely, without fighting back. When that retaliation becomes commonplace, the results will be unbelievably ugly.

Theresa May Urges Global Internet Regulation "To Deprive Terrorists Of 'Safe Spaces'"

Speaking to the public following the attacks in London last night - the third such terorist incident since March - UK Prime Minister Theresa May proposed Sunday that the UK work with democratic allies to root out extremist groups from the internet and social media.

Here’s May:

“We cannot allow this ideology the safe space it needs to breed, yet that is precisely what the internet, and the big companies that provide internet-based services provide.”

“We need to work with allies, democratic governments to reach international agreements to regulate cyberspace to prevent the spread of extremist and terrorism planning,” May said. “And we need to do everything we can at home to reduce the risks of extremism online.”

Western tech firm, May believes, should do more to censor and police extremist content. But who would be qualified to determine what is and isn"t fit for publication? It seems there"s a danger that unpopular views and political opinions that don"t fit with the mainstream narrative could also be swept up in this type of censorship...and to a degree they already have. For example, Twitter suspended WND for its reporting on the suspicious death of former DNC staffer Seth Rich.

“We need to work with...democratic governments to reach international agreements to regulate cyberspace..." - Theresa May pic.twitter.com/cikJM3ecg6

— Don Draper (@DonDraperClone) June 4, 2017

As the Verge reported, this isn’t the first time that May has made calls to regulate internet behavior. In 2012, then-Home Secretary May drafted a bill that would force internet service providers to retain user data for up to a year. That bill was blocked, but she worked to introduce similar legislation in subsequent years.

Last month, May’s Conservative Party included its intent to enact internet regulations that are designed to combat online extremism and to protect the public from abusive and offensive materials.

The Prime Minister also said Britain was too tolerant of extremism and that "pluralistic" British values had to be established as superior.

Newly Released FBI Interview Claims FBI Contacted Boston Bombers BEFORE Attack

On the 23rd day of April in 2011, Tamerlan Tsarnaev was interviewed by the FBI, at the request of the Russians who said they were concerned about the young man’s ties to Chechen Islamic Extremists.

Two years later, Tamerlan, who was around 24 at the time of the interview, would go on to become the infamous Boston bomber in the 2013 Boston Marathon Bombings. Alongside his brother, Dzhokhar, they blew up two homemade pressure-cooker bombs near the finish line at the marathon.

The attack killed three and injured nearly 300 people. The subsequent manhunt led authorities to the Tsarnaev brothers, who went on the run after learning the authorities were on their trail. Tamerlan was killed by his brother after he panicked and ran him over with his car. Dzhokhar was later shot and captured while hiding inside a boat.

While the FBI admitted, at the time of the bombings, that it had interviewed Tamerlan, it was only this week that it released the details of the interview. The young man said he was approached by four well dressed men, who spoke without any accents, and identified themselves as FBI agents. They told him they wanted to talk with him and said they’d be back the following day to speak with him but never returned. They offered no business cards nor any contact information. Tamerlan must have thought it strange, and the FBI did not acknowledge they were real FBI agents during the interview.

The FBI then asked Tamerlan a series of questions related to his daily activities. He was asked about his Chechen heritage but said he had several Russian friends in the U.S., preferring to blame the leaders of Russia, Putin and Medvedev, rather than the Russian people.

READ MORE:  Report: FBI to Move to "Likely Indictment" Of Clinton Foundation

He then described his boxing activities, saying he’d hoped to be able to box for the U.S. National Team someday. When asked if he’d ever consider joining the military he said he preferred to train to be a professional boxer.

Tsarnaev, a Muslim, was asked about his activities at the local Mosque. He said he attended the Mosque on Fridays for prayers, along with a few of his friends from high school, but admitted he knew few people at the mosque.

He said he knew of Islamic extremist information on the internet but said he never frequented such sites. The FBI asked Tamerlan about other religions and he responded by saying he had respect for all religions and that being a part of one makes one’s life better.

Nothing from the interview reportedly raised any red flags in the eyes of the FBI, but something interesting to note, and what might be fodder for conspiracy theorists, was the strangely peculiar encounter, not documented, with four men reportedly belonging to the FBI.

