California iman calls for genocide against all Jews


Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

Can’t we all just get along? The Friday sermon of a California iman called for the killing of all Jews because Israel had the nerve to put up metal detectors at the entrances to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem.

And why did Israel do this? Because three Arabs murdered two Israeli policemen in cold blood at the site.

The bottom line here is that the Islamic world wants to kill Jews, and will find any excuse to do it, even excuses as silly as an Israel effort to prevent further violence. Listen to this guy’s sermon at the link. He makes it very clear that this is a Muslim requirement — from the Koran — to kill Jews. And Israel should negotiate with these fanatics?

I want to also point out that this iman was making his speech in California, a place that increasingly fashions itself a haven for fascists and the power-hungry. Note also these details about the mosque from which he made this speech:

The Islamic Center of Davis in Northern California is located about 15 miles from the state’s capital, Sacramento. It has, in the past, hosted events featuring Waleed Idris al-Menessey, who has also called for Muslims to kill Jews and impose Sharia law on non-Muslims law worldwide. Al-Meneesey’s Minneapolis-based Islamic center has produced five recruits for the Islamic State terrorist organization. On its online resources page, the Islamic Center of Davis links to several known Muslim Brotherhood front groups, such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), and the Muslim Students Association (MSA).

If I, a Jew, lived in Sacramento I would not feel safe.

Share

9 comments

  • Cotour

    Does anyone see a problem with this statement?

    “The clips are uploaded to the mosque’s Facebook and YouTube pages.”

    I thought Facebook banned such speech? Am I missing something here?

  • Cotour: I suspect you are being sarcastic but I must note that the whole point of my earlier post today about Facebook is that it does not ban such speech, as long as it comes from an Islamic speaker. However, should someone dare to question the genocidal ravings of this iman, and the religion he touts, Facebook would ban that critic so quick they wouldn’t know what direction it came from.

  • Cotour

    I am being both sarcastic and serious. These are paradoxical actions by Facebook, how do they justify allowing one kind of speech in one instance and not allowing another? Has anyone ever asked them to make clear the distinction between the two? What makes the one a good thing and the other a bad thing?

    So, if you question the blood thirsty, we must conquer all others doctrine of Islam, that speech is banned. But if an Islamic leader calls for the “annihilation” of an entire state and people, that’s A, OK ; ? What are the parameters and who sets them?

    I find that this sets up a blatant double standard on the part of Facebook. Good for me but not for thee.

    ( I personally tell individuals that participate in the social part of Facebook that they are playing in Lucifers living room. I have never been on Facebook but am witness to the many perversions and conflicts that it is at the center of. I was considering using it to promote my new business, but I am now reconsidering )

  • wayne

    C–
    Control of content is a huge (current on going) issue at Facebook, Twitter, and the like. And huge money is in play.
    [I watch a lot of Louder with Crowder, Sargon of Akkad, Joe Rogan, et al, and this ‘selective censorship’ stuff on “social media,” is actively discussed, way more than I care. Personally I don’t partake in any social media, but I attempt to keep up on it.]
    FB & Twitter do have their nebulous User Code of Conduct and its enforced by them at their discretion. (Recall when MILO was kicked off Twitter?)
    –Fully granted, these are private businesses and they can control their content, but they not only pretend they don’t, they overtly do pick-n-choose, and lecture the rest of us about “tolerance.” Make no mistake– “when the Product is Free, You are the Product,” and your feed is highly “customized.”
    -The abrupt trend by YouTube to demonetize, block, or restrict content, is as well highly troubling. Huge numbers of creators have been impacted in the last 12 months in particular.
    (and tangentially– nothing “neutral” about “Net-Neutrality,” and it’s telling to see who among these billionaire-progressives, want to force it upon you.)

  • In my reading of the Bible and the Koran, the primary difference is redemption: there isn’t any provision for it in Islam (or Progressivism). Original Sin must always be Perpetual Sin. Muslims and Progressives see this as a strength; I’d argue it’s their biggest weakness.

  • LocalFluff

    A drive through a village in Switzerland:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYz6vqKw6IQ

    Trump must nuke Paris and London NOW NOW NOW!!!
    Or those to islamic tyrannies will nuke the US.

  • wodun

    wayne
    July 24, 2017 at 7:08 pm
    C–
    Control of content is a huge (current on going) issue at Facebook, Twitter, and the like. And huge money is in play.
    [I watch a lot of Louder with Crowder, Sargon of Akkad, Joe Rogan, et al, and this ‘selective censorship’ stuff on “social media,” is actively discussed, way more than I care. Personally I don’t partake in any social media, but I attempt to keep up on it.]

    Rogan is funny because he is a big lefty and chronically ignorant of everything. He never does any research before shows, just flies by the seat of his pants. This makes me question how well thought out any of his views of people and events are.

  • wayne

    wodun-
    Good stuff! Totally agree on Rogan. Very perceptive observation– [“This makes me question how well thought out any of his views of people and events are.”]
    -I consider him a straight performer/entertainer, whereas I place a bit more weight on a Crowder or a Sargon, because they are straight up & consistent on their respective positions and I’ve watched them evolve over time. (I do pay for Crowder, it’s part of the Levin-TV package.)
    -Rogan does have some interesting content, and I do like the longer-form [2-3 hours & no commercials, and its all free] but I’m largely unfamiliar with most of his guests & totally ignorant (and uninterested in) the mixed martial-arts stuff end of his life.
    He does make a fortune on YouTube views alone, and cranks out content on a regular basis.

  • wayne

    Louder With Crowder #173
    Youtube monetization: Tranny Bane Vs. Cynk Unger Parody
    https://youtu.be/bUO8pLRBlas
    (first 3 minutes)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *