June 2007 Archives

"The chaos over the past two days has raised fears that the type of car bomb attacks that have become commonplace in Iraq has now reached European shores."

"Police Arrest 2 More in Connection With London, Scotland Terror Incidents," from the Associated Press:

GLASGOW, Scotland — Three terrorist suspects were in police custody Sunday — and a fourth man under guard in hospital — following attacks that saw a flaming jeep crash into a Scottish airport and two car bomb plots foiled in central London.

Scotland Yard said two people had been arrested in Cheshire, a county in northern England, in a joint swoop by specialist officers from London and Birmingham.

[...]

The chaos over the past two days has raised fears that the type of car bomb attacks that have become commonplace in Iraq has now reached European shores. Late Saturday, Britain raised its security alert level to critical — the highest possible level, indicating terror attacks may be imminent.

[...]

British Broadcasting Corp. television reported, without citing sources, that the man was wearing a suicide belt and that police had found propane gas cylinders in the Glasgow Jeep.

Rae would not say whether the device found on the suspect was a suicide belt, and made no mention of gas cylinders. However, British security officials said evidence pointed toward the Glasgow attack being a suicide mission.

London police said the latest arrests were in connection with both attacks, but did not elaborate. Officials declined to say if those arrested were men or women, or whether either suspect was a figure seen running from one of the explosive laden cars dumped in London.

[...]

Police wrestled the driver and a passenger, both described by witnesses as South Asian, to the ground, arresting them and taking one to the hospital. Witnesses said one of the men was engulfed in flames and spoke "gibberish" as an official used a fire extinguisher to douse the fire.

Glasgow police spokeswoman Elisa Dunn said five bystanders were treated for injuries, and one was hospitalized with a leg injury. Scottish airline authorities said around 2,500 passengers had been evacuated from the airport.

A report at CNN includes this account:

Witness Jackie Kennedy told the BBC that after the crash, a passenger in the Jeep doused himself with fuel from a can and ignited it, then got out of the vehicle. Airport police used fire extinguishers on him, and he fell to the ground, she said.

"I realized that this was obviously deliberately done -- the fact that the guy was in flames and seemed to be enjoying himself, even smiling," Kennedy told the BBC.

An update on the Glasgow attack. "Flaming SUV Rams U.K. Airport; 2 Arrests," by Ian Stewart for the Associated Press:

A Jeep Cherokee trailing a cascade of flames rammed into Glasgow airport on Saturday, shattering glass doors just yards from passengers lined up at the check-in counters. Police said they believed the attack was linked to two car bombs found in London the day before.

Britain raised its terror alert to "critical" the highest possible level and the Bush administration announced plans to increase security at airports and on mass transit.

One of the men in the car was in critical condition at a hospital with severe burns, while the other was in police custody, said Scottish Police Chief Constable Willie Rae. He said a "suspect device" was found on the man at the hospital and it was taken to a safe location where it was being investigated.

Rae would not say whether the device was a suicide belt. British security officials said evidence pointed toward the Glasgow attack being a suicide mission.

"I can confirm that we believe the incident at Glasgow airport is linked to the events in London yesterday," Rae said. "There are clearly similarities and we can confirm that this is being treated as a terrorist incident."

[...]

A British government security official said the methods used in the airport attack and Friday's thwarted plots were similar, with all three vehicles carrying large quantities of flammable liquid.

"A US official told ABCNews.com that the intelligence reports led to the assignment of Federal Air Marshals to flights into and out of both Glasgow and Prague."

"US Warned of Glasgow Threat Two Weeks Ago," by Richard Esposito and Rhonda Schwartz for ABC News' The Blotter:

U.S. law enforcement officials received intelligence reports two weeks ago warning of a possible terror attack in Glasgow against "airport infrastructure or aircraft," a senior US law enforcement officials tells the Blotter on ABCNews.com.

The intelligence reports also warned that airports and aircraft in the Czech Republic could be the targets of al Qaeda-connected terrorists.

The warnings were kept secret for operational reasons, according to officials. In public, the White House and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff have continued to maintain they know of no specific or credible threats involving the United States, even though the intelligence reports specify US aircraft as possible targets.

A US official told ABCNews.com that the intelligence reports led to the assignment of Federal Air Marshals to flights into and out of both Glasgow and Prague.

Air marshals had been added to flights into and out of Germany late last month, based on similar warnings.

From Sky News. The "critical" level warns of an imminent attack.

Watch this space for updates.

Also, "U.S. Orders Boost in Airport Security in Wake of London, Glasgow Terror Acts," from Fox News:

WASHINGTON — Some U.S. airports will tighten security in response to possible terrorist incidents in Britain, the White House said Saturday.

The United States, however, is not raising its terror alert status, President Bush's spokesman said. "There is no indication of any specific or credible threat to the United States -- no change in the overall security level," Tony Snow told reporters in Maine.

The Transportation Security Administration has taken steps to raise alertness at some airports, Snow said. More TSA agents will be posted outside some terminals, he said.

Eyewitness reports indicate this was no accident. "Blazing car crashes into airport," from the BBC:

A car on fire has been driven at the main terminal building at Glasgow Airport, police have confirmed.

Eyewitnesses have described a Jeep Cherokee being driven at speed towards the building with flames coming out from underneath.

They have also described seeing two Asian men, one of whom was on fire, who had been in the car.

Strathclyde Police said two people had been arrested and detained in connection with the incident.

The airport has been evacuated and all flights suspended following the incident at 1515 BST.

A Whitehall spokesman said the incident was not being treated as a national security threat however the prime minister is being kept informed of developments and is expected to chair a meeting of COBRA - the emergency committee later.

First Minister Alex Salmond has activated emergency procedures in response to the incident.

The incident comes a day after two cars were found containing explosives in central London.

The cars contained petrol, gas cylinders and nails but the devices did not detonate.

One eyewitness said: "I heard the sound of a car's wheels spinning and smoke coming out.

"I saw a Jeep Cherokee apparently as if it was trying to get right through the doors into the terminal building.

"There were flames coming out from underneath then some men appeared from in amongst the flames.

"The police ran over and the people started fighting with the police. I then heard what sounded like an explosion."

Molotov cocktails

Eye-witness Richard Grey told BBC News 24: "A green Jeep was in the middle of the doorway burning.

"There was an Asian guy who was pulled out of the car by two police officers, who he was trying to fight off. They've got him on the ground.

"The car didn't actually explode. There were a few pops and bangs which presumably was the petrol."

Stephen Clarkson said he saw people running towards him and "panicking" then noticed a crashed Cherokee jeep.

He said he helped police restrain one of the men.

"It was lucky that I was there," he said.

"I managed to knock the man to the ground with my forearm and the police got on top of him and restrained him and put handcuffs on him."

Thomas Conroy, a maintenance worker at the airport believes the men deliberately tried to set the car on fire.

"It looked like they had molotov cocktails with them," he said.

"They sort of burst them round about the flames to make sure the car would go up big style.

"Within minutes it was up and the terminal caught as well."

'No accident'

[...]

Taxi driver Ian Crosby said: "This was no accident. This was a deliberate attack on Glasgow Airport."

UPDATE: Sky News reports that this is "being treated as a terrorist strike," and "armed police have now closed off Blackpool airport."

"Was London Bomb Plot Heralded On Web?" by Tucker Reals for CBS News:

Hours before London explosives technicians dismantled a large car bomb in the heart of the British capital's tourist-rich theater district, a message appeared on one of the most widely used jihadist Internet forums, saying: "Today I say: Rejoice, by Allah, London shall be bombed."

CBS News found the posting, which went on for nearly 300 words, on the "al Hesbah" chat room. It was left by a person who goes by the name abu Osama al-Hazeen, who appears regularly on the forum. The comment was posted on the forum, according to time stamp, at 08:09 a.m. British time on June 28 -- about 17 hours before the bomb was found early on June 29.

Al Hesbah is frequently used by international Sunni militant groups, including al Qaeda and the Taliban, to post propaganda videos and messages in their fight against the West.

There was no way for CBS News to independently confirm any connection between the posting made Thursday night and the car bomb found Friday.

Al-Hazeen's message begins: "In the name of God, the most compassionate, the most merciful. Is Britain Longing for al Qaeda's bombings?"

No.

Al-Hazeen decries the recent knighthood of controversial author Salman Rushdie as a blow felt by all British Muslims. "This 'honoring' came at a crucial time, a time when the whole nation is reeling from the crusaders attacks on all Muslim lands," he said, in an apparent reference to the British role in Iraq.

"We say to Britain: The Emir of al Qaeda, Sheikh Osama, has once threatened you, and he carried out his threats. Today I say: Rejoice, by Allah, London shall be bombed," the message reads.

Speaking at a news conference Friday after the bomb scare in central London, the Metropolitan Police force's Counter-Terrorism Commander Peter Clarke said that officials had "no indication that we were going to be attacked this way".

Prior to the Thursday night posting by al-Hazeen, there had been no specific allusions to threats against London or Britain seen on al Hesbah, or any other major jihadist forums in recent weeks.

Several responses to the posting by other forum members expressed hope that an attack against London would be realized in the near future.

In response, al-Hazeen urges patience, saying, "Victory is very close, but you are just rushing it."

Islamic Tolerance Alert, and an update on the plight of Christians in Nigeria. "Nigeria - Muslim Rule in Kebbi State Chokes Church," from Compass Direct:

KALGO, Nigeria, June 29 (Compass Direct News) – For Kebbi state pastor Nuhu Mamman, to become a Christian was to have a death sentence passed on the life he knew: converting killed his past, and his future appeared moribund as family, friends and fiancée abandoned him.

[...]

“My Muslim blood relations don’t like me – they dislike and keep away from my family as if we are a plague to be avoided,” Rev. Mamman said. “They hate us because we have abandoned Islam. Our predicament has even been made worse as even Christians from other non-Muslim communities still don’t trust us. They believe that we are still Muslims despite our conversion to Christianity. This is very tough on us.”

Rev. Mamman, from the Hausa ethnic group of Kebbi state, says persecution of Christians is widespread in the state.

“In the northern part of Kebbi state, Christians face serious difficulties,” he told Compass. “We are always being forced to transfer former Muslims who have become Christians to other parts of this country in order to shield them from persecution.”

The church works hard to protect converts to Christianity from Muslim extremist attacks. After Adamu Muhammed, a Muslim from the town of Birnin Kebbi, became a Christian in 1997, Muslim radicals sought to kill him. As they hunted for him, Rev. Mamman said, the church moved him to Jos in central Nigeria, where he became a Bible student.

In 2003, Rev. Mamman added, a Muslim named Ibrahim Jega from Jega town converted to Christianity.

“His family members and other Muslims threatened to kill him,” Rev. Mamman said. “We were forced to take him to Zuru town for safety. Another convert from Islam to Christianity, Mohammed Abara from Sabon Birni town, also had to be taken to Pisabu by us in order to save his life.”

Of course, such actions follow the orders of Muhammad himself: baddala deenahu faqtuhu -- "If anyone changes his religion, kill him" (Sahih Bukhari 9.84.57).

Equally difficult is obtaining places for converts from Islam to worship.

“Even if we succeed in getting land to provide such converts with places of worship, Muslims who are in government will not allow us build such churches,” said Rev. Mamman, who was ordained an ECWA minister in 1994.

“Whenever we go to renew our land documents or even pay land rent for our church lands, Muslim government officials usually refuse to accept such payments,” he said. “But then, this is deliberate, as after a period of time they usually declare our church buildings as illegal structures, just to find reasons to demolish our places of worship.”

As one example of arbitrary demolitions of places of Christian worship in the state, Rev. Mamman cited the destruction of a church in Danbargo village by government agents.

“In Danbargo village of Shanga Local Government Area, almost all the villagers last year decided to become Christians after listening to the gospel preached to them,” he said. “We built a place of worship for these Christians, but the local government council authority of Shanga demolished this church building.”

Rev. Mamman said the local council also told the Christian villagers that if they refused to recant their belief in Christ and return to Islam, the government would seize their farms.

“Without any visible means of surviving this attack,” he said, “these Christians in Danbargo village went back to Islam.”

The Rev. Adamu Sunday Peni, vice chairman of the Christian Association of Nigeria, Kebbi state chapter, told Compass that lack of land for building places of worship – along with forceful conversion of Christians to Islam and discrimination against Christian public workers – is among the most pressing problems Christians face.

Among other foreign jihadists. "Arrested Aussies 'not senior extremists'," by Ed O'Loughlin for the Sydney Morning Herald:

POLICE who arrested boxing champion Ahmed Elomar with two other Australian friends in Lebanon say that the three are not known to be senior wanted extremists.

"These are not names that I've heard of," said Lt Colonel Bassem al Ayoubi, the chief of police in Tripoli, when asked about the Elomar group. "I don't think they are major people."

But two other Australians arrested in connection to the bloody shoot-out in Tripoli on June 24 are still being interrogated by military intelligence over suspected links to the international jihadi movement.

Nine people died in a ten-hour gunbattle after former Australian taxi driver Omar Hadba broke under interrogation and led police to a militant cell hiding in an apartment belonging to Basam al Sayed, another dual Australian-Lebanese citizen.

Among the dead were five Sunni militants (three Saudis, a Chechen and a Lebanese), a Lebanese soldier, and an off-duty policeman and his two daughters, aged eight and four.

Police said that hours before the fatal raid they had recovered a substantial arsenal of weapons and other military equipment from Hadba's property.

The arrests of five Australian citizens in the north Lebanon city come at a time of high tension between the Lebanese government and the strongly Sunni Muslim local population

"We are arresting a lot of people at this time, some thanks to investigations and others due to suspicions," said Lt Colonel Ayoubi. "We interrogate them and if there's nothing we let them go."

Police have yet to make any specific allegations against the group of three Australian men who were arrested on June 20, including boxing champion Ahmed Elomar.

"The ministry had said the men arrested Tuesday were suspected of recruiting people to send to jihadist training camps in Africa."

From Agence France-Presse:

MADRID: Spain's Interior Ministry said Friday police had arrested a Moroccan man in Barcelona suspected of having links to Al-Qaeda, three days after three other Moroccans were detained for the same reason. The ministry said the man arrested Friday was "presumed linked to the Al-Qaeda cell dismantled this week." The ministry had said the men arrested Tuesday were suspected of recruiting people to send to jihadist training camps in Africa. Morocco is seeking the trio's extradition, the ministry said, adding they were thought to belong to an Al-Qaeda group which claimed responsibility for more than 30 deaths in attacks in Algeria. Al-Qaeda-linked fighters are being trained in countries in the Sahel region such as Mali, Mauritania and Niger.

This week's arrests follow an investigation launched in 2005 after Morocco dismantled a militant network with branches in Spain. The Algerian-based Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat changed its name late last year after it rebranded itself the North African branch of Al-Qaeda.

And then, sympathizers would accuse government forces of destroying the mosque themselves. Lal Masjid Update. "Suicide bombers hiding in mosque, claims Musharraf," from Reuters:

ISLAMABAD: President Pervez Musharraf yesterday said suicide bombers from an Al Qaeda-linked militant group are holed up in a mosque in the centre of the capital, Islamabad.

Authorities have been locked in a tense standoff for months with clerics and students associated with Lal Masjid, who are pushing for imposition of Taliban-style social values in Islamabad.

Clerics at the mosque had threatened suicide attacks if government used force against them. Speaking to reporters, Musharraf said militants of Jaish-e-Mohamed, an Al Qaeda-linked group fighting Indian rule in Kashmir, were hiding in the mosque.

“They are indoctrinated people,” he told a workshop on journalism. “There are also people associated to Jaish-e-Mohamed. They have explosives. Many of them are ready to carry out suicide attacks,” he added.

Musharraf, who survived two Al Qaeda-inspired assassination attempts, said the government had tried to resolve the standoff through negotiations to avoid bloodshed in the sprawling mosque complex.

“Action is ready but timing is important,” he said. “I am not a coward person ... but the issue is tomorrow you will say what have you done. There are women and children inside,” he said.

[...]

Maulana Abdul Aziz, chief cleric of the mosque, said his followers would carry out suicide attacks if the government used force.

The date of this statement is unclear from the article, but nonetheless telling, and the cleric certainly has not retracted it:

“If the government carried out an operation then we will follow the way of jihad... our male and female students can carry out suicide attack as a last option,” he said, his face covered with a scarf.

On American television, shows "jump the shark." On Hamas TV, apparently they "martyr the mouse." And then it's time to move on to new programming. An update on this story. "Hamas TV show kills militant mouse character," from the Associated Press:

GAZA CITY (AP) -- A Mickey Mouse lookalike who preached Islamic domination on a Hamas-affiliated children's television program was the victim of a pretend beating death in the show's final episode Friday.

Gone with a final salvo of anti-Israel rhetoric:

In the final skit, the "Farfour" character was killed by an actor posing as an Israeli official trying to buy Farfour's land. At one point, the mouse called the Israeli a "terrorist."

"Farfour was martyred while defending his land," said Sara, the teen presenter. He was killed "by the killers of children," she added.

The weekly show, featuring a giant black-and-white rodent with a high-pitched voice, had attracted worldwide attention because the character urged Palestinian children to fight Israel. It was broadcast on Hamas-affiliated Al Aqsa TV.

Station officials said Friday that Farfour was taken off the air to make room for new programs. Station manager Mohammed Bilal said he did not know what would be shown instead.

Israeli officials have denounced the program, "Tomorrow's Pioneers," as incendiary and outrageous. The program was also opposed by the state-run Palestinian Broadcasting Corp., which is controlled by Fatah, Hamas' rival.

"Two explosive-laden cars in London linked," from CNN:

LONDON, England (CNN) -- A vehicle containing fuel, gas canisters and nails found early Friday near Trafalgar Square is "clearly linked" to another explosives-packed car found outside a nightclub near Piccadilly Circus, Metropolitan Police said.

A "considerable" amount of fuel and gas canisters, along with a "substantial quantity of nails," was found in the blue Mercedes 280E, said Peter Clarke, Metropolitan Police deputy assistant commissioner.

He called the discovery of the second bomb "troubling," but urged the public to remain vigilant and report suspicious behavior to authorities.

The second vehicle was ticketed about 2:30 a.m. Friday (9:30 p.m. Thursday ET), Clarke said. It was near Trafalgar Square, roughly a half-mile from where the first vehicle -- also a Mercedes -- had been found about an hour earlier.

About 3:30 a.m., Clarke said, the Mercedes was taken to an impound lot in Hyde Park. Security sources earlier told CNN that workers who towed it thought the car smelled of gasoline, and became suspicious because of the reports that gasoline was among the explosive materials found in the first vehicle.

Clarke said the second device, like the first, was "potentially viable" but was rendered safe by police explosives officers.

And the neutralized bombs, of course, should prove to be a bonanza for forensic investigators.

"These vehicles are clearly linked," he said.

Not Methodists. Not from Phoenix. "Terror Plot Involves Islamic Extremists; Police Have 'Crystal Clear' Picture of Suspect," by Brian Ross and Richard Esposito for ABC News:

British police have a "crystal clear" picture of the man who drove the bomb-rigged silver Mercedes outside a London nightclub, and officials tell the Blotter on ABCNews.com he bears "a close resemblance" to a man arrested by police in connection with another bomb plot but released for lack of evidence.

Officials say the suspect had been taken into custody in connection with the case of al Qaeda operative Dhiren Barot, who was convicted of orchestrating a vehicle bomb plot involving targets in London, New York, Newark, N.J. and Washington, D.C.

Officials say a surveillance camera caught the suspect "staggering from the Mercedes" shortly after parking it outside the Tiger Tiger nightclub.

U.S. and British law enforcement officials tell ABC News it is increasingly clear Friday's bomb plot in London involves multliple vehicles, and is described by a senior official as a "terror plot involving lslamic extremists."

The car contained five or six propane and butane gas cylinders as well as 33 gallons of gasoline, all rigged to detonate with calls to two cell phones. Officials say the cell phones failed to initiate the explosions, even after each phone had been called twice.

Hmmm. Methodists from Phoenix?

"Police avert car bomb 'carnage,'" from the BBC, with thanks to Mao:

...Police were alerted by an ambulance crew who saw smoke coming from the silver Mercedes, parked near the Tiger Tiger nightclub.

"International elements" are believed to be involved, the BBC has been told.

Police sources say it is quite possible the device failed to ignite - and might have been minutes away from exploding.

Deputy Assistant Commissioner Peter Clarke, head of Scotland Yard's counter-terrorism command, said: "It is obvious that if the device had detonated there could have been serious injury or loss of life."...

