"Jihad against America obligation of all Muslims"

Wali-ur-Rehman bases this on the Islamic principle that defensive jihad is fard ayn, incumbent upon every individual Muslim, if an Islamic land is invaded.

"'Jihad against America obligation of all Muslims,’" from the Daily Times, July 3 (thanks to Jeffrey Imm):

KHAR: It is incumbent on every Muslim across the world to fight alongside Afghan Muslims against America, Jaish-ul-Islami Pakistan (JIP) Bajaur Agency commander Wali-ur-Rehman said on Wednesday.

Rehman said it was not un-Islamic to go to Afghanistan for jihad and to defend Afghan Muslims in the war against the United States-led allied forces.

Addressing a press conference at an undisclosed location, he said jihad against the US and NATO forces would continue until they (allies) were driven out of Afghanistan.

He attributed the worsening law and order in Pakistan and its Tribal Areas to the flawed policies of President Pervez Musharraf, which had made Pakistan and its Tribal Areas prone to the US-led allied forces’ attacks. He said that America was the major terrorist in the world and the biggest enemy of Islam and Pakistan.

Spies: Rehman said those spying for America would be strictly punished and would be publicly hanged to teach others a lesson.

He said one of the spies arrested following the bombing of a Damadola madrassa in May by the US, had been beheaded. He said the JIP had sentenced him to death under the Islamic laws....

Al Qaeda recruiting prepubescent boys for the jihad?

This is actually not altogether surprising. Back in 1998, Bin Laden declared that “we find that the only age group capable of giving and waging jihad is the 15-25 age bracket” (The Al Qaeda Reader, 267). According to Ayman Zawahiri: “Let the Muslim youth not await anyone’s permission, for jihad against the Americans, Jews, and their alliance of hypocrites and apostates is an individual obligation, as we have demonstrated [based on an Ibn Taymiyya fatwa],” (Ibid, 114).

“Al Qaeda Expanding Recruitment of Children,” by Farhan Bokhari for CBS News, July 4:

Al Qaeda has successfully established a network for recruiting boys as young as 12 from across central Asia as it seeks new volunteers to enlarge its team of prospective suicide bombers and militants fighters, senior security officials from the Middle East have revealed to CBS News.

News of al Qaeda venturing into the former Soviet central Asian republics with a population that has a largely Muslim heritage marks a significant addition to reports earlier this year that the hardline group had recruited young boys in the Pak-Afghan border region.

Last May, a senior Pakistani security official showed a rare video clip to CBS News documenting a boy, barely 12 years old, using a machete to severe the head of a middle-aged man whom militants probably suspected as being a spy for the U.S.

In an execution which typified the Taliban brand of quick justice, that boy severed the head of his victim who was completely tied up and thrown on the ground as a crowd of hundreds of spectators cheered.

The mountains visible in the background of the video suggest that it was carried out in the rugged terrain somewhere in the border area between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

“The effort to recruit young boys for the cause has been extended to central Asia. We have reports that this effort may now be up to two years old,” said one senior Middle Eastern security official who spoke to CBS News on condition of anonymity.

He said al Qaeda appears to have had more success in central Asian countries such as Tajikistan and Uzbekistan - the two states at the center of Islamic militancy - compared to other central Asian republics.

Muslims as Jews?

Some Muslims don't feel like the Jews of Europe

Fraught with contradictions: “British Muslims 'feel like the Jews of Europe,'” by Murray Wardrop for the Telegraph, July 4:

Shahid Malik, the UK's first Muslim minister, said it has become legitimate to target Muslims in the media and society in a way that would be unacceptable for any other minority.

Fair enough. To this observation, however, the following question springs to mind: Why are Muslims, specifically, being targeted in the first place? It can’t be because Brits simply like to target ethnic or religious minorities, since, according to Shahid’s own statement, Hindus, Buddhists, and blacks are not being similarly targeted. Why is it always only Muslims?

The MP for Dewsbury, West Yorks, said many British Muslims now feel like "aliens in their own country" as society turns a "blind eye" to their persecution.

I wonder: are these the same Muslims who are always quick to point out that they are Muslims first and British citizens second?

Mr Malik, a minister in the Department for International Development, said this has the negative effects of segregating society and undermining efforts to deal with extremism and terrorism.

The 40-year-old said he had himself been the target of a string of racist incidents, including hate mail, the firebombing of his family car and an attempt to run him down at a petrol station.

Not so fast, Shahid: Islam is not a race; Muslims are not “ethnic” minorities. Thus whatever position anyone takes against Muslims, it has absolutely nothing to do with race or “racism.” Nice try at taqiyya, though—trying to subtly conflate race and religion.

Mr Malik said: "I think most people would agree that if you ask Muslims today what do they feel like, they feel like the Jews of Europe.

What, they feel like infidel pigs and monkeys?

"I don't mean to equate that with the Holocaust but in the way that it was legitimate almost - and still is in some parts - to target Jews, many Muslims would say that we feel the exact same way. […]

“Still is in some parts,” to be sure: especially the entire Islamic world.

Mr Malik's constituency was home to July 7 suicide bomber Mohammad Siddique Khan.

Not only has Shahid been voted minister; he can also actually complain about “racism.” Don’t worry, Shahid: you’re still in good, dhimmi hands. Just don’t be tempted to live up to the Arabic meaning of your name—“martyr”—especially in the uniquely Muslim sense.

What we should be fighting for this July 4

1. Freedom of religion

What we must defend:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." — First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

What we must defend it against:

"Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth." — CAIR co-founder and longtime Board Chairman Omar Ahmad (he denies saying it, but the original reporter stands by her story)

"I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future." — CAIR's Ibrahim Hooper

The Muslim Brotherhood “must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.” — Mohamed Akram, “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America,” May 22, 1991

2. Freedom of speech

What we must defend:

"Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..." — First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

What we must defend it against:

"In confronting the Danish cartoons and the Dutch film 'Fitna', we sent a clear message to the West regarding the red lines that should not be crossed. As we speak, the official West and its public opinion are all now well-aware of the sensitivities of these issues. They have also started to look seriously into the question of freedom of expression from the perspective of its inherent responsibility, which should not be overlooked." — Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, Secretary General of the 57-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference

"Pakistan will ask the European Union countries to amend laws regarding freedom of expression in order to prevent offensive incidents such as the printing of blasphemous caricatures of Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) and the production of an anti-Islam film by a Dutch legislator..." — Daily Times, June 8, 2008

3. Equality of rights before the law

What we must defend:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." — Declaration of Independence

What we must defend it against:

"The indemnity for the death or injury of a woman is one-half the indemnity paid for a man. The indemnity paid for a Jew or Christian is one-third the indemnity paid for a Muslim. The indemnity paid for a Zoroastrian is one-fifteenth that of a Muslim." — 'Umdat al-Salik, o4.9

"Thus if [a] Muslim commits adultery his punishment is 100 lashes, the shaving of his head, and one year of banishment. But if the man is not a Muslim and commits adultery with a Muslim woman his penalty is execution...Similarly if a Muslim deliberately murders another Muslim he falls under the law of retaliation and must by law be put to death by the next of kin. But if a non-Muslim who dies at the hand of a Muslim has by lifelong habit been a non-Muslim, the penalty of death is not valid. Instead the Muslim murderer must pay a fine and be punished with the lash....Since Islam regards non-Muslims as on a lower level of belief and conviction, if a Muslim kills a non-Muslim…then his punishment must not be the retaliatory death, since the faith and conviction he possesses is loftier than that of the man slain...Again, the penalties of a non-Muslim guilty of fornication with a Muslim woman are augmented because, in addition to the crime against morality, social duty and religion, he has committed sacrilege, in that he has disgraced a Muslim and thereby cast scorn upon the Muslims in general, and so must be executed....Islam and its peoples must be above the infidels, and never permit non-Muslims to acquire lordship over them." — Sultanhussein Tabandeh, A Muslim Commentary on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

4. Governments deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

What we must defend:

"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..." — Declaration of Independence

What we must defend it against:

Non-Muslims have "absolutely no right to seize the reins of power in any part of God’s earth nor to direct the collective affairs of human beings according to their own misconceived doctrines." If they do, "the believers would be under an obligation to do their utmost to dislodge them from political power and to make them live in subservience to the Islamic way of life." — Syed Abul Ala Maududi, founder of the Pakistani political party Jamaat-e-Islami

Never surrender. Never submit. Never be silenced. Freedom and independence forever.

