Jihad Watch

Girls going to school: a grave sin. Poisoning girls who go to school: pleasing to Allah. "97 Takhar students poisoned," by Nadar Azizi and Zarghona Salehi for Rawa News, June 2 (thanks to Wimpy):

PAN, May 27, 2012: Once again radicals opposing girls’ education on Sunday poisoned more than three dozen schoolgirls in northern Takhar province, the third incident of its kind over the past two months, officials said.

At least 97 students of the Bashirabad girls’ high school in the northern province of Takhar were poisoned on Saturday, officials said.

Seven schoolgirls are in critical condition while the rest were discharged from hospital after treatment, Public Health Director Habibullah Rostaqi told Pajhwok Afghan News.

Education Director Abdul Wahab Zafari said most of the 8th grade and 10th grade students were victims to Saturday’s poisoning.

With the latest case, the number of poisoned school girls over the past one month had reached 400, he said.

Even the sanitized translation of this Islamic legal manual makes it clear that Islamic law calls for female genital mutilation:

"Circumcision is obligatory (O: for both men and women. For men it consists of removing the prepuce from the penis, and for women, removing the prepuce (Ar. bazr) of the clitoris (n: not the clitoris itself, as some mistakenly assert). (A: Hanbalis hold that circumcision of women is not obligatory but sunna, while Hanafis consider it a mere courtesy to the husband.)" -- 'Umdat al-Salik e4.3

Here is the actual translation:

"Circumcision is obligatory (for every male and female) (by cutting off the piece of skin on the glans of the penis of the male, but circumcision of the female is by cutting out the bazr 'clitoris' [this is called khufaadh 'female circumcision'])." -- Mark Durie, The Third Choice, p. 64

"Islamic holy man and his wife are jailed for mutilating the genitals of their four daughters," by Craig Mackenzie for the Daily Mail, June 3 (thanks to Alan of England):

An Islamic holy man and his wife have been jailed for the genital mutilation of their four daughters.

The case has shocked France and was branded by a female government minister as a 'grave crime' and an 'intolerable affront to women's dignity.'

All four of the victims, now aged between 11 and 20, were in court to hear the sentence and wept and cried out as their parents were led away from the dock.

The unnamed father was sentenced to two years and his wife got 18 months for allowing a 'doctor' to remove parts of their vaginas.

They were charged with ‘complicity in voluntary violence having led to mutilation by an older person of a minor under the age of 15 years’ , a crime punishable by a maximum of 20 years jail.

The father was said to be a ‘ marabout’ - an Arabic word for an Islamic ascetic holy man alleged to be endowed with magical powers.

The couple originally came from the west African state of Guinea where according to a 2007 study, 96 per cent of young girls have their genitals mutilated in the name of religion....

At the trial in Nevers, central France, the two youngest victims had declared themselves plaintiffs under French law but the elder girls withdrew their complaint and sided with their parents....

The two eldest girls defended their parents action, saying that they did not understand why they were appearing in court.

Sobbing in the witness box , the mother told the court that she now regretted what had happened .

‘Now I would be less passive, ' she said. 'Circumcision is not good.'

The former holy man, said to have been severely handicapped by a stroke, told the judge ,’ What is the most important thing for me is the wellbeing of my family. I am sorry for what happened.'

Moroccan- born Najat Vallaud-Belkacem, 35, Minister of Women’s Rights in the new government of François Hollande, has now pledged a crackdown on the illegal practice.

She vowed to track down what she called ‘ executioners’ who have performed covert surgery on an estimated 50,000 young girls in France....

Venting their aggression on those whom the Qur'an designates as the worst enemies of the Muslims (cf. 5:82). And Pamela Geller makes some trenchant observations about the way that AFP identifies the attackers: "Of course, the AFP description of the jihadists is at the bottom of the article. Here again we find the media identifying the terrorists by nationality. Geography has as much to do with it it as the color of their pants. It is ideology. The ideology behind these attacks is carefully omitted out of respect to the blasphemy laws under the sharia (do not criticize Islam). Instead, 'North African origin' is the laughable label."

"Lyon: three young Jews wearing yarmulkes attacked with a hammer and iron bar," a corrected version of the Google translation of this AFP article, June 3 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

Three young Jews wearing skullcaps were attacked Saturday night in Villeurbanne, a suburb of Lyon, by a dozen individuals who beat them with hammers and iron bars, "extremely serious" acts denounced by the Minister of the Interior, Manuel Valls.

A youth suffered an open wound to the skull and a young girl was hit in the neck, according to the Ministry of Interior. Briefly hospitalized, they were all released from the hospital Saturday night, after five days of hospitalization, the police told AFP.

Manuel Valls described the anti-Semitic attack as "extremely serious" and reiterated his "determination to fight against any aggression of a religious nature."

"These acts are extremely serious: a deliberate attack upon our republican model that should enable everyone of whatever religious affiliation, without distinction, to live freely and safely," said the Interior Ministry in a statement.

"Manuel Valls ensured the full mobilization of police on site so that the perpetrators of this assault were, as required by the laws of the Republic, arrested and placed at the disposal of justice," it added.

The incident occurred on Saturday at about 6:30PM near the Beth Menachem Jewish School of Villeurbanne. Three young Jews of about twenty years of age, wearing yarmulkes, were "insulted and jostled by three individuals."

The assailants, joined minutes later by "ten armed people," returned to the scene. This was followed by an "exchange of blows," during which "two of the three youths" received "a hammer and a blow with an iron bar at the head," police said. The third youth was hit in the arm.

Upon leaving the hospital, the three victims filed complaints after being interviewed by police, who opened an investigation.

Police said additional patrols have been assigned to Villeurbanne to "strengthen the security sector." As of now, no arrests have taken place.

Lyons police confirmed that they had not wished to make public the Sunday night attack, which was made public by Mr. Valls, citing the need for a "secret investigation" for reasons of efficiency. "We are looking for the perpetrators with the utmost discretion," said a police official.

The National Bureau of Vigilance against Anti-Semitism (BNVCA) reacted to this "anti-Semitic violent assault." The attackers, described as "of North African origin," uttered "insults in connection with the Jewish religion" of the victims before assaulting them physically, said the BNVCA.

"We ask the police to make every effort to identify and question the perpetrators that the victims are able to recognize," it added in a statement.

"It is the twenty-first century and we have young people who are assaulted with blows from iron bars and a hammer because they wear a yarmulke," Alain Jakubowicz, Chair of Licra and a lawyer in Lyon, told AFP .

Referring to the fact that the attackers appear to be of North African origin, he warned to "be wary of racial profiling" while the investigation remains ongoing, while evoking the tensions between Arab and Jewish communities around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, "with the identification of the Jews as Zionists."

Unfortunately for those many, many people given to wishful thinking and fantasy-based policymaking, this group's idea of jihad doesn't involve hugs and teddy bears, either. "New Islamist group emerges in Nigeria, claims ‘different’ understanding of Jihad," from Al Arabiya, June 3:

A new Islamic group in Nigeria has pledged to defend the interests of Muslims in Africa, claiming a different understanding of Jihad and vowing to avenge the killing of Muslims, the All Africa news website reported on Sunday.

The group, named Jama’atu Ansarul Musilimina fi Biladin Sudan, (Supporters of Islam in the Land of Sudan) has said in a recent video posted on the internet that does not target non-Muslims except “in self-defense or if they attack Muslims like the cases we have in Jos.” It was referring to violence in the restive central Nigerian city.

Muslims have attacked Christians in Jos, and the Christians have in some cases fought back. For the Supporters of Islam in the Land of Sudan, that means they attacked Muslims.

Headed by a man that goes by the pseudonym Abu Usamatul Ansar, the new group stated that their understanding of Jihad in Islam is different from that of any other group, the website reported.

Doesn't that mean they're misunderstanders of Islam? Or are they the only ones who have discovered the true understanding of Jihad in Islam?

In the video, which was originally made in Arabic and translated into English, Ansar said that his group considers anybody that accepts the Muslim belief of the oneness of God and acceptance of Muhammad as God’s prophet “must not be killed unless he/she has committed an act that is punishable by death as stated in the holy Quran,” according to the report.

How reassuring!

“Islam forbids killing of innocent people including non-Muslims. This is our belief and we stand for it,” Ansar said.

Define "innocent."

Ansar said the group will not target or kill any security personnel in the name of Jihad but they will protect the interest of Muslims and Islam in Africa. In the context of holy war, Jihad refers to the use of violence against individuals or governments deemed to be enemies of Islam. The term is increasingly attributed to extremist Islamic groups.

Ansar’s group expects the Nigerian government to allow them to freely practice their religion and to always serve justice to the people, the report stated.

Ansar said attacks on Muslims in Jos in the aftermath of the Nigerian presidential election violence in April last year were unacceptable to the group.

In March, at least 10 people were killed after a Catholic church was targeted by suicide car bombers in Jos. No group claimed responsibility for the bombing, although Islamist militant group Boko Haram said it was behind a similar attack on a church last month.

Ansar said the “rampant massacre of Muslims in Nigeria will no longer be tolerated and that they will never attack any religion or government institution that didn’t attack them and their religion,” the report stated.

Note that he didn't say anything about the jihad massacres of Christians in Nigeria.

Boko Haram, which says it is fighting to reinstate an ancient Islamic caliphate in northern Nigeria that would impose stricter Sharia (Islamic) law, has been blamed for hundreds of killings in bomb or gun attacks over the past two years.

Such attacks on Christians seem aimed at igniting sectarian strife in a country of 160 million split about evenly between Muslims and Christians, according to BBC figures.

In response to such sectarian strife, Ansar emphasized that the Prophet Muhammad had lived with non-Muslims and even Jews but on the condition that they would not do anything to harm them.

And play the good subservient dhimmi.

But Ansar also said that his new group will attack any group or religion that attacks Islam and Muslims, All Africa reported.

One wonders what Ansar thinks constitutes an attack on Islam and Muslims. Probably he would consider this post, and this website, to be such an attack.

Why should the benign and tolerant Religion of Peace be anything that anyone should fear? Alas, the Ayatollah did not explain. "Ayatollah: West fearful of Islamic Iran," from UPI, June 3:

TEHRAN, June 3 (UPI) -- Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei, said Sunday the West was more fearful of Iran's fervent Islam than its nuclear program.

The religious leader spoke Sunday at the 23rd anniversary of the death of Ayatollah Khomenei and claimed Iran was stronger than ever despite Western efforts to keep the country at bay.

"What the enemies of Iran fear, and must fear, is not a nuclear Iran but the Islamic Iran," Khamenei said....

Let us develop a nuke and destroy Israel, or we'll destroy Israel and your military bases. More threats and murder from the mullahcracy of peace: "Iran threatens to target U.S. bases if attacked," by Marcus George for Reuters, June 2 (thanks to all who sent this in):

DUBAI (Reuters) - Iran has warned the United States not to resort to military action against it, saying U.S. bases in the region were vulnerable to the Islamic Republic's missiles, state media reported on Saturday.

