Meet a guy named Jihad, who’s so flush with dodgy Arab money that he can turn down nearly a million from the taxpayers, because it came with an expectation his institution would not be a propaganda outlet for small-j jihad.
They don’t want anti-terrorist money, you see. Terrorist money? That, they’re cool with.
A California Islamic school … rejected $800,000 in federal funds aimed at combatting violent extremism.
The school’s head jihad guy Jihad is blaming Trump for the fact that it’s not taking the lavish grant from the Obama-era “countering violent extremism” program. This topsy-turvy program, which apparently continues its undead depradations, sought to fund questionable Islamic institutions whilst blaming other, smaller groups, and fringe crackpots, for the global tsunami of Islamic terrorism.
Money from Saudi terror financiers? That’s OK. After all, the head of the school is named Jihad. There are 7,000 Saudi princes with their checkbooks out for jihad every day!
Other questionable Islamic non-profits did take the money, scores of millions of dollars of which were shoveled out “in the dwindling days of the Obama administration,” per the story’s own moslem author who thinks it’s all a good idea.
The school says it would have used the money to train Islamic and anti-American “community organizers” and “social justice workers.” Oh, yeah, we’ve run into those cats.
The school had hoped to use the money to help create a new generation of Muslim community leaders, with $250,000 earmarked for more than a dozen local nonprofits doing social justice work.
Suicide vests were presumably optional. And being California-based, maybe they’d have had hybrid VBIEDs.
But the fledgling school’s founding president, Jihad Turk, said officials ultimately felt accepting the money would do more harm than good.
It’s “a heck of a lot of money, (but) our mission and our vision is to serve the community and to bring our community to a position of excellence,” Turk said. “And if we’re compromised, even if only by perception in terms of our standing in the community, we ultimately can’t achieve that goal,” he said, adding that accepting the funds would be short-sighted.
So there you have it. Taking money for an anti-terrorism message: “We’re compromised.” Taking money from the guys procuring murder on a global scale? “Shukran, effendi.”
But hey, they’re just as American as anyone who wants to enslave you.
Speaking of which, another foreign-funded pro-terrorist professor has been taking some incoming for his pettifogging explanation that, when the US allowed slavery almost two centuries ago, a problem “solved” with the deaths of 600,000 non-slaves, that permanently tainted America. But the current practice of slavery, among the very people who fund him? “That’s different, m’kay.”
Jonathan Brown, a tenured Georgetown professor and holder of the Al-Waleed bin Talal Chair in Islamic Civilization at Georgetown University, has delivered a lecture defending slavery and
You may recognize the name Al-Waleed bin Talal better if we throw in its next chapter, ibn Saud. In that article, Rod Dreher makes a certainly unauthorized exploration into Prince Al Waleed’s genealogy:
In other words, what is a Catholic university doing employing a professor who defends slavery, including sexual slavery, to the point of equating it with Christian marriage?
What kind of fool thinks Georgetown is a Catholic or even Christian institution any more? It is fully converged to the social justice faith, nihilistic atheism.
Al-Waleed bin Talal, the Saudi bllionaire who funds that professorship at Georgetown, is the grandson of an Armenian Christian woman who escaped the 1915 Armenian genocide at the hands of the Turks, and who was presented to King Abdulaziz Ibn Saud, founder of the Saudi dynasty, when she was 12 years old. She was likely an Orthodox Christian child (Armenians are Orthodox) captured and pressed into slavery by Muslims. She could have been a concubine, but he made her his wife. In those days, less than a century ago:
An immense slave corps, mostly of African origin, now served the royal family and its palaces. …
Abdulaziz had been prodigiously fertile, taking brides in order to co-opt one or another tribe or to mend relations with cadet branches of the al-Saud. Abdulaziz, as a unitarian Wahhabi, had been a sternly devout Muslim and as such never had more than four legal wives at a time. But these were regularly divorced and rotated as his whims and passions warranted. And the king had also made ample use of slave-girls and concubines. In this, he had held fast to an Islamic tradition that allowed rulers to take women as chattel in addition to the four wives allotted under Sharia law.
In 1921, …[i]n triumph he and his warriors visited the emir, or prince, of Unayza, a large desert trading post halfway to the Iraqi border. In the emir’s palace, according to family members, Abdulaziz was presented with a beautiful 12-year-old girl, Munayer.
Munayer’s father, it is thought, was most likely an Armenian Christian from eastern Anatolia. His wife certainly was. Six years earlier, in 1915, the family had been forced to flee in terror before the vast anti-Armenian massacres of that year. Unlike the hundreds of thousands of Armenians who fled west to Athens or Beirut, Munayer, her father, mother, and two other siblings traveled southward, along old caravan routes, deep into the interior of Wahhabi Arabia. It was a strange choice for a Christian family. They may have been too terrified to reason carefully. Or perhaps they intended to head for Lebanon or even Persia – safe havens then for fleeing Armenians – and simply got lost.
This slaver is, as Rod points out, Prince Al Waleed’s granddad, and one or the other of grandad’s child-slave wives is probably al Waleed’s grandma. Not that they keep track of mere women in the House of Ill Repute of Saud.
In case you’re wondering just how it happens that extremst, terror-supporting moslems don’t seem to honor their mothers. Who cares? They’re only women!
Dreher also quotes a moslem reformist (tough job, that):
“Slavery wasn’t racialized” in Muslim societies, Brown stated. That would be believable if it weren’t well-known black people in the Arab World and African-Americans in this country weren’t constantly referred to as abeed (slaves) simply because the color of the skin.
Obviously Dreher and his moslem-reformist pal, Umar Lee, didn’t get the memo (or the money) from Riyadh. Equally obviously, Professor Brown of Georgetown and Jihad (!) Turk of the Californian-based Islamic (jihad?) school, Bayan Claremont, did. And a third obvious fact is that a Government program granting millions to characters like this is at best a waste of money and at worst a subsidy to enemies.
We already have a superior program to counter extremism: it comes in you choice of colors: Army, Navy, Marine and Air Force.