This call for "true SCHOLARS" comes into the Hate Mail Bag from ThanksToBeAMuslim@AllahSWT.org:

I hope some (few) commentators here are true SCHOLARS (started by Islam- during the WesternDarkAge- lol). It is clear the Autistic-Depressed-JewishCancerGene needs AGAIN...yes...AGAI..therapy. Now I know why GOD (Allah-SWT) "cursed" the jews...it speaks for itself in the hateful, proud-for-nothing-INTEREST-gulping Jews (not all few Jews know Islam is THE ANSWER). So, what is the deal with the "flip-flop" authors of the corrupted writers. You "changed" the message of Isa (Jesus-PBUH) and then God (Allah) sent ISLAM...yes..."swallow" that...it will "burn" your BLACK heart...fire from the HELL itself. WE...again..we DO NOT CARE about you.. got it YOU are free to worship your "golden cow" made out of INTEREST (RIBA) money of the "poor" citizens. LEAVE US ALONE TO OUR LIFE. "but, but" if you mess with us THIS TRUE Princess of the ARABS and Indian and CHINA and Africa will BLOW you out...

In "Kosovo conundrum" in the Washington Times (thanks to all who sent this in), Michael Djordjevich of the Studenica Foundation discusses U.S. aid for the Kosovo jihad:

...Kosovo is unfinished business, left over from the violent dissolution of Yugoslavia in the past decade and the legacy of fundamentally flawed American policies promulgated by the Clinton administration and then perpetuated by his successor. In terms and perspective of American long-term geostrategy and the ongoing struggle with radical Islam, it is indeed unfathomable how our foreign policy establishment has rationalized its strategy in the Balkans. Already, a body of impartial evidence strongly suggests an inexplicably steady policy of accommodation by the United States to Islamist demands. Essentially, at several key junctures on the road to peace and stability in the Balkans, America gave veto power to extreme Islamist leadership and its supporters worldwide.

The U.S. objective in Bosnia has been to establish a unitary state governed by Muslims, in effect abrogating the international treaty, the Dayton Accords. Together with the European Union, the United States has exerted consistent and relentless pressure to abolish or at least severely diminish the Serbian entity.

Currently in Kosovo, America is aggressively forcing the establishment of the second Muslim state in Europe. This is in contravention of international law and despite serious misgivings in Europe and resolute resistance by Russia.

An independent Kosovo would be a failed state, ethnically and religiously cleansed of Serbs and other minorities. During the past eight years of U.N. and NATO control of the province, the non-Albanian population experienced ethnic cleansings, destruction of a great number of homes and more than 100 churches and other medieval evidences of overwhelming Christian presence. Add to this a flourishing international drug and white slave trafficking, Kosovo is rather far from the democratic and multicultural model that the U.S. foreign policy establishment professes to support. Obviously these are not credentials for independence.

Equally serious is the undeniable rise of the puritanical strain of Wahabbi Islam and real potential for increased interacting between heroin trafficking and crime with terrorists in Kosovo, Southern Serbia, Bosnia and Northern Macedonia.

Read it all.

When he spoke this week at the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the opening of the Islamic Center of Washington, President Bush said: "In the Middle East, we have seen instead the rise of a group of extremists who seek to use religion as a path to power and a means of domination. This self-appointed vanguard presumes to speak for Muslims. They do not."

There we are again. The Administration and the mainstream media (both Left and Right) take it as axiomatic that the jihad we see all over the world today represents a perversion of Islam, repudiated by the vast majority of Muslims. The American Muslim advocacy industry, chiefly the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), which has recently been named an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case, has quite successfully portrayed any exploration of the elements of Islam that give rise to and justify jihad violence and Islamic supremacism as a manifestation of "hatred," "bigotry," "Islamophobia." Those who do not accept the iron dogma that Islam contains nothing within it that can reasonably be used to justify terrorism are vilified and marginalized.

However, consider for a moment that if the iron dogma is false, the dogmatists are doing a grave disservice to the United States and even to peaceful Muslims. For if there is nothing in Islam that needs reforming, we cannot possibly offer assistance to Islamic reformers. And if Islam is a fundamentally peaceful belief-system, then we need not reevaluate our immigration policies vis-a-vis Muslims entering the U.S. from a national security standpoint, and we need not call American mosques to account for what they are teaching. If we're just dealing with a few crazies, we need not call upon Muslims in the U.S. and elsewhere to perform a searching and honest reevaluation of their beliefs, and decide whether they want to live in a state of conflict with the rest of the international community on an indefinite basis. I suspect that if the question were posed to Muslims worldwide, many would opt for otherwise universally accepted notions of human rights: the freedom of conscience, equality of dignity of women and men, equality of dignity of non-Muslims with Muslims. But we will never know, because Western leaders wouldn't dare pose the question on those terms. After all, they don't want to be seen as "hatemongers."

But there is another aspect to that hatemongering. And that is that the vision of Islam and jihad that the "hatemongers" present today is identical to the one that was universally accepted by academics, including Muslim ones, up until the age of political correctness and Said's Left-McCarthyite Orientalism swept propagandists like Carl Ernst, Omid Safi, Rashid Khalidi and others into our universities. If this is an unfair picture of Islam, motivated by hatred and powered by selection bias involving the ignoring of peaceful Muslim authorities, that is an exceedingly strange fact. But fact it is. Let us examine, to take just one example, the work of the great Islamic scholar Majid Khadduri, who died earlier this year at the age of 98.

Khadduri was an Iraqi and a scholar of Islamic law of international renown. I've lately been revisiting his book War and Peace in the Law of Islam, which was published in 1955 and remains one of the most lucid and illuminating works on the subject. Khadduri says this about jihad:

The state which is regarded as the instrument for universalizing a certain religion must perforce be an ever expanding state. The Islamic state, whose principal function was to put God's law into practice, sought to establish Islam as the dominant reigning ideology over the entire world. It refused to recognize the coexistence of non-Muslim communities, except perhaps as subordinate entities, because by its very nature a universal state tolerates the existence of no other state than itself. Although it was not a consciously formulated policy, Muhammad's early successors, after Islam became supreme in Arabia, were determined to embark on a ceaseless war of conquest in the name of Islam. The jihad was therefore employed as an instrument for both the universalization of religion and the establishment of an imperial world state. (P. 51)

And:

Thus the jihad may be regarded as Islam's instrument or carrying out its ultimate objective by turning all people into believers, if not in the prophethood of Muhammad (as in the case of the dhimmis), at least in the belief in God. The Prophet Muhammad is reported to have declared "some of my people will continue to fight victoriously for the sake of the truth until the last one of them will combat the anti-Christ." Until that moment is reached the jihad, in one form or another, will remain as a permanent obligation upon the entire Muslim community. It follows that the existence of a dar al-harb is ultimately outlawed under the Islamic jural order; that the dar al-Islam is permanently under jihad obligation until the dar al-harb is reduced to non-existence; and that any community which prefers to remain non-Islamic -- in the status of a tolerated religious community accepting certain disabilities -- must submit to Islamic rule and reside in the dar al-Islam or be bound as clients to the Muslim community. (Page 64)

Khadduri is, in Bush's words, explaining a doctrine that uses "religion as a path to power and a means of domination." Was Khadduri an "Islamophobe"? A "propangandist"? A practitioner of "selection bias"? A diabolical character misrepresenting the testimony of the texts? Did he ignore Islam's peacefulness and moderation? Those who level such charges at those who discuss the jihad ideology of Islamic supremacism today should kindly explain how it is that a scholar like Khadduri (and there are others like him, which I will discuss at another time) could have come to the same conclusions as the "venomous Orientalists" of the 1950s and the "Islamophobic propagandists" of today.

Fair-minded observers, however, should take Khadduri's scholarship as confirming the findings of those who say today that elements of Islam are giving rise to violence and terrorism today, and that that must be addressed by both Muslims and non-Muslims if there is ever going to be an end to it.

Not that Khadduri saw it coming, at least in 1955. In the same book, he wrote that the jihad ideology had largely fallen into desuetude:

The Muslim states, however, are quite aware that at the present it is not possible to revive the traditional religious approach to foreign affairs, nor is it in their interests to do so, as the circumstances permitting the association of religion in the relations among nations have radically changed....the jihad [has] become an obsolete weapon...Islam has at last accepted, after a long period of tension and friction with Christendom, its integration into a world order which, although originating in western Europe, now tends to encompass the entire world. (Pages 295-296)

Those assertions were much truer in 1955 than they are in 2007. Today we are dealing with a global movement that is doing all it can "to revive the traditional religious approach to foreign affairs," and who vehemently reject the idea that "the jihad [has] become an obsolete weapon." They are explicit opponents of the "world order" which originated in western Europe, and posit Sharia as an alternative to it. Note that Khadduri doesn't say that Islamic sects and schools have rejected jihad and reformed the doctrines that mandated Islamic supremacism. Rather, he says that these doctrines were set aside in practice. And now they are being taken up again, fifty years after Khadduri was ready to pronounce them dead -- and now many Western analysts, ignorant of history, think that only we introduce Western ideas into the Islamic world, they will be widely adopted.

In fact, those ideas have long been present, and today's global jihad represents a rejection of them, not a manifestation of ignorance of them. Hugh Fitzgerald has frequently pointed out here that Saudi oil money, massive Muslim immigration into the West, and the revolution in communications technology have made this reassertion possible. I would also add that the Khomeini revolution in Iran has encouraged jihadists in numerous ways, not least by demonstrating that they can capture a state and hold power.

But Bush's address is just the latest example of the fact that Western leaders are largely ignoring all this, and continuing to make policy based on fictions. Karen Hughes is reading John Esposito and Reza Aslan instead of Majid Khadduri and those who confirm his analysis. The negative consequences of this will only grow more obvious as time goes on.

No Compulsion In Religion Alert from Pakistan. From Christian Today (thanks to the Constantinopolitan Irredentist):

Lawyers in Pakistan are investigating a report that up to 30 men tortured and gang-raped a young Christian man for refusing to convert to Islam.

The victim is seriously injured and unable to move, Release International’s partner in Pakistan has reported. However, according to the Centre for Legal Aid Assistance and Settlement (CLAAS) the police are keeping him locked up and have denied him medical treatment.

The police are also refusing to register the rape following a counter-claim made by his principal attacker – “a man of influence”, Release International has told Christian Today.

According to CLAAS, the Christian was invited to a game of cricket. A quarrel broke out and he was beaten up. Later that evening, the father of one of the Muslims asked the Christian over to his house.

Joseph Francis, the National Director of CLAAS, explained: “When he entered the drawing room, he found it filled with unknown people. They began to beat him severely. They threatened him with dire consequences if he did not accept Islam. After his refusal, they committed sodomy with him one by one for the whole night.”

Francis said that they later threw their victim out on the street unconscious.

CLAAS has visited the victim and his family. They believe the counter accusation that he stole money and a mobile phone is false. They say the charges were drawn up by the attacker, who has used his influence to put pressure on the authorities.

“We’re deeply concerned about the growing number of attacks against Christians in Pakistan,” says Release International’s CEO Andy Dipper. “We are receiving reports of rape, abductions and forced conversion. Pakistan is becoming an increasingly difficult place for Christians to live.

“To make matters worse, the government is pushing through a law which could impose the death penalty for any Muslim man who converts to Christianity – and life imprisonment for any woman."

Sheikh Sa'd Sharaf is proceeding from a fact that we have pointed out here again and again: that the jihadists appeal to Muslims by presenting themselves as the exponents of "true Islam," and moderate Muslims (not to say that Fatah is a genuine example of such people) have made no effective comeback. We have, incidentally, been harshly criticized for pointing this out; will Sheik Sa'd Sharaf now be denounced also as an "Islamophobe"?

"West Bank activists push peace, moderation," by Joshua Mitnick for the Washington Times (thanks to Davida):

RAMALLAH, West Bank — Some Palestinian political activists are encouraging the secular Fatah party, which controls the West Bank, to combat radical Islam by incorporating religious teachings that emphasize peace and moderation.

Sheik Sa'd Sharaf said he is pushing Fatah leaders to enlist religious figures to openly debate the violent interpretation of the Koran as espoused by the rival Hamas militia.

"The prophet Muhammad says, 'Don't kill those who don't use weapons against you. Don't kill a woman. Don't kill a baby,' " he said.

He is reported to have said that. Unfortunately, the data on this point, as on so many others, is not unambiguous. There is also a hadith in which Muhammad is "asked about the women and children of the polytheists being killed during the night raid." Muhammad responded, "They are from them," which has generally been understood to mean that it was acceptable for them to have been killed.

Also, the idea that Fatah could possibly oppose Hamas because the latter kills women and children and the former doesn't is laughable on its face.

Sheik Sharaf, who preaches in mosques, lectures at a junior college and hosts a television program from the West Bank city of Nablus, said the key to Islamist group Hamas' success has been its ability to present itself as representing the one authentic version of Islam....

Oh Sheikh, you Islamophobe!

Another prominent Palestinian, Mohammed Dajani, has established a religious movement called Wasatia — a term from the Koran meaning "centrism," "balance" or "moderation."

Unlike Sheik Sharaf, who hopes to moderate Fatah with religion, Mr. Dajani believes that a new political party is needed to fill a vacuum between Fatah and Hamas.

Although a secular party, Fatah militants are as deadly as Hamas. A radical offshoot of the group, the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, has also boasted of dozens of suicide bombings inside Israel.

"We are undergoing a social, religious, economic and a political crisis," said Mr. Dajani, who also teaches political science at Al Quds University in East Jerusalem.

"We feel that this crisis will not be addressed without the rise of a new party — a middle-ground Islamic party supporting tolerance and calling for dialogue. This is the only solution."

Alongside quotes from the Jewish holy book, the Talmud, and the New Testament, the Wasatia Web site quotes the Koran as saying "we have created you a midground nation" and ascribes to Muhammad the saying: "The best way to run affairs is moderation."

This "balance" and "moderation" or "midground" is Qur'an 2:143: "We have created you a balanced (or middle, moderate, midground, etc.) nation...."

Mr. Dajani said he wants to change pre-school and elementary school curriculum teachings on "jihad," which he says extol violence and discourage interfaith coexistence.

"Religion is being hijacked and misrepresented," he said in a recent interview with a Jewish peace group. "Palestinian society is moderate, but being pushed to extremism and fundamentalism. This is not the Islam we were raised on."

Sheik Sharaf, who wants to reform Fatah by creating a religious branch within the organization, acknowledges that politicians in the Fatah movement have largely ignored efforts.

"[Fatah] doesn't understand the danger. They are ignorant in this," he said.

But he also believes that in the two weeks since Hamas' takeover of Gaza and their public executions of Fatah members, more Palestinians have become disillusioned by the Hamas brand of Islam.

"I want to prevent the misleading of the people," he said.

Well, Sheikh, I hope you pull it off.

Olmert admits defeat, and tells the residents of Sderot to get used to jihad attacks. When has the leader of a nation ever spoken this way? The sooner the Israelis get a new Prime Minister, the better.

By Hana Levi Julian for Israel National News (thanks to WriterMom):

(IsraelNN.com) Prime Minister Ehud Olmert warned in a speech at the annual Caesarea Conference Thursday night that Sderot residents should not expect to be completely protected against Kassam rocket attacks fired at the town from northern Gaza.

The Prime Minister declared that his government cannot offer reinforced rooftops for every edifice within rocket range, saying: "A country cannot protect itself ad infinitum, because there would be no end to it."

He added that providing rocket-proof structures to all the city’s beleaguered residents who have suffered continuous rocket attacks for seven years, would come at the expense of the security establishment's operational needs.

The Prime Minister also took a swipe at the media and said it should not "encourage, even mutely, demands of citizens that no normal government could accept."

An update on this story. "Mirza plays down Peer pairing," by Pritha Sarkar for Reuters:

LONDON, June 28 (Reuters) - India's Sania Mirza hopes her decision to renew her doubles partnership with Israel's Shahar Peer at Wimbledon does not stir up another religious storm.

"We're playing tennis, we're not making statements. We're just here to play tennis and we're here to perform and be the best we can be," the Indian number one said on Thursday.

Me and Shahar are playing just like the way me and (Eva) Birnerova played the French Open, just like the way I played with anyone else the last six weeks. It doesn't make any statement."

The last time Mirza, a Muslim, joined forces with Peer at the 2005 Japan Open, their association was short-lived.

Under pressure from militants furious over a Muslim and a Jew playing together, Mirza called for some time out.

Mirza has also had a fatwa issued against her for wearing "revealing" clothing at matches.

She hopes their second stab at success will be remembered more for their on-court exploits.

"We've grown up together. We're great friends. So we said, why not?" said Mirza, who comes from the southern Indian city of Hyderabad.

"We were both very lucky to find each other because it's someone who suits each other's game. I have a big forehand, she has a big backhand. We've done well in the past.

"We really don't care whether she's from Israel or I'm from Pakistan. At the end of the day it matters whether we win a match or not."

Doubles partnerships between Muslim and Jewish players have not gone down too well in the past.

In 2002, Aisam-ul-Haq Qureshi was threatened with a suspension from Pakistan's tennis federation when he entered the Wimbledon men's doubles with Israel's Amir Hadad.

The partnership won the duo a humanitarian award from the organisers of men's tennis but Mirza does not want any similar recognition.

"I'm here to play tennis and so is she. That's the end of that. It has nothing to do with anything else," she said.

No Compulsion in Religion Alert from modern, moderate Malaysia: "Tougher law for Malaysia converts," from Al-Jazeera (thanks to LGF):

The only opposition-ruled state in Malaysia has approved stiffer penalties to deter people from trying to convert Muslims to other faiths. Under the revised law passed by Kelantan state, anyone found guilty faces a maximum penalty of six lashes with a rattan cane, five years in prison and a fine of almost $3,000.

Kelantan is a moderate Muslim area. If it were imposing Sharia strictly, those who leave Islam would be executed, per Muhammad's instructions: "If anyone changes his religion, kill him."

Kelantan is the only Malaysian state led by the opposition Islamist party, PAS. Hassan Mohamood, who heads Kelantan's Islamic affairs committee, told The Associated Press on Wednesday that the stiffer laws are useful "as a form of deterrence". The previous maximum penalty was two years in prison and a fine of RM5,000 ($1,400). Proselytising of Muslims is forbidden under federal laws, but the recent case of Line Joy, a Malay-Muslim woman who sought legal recognition of her right to pick her religion of choice, raised fears among some in Malaysia over mass conversion.

Yes, and we can't have that. Just imagine -- Christians in Malaysia! The horror!

Probably not Irish. From SkyNews:

Shane Brighton, a counter-terrorism expert, told Sky the device may be linked to Al Qaeda in the wake of Gordon Brown becoming Prime Minister.

He said: "This is highly unlikely to be an Irish device, given the current state of politics there. Al Qaeda tend to go for symbolic timing."

Watch out: there could be more. From Bloomberg:

``The police did not have any advance intelligence of this which is worrying,'' said Paul Wilkinson, chairman of the Centre for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence at St. Andrew's University in Scotland. ``They will be concerned there might be other devices in the area or elsewhere in central London because if it is al-Qaeda one of their characteristics is to set off coordinated devices.''

This report, characteristically enough, never mentions Islam, and implies that these laws are all particularly Sudanese. Yet every legal provision it mentions is Sharia-based. It sounds from this as if Sudan's rape laws are based on Sharia, which allows for rape and adultery to be established only by the testimony of four male Muslim witnesses who actually saw the act. This is based on Qur'an 4:15 and other passages, along with ahadith about an accusation of adultery against Muhammad's favorite wife, Aisha.

By Amber Henshaw for BBC News (thanks to JE):

Sudan must overhaul its legal system to stop mass rape from being committed in the war-torn region of Darfur, an aid agency says in a report.

Rape victims have almost no access to justice and even risk being prosecuted for having had sex outside marriage.

Because if they cannot produce four witnesses and they end up giving birth to a child, the pregnancy becomes evidence against them.

Refugees International said government soldiers and affiliated militias were often responsible for the rapes.

Khartoum denies that rape has been used as a weapon of war in Darfur and says Sudan already punishes rape harshly....

Refugees International said the government was more likely to take action against those who reported and documented rape than those who committed it.

Its report said the Sudanese rape laws needed to be completely revised to protect women and girls from systemised sexual attacks.

The report said the high incidence of sexual violence in Darfur had been well documented in the past, but existing regulations made it "all but impossible" to prosecute rapists.

It added that women who admitted being raped also risked being prosecuted themselves for having sex outside marriage - an offence punishable by 100 lashes or death by stoning.

That is in accord with Qur'an 24:2, which mandates the hundred lashes, and several ahadith, notably this one, in which Muhammad stones adulterers.

The report made 24 recommendations for change, including the need for more judges to be trained and more female police officers to be recruited.

Yeah, that'll change Sharia law, all right.

The report also urged Sudan to expand its definition of rape to include sexual assault with objects, including rifle barrels.

It said courts should also give equal weight to the evidence of both men and women.

Islamic law disallows the victim's evidence in her own rape case. And the Qur'an values a woman's testimony in general as half that of a man (2:282). So the report is asking Sudan to discard the Sharia in this particular. I expect that the derivation of these laws will make Sudanese officials reluctant to heed this report and do away with them.