The comments by a senior Iranian military commander were an apparent response to U.S. officials who have said Washington was ready to use military force to stop what it suspects is Iran's goal to develop a nuclear weapons capability.

World powers held talks with Iran in Baghdad on May 23-24 in an attempt to find a diplomatic solution to their concerns over its nuclear program, which Tehran maintains is entirely peaceful. Another round was set for June 18-19 in Moscow.

"The politicians and the military men of the United States are well aware of the fact that all of their bases (in the region) are within the range of Iran's missiles and in any case ... are highly vulnerable," Press TV reported Brigadier-General Yahya Rahim Safavi as saying.

Safavi is a military adviser to Iran's clerical Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and was until 2007 the commander in chief of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, the force that protects Iran's Islamic system of governance.

He also warned that Iranian missiles could reach all parts of Israel but played down any possibility of military action against his country as "faint" because of the current economic condition of the United States....

Aww, he is just saying that to get elected. The Brotherhood wants Sharia, which is perfectly benign and not in the least threatening to Jews or Christians. Go back to sleep. "‘Muslim Brotherhood will Terrorize Christians,’ Warns Candidate," by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu for Israel National News, June 3 (thanks to Kenneth):

Presidential candidate Ahmed Shafiq hit hard at the Muslim Brotherhood on two fronts Sunday, warning that an Islamist victory will lead to terrorizing Christians and accusing the Brotherhood of trying to make “Palestine" the central issue for Egyptians.

Shafiq was a close aide to ousted Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, and the Brotherhood took the offensive after Saturday’s life sentence for Mubarak, instead of death, and the acquittal of his two sons regarding their involvement in the murder of hundreds of protesters last year.

Egyptians will go the polls in two weeks to vote for Shafiq or Muslim Brotherhood candidate Mohammed Morsi.

In an unusually sharp attack, Shafiq accused the Brotherhood of acting as if “Palestine is the capital of Egypt.” He said that Egyptians face several domestic issues that should not be overshadowed by the status of the Palestinian Authority, whose Hamas faction was founded by the Brotherhood.

“Don’t let the Muslim Brotherhood control Egypt and take it to the dark ages," Shafiq declared.

"I represent a secular state... the Brotherhood represents a sectarian state. I represent progress and light, they represent backwardness and darkness," he said.

Walter Scott, The Talisman, the Crusades, Richard I of England and Saladin: Myths, Legends and History
by Ibn Warraq
Part 3
Part 1 / Part 2

In the novel, the Northerners are constantly painted as uncouth -- “uncultivated savages”, and the Byzantines as sophisticated and “enlightened”. Again, Scott does not follow the Crusaders to the principal theatre of action, the Holy Land and Jerusalem, and the First Crusade is not described, though obviously the motives of the Franks are not comprehensible without an understanding of the Crusader movement. We are nonetheless able to gather Scott’s attitude to the Crusaders and the Crusades. Scott presents one view of the Crusades through the character Nicephorus, son-in-law of the Greek Emperor of Constantinople, Alexius I Comnenus -- though we should be wary of assuming that this is Scott’s own view. Nicephorus sings the praises of Godfrey of Bouillon [c.1060 -1100], considered one of the heroes of the First Crusade [1096-1099]:

This Godfrey is one of the wisest, noblest, and bravest of the leaders who have thus strangely put themselves in motion; and among a list of independent princes, as many in number as those who assembled for the siege of Troy, and followed, most of them, by subjects ten times more numerous, this Godfrey may be regarded as the Agamemnon. The princes and counts esteem him, because he is the foremost in the ranks of those whom they fantastically call knights, and also on account of the good faith and generosity which he practises in all his transactions. The clergy give him credit for the highest zeal for the doctrine of religion, and a corresponding respect for the church and its dignitaries. Justice, liberality, and frankness have equally attached to this Godfrey the lower class of the people. His general attention to moral obligations is a pledge to them that his religion is real; and, gifted with so much that is excellent, he is already, although inferior in rank, birth, and power to many chiefs of the crusade, justly regarded as one of its principal leaders.

To which the Emperor replies: “Pity that a character such as you describe this prince to be should be under the dominion of a fanaticism scarce worthy of Peter the Hermit, or the clownish multitude which he led, or of the very ass which he rode upon; which I am apt to think the wisest of the first multitude whom we beheld, seeing that it ran away towards Europe as soon as water and barley became scarce.”

As we shall see shortly, Scott had expressed his views on the ambiguous legacy of the Crusaders in his earlier novel Ivanhoe [1820], but here we cannot take the Emperor’s views as Scott’s own. For later in Count Robert of Paris, Scott concedes that at least some Crusaders, including Godfrey, were motivated by higher principles: “A better principle determined the celebrated Godfrey, Raymond of Thoulouse [sic] , and some others, in whom devotion was something more than a mere burst of fanaticism”.

In the novel, Michael Agelastes, an old Greek sage, warns the Byzantine Emperor of the avaricious kind of Crusader: “…[T]hese European barbarians are like no others under the cope of the universe, either in the things on which they look with desire or in those which they consider as discouraging. The treasures of this noble empire [Byzantium], so far as they affected their wishes, would merely inspire them with the desire to go to war with a nation possessed of so much wealth, and who, in their self-conceited estimation, were less able to defend than they themselves are powerful to assail. Of such a description, for instance, is Bohemond of Tarentum [also known as Bohemund of Taranto], and such a one is many a crusader less able and sagacious than he; for I think I need not tell your Imperial Divinity that he holds his own self-interest to be the devoted guide of his whole conduct through this extraordinary war; and that, therefore, you can justly calculate his course when once you are aware from which point of the compass the wind of avarice and self-interest breathes with respect to him.”

However, there are nobler spirits among the Crusaders, continues the Greek Sage, “but there are spirits among the Franks of a very different nature. And who must be acted upon by very different motives, if we would make ourselves masters of their actions and the principles by which they are governed….This people -- I mean the more lofty-minded of these crusaders, who act up to the pretences of the doctrine which they call chivalry -- despise the thirst of gold, and gold itself, unless to hilt their swords, or to furnish forth some necessary expenses, as alike useless and contemptible”.

It remains an ambiguous compliment; what does the Greek Sage (Scott himself?) mean by “act up to the pretences of the doctrine which they call chivalry” -- that they are sincere but self-deluded, or even simply insincere? We need to go back to Scott’s earlier novel Ivanhoe to arrive at a sense of Scott’s attitudes to chivalry. Ivanhoe, set in late Twelfth Century England, displays Scott’s more general concerns, his commitment to religious and racial tolerance, and his Enlightenment abhorrence of superstition and fanaticism, whether the unreflective kind of the masses, or the more dogmatic variety of the religious bigot. Scott more generally is concerned with fanaticism; one could even take the motto, usually attributed to Scott himself, to Chapter XXXV as the motto to the entire novel:

Arouse the tiger of Hyrcanian deserts,
Strive with half-starved lion for his prey;
Lesser the risk, than rouse the slumbering fire
Of wild fanaticism.

To be continued.

Ibn Warraq is the author of numerous books, including Why the West Is Best and Why I Am Not A Muslim.

Haram in so many, many ways

Sharia priorities. "Women, tie-sellers targeted in Iran clothing crackdown," from AFP, May 30 (thanks to all who sent this in):

Police shut down 80 booths at international trade fair in Tehran shut down because female attendants 'not properly observing the hijab;' police chief says fresh crackdown launched to enforce an ban on sale of ties

Female booth attendants at an international trade fair and shops selling men’s ties have become targets in a strict crackdown by Tehran police on clothing deemed un-Islamic, Iranian media reported on Wednesday.

Women “not properly observing the hijab,” or the Islamic headscarf, as they staffed stands at an international food exhibition, prompted police to shut down 80 of the booths, Iranian deputy police chief Ahmad Reza Radan was quoted as saying in the Mardomsalari newspaper.

"The organizers of the fair must make certain that women are properly dressed, or else police will have to shut it down," he said. Radan said the crackdown will soon expand to other Iranian cities.

His boss, police chief Esmail Ahmadi Moqadam, said the female attendants had been warned, “but they did not take it seriously -- that is why we shut them (the booths) down.”

It was not known if the women were fined or arrested, as often happens for such offences, nor was it known if any foreigners were among them.

The fair, which wrapped up on Wednesday, hosted exhibitions by companies from several countries, including Austria, China, France, Germany, India, Italy, South Korea, Spain and Turkey.

According to Mardomsalari and other media, police have also launched a fresh campaign to enforce an often-ignored ban on the sale of ties -- apparel deemed by regime hardliners as a symbol of Western cultural influence rejected since Iran’s 1979 Islamic revolution.

“We had to remove all ties from our shop” on the orders of Tehran’s morality police, an unnamed shopkeeper told the ISNA news agency....

Will the Islamophobia never end? "15 killed and dozens wounded in Nigerian church attack," from the Telegraph, June 3 (thanks to all who sent this in):

At least 15 people were killed and dozens wounded when a suicide car bomber drove into a Nigerian church compound and detonated his explosives as worshippers left an early morning service.

The bomber targeted the Living Faith church, in a neighbourhood near the airport in Bauchi, the capital of northern Bauchi state. The timed blast caught many people outside the church without any cover to protect themselves from the explosion, causing heavy casualties, witnesses said.

At least eight people were killed in the blast, as well as the bomber, Bauchi state police commissioner Mohammed Ladan said. He said security personnel stationed near the churches stopped the car from getting any closer to worshippers than it did.

More than 40 people suffered injuries in the blast, the Nigerian Red Cross said.

The powerful blast from the car destroyed part of the Harvest Field Church, sending walls of the building crashing down on worshippers still inside. Others suffered burns in the blast.

The death toll from the blast could rise. Police and soldiers surrounded the church immediately after the explosion, stopping emergency workers from going inside to collect the corpses of those killed. Witnesses who left the church after the blast said they saw as many as 10 dead....

No group immediately claimed responsibility for the attack, though the blast comes as Nigeria faces a growing wave of sectarian violence carried out by a radical Islamist sect known as Boko Haram. Boko Haram, whose name means "Western education is sacrilege" in the Hausa language of Nigeria's Muslim north, has been blamed for killing more than 530 people this year alone.

The sect's targets have included churches, often attacked by suicide car bombers....

In Pakistan today these guys stood about as much chance of being convicted as Osama bin Laden did of being turned in by Pakistani government officials. "Pakistan: Court acquits 4 of helping NYC bomber," by Zarar Khan for the Associated Press, June 2 (thanks to all who sent this in):

ISLAMABAD (AP) -- A Pakistani anti-terrorism court freed on Saturday four men accused of involvement in the 2010 Times Square bomb plot, said a lawyer and family members of the men.