As we’ve learned from subsequent FBI investigations, one as recent as today’s announcement of the arrest of two Chicago ISIS sympathizers, the bureau has an extensive network of informants. Those individuals often infiltrate the lives of targeted individuals, in an effort to see if they’re capable of carrying out terrorist attacks. They’re then presented with an opportunity to do so, and it’s at that time they’re arrested.

The FBI then takes credit for preventing a terrorist attack, thereby validating their anti-terrorist budget and activities. Some critics of the FBI call those actions nothing less than entrapment. And without the help of the FBI, those individuals would arguably be going about their everyday activities, unconcerned with carrying out acts of terrorism. The FBI’s anti-terrorism activities, some have said, actually create terrorists out of regular citizens.

READ MORE:  Real-Life "Training Day" Cocaine Pushing Cop Robbed Drug Dealers & FBI Agents While on Duty

While it’s still unclear, from Tsarnaev’s interview, whether or not the Boston bombings was one such sting operation that went horribly wrong, the facts are now becoming clear. Tsarnaev was approached by people he thought were the FBI. He was then interviewed by the FBI. He and his brother then bombed the Boston Marathon. What happened between the time of the interview and the time of the bombing is still unknown. But we hope that activists using the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) can uncover any government documents which might be able to answer those remaining unanswered questions.

One thing is now for certain. When Zubeidat Tsarnaev (mother) claimed the pair of brothers were being handled by the FBI, her accusations were met with much skepticism. She proclaimed her sons’ innocence and said the FBI knew what they were doing all along. “They used to come [to our] home, they used to talk to me…they were telling me that he [the older, 26-y/o Tamerlan] was really an extremist leader and that they were afraid of him. They told me whatever information he is getting, he gets from these extremist sites… they were controlling him, they were controlling his every step…and now they say that this is a terrorist act! Never ever is this true, my sons are innocent!”

London Mayor's Ties To Extremism Call Commitment To Fighting Terror Into Question

Via Disobedient Media

In 2016, Prime Minister David Cameron was widely criticized in the UK when he claimed that London mayor Sadiq Khan had ties to the terror group ISIS. An investigation by Disobedient Media has determined that Khan has ties not just to organizations associated with ISIS, but also groups such as Hamas, Al-Nusra, Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood. During his time as mayor, London has seen an increase in terror incidents with concerning indications that terror groups wish to stage a major attack on the City of London. Rather than focusing on combatting terror, Khan has used his forum to tell Londoners as well as citizens in other parts of Europe and the United States that the West must learn to live with terrorism as a part of daily life. Khan"s extreme flirtation with radical Islamic extremism raises serious questions about his commitment to fighting a wave of extremist fueled terrorism that only continues to spread after a number of attacks and police operations in London and other areas of the UK.

I. Khan Has Been Affiliated With Organizations Tied To Hamas, Al-Qaeda, Al Nusra, ISIS And The Muslim Brotherhood

A. Khan"s Relationship To Figures Tied To Hamas And The Muslim Brotherhood

Khan has openly associated in the past with individuals and organizations tied to Palestinian terror group Hamas. During his time as a legal advocate, Sadiq Khan served as the Chief Legal Advisor of the Muslim Council of Britain"s legal affairs committee. Khan was a member of a delegation organized by the Muslim Council of Britain in 2003 to protest what they described as "indiscriminate" arrests of Muslims for alleged terror ties. The Muslim Council of Britain was placed under investigation by the British government over "irregularities" surrounding £1,263,000 in aid given to it by the government. In the past it has admitted to funding groups tied to both Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad and is banned from Israel as a result of its ties to terror. On September 19th, 2004, Khan spoke at an event which included Ibrahim Hewitt; Hewitt has decreed on record that adultery should be punished by stoning. Hewitt serves as the Chairman of The Palestinian Relief and Development Fund (Interpal), an organization which has been labeled as a Terrorist Entity by the United States Department of the Treasury for providing support to Hamas and acting as a part of its funding network in Europe. Despite the US Treasury"s designation, Labour Party Leader Jeremy Corbyn has described Hewitt as a "very good friend."

