Islamic charity does verbal calisthenics to find a way to blame the Jews for 911

WASHINGTON, D.C. , In what education experts are calling a bold new approach to history, the Council on American-Islamic Relations has reportedly released a school resource guide suggesting that the September 11 terrorist attacks were less about Islamic terrorism and more about America's unfortunate habit of supporting Israel, you know, the Jooooooze!

The guide, released as part of CAIR's “Back to school resource guide,” was apparently designed to help teachers explain the 2001 attacks to a new generation of students who might otherwise make the historically outrageous mistake of believing that terrorists were responsible for the terrorism. 

How Canadian Broadcasting Corporation of them, eh.

Thankfully, the guide appears to have been removed shortly after its publication, presumably after someone remembered that telling American children that their country basically had it coming for supporting Israel might not be considered traditional civics education. But I bet it wasn't Randi Weingarten who had the guides removed.

Among the guide's more creative historical formulations was the claim that the attacks were carried out not by Islamic terrorists, but by a “group self-identifying as Al Qaeda hailing from the mountains of Afghanistan.” In fact, some of them may have even looked Jewish.

This distinction is important. After all, if a group calling itself Al Qaeda hijacks four airplanes, murders nearly 3,000 people and attacks the Pentagon and World Trade Center, the least we can do is carefully avoid jumping to conclusions about whether it might have had anything to do with Islamic terrorism.

The guide also cited American support for Israel and the U.S. military's involvement in the Gulf War as grievances that supposedly helped justify attacks against the United States. In other words, we had it coming. 

Apparently, the terrorists had grievances, America had foreign policy, Israel existed, and therefore everyone can go home with a B-plus in History.

The guide's explanation of the aftermath of 9/11 was even more remarkable. According to the materials, the Global War on Terror helped create an “Islamophobic” culture in which the words “terrorism” and “terrorist” were supposedly applied primarily to Muslims.

“While Islamophobia and anti-Muslim racism existed long before the 9/11 attacks, this time period marked a stark shift in US policy and state sponsored Islamophobia in the U.S. and abroad. There was immediate backlash against anyone perceived to be Muslim,” the propaganda read.

Of course, there was also an immediate backlash against people who flew airplanes into buildings, murdered civilians and attacked the Pentagon. But apparently that distinction was considered too nuanced for the back-to-school crowd.

The guide also included terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden's “Letter to America” as “resource material,” apparently because nothing says "educational enrichment" quite like assigning students the writings of the man responsible for the murder of thousands of Americans.

Among the gems included in bin Laden's letter was this passage:

“Your law is the law of the rich and wealthy people, who hold sway in their political parties, and fund their election campaigns with their gifts. Behind them stand the Jews, who control your policies, media and economy.”

Somewhere in Israel, a history teacher is presumably preparing a lesson explaining that this is definitely not antisemitic, but merely another example of America's complicated relationship with foreign policy.

Nicholas Haros Jr., whose mother Frances was killed on 9/11, wasn't buying it.

“The further we get from 9/11, this new generation of kids will learn to blame our country. These kids are going to be poisoned – and that’s the intent.”

Sen. Tom Cotton had already warned about CAIR's efforts to influence American schools nearly a year earlier.

“I write to alert you to the Council on American-Islamic Relations’s (CAIR) efforts to influence K-12 schools … It is well documented that CAIR has deep ties to pro-Hamas terrorist organizations and publicly supports Hamas’s terrorist activities,” Cotton wrote in part.

“Such an organization should never have access to our nation’s children,” he asserted, adding, “The organization offers ‘educational’ materials on its website that perpetuate pro-terrorist, anti-Israel rhetoric. CAIR Philadelphia recently issued guidance for educators titled ‘Remembering and Reflecting: Teaching September 11, 2001, in Diverse Classrooms.’ The guide directs teachers to avoid using ‘inaccurate and inflammatory terms such as ‘Islamic terrorists,’ ‘jihadists,’ or ‘radical Islamic terrorists,’’ when describing the September 11 terrorists.”

“The U.S. Department of Education must ensure that CAIR is not given an opportunity to push its radical, pro-terrorist, anti-Israel ideology on American schoolchildren,” he concluded.

The whole episode raises an important question for American parents: When their children come home from school saying that Israel somehow caused 9/11, should parents correct them, or simply congratulate them for successfully completing Advanced Blame-America Studies?

Fortunately, there remains one group that cannot be blamed for the attacks: Israel.

But give the education establishment another semester and somebody will probably assign that possibility as extra credit.

Thanks for following Brain Flushings. Please take time to check out the sponsors on this page--it's one way to support my work and you don't need to purchase anything to do so. Of course, you can Buy Me A Coffee at any amount if you want to support me directly. And finally, don't be afraid to subscribe if you enjoy the blog--it's free, and worth the cost.

Tweet

El-Sayed’s Mom Clocked Time at a Designated Terror Outfit That Funneled Cash to Osama bin Laden

It turns out the Democratic Senate nominee in Michigan is everything we thought he is.

Apparently, the party of pink hair, open borders, endless virtue-signaling, and creative definitions of “moderate” decided it was time to add a little international intrigue to the résumé.

Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed recently highlighted how his mother “taught me so much about both how to stand with others, and how to stand alone.” Of course, he meant that he doesn't stand for America and is a blatant anti-Zionist [which is the same as being anti-Semitic].

So far, so wholesome if you don't count the America/Israel stuff.

Then the family biography takes a turn that sounds less like a Senate campaign introduction and more like something the FBI might have filed in a folder marked “Please Explain.”

“They ended up getting divorced,” El-Sayed said of his birth parents during a 2017 speech before the Islamic Foundation. Maybe dad refused to be anti American and anti-Zionist; I don't know.

“And my mother, she remarried a gentleman who was working as a translator in the Middle East and moved back to the Middle East.”

But according to reporting by the Midwesterner, El-Sayed’s birth mother, Fatten Fathy Elkomy, worked from 1999 through at least 2004 for the Islamic American Relief Agency, also known as the Islamic African Relief Agency, a jihadi organization that would love to impose sharia across the globe.

The IARA operated more than 40 offices around the world and publicly focused on health care, orphans, and disadvantaged people in conflict zones. The organization no longer exists as it was dissolved after a federal criminal case, and while they claimed to provide aid and assistance to all people without regard to religion or race, that claim doesn't sit well with those who know how Islamic charities tend to work.

So, in October 2004, the U.S. Department of the Treasury designated the worldwide network and five senior officials as supporting terrorism. Treasury said the organization had ties to Osama Bin Laden and al-Qaeda.