The men were arrested in the wake of the May 2010 incident during which Pakistani-American Faisal Shahzad drove an SUV packed with a bomb into Times Square. The bomb produced smoke but no explosion.

Lawyer Malik Imran Safdar said Saturday that the prosecution failed to prove its case against his clients. The men were released Saturday evening after the court in Rawalpindi, next to the capital of Islamabad, acquitted them.

The father of one of the men, Humbal Akhtar, said he was ecstatic at his son's release.

"I have suffered a lot during these two tough years," said Muhammed Akhtar. "Finally I got justice."

In addition to Akhtar, the court released Muhammad Shoaib Mughal, Muhammad Shahid Husain, and Faisal Abbasi. The men were picked up by Pakistani security officials in the wake of the 2010 incident, and few details of their case have emerged over the two years of their detention.

They were tried by a Pakistani anti-terrorism court, which are generally off limits to the press or other outsiders.

Terrorism cases in Pakistan rarely result in convictions or prison sentences. Police often lack basic investigative skills, prosecutors lack training in terror cases and judges and witnesses are often subject to intimidation....

Two other men arrested by Pakistan in the wake of the Times Square incident were previously released....

The mullahs love Nazis

Why haven't the mullahs shut down this website? Because, contrary to the propaganda claims of the defenders of Sharia oppression in the U.S., it is actually the jihad, not the counter-jihad, that has a deep ideological affinity with National Socialism and its genocidal Jew-hatred.

"Nazi propaganda website starts operation in Iran, government censors do nothing," by Reza Kahlili in The Daily Caller, June 2 (thanks to all who sent this in):

A pro-Nazi association now operates a Persian-language website in Iran, promoting anti-Semitism and memorializing Adolf Hitler, apparently with the approval of the Iranian government and its censors.

The site, Nazicenter.ir, features videos of Nazi leaders and pictures of Hitler, and praises the Third Reich for nearly conquering the Western world. It also includes a public forum whose members routinely discuss their hatred of the Jewish people.

The site’s primary goal, its administrators write, is to confront the “story of the Holocaust, which without a doubt has been taken advantage of in contemporary history.”

Iran’s Islamic regime strictly regulates all forms of communication. Hundreds of websites have been banned, and Iranians’ online access to the free world is severely restricted. But a Nazi propaganda website is consistent with the proclamations of Iran’s military and political leaders, who have both denied the existence of the Nazi Holocaust and called for the destruction of Israel.

The chief commander of the Iranian armed forces, Maj. Gen. Hassan Firouzabadi, announced the doctrine of the Islamic regime in a recent speech. “The Iranian nation is standing for its cause,” he said, “and that is the full annihilation of Israel.”

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has openly called Israel a “cancerous tumor” that should be cut out. And Iran’s president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has repeatedly denied the Holocaust occurred.

Nazicenter.ir is hosted on a Web server in Germany and administered by two individuals who also own the Internet domain “NaziClub.ir.”...

A published set of ground rules prominently displayed for forum participants includes the warning that “All members must respect the current laws of the Islamic Republic of Iran.” The also include requirements that members should promote “the expansion of Iran’s nationalism” and “make known the true picture of Zionism.”

“We as an Internet media outlet consider it a duty to show the ugly and oppressive face of Zionism,” the text continues, “which rules the world’s media who have hidden its true face.”...

On April 20 the site offered “congratulations” to its readers “with Aryan blood” on the anniversary of Adolf Hitler’s birth. On May 9 an unnamed author republished video of a 1938 speech in which Hitler warned about the dangers Allied powers posed to “occupied Palestine.”

“If you think that the German leader was thinking of rescuing Germany alone from such exploitation, then you are wrong,” the writer insists. “Adolf Hitler in his 12 years of governance criticized the Western powers in defense of the oppressed — one of them being the Palestinians.”

Of course!

An ugly new development in American politics: Muslim voters lining up to defeat a Jewish candidate. "Jersey Roar: Democratic House primary turns into ethnic proxy war over Israel," by Adam Kredo in the Washington Free Beacon, June 1 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

A Democratic primary race in northern New Jersey has devolved into a highly competitive proxy war over Israel, pitting the state’s pro-Israel community against a growing constituency of Arab voters who have accused a sitting congressman of putting Israel’s interests before America’s.

As the race between Democratic Reps. Steve Rothman and Bill Pascrell nears its Tuesday finish, veteran political observers on the ground have expressed concern at the way the battle between the two veteran lawmakers has transformed into a troubling ethnic brawl.

“One side says, ‘We want this Jew out of office’ and, frankly, it’s pretty unsettling,” Ben Chouake, president of NORPAC, a pro-Israel political action committee based in Englewood Cliffs, told the Free Beacon. “They emphasized [Rothman] is a Jewish congressman.”

Others say they simply cannot recall a congressional race becoming a referendum on a candidate’s religion.

“For the first time in recent American political history, we are witnessing a proxy battle between supporters and detractors of Israel, and it’s playing out in the Ninth District of New Jersey,” said one veteran campaign strategist who is knowledgeable about the district.

The race took an unprecedented turn on Monday when an Arabic campaign poster supporting Pascrell surfaced. It urged the “Arab diaspora community” to “elect the friend of the Arabs” and billed the race as “the most important election in the history of the [Arab] community,” according to a WFB translation of the sign.

“I don’t read Arabic well, but I am pretty sure that the pro-Pascrell posters that have appeared across the district are not calling to elect the candidate who supports a strong relationship between America and the only democracy in the Middle East, one which is rooted in progressive Western values—women’s rights, gay rights, tolerance, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc.,” said Josh Block, a Democratic strategist and former spokesman for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.

Observers such as Susan Rosenbluth, publisher of the New Jersey-based Jewish Voice and Opinion, say the race took an anti-Semitic turn in late February, when a prominent Arab supporter of Pascrell accused the state’s Jewish voters of being more loyal to Israel than America.

“Unquestionably, this primary election is pitting two otherwise harmoniously coexisting communities: the Muslim and Jewish communities,” Aref Assaf, president of the New Jersey-based American Arab Forum, wrote in a New Jersey Star-Ledger column headlined “Rothman is Israel’s man in District 9.”

“As total and blind support for Israel becomes the only reason for choosing Rothman, voters who do not view the elections in this prism will need to take notice. Loyalty to a foreign flag is not loyalty to America’s,” Assaf wrote.

The canard—reminiscent of the “Israel firster” controversy that has engulfed the left-wing Center for American Progress Action Fund and Media Matters for America—reverberated through the tight-knit Jewish community, raising alarm among pro-Israel stalwarts.

“A number of Arab-American constituents have come out with outrageous attacks on Rothman,” said Rosenbluth, whose newspaper is based in Englewood. “I haven’t heard a dual loyalty charge for years.”

At that point, things really “started to get ugly,” said NORPAC’s Chouake, explaining that “for the pro-Israel community, it’s not about Jewish or not-Jewish or helping an ethnic culture, but about believing there should be a homeland for a people oppressed and slaughtered for 2,000 years.”

“It’s a little bit scary,” said Chouake, who noted that massive voter registration drives in the Arab community have added at least 6,000 new names to the rolls. Some of those registrations have been disputed....

Oh, I'm sure they are as genuine as the day is long.

The thuggish, dead-eyed gunsel Lean

Nathan Lean, Editor-In-Chief of Aslan Media, Islamic supremacist Boy Reza Aslan's house organ, is in a tizzy about Kansas's pro-freedom law limiting the use of Sharia, which denies the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and equality of rights for women and non-Muslims.

Lean, of course, is the thug who has repeatedly sent me veiled threats, emailing and tweeting what he thinks is specific information about where I live and who my relatives are. The threat is quite clear: he could not possibly have any other reason to send this information to me and to others except to let me know that he thinks he knows where I live, and to alert Leftist and Islamic supremacist thugs who wish to injure or kill me to what he thinks is my location. He thinks that by doing this he can frighten me into silence. He is wrong. And all he accomplishes is to show the fascist, brownshirt spirit at the heart of the opposition to "Islamophobia."

Lean is an experienced thug. The Goldsboro News-Argus reported this on February 24, 2005:

Two young men who spoke obscenities after what they thought was an unfavorable decision at a Goldsboro City Council meeting were disciplined Wednesday in Wayne County District Court. Aaron Kornegay, 27, of Beston Road, LaGrange and Nathan Chapman Lean, 20...

Now Lean has graduated from shouting obscenities at City Council meetings to threatening counter-jihadists and cheerleading for oppression in the HuffPo. In "The Islamophobia Industry Strikes in Kansas," by Nathan Lean in the Huffington Post, June 1, Lean whines about the "Islamophobia industry" that he holds responsible for the Kansas bill and identifies pro-freedom lawyer David Yerushalmi as a "Hasidic Jew" -- which is only relevant to a discussion of stealth jihad and Sharia in America if you're a nudge-nudge-wink-wink antisemitic Leftist and/or Islamic supremacist Jew-hater: Lean's antisemitism is as veiled as his death threats. He repeats the same old tired falsehoods and smears of Yerushalmi, Pamela Geller and me -- including, ironically, the insinuation that we're neo-Nazis because the EU calls SIOE a "neo-Nazi organization." It doesn't, and SIOE isn't, and neither is SIOA, and the charge is hugely ironic considering the fact that the only one in this room who is behaving like a neo-Nazi is Lean himself, with his threats, thinly veiled antisemitism, and character-assassination smears of defenders of freedom. He does not, and cannot, refute the facts we adduce -- all he has are ad hominems.

Above all, Lean never bothers to mention that Kansas's law is perfectly justified and much needed, in light of the fact that Sharia has already been used as a determining factor in court cases in 23 states. When confronted with this fact in, of all places, the HuffPo comments, Lean claimed that it had been "debunked," but provided no details (since it hasn't been, and there aren't any) and added a new flurry of ad hominems.

That an intellectually bereft and morally compromised thug like Nathan Lean would be in the employ of Reza Aslan is revealing. And that he would be published in the HuffPo is further evidence of that publication's corruption and anti-freedom agenda.

UPDATE: I emailed this post to Lean without comment, a courtesy to give him the chance to respond. I just got back this reply from the trashy little creep -- a reply that is almost worthy of his wali Aslan's howlers about his automated insult generator:

This is an automated reply. Please know that your email to Nathan Lean has been unread and permanently deleted. It has also been automatically forwarded to law enforce [sic] authorities as evidence of continued harassment.

Nathan only prefers to deal with writers and scholars of sound mind and good character. Regrettably, you fit neither category.

Actually, it is I who have forwarded Lean's threats to the FBI, and they have told me that they're looking into them.

A Christian family in India needs your help. I just received this email:

SUBJECT: RADICAL MUSLIMS ARE CONSTANTLY THREATENING ME & FAMILY TO MURDER US AS WE ARE CHRISTIANS

Dear Bro. Robert Spencer in Christ,

Greetings to you in the name of our Lord & Saviour Jesus Christ from Nutangram village in India!