That same year, Khan spoke out in defense of Qatar-based Egyptian cleric Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who has praised suicide attacks and decreed that homosexuality is a crime under Islam. Qaradawi has travelled directly to Gaza for the purpose of providing Hamas with ideological legitimacy and stated that Palestinian suicide attacks against the nation of Israel are justified. Qaradawi was also barred from entering into the United States in 1999, the UK in 2008, and France in 2012. In 2007, Khan and Jeremy Corbyn were present at a tenth anniversary celebration of the Palestinian Return Centre (PRC). The PRC is accused by the Israeli government of being affiliated with Hamas and had invited Hamas Minister of Refugee Affairs Atef Ibrahim Adwan to speak at the same event the year before.

While the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) claims to be non-sectarian, a government report released in 2015 revealed that supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood “played an important role in establishing and then running” the MCB and continues to exert "significant influence" in it. In 2009 the UK government cut ties with the MCB after it signed a public document which appeared to condone violence against any country supporting an arms blockade of Gaza. The government report also found that a number of Brotherhood groups have for years been raising funds in the UK. Some of those funds have allegedly been linked to Hamas, whose military wing was proscribed by Britain as a terrorist organisation in 2001. The MCB was also criticized for its ties to Jamaat-e-Islami, an Islamic group linked to a number of terror organizations in Pakistan whose members have been accused of war crimes in Bangladesh.

B. Khan Supported Convicted Taliban Sympathizers

In 2009, Khan acted as a member of an international campaign which sought to resist attempts to extradite Babar Ahmad and Syed Talha Ahsan for their role in providing material support to the Taliban and Chechen jihadist groups via a number of websites they ran under the name of Azzam Publications. Ahmad and Ahsan were ultimately extradited to the United States, where they pled guilty to terrorism charges.

Khan went to visit Babar Ahmad on multiple occasions between May 21, 2005 and June 2006, while he was being held in Woodhill prison awaiting a ruling on his extradition request. It was reported that Khan visited Ahmad, not in his capacity as an MP, but as a friend, as the two had known each other since they were children. In September of 2005, in an attempt to thwart Ahmad’s extradition to the United States, Khan presented a petition containing 18,000 signatures to then Home Secretary Charles Clarke, calling for him to be tried in the UK instead. However, Ahmad was ultimately extradited to the US on October 5, 2012, where he was held in custody until his release in July 2015.

C. Khan Has Involved Himself With Groups Connected To Al-Qaeda, ISIS and Al-Nusra

Sadiq Khan has historically maintained close relational and professional ties with groups associated with both Al-Qaeda and ISIS. During the 1990"s, Khan"s brother in law Makbool Javaid gave fiery public addresses advocating jihad and whose name even appeared on a fatwa calling for holy war against the United Kingdom and United States. Javaid was a member of the Islamic group Al-Muhajiroun. Al-Muhajiroun was founded by Islamic hate preacher Omar Bakri Muhammad, who has been banned from the UK since 2005 and acted as a sponsor and recruiter of British jihadists seeking to join ISIS. Al-Muhajirou was also lead by Anjem Choudary, a British Islamist who was jailed in 2016 for supporting the Islamic State after he released guides on making bombs and establishing "Muslim gangs" for the purpose of committing terror attacks. The guides are indicative of an increasingly tight relationship between organized crime and ISIS in Western Europe previously reported on by Disobedient Media. Other connections to Al-Muhajiroun include Parliament attacker Khalid Masood, Lee Rigby"s murderer Michael Adebolajo and Abdul Waheed Majeed, an Al-Nusra affiliated militant who in 2014 became the first British born jihadist to carry out a suicide attack in Syria.

While Khan has tried to distance himself from his brother in law and Al-Muhajiroun, in 2003 he shared a stage with Sajeel Abu Ibrahim, another member of Al-Muhajiroun and convicted terrorist who ran a camp in Pakistan which trained Taliban militants and Al-Qaeda 7/7 bomber Mohammad Sidique Khan. Also speaking at the same event was Yasser al-Siri, a terrorist who has been sentenced to death in absentia by Egyptian authorities over a political assassination attempt there which left a young girl dead.

In 2004, Khan made an "error of judgement" by attending four meetings organized by Stop Political Terror, a group supported by Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula senior recruiter Anwar al-Awlaki. Stop Political Terror was later merged with the Islamic organization CAGE, who represented the ISIS executioner "Jihadi John" (Mohammed Emwazi) as a "beautiful young man." Khan claimed that he was merely there as part of his efforts to help fight the extradition of convicted terrorist Babar Ahmed to the United States. He has furthermore stated that he condemns CAGE despite his appearances at events organized by their affiliates and the fact that he wrote a forward for a report run by CAGE in 2006.