According to a 2004 Treasury announcement:

“IARA is identified as a non-governmental organization (NGO) formerly affiliated with Maktab Al-Khidamat (MK), which was co-founded and financed by UBL (Usama Bin Laden or Osama bin Laden) and is the precursor organization of al Qaida”

Now, obviously, none of this means Abdul El-Sayed personally supports terrorism. A person's family history is not automatically their political ideology, but let's not disregard some of the things he has said. 

Here are a few examples: 

He described America's political system as a "disease" and President Trump as its "worst symptom." In his view, the "disease" is a system that allows "corporations and billionaires and special interest groups like AIPAC to buy and sell politicians to rig the system against us."

In 2021, he posted publicly (and later made private) about Trump, comparing his role in the Jan. 6 to Osama bin Laden's role in 9/11, saying Trump "recruited, radicalized and reassured" rioters in a parallel way.

He has called ICE a “rogue agency” that “has nothing to do with immigration” or the southern border, instead “normalizing paramilitary forces,” “weaponizing the idea of immigration against the Constitution,” and that “cannot be reformed” but “has to be abolished.”

Statements critical of Israel:

He has repeatedly accused the Israeli government of genocide in Gaza, apartheid (in the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza), and war crimes. He has called Netanyahu a war criminal for conducting a genocide and described Israel as having become a “rogue nation” or “rogue state” due to its government’s choices, saying the U.S. should treat it accordingly under international law (stop selling weapons, end diplomatic cover at the ICC/ICJ/UN).

When asked if the Israeli government is “as evil” as Hamas, he replied: “Yes. Killing tens of thousands of people makes you pretty damn evil… Hamas, evil. Israeli government, evil. You can say both.” He has also called the Israeli government “bloodthirsty” (not limited to Netanyahu; referencing a long-standing “illegal apartheid regime”).

He strongly opposes all U.S. military aid to Israel (offensive and defensive, including systems like Iron Dome—“Weapons are weapons”), arguing it funds genocide/apartheid, annexation efforts (e.g., southern Lebanon), and wars “we don’t need to fight” (including involving Iran). He wants the money used instead for Michigan priorities and has criticized AIPAC heavily as spending tens of millions to influence races for “one more vote” supporting this aid.

On Israel’s “right to exist as a Jewish state,” he has said he “often struggle[s]” with the question because it requires defining “Jewish state” and whether that is consistent with “liberal values.” He has disputed the idea of an “ethnostate,” noted that no one asks about Palestine’s right to exist (which “doesn’t exist”), and emphasized that Israel “exists” while the key issue is whether it has a right to U.S. tax dollars. He supports equal rights to “peace, dignity, and self-determination” for Palestinians and Jewish Israelis, leaving the ultimate form (one state, two states, or otherwise) to them.

In interviews, he has said he is “haunted” by “nightmares about the children who’ve been orphaned at the hands of the Israeli military” (contrasting with positive “dreams” about Israel attributed to others).

But for a Democratic Party that routinely demands a 47-point background investigation before allowing Republicans to exist within 500 yards of public office, this is certainly an interesting family résumé to explain.

After all, when your party has spent years insisting that everybody's background matters, somebody might eventually notice when the background of your own Senate nominee comes with a footnote from the U.S. Treasury Department.

And that's when the campaign slogan “stand with others, and stand alone” starts sounding like extremely useful advice from the communications department.

Thanks for following Brain Flushings. Please take time to check out the sponsors on this page--it's one way to support my work and you don't need to purchase anything to do so. Of course, you can Buy Me A Coffee at any amount if you want to support me directly. And finally, don't be afraid to subscribe if you enjoy the blog--it's free, and worth the cost.

Tweet

US Dropped $10 Billion and 42 American Lives into the Somali Black Hole

If you want a masterclass in how Washington turns a fake crisis into an endless money pit and graveyard for American heroes, look no further than Somalia.

A phony famine [yes seriously] sucked us into the Horn of Africa mess, and decades later, we still can't seem to find the exit door.

Back in 2024, the Biden crew was actually bragging that "the U.S. government is the single largest donor of humanitarian assistance to Somalia." 

Shocker. The year before that we sent $1.1 billion down the drain. And the pattern goes way back. Spending jumped from a modest $103 million under a Republican House to $300 million once Pelosi's Democrats took the wheel. By 2017 we were past half a billion, 2018 topped $800 million, and by 2020, right around the time Rep. Ilhan Omar settled into her congressional seat, we blew past the $1 billion annual mark.

Over the last decade alone we spent $9.3 billion, and since 9/11 we blew over $10 billion. 

Even with the second Trump administration trying to slam the brakes, another $150 million got earmarked for 2025. We've been shoveling "humanitarian" cash at Somalia’s never-ending (and highly questionable) famines, while also making it one of the top recipients of security aid in sub-Saharan Africa, despite plenty of other places being far more chaotic.

Here's the dirty little secret: the explosion in spending tracks perfectly with the rising political clout of Somali immigrants in key American states. And the whole disastrous saga traces straight back to Maine.

Democrat Sen. George Mitchell, partial Lebanese Arab heritage and all, became the chief cheerleader for intervention after the UN manufactured a famine scare, insisting millions of Somalis were "on the brink of starving to death." The former director of OFDA (USAID's predecessor) called it "the worst humanitarian disaster in the world today." 

Reality check: there was no mass famine. Food shortages were isolated to a few rural pockets, not Mogadishu, where we stupidly sent our troops. The real trigger was the fall of dictator Mohammed Siad Barre’s regime and the ensuing civil war. Somali elites, including Rep. Omar's father, one of Barre's colonels, fled to the U.S., landing in places like Minnesota and Maine. They built influence fast and lobbied hard: intervene now, or millions die!

Mitchell pushed the mission like someone pushing a rope as if it's a shopping cart with square wheels. He defended the growing Somali community against immigration restrictions, and refused to pull troops even as things went south. The intervention cost the lives of "thirty American soldiers, four marines, and eight Air Force personnel."

Here's a grim visual reminder of what that political pressure delivered:

Omar: her husband wants her to see other relatives

It quickly morphed into something far uglier: a proxy war pushed by Somali Darod exiles (the clan of Rep. Omar and much of the old ruling class) against Mohamed Farrah Aidid. "Warlord" for sure, but no more than the others. The difference is that he was systematically taking out the Darod power players, and they wanted him gone.

A reluctant President George H.W. Bush caved to the pressure and sent 26,000 troops. Original cost estimate: $200 million, while the actual bill came to $885 million (over $2 billion in today’s dollars). Bush funded it by slashing C-130 production and defense research, a move so stupid that the Democrats loved it.

Then came the UN tether: American forces got tied to Pakistani "peacekeepers" whose government backed Aidid's rivals. They picked a fight over a radio station, sparking a clash. We jumped in to back them up, and boom, the Battle of Mogadishu.