I would like to introduce myself with you that I am Aimazan Bibi. I live in the village named Nutangram under Murshidabad Police station, Dist. Murshidabad, West Bengal State, India.

My husband name is Gaffar Shaike. I and my entire family accepted Jesus as our Lord & Saviour and we are followers of Lord Jesus Christ. I am conducting House Church fellowship at my own house on every Monday and few other Christian brothers & sisters are attending at our fellowship from last few years.

On 30th March 2012 , while I had invited few Christian families for lunch and for prayer meeting at my own house. While we had started prayer service, numbers of radical Muslims forcibly entered to my house and attacked our prayer meeting at around 2.P.M.

Annu Shaike, son of Nizammuddin Shaike started to kicked my stomach & head mercilessly and injured my hand. Even he twisted my hand very tightly and tried to break my hand but God saved my hand.

Later on radical Muslims mocked, abused to my Christian brothers & sisters. A mob of about 100 Islamists gathered and they were shouting anti-Christian slogans and threatening to murder us. Even they pushed, kicked and slapped us.

When my Christian brothers & sisters tried to flee, the radical Muslims blocked their way. Ahammed Shaike, son of Late Kalimuddin Shaike, leading the extremists group to beat all the Christians and killed them for the sake of Allah. Mohammed Kuran Shaike, son of Ahammed Shaike beat to my mother who is 65-year-old widow Moyazan Bewa. Ahamed’s wife Mrs. Salema Bibi started to beat to another Christian women Selina Bibi. All other Christian men & women received minor injuries. Two small children present at the meeting were crying in fear.

Christian brothers & sisters somehow made their way out and scattered, but Mohammed Aanu Shaike with a sickle chased us and wanted to murder us as Ahammed Shaike encouraging him and all other extremists as we are Christians.

Ahammed Shaike, his family members and their extremists group always threatening me & my family that they are openly telling us that they will murder us as we are Christians.

My hasband, Gaffar Shaike submitted written complaint to the local Police station on 31st March 2012 and copied to District Magistrate & Superintendent of Police in Murshidabad district. But, so far police or Administration didn’t take any action. Therefore, Ahammed Shaike, his family members and their extremist groups are giving more troubles to us and forcibly coming to my house and telling us publicly that they will murder us as we are Christians.

I humbly request you kindly pray for God’s protection for me, family & all other Christians in Nutangram village. Also I request you kindly write a letter to the Authorities of my country & State and request them to look after our situation. So, that they might take necessary action and provide protection for me & family and other local Chistians in Nutangram.

With regards,

Aimazan Bibi

* Please write to the authorities : such as

1. President of India:

MRS. PRATIVA SINGH PATIL

Rashtrapati Bhavan,
New Delhi - 110 004
Fax: 011-23017290 & 011-23017824

Email: presidentofindia@rb.nic.in

2. Prime Minister of India
Dr. Monmohan Singh
Fax: 91-11-23019545 / 91-11-23016857
e-mail: manmohan@sansad.nic.in

3. Ministry of Home Affairs,

Mr. P. Chidambaram

Phone: 23092161,23092011
Fax: 23093750, 23092763

email: websitemhaweb@nic.in

4. Chief Minister of West Bengal State.
Miss. Mamata Bannerjee
Email : cm@wb.gov.in
Office Fax : +91 33 22145480

1. Governor of West Bengal State
Mr. M. K. Narayanan
Raj Bhavan
Kolkata 700 062
Phone: 033-2200 1641
Fax: 91 - 33 – 2200 2444 / 2200 1649

Email: secy-gov-wb@nic.in
governor-wb@nic.in

Note: UK residents may approach the High Commissioner of India, London: His Excellency Dr. J. Bhagwati: India House, Aldwych, London, WC2B 4NA Tel: 020 7836 8484 Email: hc.office@hcilondon.in

US residents may approach the Indian Ambassador Her Excellency Ambassador Mrs Nirupama Rao 2536 Massachusetts Avenue Northwest Washington, DC 20008, United States (202) 939-7000 Contact page through http://www.indianembassy.org/

"'Trouble was sparked off when a young Muslim boy accidentally put his hand in a drum of water put up by a Hindu to quench the thirst of devotees visiting a nearby temple. An old man running the drinking water kiosk slapped the young boy, who went up his friends loitering around in the neighbourhood.' The Muslim youth retaliated by mustering up a larger crowd and resorting to violence and arson on the streets. Dozens of vehicles, shops and other public as well as private property was set ablaze."

Ah yes, that's an appropriate response to a slap.

"Two dead in communal clash near Mathura," from Rediff, June 2:

Two persons died and several were injured in Friday's communal clash in Kosi-Kalan town in Mathura district, close to Agra, the city of Taj Mahal.

According to delayed reports reaching the state headquarters in Lucknow, violence broke out over drawing of water from a common source by members of two rival communities.

Meanwhile, a curfew has been clamped all over the small town, where a large contingent of the armed police was deployed to prevent any recurrence of violence.

According to the police, "Trouble was sparked off when a young Muslim boy accidentally put his hand in a drum of water put up by a Hindu to quench the thirst of devotees visiting a nearby temple. An old man running the drinking water kiosk slapped the young boy, who went up his friends loitering around in the neighbourhood."

The Muslim youth retaliated by mustering up a larger crowd and resorting to violence and arson on the streets. Dozens of vehicles, shops and other public as well as private property was set ablaze.

It looks as if this judge is trying to play both sides and please everyone. He will more likely end up pleasing no one. Freedom fighters will see his half-measures as more dhimmi impotence, and Islamic supremacists will grow exasperated with even the paper impediments he puts in front of their plans.

Eric Allen Bell has important background on this case here. "Judge voids Tennessee mosque approval but doesn't stop construction," from the Associated Press, June 1 (thanks to all who sent this in):

NASHVILLE, Tenn. – Opponents of a mosque being built in Tennessee have gotten a judge to nullify the government decision that approved it but they lost their bid to stop construction immediately.

Rutherford County Chancellor Robert Corlew states in an order released Friday in the Nashville suburb of Murfreesboro that the approval is void because it was taken in violation of the Tennessee's Open Meetings Act. He ruled earlier this week that the county didn't give the public adequate notice of what has become a contentious issue.

The order prohibits further meetings on the mosque without proper notice.

But the decision also says that if the mosque opponents want to halt construction, they must begin a new court action....

Turkey races toward Sharia restrictions on the freedom of speech in an update on this story. "Turkish pianist charged with insulting Islam," by Selcan Hacaoglu for the Associated Press, June 1 (thanks to all who sent this in):

ANKARA, Turkey (AP) — A Turkish court on Friday formally charged an internationally known pianist and composer with insulting Islamic religious values in comments he made on Twitter.

The court in Istanbul voted to approve an indictment against Fazil Say, who has played piano with the New York Philharmonic, Berlin Symphony Orchestra, Israel Philharmonic, National Orchestra of France and Tokyo Symphony.

The 42-year-old Turk faces charges of inciting hatred and public enmity, and insulting "religious values." Say, who has served as a culture ambassador for the European Union, allegedly mocked Islamic beliefs about paradise in April.

Meltem Akyol, a lawyer for Say, said the pianist has denied the charges. The trial will be held on Oct. 18, she said.

"We certainly do not accept the charges," Akyol said by telephone on Friday. "He has stated in his initial testimony during the probe that he had no intention to humiliate any religion. He was basically criticizing those who are exploiting religion for profit."

Akyol said Say's tweets and retweets on social media cannot be considered as public remarks because only people who follow him can see them. In one tweet cited in the indictment, Say said: "What if there is raki (traditional anisette drink) in paradise but not in hell, while there is Chivas Regal (scotch) in hell and not in paradise? What will happen then? This is the most important question!!"

Islam forbids alcohol and many Islamists might consider such remarks unacceptable. In one of the pianist's retweets, one excerpt questioned whether paradise was a "brothel?" according to the indictment.

Akyol claimed that line belonged to the wine-loving 11th century Persian poet Omar Khayyam, most known for his work the "Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam." But Murat Bardakci, a historian, wrote in HaberTurk newspaper in April that the alleged line did not belong to Khayyam.

"He was merely expressing his ideas within free speech," said Akyol, adding that the renowned artist was not seeking any privileges or immunity from prosecution.

Akyol, meanwhile, confirmed that Say closed his Twitter account before the court decision Friday, because he was annoyed with messages.

"He has lately incurred the wrath of some people," Akyol said. "He has even been receiving death threats."...

Of course.

Walter Scott, The Talisman, the Crusades, Richard I of England and Saladin: Myths, Legends and History
by Ibn Warraq
Part 2
Part 1

Sir Walter Scott, under the influence of the Scottish historian William Robertson, who had perpetuated the Enlightenment myth of the superiority of Islamic civilization, continued the theme of the vain and avaricious Christian Crusaders in contrast to the chivalrous and honorable Saracens. Jonathan Riley-Smith summarizes Scott’s influence on the entire Romantic movement and their attitude to the Crusades:

Four of Scott’s novels involved crusades and crusaders. Count Robert of Paris [1831] was set in Constantinople at the time of the First Crusade; the other three were set during the Third Crusade. Ivanhoe [1819] and The Betrothed [1825] were concerned with events on the home front, while the plot of The Talisman [1825] was set in Palestine and centered on the friendship between a Scottish knight and Saladin, who appeared in a bewildering array of disguises, including that of a skilled physician who cured King Richard of England. The novels painted a picture of crusaders who were brave and glamorous, but also vainglorious, avaricious, childish, and boorish. Few of them were genuinely moved by religion or the crusade ideal; most had taken the cross out of pride, greed, or ambition. The worst of them were the brothers of the military orders, who may have been courageous and disciplined but were also arrogant, privileged, corrupt, voluptuous, and unprincipled. An additional theme, the cultural superiority of the Muslims, which was only hinted at in the other novels, pervaded The Talisman.[2]

Edward Said, in fact, chose the one novel of the crusades which explicitly extolled the virtues of the Saracens and the superiority of their culture, and not the contrary, as he claimed in Orientalism. I shall come back to The Talisman, once I have gone through the other three novels involving crusades or crusaders.

The Betrothed, and Count Robert of Paris.

Sir Walter Scott wrote four novels that refer in one way or other to the Crusades; the first two were published together in 1825 under the general heading Tales of the Crusaders, The Betrothed, and The Talisman, the other two novels being Ivanhoe [1819] and Count Robert of Paris [1832].

Let us dispose of The Betrothed first. Although parts of it were incorporated into Francesco Maria Piave's libretto for Giuseppe Verdi's 1857 opera, Aroldo, The Betrothed is of little literary interest, and is virtually unreadable; Scott’s biographer Hesketh Pearson wrote, "The Betrothed was clearly composed in a somnolent if not stertorous condition, and would score high marks in a competition to decide which was the dreariest and stupidest book ever produced by a writer of genius." [1] It has very little to do with the Crusades as such: the tale unfolds in the Welsh Marches during the reign of Henry II after 1187. One of the characters in the tale, Sir Hugo de Lacy, the Constable of Chester, disappears on a crusade for three years, but the Crusades play no part in the plot.