FBI mulls profiling; CAIR says it's "un-American"

As one might expect, the FBI proposes a common-sense procedure -- spend more time looking for terror activity among Muslims than among Methodist grandmothers -- and CAIR, an unindicted co-conspirator in a terror funding case, cries foul.

"FBI eyes profiling in terrorist inquiries: Race could be weighed to justify investigations," by Lara Jakes Jordan for Associated Press, July 3 (thanks to all who sent this in):

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department is considering letting the FBI investigate Americans without any evidence of wrongdoing, relying instead on a terrorist profile that could single out Muslims, Arabs or other racial and ethnic groups.

Law enforcement officials say the proposed policy would help them do what Congress demanded after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks: root out terrorists before they strike.

Although President Bush has disavowed targeting suspects based on their race or ethnicity, the new rules would allow the FBI to consider those factors among a number of traits that could trigger a national security investigation. [...]

"We don't know what we don't know. And the object is to cut down on that," said one FBI official who defended the plans. [...]

The changes would allow FBI agents to ask open-ended questions about activities of Muslim- or Arab-Americans, or investigate them if their jobs and backgrounds match trends that analysts deem suspect.

FBI agents would not be allowed to eavesdrop on phone calls or dig deeply into personal data until a full investigation was opened. [...]

Justice spokesman Brian Roehrkasse said the guidelines governing when to open a national security investigation are part of a "harmonizing" process that will not give the FBI any more authority than it already has. He declined further comment, but he and two other senior Justice officials would not deny the changes as they were described to AP by others familiar with the guidelines.

"Any review and change to the guidelines will reflect our traditional concerns for civil liberties and First Amendment liberties and our traditional investigative emphasis on using the least intrusive means feasible," Roehrkasse said Wednesday....

"FBI terrorism profiling proposal 'un-American': Muslim rights group," by Mike Rosen-Molina in Jurist, July 3 (thanks to Writer Mom):

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Thursday blasted a proposed plan that would allow Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents to consider a person's race, religion, or ethnicity in deciding whether to open a terrorism investigation. CAIR decried the plan as "unconstitutional and un-American," saying that it could allow security agents to target Muslims and Arab-Americans for harassment....

True to its pattern, CAIR demonstrates no concern whatsoever for protecting Americans from terror attacks.

South Korean police bust drug ring shipping heroin-processing chemical to Taliban

Better jihad through chemistry. "S Korean police bust ‘Taleban-linked' drug ring," from Agence France-Presse, July 4:

SEOUL - South Korean police said Friday they have arrested members of a major drug-trafficking ring with suspected links to Afghanistan's Taleban insurgents.

‘Police have rounded up a drug-trafficking ring involving Afghans and Pakistanis who are suspected of being linked with the Taleban,’ a National Police Agency spokesman told AFP.

‘They are suspected to trying to smuggle raw materials for heroin production into Afghanistan,’ he said.

Police said two Afghans, three Pakistanis and four Koreans tried to use South Korea as a shipping point for several tons of acetic anhydride destined for southern Afghanistan.

The chemical is heated with morphine, extracted from opium, to produce heroin.

‘The key Afghan suspect admitted he did it at the instigation of the Taleban,’ Oh Ki-Duk, an investigator, told AFP. ‘But he claimed he is not a member of the Taleban.’

Police confiscated 12 tons of acetic anhydride in a chemical engineering factory in the Seoul suburb of Ansan and arrested the two Afghans. The chemical was disguised as motor oil.

In a separate operation by the three Pakistanis -- who were also arrested in a Seoul suburb -- police said about 50 tons of the chemical had already been shipped, labelled as disinfectant.

It was sent between April 2007 and March this year.

The operations were funded by the hawala money transfer network widely usedin the Middle East, police said.

The 62 tons of acetic anhydride cost about 360 million won (344,800 dollars) but could be used to produce nearly 30 tons of heroin, Yonhap news agency quoted investigator Kim Ki-Yong as saying.

‘The suspects had money transferred from accounts suspected to be linked to hawala, and they acknowledged they had received orders from the Taleban,’ Kim said.

The acetic anhydride was imported from Japan through several Korean dealers, who are now being questioned.

The investigation started in March after the international police organisation Interpol discovered 14 tons of the chemical which had been shipped from Korea in the southern Pakistani port of Karachi.

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime says Afghanistan produced 8,200 tons of opium base last year, 92 percent of the worldwide total.

The report also noted that 80 percent of the output came from five southern provinces where Taleban insurgents profit from drug-trafficking....

Excusing taqiyya?

Instead of trying to be “bold” and tackling a “controversial” topic, innate apologists would do better to simply remain silent.

In “Secret Muslims: Are Muslims allowed to hide their faith?” in Slate, July 3, Juliet Lapidos wonders "whether there's a history of Muslims who deny their faith publicly while maintaining it privately.” She concludes:

Yes, if you're a Shiite; maybe, if you're a Sunni. According to Chapter 16, Verse 106 of the Quran, "Any one who, after accepting faith in Allah, utters Unbelief—except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in Faith—but such as open their breast to Unbelief, on them is Wrath from Allah, and theirs will be a dreadful Penalty." Shiites cite this verse to justify taqiyya, a religious dispensation by which persecuted Muslims may hide their beliefs. But Sunni scholars have a more equivocal take. Some reject taqiyya as unacceptable hypocrisy and evidence of cowardice: Muslims shouldn't fear other humans, only Allah. Others argue that concealment is warranted under life-threatening circumstances.

This is inaccurate. For starters, the author quotes a secondary verse to justify taqiyya; the primary verse (to say nothing of some very straightforward hadiths) that all the ulema have relied on to articulate doctrines of deception states: “Let believers not take for friends and allies infidels rather than believers; whoever does so shall have no relationship left with Allah—unless you but guard yourselves against them, taking precautions” (3:28).

Note: this verse says nothing about forced conversions. So why does Lapidos evoke 16:106, the one that does? As the remainder of her article makes clear, she wants to portray Islam as justifying dissembling only when non-Muslims try to forcefully convert Muslims—that and nothing else.

She goes on to claim that “Sunni scholars have a more equivocal take” regarding the validity of taqiyya, as opposed to Shias. While it is true that, historically, Shia minorities living among Sunni majorities have had more need to dissemble (tells you something about residing with Sunnis, no?), that is simply a quirk of circumstance. In other words, now that Sunnis are minority groups living among infidel majority groups, such as in the West, they, like Shias surrounded by Sunnis, have developed perhaps an even greater need to hide their true beliefs.

As for the notion that “some [Sunnis] reject taqiyya as unacceptable hypocrisy and evidence of cowardice…. Others argue that concealment is warranted under life-threatening circumstances,” the very first lines of one of the few Arabic books wholly dedicated to treating the doctrine of taqiyya, called al-Taqiyya fi al-Islam (“Taqiyya in Islam”), by Islamic studies professor Sami Makarem, unequivocally states in its opening page:

Taqiyya is of fundamental importance in Islam. Nearly every Islamic sect has agreed to it and practices it….Indeed, we can go so far as to say that mainstream Islam practices taqiyya, and that those few sects that do not practice it are aberrant, diverging from the mainstream. (p.7)

Lapidos continues later on in her article:

Outside the Islamic world, there are two major historical examples of Muslims practicing taqiyya. During the 16th century, Catholic authorities in Spain gave the local (predominantly Sunni) Muslim population an ultimatum: Convert or leave the country. Some of the converts (called Moriscos by the Spanish) became sincere Catholics while others perpetuated their faith in private. Crypto-Muslims attended church services on Sundays but used Aljamiado—an Arabic alphabet for transcribing Romance languages—to secretly pass down Islamic traditions. In antebellum America, slaves from West Africa, many of whom were Muslim, were forced to convert to Christianity. As in medieval Spain, some slaves converted sincerely while others maintained their religion in secret.