If "the behaviour of the job seeker prevented him or her from finding a job," that is the responsibility of the individual in question, not of the state.

"'Cut benefits to burqa wearers,'" from Expatica (thanks to Dave):

THE HAGUE – A majority in Parliament wants the government to allow municipalities to cut benefits if the recipients are unable to find a job because they wear a burqa.

A motion to this effect from Liberal VVD MP Atzo Nicolaï and Labour PvdA MP Hans Spekman was passed on Tuesday.

Coalition party PvdA and opposition party VVD are concerned about a verdict from the court in Amsterdam earlier this month. The court found in preliminary proceedings that the municipality Diemen had unlawfully docked the benefits of a Muslim woman who wears a burqa because she had been unable to find a job after four job applications.

[...]

Aboutaleb has said in earlier debates with Parliament that the case in Diemen should be put in perspective. He says it is just "one case," while there have also been court verdicts that have found in favour of municipalities in cases where the behaviour of the job seeker prevented him or her from finding a job. One of these cases also concerned the wearing of a burqa.

With "potentially massive" destructive power.

By Guy Dresser and Avril Ormsby for Reuters:

LONDON (Reuters) - British police defused a bomb in an abandoned car in London's theatre district on Friday and launched a counter-terrorism investigation.

The bomb, which Sky News quoted unidentified sources as saying was "potentially massive", was found inside a light green Mercedes left outside a nightclub in the early hours of Friday, a police officer quoted witnesses as saying.

The witnesses said the occupant drove "erratically" before smashing into some bins outside the nightclub and running off. Bouncers from the nightclub investigated, saw what looked like gas canisters inside the vehicle and called the police.

Officers sealed off the area at around 2 a.m. (0100 GMT) and found a bomb, the Metropolitan police said.

"They discovered what appeared to be a potentially viable explosive device. This was made safe," they said, adding that counter-terrorism officers were investigating.

[...]

Terrorism experts said an al Qaeda connection to the potential attack could not be dismissed.

"We couldn't rule it out," a security source said, noting that the threat from international Islamist terrorism was the main reason the official British threat level is placed at "severe", the second highest level.

"Numerically speaking, al Qaeda is a strong possibility but it just is too early to attribute specifically.

"It would be wrong and short-sighted to rule out domestic options as well. Obviously there are various extremist groups out there too," the source added.

The MI5 intelligence agency said last year it believed Islamist radicals were plotting at least 30 major terrorist attacks in Britain and it was tracking some 1,600 suspects.

One would think that the endless "Religion-of-Peace-hijacked-by-a-Tiny-Minority-of-Extremists" drumbeat would have headed off all such concern, but apparently Canadians still have eyes and the capacity for independent thought. "Canadians fear Muslim, Christian tensions: survey," by Randy Boswell for CanWest News Service (thanks to Twostellas):

Canadians believe that the country's traditional French-English tensions will be overshadowed by friction between Christians and Muslims when Canada celebrates its 150th anniversary a decade from now, according to a survey of attitudes on intercultural and interfaith relations by the Association for Canadian Studies.

Of the 1,500 people polled, 34% said they were pessimistic about the future of Christian-Muslim relations and another 29% expected tense interaction between aboriginal Canadians and non-aboriginals by the year 2017.

Respondents were much more optimistic that white Canadians and visible minorities, as well and Christians and Jews, would enjoy good relations in 10 years. Only 16% and 14% respectively were pessimistic about those relationships, similar to the 19% who predicted troublesome French-English relations by the time Canada reaches the sesquicentennial of Confederation.

Twenty-three per cent said they were pessimistic about the relationship between religious and secular Canadians, and 22% were pessimistic about immigrant-non-immigrant relations.

"For the most part, the results reflect a fair degree of optimism," said Jack Jedwab, executive director of the Montreal-based research association. "They do, however, suggest a shift in concerns away from language and inter-racial tensions to concerns over aboriginal-non-aboriginal and interfaith relations --in particular relations between Christians and Muslims."

He noted the Christian-Muslim relationship is a complex dynamic involving religious and cultural differences, highlighted by such flashpoint controversies as the debate over Sharia law and the expulsion of a female soccer player for wearing a hijab.

Human beings need sunshine. "Are Muslim dress codes bad for women's health?," by Preeti Aroon for Foreign Policy (thanks to WriterMom):

Conservative Muslim dress codes may be causing vitamin D deficiency in women by limiting their exposure to sunlight, humans' main source for the vitamin, according to new research.

Scientists had previously found high rates of vitamin D deficiency in Arab and East Indian women living in the United Arab Emirates. A follow-up study investigated the effect of vitamin D supplements on 178 UAE women, many of whom covered themselves entirely, faces and hands included, when outside their homes. Only two of the women did not have vitamin D deficiency prior to receiving supplements. The results were published by a team of scientists in the June issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

Read it all.

"New fund 'to unlock potential of Muslim women,'" from 24dash.com (thanks to WriterMom):

Communities Secretary Ruth Kelly is announcing a new community leadership fund today to support Muslim communities to unlock the potential of women and young Muslims in making communities resilient and stronger in facing down the voices of violent extremism.

She will launch a new £650,000 Preventing Violent Extremism: Community Leadership Fund which will provide grants to programmes across the country.

Ruth Kelly believes that supporting Muslim communities to play a greater leadership role in civic life and shaping the places they live will help promote greater equality and strengthen resilience to extremism in local communities.

The fund is expected to support the following types of projects:

* New community-led programmes that break down the barriers to the progression and participation of Muslim women in mosques and wider society. For example, building on the work of organisations such as the British Muslim Forum and the Sufi Muslim Council who are encouraging greater access to mosques and mosque committees for women.
* A major expansion in community leadership training courses for Muslim women and young Muslims, including work around confidence building, communication skills, negotiation and mediation. Courses run by organisations like Common Purpose could cover the chance to meet and work as apprentices for senior decision-makers and leaders across communities, business and voluntary sectors. Participants can also visit prisons, housing developments, businesses, hospitals and manufacturing plants to help learn the leadership skills necessary in influencing people and confronting difficult issues.
* New local projects that promote opportunities for Muslim women and young Muslims to play a greater role in civic life such as becoming magistrates, local councillors or school governors. This will help promote equality and the skills that strengthen communities’ resilience to extremism. Roughly only 0.4 per cent of councillors are Asian women. In 2006 there were 75 Asian female councillors and 438 Asian male councillors. In total, only 2.8 per cent of councillors were Asian, compared 4.6 per cent of the adult population.

Anything about "teaching against the jihad ideology of Islamic supremacism"? Of course not.

So says Steve Emerson in "Radical Outreach: Bush coddles American apologists for radical Islam" in National Review (thanks to Looney Tunes):

At Wednesday’s rededication ceremony of the Saudi-funded Islamic Center of Washington, D.C., President Bush missed a perfect opportunity to repudiate apologism for radical Islam, and instead announced his latest plan to get the Muslim world to stop hating America: appoint a special envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC).

Bush praised the OIC, saying, “We admire and thank those Muslims who have denounced what the Secretary General of the OIC called ‘radical fringe elements who pretend that they act in the name of Islam.’” The special envoy’s mission, Bush said, would be to “listen and learn” to OIC ambassadors.

While this may sound nice, it is rooted in complete ignorance of the rampant radicalism, pro-terrorist, and anti-American sentiments routinely found in statements by the OIC and its leaders, including referring to “Islamophobia” — and not the mass slaughter of innocents in the name of Islam — the “worst form of terrorism,” as OIC did last May.

In 2002, the OIC published its “Declaration on International Terrorism.” Therein, the authors stated, amongst other outrageous claims, that there was no such thing as Palestinian terrorism, writing, “We reject any attempt to associate Islamic states or Palestinian and Lebanese resistance with terrorism.” To the OIC, groups like Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, and Hezbollah are not terrorists, but “freedom fighters.”

Read it all.

Leiken's naivete and willful ignorance win the day. For now. From the World Tribune (thanks to Morgaan Sinclair):

WASHINGTON — The Bush administration has been quietly engaging the Muslim Brotherhood movement.

Officials said the State Department has approved a policy that would enable U.S. diplomats to meet and coordinate with Brotherhood leaders in Egypt, Iraq, Syria and other Arab states. They said the program would first be restricted to elected officials from the Brotherhood and eventually be extended to their political chiefs.

"The region is going Islam," an official said. "We see this in nearly every country in the Middle East. We either understand it and engage with it or find ourselves completely out of the picture."

The Brotherhood has been regarded as the inspiration for Muslim movements throughout the Arab world. The organization, founded in Egypt, spread through Saudi financing and has served as the inspiration for Al Qaida.

Many Arab countries have banned the Brotherhood. But in Egypt, a party composed of Brotherhood members has won 20 percent of the seats in the National Assembly and plays a major role in domestic policy.

[...]

The State Department has been discussing the new policy with the U.S. intelligence community. On June 20, the department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research convened a meeting with members of the CIA and Defense Intelligence Agency to expand dialogue with the Brotherhood.

The proposal was based on a study by Robert Leiken, a researcher at the Nixon Center. The study, commissioned by the National Intelligence Council, urged the United States to open a formal channel to the Islamic movement.

Such a channel would include formal meetings with Brotherhood leaders throughout the Arab and Islamic world and invite members to study or work in the United States. Officials said the law enforcement community, particularly the FBI, opposes the proposal, concerned that this would facilitate Al Qaida plots to attack the United States.

At the State Department forum, Leiken was opposed by Hillel Fradin, an Islamic expert from the Hudson Institute. Fradkin was said to have argued that engaging the rigidly ideological Brotherhood would dash any hope for reform within political Islam.

"You make them partners," Zeyno Baran, Fradkin's colleague at Hudson, told the New York Sun. "They might Islamize the Muslims, but it's okay because they can think or do what they want as long as they are not violent. That is the misunderstanding and mistake."

The attorney for the massive effort at legal intimidation and the impeding of anti-jihad efforts that is the Flying Imams lawsuit is unhappy. His clients, you see, have been getting a lot of bad press. Never mind that MSNBC's Contessa Brewer, to the surprise and delight of Ibrahim Hooper of unindicted Hamas co-conspirator CAIR, compared them to Rosa Parks. Others have exposed what they're really up to, and attorney Omar Mohammedi, a CAIR op himself, can't bear that. But he'll just have to put up with it, for now.

"Attorney for imams removed from plane loses bid to limit access," by Amy Forliti for Associated Press (thanks to all who sent this in):

A federal judge overseeing a lawsuit filed by six Muslim men who were removed from a US Airways flight last fall has declined to limit public access to the case.

Omar T. Mohammedi, a New York attorney for the six Muslim scholars, told The Associated Press on Wednesday that he sought limited media access because he felt some of the coverage of the case has been biased against his clients.

"When you think of the media, and the way they have been portraying this case, it has not been very helpful. It has been biased," Mohammedi said. "That has caused a lot of stress, a lot of stress on our clients, as well as made it difficult for us to handle this case ... in a manner that it should be handled."

[...]

In a letter dated Tuesday and addressed to Mohammedi, U.S. District Judge Ann Montgomery noted that Mohammedi had requested that the court remove members of the media from an electronic distribution list, bar members of the media from attending hearings, and hold proceedings in closed session.

"The Court declines to treat this case in the extraordinary manner that you request," the judge wrote. She added that the public and press have an interest in full access to judicial proceedings under the First Amendment.

"You have provided no legal authority supporting your request to limit public access to this case," Montgomery wrote. "While it is regrettable that anonymous individuals have threatened violence, the Court Security Officers will insure that the United States Courthouse here in Minneapolis is secure."

What's a life looser, and where can I get one? From the Hate Mail Bag:

Never have I come accross such a sore looser such as the likes of robert spencer.

Some low grade writer trying to get attention LOL

apreaing here and there for 5 mintues wiht his funny goofy smile and doing self promotion.

You can't hurt my faith you only make yourself look stupid trying to do so. You not only look stupid you ARE stupid.

Are you Christain ? must be really envious of the Prophet of Islam , Muhammad ( S A W ) to spout continuous garbage from your stupid mouth.

Your site is full of vile and vulgar cowards who have nohting better to do then get jealous from the one true Faith

Get a life loosers

Makeshift hijabs were the order of the day for Bush's female staffers, but there is one lone dissenter in the background. ("Dhimmi diplomats" just because they covered their heads? No.) Reuters' caption:

Senior White House staff members attend the rededication ceremony of The Islamic Center in Washington June 27, 2007. From L-R are: Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism Frances Townsend, White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten, and Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Karen Hughes. REUTERS/Larry Downing (UNITED STATES)

They really needn't have gone to the trouble to cover their heads. If they hadn't, their friends at unindicted terror co-conspirator CAIR could have just photoshopped the hijabs on.

Shock horror! Don't they...don't they want peace, like Condi Rice says?

By Yaakov Lappen from Ynet News (thanks to WriterMom):

Of 37 populations around the world, Palestinians rank first in their level of support for a nuclear-armed Iran, a new poll has revealed. The survey, taken by the Pew Global Attitudes Project, found that 58 percent of the Palestinian public are in favor of Tehran acquiring atomic weapons, making Palestinians the only Middle Eastern population not opposed to an Iranian bomb.

"Most of the Muslim countries surveyed have negative or mixed opinions of Iran. Majorities among just three Muslim publics – in Pakistan, Bangladesh and the Palestinian territories – say they favor Iran acquiring nuclear weapons," the survey said.

The poll added that "positive views of Iran have declined sharply over the past year in three Muslim countries – Indonesia, Egypt, and, especially, Turkey."

When it came to attitudes towards the US, Israel and the Palestinians were placed, unsurprisingly, on opposite ends of the spectrum.

Unsurprisingly? When you consider all the money the U.S. has poured into the PA, one would think Palestinians would be overflowing with gratitude. But of course, this sort of thing never wins over the hearts and minds of those who are imbued with jihadist attitudes -- which doesn't stop American officials from trying it over and over again anyway.

Apparently Elahi figures that as long as they've got this rage all worked up, why not expand the victims' list?

"BB is also guilty like blasphemer Salman Rushdie, says Elahi," from the PakTribune, with thanks to DFS:

LAHORE: Punjab Chief Minister, Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi has said that Benazir Bhutto is also guilty like blasphemer Salman Rushdie.

[...]

He said that Benazir, who remained Prime Minister of Pakistan twice, has forgotten the name of Islam while living abroad and is disturbed for support of blasphemer Salman Rushdi.

He said that those who are supporting blasphemer Salman Rushdi are not only enemy of Pakistan and its masses but are also enemy of Islam and Muslim Ummah.

He said that the people cannot tolerate blasphemer Salman Rushdi and his supporters. He said that the people will never support such party which is against our country, religion and people.

He said that the future of democracy is safe in the country and the forthcoming elections would be transparent and fair.

Especially if they kill off those pesky blasphemers. Then the future of democracy in Pakistan will be exceedingly bright.

We've been posting a great deal of information lately about some disastrous misjudgments by Ehud Olmert, but an informed observer in Israel has just sent this to me:

I was down on the Gaza border yesterday, which is very interesting. I was observing the first big offensive against Hamas, which is testing the waters. Please note that everything Olmert says must be taken with reserve, and not as indicative of the majority view. For example, there are a lot of key people here arguing for cutting off Gaza with the absolute minimum. There is no decision on letting in a PLA brigade (actually an understrength battalion with no combat experience) or arming Fatah. I thought Olmert was a fool for the way he handled the Washington press conference, but that was typical Olmert. The new chief of staff is good--and has made some very tough statements as well as preparing for a war with Hizballah, Syria, or Hamas--and Barak is no fool.

We are not as suicidal as some people seem to think. Of course it is true that the opportunity to explain why both Fatah and Hamas are bad was wasted. But people here are not so naive. And the assumption that Fatah might well collapse means that we should not be seen as responsible for it. Look at what Hani al-Hassan said! I know him and if he does not stand up for Fatah they are really doomed.

Iran demonstrates the long reach of Islamic Tolerance. From Reuters (thanks to all who sent this in):

THAILAND has caved in to pressure from Iran and withdrawn the animated movie Persepolis, about a girl growing up and feeling repressed under Islamic rule, from next month's Bangkok International Film Festival.

"I was invited by the Iranian embassy to discuss the matter and we both came to mutual agreement that it would be beneficial to both countries if the film was not shown," festival director Chattan Kunjara na Ayudhya said today.

"It's a good film, but there are other considerations."

The film, based on the popular French comic books of Iranian director and writer Marjane Satrapi, drew complaints from the government-affiliated Iran Farabi Foundation when it was screened at this year's Cannes Film Festival in France.

In a letter published by several news organisations, the foundation said the film "presented an unrealistic face of the achievements and results of the glorious Islamic Revolution in some of its parts"....

And that isn't allowed in Thailand, evidently.

Iran's rulers are criticised in Persepolis but so are Western democracies for backing the Shah and supplying his government with weapons.

Strictly routine. "Scuba warning issued for instructors," from AP (thanks to the Constantinopolitan Irredentist):

WASHINGTON - The FBI is asking the nation's scuba instructors to watch for potential terrorist threats.

The agency's Joint Terrorism Task Force recently alerted dive shops around the country to look out for divers seeking advanced training, including diving in murky water and in sewer pipes.

FBI spokesman Richard Kolko described the advisory as routine and said it was not prompted by any threat.

The advisory asked instructors to be aware of "odd inquiries that are inconsistent with recreational diving." That includes advanced navigation techniques, deep diving and the use of underwater vehicles.

We keep hearing the same old rhetoric used to describe the new and improved moderate Fatah government: "New Government," "New Opportunity," "Fresh Start," etc. PA and Fatah Chairman Mahmoud Abbas continues to play his role in this ugly game to perfection. In the true spirit of "moderation," he has outlawed all weapons that are not in the hands of his Security Service (S.S.). "Abbas bans carrying explosives, arms without license in W. Bank," from Ha’aretz :

Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas on Tuesday outlawed all armed Palestinian groups except for the official PA security services.

"On the basis of the declaration of a state of emergency in the Palestinian territories, and by virtue of my authority, all armed militias, groups and brigades that do not belong in practice to the security services shall be treated as illegal organizations," read the first order.

The order forbade such groups to conduct any activity, whether secret or public, and said that criminal investigations would be opened against anyone caught participating in such activity.

"The government must halt the phenomenon of armed groups, prevent the bearing of arms and confiscate guns, explosives and any type of weaponry purchased illegally, since they endanger the public order," the decree continued.

Needless to say, the point is moot. In "Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad Ignore Weapons Prohibition" in INN, the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade (a Fatah group) had this to say about the weapons ban:

The Al-Aksa Martyrs Brigade, which is linked to Abbas’s Fatah, was among those to announce an intention to keep their weapons. Zacharia Zubeidi, the group’s head in Jenin, said, “Abu Mazen [a/k/a Abbas] meant the illegal weapons owned by criminal organizations, but our weapons are legitimate—the weapons of the resistance organizations.” Another wanted terrorist, Abu Aziz, called Abbas’s proclamation “irresponsible,” but said he would consider turning in his weapons if Israel would guarantee his safety.

In fact, a spokesman from the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade today denied there ever was an order to disarm. This from "Terrorists deny Abbas' disarm claims" by Aaron Klein for WND:

TEL AVIV – Members of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' declared military wing, the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, today denied claims by Abbas he asked the terror group to turn in their weapons, stating officials instead have encouraged them to continue their "resistance" activities.

"No one from Abbas' office ever asked us to disarm," Nasser Abu Aziz, the deputy commander of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades in the northern West Bank, told WND. "We will never disarm until all issues are settled, including a complete Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and Jerusalem and the right of return for all Palestinian refugees."

Abu Yousuf, a leader of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades in Ramallah, told WND Abbas' claims the Brigades will disarm "are more of a message meant for the Israelis, the Americans and the international community."

"No one (from Abbas' office) addressed a single member of the Brigades and asked us to turn in our weapons," he said.

"A message for the West" is a common thread here. Say one thing and do the opposite. Whatever it takes to keep the cash flowing. And the West falls for it again and again.

One down. Hamas also cordially refused. "Hamas dismisses Abbas decree to ban all armed militia," from Xinhuanet:

Abu Obaida, spokesman of Hamas' military wing the al-Qassam Brigades, said President Mahmoud Abbas' decree was "mere ink on paper and doesn't worth the ink that was used to write it." "The resistance groups will not wait any decree when they go to combat the invasion and no one has the right to determine the groups' future as long as the occupation remains in place," said Abu Obaida.

So much for Abbas and his plans. As if he actually has a chance of enforcing this edict. As usual, it’s all smoke and mirrors. A pretty facade for Western consumption. Hi Mom…send money.