In 2008, reports revealed that Khan was serving as a legal consultant for convicted 9/11 plotter Zacarius Moussaoui. It was further revealed that Khan was the only practicing Muslim on Moussaoui’s defense team. Moussaoui was ultimately extradited to the US, where he pled guilty to taking part in the 9/11 attacks. Moussaoui is currently being held at the Federal ADX Supermax prison in Florence, Colorado, where he is serving 6 life sentences without parole.

Khan also regularly attended Tooting Islamic Center (TIC), which was run by Suliman Ghani. Gani is a vocal supporter of convicted Al Qaeda operative Aafia Siddiqui, as well as a supporter of former Guantanamo Bay detainee Shaker Aamer. Khan has shared a platform with the controversial imam at least nine times between 2004 and 2013.

II. Khan Has Used His Political Influence To Fuel Sectarianism And Has Routinely Failed To Speak Out Against Those Who Denigrate Women"s Rights

A. Promotion Of Sectarianism

Sadiq Khan claims that much of his association with various individuals and groups tied to jihad and terrorism was a result of his work as a human rights lawyer. However, The Daily Beast has noted that Khan did not attend the majority of these events in his capacity as a lawyer at all. Khan has a long history of making off color comments justifying sectarianism and terror. He has repeatedly had to apologize for comments he has made smearing moderate Muslims and telling Europeans and Americans to expect terrorism as a part of living in metropolitan areas. In 2009, while serving as the "Minister for Community Cohesion," Khan was interviewed by Iranian-backed Press TV. During the interview, he referred to moderate Muslim groups who commonly lead the fight to curb Islamic extremism as “Uncle Toms."

While Khan apologized for the remark, he has had no qualms about fomenting sectarian strife against Islamic minorities for political gain. In 2010, while running for re-election as Shadow Justice Secretary, Khan worked with the Tooting Islamic Center (TIC) to attack his political opponent, Nasser Butt based on his ties to the Ahmadiyya Islamic minority. The Muslim Council of Britain also contributed to sectarian attacks against the Ahmadiyya community in the UK.

In September 2016, Khan stated in the wake of the New York and New Jersey bombings, which injured 35 people that he believes the threat of terror attacks are simply “part and parcel of living in a big city." Khan has demonstrated a ready willingness to label Scottish nationalism as promoting racism. Yet he was silent when huge crowds of Muslims descended upon London in December 2016 for a week of protests calling for the establishment of a global Caliphate. Protestors at the event openly waved flags and bore placards supporting the Taliban and Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain.

B. Failure To Speak Out Against Marginalization Of Women

On many occasions, Khan has spoken alongside individuals who promote Salafist principals advocating the abuse of women. In 2008, Khan was filmed delivering a speech at the Global Peace and Unity festival in 2008 organised by the Islam Channel. The Islam Channel was found guilty by  the UK Office of Communications (Ofcom) of extremism both before and after the MP"s appearance. Members of the audience during Khan"s speech were openly waving the black flag of jihad and sporting headbands with extremist slogans written on them. The network"s head, Mohamed Ali Harrath was arrested on terror charges in South Africa after he was sought by Interpol and Tunisia due to his involvement with a militant group there. Ofcom specifically criticized the Islam Channel for comments it made labeling women who wore perfume as prostitutes as well as for advocating marital rape and violence against women.

Screenshot from a 2008 video of a speech by Sadiq Khan showing a spectator waving a jihadist flag

In addition to his appearances at events alongside individuals who have demeaned and denigrated women, Khan also accepts funding from financial backers who promote extremist figures who have repeatedly expressed contempt for women"s rights. In 2016, the Daily Mail revealed that Muslim millionaire Farouq Sheikh had donated £15,000 to Khan"s mayoral campaign. Mr. Sheikh has also donated at least £150,000 over a three-year period to a charity founded by Dr Zakir Naik. Dr. Naik is a Indian cleric who has been barred from entering Canada and the UK after making very controversial comments exhorting Muslims to become terrorists as well as stating that "Jews are our staunchest enemy." Naik is also the founder and owner of Peace TV, which is believed to reach a global audience of nearly 100 million. Despite having such a large audience, Dr. Naik’s preaching has been banned in India, Bangladesh, Canada, and the UK, due to the many extremely controversial statements he has made and beliefs he holds. In 2016, The Huffington Post condemned Naik over his comments supporting female sex slavery, beating one"s wife, the death penalty for those who renounce Islam and the prohibition of homosexuality.