Lapidos maintains that the “two major historical examples of Muslims practicing taqiyya” were when Christians tried to forcefully convert them—again, as if that’s the sole purpose of Muslim deceit. (Of course, subtly injecting the image of “intolerant,” “slave-driving” Christians goes a long way in justifying, or at least further clouding, the issue of taqiyya—especially for an audience such as Slate’s.) But aside from the fact that current events are full of Muslims engaging in taqiyya, and not because they fear for their faith—from “reneged” peace treatises with Israel and other infidel entities to terrorist-linked organizations and people like CAIR and Tariq Ramadan constantly proclaiming that “Islam means peace”—history in fact furnishes numerous anecdotes where Muslims deceived, and not because anyone was trying to force them into another religion, starting with Islam’s prophet Muhammad himself:

Apart from his famous assertion that “War is deceit,” Muhammad allowed his followers to feign goodwill towards infidels, solely in order to treacherously strike them down, as in the following hadith:

“Allah's Apostle said, "Who is willing to kill Ka'b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?" Thereupon Muhammad bin Maslama got up saying, "O Allah's Apostle! Would you like that I kill him?" The Prophet said, "Yes," Muhammad bin Maslama said, "Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Kab). "The Prophet said, "You may say it."

As for Islam’s ulema, Taqiyya in Islam quotes from a number of the most prominent, the vast majority of whom agree that taqiyya is not just limited to preserving one’s faith. Here, for instance, is the premiere exegete al-Tabari: “Allah Almighty has forbidden the believers from being friendly with infidels or from taking them as confidants in place of other beliers—except when they are clearly outnumbered by the infidels, in which case let them display outward friendliness, while holding onto their faith” (p.22).

After quoting from a number of other authoritative ulema, Makarem concludes that “There is no major difference between what al-Tabari, Ibn Kathir, al-Baydawi, and al-Jilalan all say in regards to taqiyya” (p.26).

Note: Tabari recommends that Muslims feign goodwill towards infidels not when the latter are trying to forcefully convert them, but because they are natural enemies, at least from a Muslim perspective. So, far from being a question of preserving their faith, taqiyya is to be practiced when Muslims are in the minority and living among majority infidels—precisely the scenario we have today in the West.

The Slate article tries to pull a fast one: it admits to taqiyya, but then quickly portrays it as “controversial” and only used as a last resort from Muslims trying to escape (Christian) persecution. Depicting an incomplete picture is worse than no picture, and Slate would have been more objective to stay silent on the matter. At any rate, I am more inclined to heeding the words of Islamic scholar Sami Makarem, who has written an entire book on taqiyya—not to mention the plain words of al-Tabari, Ibn Kathir, al-Baydawi, indeed, Muhammad himself—as opposed to half truths coming from one Juliet Lapidos.

Geert Wilders: Prisoner of Islam

The brilliantly insightful and fearless Diana West speaks with the equally fearless hero of free speech and of the defense of the West against Islamic supremacism, Geert Wilders:

THE HAGUE, The Netherlands -- Having run the polite-but-grim gauntlet of Dutch government security to gain access to Geert Wilders, I finally understood what the 24-hour security requirements of the man's continued existence really mean: To make the survival of Western-style liberty in the Netherlands his political cause, this Dutch parliamentarian has to live under high-tech lock and key.

This stunning paradox, with no end in sight, illustrates how far political freedom in the West has already eroded. Think of it: For writing about the repressive ideology of Islam, for arguing against the inequities of Sharia (Islamic law), for making a video ("Fitna") to warn about Islamic jihad, Wilders lives in his own non-Islamic country under a specifically Islamic death threat.

If it is politically incorrect to notice this, it is also indisputably true. True, too, is that, sans state security, this death threat could conceivably be carried out anytime, anywhere -- from the picturesque streets outside the Dutch parliament, to the house Wilders hasn't slept in since 2004. That, of course, was when, on an Amsterdam street, a Muslim assassin plunged a knife into Theo van Gogh's corpse, thus attaching the Islamic manifesto threatening both Wilders and his then-parliamentary colleague, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, with death.

Obama a victim of "Islamophobia"!

As everyone knows, Obama has been going to some lengths to make sure nobody thinks he's a Muslim. Nor has he been making any particular effort to add, "Not that there's anything wrong with that." Today the reliably dhimmi Wall Street Journal gives space to Junaid M. Afeef, director of public and government Affairs at the Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago, to blame this not on Obama's canny political calculation and tacit awareness that people are suspicious of the violent and supremacist elements of Islam, but on "Islamophobia," that rampant plague which, he says, has claimed yet another victim: the sainted candidate himself.

It is a particularly grotesque irony that the Wall Street Journal would print this whine about "Islamophobia" the day after a man shouting "Allahu akbar" murdered three people in Jerusalem -- as if the problem (yet again) were not the people who commit such acts in the name of Islam, and the utter failure of peaceful Muslims to take the first step toward cleaning house. Oh no -- that doesn't provoke any "Islamophobia" at all. It's all about racism and bigotry, doncha know. Everyone would love Muslims and Islam, and find them cute and cuddly, were it not for Western non-Muslim "Islamophobes" spreading racism and bigotry by...noting the fact that some guy shouting "Allahu akbar" and running amok with a bulldozer murdered three people in Jerusalem yesterday.

"Obama Should Embrace His Muslim Heritage," by Junaid M. Afeef in the Wall Street Journal, July 3 (thanks to all who sent this in):

Many Muslim voters love Barack Obama. They love him even if he doesn't seem to love them back.

One young professional I know credited Muslims' enthusiasm for Sen. Obama to a perceived promise of a "brand new, informed international perspective." Other Muslims are moved by a broad and empowering message of hope and change in a tumultuous time of trouble and strife. And many see a reflection of themselves in Mr. Obama – a person who looks different, has a funny name, a sense of the world beyond our borders, and at the same time is very patriotic. That is how most Muslims in America view themselves.

In most circumstances such a strong affinity would be embraced by a candidate. But an affinity with Muslims is perceived by his campaign as a liability.

Mr. Obama is another victim of Islamophobia. He is now facing what Muslims have been and still are struggling with: an irrational fear and hatred of Muslims. Polls show that as many as 25% of Americans admit to prejudicial feelings against Muslims.

Mr. Obama knows that Islamophobia has taken root in the U.S. Islamophobia hits very close to home for him because his father, from whom he also derives his black heritage, was a Muslim.

While his heritage may include Muslims, Mr. Obama is a Christian, and when his religion is incorrectly identified he rightly corrects the record. Now there is even a Web site called "Fight the Smears" that challenges the lie that he is a Muslim.

The problem, however, is the manner in which he corrects the record. He vociferously denies being a Muslim as if it were a slur.

That is true; he does. And it is a very sharp political move. Muslims aren't going to vote for McCain no matter what. And by implying that to call him a Muslim is a "smear" (the website rebutting the claim is called Fight the Smears), Obama implies also that he will be tough on Islamic terrorism.

Mr. Obama does not need to take this approach. He knows how to smash through barriers. He brought whites and blacks together in the primary, no small feat in a nation that still struggles with race issues.

As a great leader, Mr. Obama should take a principled stand on the issue of Muslims and Islamophobia. While anti-Muslim sentiment in the U.S. is substantial, it is not an insurmountable challenge.