And what has Fatah been up to recently….conveniently ignored by the MSM? "Fatah combatants launch an RPG at an Israeli military base on Gaza's border," from Ma’an News Agency :

Date: 26 / 06 / 2007 Time: 21:00 Gaza – Ma’an – The Fatah-affiliated Al Buraq Army announced that they launched a rocket-propelled grenade at the Israeli military position at Karni Crossing, between Israel and the Gaza Strip, on Tuesday.

“We are retaliating for Israeli aggression and assassinations and will stick to the choice of resistance,” said the brigades in a statement.

More Fatah activity: "Fatah and Hamas-affiliated fighters claim involvement in fighting Israeli forces in southern Gaza," from Ma’an News Agency :

Date: 27 / 06 / 2007 Time: 12:33 Gaza - Ma'an - The Fatah-affiliated Al Buraq Army has claimed to have been involved in a gunfight with Israeli Special Forces in the southern Gaza Strip on Wednesday morning.

The guns are not only still out there, but they are now pointed at Israel. RPG’s as well. I guess Olmert’s goodwill gestures weren’t rich enough.

The MSM still refuses to cover any Fatah hostilities -- to do so would surely interrupt the lovefest. As long as the naughty bits are swept under the rug, the West (and Israel) can continue to satisfy their undying hunger for appeasement.

We’ve been down this road before and nothing was accomplished. In fact, the situation is much worse. Iran -- that is, Hamas -- rules Gaza, and it seems like only a matter of time before the West Bank falls as well.

Why does anyone think that supporting the "moderate" Jihadists will work now?

Crossposted from The American Israeli Patriot.

Apparently Shi'ite retaliation for the last Sunni massacre. The law of retaliation (qisas), based on Qur'an 2:178, establishes a never-ending cycle of revenge.

By Sinan Salaheddin for Associated Press (thanks to Sr. Soph):

BAGHDAD - Twenty beheaded bodies were discovered Thursday on the banks of the Tigris River southeast of Baghdad, while a parked car bomb killed another 20 people in one of the capital's busy outdoor bus stations, police said.

The beheaded remains were found in the Sunni Muslim village of Um al-Abeed, near the city of Salman Pak, which lies 14 miles southeast of Baghdad.

The bodies — all men aged 20 to 40 years old — had their hands and legs bound, and some of the heads were found next to the bodies, two officers said on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to release the information.

Meanwhile, a parked car bomb ripped through a crowded transport hub in southwest Baghdad's Baiyaa neighborhood at morning rush hour, killing at least 20 people and wounding more than 50, another officer said on the same condition.

Malaysia's The Sun (thanks to RS) has an interview with Islamic apologist Karen Armstrong. One question was about the Malaysian government banning several of her books. Then follows:

What are your thoughts on this, and have you been banned anywhere else in the world?

There are people who would love to ban me, such as the neo-conservatives Daniel Pipes or Robert Spencer in the United States...

Come on, Ms. Armstrong. You can't provide a scrap of evidence for the assertion that I would "love" to "ban" you. In fact, I want to debate you. And I am not the one who has turned down opportunities for this to happen, now, am I?

So I am once again offering you an opportunity to air your views in any forum that will host our debate, and to demonstrate the superior accuracy of your views of Muhammad and jihad warfare -- if you can. Contact me at director[at]jihadwatch.org.

You can download a pdf of Armstrong's entire steaming, acrid interview here.

"It is these radicals who are Islam's true enemy." Fair enough. Certainly the jihadists have never hesitated to target Muslims whom they didn't deem sufficiently Islamic. Just think for a moment, however, about what we do not see: we don't see comprehensive programs in American mosques to teach against the jihad ideology and political Islam, and the virtues of the U.S. Constitution and the non-establishment clause. We don't see any Islamic authority that has rejected not just the vague "terrorism," but the specific supremacist agenda that has always been part of the jihad imperative. These things make it unlikely that the President will succeed in convincing large numbers of Muslims to turn against their "true enemy" with more than mere words, and vague, half-hearted words at that.

By James Gerstenzang for the Los Angeles Times (thanks to the Constantinopolitan Irredentist):

WASHINGTON -- Visiting an Islamic mosque on Washington's Embassy Row, President Bush delivered a strongly worded denunciation today of Muslim radicals and said he would appoint for the first time a U.S. representative to a major international Islamic organization.

Drawing a distinction between moderation in the practice of Islam and those seeking to use the faith for what he described as radical political ends, the president said "it is these radicals who are Islam's true enemy."

[...]

He cited U.S. support for Muslims in Kosovo and Bosnia-Herzegovina after the disintegration of Yugoslavia — a reference applauded by his audience — and said Americans offered such support out of "compassion, conviction and conscience." It reflected the proper course of supporting moderation against extremism, he said.

In the Middle East, he said, "we have seen the rise of groups of extremists who seek to use religion as a path to power."

It is the radicals, Bush said, who stage "spectacular attacks" against Muslim holy sites to divide Muslims and push them into fighting each other, conducting "acts of butchery ... in the name of Allah."

It is such extremism, the president said, that needs to be turned back "before it finds its path to power."

Bush, like virtually everyone else, continues to ignore political Islam and to pretend that by ignoring it, it will disappear. Things will not prove to be that easy.

"Bush to name envoy to Islamic Conference," by Ben Feller for Associated Press:

WASHINGTON - President Bush announced Wednesday he will establish an envoy to a coalition of Muslim countries, with hopes of bolstering ties to the Islamic world and improving the image of the United States.

Bush's special envoy, who has not yet been named, will be a liaison to The Organization of the Islamic Conference. The intergovernmental organization, representing more than 50 Islamic states, promotes Muslim solidarity in social and political affairs.

"Our special envoy will listen to and learn from representatives from Muslim states, and will share with them America's views and values," Bush said in a ceremony honoring the 50th anniversary of the Islamic Center, a mosque and cultural center in Washington.

"This is an opportunity for Americans to demonstrate to Muslim communities our interest in respectful dialogue and continued friendship," Bush said.

His move marks the first time a U.S. president has made an appointment to the Islamic Conference. The naming of a U.S. envoy comes as the plodding war in Iraq has fanned anti-American sentiment across the Muslim world.

The smell of incense filled the mosque, originally dedicated by President Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Those attending the ceremony, including the president, took off their shoes as they entered. Bush listened as a verse from the Quran was read....

I wonder which one. 5:51? 3:28? 9:29? 98:6? 5:33?

"This Muslim center sits quietly down the road from a synagogue, a Lutheran church, a Catholic parish, a Greek Orthodox chapel, a Buddhist temple — each with faithful followers who practice their deeply held beliefs and live side by side in peace," he said.

Bush singled out Iran and Syria and accused them of religious and political repression.

"Millions seek a path to the future where they can say what they think, travel where they wish and worship as they choose," he said. "They plead in silence for their liberty and they hope someone, somewhere will answer.

"So today in this place of free worship, in a heart of a free nation, we say to those who yearn for freedom from Damascus to Tehran: you are not bound forever by your misery. Plead in silence no longer. The free world hears you. You're not alone. America offers you its hand in friendship. We work for the day when we can welcome you into the family of free nations."

ADDENDUM: To give you a sense of the implications of an American envoy to the OIC, Charles at LGF offers a trip down memory lane.

"A woman who did not identify herself said this was not a criminal case but a family matter between them and their daughter's boyfriend." That's how such cases are treated now all over the Islamic world. And how they will soon be treated in Europe, and eventually in Pennsylvania, unless Westerners start to wake up.

Police: Father, Son Try To Kidnap Daughter's Fiancé," from Philadelphia's NBC10.com, with thanks to SCC:

MIDDLETOWN TOWNSHIP, Pa. -- A Bucks County father was accused of going to extremes to break-up his daughter's romance.

Police said the father and his son tried to kidnap her fiancé by beating him up and tossing him into a sport utility vehicle.

Robert Webber, of Middletown Township police, said he thought he was being dispatched to a Bucks County diner Friday night for a fight but once he got there he was in the middle of a family disagreement turned violent.

"The victim advised me that his fiancée's family was trying to kill him, drag him into a car and take him somewhere, where he believed he was going to be killed," Webber said.

Webber said the alleged victim told him his fiancée's family was upset the two had moved in together.

He said there were cultural differences and that's why 48-year-old Mohd Nasher and his son 20-year-old Mohammed Nasher were allegedly gunning for the fiancé.

"The father and son came in, grabbed our victim, pulled him outside, began choking and beating him. Drug him into the back of a Ford Explorer and that's where they advised him that they were going to take him somewhere. He jumped out the other side window in fear for his life and as he went to run away the father told him, 'I'm going to find you and I'm going to shoot you.' The son went and grabbed a bat and went to chase after him," Webber said....

NBC 10 left several voicemails asking for comment and when a call was returned, a woman who did not identify herself said this was not a criminal case but a family matter between them and their daughter's boyfriend.

Rudy says we must not get fooled again, and fall for someone like Arafat. So, he says...let's aid Fatah. Hard-nosed and unfoolable as ever, eh, Rudy?

"Giuliani Calls for Increasing American Support for Fatah," by Marc Santora for the New York Times (thanks to WriterMom):

VIRGINIA BEACH, June 26 — Rudolph W. Giuliani addressed Israeli-Palestinian discord on Tuesday, saying it was pointless for the United States to negotiate with Hamas, the Islamic group that has seized control of the Gaza Strip, and that Washington should work with Egypt and Jordan to bolster Fatah and its control over the West Bank.

As he advocated active American engagement, Mr. Giuliani urged caution and broadly criticized the Clinton administration’s approach in the 1990s, trying to broker peace with Yasir Arafat, the Palestinian leader.

“Let’s not become like starry romantics like we were with Arafat, where he was leading us down the primrose path and we were helping him get the Nobel Peace Prize,” Mr. Giuliani said in a speech here at Regent University, which Pat Robertson, the evangelist, founded.

Setting out a position that largely tracked Bush administration policy and the positions of Egypt, Israel and Jordan, Mr. Giuliani suggested that the best course was to bolster Fatah, which Mr. Arafat controlled until he died and is now run by Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president.

“Let’s see if we can’t get Jordan and Egypt to help us try and create something with Abbas in the West Bank,” Mr. Giuliani said.

Hey, great idea, Rudy. You may recall that Jordan ruled the West Bank from 1948 to 1967, and there was no Palestinian nationalist movement then. Now, why was that?

More incisive analysis from Giuliani here. He's missed a chance to explain what the war is, and what can be done to weaken the global jihad more effectively.

"Giuliani Slams Bill Clinton on Terrorism," by Bob Lewis for The Associated Press:

In his comments Tuesday, Giuliani said Democrats would abandon Iraq while giving terrorists the U.S. "timetable for retreat."

Giuliani remained aligned with President Bush in keeping U.S. forces in Iraq even as two more senior Senate Republicans Indiana's Richard Lugar and Ohio's George Voinovich in the past two days suggested the president's policy is failing and said he should begin bringing troops home.

In his Rockville appearance, Giuliani compared the war in Iraq to the conflict between Hamas and Israel.

"What happened in Gaza is a microcosm of what's going to happen in Baghdad" if the United States withdraws. "It will become something that inflames the entire region."

In "A lawsuit without merit," Jeff Jacoby sums up the Islamic Society of Boston's now-dropped frivolous lawsuit in the Boston Globe (thanks to WriterMom):

ON MAY 29, the Islamic Society of Boston folded its cards. It abandoned the sweeping defamation lawsuit it had filed in 2005 against 17 defendants -- journalists, scholars, activist groups, and others who had expressed concerns about the Islamic Society's leaders, some of whom had ties to jihadist extremism, and about the land the city of Boston sold it at a cut-rate price in order to build a mosque.

The complaint had accused the defendants of despicable behavior -- lying about the Islamic Society, vilifying innocent people, conspiring to deprive Boston-area Muslims of their civil rights. If even some of the charges were true, the defendants deserved to face harsh legal penalties and be shunned by the entire community. Instead, the Islamic Society dropped its suit without collecting a penny. Why?

Because the charges were false, that's why. And pretrial discovery -- the evidence being gathered through subpoenas and depositions -- was proving it.

For example, the Islamic Society claimed that publicity about its leaders' ties to Islamist extremism had "been devastating" to the organization's fund-raising. "Donations to the ISB have decreased," the lawsuit charged. In a press release, the organization lamented that negative media coverage had resulted in "donations trickling to a halt."

But in July 2005, well after the supposedly "devastating" news coverage had first appeared in the Boston Herald and on Fox 25 TV, a letter written by the Islamic Society's attorney and e-mailed by Chairman Yousef Abou-allaban conveyed a very different message. "Fund-raising has been robust," it reported, "and ISB has $2 million in cash."

Fund-raising had indeed been robust. Documents acquired during discovery revealed that some $4.2 million had been wired to an Islamic Society bank account in New Hampshire between April 2004 and May 2005 -- nearly all of it from Saudi Arabia. Another $1 million came from the Saudi-based Islamic Development Bank in late 2005.

Those ties to Saudi Arabia were a key reason for concern . Saudi Arabia's state religion is Wahhabism, a radical and belligerent form of Islam, and as the 9/11 Commission reported, Saudi money is used "to spread Wahhabi beliefs throughout the world, including in mosques and schools. . . . Some Wahhabi-funded organizations have been exploited by extremists to further their goal of violent jihad against non-Muslims."

But in its lawsuit, the Islamic Society had denied any Saudi connection to the mosque it was building in Boston. It said it had been libeled by the "false information" that it received money "from Wahhabis and/or Muslim Brotherhood and/or other Saudi/Middle Eastern sources." As the evidence amassed during discovery made clear, however, that wasn't libel. It was the simple truth.

Repeatedly, the Islamic Society sought court orders blocking the release of such evidence. In one case, it warned that publishing certain documents would "create serious security risks" for Muslim worshipers, since it would reveal the new mosque's architectural schematics. The court denied that request after the defendants pointed out that the schematics were not exactly a secret: They are publicly posted on the Islamic Society's own website.

And so it went. One by one, the Islamic Society's claims and accusations proved groundless. By the time it dropped its lawsuit on May 29, it was clear that it had no chance of winning.

And yet the Islamic Society spins its loss as a victory, noting that the construction of the mosque is going forward. "It was never about money," said Mahdi Bray of the Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation. "It was about religious freedom."

What the lawsuit was really about, it seems, was intimidation -- intimidation of anyone inclined to raise questions or express concerns about the Islamic Society's leaders and their connections to radical Islam. Libel suits have become a favorite tactic of Islamists, who deploy them to silence their critics. In yet another document produced during discovery, the head of the Islamic Center of New England advises Abou-allaban to "thwart" Fox 25 with a lawsuit. "If Fox is being sued for this story," he writes, "it stands to reason that they will be prevented from reporting on the story further while the case is in court."

Read it all.

Calls for Ahmadinejad's head…from Iranians. "Guns, fireworks, tanks, [President] Ahmadinejad should be killed."

"Iran fuel rations spark violence," from the BBC:

At least one petrol station has been set on fire in the Iranian capital, Tehran, after the government announced fuel rationing for private motorists. Iranians were given only two hours' notice of the move that limits private drivers to 100 litres of fuel a month.

Tehran is trying to rein in fuel consumption over fears of possible UN sanctions over its nuclear programme.

Iran fears the West could sanction its petrol imports and cripple its economy.

"Guns, fireworks, tanks, [President] Ahmadinejad should be killed," chanted angry youths, throwing stones at police.

Eyewitnesses have seen at least one petrol station in the outskirts of the west of Tehran on fire.

All over the city there are huge queues and reports of scuffles at petrol stations as motorists try to beat the start of the rationing and fill their tanks.

Finally…a crack. This is proof positive that the West's approach to Iran must be hardened. Tougher sanctions lead to tougher times. Tougher times lead to unrest. Unrest leads to change.

Crossposted from The American Israeli Patriot.

Sticking to their guns. Incidentally, a question for you Jews and Christians who may be inclined toward moral equivalence: when was the last time you heard a sermon in your synagogue or church calling for anyone to be killed? "Ahmad Khatami from the Iranian Assembly of Experts in a Tehran Friday Sermon: Fatwa against Rushdie Must Be Carried Out. Fatah Staged a Coup d'Etat against Hamas," from MEMRITV (thanks to Hot Air):

Following are excerpts from a Friday sermon by Ahmad Khatami of the Iranian Assembly of Experts, which aired on Channel 1, Iranian TV on June 22, 2007:

[...]

The old, decrepit, and colonialist English regime presents itself as the defender of human rights, yet it awards a medal to such a wretched, bankrupt man [Salman Rushdie], who has offended the sacred values of more than 1.5 billion Muslims. Are these your human rights?

Crowd chants: Death to England.

Death to England.

Death to England.

Ahmad khatami:Is this your civilization? This old, decrepit government of England should know that the days of its imperialistic aspirations are gone, and today it is considered America's branded slave. They must also know that the wave of Islamic revival in the world has begun, whether they like it or not. Under these circumstances, awarding England's highest honor to a wretched man, who lacks any talent whatsoever... He is not considered a prominent novelist or author. They awarded him this medal only because he cursed the Prophet. Under these circumstances, awarding a medal to such a man entails a conflict with one and a half billion Muslims throughout the world, and you will gain nothing from this. The one thing that will happen is that you will see the Islamic world roaring together. In Islamic Iran, this revolutionary fatwa still exists. It is unchangeable and with God's grace, it must be carried out.

Slick, oleagineous, is Hamid Karzai, but not more than one is used to in such regions. Think of Hussein of Jordan, in his celebrated role as plucky little king. Hamid Karzai, when he first appeared on the world scene, in that beautifully-colored robe he wears, seemed okay. He had brothers and a sister running restaurants in Maryland and Massachusetts. He was the son of a civic-minded Afghan. He seemed -- okay. He seemed to be one of those "Muslim-for-identification-purposes-only" Muslims, or as close to it as one might hope for outside of Azar Nafisi and Fouad Ajami. He was not able to fess up to it all himself, but still...or so one thought.

Then came the Speech of Mahathir Mohamed, the sober-toned, yet hysterical and telling speech, at the O.I.C., when he made an appeal for the world’s Muslims to use their brains, not in order to investigate the nature of the brain or DNA or of the atom or the origins of the universe, but only -- the only thing he meant by "science" -- to acquire military technology, and to defeat, among others, "the Jews." Smooth Hamid Karzai, oily Hamid Karzai applauded. Interviewed just after, Karzai was enthusiastic about Mahathir’s speech. The oleaginous Karzai said he found the speech deeply impressive. He said he had found the speech wonderful, inspirational, tip-top. Well, that was it as far as Hamid Karzai was concerned.

"According to the official, some senior officers [of Fatah] have been suspected of cooperating with Hamas even prior to the decisive round of clashes with Fatah. He said the officers received money from Hamas in exchange for transferring information on the deployment of Palestinian Authority forces in the Strip." -- from this article

Hardly surprising. Fatah is hardly distinguishable from Hamas, except in the perfervid imaginations of Western leaders, and some dismal Israeli ones, determined to make a soap opera with "good" Fatah and "bad" Hamas playing their assigned roles. They differ only in that the people who sign up to get their checks from Fatah are a little more worldly and cynical. They have a better sense of the current balance of forces, and just a little more willingness to utter a phony phrase or two in order to keep the Jizyah flowing. But they have no intention of ever making real peace with Israel.

Rather, as Slow Jihadists, they differ from Hamas only in tactics and timing. They are quite willing, whenever the occasion presents itself, to be as murderous, or more murderous than Hamas. Everything in their history and in their statements for fellow Muslims proves it; not a single thing disproves it.

The US State Department recognizes Hamas as a terrorist organization. However, to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice it is a "resistance movement." What's next, Condi? American aid for Hamas? Khaled Maashal in Washington?

"Rice calls Hamas 'resistance movement': But unscripted remarks about terror group not published by paper," by Aaron Klein for WND:

JERUSALEM – U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice twice referred to Hamas as a "resistance movement" during a meeting with reporters from the New York Daily News earlier this month, but the newspaper did not report her remarks, WND has learned.

Rice's interview is transcribed in full on the State Department website.

Rice's statements mark the second documented time in recent months she called Hamas a "resistance movement" during unscripted chats with journalists.

Hamas is responsible for scores of suicide bombings, shooting attacks and rocket firings. It's classified by the State Department as a terror organization. The group's official charter calls for the murder of Jews and quotes widely from the anti-Semitic creed, the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion."

During the interview June 8 with the editorial board of the Daily News, Rice was asked about the recent history of democratic elections in the Middle East resulting in the rise to power of terror groups, such as Hamas.

Rice told the paper it was "very interesting to see Hamas trying to come to terms with no longer being really a resistance movement, but having to deal with politics."

Rice then referred to Hamas as a resistance movement a second time during then interview.

"A moderate Palestinian friend of mine said, 'You know, they (Hamas) used to be the great resistance, running the streets with their faces covered and going after Israel. And now, they look like a bunch of politicians who also can't make the sewer system work.'"