Count Robert of Paris [1832] is a far more interesting novel, and though it is set in Constantinople at the time of the First Crusade, it works best as a novel of ideas, since it constantly contrasts the manners, principles, goals and actions of the Frankish knights on their way to the Holy Land with those of the values and goals of the Greco-Roman Classical society of Byzantium. Along the way, Scott is able to discuss religion, politics, and the internecine squabbles and grievances amongst the Europeans and the dangers the latter pose to the stabililty of the Byzantine Empire.

One of Scott’s principal sources for the First Crusade and Byzantium in general, and hence the novel Count Robert of Paris, was Anna Comnena or Komnene’s The Alexiad. One of the foremost authorities on the First Crusade and Byzantium, Peter Frankopan, Senior Research Fellow at Worcester College, University of Oxford, wrote, “The Alexiad is perhaps the most famous of all the vast range of Byzantine texts. Written in the mid-twelfth century by a princess, the beautiful and fiercely intelligent Anna Komnene, daughter of Emperor Alexios I Komnenos (reigned 1081-1118), it is a stylish and colourful account of the defining period in the formation of modern Europe. The text covers the time of the First Crusade, the establishment of a Turkish state in Asia Minor, the decisive schism of the eastern and western churches, and ultimately, the separation of the east and west Mediterranean”. [2]

[1] Hesketh Pearson. Walter Scott: His Life and Personality, New York: Harper & Brothers, 1954, p. 54.
[2] Peter Frankopan. Introduction in Anna Komnene The Alexiad. London: Penguin Books, Revised Edn. 2009, p.ix.

To be continued.

Ibn Warraq is the author of numerous books, including Why the West Is Best and Why I Am Not A Muslim.

"All we wanted was to be free to practice our own religions and not be forced to follow Islam, but now we have been punished by being deprived of safe accommodation." Imagine the outcry that would ensue if they had been kicked out of the dorms for refusing Christianity. But no one will take particular notice of this.

Islamic Tolerance Alert: "Protesting students kicked out of dorms," by Bongani Hans for The Mercury, May 31 (thanks to all who sent this in):

A row over the observance of Islamic customs and rules has left about 70 students without a roof over thier [sic] heads.

More than 70 further education and training students on the South Coast have been left without a roof over their heads after they were kicked out of the institution’s dormitories following a row over the observance of Islamic customs and rules.

The Coastal KZN As-Salaam campus in Braemar near Umzinto suspended lessons two weeks ago after students protested that those staying in the college dormitories were being forced to follow the religion.

About 500 students study at the college premises.

The campus was reopened on Tuesday, but more than 70 students who had been living in the dormitories, were told to find their own accommodation outside the institution.

Those living in dormitories were funded by the Department of Higher Education’s national student financial aid scheme, which was believed to be paying about R16 000 a student a year towards meals and accommodation. The beneficiaries said they could not afford to pay for their accommodation and meals because they were from poor families.

“Now that we have been kicked out of the dormitories, our parents have been forced to pay for rent outside the college. I’m paying R300 a month and I’m sharing the room with 11 other students, and I still have to buy groceries. In the dormitories, I was sharing the room with four people, and the meals were provided by the college,” student Zanele Mgedezi said....

The students went on strike after campus management allegedly compelled them to study the Qur’an and wear Muslim clothes.

They said they were not allowed to carry Bibles inside the premises.

The campus belongs to the Department of Higher Education, which rents the premises to the As-Salaam Institution, which promotes Islamic education and religion.

“All we wanted was to be free to practice our own religions and not be forced to follow Islam, but now we have been punished by being deprived of safe accommodation,” said Mofokeng.....

Frontpage’s editor Jamie Glazov appeared on GBTV on May 30 to discuss the Unholy Alliance between the radical Left and Islamic Jihad. Host Erick Stakelbeck filled in for Glenn Beck.

Last month, Sheikh Yassir al-Burhami, a prominent figure in Egypt’s Salafi movement—who also hates Christian Copts, hates Mother’s Day, and is an advocate of taqiyya—appeared on the Egyptian show Al Hayat Al Youm ("Life Today"), giving his views on the presidential candidates. At one point, the host asked Burhami which of the policies of Abu al-Futuh—the “liberal” Islamist candidate who lost out to the more “conservative” Muslim Brotherhood candidate—he especially rejected.

Burhami started vaguely, saying “There were some things we were concerned about,” adding that they met and discussed these matters with Abu al-Futuh, and how the latter had clarified his position, finally agreeing that he might need to revise his opinion.

Then Burhami made clear what the issue was: Apostasy—if Muslims have the right to leave Islam and convert to other religions. In the words of Burhami:

For example, is it the right of the Muslim to convert to Christianity or another religion? Of course this is not a right; this is a matter that Sharia has clearly addressed, according to the agreed upon hadiths. It is impermissible, for any reason, for a Muslim to leave the community. Of course, you cannot coerce any infidel to enter into Islam [Koran 2:256]—except for the apostate. It is impossible to let the apostate remain in [a state of] apostasy, deeming it a form of “freedom.”

For the record, the “agreed upon hadiths” that Burhami indicated, are, in fact, unequivocal in regards to the crime of apostasy. The most canonical and oft cited among them simply has Muhammad saying: “Whoever leaves his religion, kill him.”

Hamas-linked CAIR distributed this poster in California

Actually, true to form, they were helping Muslims learn how to impede counterterror efforts. If the mainstream media narrative were correct, that the vast majority of Muslims are peaceful and loyal citizens, we should expect to see frequent seminars from Muslim groups exhorting Muslims to cooperate with counterterror investigations. Yet we don't see any, and no one ever seems to notice or care.

"CAIR-MI Holds ‘Know Your Rights’ Presentation," from Hamas-linked CAIR-MI, May 29 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

(SOUTHFIELD, MI, 5/29/12) - The Michigan chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-MI) recently held a "Know Your Rights" presentation at the Islamic Center of Detroit in Detroit, Mich.

The presentation primarily focused on the rights of citizens and legal residents within American borders to have an attorney present while being questioned by local, state and federal law enforcement.

The session also focused on citizens and legal residents' right to refuse answering invasive questioning by federal law enforcement agents pertaining to religious beliefs and practices.

CAIR-MI recently filed a federal lawsuit against Custom Border Protection (CBP), FBI and Transportation Security Administration (TSA) for invasive religious questioning of Michigan Muslims....

Any Arab or Muslim group that believes in the Constitutional principle of equality of rights of all people before the law should reject and oppose this. But they won't.

Here is the fruit of the Muslim advocacy groups' victimhood myth. But in reality, hate crimes against Muslims are infrequent:

Anti-Jewish attacks 70% of hate crimes, anti-Muslim attacks 9% of hate crimes -- Senate to hold hearings on "anti-Muslim bigotry"

Just-released New York 2009 report: Hate crimes against Jews: 251. Hate crimes against Muslims: 11.

Backlash! Anti-Muslim hate crimes only eight percent of hate crimes, far less than those against Jews

And so in order to deflect attention away from jihad activity and try to portray Muslims as victims, so as to shame non-Muslims into not investigating or even being suspicious of further jihad activity, Islamic supremacist groups have resorted to making it up. Hamas-linked CAIR and other Muslims have not hesitated to fabricate "hate crimes." CAIR and other groups like it want and need hate crimes against Muslims, because they can use them for political points and as weapons to intimidate people into remaining silent about the jihad threat.

"Feds consider special rights for Arab Americans," by Rachel Leven for The Washington Times, May 29 (thanks to all who sent this in):

The Commerce Department is considering naming Arab Americans a socially and economically disadvantaged minority group that is eligible for special business assistance.

The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) petitioned Commerce earlier this year to ask that Arab Americans be made eligible for the Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA), which helps minority entrepreneurs gain access to capital, contracts and trade opportunities.

The ADC petition cited “discrimination and prejudice in American society resulting in conditions under which Arab-American individuals have been unable to compete in a business world.” The group claimed discrimination against Arab Americans increased after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Only in the sixth paragraph does the BBC let slip, and then only indirectly, that these "people" are Islamic jihadists. Why? For whom are they covering, and for what reason?

"Azerbaijan 'foiled plot to attack Eurovision,'" from the BBC, May 30 (thanks to all who sent this in):

Azerbaijan says it has arrested 40 people suspected of having plotted a "terrorist" attack on last week's Eurovision Song Contest in Baku.

The Azeri National Security Ministry says the plotters had planned to attack the event's venue - the Baku Crystal Hall - and several hotels on the eve of the competition.

The news was deliberately held back to prevent alarm among visitors, it adds.

There has been no independent confirmation of the alleged plot.

The suspects had "obtained Eurovision tickets with the aim of (committing) a terrorist act at the Baku Crystal Hall", the official statement said. Among the hotels named as targets were Hilton Baku and the JW Marriott Hotel.

They allegedly had links to neighbouring Dagestan, a mainly Muslim republic in the Russian North Caucasus plagued by Islamist insurgent attacks.

The suspects were found possessing guns and explosives, the ministry says....

53,000 Square Foot Mega Mosque, Under Construction, May 2012

The Murfreesboro Mosque: Built on a Foundation of Lies
by Eric Allen Bell

A huge grassy field in Murfreesboro, Tennessee – summer, 2010. My video camera was set on its tripod, ready to film the first shot in what would become over 300 hours of footage, for a documentary I was about to produce. This documentary was to be about how a small town, in the heart of the American Bible Belt, was reacting to the proposed construction of a 53,000 square foot mega mosque. I was standing on a plot of land that was to become the site of rushed construction of this massive structure, the subject of international media attention, lawsuits, an arson, vandalism, interfaith rallies, and press conferences. This plot of land was about to be highly politically charged and would even become the mysterious burial site of a human body.

And so I pointed my camera and I filmed my first shot: a huge red, white and blue banner, directed at the passing cars of local residents on a rural country two-lane highway. It was hard to know at that time if the banner was patriotic, a bit of public relations or a mix of both. It read: “Happy 4th of July from the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro”.

FOUNDATION:

I later learned about another sign that had stood recently in that same spot, one that was defaced, a sign that would become the poster for my documentary and provide its title as well. That sign had read: “Future home of the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro” and across were spray painted the words “Not Welcome”.

The premise of “Not Welcome” was that, contained within this image of the defaced sign, was a story. And I felt that within the story of this defaced sign was the story of human civilization and our inability to peacefully coexist. I may have been a bit naïve, but I meant well. Coexistence seemed like a good idea. And Mufreesboro seemed like a microcosm of the world, and an excellent jumping off point to look more deeply and how and why we are divided as a people on this planet. Little did I know that I was going down a rabbit hole, for which there was no turning back.