The vast majority of Americans are sincere and open-minded; anti-Muslim sentiments are a product of fear and lack of understanding. These sentiments can be overcome.

Mr. Afeef, anti-Muslim sentiments are a product of Muslims Allahu-akbaring while operating bulldozers, AK 47s, and passenger jets in order to kill infidels.

If Mr. Obama simply said, "Yes, there are Muslims in my family, and while I am and always have been a Christian, I embrace my family's religious diversity," then surely the vast majority of Americans would move on to the real issues in his campaign.

He should say that there are Muslims in his family, since it is true, and since some of his statements seem to suggest that he hasn't been completely forthright about this aspect of his background. It would dispel suspicions of dishonesty.

Meanwhile, it's interesting that Junaid Afeef can say that Obama should "embrace [his] Muslim heritage with the same vigor and eloquence with which [he has] embraced [his] white and black heritage" in the dhimmi WSJ and it is an example of diversity and broad-mindedness and multiculturalism, but when I said he should do something very much like that at Jihad Watch it traveled around some lefty blogs as just another shameful example of "Islamophobia." Ain't multiculturalism grand?

"He yelled Allahu Akbar and hit the gas"

The Palestinian Arab who killed three people in a bulldozer rampage yesterday was a freelance jihadist -- once again underscoring the international need for the Islamic groups who profess to oppose today's jihad activity to begin to teach actively against it. But they are not doing so, and will not do so, and if you think they are doing so or will soon, I have a very fine bridge to sell you.

"Palestinian's rampage the work of `lone attacker,' police say," by Dion Nissenbaum and Cliff Churgin for the McClatchy Newspapers, July 2 (thanks to JCB):

JERUSALEM — A Palestinian construction worker commandeered a construction vehicle and rampaged through central Jerusalem on Wednesday afternoon, killing three people in what police later described as the spontaneous act of a lone attacker.

Dozens were injured as the front-loader flattened cars and flipped a crowded bus before its driver was shot dead by an Israeli soldier on leave who scrambled onto the vehicle.

Though the attack evoked memories of the politically motivated suicide bombings that demoralized Jerusalem during the second Palestinian uprising, police said that the man appeared to have no ties to militant groups.

"This appears to have been a spontaneous attack," Israeli Police Commissioner Dudi Cohen said.

Three militant Palestinian groups claimed responsibility for Wednesday's rampage, but police officials dismissed all of them as groundless.

Police identified the driver as Hosam Dwayyat, a married, 30-year-old father of two who lived in predominantly Arab East Jerusalem.

Israel's Channel 2 reported that Dwayyat had served two years in prison for rape and attempted murder.

[...]

The attack created confusion and pandemonium as people scrambled for safety.

Assaf Nadav , the driver of the bus that the front-loader flipped on its side, said he wasn't sure what was going on when he saw people running away from the construction vehicle as it headed toward him.

"He hit me lightly and I rolled down my window to ask him what he was doing when I saw him lower the scoop and turn the bus upside down," Nadav said on Israel Radio. "Screaming would be an understatement."

Two armed men and a police officer scrambled onto the vehicle, wrestled with the driver, then shot him, Israeli Police spokesman Mickey Rosenfeld said.

The men thought the attack was over, but the driver then lurched forward in a scene captured by nearby cameramen.

In a video that aired on Israeli television, one person rolls out of the way of the Caterpillar as the three armed Israelis wrestle with the driver.

A man in shorts and a T-shirt, later identified in Israeli news reports as 18-year-old Moshe Plesser , shoots the driver twice in the head, who then slumps in the seat.

Plesser, an Israeli soldier who just finished basic training, said the man yelled "God is great" in Arabic before trying to continue with his rampage.

"He yelled Allahu Akbar and hit the gas," Plesser told Israel's Yediot Ahronot newspaper.

The truth depends on who's listening

Here is a stunningly frank account -- by a Muslim, in a stridently pro-Islamic paper -- of Islamic scholars' changing their answers on religious questions based on whether the question is presented publicly or privately. That a supposed moral "truth" can depend upon the audience speaks volumes about the pitfalls of "interfaith dialogue," and ultimately confirms something we have seen time and time again from Islamic apologists. "A source of mercy," by Samir Al-Saadi for Arab News, July 3:

JEDDAH: A wise man once told me, “If you want to ask a scholar a question whisper it in his ear to get an accurate answer. If you do it in public there is a chance you might get a different answer.”

Hadi Fakeeh, a journalist for Al-Hayat newspaper, recently asked Sheikh Abdul Mohsin Al-Obaikan, a prominent Saudi scholar, a question relating to the mixing of genders in Islam.

The question was asked on the sidelines of the Seventh National Dialogue.

Sheikh Al-Obaikan, who is also a member of the Kingdom’s Higher Religious Committee, replied that not every form of mixing is forbidden. Only if there is “fitna” (strife), citing that there is mixing at the Holy Mosques in Makkah and Madinah, and in the Kingdom’s malls.

He added that Shariah does not ban “intermingling,” it only bans “Khalwa,” which is when a man and a woman are in a state of isolation away from other people.

“In the workplace, if there is a number (of people, more than one) and the woman is wearing a Hijab, then this is not considered Khalwa,” said Sheikh Al-Obaikan.

Fakeeh reproduced the comments in an article. However, Sheikh Al-Obaikan retracted his comments calling the report a fabrication.

“Luckily for me, I taped the entire conversation,” Fakeeh told Arab News. He further provided a copy of the recording.

When asked why Sheikh Al-Obaikan retracted his comment, Fakeeh said this is something for the Sheikh to answer. “He needs to obtain the courage to do so,” he said, hinting that the sheikh may have been pressured to retract his comments.

Meanwhile, Sheikh Al-Obaikan gave a slightly different statement on mixing when he addressed the audience at the Seventh National Dialogue in April. He said Shariah does not prevent women from working, as long as they do not mix with unrelated men. “We have to understand that the basic duty of women is to remain at home and look after the children,” he said.

He further called for the establishment of separate women’s sections at companies and offices — a position shared by the majority of scholars here. When contacted by Arab News on the issue, Al-Obaikan stood by his retraction, adding that he has filed a lawsuit against Al-Hayat.

“It is forbidden for women to work with men in the workplace,” he said, adding that he has not retracted his comments.

Sheikh Al-Obaikan said that he previously issued three other religious edicts, which he stands by even though they attracted enormous public criticism. One was regarding the legality of using magic to undo spells when all other means do not work, the second fatwa was the legality of women traveling outside or inside the Kingdom without a legal guardian (mahram), the third was regarding the permissibility of insurance.

Speaking about the criticism his edicts have attracted, Sheikh Al-Obaikan said, “I see that I am right and they are wrong on this… I base my rulings on correct Shariah evidence.”

He added that there is nothing wrong with women working in the market and interacting with male customers because contact is for only a few minutes and in the eye of the public.

“But in modern workplaces, they interact for longer hours, something that results in fitna,” he said, adding that there are numerous examples that prove this. “Companies should follow banks in opening separate female sections,” he added.

In response to a question whether it was true that scholars reply differently when speaking in private, he said, “In some cases fatwas are better not mentioned in public. For example, those that deal with marriage have to discuss a personal issue, which is unsuitable for other listeners. It is suggested that they deal with these subjects on the side with the person concerned to avoid embarrassment.”

He added that fatwas are the same and do not change according to the number of people listening or where it is being given.

Commenting on the intermingling of the sexes, Sheikh Abdul Aziz, a Saudi scholar who asked his full name not be published, said people in the Kingdom have lived with dignity and in happiness for centuries. “So what is the problem now? Countries are facing tremendous problems due to the mixing of the genders. The problems that we see today stem from allowing un-Islamic behavior to penetrate our societies,” he said.