Eighteen Americans killed, bodies dragged through the streets, 84 wounded. The worst single-day loss since Vietnam. And yes, Al Qaeda operatives were right there on the ground. Bin Laden watched, concluded America was paper-tiger weak, and the path to 9/11 got shorter.

The supposed 4.5 million starving Somalis was pure codswallop, just like the UN's later fake-famine claims in Gaza, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen. By 1996 the population had actually grown by about 500,000 since the civil war started. Up nearly 20% by decade's end. Not exactly famine stats. The 300,000 "famine deaths" claim came mostly from malaria, according to aid workers on the ground.

Dozens of American soldiers died for a lie sold by Somali clan operatives here at home.

Now they want us to fund the African Union peacekeeping mission. The UN's latest budget proposal is a "modest" $102.8 million, but costs always balloon.

We're supposedly there to help the Somali regime battle Al-Shabaab (local Al Qaeda flavor). Except it's all clan warfare dressed up as counterterrorism. Al-Shabaab gets Iranian backing; the regime gets Turkey and Qatar. Terrorists fighting terrorists. What could go wrong?

Meanwhile, Somali Christians live in hiding, underground churches, constant death threats. One Somali Christian put it bluntly: "Outwardly, all Somali Muslims must support attacks on Somali Christians because otherwise they may not be seen as Muslim." 

Their scripture dictates it and so they must obey.

Our troops aren't protecting them. They're propping up Prime Minister Hamza Abdi Barre, the same guy who publicly declared "Hamas is not a terrorist outfit but rather a movement for the liberation of its territory and people" and praised the blood in Gaza as heralding the "forthcoming liberation of the Al-Aqsa Mosque."

If you enjoy Brain Flushings and would like to subscribe or Buy Me a Coffee, and check out the sponsors on this page, I would appreciate it, as it supports my work and my coffee drinking habit. No pressure and subscribing is free.

Bottom line: America bled treasure and lives for a nonexistent famine, set the stage for 9/11, and got dragged into endless "stabilization" to counter Somali pirates, terrorists, and the very refugees whose communities have cost taxpayers billions through fraud schemes, from Minnesota welfare meal scams ($250 million alone) to housing and autism rackets. 

Somalia's officials got busted embezzling $21 million and branded "very corrupt." Meanwhile, Somalis in Minnesota and Ohio allegedly embezzled billions more, no wonder their foreign minister, UN ambassador, and deputy speaker have all been linked to shady health care companies here.

We gave Somalia billions. Then Somalis took billions from us. After 42 American lives and over $10 billion flushed away, it’s long past time to get Somalia out of America, and get America the hell out of Somalia.

Tweet

Trump takes out nuke facilities, Dems want to take out Trump: but Obama did what?

As soon as President Donald Trump does something strong that the left doesn't agree with, the Democrat idiots in office want to impeach him. Meanwhile, former President Barack Hussein Obama pretty much had carte blanche when it came for the US to use its military might and the left was totally okay with it. So something tells me Democrats are some of the worst hypocrites in the history of mankind. 

Hyperbole? I don't think so.

As president, Obama authorized a number of military actions and counterterrorism operations. I have listed an overview of key attacks and ops he ordered when he was busy dividing the nation racially.

First, Obama dramatically expanded the use of drone strikes against suspected terrorists, mainly targeting al-Qaeda, the Taliban and eventually ISIS affiliates.

Secondly, he ordered literally hundreds of targeted strikes against militants in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, killing key al-Qaeda and Taliban people such as Baitullah Mehsud, in 2009. Conservative estimates believe 2,500 to 4,000 people were killed, including civilians.

Thirdly, in Yemen, strikes were launched targeting al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), which include the 2011 elimination of Anwar al-Awlaki, a U.S. citizen and AQAP honcho.

Next, in Somalia, drones struck al-Shabaab scumcrumpets, and operations increased after the 2011 famine and piracy threats. Of course, these strikes were controversial because they involved civilian casualties.

Operation Neptune Spear, aka the Bin Laden Raid, went down on May 2, 2011 and was ordered by Obama. The U.S. Navy SEAL Team Six raided Osama bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, resulting in bin Laden's death and a huge success in the fight against Islamic terrorism.

Then Obama, in 2011, authorized U.S. participation in NATO-led airstrikes to enforce a UN-mandated no-fly zone during the Libyan Civil War. Operation Odyssey Dawn targeted Muammar Gaddafi's forces in order to protect civilians. This eventually led to Gaddafi's overthrow. The U.S. conducted airstrikes along with logistical support.

Operation Observant Compass, between 2011 to 2017, sent about 100 U.S. military advisors to assist African troops in fighting the Lord's Resistance Army [LRA] in Central Africa. The main target was their leader, Joseph Kony, and while no direct combat was authorized, U.S. forces provided intelligence and support.

Between 2014 and 2017, the Obama administration conducted a military campaign against ISIS. In Operation Inherent Resolve [2014] the U.S. conducted airstrikes in Syria and Iraq, targeting ISIS strongholds, and also to protect Yazidis in Sinjar [where I throw a quarter into whenever I use bad language] and our personnel in Erbil. We also conducted a special operation in 2015 in Syria that killed ISIS leader Abu Sayyaf. By 2017, we flew thousands of airstrikes and significantly weakened ISIS's control.

Going back to 2009, Obama ordered an additional 30,000 boots on the ground to Afghanistan to fight the Taliban. Our presence at that time was around 100,000. 

Now let us be clear; I supported Obama's moves against terrorism and their leaders. But there is that double standard when it comes to President Trump. 

Hey guys, if you like my blog,  feel free to toss a virtual coffee my way on Buy Me a Coffee  It’s like a high-five with caffeine, and coffee keeps me focused, albeit somewhat hyper. No pressure, it's your call.

Obama's ordered strikes had a significant number of civilian casualties and even sparked debate among human rights groups. Trump's ordered attack on nuclear sites did not result in civilian casualties and was not a declaration of war, like AOC and her idiot friends accuse Trump of unconstitutionally circumventing Congress.

Obama's actions were significantly closer to war than Trump's by a country mile, but he was the untouchable Obama.

Hypocrisy much?

Tweet

India strikes back on Pakistan after the latter's terror attack

Let us confront the grim spectacle unfolding between India and Pakistan, two nuclear-armed adversaries locked in a perilous dance of retaliation and recrimination. 

On Tuesday, India unleashed a barrage of airstrikes across Pakistan and its controlled territories, a move that has sent shockwaves through an already fractious region. The Indian military, with characteristic audacity, claims it targeted nine sites where, as the BBC reports, “terrorist attacks against India have been planned and directed.” 

Pakistan, predictably, scoffs at this, asserting that India’s bombs fell not on shadowy terror camps but on civilian soil, claiming the lives of two children, according to its military’s account.