She went on to reference Hamas' terror cells, calling them the group's "military wing," which regularly carries out terror attacks, including shootings and firing of rockets into Jewish population centers.

"And they're (Hamas) clearly uncomfortable in that framework, which is part of why I think you see the military wing of Hamas trying to make this again about Israel and the Palestinians, not about the contestation of politics inside the Palestinian territories," Rice said.

According to Rice, there are no longer any terrorist groups. Only resistance movements remain.

Crossposted from The American Israeli Patriot.

A genocide no one noticed.

"Baghdad Christians Find New Life in Kurdish North," by Sabrina Tavernise in the New York Times:

KARA-ULA, Iraq — The 70 houses of this tiny village spring from the treeless, arid plain here in the northern tip of Iraq with the uniformity of an army camp.

Built over the past four years of war, they house Christian refugees from some of Baghdad’s most dangerous neighborhoods: Dora, New Baghdad and Mashtel.

There the residents did not know one another, busy with their city lives. Now a barber, a bank manager, a news anchor and an electrician are comrades in the misery of flight.

“We saw everything a human can see,” said Majida Hamo, a mother of four who came from Mashtel recently. “It was a kind of genocide killing.”

“We were saying to Jesus, ‘See us and save us.’ ”

The Iraqi exodus is one of the largest displacements in the Middle East since the creation of Israel in 1948. Many have fled to Jordan and Syria, countries where Arabic is spoken. Others have stayed within Iraq’s borders, moving into the largely peaceful Kurdish north, which is more foreign to them than neighboring countries because the main language is Kurdish, not their native Arabic.

The choice of this small patch of land along the Turkish border was not arbitrary. On a gray day in 1975, the refugees’ parents were driven from their farms here, caught in one of Saddam Hussein’s cruel sectarian relocation plans, residents said. They were given a few hours to gather their possessions and get into army trucks. They ended up in Baghdad.

In the capital, the families — farmers and shepherds — became city dwellers, taking jobs as taxi drivers, maids and barbers. Samir Bibadro was born the year his parents arrived. They settled in Dora, a bustling lower-middle-class area with a large Christian population.

For most of his adult life Mr. Bibadro worked as a barber, giving trims and close shaves in his southern Baghdad neighborhood. After the American invasion, Sunni militants moved in to control it and began killing barbers, because the Prophet Muhammad wore a beard.

Read it all.

Gee, that would be nice, now nearly six years after 9/11. But it isn't nearly enough. Muslim leaders of all kinds have already denounced "terror." The problem here is that no one is defining these terms; rather, everyone is assuming that we all mean the same things by them whenever we use them. By "terror" does one mean "an unprovoked attack against innocent civilians with the intention of causing undifferentiated mayhem"? Muslim leaders will have no problem denouncing that. But if one means "actions carried out in order to further the program of Islamic supremacism that advances through both nonviolent and violent jihad," that is quite another matter. No one is being specific enough. No one is speaking about "the jihad ideology of Islamic supremacism" and asking Muslims to denounce that. No one dares.

"Bush wants Muslims to denounce terror," by Jon Ward for the Washington Times (thanks to Alan):

THE WASHINGTON TIMES - President Bush will challenge Muslim leaders to denounce acts of terrorism committed in the name of Islam during a speech today at the same Washington mosque he visited days after the September 11 attacks.

Mr. Bush will commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Islamic Center of Washington, a half-century after President Eisenhower spoke at its dedication on June 28, 1957.

The president's speech will focus on "the importance of religious freedom in the Middle East, and how securing that freedom requires Muslims to stand up to extremists," according to a White House briefing document released yesterday evening.

Mr. Bush also will thank Muslim leaders who have spoken out against terrorism.

Although the president will emphasize that "the face of terrorism is not the true face of Islam," he brings a different message with him to the mosque than he did six years ago.

On Sept. 17, 2001, Mr. Bush, seeking to prevent acts of retaliation against American Muslims after the September 11 attacks, said, "Islam is peace."

But since then, the president's rhetoric about Islam and terrorism has shifted. In 2005, he spoke about "Islamic radicalism," specifying that the enemy in the war on terrorism is a certain brand of Islam.

James Phillips, a Middle East analyst at the Heritage Foundation, said Mr. Bush was distinguishing between "an ideology and a religion."

Great. But this is an artificial distinction, imposed from without, and having no basis in traditional Islam.

"Muslims need to recognize that we distinguish between traditional Islam and the radical Islamists who want to use it as a means of seizing power and imposing a totalitarian vision on other Muslims," Mr. Phillips said.

Then, last August, Mr. Bush referred to "Islamic fascists" after British authorities foiled a plot by Muslim terrorists to blow up several airplanes bound for the United States.

"This nation is at war with Islamic fascists who will use any means to destroy those of us who love freedom, to hurt our nation," he said on Aug. 10, 2006.

Peter Singer, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, said that term was overly provocative, and was interpreted by many Muslims as a criticism of Islam itself.

"Why do you think we haven't heard it again since then?" Mr. Singer said.

White House spokesman Tony Snow yesterday reaffirmed that the president views Islam as "a religion of peace."

"He also believes that it has been hijacked, in some cases, by people who use Islam as a shield for murdering people, who use it as a way of spreading terrorism, rather than tolerance," Mr. Snow said.

A senior White House official said the president shifted away from using the term "Islamic fascists" because he did not think it helped him contrast radical Muslims with moderate Muslims.

A recent study found that there is substantial sympathy for Islamic terrorism among Western Muslims, including those in the United States.

The Pew Research Center found that 26 percent of 18- to 29-year-old Muslims in the United States think suicide bombings are sometimes justified to defend Islam.

Radwan Masmoudi, founder and president of the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy, said that he was disturbed by those findings, but added that such views are "not reflective of who we are or what our religion teaches."

Maybe it isn't, but the jihadists are saying that it is, and making recruits on that basis. More than a simple denial is needed from Radwan Masmoudi and others like him, if this is ever going to stop.

The Taliban has claimed control of Helmand. And opium always provided a significant part of the Taliban's income. From the Mail & Guardian Online, with thanks to DFS:

Helmand province in southern Afghanistan, where about 7 000 British troops are based, is on the verge of becoming the world's biggest drugs supplier, cultivating more opium than entire countries such as Burma, Morocco or even Colombia, the United Nations warned on Tuesday.

The region was largely responsible for a huge increase last year in Afghanistan's opium-poppy harvest, the origin of most of the heroin on the streets of Britain and mainland Europe. And Helmand's poppy harvest is expected to increase again this year, according to the latest annual report of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime.

"Curing Helmand of its drug and insurgency cancer will rid the world of the most dangerous source of its most dangerous narcotic and go a long way to bring security to the region," said Antonio Maria Costa, the UN agency's executive director.

The report will not be welcome reading for the British government. Five years ago, Tony Blair said Britain would take responsibility for overseeing Afghanistan's anti-narcotics programme. Last year, Kim Howells, the Foreign Office minister, said an increase in the opium harvest planted before British troops arrived in Helmand was one thing; a further rise this year -- now predicted by UN and British officials -- would be quite another.

"Drugs and the insurgency are intrinsically linked," a British official admitted on Tuesday. British military commanders, meanwhile, warn that attempts to eradicate the poppy crop without providing alternative incomes will simply increase hostility to foreign troops and increase support for the Taliban.

A United States proposal to spray the poppy crop was vetoed by the Afghan President, Hamid Karzai.

Why?

Not, in this view, "to coexist peacefully as equals with non-Muslims on an indefinite basis."

More efforts to impede the anti-jihad resistance by playing on Western phobias about "bigotry": "West funds elite unit to destroy Islam: hardliners," by Mark Forbes for the Brisbane Herald (thanks to the Constantinopolitan Irredentist):

INDONESIAN Muslim hardliners have called for the Australian-backed anti-terrorism squad Detachment 88 to be abolished because they say it is financed and trained by foreign countries to destroy Islam.

Islamic leaders including the cleric Abu Bakar Bashir, the alleged former leader of the terrorist network Jemaah Islamiah, and lawyers for terrorist suspects recently arrested by the squad, made the demand at a press conference yesterday.

Throwing down the gauntlet to authorities after the capture of two JI leaders, Kholil Ridwan, of the Islamic Community Forum, said Detachment 88 was a US tool to "stigmatise Islam".

"We call on the Indonesian Government to stop co-operation with the United States and its allies in the global war on terror," Mr Ridwan said. "The United States' war on terror, with the help of its sheriff, Australia, and deputy sheriff, Singapore, is a war against Islam."

It most certainly is nothing of the kind. But this just shows that all the blather about the Religion of Peace, and all the efforts to emphasize that this is not a war against Islam, have accomplished nothing. We would have been much better off had Western leaders spoken forthrightly about this effort as a defense against the global jihad, and called upon peaceful Muslims to reject the ideology of the jihadists, instead of ignoring it and denying it exists.

Bashir denied terrorists existed in Indonesia, saying: "Those who did bombings, they are just doing counter-terrorism. They are holy warriors to defend Muslims terrorised in other countries." The real terrorist was America, he said, though it was a mistake for bombers to target peaceful areas....

Dujana told CNN the group would continue its fight for Islamic rule but he wanted it to limit civilian casualties....

A team of 13 lawyers will today file a lawsuit demanding Detachment 88 be disbanded on behalf of Muslim activists who say they have been wrongfully arrested. "We don't want any more arrests taking place," said one lawyer, Munarman.

He said the unit was torturing holy warriors who were trying to defend Islam.

Bashir warned all Muslims against helping the squad. "We know that Detachment 88 is a tool of Americans and Jews and any Muslim who helps infidels is an apostate," he said....

All Muslims should fight to create an Islamic state, he urged. "There are only two options for Muslims; to win or to die."

No, no, not this guy

Here I go again, answering a critic. And every time I do this, some of you mugs write in below, saying, "Who is this cheesehead, anyway? Why are you wasting our valuable time making us read you arguing with him?" Well, I'll have you know that the critic in question this time is none other than Bob Crane himself, star of the beloved 1960s sitcom Hogan's Heroes, and -- what's that? It's not that Bob Crane? He's...dead? Foul play? Scandal? Oh...dear.

In reality, the author of "The Mission of Imams in America: Marginalizing Extremists by Revealing the Real Truth About Muhammad" in The American Muslim is Robert D. Crane, former Nixon aide, former Deputy Director (for Planning) of the U.S. National Security Council, former U.S. Ambassador to the U.A.E., former Principal Economic and Budget Adviser to the Finance Minister of Bahrain, and present-day Islamic activist. Well, all that sounds important enough, doesn't it? I mean, a Nixon aide. Who knows? Maybe it was old Bob Crane who whispered into his ear, "Now tell them, 'I am not a crook!'" -- or maybe it was Bob behind the deathless classic "You won't have Nixon to kick around anymore!" We could be on the threshhold of history here!

Okay. Seriously, now, I am having a bit of fun with Bob, but in reality, I am answering this for the same reason why I answer everyone, even raving, spitting, blinkered, self-deluded types and their cleverer, slyly disingenuous friends. The point in all such cases has nothing to do either with me or with the identity or importance of the critic. The counterjihad, the resistance to Islamic supremacism, is much larger than any personality. I post these things as a pedagogical exercise. There is every possibility that you may find yourself confronted by the same arguments I deal with in this or that reply to this or that individual, be he a frothing-at-the-mouth repo man or a friend and advisor to Presidents and Emirs. Perhaps you will find my responses helpful. Forget about the people involved and concentrate on the issues, will ya?

All right. Now that that is out of the way, let me say that in reality Bob Crane has done me a great service, for which I offer him a hearty "Ho-gaaaannnn!!" (Okay, okay, I know it's not that one, already.) Lots of people have dismissed my book The Truth About Muhammad, but almost no one has even attempted to deal substantively with what it says -- and one of the few who did was the severely truth-challenged Karen Armstrong. But here ol' Bob dives right in -- to be sure, with somewhat Nixonian candor, and in the same spirit that led his old boss to devise his Enemies List -- but nonetheless, dive in he does.

My talk today, a first draft of which is available on the tables at the entrance and will be available edited post-conference on line at http://www.theamericanmuslim.org, addresses the professional hatemongering best illustrated by the New York Times bestselling polemicist, Robert Spencer, in his popular book, The Truth About Muhammad: Founder of the World’s Most Intolerant Religion.

This book is significant partly because it bases all its perversions of the Qur’an on statements by Muslims. This is designed to show that Muslims themselves properly interpret Islam as inherently terroristic and as a threat to America and to all traditional American values....

Bob veers close to the truth here -- my book is indeed made up of "statements by Muslims." How this amounts to "professional hatemongering" is unclear. I have never figured out how it can be hatemongering just to quote someone, but Bob seems to have it all figured out. Maybe it's something he picked up over in Bahrain:

The favorite tool of political movements is to adopt an enemy to demonize. The favorite enemy today is Islam, because it is potentially the most powerful force in the world capable of resisting any new international law that would legitimize global oppression by secular fundamentalism. Islam is demonized by interpreting the Qur’an and ahadith as the source of Muslim extremism and therefore as the ultimate cause of terrorism throughout the world.

Wait a minute, Bob. If I quote Muslims using the Qur'an and ahadith to justify violence, how does it qualify as hatemongering and demonizing? I'm just reporting on what's in the Islamic texts and how Muslims use them. If I were inventing quotations, or inventing interpretations of them, you might have a case. But you already acknowledged that I based everything on "statements by Muslims." So...shouldn't you be directing your energies toward disabusing your fellow Muslims of these ideas, rather than demonizing me for drawing attention to the use Muslims make of certain Islamic texts? (And I do mean demonizing -- read on.)

Of course, what Bob means is that I take the jihadists' "hijacked" Islam for the real thing:

There have always been extremists among Muslims who pervert the Qur’an in their efforts to hi-jack their own religion, just as extremists among Christians and members of other faiths have often done so in the past and continue to do so even today.

This, however, is false. As I have said many times, there is no "true Islam." But jihadists make recruits by presenting their Islam as the true Islam, and by pointing out chapter and verse of the Qur'an, as well as the example of Muhammad and the rulings of the schools of Islamic jurisprudence. For peaceful Muslims to stop this from being a successful appeal, they have to confront it. Bob thinks so too, but he contends (in the face of quite a bit of evidence) that the original Islam and the example of Muhammad do not actually contain anything the jihadists can use:

This attack on Islam from within can be countered only when the imams assert their right and responsibility to bring their knowledge of classical Islam to bear in countering and marginalizing Muslim extremists. As I have been preaching for decades, Muslims must revive the classical teachings of the great Islamic scholars, almost all of whom have been imprisoned by one tyrant or another for trying to maintain the purity of Islam as revealed by Allah and taught by the words and actions of his prophet, Muhammad, salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa salam. Only Muslims can do this. Among Muslims only the most courageous can do so, because the extremists have tried to terrorize all Muslims who disagree with them. And among the courageous we must begin to rely on the imams among us, whose calling is to preserve the purity of the traditionalist teachings of all the world religions....

Crane attempts to establish this in discussing my alleged "lies":

For short-run impact, however, it would be useful to expose Spencer’s demonic lies directly and in detail. For this purpose, I have been asked to write a book for this express purpose. Exposing Spencer’s bias is very simple, because one needs merely show that in every case he quotes only Muslim extremists and ignores untold centuries of mainline scholars who taught the exact opposite of what he contrives to be the message of Islam. His bias is embarrassingly evident throughout the book. For example, he questions whether the Medina constitution calling for protection of the Jews ever existed, but he has little doubt that the story about the massacre of the treasonous Jewish Qurayzah tribe is true. He dismisses the scholarly investigation by W. N. Arafat reported in a lengthy article in 1976 in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, which concludes that the alleged massacre never happened. Spencer attacks Arafat by ridiculing one of his arguments, namely, that such a massacre would violate Islamic law. Since Spencer’s whole purpose is to brand Islam as terroristic, he dismisses every scholarly analysis that would undermine his diabolical strategy.

"Diabolical strategy"! (Hey Bob: Boo!) I stand by my points here. No reference to the Medina constitution is made in any of Muhammad's subsequent dealings with the Jewish tribes with whom it was supposed to have been made. That's rather like there being no mention of the U.S. Constitution in American history after 1789. The Qurayzah massacre has a much greater attestation in the early Islamic sources, and I stand by my view that W. N. Arafat's saying it couldn't have happened because it would have violated Islamic law is both silly and anachronistic. Islamic law was in its earliest stages at that time, and in any case human beings don't always act reliably according to how the laws on the books say they should act. Anyone with a basic understanding of human nature realizes this. Crane might have discussed the merits of that argument, but with Nixonian Enemies List gusto, he instead dismisses me as "diabolical." And he has more in that line coming, too.

Today, I have time only to touch on one example of Spencer’s apparently deliberate distortion both of the Qur’an and of the character of the Prophet Muhammad, salah Allahu ‘alayhi wa salam. This is Spencer’s treatment of the Battle of Badr and the several revelations from Allah that came immediately afterwards. These set forth the guidelines for all subsequent scholarship on human rights in Islam. Spencer distorts all these revelations in an effort not merely to counter them but to reverse their meaning. According to the ahadith on the Messiah al Dajjal, known in Christianity as the Anti-Christ, such reversal of truth and falsehood is the definition of evil....

Good words to keep in mind as we read more of what Bob has to say, and see how much truth and how much falsehood is in what he says. He continues with a long disquisition on defensive jihad, which is generally accurate as far as it goes, and then:

Spencer starts his commentary on the Battle of Badr by asserting, “Allah told Muhammad’s followers to fight fiercely and behead their enemies.” Spencer, incidentally, uses the term Allah rather than God in order to show that Allah is a false god who incites all manner of crimes.

What I actually wrote was this: "I have in all cases referred to the deity of Islam as 'Allah,' while the English translation of the earliest Muslim biography of Muhammad refers to the same deity as 'God' – as I’ll illustrate in my quotations from that biography in this book. Of course, the word 'Allah' does not belong exclusively to Islam; it predates Islam, and Arabic-speaking Christians and Jews use the word Allah for God. The Qur’an, of course, claims that the deity of Jews and Christians is the same as that of the Muslims (29:46). However, since traditional Islam rejects such Christian doctrines as the Trinity, the divinity of Christ, and others, and classifies Judaism along with Christianity as a renegade perversion of Islam, it seems prudent to me, as well as to many English-speaking Muslims, to continue to use the Arabic word 'Allah' to refer to the Islamic deity in English. I hope that this will not cause further confusion." (Page 17)

Do you think Crane's is a fair and accurate summation of that? Neither do I.

The issue here concerns Surah al Anfal 8:12-13, which uses the phrase “smite above their necks.” Spencer says that this provides the basis for the practice of beheading hostages and prisoners, when in fact this phrase in classical Arabic calls merely for unconditional surrender.

Classical Arabic, English, French, Swahili, you name it, and I expect that "smite above their necks" means something a trifle closer to beheading than just "unconditional surrender." I don't recall there being any "smiting above the necks" of the Confederate forces of Robert E. Lee after he surrendered unconditionally to General Grant. Also, Bob has to deal with the fact that the late Zarqawi himself, as I point out on pages 108 and 109 of the Muhammad book, invoked Muhammad's behavior after the Battle of Badr, when he ordered some prisoners beheaded, to justify his beheading of Nick Berg. So here again, this isn't the demonic Spencer misinterpreting the Qur'an, this is a jihad terrorist misinterpreting the Qur'an, and me reporting on it all. Crane's quarrel should properly be with those Muslims who agree with Zarqawi. If he can convince them all that 8:12 refers only to unconditional surrender, not beheading, I for one would be delighted.

Spencer then uses Surah al Anfal 8:1 and 8:41 to claim that the early Muslims were greedy bandits interested only in booty. In fact, these two ayat were revealed to command that booty captured from the enemy should not be an object of individual greed, as was common at the time in Arabia (Surah al Anfal 8:41). For this reason the sole authority on disposing of the booty was to be the Prophet Muhammad, who was directed to distribute a fifth for the common good as determined by the government, “for the near of kin, and the orphans, and the needy, and the wayfarer.”

Stonewall 'em, stonewall 'em all, eh, Bob? In fact I never say that "the early Muslims were greedy bandits interested only in booty." I do record disputes over booty that arose after Badr, which are recorded by Muhammad's earliest biographer, Ibn Ishaq -- a pious Muslim. Is Crane saying that those disputes didn't happen? Then he needs to take issue with every Islamic historian who has ever relied on Ibn Ishaq as a source, not just with me. But I won't be holding my breath.

The third revelation, in 8:67, is interpreted by Spencer, on pages 110-111 of his book, to call for the killing of prisoners of war in order to promote the religion of Islam. In fact, 8:67 merely forbids the taking of captives in peacetime, that is, except after a legitimate defensive jihad on behalf of justice and freedom. This was designed to forbid the taking of slaves as an object of warfare and, in effect, at the time was designed eventually to eliminate slavery altogether. And even those POWs taken in legitimate warfare, according to the previous surah (47:4), must be freed after the war is over.