When asked why a scholar may change a statement depending on whether he is speaking in public or private, Sheikh Abdul Aziz said, “It is the scholar’s duty to reply to questions, answers should be given from the Qur’an and Sunnah.”

He added that hospitals should avoid the mixing of men and women, and that there is no problem in opening women-only hospitals.

Mushari Al-Thayedi, an Islamic researcher and journalist with Arab News’ sister publication Asharq Al-Awsat, said, “Throughout Islamic history, some scholars in some cases have made different statements when speaking in public. They then say something else when speaking individually.” He added, “The change is due to several reasons — this includes wisdom to avoid misinterpretation, or fitna, or directives from the state.”

“In principle, a correct religious ruling is made for everyone. In public, sheikhs take into consideration the fact that they are speaking to a general audience, which includes the educated and non-educated. On a one-to-one basis, scholars are able to clarify issues to avoid misunderstandings by giving more explanations. It is not an organized process. It can be a whole different answer.”

Al-Thayedi believes Sheikh Al-Obaikan retracted his comment due to pressure from the general public and other religious scholars. “This is not the first case when a prominent scholar has backed out from a statement. Sheikh Abdullah Al-Mutlaq retracted a statement he had made two years ago when he said there was nothing wrong in a woman not covering her face,” said Al-Thayedi, adding that the sheikh retracted his statement due to public pressure.

"When Christians kill Muslims, it's the Crusades. When Jews kill Muslims it's murder, and when Muslims kill Muslims, it's like talking about the weather. Nobody really cares about it"

Gillerman might have added that when Muslims kill non-Muslims, nobody particularly cares either, because that is a reaction to oppression, or occupation, or Britney Spears (for that last one, ask Dinesh D'Souza). Jihad? Pah. It's a Religion of Peace, and no amount of empirical evidence can shake that iron conviction.

"Outgoing Envoy Gillerman: We Live in a Crazy World," from Israel National News, July 3 (thanks to Romy):

(IsraelNN.com) Danny Gillerman, outgoing Ambassador to the United Nations, told the Israel-American Chamber of Commerce, that the U.N. can be "a crazy world." He joked, "You know you're in a crazy world when world's greatest rapper is white, the world's greatest golfer is black, the world's greatest soldiers are Jewish, Germany doesn't want to go to war, and the French accuse the Americans of being arrogant."

Gillerman said he was proud as an Israeli when he appeared in the U.N. because he represented "a country that is far better than most member states of the U.N. with the possible exception of the United States." He also noted that Muslims lead the world in violence and terror.

"Muslims are killing Muslims. When Christians kill Muslims, it's the Crusades. When Jews kill Muslims it's murder, and when Muslims kill Muslims, it's like talking about the weather. Nobody really cares about it," he said.

"The truth is that the biggest enemy of Islam is the Muslims themselves, because they have relinquished all decency in dealing with others, as well as the courage to oppose oppression"

The statements these columnists make are generally true and commonsensical, but highly unusual in the Islamic world -- where self-righteous moral posturing and finger-pointing rules the day. We see this also from Islamic groups in the West: they vilify and demonize those who speak about the violent and supremacist teachings of Islam, and never confront those teachings honestly and directly. "Arab Columnists: Islam Has Been Harmed More By Muslims than By the West," from MEMRI, June 6 (thanks to all who sent this in):

The recent re-publication of a cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad by the Danish press and release of Dutch MP Geert Wilders' film "Fitna" have precipitated a wave of Muslim protest, some of it violent, throughout the world. Following these developments, several Arab columnists wrote to condemn the violent reactions, arguing that the Muslims themselves had committed iniquity against both their coreligionists and everyone else, thereby harming the name of Islam.

The following are excerpts from some of the articles:
Islam's Biggest Enemy is the Muslims Themselves

In an article in the Kuwaiti daily Al-Siyassa, titled "Muslims Against Islam," Kuwaiti liberal Dr. Ahmad Al-Baghdadi wrote: "In most countries around the world, Muslims broke into Danish Embassies, setting fire to them, and called for a ban on Danish imports... They have also launched a satellite TV channel and organized various committees and institutions, with the sole purpose of defending the Prophet [Muhammad] and the Islamic religion... Have the Muslims ever taken account of the tremendous iniquities they themselves have committed and are still committing against Islam [within and outside] the Islamic countries?

"Let us examine the following problems, which I will briefly outline below:

"How many prisoners are locked up in Muslim prisons for their opinions, ideas, and cultural identity? Is it in the spirit of Islam that Muslims are fleeing their homeland for 'heretical' countries in order to attain security and live in dignity?... Is it in the spirit of Islam to be silent in the face of the tyranny of rulers? Is it in the spirit of Islam that one family should rule over an entire people? Is it in the spirit of Islam that some Muslim countries abound in magnificent palaces while 60% of their population is illiterate? Is it in the spirit of Islam to turn a blind eye to a billionaire's several profligate satellite channels, whose programs make a mockery of religion and morality, only because [this billionaire] has [also] launched a religious channel?... The truth is that the biggest enemy of Islam is the Muslims themselves, because they have relinquished all decency in dealing with others, as well as the courage to oppose oppression..." [1]

True enough, but Al-Baghdadi seems to leave open the possibility that the reaction to the Motoons was justified. Others were not quite so circumspect: Al-Aswani says that cartoons don't hurt Muhammad and that the reaction to them hurt him more. He has an idealized vision of Muhammad that many Muslims share: when confronted with uncomfortable aspects of his life, they will reject them as inauthentic, no matter how well-attested these uncomfortable aspects may be in Islamic tradition. They do not dare take the step of reevaluating Muhammad's Qur'anically-affirmed postion (33:21) as the supreme example of conduct.

Who Is Harming The Prophet?

In an article on the liberal website Aafaq.org, Egyptian writer Ahmad Al-Aswani set out the crimes committed by the Muslim world that he believed have harmed the Prophet Muhammad and discredited the spirit of Islam: "I do not think that cartoons, books, or films can harm a religion or affect the faith of those who adhere to it out of conviction.

"The ones who harm the Prophet are those who butcher and bomb innocents all over the world, from New York to Madrid, London, Bali, Riyadh and Cairo, Kabul and Baghdad - while invoking Allah and the Prophet under the banner of Islamic jihad...

"Among those who harm the Prophet are the likes of Sheikh Yousef Al-Qaradhawi, who incites to the murder of Jewish children in their mothers' wombs (e.g. in a 1996 lecture to the Egyptian journalists association) and to suicide operations, as well as those who cause the death of innocent victims by declaring jihad in Iraq in the name of religion and the Prophet.

"The ones who harm the Prophet are those who call on the world to pass a resolution against disparaging religion, while they themselves denigrate other religions in each prayer in the mosques, as well as in their schools and on their satellite channels - and especially [the religion] of Christians and Jews, whom they curse in every prayer. When Muslim countries submitted a draft of this resolution to the U.N. Human Rights Council, the Saudi Shura Council raised objections, since reviling other religions is one of Islam's central precepts.

"The ones who harm the Prophet are the likes of those who issued the fatwa sanctioning the breastfeeding of adults, and asserting that [the drinking of] the Prophet's urine is a source of blessing - or those who allow such fairy tales to be studied in religious schools and colleges... The ones who harm the Prophet are those who teach children in schools, particularly so-called Islamic [schools], to hate Christians on the grounds that it is forbidden to love them...

"The ones who harm the Prophet are those who believe that external attributes such as a beard, a spot on the forehead [attesting to deep genuflections during prayer], a veil, or a cloak are prescribed by Islam, and also those who accuse others of heresy and kill [them] on account [of these external attributes].

"The ones who harm the Prophet are those who believe that woman is [lewd], and that she detracts from [the purity] of prayer just like a dog or a donkey... [2] and those who believe that a woman lacks intelligence and religion, forgetting that [they are talking about] a mother, sister, beloved, daughter, or wife, who is equal to man in every respect.