The Indian embassy in Washington, with a tone of righteous indignation, dubs this Operation Sindoor, a direct riposte to a heinous terror attack on April 22 in Jammu & Kashmir that left 26 civilians dead. [A sindoor is the red dot worn by married Indian women and the operation was named to honor the Hindu men who were slaughtered by the Muslim Pakistani terrorists.] 

India points the finger squarely at Pakistan, alleging that some of the terrorists—vile opportunists who singled out Hindus—hailed from across the border. This atrocity, coincidentally or not, erupted as Vice President JD Vance was in India, shaking hands with Prime Minister Narendra Modi over a four-day diplomatic jaunt.

What followed was a grimly familiar escalation: cross-border gunfire, the scrapping of a river water-sharing treaty, and a war of words that threatens to spiral into something far deadlier. India’s embassy, in a statement dripping with conviction, declares it has “credible leads, technical inputs, testimony of the survivors and other evidence pointing towards the clear involvement of Pakistan-based terrorists in this attack.” The strikes, it insists, were “focused and precise,” a surgical effort to excise the cancer of terrorism. Yet, in a lamentable but unsurprising twist, India accuses Pakistan of “indulging in denial and making allegations of false flag operations against India” rather than rooting out the terrorist culprits.

And let us not forget, that Pakistan harbored Osama bin Laden, the model terrorist.

India maintains its strikes were a restrained affair, targeting “terror camps” while sparing Pakistani civilians, economy, or military. Pakistan, however, is having none of it. 

Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, with the fervor of a man wronged, condemns the “cowardly attack” on five locations within his borders. “This heinous act of aggression will not go unpunished,” he thunders, vowing that “Pakistan reserves the absolute right to respond decisively to this unprovoked Indian attack — a resolute response is already underway.” 

The Pakistani people and their forces, Sharif assures, “are fully prepared to confront and defeat any threat with our strength and determination.” As if to underscore the point, Pakistan claims to have swatted two Indian jets and a drone from the sky, a boast India has yet to dignify with confirmation, per the BBC, but this turned out to be false and the photos they used were from a previous operation. 

And so, the cycle of vengeance churns. Pakistan’s artillery roars across the border into India-administered Kashmir, a retort to what Sharif calls India’s treachery. “The enemy will never be allowed to achieve its malicious aims,” his statement concludes, a rallying cry for a nation on edge.

What is clear, Pakistan has attacked India's civilian population, much like Hamas did in Israel. And India is returning hostilities in a pin-point response, as Israel did with Hamas.

Across the Atlantic, President Trump calls the strikes “a shame.” 

Freshly briefed as he strode into the Oval Office, he muses, “I just hope it ends very quickly.” A sentiment echoed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, doubling as National Security Advisor, who received a briefing from India’s Ajit Doval on Wednesday. 

Rubio, monitoring the crisis with a wary eye, urges a swift de-escalation and pledges to “engage both Indian and Pakistani leadership towards a peaceful resolution.” The United Nations, through a spokesperson for Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, wrings its hands, expressing “very concerned” murmurs and pleading for “maximum military restraint,” as the BBC notes.

Here we stand, on the precipice of catastrophe, watching two nations armed to the teeth with nuclear arsenals trade blows and bravado. The stakes could not be higher, nor the margin for error slimmer. One can only hope that cooler heads prevail before rhetoric and rockets ignite a conflagration none can control.

If you enjoy my blog, feel free to toss a virtual coffee my way on Buy Me a Coffee – it’s like a high-five with caffeine, and coffee keeps me focused. No pressure, it's your call. 

Tweet

Xi and bin Laden like Biden for POTUS

Declassified documents show that "Usama bin Laden wanted to kill Obama so 'totally unprepared' Joe Biden would be president, declassified documents show.

" Fox News ran this headline in 2012 and the story came back to haunt the left on April 23, 2020.

“The reason for concentrating on them,” the al-Qaeda leader explained to his top lieutenant, “is that Obama is the head of infidelity and killing him automatically will make Biden take over the presidency... Biden is totally unprepared for that post, which will lead the U.S. into a crisis.”

And now that he's barely sentient, our enemies would be delighted for Biden to beat Trump.

At the time, administration officials said the Obama plot was never a serious threat, and today, he's even less than ever before.

This Thursday, writing in National Review, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) slammed  Biden for his undying support for Communist China; the title alone was a contemptuous attack: “Joe Biden Is China’s Choice for President.”

Cotton noted, “The Democratic Party has always been weak on national security when it comes to China. But some credit is due when it comes to China’s atrocious human-rights record and its theft of American jobs. For a generation, prominent Democrats loudly criticized Beijing on these fronts … Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi have been long-standing China trade hawks, for instance. Even a socialist like Bernie Sanders has been a reliable critic.”

Then Cotton took aim at the now somewhat disoriented Biden. “Despite the occasional box-checking, wishy-washy comment slapping Beijing on the wrist for the worst of its abuses, the reality is that the former vice president’s support of the People’s Republic of China is deep and longstanding.”

Cotton detailed Biden's past actions that held up his attack:

Biden discredited opposition to allowing China most-favored-nation trade status and World Trade Organization membership in the 1990s at the time he served as senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

His support of Communist China President Xi Jinping on his quest for absolute power while Biden “continued to push for closer ties and even more trade,” at a time when millions of American jobs were being lost and while his son, Hunter Biden, was involved in Chinese business affairs. Hunter accompanied Joe on a trip to Beijing in 2013, the same year Hunter joined the board of a Shanghai-based private equity firm. 

Cotton noted Biden’s obsequious attitude toward China, when Biden said, “China is going to eat our lunch? Come on, man. They’re not bad folks, folks. But guess what? They’re not competition for us.” And then said, “Our workers are literally three times as productive as workers . . . in Asia. So what are we worried about?”

Biden always takes China's side and Xi would like to see him in office.

Please consider following this blog, and remember, every time you click on an ad, an angel gets its wings and a dead terrorist gets his virgins.

Tweet

Justin Trudeau shakes hands with Iranian terrorists: Canadians become impolite

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is either an oblivious idiot or he's a horrible human being--one or the other--because it didn't dawn on him that shaking hands with an Iranian scumbag terrorist was the wrong thing to do.

The leader of the cold world is facing impolite anger by his fellow countrymen after he was photographed shooting the breeze, shaking hands, and doing the "Obama Bow" to Iran's Foreign Minister Javad Zarif. The thing is, the kissing up came after the terrorist nation of Iran shot down a commercial airplane killing 57 Canadians.

Oops!