Crane's interpretation may be true, but I didn't invent mine. Here again, I just record Ibn Ishaq's interpretation of 8:67. You can find it on pages 326 and 327 of the Oxford edition of the Sirat Rasul Allah, The Life of Muhammad. But about the fact that Muslims have viewed the Qur'an this way, Crane is stonewalling again, as any good Nixonian would.

Spencer discusses the ahadith that describe a dispute between the men who became the first two political successors of the Prophet Muhammad, Abu Bakr and Umar, over what to do with the prisoners taken at the Battle of Badr. ‘Umar ibn al Khattab argued that they should all be killed in revenge. Abu Bakr, on the other hand, argued that they should be released in return for ransom, because such an act of mercy might induce them to appreciate the truth of Islam. This dispute was settled by another revelation, Surah al Anfal 8:68, which has been interpreted by most of the classical scholars as a warning that the taking of booty is legitimate but the proposed execution of the prisoners would have constituted an awesome sin and warranted a “tremendous chastisement.” Spencer uses these ahadith to show the opposite.

I do, eh? I made it all up, I suppose? Here's what Ibn Ishaq says about this incident, quoting and interpreting Qur'an 8:67: "God said, 'It is not for any prophet,' i.e. before thee [Muhammad], 'to take prisoners' from his enemies 'until he has made slaughter in the earth,' i.e. slaughtered his enemies until he drives them from the land. 'You desire the lure of this world,' i.e. its goods, the ransom of the captives. 'But God desires the next world,' i.e., their killing them to manifest the religion which He wishes to manifest..." (Pages 326-327).

"Killing them to manifest the religion which He wishes to manifest." Does that sound like "the proposed execution of the prisoners would have constituted an awesome sin" to you? "I am not a crook," hey, Bob?

Another revelation cited in connection with Badr is Surah al Nisa’a 4:91, which reads, “But if they do not stay their hands, seize them and slay them whenever you come upon them, for it is against these that We have clearly empowered you [to make war]”

This command follows a series of revelations that urge Muslims to seek peace in every way and to make war only after exhausting all means to peace. Spencer perverts every one of these revelations. In his chapter, entitled “War is Deceit,” he argues that they call for the exact opposite of what they clearly mean. In Surah al Anfal 8:58, the Muslims are warned against treachery, whether committed by themselves or by others: “If you have reason to fear treachery from people [with whom you have a covenant], cast it back at them in an equitable manner (sawaa’wink”. The classical scholars interpret this to mean that one should not attack without warning, but announce beforehand that the treaty is no longer binding....

In other words, tell those with whom you are breaking a treaty that you're breaking it. Gee, I feel so bad for making this sound as if it's something negative!

Anyway, Bob goes on to purvey some great steaming piles of careful Islamic analysis on the order of what has gone before, but I think you get the idea. And here's the conclusion:

The major challenge to Muslims today does not come from people like Robert Spencer, who come from the fringes of society, but from all those Muslims who are afraid to speak out against Muslim extremists....

of course, Bob. I'm just a fringe element. Sure. Unfortunately for you, the elements of Islamic tradition about which I have reported in my books aren't going to go away no matter how much you vilify me and call me demonic. And you're doing less than nothing about this -- in fact, you're abetting it by purveying your inaccuracies about the Qur'an and Muhammad instead of confronting what's there and formulating some positive way to deal with it.

But of course, I'm hopeless:

We must do this not only to educate people like Robert Spencer, who no doubt are hopeless. Much more importantly, we must speak out in order to inspire the youth, both Muslims and non-Muslims, to recognize the power of Islam to change persons and to focus attention on the possibilities and responsibilities to promote compassionate justice as the only road to peace and indeed for the survival of civilization.

I don't think you're hopeless, Bob. Dum spiro spero. I don't think you've been quite as forthcoming as you might have been, but if you're willing to deal honestly with the points I've raised here, so am I -- unless, of course, you're afraid to discuss matters with a demonic, funny looking Jewish Jesuit. And I expect that you are.

Just when the honeymoon with the Sunnis was going so well. Blue-Thumbed Iraqi Jeffersonians Update: "Sunni leaders angry over arrest warrant," by Kim Gamel for Associated Press, with thanks to Special Guest:

BAGHDAD - Iraqi commandos raided the home of a Sunni Cabinet member Tuesday after a warrant was issued for his arrest, outraging Sunni politicians and jeopardizing U.S.-backed reconciliation efforts within the Shiite-led government.

The move against Culture Minister Asad Kamal al-Hashimi came after he was identified by two suspected militants as the mastermind of a Feb. 8, 2005, ambush against secular politician Mithal al-Alusi, an Iraqi government spokesman said. Al-Alusi escaped unharmed but two of his sons were killed.

"The two who planned and carried out the killings of Mithal al-Alusi's two sons confessed that they took orders from him," Ali al-Dabbagh said. The spokesman said al-Hashimi was a mosque imam at the time.

Well then, he couldn't have done it. He must, as everyone knows, be a man of peace.

Al-Hashimi was not at home when the security forces staged the pre-dawn raid and detained some 40 of his guards. Muhanad al-Essawi, a spokesman for the main Sunni parliamentary bloc, said the minister was being kept in an undisclosed safe place in Baghdad and that Sunni politicians were asking the government to close the case.

Al-Hashimi is the first serving Cabinet minister to face arrest. The deputy health minister was arrested in February for alleged ties to Shiite militiamen.

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a Shiite, has promised not to let political or sectarian considerations stop him from cracking down on violence. But the move threatened to set back efforts to bring the disaffected Sunni minority into the political process, a step the U.S. says is key to stem support for the insurgency and enable American troops to go home.

Al-Hashimi's party, the Congress of the People of Iraq, condemned the arrest warrant and warned the government to avoid "playing with fire" by "fabricating lies to exclude Sunni politicians and officials from the Iraqi arena."

Time for some Balance: after posting a negative review of the Islam: What the West Needs to Know documentary film here earlier today, I should post a positive one. In fact, here are two: from DVD Talk, and from DVD Movie Central.

Sharia Alert from Brave New Democratic Afghanistan. From AP (thanks to Morgaan Sinclair):

Farida Nekzad began receiving menacing calls on her cell phone a half hour after arriving at the funeral of a fellow female journalist assassinated by gunmen.

"'Daughter of America! We will kill you, just like we killed her,'" she quoted the man on the phone as saying as she stood near the maimed body of Zakia Zaki, the owner of a radio station north of Kabul.

Part of Zaki's face was blown away by three attackers who entered her home and shot her seven times with pistol and automatic rifle fire in front of her 8-year-old son this month.

"'At least people can recognize her from one side of her face. We will shoot your face, and nobody will recognize you,'" Nekzad quoted the caller as saying before she hung up on him.

[...]

When Afghans talk about Shaima Rezayee, a popular music video show host shot to death in 2005, they speak in hushed tones _ about the racy, un-Islamic way she dressed and behaved on TV, as if this justified her death.

And it appears Zaki may have been targeted because of her radio programming.

The radio host had been critical of warlords who warned her to change the programming on her station. Two suspects being held for her slaying are connected with the militant group Hezb-e-Islami, officials said.

In a second killing of a female journalist this month, Shokiba Sanga Amaaj, a newscaster for private Shamshad TV, was shot in her home in Kabul on June 1. Two family friends have been detained in the case....

Nekzad, 29, who works for the news agency Pajhwok Afghan News, forwarded an e-mail to an Associated Press journalist that warned her, "We will kill you as soon as possible, INSHA ALLAH" _ if God wills it.

The message, dated June 8, accused her of sexual impropriety and of working for NATO. It was signed "Habib from Hezb-e-Islami," the same militant group authorities suspect in Zaki's death. The authenticity of the e-mail could not be verified.

Nekzad said Afghans began paying attention to her fears only after she told foreign journalists, who took the dangers she faced seriously. She said she wondered if her own role as a journalist could somehow have saved Zaki.

A year ago, Nekzad assigned a reporter to interview Zaki about death threats she had received. Zaki later decided against airing the story, so the reporter scrapped it and erased the videotape.

"If it were published, maybe the international community would have taken it more seriously, but after her death, it has no meaning," Nekzad said. "Nobody paid attention, not even the international community or the government."...

"Maybe they will kill me after six months, after six days, after six minutes," she said. "We know that one day we will leave this world, but if you are informed that you will be killed, it is very, very bad. Every second kills you."

It seems that "the locals believed that the criminals were enjoying support of the militant groups." The jihadists have never hesitated to make use of criminal elements to further their ends -- witness their opium trafficking in Afghanistan.

"Pakistan: Local Taliban Asked To Help Curb Crimes," from AKI (thanks to Insubria):

Lakki Marwat, 26 June (AKI/DAWN) - Elders of a grand jirga of the Marwat tribe in the Lakki Marwat district of Pakistan's North West Frontier Province (NWFP) have asked the local Taliban to take action against kidnappers and criminals in the district.

The opposition Pakistan Muslim League - Nawaz (PML-N) provincial general-secretary Kamal Khan Marwat represented the jirga and held talks with the local Taliban in the village of Mamashkhel on Sunday evening and apprised them of the increasing cases of kidnapping and other crimes in the area.

A tribal elder said they had urged the Taliban to take action because the locals believed that the criminals were enjoying support of the militant groups.

The Taliban played an active role in releasing kidnapped persons in the district, he said and asked them to use their influence for the recovery of a local official.

The Sharm Summit that took place in Egypt yesterday was not exactly a ringing success for Israel. Even so, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not exactly pleased with Jordan and Egypt. And for the West: more threats. "Ahmadinejad tells Arabs: Stop the betrayal," by Dudi Cohen for Ynet:

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad criticized Tuesday Arab countries who maintain ties with Israel, saying they "help the Zionist regime oppress the Palestinian people."

According to the Iranian news agency IRNA, Ahmadinejad appealed to Jordan and Egypt to "stop this betrayal."

"What do you want? You want to placate the arrogant (western world)? Try placating the Lord and the suppressed people. If it's power you want, this is the better way to go.

"If you think you can sell Palestine to the leaders of arrogance, you are wrong. These steps will arouse the rage of the peoples and you will lose their support."

Addressing western leaders, Ahmadinejad added, "Notice that the age of power, threat and coercion of the people is over. Do not think that if a number of people convene in one city and make a few decisions, they can solve the problem of Palestine."

How ironic! Power, threat and coercion is Ahmadinejad’s recipe for staying in power!

The Iranian president sent out a warning to the western world, saying, "You must know that the peoples of the region have woken up and they will repay your betrayal with tight fists.

"They will not allow the traitors to continue their work. The way to solve the problem of Palestine is through justice and respectful treatment of the Palestinian people."

And that, of course, means the destruction of Israel.

Crossposted from The American Israeli Patriot.

And now we begin to see the fallout from Ehud Olmert’s surrender. Abbas wants to import Jihadists from….Jordan! "Abbas appeals to Israel to allow the Fatah-affiliated Badr Brigades into the West Bank," from Ma’an News Agency:

Jerusalem - Ma’an - Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has requested that Israel allow the transfer of the Fatah-affiliated Badr Brigades from Jordan to the West Bank in order to bolster his powers after Hamas’ seizure of control in the Gaza Strip, Israeli officials said on Tuesday.

"The Palestinians put in a request yesterday to transfer the Badr Brigade from Jordan to the West Bank," a senior Israeli government official told Reuters. "It is being evaluated and a decision will be made soon.

It has been reported that the Badr Brigade has less than 1,000 fighters, who are at various levels of training.

The brigades’ readiness for action against militant groups is debated.

Although Badr is considered to be loyal to Fatah, it also has strong ties to the Jordanian king.

1,000 troops -- probably useless in battle. What does Abbas need them for? Is this the beginning of the "Right of Return" campaign?

Crossposted from The American Israeli Patriot.

A summary of Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's statement of surrender. "PM Olmert Plans to Release 250 Fatah Terrorists From Jail," by Nissan Ratzlav-Katz for the INN :

Addressing his remarks to the PA Arabs, Prime Minister Olmert said that Israel is just as sensitive to the issue of its kidnapped soldiers as the residents of the PA are to the issue of their relatives serving time in Israeli jails.

Prime Minister Olmert then announced, "Out of sensitivity to the matter of the prisoners, I decided today to bring before the government of Israel a decision according to which we will release 250 prisoners, members of Fatah, without blood on their hands, and who will commit themselves to refrain from further involvement in terrorism. I do this because I understand the importance of negotiations with the Palestinian Authority."

Who is going to guarantee the commitment? Abbas? He just merged the murderous al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade into his own security force! And that force is about to increase by 250 members.

He added that the intended mass prisoner release had another purpose, as well: "It is important that every Palestinian knows that whoever is prepared to have peaceful and conciliatory relations with us will receive our hand outstretched in peace."

What every Palestinian knows now more than ever is that terror pays. I would paraphrase Olmert's statement as follows: "It is important that every Palestinian knows that as long as the terror continues, you will receive our arms outstretched in surrender."

In addition, Olmert promised to transfer withheld tax revenues to the PA, to make "meaningful" improvement in the freedom of movement of the Arab population in Judea and Samaria, and to renew commercial ties with that population.

More money for terror. More money to line the pockets of the corrupt Fatah leadership.

Israel will not cut basic supplies to Gaza, either, the Prime Minister avowed, saying, "We will not punish the Gaza population for the actions of the Hamas leaders."

Why punish the population who brought Hamas to power? Did the US support the German population during WWII? Israel supplies Gaza with water and electricity, while it hastily turns off service to Israelis who are suffering economic distress due to the effects of terror. Qassam-besieged Sderot still has not received the proper protection promised by the government so long ago. Residents of the north still do not have the adequate bomb shelters promised by the government so long ago.

What is important to the Olmert government is that Gazans are taken care of. But why? Israel disengaged. Let Egypt feed them. Let Egypt supply them with water and electricity.

According to Prime Minister Olmert, the new Abbas- and Fatah-led government of the PA "recognizes Israel's right to exist," accepts the "two states for two peoples" solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict, "opposes terrorism," and "includes no representatives of terrorist organizations."

Fatah's response? "Al Aqsa Brigades spokesperson urges Palestinians to support resistance," from Ma'an News Agency:

Gaza - Ma'an - Spokesman for Fatah-affiliated Al Aqsa Brigades, Abu Fuad, on Monday urged the Palestinian people to support the "choice of resistance".

In a press statement made in Gaza he said "the Israeli policies will be frustrated on the rock of the steadfastness of the people, as before. We confirmed that we are putting the issue of the prisoners at the top of our priorities".

He urged the Palestinian leaders to move immediately to "expose the Israeli position and the barbaric way they are treating the Palestinian people." He also urged "the Arab League and the Islamic organizations to take a step forward, act in more responsible way and support the Palestinian people."

So much for Olmert's goodwill gestures.

According to "Olmert agrees to free Palestinians" in Al Jazeera, the 250 acts of treason committed by Olmert will result in…..nothing!

But the "goodwill" measure will not help increase Abbas's popularity across factional divides because Ehud Olmert said the prisoners had to be members of Abbas's Fatah faction.

They also had to be "without blood on their hands" and willing to renounce terrorism.

The Arab media is already planting the seeds to negate the "goodwill gesture."

Olmert released 250 Jihadists and all he well get in return is a demand for more. And terror, of course. All the while Gilad Shalit still sits in Gaza.

In "MK Ahmed Tibi embraces Ehud Olmert's Sharm statements" in the Jerusalem Post, we find two noteworthy responses from Israel's right:

MK Zvi Hendel of NU\NRP said that "Olmert continues to gallop at breakneck speed towards the precipice of a destroyed path and the annihilation of Israel's might. If the prisoners who are to be released were imprisoned subsequent to the Oslo accords then what has changed? Hendel asked, and answered that "Then too we said that Fatah was peace-loving and that we should caress them and hug them, and yet they committed crimes against the citizens of Israel. Every minute that goes by with this man (Olmert) still in power intensifies the danger to Israel."

MK Arye Eldad, another member of Hendel's party, said that "Irrespective of the practical failure of the Sharm summit for furthering peace in the Middle East, Olmert was forced into the Pavlovian response of releasing prisoners and rewarding terror."

At least some people get it. It's treason.

Crossposted from The American Israeli Patriot.

Neo-Nazis? Here is yet another indication of the deleterious effects of the abdication of the European political mainstream. Its refusal to confront and deal with the many and various effects of rapid, large-scale Muslim immigration into Europe leaves the field open to unsavory groups. Then the presence of such groups taints the whole issue and give ammunition to the Leftists and jihad apologists who claim that anyone who opposes the Islamization of Europe is a crypto-Nazi anyway. In a sane Europe, prime ministers and parliaments would be discussing Sharia, deciding just how much of it, if any, they intend to allow, and moving sternly against those who are trying to implement Sharia in their states. But we do not live in a sane age in Europe's history.

"Huge mosque stirs protests in Cologne," by Harry de Quetteville in the Telegraph, with thanks to Jay:

The construction of one of Europe's biggest mosques near to a globally famous Christian landmark has sparked a furious row in Germany. Immigration and integration are hugely sensitive questions in Germany, which is home to a Turkish community of several million. But almost within the shadow of Cologne Cathedral, political correctness has now been replaced by bitter confrontation as the city's Muslims begin to build a 2,000-capacity mosque with twin minarets that will reach 170ft.

"Muslims have been here for 40 years, yet people are praying in back rooms," said Seyda Can, an Islamic theologian at the Turkish Islamic Union in Cologne. "There are 120,000 Muslims in Cologne, that's 12 per cent of the population. We should not hide."

Work will begin in the autumn on the £15 million mosque, which will include huge glass and stone cupolas and two six-storey minarets.

[...]

"With this mosque Muslims will no longer think of their old countries as their home, but of Germany," she said.

That will do it, eh? No need to deal with any questions about Sharia or the overarching loyalty to the umma, transcending loyalty to any nation state, that has always been part of Islam? All that will just fly out the window as soon as this mosque is completed, I suppose?

"Two hundred years ago the first Protestant church was built in Cologne. It was a long process for Protestants to be accepted but today, of course, they are. Why can't we be the same?"

Because Islam is not the same. Protestantism is not incompatible with the European separation of religion from state power. Islam traditionally recognizes no such separation. What assurance can you give us that Muslims in Germany will acquiesce to this separation without any intention to impose Sharia in the future?

However, others believe that the mosque in the city's Ehrenfeld district, just two miles from the Gothic spires of Cologne Cathedral, will foster, rather that heal, divisions.

"It's not a popular plan," said Joerg Uckermann, the district's deputy mayor. "We don't want to build a Turkish ghetto in Ehrenfeld. I know about Londonistan and I don't want that here."

Mr Uckermann is part of a curious coalition of protest that has united Jewish intellectuals and neo-Nazis. Leading the charge is Ralph Giordano, a prominent Jewish author, who wrote recently that Germany was witnessing a "clash of two completely different cultures" and questioned whether they could ever be reconciled.

Stating that he had received death threats for his opinions, he added: "What kind of a state are we in that I can face a fatwa in Germany?"

Good question.

Gates of Vienna has details, along with video (thanks to all who sent this in). The Danes who did this probably realize that they are, uh, playing with fire. If the puppetmasters decide to make an issue of this, there could be worldwide riots.

But ultimately it comes down to the same old questions. Freedom of speech encompasses precisely the freedom to annoy, to ridicule, and to offend. If it doesn’t, it is hollow: inoffensive speech doesn’t need the protection of a constitutional amendment. The instant that any person or ideology is considered off-limits for critical examination and even ridicule, freedom of speech has been replaced by an ideological straitjacket.

Will the West acquiesce in the Islamic world's efforts to place Islam beyond criticism -- and at a moment when jihad terrorists use Islamic texts and teachings to justify violence? Or will we stand up and defend ourselves?

But I'm sure he means that in a peaceful way.

Anyway, here again is a Qur'anic exposition in favor of the jihad ideology. In response all we get from peaceful Muslims are vague condemnations of "terrorism." Unless and until peaceful Muslims begin to refute these Qur'anic arguments, jihadists will continue to make recruits among them. If they cannot refute them, they need to show why these commands should not now or ever be taken literally. The fact that they do not do that speaks volumes. And meanwhile bemused Americans and Europeans continue to affirm, without a shred of evidence, that traditional and mainstream Islam abhors violence and rejects jihad supremacism, and assumes that the theological battle in Islam between moderates and jihadists has already been won, when in fact it is hardly even being fought.