A couple weeks later there was a rally and a march against the mosque, down Main Street in Murfreesboro. The anti-mosque marchers were met with counter-demonstrators, organized by college kids, who held up a big banner which read: “Coexist” – using the symbols of all of the world’s major religions. And it didn’t take me long to lose my objectivity and to take sides. I had a film crew embedded with the townspeople who were marching against the mosque. And I had a film crew embedded with the college activists, who were there to say that the Muslims were being picked on and that this was an issue of religious freedom. And given my Liberal leanings, I tended to see the Muslim community as the underdog and those who were fighting the mosque to be the bullies.

And so I did a lot of bad things, thinking they were good things. I helped a colleague at “The Daily Show” in their attempt to humiliate prominent members of the Mufreesboro Counter Jihad movement. I accepted the support of Michael Moore, to expose what I (wrongly) thought was a foaming at the mouth, bigoted Evangelical bullying of a minority group. I said and did things, in print, on the news, everywhere, which have consequences. And much of my work today is focused on correcting my mistakes and educating the world about what I now know to be the defining issue of our time: The grave threat of Political Islam.

It would be fantastic indeed, if they were taught how to read it carefully and critically, so as to understand how jihadists use it to justify violence and supremacism. But that won't happen.

"Schools could be sent copies of the Koran, Michael Gove says," by Christopher Hope and Andrew Hough in the Telegraph, May 25 (thanks to all who sent this in):

Every school in England could be sent free copies of the Koran, Michael Gove has said.

The Education Secretary said it would be “fantastic” if a rich benefactor would support sending out copies of the Islamic holy text to schools.

There is no shortage of those among Muslims and Islamophiles.

Mr Gove has been an enthusiastic supporter of a current privately-funded scheme to send copies of the King James’ Bible to every state primary and secondary school in England.

Last week thousands of the books were sent out to mark the book’s 400th anniversary.

Asked in a radio interview if he would “consider sending out other important texts like the Koran”, he said: “Well if people wanted to put forward proposals to me, philanthropists or others, for distributing great books to school then fantastic.”...

Walter Scott, The Talisman, the Crusades, Richard I of England and Saladin: Myths, Legends and History
by Ibn Warraq
PART I

PREAMBLE.

Genesis of an Idea.

The present essay grew out of my inquiries into something that Edward Said wrote about Sir Walter Scott’s The Talisman. It took on a life of its own, and grew and grew, and led me into the Crusades generally. What follows is not meant as a complete narrative history of the Crusades -- some superb new histories of the Crusades have appeared in the last ten years [1], I do not need to add to these, even if I could -- rather, I wish to examine some of the myths and legends perpetuated by Sir Walter Scott in his novels on the Crusades, and at the same time I wish to elucidate, if possible, the motives of the Crusaders, and the real origins of the Crusades. I began my studies of Scott’s Crusade novels three years ago with an examination of Ivanhoe in Sir Walter Scott, Jews and Saracens, and Other Sundry Subjects [2], but never finished them; this present essay is my belated effort to make good on my promise. While recently researching the historical background of Scott’s novel The Talisman, which recounts the exploits of Saladin and Richard the Lionheart during the Third Crusade, I came across Sir Hamilton Gibb’s biography -- or rather hagiography, as we shall see later -- of Saladin. Gibb [1895-1971], born in Alexandria, Egypt, but later educated in Edinburgh, was one of the last great Orientalists, or as Albert Hourani described him, “the last of the universal Arabists”; a professor at SOAS, then Oxford, and finally at Harvard. I discovered something that delighted me, since the discovery adds a certain poetic symmetry and brings some kind of justification to my study of Scott’s The Talisman. Here is the treasure: Sir Hamilton Gibb not only attended the same school as Scott in Edinburgh, he also immersed himself in Scott’s novel at an early age, and Saladin became his hero; and when he became a historian and university professor, Gibb recommended The Talisman to his students as “a work of art from which they could learn much about Islamic history”. [3]

Three years ago, I began my essay on Scott’s novels with what Edward Said said of The Talisman:

Edward Said, the late Professor of Comparative Literature at Columbia University, has, in his influential Orientalism, a characteristically shallow, sneering aside on Sir Walter Scott, and, in particular, on his novel, The Talisman:

In Scott’s novel The Talisman (1825), Sir Kenneth (of the Crouching Leopard) battles a single Saracen to a standoff somewhere in the Palestinian desert; as the Crusader and his opponent, who is Saladin in disguise, later engage in conversation, the Christian discovers his Muslim antagonist to be not so bad a fellow after all. Yet he remarks: "I well thought…that your blinded race had their descent from the foul fiend, without whose aid you would never have been able to maintain this blessed land of Palestine against so many valiant soldiers of God. I speak not thus of thee in particular, Saracen, but generally of thy people and religion. Strange is it to me, however, not that you should have the descent from the Evil One, but that you should boast of it." For indeed the Saracen does boast of tracing his race’s line back to Eblis, the Muslim Lucifer. But what is truly curious is not the feeble historicism by which Scott makes the scene “medieval,” letting Christian attack Muslim theologically in a way nineteenth-century Europeans would not (they would, though); rather, it is the airy condescension of damning a whole people “generally” while mitigating the offense with a cool “I don’t mean you in particular.”

Not only does Said make the unwarranted assumption that Sir Kenneth is voicing Scott’s thoughts [Said would have done well to heed Waugh’s motto to Brideshead Revisited, “I am not I; thou art not he or she; they are not they”], he misunderstands and or at least fails to mention, the entire import of Scott’s novel, the contrast between the two cultures, particularly in the early chapters, with the Muslim one emerging to its advantage many times over. We come away from the novel with a sense of the chivalrous superiority of the Saracens. [4] (Incidentally, Said accuses Scott, creator of the historical novel, of “feeble historicism”, when he clearly means “historicity”).

[1] Thomas Asbridge. The Crusades. New York: Harper Collins, 2010.
Christopher Tyerman. God’s War. A New History of the Crusades. Cambridge [Mass.]: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2006
Jonathan Riley-Smith, The Crusades, A History. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2005 [2nd Edn.]
Jonathan Riley Smith. The Crusades, Christianity, and Islam. New York: Columbia University Press, 2008.
Thomas F.Madden. The New Concise History of the Crusades. New York: Barnes and Noble, 2006.
Peter Frankopan. The First Crusade. The Call from the East. Cambridge [Mass.]: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2012.

[2] See http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/37551/sec_id/37551

[3] Albert Hourani. Europe and the Middle East. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1980, p106.

[4] Paul Pelckmans. Walter Scott’s Orient: The Talisman. In Oriental Propects Edd. Barfoot, D'Haen. Rodopi: Amsterdam & New York, 1998, p.99.

To be continued.

Ibn Warraq is the author of numerous books, including Why the West Is Best and Why I Am Not A Muslim.

Egypt: Copts Dismayed At Unjust Verdict
by Joseph Nassralla

The verdict passed by the Minya Criminal Court on May 21 convicting 12 Copts and sentencing them to life imprisonment while acquitting eight accused Muslims in the same case, known as the Abu Qurqas sedition case, has caused widespread anger among the Copts. Georges Wahib of United Copts, who attended the court session, said that when judge Abdel Fattah Ahmed al-Sughayar pronounced the verdict at the court, "there was complete silence, as it came as a shock to everyone. Then cries of grief and wailing could be heard from the Coptic families with shouts of we are innocent, while the Muslim side broke out into jubilation and shouts of Allahu Akbar."

All prisoners were taken to the basement, and the court itself was surrounded by hundreds of military police. For security reasons, the court session was transferred to Beni Suef from Minya Criminal Court.

The events of the case started on April 18, 2011 over a speed hump built in front of the residence of a wealthy Coptic lawyer, Alaa Reda Roushdi, which a minibus driver claimed was damaging cars. The fight that broke out led to the death of 2 Muslims, injury to 4 Copts, and the destruction and looting of Coptic-owned homes and businesses. THE WAY TV www.atvsat.com) covered all this at the time.

Many rights groups criticized the verdict as being "unbelievable" and "extremely harsh" towards the Copts. All the Muslim defendants, "who torched at least 56 Coptic homes, as well as businesses and barns, were acquitted," said Wagdi Halfa, defense attorney of the Coptic victims, in an interview aired by THE WAY TV Channel. He expressed his incomprehension at how Coptic lawyer Alaa Reda Roushdi, who was not even in Abou Qorqas during the events, and then was kept under house arrest by the police for another three days, could get life imprisonment.

The brother of Alaa Roushdi said during the same TV interview that the Islamists wanted to get rid of his brother because of the parliamentary elections, which his brother was sure to win. He accused the police chief in Abou Qorqas of planning the whole episode.

Dr. Naguib Gabriel, president of the Egyptian Union Human Rights Organization, said that one should not keep silent over the continuing harsh verdicts against the Copts. He called upon the military council to stop the implementation of this ruling and to order a retrial of the case in an ordinary court in another district. He said, "Where is the conscience and faith of the judge in connection with the torching of Christian homes and shops by Muslims, as reported by the police?" He also questioned the reason for having the case in front of an Emergency State Security court, where no appeal is allowed, while the charges were murder, attempted murder, unlawful assembly and carrying of firearms.

Mr Joseph Nassrallah, the founder of THE WAY TV, witnessed all the events happening in Abou Qorqas. The Muslims attacked the Christian houses and shops in the area for about 3 hours. Live on the air, The Way TV was talking with the Christians crying and asking for help and receiving no answer. On 19 April 2011, this was posted on the TV site www.atvsat.com.

Ehab Ramzy, one of the lawyers and a member of the Egyptian Parliament, described the verdict as racist and unjust, adding that "it also shows that the Egyptian judiciary takes its orders from higher authorities."

The European Union of Coptic Organizations for Human Rights (EUCOHR) issued a statement that it would not keep silent about the injustice in this case, and that it is calling for an urgent meeting with members of the European Parliament in Brussels to explain the tragedy of Copts in Egypt. They called upon the governing Supreme Council of the Armed Forces to use its constitutional powers to nullify this verdict and present the defendants to another court, where the rule of law and human rights are honored.

Dozens of Coptic human rights organizations and hundreds of Copts staged a sit-in at midday on May 22 in front of the Cairo High Court, denouncing the court ruling. The protesters raised banners bearing the phrase "by the mercy of God, the Egyptian judiciary is dead" and "This is a Country governed by beards and not the law." They chanted "Down with the military," "Muslims and Christians -- one hand," and demanded the equal application of justice and non-discrimination among Egyptians.

Attorney Karam Gabriel, who was present at the sit-in, said that the deputy attorney general called the Coptic lawyers and they presented their grievances against the Court's ruling, "which is beyond belief." He said that the deputy attorney general promised to have a look at the verdict and could then present a grievance memo to the military commander. Karam also said that the president of the bar association will also send a grievance memorandum, because one of the twelve convicted Christians is Alaa Roushdi, a lawyer.