Last January Iran shot down a plane after they launched a series of missile attacks at two Iraqi military bases housing American troops. The Iranian response, a form of sword rattling, came after U.S. President Donald Trump blew away terrorist Quds Force general Qassem Soleimani, to the dismay of his fellow terrorists and the U.S. Democratic Party.

Soleimani was in Iran [where he was not supposed to be] trying to stir up anti-American sentiment and organize anti-American terror operations.

At first, Iran denied downing the airliner, but after United States and international intelligence organizations proved the downing was caused by a pair of surface-to-air missiles fired from inside Iran, they finally issued a statement taking responsibility. Of course, they blamed both missile launches on "human error," but that's highly doubtful as the Quds Force is not composed of actual humans.

More than 150 passengers perished in the attack which Iran called an "unforgivable mistake."

The U.S. Democratic Party forgave them along with Justin Trudeau, it seems.

There were 57 Canadians aboard the Ukrainian Airlines plane, headed to Kiev, Ukraine, where they planned to catch a connecting flight to Toronto, according to the BBC.

“The plane was bound for the Ukrainian capital, Kyiv, [aka Kiev] and many on board had a connecting flight to Toronto, Canada’s largest city and a transit hub,” the British outlet reported, identifying why so many Canadians were killed in the attack. “Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has said that, all told, 138 people on that flight were en route to Canada.”

At the time of the attack, Trudeau insisted that he would demand “closure, accountability, transparency and justice” from the Iranians. By justice he meant that he would force Zarif to tolerate his poor jokes and shake his hand.

However, last week, at a conference in Munich, Germany, Trudeau seemed to cozy up with the Iranian delegation, according to GlobalNews.ca, [mainly because he's a politician and a liar, but I repeat myself].

“Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is facing criticism over new photographs showing him shaking hands with Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif,” the outlet reported. “The meeting on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference on Friday quickly sparked criticism online given that Iran shot down a passenger plane last month near Tehran killing all 176 on board, including 57 Canadians. Since then, it has refused to hand over the black boxes recovered from the crash site.”

Trudeau, who has fallen under criticism for failing to treat President Trump with due respect, defended his congenial interaction with the Iranians when asked about it by reporters, even as Iranian state television reportedly played the handshake off as a sign of forgiveness.

“I made a promise to families in Canada to do everything I could to make sure that they get answers, that we have a full and complete investigation, that we understand exactly what happened,” Trudeau told reporters. “I went by to impress upon the foreign minister of Iran how important it is that we work together.” And he hoped that they could be friends.

Not everyone was impressed with Trudeau’s thoughtless behavior and abject stupidity.

“Not a good look to see PM Trudeau with smiling FM Zarif of Iran after Canadians killed at the hands of Iranian incompetence and malice on Ukrainian plane- not to mention the innocent Iranian protestors‘ killed,” one expert on Iranian-Canadian relations tweeted.

And, GlobalNews.ca reports, families of the plane crash victims are “furious.”

The Canadian delegation tried to wave off the controversy, suggesting that Trudeau was forceful in private meetings, demanding that Iran turn over the flight’s black boxes to international officials, but they offered no proof of Trudeau’s position and truth be told, Trudeau is a wuss and a former snowboard instructor.

Like every other leftist finger-pointer, Trudeau did have some harsh words for at least one person he holds responsible for the airplane being shot down: President Trump.

Back in January, the Andy Kaufman lookalike pinned Iran's "human error" squarely on Trump's shoulders, because whenever anything in any part of the world goes wrong, no matter who is at fault, they blame Trump. And normal people [those of us without Trump Derangement Syndrome] are tired of their bs.

“If there were no tensions, if there was no escalation recently in the region, those Canadians would be right now home with their families,” Trudeau said.

Soleimani deserved to die. He killed tens of thousands both directly and indirectly. Osama bin Laden also deserved to die for the same reason. The only difference in the reaction is due to who made the call. Anyone who is not in a coma knows that.


Please consider following this blog, and remember, every time you click on an ad, an angel gets its wings and a terrorist gets his virgins.




Tweet

Dem Rep. refuses to condemn anti-Semitism by Omar but calls Crenshaw a racist

It's unclear as to whether Rep. Sean Casten (D-IL) is an anti-Semite but it is clear that he refuses to condemn anti-Semite Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) because for him, politics is more important than morals.

On October 5th, Casten told a voter that Omar's anti-Semitic comments about those who support Israel were "horribly inappropriate" but then proceeded to attack Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) for introducing an amendment to prevent illegal immigrants from voting. If Casten's kid was running for third grade class president and the class allowed the second or fourth grade to vote in that election, he would have a cow.

But the Democratic line must be towed and tow it Casten shall.

"The last amendment on the floor that day … came from Dan Crenshaw, the new Republican, the Navy SEAL with the eyepatch," he said, referring to the eye accessory Crenshaw wears to cover the empty orbit he got from an IED in 2012 while serving his country in the Helmand Province of Afghanistan. It was his third deployment and he lost his right eye and needed surgery to save the vision in his left eye. It isn't just that he wears an eyepatch to look cool, as Casten, who never served in the military, would have you believe. [H/T Washington Free Beacon.]

"He came up with an amendment to say, ‘we're going to add a rider on this bill that says that illegals can't vote.' And I sat there and I said, ‘you know what? You're not allowed to vote if you're not a citizen.' … Why are you doing that? The reason you're doing that is because you are a racist. Because you are trying to appeal to people who will vote for you if you stand up and oppose brown people."

Being called a racist by a liberal is their default position when they have nothing in their bag of bullcrap. Crenshaw is a racist like Ilhan Omar is a Sabra.

"That's what we have to stand up to," he added. "This ain't about Ilhan Omar. Did she say some unfortunate things? You bet she did. But you know what? She apologized for it."

If he actually listened to the question, he would know that it was precisely about Omar. It wasn't at all about Dan Crenshaw but that's a strawman argument that the left consistently does when it cannot answer the questions directly.

Omar tweeted in February it was "all about the Benjamins" for pro-Israel politicians and accused the lobbying group AIPAC of paying them off. But when it comes to her "Squad" buddy, Rashida Tlaib, who obviously has a dual loyalty to the Palestinians, she says nothing.

Crenshaw's office told the Washington Free Beacon it appreciated the focus on Crenshaw's "record of protecting Americans' right to vote," but that insults coming from someone who once likened President Donald Trump to Osama bin Laden "won't be taken seriously."

"If Rep. Casten is so deeply offended that our laws prohibit non-citizens from voting in federal elections, then he should be honest with his constituents and let them know how little he values the power of their vote," spokeswoman Kerry Rom said.

Crenshaw's attempt to amend H.R. 1, the "For The People Act of 2019," was defeated, with the vote falling almost completely along party lines.