"The ones who harm the Prophet are people like [Egyptian geologist and Ph.D] Zaghlul Al-Najjar, who claims to have knowledge yet at the same time regards natural disasters such as storms, volcanic eruptions, and floods as divine punishments [for] sinners, and who disparages the New and Old Testaments, believing them to be fabrications - and all this in the name of Islam and the Prophet...

"The ones who harm the Prophet are the rulers of Arab states who have made their countries the last bastions of tyranny and dictatorship in the world, and who demand submission to religious texts to justify their crimes.

"The ones who harm the Prophet do not live in the West - they are among us, the Muslims. [It is the Muslims] who have fashioned an Islamic model that is [inherently] terrorist, hypocritical, life-negating, and sustained by the murder of others in the name of jihad and by attacks on freedom of opinion under the pretext of [defending Islamic] national principles - which are actually nothing but retardation and fossilized prejudice... This is what we - and no one else - have produced." [3]...

Read it all.

Prisoner Rehabilitated; Fifty Million Die

Barry Rubin of the Gloria Center discusses the Fantasy-Based Policymaking of which so many in Washington are so very fond:

Each day we're told that radical Islamists, terrorists, and assorted extremists are going to moderate, so why not negotiate with them, appease them, defuse their grievances, have dialogue, and then everything will be okay.

But, those who are doubtful, argue, shouldn't we have learned from history that militant ideologies are not prone to compromise and ruthless dictators don't change their stripes. You cannot appease them, they don't go away; displays of weakness make them more aggressive.

Oh, no! Not the Nazi analogy again!

And yet what can you say when confronted with this New York Times headline of December 21, 1924:

"Hitler Tamed By Prison; Released on Parole, He Is Expected to Return to Austria."

[This is not a satire. See for yourself at: http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F70A17F73F5B12738DDDA80A94DA415B848EF1D3&scp=1&sq=Hitler+tamed+by+prison+article&st=p]

The correspondent explains that Hitler, once a demigod for the extreme right, was released on parole from the Landsberg fortress where he had been sent for trying to overthrow the democratic German government in what has come to be known as the Beerhouse Putsch.

Prison, the article continues, seems to have moderated him. The authorities were convinced that he presented no further danger to the existing society. In fact, it was expected that he would abandon public life and return to his native land, Austria.

Well, that problem was certainly solved easily.

And also the Times learned its lesson, hasn't it?

As the newspaper explained in a June 30 editorial:

"Few countries can afford the luxury of limiting their diplomacy to friendly countries and peace-loving parties. National security often requires negotiating with dangerous enemies."

Right. And believing their protestations of moderation, making concessions to them, ending sanctions, blaming ourselves for problems, and never using force is the actual content of such negotiations.

Then the leaders of Hamas, Hizballah, Syria, Iran, the Muslim Brotherhoods, al-Qaida, North Korea, Zimbabwe, Sudan, etc., will no doubt be tamed, abandon public life, and go back to their homes.

Henry Kissinger once told the joke--or at least is credited for doing so--that it is very easy to have the lion lay down with the lamb, as long as you put in a new lamb every day. Kissinger no doubt little expected at the time that this would become the democratic world's favored strategy. No surprise that the main villain for the politically correct West is Israel, the lamb that refuses the honor.

35 suspected al-Qaeda recruiters arrested in Morocco

Whole lotta "misunderstanding" of Islam going on there. And the story supports yesterday's report of al-Qaeda's increasing use of North Africa as a base of operations (along with Pakistan and Somalia). "35 suspected Al-Qaeda recruiters arrested in Morocco: agency," from Agence France-Presse, July 2:

RABAT (AFP) - Thirty-five alleged recruiters for Al-Qaeda operations in Algeria and Iraq were arrested by police in Morocco, where they are also accused of planning attacks, the Moroccan news agency said Wednesday.

"This network recruited and sent around 30 candidates for suicide operations in Iraq and three volunteers to fight alongside members of Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb," police told Map.

The suspects allegedly belong to a Salafist group, Salafiya Jihadiya -- a security source told AFP -- and have links to Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, as well as Al-Qaeda movements in Lebanon, Syria and Turkey.

"The suspects were also planning acts of terror in Morocco," Map's source said.

This is the third such group Morocco has said to have broken up since the beginning of the year.

The latest arrests took place in Tangiers, Larache, Oujda, Tetouan, Rabat, Khouribga and Fes, a security official told AFP.

Moroccan police in February announced the arrest of 36 people alleged to have been part of an Islamist network led by Belgian-Moroccan Abdelkader Belliraj.

Chadian sheik declares jihad on Christians and atheists "as far as Denmark"; 70 followers killed in clash with government forces

Motoons Rage comes to Chad, and meets up with an ingrained, general hatred of unbelievers. "Chad halts 'holy war' by Muslim leader, 70 killed," from Reuters, July 3:

Chad says its security forces have killed 66 followers of an Islamic spiritual leader who was threatening to launch a holy war against Christians and atheists from Africa to Europe.

The 28-year-old Muslim holy man, or sheikh Ahmat Ismael Bichara, was arrested after hundreds of his disciples armed with swords, spears, bows and clubs fought gendarmes armed with automatic rifles at a south-eastern village on Sunday and Monday.

Four members of the Chadian security forces were also killed and six wounded in the one-sided battles at Kouno, 300 kilometres south-east of the Chadian capital N'Djamena.

Bichara, his lip bloodied, wearing a white robe and reciting verses from the Koran, was presented by the authorities to journalists in N'Djamena overnight along with seven of his captured followers.

Ministers in the landlocked ethnically mixed African country, where just over the half the population is Muslim, said the Government had been obliged to act against the Islamic holy man to stop him triggering a religious war in the country.

"Since June 3, he has been calling on all Muslims to prepare to engage in a holy war against Christians and atheists, saying that the war would be launched from Chad to as far as Denmark," Security Minister Ahmat Mahamat Bachir said....

Cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammad published by newspapers in Denmark in 2006 touched off a wave of violent protests in Islamic countries.

Largely arid Chad has suffered waves of violence over the last few years, including not just raids over the eastern border from Sudan by Janjaweed militia and attacks by anti-government rebels, but also bloody clashes between Arab and non-Arab communities.

Conviction of New York missile plot jihadists upheld on appeal

Predictable arguments -- profiling, not knowing what was going on -- didn't work this time. An update on this story. " U.S. conviction upheld in FBI sting of NY Muslims," by Christine Kearney for Reuters, July 2:

NEW YORK (Reuters) - An Iraqi Kurdish imam and a Bangladeshi-American pizzeria owner on Wednesday lost an appeal of their convictions for plotting to kill a Pakistani diplomat in what turned out to be an FBI sting operation.

The U.S Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the convictions of Yassin Aref, 37, and Mohammed Hossain, 53, who were sentenced last year to 15 years each in prison for their roles in a fake plot to attack the Pakistani ambassador to the United Nations in New York with a missile.

Both appealed their convictions of money-laundering and conspiring to provide material support to the Pakistan-based Islamic militant group Jaish-e-Mohammed, which is considered a terrorist organization by the U.S. government.

The federal appeals court rejected all the defense's arguments, including that the men did not know missiles were involved.

"The evidence sufficed for a jury to conclude that Aref intended to aid in preparing a missile attack on American soil," the ruling said, concluding the same for Hossain.

During the 2006 trial, the two were found to have laundered $50,000 from an FBI informant who said he worked for the militant group.

Aref, who came to the United States as a refugee, was the imam of an Albany mosque when he was arrested in August 2004. Hossain is a naturalized U.S. citizen.

In a separate ruling, the appeals court dismissed arguments from defense lawyers and the New York Civil Liberties Union that the lower court had improperly denied it access to classified information and sealed court papers and orders.

The NYCLU's request for the wiretapping evidence followed a New York Times report citing the case as an example of the National Security Agency's warrantless surveillance program.