Pastor Boutros Anba Bola, who was at the sit-in, explained that this unjust verdict was passed at this point in time before the presidential election by an Islamist judge in order to make the Christians feel low and depressed so as not to participate in the voting, besides penalizing them for not wishing to vote for Islamists. He told Coptic activist Mariam Ragy in an audio interview that although he is not supposed to recommend any candidate, still he recommends General Ahmad Shafik, "as he is the best one for the Copts."

In Alexandria, nearly two thousand Copts and Muslims have staged a protest in front of the high court denouncing the "unjust verdict of the Salafist judiciary," said activist Grace Iskandar from International Echo Organization. She said that their sit-in will remain until a just verdict is achieved. Another protest was scheduled in Alexandria for Saturday May 26.

Joseph Nassralla is the founder of The Way TV.

And we are remaining in Afghanistan and subjecting our troops to this for what purpose?

"Afghan insurgents attack US-led coalition base: NATO," from AP, June 1:

KABUL, Afghanistan — A suicide car bomber and other insurgents attacked a US-led coalition base Friday outside of Khost, the capital of Khost province in eastern Afghanistan, Afghan officials said. There was no immediate information about military casualties, but at least six civilians were wounded.

The Taliban claimed responsibility for the attack.

NATO confirmed that insurgents attacked a coalition base at 1 p.m. local time in the east but did not disclose the location.

In the past two years, tens of thousands of US-led coalition troops have flooded Taliban strongholds in the south and have largely succeeded in boosting security there. But the Taliban have proven resilient, opening up new fronts in the north and west and stepping up attacks in the east, where much of the heaviest fighting is presently concentrated.

NATO plans to pull combat troops out of Afghanistan by the end of 2014 and turn security over to local forces.

Provincial police chief Gen. Sardar Mohammad Zazai said the blast occurred at a coalition base about 3 miles outside Khost.

"It was a very strong blast. Khost city shook and we heard firing," Zazai said.

Gen. Gula Jan, an Afghan police official who was at the scene, said the attack occurred at Camp Salerno. Jan said six civilians — three women and three children — were wounded when a wall collapsed from the force of the explosion.

"The blast was inside the compound and then we heard firing," Jan said. "There is a helicopter flying over the base."

Zabiullah Mujahid, a spokesman for the Taliban, said a suicide bomber targeted the base in an explosives-filled car that slipped onto the base near where coalition troops dine.

"The truck was full of explosives," Mujahid said in a statement.

He said that after the blast, other insurgents entered the compound on foot and opened fire.

"They had suicide vests, rocket-propelled grenades, heavy machine guns and hand grenades," Mujahid said, adding that fighting was still under way at the site.

Mujahid claimed that an airplane on an airstrip at the base was destroyed and that "tens" of foreign forces were killed and wounded, but that could not be independently confirmed....

There is no significant call for turning it back into a church. Christians get no "right of return" to Constantinople. "Muslims praying that historic museum in Turkey be turned into mosque," by Ayla Jean Yackley for Reuters, May 27 (thanks to all who sent this in):

Thousands of devout Muslims prayed outside Turkey's historic Hagia Sophia museum on Saturday to protest a 1934 law that bars religious services at the former church and mosque.

Worshippers shouted, "Break the chains, let Hagia Sophia Mosque open," and "God is great" before kneeling in prayer as tourists looked on.

Turkey's secular laws prevent Muslims and Christians from formal worship within the 6th-century monument, the world's greatest cathedral for almost a millennium before invading Ottomans converted it into a mosque in the 15th century.

"Keeping Hagia Sophia Mosque closed is an insult to our mostly Muslim population of 75 million. It symbolises our ill-treatment by the West," Salih Turhan, head of the Anatolian Youth Association, which organised the event, told the crowd, whose male and female worshippers prayed separately according to Islamic custom.

The government has rejected requests from both Christians and Muslims to hold formal prayers at the site, historically and spiritually significant to adherents of both religions....

In 2010, 200 or so Greek American Orthodox aborted plans to pray at Hagia Sophia after the Turkish government threatened to block their entry into the country on security grounds.

The Ecumenical Patriarchate, spiritual leader of the world's 250 million Orthodox, does not support efforts to revert its former dominion into a church.

"We want it to remain a museum in line with the Republic of Turkey's principles," said Father Dositheos Anagnostopulos, the patriarch's spokesman.

"If it were to become a mosque, Christians wouldn't be able to pray there, and if it became a church it would be chaos."

And everyone knows why there would be chaos.

Pipe dreams. Sallah says that Allah blessed Saudi Arabia with oil, and ties that to its adherence to Sharia. So how, then, to explain the poverty of the Sharia-enforcing areas of Somalia and Nigeria? Pakistan is very nearly a full Sharia state, and yet economically it compares quite unfavorably to India. Islamic law actually instills no work ethic and teaches Muslims to live off the dhimmis -- hence the need for jihad conquest. When jihad conquests and dhimmi wealth are not in the offing or the dhimmis have been bled dry, Sharia states stagnate economically. This creates an everlasting conundrum for Muslims like Sallah. Sayyid Qutb, the great 20th-century jihad theorist, also taught that adherence to Sharia would bring prosperity -- yet the evidence of his eyes was everywhere disconfirming, so he had to find a scapegoat. Sharia adherents know their countries are poor, and they think Sharia will bring wealth. When it doesn't, they inevitably turn to conspiracy theories: their continuing lack of prosperity must be the work of the Jews.

"Egyptian Cleric Muhammad Sallah: Implementing Religious Law Will Make Egypt the Mightiest Country in World, Richer Than Sweden," from MEMRI, May 4 (thanks to Wimpy):

Following are excerpts from a Friday sermon delivered by Egyptian cleric Sheik Muhammad Sallah, which aired on Al-Hekma TV on May 4, 2012:

[...]

You are wrong in your assessment that if Islam comes to power, people’s hands will be chopped off. This would mean that we are thieves. Are we really thieves? They say that Islam will stone people. This would mean that we are fornicators. Are we really fornicators? They say that people’s hands and feet on alternate sides will be chopped off. This would mean that we have committed hiraba. But we are not like that. This people rejects sin and rebels against tyranny. The shari’a of Allah is the way to resolve crises.

[...]

If we accept the demands of Allah and implement His laws, we will live according to His words: “If the people of the towns had but believed and feared Allah, we should have opened for them all kinds of blessings from heaven and earth.”

The best proof of this is Saudi Arabia. Abraham said [to Allah]: “My Lord, I have made some of my offspring dwell in a valley without cultivation, near Thy Sacred House.” But this “valley without cultivation” exports wheat, this “valley without cultivation” received bounty from the skies. Thus, airplanes carrying pilgrims in their millions have landed there. The people in that country live a life of plenty, after having lived a life of hardship, poverty, and deprivation. The land gives forth minerals and petroleum, and it has become one of the wealthiest countries. Why? It is thanks to the law of Allah.

If a country with no potential for wealth can live in such abundance and joy, it is needless to say what would become of a country full of natural resources, if it implemented the law of Allah. By Allah, [Egypt] would be the mightiest nation of the world. It would be richer than Sweden, and its per capita income would be higher than any European country. Hence, our enemies do not want us to have stability, prosperity, or security, and they are constantly instigating civil strife, which afflicts the people like wildfire.
Therefore, you must be vigilant. Be vigilant.

Imam Rauf should be jetting to Khartoum any minute now, to explain to Sudanese officials how they are misunderstanding Sharia, which is utterly benign and compatible with Western notions of human rights.

"Young woman sentenced to death by stoning in Sudan," by Alexander Dziadosz for Reuters, May 31 (thanks to Wimpy):

(Reuters) - A Sudanese woman, believed to be around 20, has been sentenced to be stoned to death for adultery, and is being held near Khartoum, shackled in prison with her baby son, rights groups and lawyers said on Thursday.

Campaigners condemned the ruling, saying it violated international standards and raised concerns that Sudan might start applying sharia, or Islamic law, more strictly following the secession of mostly non-Muslim South Sudan last year.

The woman, Intisar Sharif Abdalla, was sentenced by the Ombada criminal court on April 22, court documents seen by Reuters showed.

Two lawyers assigned to her case, who declined to be named, said they were launching an appeal adding Abdalla appeared to be under severe psychological strain.

"She's in dire need of a psychiatrist because she appears to be in a state of shock from the social and family pressures she's under," one lawyer said.

Abdalla was illiterate and did not have a lawyer or interpreter in the courtroom, although Arabic is not her native language, the lawyers and activists added.

Arabic is the main language in the overwhelmingly Muslim nation, though a wide range of smaller languages are also spoken, particularly in tribal areas. It was unclear where Abdalla came from.

Officials in Sudan's justice and information ministries said they could not immediately comment on the case when Reuters contacted them by phone.

Abdalla's exact age has not been confirmed, but activists said she was believed to be around 20, although some reports indicated she could be younger....

In 2010, the case of Lubna Hussein, a Sudanese U.N. official, sparked international furor when she was sentenced to flogging for wearing trousers.

Fahima Hashim, a women's rights activist following Abdalla's case, said sentences were often inconsistent in Sudan because the legal system gave authority to judges to decide punishments. Previous stoning sentences had not been carried out, she said.

Hashim called for the reform of articles in Sudan's criminal code which she said harm women's rights, including one used in Abdalla's case.

As long as this articles remained unchanged, execution by stoning would not be out of the question, she said. "It's a threat. It could happen."

This just in from a moderate Muslim who opposes jihad terror but has not quite grasped that "peace" thing:

Name: Humanity

Email: somebody50@hotmail.co.uk

Subject: Listen

Message: Im a muslim but im also a human all these muslims who say it sais to terrise them in the quran are fucking stupid shitheads I would kill them myself if I could. The attack of 9/11 was WRONG and if any muslim who sais they deserved it deserves to die. Osama bin laden is islams worst enemy portrayed as a hero. Now listen you demented fucking basterds dont you fucking promote jihad or you will burn on the da of judgement. You fucking idiots I hope you die from cancer and pain in every single bone in your fucking body. You repeat the 9/11 and we will mass murder all the muslims who follow you we have high links. muslims believe in peace but killing fags like you il be doing a favor to god and il enjoy your throates being cut of and your blood ozzing out before me. You do one attack and we attack you. Dont play the game if you cant take the heat #Humanity

Muhammad said, "If anyone changes his religion, kill him," and the death penalty for apostasy is still part of Islamic law. Those who choose to leave Islam have to live with a death sentence over the heads for the rest of their lives -- even if they live in the U.S. But Muslim "civil rights" organizations whine about "Islamophobia" and never say a word about the human rights of apostates from Islam. Meanwhile, the former Muslim Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani is on death row in Iran for exercising his freedom of conscience, and apostates from Islam are brutalized and killed all over the Islamic world, or live a lie, hiding their true beliefs.