While running for Congress last year, Casten drew criticism after he bloviated that Trump and bin Laden "have a tremendous amount in common." Casten failed to explain just what the two of them have in common, but it's a sure thing that Trump isn't responsible for killing 3,000 Americans and bin Laden never did anything to bring about historical American job growth for the entire country while reducing unemployment in the black and Hispanic community.

And Casten will never be accused of killing Osama bin Laden.



Please consider following this blog and feel free to click on the ads on this page. It costs nothing, and may just save your life. Or not. But seriously, please check out the ads as this is my source of generating revenue. And you can also see my blog on the Times of Israel.





Tweet

Ill. Dem. dummy compares POTUS to Osama bin Laden

Mouth-breather and maybe
 the next Dem in Congress?

Wheaton, Ill. -- A hopeless Democratic congressional hopeful Sean Casten said that he believes President Trump has a "tremendous amount in common" with Osama bin Laden, the founder of the terrorist organization al Qaeda, the group responsible for the September 11, 2001 attacks that killed almost  3,000 people.

It's hard to believe that anyone takes the Democratic Party seriously, but then again, many of them watch CNN and MSNBC.

"In many ways--and I don't mean to sound overly, I don't know, hyperbolic on this--Trump and Osama bin Laden have a tremendous amount in common," the hyperbolic idiot said, which was recorded on audio from a February meeting with voters that the Washington Free Beacon was able to acquire.

Casten is a "clean energy entrepreneur" and a highly qualified schmuck, which puts him in good stead with the party that has gone so far to the left that it's causing high tides on California's coastline. He made the stupidly insensitive comparison after a voter asked about his plans to advance gun-control legislation if he was elected [God forbid].

His comment was part of an explanation that gun-control opponents, whom he apparently compared to al-Qaeda supporters, are what will keep gun-control legislation from advancing to the House floor.

So Casten thinks that Second Amendment supporters also support al-Qaeda? From what does he base that baseless opinion on? Does he just like hearing the sound of his voice when he says incredibly stupid and insulting things?

"They have both figured out how to use the bully pulpit to activate marginalized young men," Casten said without a shred of credibility. "Every demagogue has done this--find a group of angry people and give them something to be angry at."

But not including Antifa nor Black Lives Matter.

The terrorist comparison began when a woman told Casten that her child was afraid to go to school because of gun violence. You can hear the conversation they had here and you might agree that the woman has more insight than Casten when she mentions the culture being a big part of the problem. He sees it as a problem with gun access.

Then he makes the comparison with Trump and bin Laden saying that both have used the bully pulpit to activate marginalized young men.

Wrong. Religious extremism is what has activated young Muslim men, and it wasn't simply bin Laden--it was the imams and other Islamic clergy who have helped that process.

Whenever liberals make stupid comparisons like calling a particular Republican Hitler, or Nazi, or Osama, they minimize and trivialize the terrible things those people did.

And by the way, the number of those marginalized young men who support Trump are astonishingly small in number. The neo-Nazis at the last rally that was scheduled had about 20 protesters show up, while Antifa outnumbered them by hundreds.

Evidently, the attendees at the meeting didn't object to Casten's hyperbole, proving the notion that liberalism truly is a mental illness.

This is why Trump is president.

Last year, Tom Perriello, the failed Virginia senatorial candidate, was caught by the Free Beacon calling Trump's election "a political and constitutional September 11." He later said he regretted the comparison and apologized.

Casten is running against Republican Rep. Peter Roskam, who has held the seat for eleven years and won by a wide margin in 2016 in a district Hillary Clinton won that year.

The race is considered a toss-up by most election prognosticators.


Please follow Brain Flushings and take a moment to visit the sponsors on this page. Thank you.


Tweet

Hamza bin Laden takes his first bride

Not gay Hamza

It's a marriage made in Jannah--Hamza bin Laden, son of the incredibly dead Osama bin Laden, has married the possibly beautiful daughter of Mohammed Atta, the dead-eyed, dead dude 911 hijacker and World Trade Center terrorist.

The marriage was confirmed by Osama's half-brothers in an interview with The Guardian newspaper.

Ahmad and Hassan al-Attas both said they believe Hamza has taken a senior terrorist position with al-Qaeda and is set on avenging the death of his father, who was shot and killed in a US military raid in Pakistan in 2011.

Hamza's first blushing bride

Hamza is the son of one of Osama's three surviving wives, Khairiah Sabar. Khairiah and Hamza were in the same compound in Abbottabad [just down the street from a huge Pakistani military facility], when Osama was shot in the head by Rob O'Neill, the only member of the Fox News team on that mission.

Hamza has gone public with urging his religious followers to wage war on Washington, London, Paris and Israel. He is considered a deputy to al-Qaeda's current leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and he swears that he is not gay, hoping this marriage will affirm that assertion.

Mo Atta

"We have heard he has married the daughter of Mohammed Atta," Ahmad al-Attas said. "We're not sure where he is [and if we knew, we wouldn't tell you], but it could be Afghanistan," [or any number of places that rhyme with it.]

For over two years, Western intelligence has been trying to locate Hamza because they see him as the biggest threat to gather followers because of his father's terrorism fame. His marriage to the daughter of Atta [aka: "Mo Dead-eyes"] an Egyptian national, likely confirms that he is a central part of al-Qaeda and that the organization remains organized around his incredibly dead father.

Another of Osama's sons, Khalid, was blown to smithereens in the US raid in Abbottabad, and a third son, Saad [aka: "Very Very Saad"] was killed in a drone strike in Afghanistan in 2009. Letters from Osama later seized suggested he was grooming Hamza to replace him, partly to avenge the death of Saad, and partly to have someone to leave his porn videos to.

All of bin Laden's wives and his many children are in Saudi Arabia and have been given refuge by former crown prince Mohammed bin Nayef. They all stay in touch with Osama's loving mother, Alia Ghanem.

Osama's mom

The family swears they've tried to talk Hamza out of following in his father's bloody footsteps. "When we thought everyone was over this [because the death of thousands of Americans shouldn't take all that long to get over], the next thing I knew was Hamza saying 'I am going to avenge my father,'" said Hassan al-Attas. "I don't want to go through that again."

"If Hamza was in front of me now," he said, "I would tell him: Allah guide you Think twice about what you are doing [then go do it, my son]. Don't retake the steps of your father [be prepared for the infidels coming for you]. You are entering really negative and horrible parts of your soul," [but a little jihad can do you a world of good].

The family claims they haven't contacted Osama bin Laden from 1999 until his death in 2011. But if you believe that, you might also believe that snakes have hips. They also said that they haven't heard from Hamza nor received any messages from him, but somehow they know that he just got hitched to the girl of his dreams.

Knowing his relationship with al-Qaeda, the US labels him a specially designated global terrorist as of January 2017. They could freeze his assets and arrest anyone dealing with him.