During the trial, Aref alleged Muslims were unfairly branded as terrorists in the United States. Defense lawyers argued the men were victims of post-September 11 racial profiling.

Spencer: The Second Amendment and Islamic Law

In a Sharia state, dhimmis don't have the right to bear arms. My Human Events column for this week:

The Supreme Court’s ruling upholding the Second Amendment comes just as it has been revealed that in Iraq, Islamic jihadists have been forcing the Christians remaining in the country to pay jizya -- the tax mandated in the Qur’an for non-Muslims who live under Islamic rule. And in Pakistan’s Northwest Frontier Province, the Taliban has been enforcing Islamic Sharia law by waving automatic weapons, forcing music stores to close down at the point of a gun (music is forbidden in Islamic law).

Maybe if Iraq and Afghanistan had the Second Amendment, these things wouldn’t be happening. But they are a bracing reminder of just how radically different are American republican pluralism and the Islamic law that jihadists worldwide are fighting in order to implement. In April 2008, the Pakistani jihadist group Lashkar-e-Islam offered a glimpse of their perfect society, as they set down a list of measures they planned to implement in the Khyber Agency, a Pakistani tribal area. Many of these would be features of any Sharia regime imposed upon a population that hitherto had not been governed by Islamic law.

Lashkar-e-Islam would:

Nine jihadists arrested, bomb cache seized in Indonesia

A major attack thwarted. "9 terror suspects arrested in Indonesia," by Zakki Hakim for the Associated Press, July 2:

JAKARTA, Indonesia — A Singaporean who met several times with Osama bin Laden was among nine terror suspects arrested Wednesday in western Indonesia, a local television station reported.

A cache of powerful bombs packed with bullets was also seized in the raid.

The men initially planned to attack Western tourists on Sumatra Island, but changed their minds after realizing too many Indonesian lives could be lost, TVOne quoted anti-terror police as saying. They reportedly were considering a bombing in the capital, Jakarta, instead.

Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim nation, has been hit in recent years by a string of suicide bombings that have killed more than 240 people. The regional terror group Jemaah Islamiyah has been blamed in those attacks.

The last bombing occurred on Bali in late 2005 and earlier this year the United States lifted a travel warning imposed in 2000, citing improvements in security.

A police general, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to the media, told The Associated Press 22 bombs were seized Wednesday in Palembang, a coastal city on Sumatra, the largest weighing 11 pounds.

Some were packed with bullets, rather than Jemaah Islamiyah's hallmark ball-bearings, probably to maximize the impact of the blast.

Only the nationality of one suspect - the Singaporean - was identified by TVOne. The station said the man allegedly met with bin Laden on several occasions and received training in Afghanistan, but provided no further details.

The other men allegedly had ties with Southeast Asia's most wanted terror suspect, Noordin Top, who is believed to head a breakaway faction of Jemaah Islamiyah that is committed to al-Qaida style attacks on Western, civilian targets.

Police documents obtained recently by The Associated Press indicate Jemaah Islamiyah has maintained the ability and desire to forge international links despite a crackdown that has resulted in the arrest and convictions of hundreds of terrorists.

The newly detained suspects will be transferred to Jakarta on Thursday.

Police spokesman Abubakar Nataprawira confirmed the arrests and the recovery of explosives, but would not elaborate, saying the investigation was ongoing.

But another police official, also speaking on condition of anonymity, confirmed that nine were being held and that eight bombs were seized.

Jihadists using Internet to recruit!

We have seen accounts of this many times in the past, of course. The Internet makes it possible for jihadists to reach into communities of cultural Muslims where the jihad ideology has not been emphasized for centuries, and to call those Muslims back to what they represent as the purity of Islam. "Jihad Detainees Reveal Mass Recruitment Via Internet," from The Media Line, July 2 (thanks to the Constantinopolitan Irredentist):

Confessions of several detainees in Saudi Arabia are providing an indication of the extant Jihadi websites are impacting on potential Al-Qa’ida recruits.

Detained terror suspects explained in televised interviews broadcast on Saudi television on Tuesday how Al-Qa’ida was using the Internet as a tool to recruit new members and propagate radical ideology.

Detainees said they were inspired by Jihadi films and statements by Al-Qa’ida chief Osama Bin Laden and other leading Jihad figures, which were posted on the Internet.

The interviewees included the Egyptian Abu ‘Azzam Al-An’sari, who is editor of the online ‘Sada Al-Jihad (Jihad Echo) magazine, and Um Usama, editor of the Al-Khansa magazine.

Those interviewed said the Internet was their preferred means of recruiting people and propagating their ideas, because it provided relative security, especially since none of the participants in the forums know each others’ identities.

Detained Al-Qa’ida suspects have admitted to joining the organization after following news of the fighters in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The televised reports said these radical websites promised their readers they would reach paradise if they participated in holy war, propaganda and training. The websites base their legitimacy on fatwas or religious decrees of well-known religious figures in order to persuade youngsters to join their ranks....

Jerusalem: At least 4 killed, 44 injured as Palestinian goes on rampage with bulldozer

Watch this space for updates. "Bulldozer driver shot dead after going on rampage in capital," from the Jerusalem Post, July 2:

At least four people were killed and 44 were wounded - one seriously, one moderately and 42 lightly - on Wednesday afternoon when a bulldozer driver went on a rampage in downtown Jerusalem.

Police said that the driver plowed his vehicle into two public buses, toppling them over, and slammed into several cars.

A off-duty soldier took the gun from an elite policeman at the scene and shot the terrorist dead. The soldier, Moshe Klessner, 18, is the brother-in-law of IDF officer David Shapira, who killed the terrorist in the Mercaz Harav Yeshiva attack, Channel 2 reported.

Klessner was assisted in neutralizing the attacker by another elite policeman.

Another elite policeman was lightly wounded, apparently by gunfire, indicating that the terrorist was armed.

Police said the incident was definitely a terror attack, emphasizing that the terrorist, Jabr Duwait, a 32-year-old father of two from Jebl Mukaber, was carrying an Israeli identity card. The Mercaz Harav attacker was from the very same east Jerusalem town....

UPDATE: The Jerusalem Post now reports 3 killed, and 57 injured.

Geert Wilders plans sequel to Fitna

Unbowed. "Dutch politician to make another anti-Muslim film," from Reuters / Hollywood Reporter, July 1:

AMSTERDAM (Hollywood Reporter) - Right-wing Dutch politician Geert Wilders is planning a sequel to his anti-Muslim film "Fitna," the local daily De Telegraaf reported Tuesday. The move comes after the Dutch Ministry of Justice on Monday decided not to prosecute him for inciting hatred of Muslims with his film denouncing the Koran.

Not to mention the ridiculous charges filed in Jordan.

About 40 complaints were filed against Wilders by both Muslim and non-Muslim organizations in the Netherlands after "Fitna" was released on the Internet. A number of those groups are thought to be considering appeals against the Dutch Prosecutors decision.

Wilders also was investigated for remarks published in the newspaper De Volkskrant calling the Koran fascist and calling for it to be banned.

Hizballah now training Shi'ite jihadists inside Iraq

An update on this story. "Hezbollah said to train Shiite militiamen in Iraq," by Hamza Hendawi and Qassim Abdul-Zahra for the Associated Press, July 1:

BAGHDAD - Hezbollah instructors trained Shiite militiamen at remote camps in southern Iraq until three months ago when they slipped across the border to Iran — presumably to continue instruction on Iranian soil, according to two Shiite lawmakers and a top army officer.

The three Iraqis claim the Lebanese Shiites were also involved in planning some of the most brazen attacks against U.S.-led forces, including the January 2007 raid on a provincial government compound in Karbala in which five Americans died.

The allegations, made in separate interviews with The Associated Press, point not only to an Iranian hand in the Iraq war, but also to Hezbollah's willingness to expand beyond its Lebanese base and assume a broader role in the struggle against U.S. influence in the Middle East.