From MEMRI (thanks to the Constantinopolitan Irredentist):

The April-May 2007 issue of the jihadi e-magazine Sada Al-Jihad, published by the Global Islamic Media Front (GIMF), includes an article by Sheikh Hussein bin Mahmoud [1] titled "Let Them Find Ruthlessness in You," in which he criticizes the Muslims for being too lenient in their war against their enemies. Bin Mahmoud states that Allah commanded the Muslims to fight their enemies fiercely, without compassion or mercy, and uses Koranic verses to back up his assertions. He extols the example of Abu Mus'ab Al-Zarqawi, who cut off the infidels' heads and struck terror in their hearts.

The following are excerpts from the article:
"When… Al-Zarqawi Went Out and Slaughtered a Few Infidels, the [Advocates of] Tolerance and Friendship Had a Fit"

"The way of [waging] jihad changes according to the [available] means, innovations, ploys and practices. Over the history of Islamic conquests, jihad was [waged] according to these [changing] general principles... which we cannot enumerate here fully. We can, however, mention one aspect which our [Islamic] nation is now in dire need of, since many Muslims today have a distorted [understanding] of Islamic principles and tenets, due to [the influence of] the enemy, or due to [the influence] of some Muslims whose spirit has been defeated... and they have begun to distort the [true] meaning of Koranic verses on [the pretext of] rationalism, moderateness, a civilized [outlook], or similar notions. These notions have lost their [true] meaning and have become synonymous with defeat, withdrawal, impotence and falsification of the truths of Islamic shari'a.

"The aspect that Muslims must accept is that of ruthlessness and firmness in jihad. Many Muslims today are educated in a spirit that is far from the [true] spirit of the Koran... The Muslim nation is the strongest nation in history... since it has the mightiest prophet, the mightiest book [i.e., the Koran] and the mightiest religion on Earth, and it is the nation which strikes its enemies hardest, [since it fights them] according to Islamic shari'a. Owing to these qualities, [the Muslim nation] is the most awe-inspiring of nations, and nobody [dares to] covet [what belongs to it], as long as it adheres to its principles and to the sources of its strength, which are the Koran and the sunna.

"It is no exaggeration to say that many Muslims today have never heard of the Koranic verses [that speak of] jihad... and do not believe that the Koran includes verses that speak of force, firmness, terror and cruelty, since they have heard so much about peace, security, compassion, friendship, justice, grace, honesty and moderateness. These are all words of truth, but in times of war, they are used to express falsehoods.

"When the emir and commander Abu Mus'ab Al-Zarqawi went out and slaughtered a few infidels, the [advocates of] tolerance and friendship had a fit. They jumped up, made threats and swore that this [act] runs counter to the spirit of [Islam]. How much suffering have these people and their supporters caused us! When we told them that Allah commanded to cut off the heads [of the enemies], they would say, 'be mindful of Allah, and do not make things up,' and we had to bring the Koran and show them these verses so that they would believe [us]. Some of them even turned the book over [and looked] at the cover to make sure that it really was the Koran. These [people] had read the Koran many times, but they had not read it [carefully]..."

"The Perfect Muslim is Gentle with His Fellow Believer and Harsh Towards His Enemy, the Infidel"

"A quick review of some Koranic verses [will help us] characterize [the concept of] cruelty in battle, so that the Muslims understand the truth about this matter and [realize] what is missing from their [school] curricula, sermons and religion courses. The [Muslim] nation must urgently familiarize itself with these military aspects of the Koran, so that it can deal with its enemies and fight [them]... in the way prescribed by Allah in order to grant [the nation] victory. After the great battle of Badr, Allah told the Prophet [Muhammad]...: 'It is not for any prophet to have captives until he hath made slaughter in the land. You desire the frail goods of this world, while Allah desires [for you] the hereafter; and Allah is Mighty and Wise [Koran 8:67]'... The word 'prophet' in this verse appears in the indefinite form, which means that [all] the prophets used to kill many of their enemies by the sword rather than take them captive... Allah says this explicitly [in the following verse]: 'So when you meet the infidels in battle, then cut off their heads, and after you have killed many of them by the sword, place [them] in shackles, and afterwards either set them free if you choose or let them ransom [themselves] until the war ends [Koran 47:4]'...

"The first real battle fought by the Muslims was the battle of Badr, in which they captured many polytheists in order to hold them for ransom, according to the custom of the [pre-Islamic] Arabs. Allah rebuked them and explained to them that this was not the way of the prophets, for [the prophets] killed many of the infidel leaders and soldiers in order to purge the land of them... and [in order to] prepare the world for da'wa for the sake of Allah. During the battle of Badr, something momentous happened: Allah ordered the angels to fight alongside the Muslims and to strengthen their spirits, and He told [the angels] that he would strike terror into the hearts of the infidels. [The Koran says]: 'Remember thy Lord inspired the angels [with the message]: I am with you. Give firmness to the Believers, [and] I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers. You cut off their heads and smite all their fingers off them [Koran 8:12]'...

"This was the beginning of the war against the infidels, and the initial shock, [meant to] fill the hearts [of the infidels] with fear and terror of the Muslims, so that they would stop resisting and accept the treaty, and later either convert to Islam if they want to, or continue to live under the treaty and come to no harm...

"[The question is]: This violence, ruthlessness and firmness - Is it [meant to be] a permanent law and feature of war, or does it apply only to the early [years of Islam]? The answer [is given in] Koran 9:123, where Allah says: 'O ye who believe! Fight the infidels who are near to you, and let them find ruthlessness in you, and know that Allah is with the faithful.' This was one of the last suras to descend, its verses were among the last to descend, and the laws [they set out] are timeless... The perfect Muslim is gentle with his fellow believer and harsh towards his enemy, the infidel..."

"Allah Commanded the Believers… to Show [Their Enemies] No Mercy or Compassion"

"Today, the content of all these verses is perhaps encapsulated in a single verse, which is: 'If ye punish, then punish with the like of that wherewith ye were afflicted [Koran 16:126].' [In this verse], Allah commands [us] to fight the enemy the same way he fights us, to kill him in the same way he kills us, and to deliberately kill those who set out to kill us. Today, our enemies hit us with nuclear bombs, cluster [bombs] and chemical [bombs] which have killed many of our men, women and children, destroyed homes and crops, spread disease and burned [people's] bodies. We [therefore] have the right to fight back by the same means, by the command of Allah who [instructs us] to be ruthless and fierce [with the enemy] and to smite him, in order to teach others a lesson...

"These verses teach us that Allah commanded the believers to be firm, forceful, ruthless and radical in killing the enemies who fight against [Islam], and to show them no mercy or compassion... This applies to offensive jihad. What about [the case in which] the infidels attack the Muslim states, shed [Muslim] blood, violate women's honor and offend [Islam]? In that case, there is no doubt that they must be struck and killed with even greater ruthlessness, as a lesson to others and in order to fill them with awe for the [Muslim] nation, so that no-one will wish to attack [the Muslims] anywhere, ever again. For Allah has said in the Koran: 'If ye gain the mastery over them in war, disperse them and those who follow them, that they may remember [Koran 8:57]'...

"Wars are fought on the basis of theories of warfare, and not [on the basis of] a hodgepodge of peace[full terms] and philosophies that are all talk. [War] is bloodshed and killing, and not [a matter for] religious arguments, theories, debates and… programs on the satellite channels. Our righteous forefathers implemented the principles of the Koran, and the results were amazing: [they gained] victory after victory and Allah's triumph was realized, because they defended his faith and obeyed his command to kill, disperse and smite the enemies of the faith...

"Looking at the Islamic [world] today, we find that these divine edicts are hardly ever implemented. We once had two men whom we beseeched Allah to give a long life so they would revive the tradition of Khaled [Bin Al-Walid]. [2] [These two men were] the commander Sayf Al-Islam Khattab [who led the jihad in Chechnya] and the slaughtering Emir Abu Mus'ab Al-Zarqawi... Despite their short lives, they left an enduring legacy that will be remembered for generations to come... They were among those who stood most firmly against the infidels, and reminded the Muslims of some of the [Koranic] verses [that they had forgotten]. They killed and cut off heads, and the mere mention of their names on any front was enough to scare the enemies and disperse those who followed them...

"May Allah send the [Muslim] nation someone who will kill them even more [savagely], strike terror in their [souls], tear their hearts out... cut their heads off, tear them limb from limb and shed their blood in rivers...

"Hussein Bin Mahmoud

"The 29th day of Rabi' Al-Awwal, 1428 (April 17, 2007)."

As if the BBC and CNN weren't enough for them already.

"Iran to vie with West by launching news channel," from Reuters, with thanks to Ur:

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran's state broadcaster will launch a 24-hour English-language satellite news channel next week to rival dominant Western services, a senior official said on Tuesday.

Tehran-based PRESS TV starts broadcasting from Tehran on Monday staffed by both Iranians and foreigners, and will seek to compete against the likes of CNN and BBC World, Nader Rad, head of live programming, told Reuters.

"The news is mostly covered by the Western media. We would like to have a say in this," he said.

"They (Western outlets) don't usually cover the whole story ... The news about Iraq does not cover all perspectives. The news about Palestine and Beirut is also like this," he said.

Rad said Britons and Americans were among those working for the new channel, some based in Tehran. PRESS TV had journalists in Washington, New York, London, Beirut and Damascus, and was planning to have staff in Baghdad and Cairo, he said.

The PRESS TV Web site (www.presstv.ir) said one of the goals was "to break the global media stranglehold of Western outlets." It also said the channel wanted to "bridge cultural divisions."

Spencer: Funny-looking, and therefore wrong

Jihad Watch reader Eric has alerted me to a review of the documentary film Islam: What the West Needs to Know, in which I appear. It's a silly, largely substanceless and poorly reasoned review by Ian Arbuckle on a silly-looking site called Cinematic Happenings Under Development, mostly on the pie-throwing level of the caption above that he placed underneath a photo of me, but it does provide an opportunity to clarify some things.

Interviews with noted anti-Islam folks such as Robert Spencer and Serge Trifkovic, along with scholars of Islam like Bat Ye'or, Abdullah al-Araby, and former Palestinian terrorist Walid Shoebat.

"Anti-Islam folks" like me. Now, this is simply false. I am not "anti-Islam." I am against supremacism and subjugation, I am against the denial of human rights to women and religious minorities. As I say here, any Muslim who renounces violent jihad and dhimmitude is welcome to join in our anti-jihadist efforts. Any hate in my books comes from Muslim sources I quote, not from me....It is not an act of hatred against Muslims to point out the depredations of jihad ideology....Am I "anti-Muslim"? Some time ago here at Jihad Watch I had an exchange with an English convert to Islam. I said: "I would like nothing better than a flowering, a renaissance, in the Muslim world, including full equality of rights for women and non-Muslims in Islamic societies: freedom of conscience, equality in laws regarding legal testimony, equal employment opportunities, etc." Is all that "anti-Muslim"? My correspondent thought so. He responded: "So, you would like to see us ditch much of our religion and, thereby, become non-Muslims."

In other words, he saw a call for equality of rights for women and non-Muslims in Islamic societies, including freedom of conscience, equality in laws regarding legal testimony, and equal employment opportunities, as a challenge to his religion. To the extent that they are, these facts have to be confronted by both Muslims and non-Muslims. But I make no apologies: it is not "anti-Muslim" to wish freedom of conscience and equality of rights on the Islamic world -- quite the contrary.

Over the course of six segments, the filmmakers work to convince you that Muslims are bad and the West is foolish to suppose that those Muslims who are not terrorists are members of a religion of peace.

This is a misstatement of the documentary's intent. The film does not state or imply or try to convince anyone that "Muslims are bad." It is an investigation of Islamic theology, which (as you will see) even this reviewer acknowledges to be accurate. But the content of Islamic theology doesn't say anything whatsoever about any individual Muslim, any more than the Catholic Church's prohibition of contraception means that all Catholics oppose contraception. The teachings of a religion are one thing and the thoughts of the people who identify themselves as adherents of that religion are quite another. The documentary does not confuse the two.

I'm not even sure why this movie exists. It has to be a propaganda piece. Why else would people sacrifice time and effort to produce a documentary with such an intellectually corrupt thesis? The terrorists have scriptural backing for their actions, goes the argument. Those millions of Muslims who are not terrorists are members of the same violent religion.

That's the whole thesis. It's not even a proper argument. It just gives you those two facts and winks and gestures at them a bit going, "Eh? Eh? See?"

"I do not see."

Leave aside for a moment that the thing looks to have been constructed on iMovie, or maybe PowerPoint, with static images and dreadful voiceovers intercut with black-background interviews with its subjects. The argument they're trying to make isn't even necessary. The West already knows that the Islamic terrorist organizations use scripture to justify their actions. This is not news. Yet the film spends almost an hour minutely detailing how Qu'ranic scripture supports terrorist actions.

Actually, the West does not know that the Islamic terrorist organizations use scripture to justify their actions. On the contrary, the mainstream media and even the allegedly fearless politically incorrect conservative talking heads and publications frequently hasten to assure us that the Islamic terrorist organizations do not have Islamic scripture on their side, and are hijacking a religion that teaches peace. The fact that the Islamic terrorist organizations use Islamic scripture to justify their actions is the inconvenient truth that virtually no one dares to acknowledge, despite the fact that acknowledging it is the only genuine path to Islamic reform and true Islamic moderation: you cannot reform what you won't admit needs reform.

The cognitive stretch that the filmmakers are hoping the audience will make is absurd. They want the audience to equate Muslim terrorists with practitioners of Islam the world over. The stance is morally repugnant. How does it even follow logically that we shold approach all of Islam as if it were a giant, violent hive of men and women eager to convert the unbeliever through any means necessary? There's is a weight of evidence to the contrary, millions of humans deep.

Here the cognitive stretch that Ian Arbuckle is hoping his readers will make is absurd. He wants his readers to believe that the documentary equates Muslim terrorists with practitioners of Islam the world over, when it doesn't do any such thing. He also demonstrates that he hasn't even grasped what the documentary says about Islamic teachings when he suggests that it intends to compel us to "approach all of Islam as if it were a giant, violent hive of men and women eager to convert the unbeliever through any means necessary." There is no imperative within Islam to convert the unbeliever through any means necessary, and the film doesn't say there is.

In reality, within Islamic teaching there is an imperative to offer conversion to the unbeliever or to subjugate him as an inferior under the rule of Islamic law -- an inferior, but free within limits to practice his religion. This is made clear in the documentary. Does this mean that every Muslim is intent on implementing this imperative? Of course not, any more than every Catholic is intent on eschewing contraception. But Catholics' rejecting that teaching does not mean it is not Church teaching, and Muslims doing nothing about jihad and Islamic supremacism does not mean that those things don't exist. In reality, peaceful Muslims must confront and reject these aspects of Islam in order to stop their use by jihadist recruiters; this cannot and will not be done if they continue to ignore these teachings or deny they exist.

For most of the film, I thought that the fearmongering was an end to itself, that the filmmakers just wanted to play at having revelations. It gets worse than that, though. The nadir of this mess is when the term jihad, meaning struggle, is equated with Mein Kampf, which also translates to "my struggle." Yes, that's right, the filmmakers have invoked Hitler, and as a result the holocaust, in their little project.

Shoebat does this in the film. His point is that simply to point out that jihad means "struggle" does not render it innocuous. It is a point confirmed by every day's headlines.

This shit makes me angry. I'm a passive kind of guy, but the dissemination of idiocy boils my blood. It's not that the factual and textual references are incorrect. On the contrary, the readings from the Qur'an and attendant texts seem to be accurate and well-researched. It's the context they're placed in that makes the film so worthless as an academic piece, or successful as a propaganda piece. (Although Leni Riefenstahl the filmmakers ain't.) Instead of using the thesis: "Terrorists have textual support for their actions. Isn't that interesting?" the filmmakers have extended it to the ill-connected mess of theses that they hope will breed together just by being placed in proximity.

"They're right, but wrong." Arbuckle seems to be saying that even though what the film says is correct, it is just too fearful a prospect to contemplate, and therefore must be rejected.

The West doesn't need to know any of this. The West already knows that religion can be used as justification for the most inhumane acts on the planet. But to devote an entire documentary to casting Islam as a ticking time bomb of violence and hysteria? The West needs only to ignore that kind of shrill, illegitimate work.

Really? Then what will keep Islam from being used as justification for the most inhumane acts on the planet? If we just ignore it, it will go away?

I may be funny looking, but at least I am not as befuddled, confused, and willfully ignorant as Ian Arbuckle.

ADDENDUM: It is worth emphasizing that I post such things in order to use them as an opportunity to clarify matters and respond to common objections to points that I raise. I may have clouded the issue here by mentioning Ian Arbuckle's snarkiness regarding my picture, but in reality this is not personal at all. This is about issues that Arbuckle raises, which are unexamined assumptions that many people have. His review just provided an opportunity to discuss them and offer some responses that you may find useful in other contexts.

The former blue-thumbed Iraqi Jeffersonians have lost their luster. Of course, this just underscores what we have pointed out here for years: that the Shi'ites were not really enthusiastic proponents of democracy. They just saw one-man-one-vote as a chance for them to take power in Iraq. Now the U.S. has awakened to just how much this helps Iran, and are trying to reverse it. But how ultimately will American officials distinguish "biased" Shi'ites from "impartial" ones?

By Pauline Jelinek for Associated Press (thanks to Looney Tunes):

WASHINGTON - More than a third of Iraq's national police battalion commanders are now Sunni after a purge of Shiites who had a sectarian bias, a U.S. general said Monday.

Despite improvements, he predicted it will still be years before Iraqi forces are capable of securing the country by themselves.

Speaking to Pentagon reporters from Iraq, Army Brig. Gen. Dana Pittard said he had been saddened to see the destruction in one province where the number of U.S. forces had been reduced too soon.

"We cannot be in a hurry to withdraw our coalition forces," he said, using Diyala province north of Baghdad as an example.

[...]

"The growth of the Iraqi security forces over the past couple of years has really been quite dramatic in many ways," he said by video conference. Among improvements: Iraqi officials have recruited Sunnis to the national police command, a group that a year ago was almost entirely Shia. The national police have been known for their ties to Shiite militia.

Pittard said that since October, officials had removed seven of nine brigade commanders — five because of sectarian bias. One of two division commanders is now Sunni, as are four of nine brigade commanders and 9 or 10 of the 27 battalion commanders, he said.

And the Sunnis, I suppose, are free of "sectarian bias."

But he warned against being "in a hurry" to hand over responsibility for Iraq security to local soldiers and police — a handover U.S. officials have said is key to bringing American forces home.

[...]

Asked if Iraqis will be able to move fairly soon to take control of areas now being cleared out, Pittard said, "We've really got to be careful."

"A lesson learned is ... do not draw down too quickly when we think there's a glimmer of success," he said. "It will take time, it will take time for the Iraqi security forces to be able to take over from our forces."

The No. 2 commander in Iraq, Maj. Gen. Ray Odierno, said last week that the current operation should last through the summer and he won't be able to determine until then how much of the follow-on work U.S. forces will have to do themselves.

Pittard noted that Iraqi security forces are taking the lead in some places, such as in Maysan in the south, the province of Muthanna, and in Irbil in the north.

"I think it'll take a couple of years before the Iraqi security forces are going to be able to fully take control of the security situation in Iraq," he said.

Meanwhile, a think tank led by John Podesta, President Clinton's former chief of staff, recommended Monday that the U.S. immediately stop arming the Iraqis and redeploy U.S. troops within a year.

"Spending billions to arm Iraq's security forces without political consensus among Iraq's leaders carries significant risks — the largest of which is arming faction-ridden national Iraqi units before a unified national government exists that these armed forces will loyally support," wrote the Center for America Progress in Washington.

Officials at the center downplayed the possibility that such an approach would lead to a genocide or a takeover by neighboring countries.

Iraq's neighbors "have an interest in not seeing things get even worse," said Brian Katulis, a senior fellow at the center.

Indeed they do. But their vision of how to do that might not be identical to that of Katulis.

Danny Nalliah and Daniel Scot have long been embroiled in this battle for free speech. Why should vilifying Islam, or vilifying Christianity, or vilifying anything you like, be against the law at all?

From CBNNews.com, with thanks to all who sent this in:

CBNNews.com - A five-year battle over free speech in Australia's state of Victoria is over.

Pastors Danny Nalliah and Daniel Scott were charged with vilifying Islam.

They have reached what is being called a mediated settlement in the case.

The Islamic Council of Victoria state has agreed that citizens have the right to "robustly debate religion" and "criticize religious beliefs" within the limits of the law.

Terms of a monetary settlement have yet to be disclosed.

However, both sides must share legal costs.

The two pastors spent more than $500,000 defending their right to criticize Islam.

An emailer kindly informs me that "if u repeat a lie enough times you actually start to fool the masses," which is a lesson that appears to have been well-learned by the "Islam is a Religion of Peace" crowd:

Dear Sir if u repeat a lie enough times you actually start to fool the masses. the fact is that islam has enlightened the world and made it a much better place. it isrevelation and sometimes old chap revelation is hard to deal with i.e moses was the first person commanded to kill people for adultury but does that make him a terrorist/women beater? until the western governments admit that they have caused more wars and killing then anyone else, they ave enslaves, occupied and pilaged, they have spread imorality throughout the globe there will never be peace.