If we don't stand up and call upon our leaders to protect the freedom of conscience, it will become a relic of history not just in the Islamic world, but in the West as well, where even now groups of former Muslims only appear in public heavily guarded. Is this the society we want for our children? Stand up for the freedom of conscience now, at our Summer Night for Human Rights in Manhattan Beach, California on June 23. We're countering Hamas-linked CAIR's deceptive "Summer Night for Civil Rights" victimhood fest, which will be held blocks away at the same time.

Stand with us for freedom for all people: register for the conference by writing to AFDISIOA@aol.com. Attendance is free (CAIR's conference will cost you a Franklin).

Over at Gatestone Institute (via RaymondIbrahim.com) I summarize an Arabic report alleging that the Muslim Brotherhood presidential candidate sees himself as the "second Islamic conqueror" of Egypt, who will enforce jizya on the nation's Christians. As I point out, it's hard to believe he would make these statements, considering he's currently trying to convince everyone -- especially Copts and women -- that he's a "moderate," to get their votes. Still, conquest and subjugation are very much in keeping with the Muslim Brotherhood's worldview, and slips of the tongue, especially now in Egypt, where passions are flying high, are common enough. You decide:

According to the popular Egyptian website, El Bashayer, Muhammad Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood presidential candidate, just declared that he will "achieve the Islamic conquest (fath) of Egypt for the second time, and make all Christians convert to Islam, or else pay the jizya," the traditional Islamic tax, or financial tribute, required of non-Muslim "dhimmis."

In a brief report written by Samuel al-Ashay and published by El Bashayer on May 27, Morsi allegedly made these comments while speaking with a journalist at the headquarters of the Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party, adding "We will not allow Ahmed Shafiq [his contending presidential candidate] or anyone else to impede our second Islamic conquest of Egypt."

After his interviewer pointed out that the first Muslim conquest of Egypt was "carried out at the hands of Amr bin al-As [in 641]," he asked Morsi, "Who will the second Islamic conqueror be?" The presidential candidate replied, "The second Muslim conqueror will be Muhammad Morsi," referring to himself, "and history will record it."

When asked what he thought about many Christian Copts coming out to vote for his secular opponent, Ahmed Shafiq, Morsi reportedly said, "They need to know that conquest is coming, and Egypt will be Islamic, and that they must pay jizya or emigrate."

If this interview is accurate, certainly Morsi would not be the first political Islamist in Egypt to say he wants to see the nation's Christians subjugated and made to pay jizya (see here for more examples)....

While Fox News and the Daily Mail are irresponsibly publishing utterly baseless speculation about the honor murders of Amina and Sarah Said, Pamela Geller has some actual news: an assessment of the case as it stands now from Gail Gartrell, Amina and Sarah's aunt.

May 30, 2012

Justice? I think not!

It is nearing the five year anniversary of the honor killing of my great nieces, Amina and Sarah Said. Within this time, much has transpired. Many facts have surfaced which has helped me to better understand what kind of hell these two beautiful and intelligent girls lived through, before being murdered for the sake of cleansing the Said name. They were spied upon by their murderous father and brother, Islam. This spying occurred at home, work, tennis practice, school and penetrated every aspect of their lives, including them sleeping. I have seen videos of the girls being harassed by Yasser filming them and telling Islam to pull the covers from them. Remarks from their murderous dad sounded more like something a lover would say to his love! At one point, Amina tells her father that what he is doing is illegal and yet, he kept on filming. I have heard from a near and dear friend of Amina's that she was afraid of her uncle too as he called her after her dad found out that she had a boyfriend and told Amina, " If you do not stop this, I will come to Texas and take care of you myself!" Thus, I learned that Amina and Sarah had many threats to live with and yet, they bravely kept smiles upon their faces as they attempted to succeed in academics, sports and their hopeful futures, as doctors.

Since the murders, I have been told to embrace my niece, " She is a victim and has been brainwashed! You need to support her.", by one of the detectives on the girls' case. I was stunned by his words of scorn towards me. These words came soon after the murders of Amina and Sarah. I wondered how he came to this conclusion so quickly? Did Sarah's 911 call seal the fate of this investigation? After all, she did name her dad as the one who shot her and her sister! They had the murderer and the bodies! Case closed? I suppose so as it seems to me that it is a cold case now and Yasser is living as a free man. This caused me great pain to feel as though they would never get the justice they deserve. My calling this an honor killing and receiving 100's of death threats for doing so...was telling the truth in vain? I am beginning to think so! I do not regret speaking the truth the day of the girls funerals. I had too! However, I do believe my words caused great concern for the Irving Police Department. In as much, I have turned a weary eye towards the ones who are suppose to be seeking a double murderer, but seems more concerned about the political correctness surrounding this case. In fact, if I am not mistaken, I do believe that most, or all of the honor murderers in the United States are in jail for their crimes. Why isn't Yasser?

Let me share what I know as facts about the night the girls were murdered and you decide! Patricia Said, the girls mother was questioned by the Irving Police. While she was being questioned, Islam, the girls brother, was in the lobby of the police department. Islam, was never questioned that night, nor any other night! Why not? After all, he was with Yasser the prior weeks leading up to the murders. He was alone with Yasser the week before the girls were murdered! I would think Islam would be a key person to question, but that's just common sense! To my knowledge, Islam has not been questioned to this day. Now, as the questioning went on with Patricia, the two boys who loved Amina and Sarah arrived at the police department too. They waited and waited only to be shocked by the news that the girls were murdered earlier that evening. These boys ran with my niece and the two girls. Were they questioned? NO! Again, as to this day, they have not been questioned, to my knowledge. Three very important figures were never questioned and yet, they were at the Irving Police Department the night of this double honor killing....

Pamela has much more, as well as rare photos of the girls. Read it all.

KUALA LUMPUR: Two influential American senators have praised [Malaysian Prime Minister] Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak for his efforts in introducing reforms and making Malaysia a model Muslim country that practised free enterprise, democracy and progress economically.

Senator John McCain and Senator Joseph Lieberman, who are on a working visit to Malaysia, said they made this observation during their meetings with the Government, opposition members and civil society leaders.

“We are very pleased with our visit to Malaysia. We have been impressed with the economic, political and social development that have taken place,” McCain told a joint press conference with Lieberman here on Thursday.

He also said the US looked forward to fair and free elections in Malaysia.

They'll have to get in line. This man is already in prison in Pakistan and widely hated for turning in Osama in that country that is supposedly our friend and ally. "Taliban vows to cut Pakistan's bin Laden doctor 'into pieces,'" from Newscore, May 31:

PESHAWAR, Pakistan -- The Taliban on Thursday called for the death of the jailed Pakistani doctor who helped the US find Osama bin Laden, vowing to "cut him into pieces when and where we manage to reach him."

Taliban spokesman Ehsanullah Ehsan told AFP that Dr. Shakil Afridi was at the top of the terrorist organization's kill list, vowing, "We will cut him into pieces when and where we manage to reach him."

"This court judgment and punishment is all a drama, staged to hand him over to America," Ehsan added.

Earlier Thursday, a Pakistani militant group accused of having links to Afridi denied associating with him and said they would "chew him alive" if they found him.

A commander from the Lashkar e Islam militant group said on condition of anonymity that, "We have no link to such a shameless man. If we see him we'll chew him alive."

His denial came after details of the May 24 verdict in Afridi's case were revealed Wednesday.

The verdict claimed that Afridi was jailed for 33 years in Pakistan because of his links to Lashkar e Islam, not for his role in helping the CIA track down the former terror leader....

Pull my other leg.

Tables turned: a Muslim journalist who has never stood for freedom, Mona Eltahawy, is learning how to become a racist, bigoted Islamophobe: dare to criticize the human rights abuses inherent in Islamic law. In "Muslim Journalist Challenges Sharia, Gets Accused of ‘Hate’: Mona Eltahawy receives the typical treatment given to defenders of Muslim women" in PJMedia today, I discuss the furious reaction that Eltahawy got from Islamic supremacists Leila Ahmed and Dalia Mogahed when she dared to criticize practices that are rooted in Sharia:

Mona Eltahawy’s piece in the May/June issue of Foreign Policy criticized a series of practices that are justified in Islamic law, including child marriage, wife-beating, and female genital mutilation. Counter-jihadist activists and writers have been calling attention to these human rights abuses for years, but Eltahawy’s piece was singular in that she is a Muslim journalist.

Muslims for the most part (with some notable exceptions) don’t criticize Muslim practices, particularly those that are rooted in Islam, and mainstream media journalists do so even less often. But the reaction to Eltahawy’s article among her fellow Muslim women is even more striking than her article itself.

If the mainstream media narrative about “extremists” making up only a tiny minority of Muslims, the vast majority of which are “moderate,” were true, Eltahawy’s article should have won applause from Muslim spokesmen in the U.S., and particularly Muslim women. But instead, Harvard professor Leila Ahmed confronted Eltahawy on MSNBC:

Mona, I appreciate what you do. I would love it if — I understand if you want to get your message across. It’s an important message. But if possible [you should not] give fuel, fodder to people who simply hate Arabs and Muslims in this climate of our day.

Eltahawy appeared surprised to be accused of fueling hate — the same accusation that jihadists and Islamic supremacists have leveled against counter-jihadists for years. And she answered it in exactly the same way counter-jihadists have innumerable times:

That’s the whole point. It’s not me that makes Muslims look bad. It’s those atrocities that make Muslims look bad. And as a writer, it’s my job to poke the painful places.

But Leila Ahmed was not alone in not wanting Eltahawy to call any attention whatsoever to those “painful places.” Another prominent Muslim woman in America, Dalia Mogahed, took to the pages of the Washington Post to denounce Eltahawy’s article. Mogahed is the executive director and senior analyst at the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies, and has served Barack Obama as an adviser in the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. She is an open advocate of Sharia, so it is perhaps not surprising that she also took a dim view of Eltahawy’s poking of the painful places.

Mogahed invoked unnamed “critics” who, she said, “question not the crimes Eltahawy describes but the causes she assigns, namely Islam and Arab culture’s inherent ‘hate’ for women, alleging that her analysis is not only pedestrian but panders to prejudice. The real danger however is that Eltahawy’s narrative harms the very cause she claims to champion. Conflating women’s rights advocacy with Arab inferiority or Islam-bashing doesn’t empower the champions of change, it aids their enemies.”...

Eltahawy never confronts Islam head-on as a cause of the human rights abuses against women that she is excoriating, but it is abundantly clear that she knows that the religion contributes to them, and that is enough for Mogahed to claim that her approach actually “hurts women.” That’s right: standing up for women’s rights and pointing to a primary root cause of the Muslim mistreatment of women actually harms women. How? Ask George Orwell....

There is more.