In addition to taking funds from mutual supporters of Dr. Naik, Sadiq Khan has also advocated for groups which support his brand of extremism. In 2011, Khan defended a controversial organization known as iEngage, from being barred from involvement with the All Party Parliamentary Group. In Parliament, iEngage was described as having a track record of aggressive anti-Semitism, homophobic, as well as having links to terror in Tunisia & the Middle East. That same year, the Chief Executive of iEngage wrote a letter asking the Home Secretary to lift the ban that had been placed on Dr. Naik.

Khan has also failed to address a growing epidemic of acid attacks in London; roughly 80% of victims of such attacks globally are on women. In 2016 alone, London saw 431 acid attacks, a rise of over 170 cases from the previous year. The instances of attacks in London represent a rising number of crime related incidents as the city has grown increasingly lawless.

III. Authorities Have Sought To Minimize A Wave Of Terror Affecting London And The UK

For well over a year now, London has been hit with a number of terror incidents. In some cases, these incidents appear to have been minimized by both authorities and the media in an attempt to stile public panic. Despite the denials by authorities in many cases, the confiscation abroad of large weapons shipments destined for London and the recent attack on Parliament makes it clear that the city"s terror problem is more serious than is publicly acknowledged.

October 6th, 2016: News World India reported that police in Karachi, Pakistan had recovered the largest ever cache of NATO weapons in the hands of Islamic jihadists in the city’s history. Karachi’s police chief stated that the weapons were scheduled to be shipped to militant groups in London for a major operation they were planning. How the militants were able to acquire the massive supply of NATO arms is unclear.

October 21st, 2016: BBC News reported a “chemical scare” at London City Airport. Paramedics treated 26 people at the scene and took two to hospital. The cause was claimed to be a CS gas spray which was “accidentally” released. The incident came several days after an explosion at facilities belonging to German chemical manufacturer BASF left two dead.

November 9th, 2016: BBC News reported that a tram derailment in Croydon, London left seven dead and 50 injured. The driver was arrested on suspicion of manslaughter. The next day The Guardian cited a survivor of the crash who stated that the driver told him he had "blacked out." The story was then dropped from the press and not followed up on. ISIS has in the past targeted trains in a number of different geographic locales, including India and the United States.

January 24th, 2017: The Evening Standard reported a huge explosion in Hornchurch, East London that sent five to the hospital. A Met Police spokesman said that two men were arrested on suspicion of arson. No further details were released about the suspects.

February 8th, 2017: Metro reported an explosion on an East London train where several were injured and passengers jumped onto the track in panic. The explosion was blamed on an “overheating battery.” The incident happened just hours after the Daily Mirror reported an explosion on the Paris metro which injured eight passengers and forced dozens to evacuate. The media immediately reported that the blast was caused by an “electrical fire” despite also reporting that it was unclear what caused the explosion.

February 27th, 2017: The Express reported that a junction in Shoreditch high street in London was evacuated and bomb squad trucks called in to deal with what they said was a "suspected explosive device." Police stated afterward that the device was an "inert WWII bomb." How a WWII era munition had managed to sit undetected next to an incredibly busy intersection of London for decades was not explained.

March 14th, 2017: The Evening Standard  reported that a 60-year-old man was stabbed by a machete-wielding attacker outside of the Horse and Groom pub in London. The attacker was arrested by the Met Police and no further information was released.

March 22nd, 2017: A terror attack targeting Westminster Bridge and Parliament has resulted in over 40 injuries and five dead, including an attacker. Authorities stated that the assailant acted alone despite multiple eyewitnesses claiming they saw multiple assailants during the attack.

March 23rd, 2017: Londoners reported a series of blasts coming from inside the city the day after the attack on Parliament. The Express subsequently reported that authorities had destroyed a suspicious package near the scene of the previous day"s attack in a controlled demolition. Police also raided six addresses in London, Birmingham and other areas of the UK in the aftermath of the terror incident, undermining official claims that the Parliament attacker had acted alone.