All this suggests that Shiite-dominated Iran is waging a proxy war against the United States to secure a dominant role in majority-Shiite Iraq, which has supplanted Lebanon as Tehran's top priority in the Middle East.

Exactly.

"The stakes are much higher in Iraq, where there is a Shiite majority, oil, the shrine cities and borders with Saudi Arabia," said analyst Farid al-Khazen, a Christian Lebanese lawmaker whose party is allied with Hezbollah.

"The big story is Iraq, and the Americans unwittingly opened it up for the Iranians" by their invasion in 2003, al-Khazen said.

Yep.

The allegations come as the United States and Iran are engaged in a showdown over Tehran's nuclear program and each country's role in Iraq.

Iran, Hezbollah's mentor, denies giving any support to Shiite extremists in Iraq.

But the three Iraqis who spoke to the AP said the Iranians prefer to use Hezbollah instructors because as Arabs, they can communicate better with the Iraqi Shiites and maintain a lower profile than Farsi-speakers from Iran.

For Hezbollah, a high-risk role in Iraq could give the Lebanese movement leverage with the United States and broaden its appeal within the Arab world where anti-American sentiment remains strong.

Iraqi officials have said little about a Hezbollah role in this country. However, President Jalal Talabani told U.S.-funded Alhurra television this week that "there have been several occasions" when Hezbollah members or those who "claim to belong to Hezbollah" have been detained in Iraq.

He gave no further details.

But the two Iraqi lawmakers and the military officer said Hezbollah instructors work only with members of the Iraqi Shiite "special groups," the U.S. military's name for splinter factions of anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army militia. The U.S. believes that Iran's elite Quds Force, a branch of Iran's Revolutionary Guard, supports the special groups....

Pakistan only one al-Qaeda sanctuary, along with Algeria and Somalia

There are three interesting points that this report touches on: One is the ease with which local jihadist groups ally with a global organization like al-Qaeda. This underscores the fact that the many jihadist-fueled conflicts worldwide cannot be written off as isolated, regional squabbles; on the contrary, those local conflicts are driven by a shared agenda they intend to pursue worldwide: Imposing Islamic law.

Next, the global reach of Al-Qaeda itself, amid the sea of other jihadist movements, should make clear that while capturing Osama bin Laden would be a psychological victory and a source of some useful intelligence, removing him and his top aides will not win the "War on Terror," or halt the jihad, because of its ideological basis in Islamic texts and tradition.

Lastly, the connection to communities in Europe mentioned in this article -- both the traditional "Al-Qaeda Pipeline" and the growing connections in Somalia and Algeria -- is of particular interest: Lax immigration policies facilitate the transfer and support of the jihadists trained and given marching orders in any of these places to their intended targets.

"Al-Qaeda finds three safe havens for terror training," by Michael Evans for The Times, July 2:

Al-Qaeda, Osama bin Laden’s terrorist organisation, driven out of Afghanistan and defeated in Iraq, is re-emerging in strength in three alternative safe havens for training, operational planning and recruiting – Pakistan, Somalia and Algeria – according to Western intelligence and defence sources.

The core al-Qaeda headquarters in the tribal areas of Pakistan pose the gravest threat to the United Kingdom. But in Somalia and in Algeria, where the so-called al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb was set up in 2004 as a powerful bin Laden offshoot, the organisation is recruiting energetically and its leaders are believed to have aspirations to hit Western targets. [...]

Al-Qaeda also appears not to be short of experienced operational commanders. One senior figure who was responsible for carrying out research into nuclear, chemical and biological systems when the organisation was in Afghanistan, is believed to be involved in trying to produce unconventional weapons to target the West. That is known to be al-Qaeda’s top ambition.

Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb has moved to the front line of terrorist operations, including suicide truck bombings and the murder of European tourists. The nationalist Algerian terrorist group has been converted into an organisation posing a threat beyond Algeria’s borders. American officials estimate that there are between 300 and 400 terrorists in the mountains east of Algiers and another 200 elsewhere in the country.

The same transformation is occurring in Somalia, particularly in the south. A large number of radicalised Somalis are living in Britain and it is feared that instead of going to Pakistan for jihad training, they are travelling to Somalia.

Somali jihadists attack Ethiopian, Somali, African Union troops, invade 3 towns

Somalia Jihad Update. "39 killed in Somalia fighting: residents," by Mustafa Haji Abdinur for Agence France-Presse, July 1:

MOGADISHU (AFP) - At least 39 people were killed on Tuesday in fighting that erupted when Islamist insurgents attacked Somali, Ethiopian and African Union forces in the capital and central region, residents said.

The clashes, some of the most serious in months, came a week before a deadline for the implementation of a truce agreement signed by rival factions last month in Djibouti was due to expire.

Thirteen civilians were killed in three southern Mogadishu districts after more than two hours of clashes punctuated by machine-gun fire, mortars and rocket-propelled grenades. [...]

Sheikh Abdirahim Isse, a spokesman for the insurgents, confirmed the Mataban clashes and claimed the Ethiopians had suffered heavy losses.

"There was heavy fighting today and the Ethiopian forces suffered huge losses. Many of them were killed and their armed vehicles destroyed," Isse told AFP by phone from an unknown location.

The Ethiopian army, which rarely comments about such incidents, has pledged to pull out once the United Nations deploys a peacekeeping force to bolster an embattled African Union peacekeeping force confined to Mogadishu.

Since they were ousted from power last year, the Islamists have waged a bitter guerrilla war, focused on Ethiopian, government and African Union targets almost daily.

According to several international rights groups and aid agencies, the fighting has left at least 6,000 civilians dead and displaced hundreds of thousands in the last 12 months alone.

On June 9, the Somali government and its political opposition signed agreements, including a ceasefire scheduled to enter into force within 30 days, but a radical wing of the Islamist fighters called Shebab has refused to recognise it.

Additionally: "Somalia: Somali Islamic Courts Spokesman Cited On Takeover of Three Towns," by Abdinasir Mohamed Guled for Shabelle Media Network, July 1:

The Islamic Courts union spokesman says that their fighters took control of three important cities in central and southwestern Somalia.

The cities are (Huddur), Wajid, and Balad Weyn. This has been confirmed by residents of these cities and tribal officials.

The spokesman also said that the fighters of the Islamic Courts attacked the strategic city of Huddur in the southwestern part of the country with RPGs, targeting the headquarters of the Somali Government in the city.

He added that the attack also targeted the house of the governor of the Bakol region "who escaped miraculously on foot after he suffered medium wounds, while three of his guards were killed and five others were wounded." [...]

Eyewitnesses in the same city said that the Islamic Courts forces withdrew from Huddur City, two hours after taking it over, and headed for Wajid City, which they also seized yesterday afternoon without significant clashes. [...]

Members of the Courts have held negotiations with tribal officials and representatives of the World Food programme Organization.

The negotiations ended in the release of two Swedish hostages. A source of the Courts said that the two Swedes were arrested in Huddur City out of fear for their safety.

The spokesman of the Courts denied that the arrest of the two foreign [Swedish] workers is a kidnapping.

He noted that the arrest "is only meant to save their lives and lest it should be said that the Courts was behind causing any harm to them, even if by hostile parties."

Islamic Courts forces entered Balad Weyn City, capital of the Hiran region in central Somalia, yesterday morning and took control of all government headquarters in it. Senior leaders in the Courts have addressed the residents of the city and asked them to be calm and not to loot government headquarters. [...]

The Islamic Courts has been waging guerrilla warfare against the Somali Government and the Ethiopian forces for more than a year.

The Courts adopt the policy of lightning takeover of cities, which they seize for a short time.

Its strength has noticeably increased recently, at a time when the Somali Government is losing control over important areas and cities in the central and southern parts of the country.