Hamza's honeymoon plans have not been divulged but his family says he's probably having a blast.

Please consider subscribing to Brain Flushings and take a moment to visit the sponsors on this page. Thank you.

Tweet

BREAKING: Obama knowingly funded an Al Qaeda affiliate, report reveals

Barack Hussein Obama knowingly funded an Al-Qaeda affiliate, a new report revealed on Wednesday.

Knowingly--that's the operant word.

The Obama administration provided an Islamic terrorist-financing organization with hundreds of thousands of dollars, and just because the group doesn't personally do the beheading and killing with their own hands, doesn't make them any less culpable for the terrorism of their henchmen.

Obama was well aware the Khartoum-based Islamic Relief Agency (ISRA) was a terrorist-finance agency--it was designated such for a decade by the government. In spite of this, his administration approved the release of well over $100,000 AFTER they were informed ISRA was affiliated with Osama bin Laden and Maktab al-Khidamat (MK), which later became al-Qaeda.

ISRA received a $200,000 taxpayer-funded grant from the Obama administration, which released no less than $115,000 to the terrorist-financing organization, according to National Review:

According to the U.S. Treasury, in 1997 ISRA established formal cooperation with MK. By 2000, ISRA had raised $5 million for bin Laden's group. The Treasury Department notes that ISRA officials even sought to help "relocate [bin Laden] to secure safe harbor for him." It further reports that ISRA raised funds in 2003 in Western Europe specifically earmarked for Hamas suicide bombings.

Perhaps this was Obama's strategy for defeating the extremists--let them blow themselves up with explosives we paid for.

The 2004 designation included all of ISRA's branches, including a U.S. office called the Islamic American Relief Agency (IARA-USA). Eventually it became known that this American branch had illegally transferred over $1.2 million to Iraqi insurgents and other terror groups, including, reportedly, the Afghan terrorist Gulbuddin Hekmatyar.

In July 2014 the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) approved $723,405 of our taxpayer funds to be sent to World Vision Inc., and from that money, "$200,000 was to be directed to a sub-grantee: ISRA," the National Review noted.

This was done even though World Vision told USAID in 2014 that ISRA was on the terrorist organization watch list and subsequently had to wait until the U.S. Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) could assess the situation before releasing any funds to these scum-buckets.

In January 2015, OFAC confirmed that ISRA was a designated terrorist organization and rejected World Vision from getting "a license to engage in transactions with [ISRA]."

Even though OFAC ruled ISRA to be a terrorist organization, World Vision wrote to OFAC and Jeremy Konyndyk of the Obama administration (who then served as director of USAID's Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance) requesting to apply for a new license from USAID to pay ISRA "monies owed for work performed."

Larry Meserve, USAID's mission director for Sudan, asserted that World Vision argued that if they didn't pay ISRA "their whole program will be jeopardized." ...

Low and behold, on May 7, 2015--after "close collaboration and consultation with the Department of State" OFAC went ahead and issued a license to World Vision International, a World Vision affiliate. The license authorized a "one-time transfer of approximately $125,000 to ISRA," whereby "$115,000 was for services performed under the sub-award with USAID" and $10,000 was "for an unrelated funding arrangement between Irish Aid and World Vision."

This is exactly why terrorist organizations grew and prospered under the Obama administration.

"[In 2014], when the U.S. first began its campaign against the terror group, ISIS had a presence in seven countries," The Hill reported in 2016. "That figure rose to 13 in 2015, and today the White House document shows that ISIS is operating in 18 countries."

And to demonstrate just where Obama's sympathies lied, he killed a huge investigation into Hezbollah, allowing them to "become one of the biggest transnational organized crime groups in the world," DEA supervisory agent Jack Kelly told Politico.

Barack Obama tried to convince the public that his failure to reduce or contain terrorism never happened and "the number of terrorist incidents [had] not substantially increased," even the left-leaning Politifact rated his statement as "mostly false."

And John Brennan, the guy who voted for a Communist, calls President Trump a "traitor."

But what's breathtaking is how the left continuously gets away with their seditious behavior.

Please consider subscribing to Brain Flushings and take a moment to visit the sponsors on this page. Thank you.

Tweet

Amazon sells jihiad recruitment 'literature' and bomb-making manual.

The case for waterboarding

Hey all you terrorists out there looking to explode on the scene, Amazon's
got the deals for you.

If you don't know much about jihad but want to learn more, you can now go over to Amazon and get your meaty little hands jihad books and even a sadistic Osama bin Laden novel, or a bomb-making manual with a step-by-step guide on how to kill your neighbors. 

And there are other interesting terror-related reading material for the religious psychopath in you.

But wait. If you order today, you can have it delivered by tomorrow with Amazon's popular next-day delivery. Just don't return the items because Amazon will be banning frequent 'returners' from ordering in the future. Of course, if you've elected to become a suicide bomber, this probably won't matter to you.

In the UK, Labour MP John Mann said, "This is Amazon giving assistance to terrorists and putting lives at risk."

Jake Wallis Simons of DailyMail.com writes:

Amazon is selling terrorist recruitment material and bomb-making manuals including a sadistic novel by Osama Bin Laden and jihadi books banned in British prisons, a MailOnline investigation has revealed.

The online retailer offers titles by jailed clerics and those expelled from Britain, leading to accusations that it is spreading the jihadi's message for them.

Many of the books, which have radicalised thousands of international terrorists, are available for next-day delivery. Some can be downloaded instantly as Kindle editions anywhere in the world.

The inflammatory titles are sold by third parties using Amazon's platform, allowing them global reach and lending them an aura of legitimacy.

Britain is going ahead with a full investigation into the matter.

It is still quite possible that heads will roll.


Tweet

Pakistan releases anti-U.S. terrorist to flip off Trump

Photo: Getty Images

Peshawar, Pakistan -- Now that President Trump has decided to cut off financial aid to the country since they don't lift a finger to help us in the fight against terrorism and even support it, a Pakistani court has ordered the release of one of their finest of scum-crumpets, Sufi Mohammad (yes, Mohammad, believe it or not). 

Yes, Mohammad went to Afghanistan with thousands of jihadis to help the Taliban in its religious quest to kill all non-believers, starting with Americans and moving on to the Jews, Christians, Hindus, atheists, gays, lesbians, transgenders, and Muslims who are think differently than they do.

Of course, this is Pakistan's way of flipping off President Trump who flipped them off first by accusing them of harboring militants like Osama bin Laden and many others.

Sufi Mohammad was released on "health grounds" and the paperwork for his release into the wild was still being processed Tuesday, said his defense lawyer Fida Gul (who as a kid had to endure classmates referring to him as "Feed a Gull").