March 25th, 2017: The London Met responded in force to an incident where a car ran over multiple pedestrians in the Islington area. Despite the Met"s insistence that terrorism was not a factor, multiple knives were recovered from the scene invoking striking similarities to the Parliament attack just days earlier. The Islington incident occurred on the same day as a massive explosion in the town of New Ferry on Merseyside that authorities attributed to a gas leak.

IV. Conclusion

David Cameron"s 2016 attempts to foster a conversation about the Mr. Khan ties to extremism resulted in detractors branding him as a rampant racist. Yet the extremely concerning connections between Sadiq Khan and those who participate in terror, promote extremist ideologies and advocate for the marginalization of women"s and LGBT rights raise very serious concerns about Khan’s willingness to take a firm stand against the threats facing London. Khan has shown that he has no qualms about fostering sectarian persecution against religious minorities not in line with mainstream Sunni Islam when it benefitted him politically. His unique history shows that he is prone to protecting the interests of his own cultural peers, but not those who differ from him culturally. As London descended into what appears to be a weekend of terror, it is apparent that the city faces these threats without a leader who is ready to take a bold stance to protect those who look up to him for guidance and protection.

This article was co-authored with Kenneth Whittle of Loyola University New Orleans College of Law

FBI Violent Extremist Groups Website Short and One-Sided on Domestic Examples

It’s fair to ask who’s pulling the strings here, and if President Trump will cut them.

“Don’t Be a Puppet: Pull Back the Curtain on Violent Extremism,” the Federal Bureau of Investigation advises visitors to its website designed to counter radicalization and recruitment of young people by enemies foreign and domestic.

“It’s the FBI’s primary responsibility—working with its many partners—to protect the nation from attacks by violent extremists,” the website overview explains. “One important way to do that is to keep young people—the future of our country—from embracing violent extremist ideologies in the first place. This website is designed to help do just that. Built by the FBI in consultation with community leaders and other partners, it uses a series of interactive materials to educate teens on the destructive nature of violent extremism and to encourage them to think critically about its messages and goals.”

The home page links to six different categories. One is germane to the purpose of this report, “What are Known Violent Extremist Groups?” subdivided into two categories: International and Domestic.

That last one is what I want to focus on. That’s because it’s of special interest to Constitution advocates who have seen their efforts and character tarred in past “fusion center” efforts relying on smears from Southern Poverty Law Center and other totalitarianism-promoting groups. We’ve further seen, for years, SPLC characterizing Oath Keepers as a “hate” group.

So the FBI further breaks down domestic extremist “threats” as: Sovereign citizen extremists; Abortion extremists; Animal rights and environmental extremists; Militia extremists; Anarchist extremists; and White supremacy extremists.

Curious. Absent from the radar are communists and domestic Islamist groups.  And evidently,  George Soros-affiliated “Women’s March” partners, along with #DisruptJ20 radicals and black separatist and reconquista agitators are also of no concern.

So let’s cut to the chase and see who really bears special scrutiny, in the eyes of the FBI, “militia extremists”:

What They Believe: A militia is a group of citizens who come together to protect the country, usually during an emergency. Some militia extremists, however, seek to violently attack or overthrow the U.S. government. Often calling themselves “patriots,” they believe the government has become corrupt, has overstepped its constitutional limits, or has not been able to protect the country against global dangers.

As far as the first and third sentences, what is there to disagree with, or that’s “extreme”?  So the FBI need to elaborate on the second sentence about “violent attacks”:

Who or What They Target: Violent militia extremists mainly target those they believe could violate their constitutional rights, such as police officers and judges. In one 2010 case, a Michigan militia group planned to kill a police officer and later attack the parade of cars in the funeral, hoping to start a large battle. The FBI and its partners stopped them from carrying out their plan.

What they’re referring to is the Hutaree case. That’s the one where the federal judge dismissed all the terror charges against seven defendants, and accepted guilty pleas with sentences for time served for three defendants charged with machine gun possession. That means the FBI is wrong to represent the allegations as fact.

That’s it? That’s what’s being singled out to illustrate the “militia extremist” threat?

Let’s hope the Trump administration soon gets a handle on this kind of taxpayer-funded nonsense. Let’s hope it cuts the strings of bureaucratic puppets still engaged in a propaganda agenda to portray patriots as threats.