The terrorist has been imprisoned since 2009 and is also the father-in-law of Mullah Fazlullah (who as a kid had to endure classmates calling him "Mullahpah Loser"), the leader of the Pakistani Taliban. 

Fazlullah is believed to be holed out in Afghanistan watching bin Laden-approved porn.

Trump said last week that the United States had "foolishly" given Pakistan over $33 billion in aid but has gotten nothing in return but "lies & deceit."

Ajam Chaudary

Aizaz Ahmad Chaudhry (not to be confused with Ajam Chaudary, the other terrorist from England currently serving time in prison), Pakistan's ambassador to Washington, said Trump was ignoring the sacrifices made by Pakistan in the war on terror.

The claim is unfair, Chaudhry told the Associated Press before beheading back to Washington.

"We have been the victim of terrorist attacks and how can we tolerate the presence of militants on our soil," he said, using his best taqiyya. 

The same way they tolerated the presence of Osama bin Laden on their soil in Abbottabad.

So releasing Mohammad, who in 2001 issued a fatwa (edict) for holy war against U.S.-led forces in Afghanistan, will not improve the current situation between the United States and that sh**hole country of Pakistan.

I am referring, of course, to the country and its politics, not the individuals who live there, just like Trump was referring to the countries in the closed-door meeting over immigration reform.


Tweet

Joshua Boyle, alleged Taliban hostage, arrested in Canada

Joshua Boyle, the certified idiot who thought it was a good idea to travel to the Middle East with his pregnant wife and was taken hostage for his efforts was arrested Monday in Canada. He faces a bunch of charges after his return home in October.

Boyle, 34, is due in court Wednesday after appearing earlier this week. He faces charges ranging from two counts of sexual assault to two counts of unlawful confinement, The Toronto Star reported. The obvious jihad sympathizer has also been charged with saying death threats, misleading police, assault and causing someone to "take a noxious thing, namely Trazodone."

Eric Granger, the lawyer for Boyle,  spoke to CTV News and said of his client: "This is an individual obviously we all know has been through a lot, is an individual otherwise who hasn't been in trouble before, and he's presumed innocent of these charges."

The alleged crimes by Boyle reportedly happened between October 14 and December 20, The Star reported, citing a court document.

Boyle's wife, 31-year-old Caitlan Coleman, is an American; he is Canadian. They and their three young children were "rescued" on October 11 by Pakistani troops from captivity in Pakistan and Afghanistan, where they were being held by Taliban-linked extremists for five years.

The idiots allegedly went backpacking in Afghanistan in October 2012. Why anyone not wanting to be kidnapped by Islamic extremists would do that is a mystery.

Coleman was seven months pregnant when she and her low-functioning husband were abducted. She claims her captors forced the abortion of her unborn daughter after Boyle allegedly refused to join their terrorist organization. Perhaps he was waiting for a better offer.

After Boyle was arrested, his wife said in a statement to The Star, "I can't speak about the specific charges, but I can say that ultimately it is the strain and trauma he was forced to endure for so many years and the effects that that had on his mental state that is most culpable for this."

It is unclear as to what mental health credentials Coleman has, but she clearly wants her diagnosis to be believed.

She wisely added: "Obviously, he is responsible for his own actions, but it is with compassion and forgiveness that I say I hope help and healing can be found for him. As to the rest of us, myself and the children, we are healthy and holding up as well as we can."

So it's all about her and the family, not about the victims of Boyle's criminal acts. We have to forgive him for being a scum crumpet but they don't need to ask forgiveness to Boyle's victims. 

Healing? This moronic family went backpacking in Afghanistan. 

I do not for one moment believe that Boyle holds no sympathies for the jihadis. 

Remember, Boyle is probably best known for being married to Omar Khadr's older sister, Zaynab Khadr. She is the eldest daughter of Ahmed Said Khadr, who was accused by the U.S. and Canada of being an associate and financier of Al-Qaeda.

Ahmed studied at the University of Ottawa and he and the family moved between Canada, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Zaynab was a staunch defender of her father and brother, Omar Khadr, who was captured with the Taliban in Afghanistan and charged with killing an American soldier when Omar was 15 and held in Guantanamo Bay Detention.

Zaynab Khadr? and Joshua Boyle

Boyle had a strong interest in national security and human rights after the Islamic terrorist attacks of 9/11. 

His friend, Alex Edwards, who lives in Ottawa, said that Boyle was smart  and a "crusader" by nature and was captivated by the plight of Omar Khadr.

"Here was this kid, this Canadian child, off in an illegal American prison, and everyone in Canada was vilifying the Khadr family, and Josh decided, 'Hey, this isn't right.' So he went off and devoted several years of his life to help this innocent kid," Edwards said.

Except that Khadr wasn't innocent--he killed an American soldier with a grenade and wounded another.

Boyle at first, had no connection to the Khadr family of terrorists, but introduced himself and volunteered to help them, explained Edwards. Boyle was their spokesperson in 2008 when Zaynab staged a hunger strike to Parliament Hill [in Ottawa] to protest Omar's detention.

Boyle married Zaynab Khadr in 2009 when he was 25 and she was 29. It was Zaynab's third marriage! 

Things just didn't seem to work out for her. The first two were arranged marriages. Her first husband was sought as a conspirator in a bombing of the Egyptian Embassy in Pakistan.

Her second marriage in Afghanistan had a distinguished guest--none other than Osama bin Laden. In 2004 she made controversial statements about the way Canadian children were raised and suggested that the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks were justified.

Boyle defended Zaynab's remarks and quoted the Bible, "Let he without sin cast the first stone."

After about ten years at Guantanamo, Omar Khadr was returned to Canada and was awarded a $10.5 million settlement from Trudeau's government for violation of his charter rights. Poor kid.

Several months after his marriage to Zaynab, intruders broke into the home of his parents, Linda and Patrick Boyle. They smashed the front door, ransacked the house and put bullet holes in the windows. Nothing was taken and the Boyles were away at the time. Joshua thinks the break-in was connected to his marriage.

They divorced in 2010 when they were living in Toronto with Zaynab and her daughter from a previous [terrorist] marriage. 

The following year, Boyle married Caitlan Coleman--they med on Star Wars fan site. The marriage took place while they were hiking through Central America. It is unknown who presided over the marriage, perhaps a 'person of the cloth,' or perhaps a chipmunk.

In the summer of 2012, they believed they had the experience to handle a backpacking trip to Central Asia, according to a video interview with Coleman's parents, but somehow they ended up in Afghanistan.

I believe that Boyle and Coleman are full of crap. Boyle's buddy Edwards said that he believed Joshua may have been in the process of converting to Islam.

There is no marriage unless Boyle converted . . . period!

Tweet