So all western governments have to do is admit that, and then there will be peace? You are setting the bar low, sir! The guilt-ravaged, suicidal West admits that all the time, and it still isn't enough!

"In effect, it means we are in a full on war with Iran -- but nobody has officially declared it."

From AFP, with thanks to Mackie:

Iranian Revolutionary Guard forces have been spotted by British troops crossing the border into southern Iraq, The Sun tabloid reported on Tuesday.

Britain's defence ministry would not confirm or deny the report, with a spokesman declining to comment on "intelligence matters".

An unidentified intelligence source told the tabloid: "It is an extremely alarming development and raises the stakes considerably. In effect, it means we are in a full on war with Iran -- but nobody has officially declared it."

"We have hard proof that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps have crossed the border to attack us. It is very hard for us to strike back. All we can do is try to defend ourselves. We are badly on the back foot."

In "An honor worth defending" in the IHT (thanks to all who sent this in), Ayaan Hirsi Ali calls on the West to recover its spine and defend its culture and civilization, as I do also in my forthcoming book Religion of Peace? Why Christianity Is and Islam Isn't (coming in August from Regnery). But there is a curious phrase in the opening paragraph:

Imagine if a crowd of Englishmen marched in London carrying effigies of Muhammad, peace be upon him, stacks of the Koran, miniatures of the Kaaba in Mecca and Saudi flags. Imagine if they then built a bonfire and hurled the items one at a time into that fire screaming "Long Live the Queen!" each time the flames shot up.

"Peace be upon him"? This is an interjection that pious Muslims add after uttering the name of a prophet. Yet Hirsi Ali has referred to Muhammad as a tyrant and a pervert. She has not presented herself as a Muslim except in a broad cultural way. So I wonder: did she add this interjection herself, as a means of identifying herself as a cultural Muslim? Or did an editor at Tribune Media Services (which distributed this piece) or the IHT add it in as an exercise in politically correct sensitivity?

If anyone knows, write me at director[at]jihadwatch.org.

Anyway, Hirsi Ali goes on:

This would be the equivalent of what hardline Muslim students did in the eastern Pakistani city of Multan, to take just one example, when they burned effigies this week of Queen Elizabeth II and Salman Rushdie, chanting "Kill him! Kill him!" in response to his recently bestowed knighthood.

[...]

Westerners have too often shrugged their shoulders at the trashing of their icons - such as when the queen is burned in effigy - by the foot soldiers of tribal barbarism. This perceived weakness makes the foes of the West more ferocious and helps recruit more jihadists.

Instead the West should join together to vigorously defend its symbols and civilization that, with all its flaws, still offers the best life to the most people.

[...]

By knighting Salman Rushdie, the queen has honored the freedom of conscience and creativity cherished in the West, making her a symbol of the essence of our way of life.

More Rushdie Rage from Iran: Ayatollah Shahroudi tells the UK, You've always hated us. "Judiciary chief: UK showing hostility to Islam," from IRNA (thanks to all who sent this in):

Judiciary Chief Ayatollah Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi said on Monday that the UK has constantly showed its hostility to Islam.

Shahroudi also condemned the recent move by the UK Queen in warding knighthood title to apostate author Salman Rushdie.

He added, "This indicates the treacherous policy of the UK colonialist regime and its longstanding hostility to Islam." Pointing to the fact that all cultures and civilizations respect divine prophets and religions, he noted that such blasphemies are considered ugly and immoral worldwide.

Shahroudi referred to Christian scholars, who wrote numerous books on the character of the Great Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) and Imam Ali (AS), saying the UK government action in awarding apostate Salman Rushdie shows their weakness in facing Islam.

I rather think that Renewed Rushdie Rage shows Islam's weakness in its inability to deal with any criticism at all. Only the pathetically insecure try to silence their opponents, rather than presenting their ideas in a spirit of honest inquiry and encouraging open discussion and debate.

What is Israel getting in return? Nothing. What unilateral goodwill gesture have the Palestinians ever offered to Israel? They never have offered any goodwill gesture at all.

Wishful Thinking Update: Ehud "Crazy Eddie" Olmert is at it again: his policies are...insane.

"Israel announces mass prisoner release," by Amy Teibel for Associated Press:

SHARM EL-SHEIK, Egypt - Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said Monday he will release 250 Fatah members from Israeli prisons in a goodwill gesture aimed at strengthening Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas after Hamas' victory in Gaza.

Olmert announced the prisoner release at a summit with Abbas and the leaders of Egypt and Jordan that the Arabs and Palestinians are hoping can push forward the peace process and strengthen Abbas' hand.

"As a gesture of good will towards the Palestinians, I will bring before the Israeli Cabinet a proposal to free 250 Fatah prisoners who do not have blood on their hands, after they sign a commitment not to return to violence," Olmert told the gathering.

After penetrating layers of security. Now how did he manage to do that? Might there have been some among the security personnel who sympathized with his jihad?

By Bushra Juhi for Associated Press:

BAGHDAD - A suicide bomber apparently targeting a meeting of U.S.-allied Sunni sheiks penetrated layers of security and blew himself up in a hotel lobby on Monday, killing four tribal leaders and at least eight others, police reported.

The sheiks were associated with the Anbar Salvation Council, which had taken up arms to help drive extremists of al-Qaida in Iraq from the western province of Anbar....

The bombing at the high-rise Mansour Hotel, on the west bank of the Tigris River in central Baghdad, struck at about noon as the lobby bustled with members of news media organizations headquartered at the hotel and other guests, witnesses said.

A man wearing a belt of explosives walked into the lobby, approached the group of sheiks meeting there, and detonated his bomb, said a police officer based at the hotel, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

He identified four tribal leaders killed as former Anbar governor Fassal al-Guood, sheik of the al-Bu Nimir tribe, Sheik Abdul-Azizi al-Fahdawi of the Fahad tribe, Sheik Tariq Saleh al-Assafi and Col. Fadil al-Nimrawi, both of the al-Bu Nimr tribe. Three of al-Guood's guards also were killed, the police officer said.

"It was a great breach of security because there are three checkpoints, one outside and two inside," said Saif al-Rubaie, a 28-year-old hotel worker who saw the blast.

Islamic law prohibits the killing of women and children "unless they are fighting against the Muslims" ('Umdat al-Salik o9.10, cf. al-Mawardi, al-Akham as-Sultaniyyah, 4.2).

By Hoda Osman and Maddy Sauer for ABC's The Blotter (thanks to Hot Air):

The Egyptian militant who leads the group he calls "Al Qaeda in Egypt" has called for his followers to launch attacks in Egypt to "strike against all Zionist-Crusader targets" there, including women and children.

The statement of Mohammed Khalil al Hakayma, who is wanted by the United States, is dated yesterday and has been posted on numerous jihadi Web sites.

"Rise up and pluck out the Zionist presence in Egypt," he says. "Rise up and inflame a war on them everywhere. Do not differentiate between a military and a civilian person. As they struck against our women and children, we will kill their women and children."

This idea of tit-for-tat retaliation is based on Qur'an 42:40: "The recompense for an injury is an injury equal thereto (in degree)..." (See also 2:178 and 5:45).

Negotiate concessions to the jihadists, or else. By Felix Lowe in the Telegraph (thanks to Darcy):

Alan Johnston has been forced to wear an explosives vest which his captors will blow up if an attempt is made to rescue him, according to a new video released of the BBC journalist.

In the video Mr Johnston, captured more than 100 days ago in Gaza, urges the British government and the Hamas movement to return to negotiations to secure his release from captivity, rather than press for a military solution.

Wearing a bomb belt of the type used by Palestinian suicide bombers, he says: "Captors tell me that very promising negotiations were ruined when the Hamas movement and the British government decided to press for a military solution to this kidnapping and the situation is now very serious."

In the poor-quality video, Mr Johnston continues: "As you can see, I have been dressed in what is an explosive belt, which the kidnappers say will be detonated if there is an attempt to storm the area.

"They say they are ready to turn the hide-out into what they describe as a death zone if there is an attempt to free me by force.

"I do appeal to the Hamas movement and the British government not, not to resort to the tactics of force in an effort to end this.

"I would ask the BBC and anyone in Britain who wishes me well to support me in that appeal. It seems the answer is to return to negotiations, which I am told are very close to achieving a deal."

A emailer to Jihad Watch from Great Britain kindly explains the defensive jihad:

I BELIEVE YOU ALL WORK 4 THE DEVIL. I AM A MUSLIM I USED TO BE A CHRISTIAN. MY MAIN GOAL RIGHT NOW IS TO STOP COMMITTING THE SINS AMERICA ENCOURAGES ME TO COMMIT LIKE GAMBLING AND FORNICATION. I AM AT WAR WITH MY SELF. IM NOT TRYING TO FIGHT ANYBODY BECAUSE I HAVE TO GET MY SELF CLEAN. AND AS FAR AS JIHAD GOES IN THE PHYSICAL ASPECT...IF ANY DISBELIEVER OPRESSES OR ATTACKS ME MY FAMILY OR MY COMMUNITY WITH INJUSTICE AND HARM FOR NO REASON OR FOR WHAT I BELIEVE IN I WILL KILL THEM HANDS DOWN!! DONT START NONE WONT BE NONE.....IF U WANT THIS JIHAD WE WILL GIVE IT TO YOU. I DONT CONDONE THE KILLING OF INNOCENT PEOPLE! I CONDONE THE KILLING OF ANY BODY THAT IS TRYING TO KILL ME OR MY FAMILY!! SO IF U ARE ABOUT KILLING INNOCENT MUSLIMS FOR NO REASON IM ABOUT KILLING YOU!!! DIE DIE DIE!! YOU ALL NEED TO LEAVE US MUSLIMS ALONE BECAUSE YOU DONT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE GETTING YOURSELF INTO AND WHEN ALLAH BLESSES ME TO GET RIGHT I CAN MAKE IT EASY FOR YOU OR I CAN MAKE IT ROUGH FOR U ITS YOUR CHOICE!! ALLAH U AKBAR!!!

Sistani For Nobel Update: "I support Hezbollah: Aussie cleric," by Richard Kerbaj in The Australian (thanks to Looney Tunes):

THE nation's most senior Shia Muslim cleric has attacked John Howard for backing Israel against Arabs and openly declared his allegiance to the Iranian-backed terrorist group Hezbollah.

Kamal Mousselmani -- head of the Supreme Islamic Shia Council of Australia -- said yesterday his entire community considered Hezbollah a "resistance group", not a terrorist network, and lashed the Howard Government over its support for Israel.

"They (the Australian Government) are encouraging terrorism," the Lebanese-born cleric told The Weekend Australian in an interview conducted in Arabic. "Australia is encouraging Israel to kill our people daily. Write that down, we are not afraid of anyone."

Tiny Minority of Extremists Update:

Sheik Mousselmani said all of Australia's approximately 30,000 Shi'ites were avid supporters of Hezbollah (Party of God) and haters of Israel.

"Shia in Australia consider Israel a terrorist organisation and also view those who support Israel in the same light," he said. "That's what we believe.

"If Australia supports Israel, they are defending terrorism. Because we believe terrorists come from Israel -- not from our people -- I support Hezbollah."

[...]

The 36-year-old cleric dismissed claims his community received funds from Iran to spread the ideology of religious hardliners in Tehran.

He said the Shia community in Australia took its religious orders and advice from Iraq's supreme Islamic leader, Grand Ayatollah Ali Husaini al-Sistani. "The Shia community has nothing to hide."

"Our people can't distinguish between resistance and terrorism. We're fighting for the liberation of our land from an occupation." -- from this article

The word "occupation" has been accepted, foolishly, by too many in the West. It does not adequately describe Israel's taking possession, because of its victory in the Six-Day War thrust upon it by Nasser and a runaway Egyptian military, of Gaza and "the West Bank." (An aside: curious, isn't it, that the topoynms "Judea" and "Samaria," though they have been in use all over the Western world since Roman times, and certainly were used by Jesus and the first Christians, suddenly dropped out of use, and the vague placename invented by the Jordanians in 1949, "the West Bank," was accepted and "Judea" and "Samaria" mocked as "Biblical names used only by Israel's right-wing" -- yet at the same time "Gaza," a Biblical term for which the Egyptians did not find a replacement, continues to be unembarrassedly used by those in the West who, having no sense of history or logic, who would not be caught dead referring to "Judea" and "Samaria"?)

Israel is not an "occupier" in the sense in which the Germans were occupiers of Occupied France, or of Occupied Paris, or after the war, the Four Powers were in control of Occupied Vienna or Occupied Berlin. Israel has a much deeper, longer claim to those areas -- which in the case of Gaza it may not wish to exercise for practical reasons. It is a legal claim based on the intent and terms of the Mandate for Palestine, which in turn is based on a historic and moral claim that the intelligent men who created the League of Nations, and the other intelligent men who staffed the Mandates Commission of that body, found convincing.

A fledgling group of Sunni and Shiite religious leaders met for the first time in Baghdad last week to condemn sectarian violence in their country, a move US military officials framed as a first of its kind and a small step toward broader political reconciliation. -- from this article

Why are they even attempting this? Not only is it likely to be fail, but it is part of a policy that is likely to fail. That policy involves the attempt to make Iraq into a unified state, with a civic-minded and informed and intelligent citizenry, full of the hardworking and the prosperous. Iraq will therefore offer Sunni Arab states a model of how to be, and everyone will be happy. For the first time in 1350 years, Muslims will take no interest in much of what Islam teaches, though as never before in history, despite their clear military inferiority to Infidels, Muslims are now capable of conducting the Jihad to spread Islam until it dominates and Muslims rule, in large parts of the non-Islamic historic West, through other non-military means, through utilization of the Money Weapon, well-financed and carefully-targeted Campaigns of Da'wa, and demographic conquest.

Meanwhile, the great cost continues to mount. It begins with the $880 billion spent in Iraq. That is more than the total cost of all the wars, save World War II, that the United States has ever fought. But the cost also includes loss of life and of limb that might be acceptable even at far higher levels, in a war such as World War II, a war that made sense, but enrages because the war in Iraq, for the goals stated, not only does not enhance American security and that of its true allies, but worse, it actually requires the American soldiers to work to attain goals that, were they to be achieved (they won't be), would hinder rather than promote American security.

Fred Thompson has denounced CAIR. Good. Now Thompson has to inject into the public discourse the word "Jizyah" -- he, or Tancredo, or others. That word, and what it means, has to be introduced into the national consciousness. Merely using it in a speech, or in speech after speech, and explaining its meaning, will do much to rectify the complete failure of the Bush Administration -- from which all Republican candidates, to be successful, should be distancing themselves as noisily and publicly as possible -- to educate, to instruct, the public about Islam.

Instead, Administration officials continue nattering on about how splendid Islam itself is. Only a "handful," they say -- oh, they're a handful all right – of the "radical wing of the Islamist wing of the extremist wing" (fill up the page, printer, with more of the same) have "hijacked a great religion." That is why we are apparently, as long as Bush and Rice and others are in power, condemned to being instructed that we are fighting a "war on terror."

"Islam has rules and everything is based on Sharia law." Yes. And Sharia law has contents that are readily verifiable from Sharia manuals. Yet those who read those manuals and report on what they say are routinely derided as "Islamophobic" by those who prefer wishful thinking to reality.

"Muslims want back land, JI captive says," from Agence France-Presse, with thanks to all who sent this in:

STOLEN Muslim land drives the hatred of Indonesia-based extremist network Jemaah Islamiah for the west, the group's jailed military boss told CNN in an interview broadcast today.

Abu Dujana, one of South-East Asia's most wanted men, was arrested by Indonesian anti-terror police on June 9 as he rode a motorcycle with three of his four young children.

Police say he is linked to several major bombings that have rocked Indonesia in recent years, including the 2002 Bali blasts that killed 88 Australians....

In the interview with CNN at a police station in the central city of Yogyakarta, Dujana, shown handcuffed and smiling, said he thought "Americans or other civilians can become a target - that's how I see it".

Asked where the hatred of the west came from, he replied: "Many lands owned by Muslims have been taken away by our enemies. America is part of it, like in Palestine and other places.

"We demand those governments return those lands and let us put Sharia law in place."

Asked where it said in the Koran that it was acceptable to kill innocent people, he said: "I didn't read it in the Koran. It's based on the teachings of our teachers, clerics, especially what Osama bin Laden first said."...

This is misleading, as it implies that what his teachers and clerics have told him is contrary to the Qur'an. In fact, however, the point of controversy here is not over whether or not it is acceptable to kill innocent people. That is not in dispute, and the Qur'an forbids it (5:32). The controversy is actually over whether or not American, British, Israeli and other citizens of non-Muslim states are innocent at all. And on that moderate Muslim spokesmen have never spoken unequivocally.

Asked by the British interviewer whether he personally was a legitimate target, Dujana giggled.

"This is how it is. Islam has rules and everything is based on Sharia law," he said through a translator.

"If you ask me if you are a legitimate target, if there is clear evidence your country has attacked Islam, then we are permitted to kill you."

Here's a golden opportunity for Ibrahim Hooper, Salam al-Marayati, and all other American Muslim spokesmen to issue a stern rebuke to al-Zawahri, condemning both Hamas and Al-Qaeda as terrorist groups and declaring that civilians in Israel are indeed innocent, as jihadists have denied, and thus must not be targeted. Ibrahim? Salam? Anyone? Anyone?

"Al-Qaida leader urges support for Hamas," by Maggie Michael for Associated Press (thanks to Sr. Soph):

CAIRO, Egypt - Al-Qaida's deputy leader called on Muslims worldwide to back Hamas with weapons, money and attacks on U.S. and Israeli interests, urging the Palestinian militant group on Monday to unite with al-Qaida after its takeover of Gaza.

The Internet audio message from Ayman al-Zawahri, who is Osama bin Laden's top deputy, marked a major shift by al-Qaida, which in the past criticized Hamas for joining a government with the U.S.-supported Fatah faction.

The audiotape appeared aimed at exploiting Hamas' gains and could fuel fears among Arab countries that Hamas-run Gaza will become a breeding ground for armed extremists.

But Hamas appeared unconfortable Monday with al-Zawahri's approach. The Palestinian group has been cool in the past to attempts to link it with al-Qaida, saying its conflict is with Israel and that it has no plans to attack targets abroad. Also, Hamas does not want to alienate powerful Arab countries, such as Egypt.

Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri, a hardliner, distanced his group from the al-Qaida deputy's comments, but stopped short of criticizing them.

"Hamas has its own program, regardless of the comments of this group or that group," he said Monday. "In Hamas, we want to have good relations with all Arab and Muslim powers, regardless of how close or far away we are in our own programs."

Ali Gomaa, the statue-hatin', wife-beatin', Hizballah-supportin' Mufti of Egypt, now says that female genital mutilation is wrong, apparently reversing the Shafi'i school's traditional judgment that it is obligatory (cf. 'Umdat al-Salik e4.3). It will be interesting to see what actions, if any, he takes in order to back up this ruling.

"Mufti bans female circumcision," from Reuters (thanks to JE):

Egypt's state-appointed Grand Mufti said today female genital cutting is forbidden by Islam.

His pronouncement came after an 11-year-old girl died while undergoing the procedure at a private medical clinic in southern Egypt.

Genital cutting of girls, often referred to as female genital mutilation or circumcision, is banned in Egypt although the practice remains widespread as a rite of passage for girls and is often viewed as a way to protect their chastity.

"The harmful tradition of circumcision that is practised in Egypt in our era is forbidden," Mufti Ali Gomaa was quoted as saying by the Egyptian state news agency MENA.

There are a couple of weasel words in there. Does he mean that if it is practiced in a different way from how it is practiced in Egypt in our era, it would be all right?

The statement was the strongest yet against the practice by the Mufti, who is the government's official arbiter of Islamic law. The Grand Sheikh of Cairo's prestigious al-Azhar mosque, Mohamed Sayed Tantawi, had previously described the practice as un-Islamic, although some other clerics have supported it.

Both Tantawi and Coptic Pope Shenouda, the leader of Egypt's minority Christian community, have said that neither the Koran nor the Bible demand or mention female circumcision, which is usually performed on pre-pubescent girls....

The practice is performed on both Muslim and Christian girls in Egypt and Sudan, but is extremely rare in most of the rest of the Arab world. It is also common in Eritrea, Ethiopia and Somalia.

A 2005 UNICEF report on the practice showed that 97 per cent of Egyptian women between the ages of 15 and 49 had been circumcised.

Egypt's campaign to end female cutting has included television programs aimed at persuading parents to abandon the ancient practice.

Yet another harrowing story from the Brave New UK. By Ferzanna Riley for the Daily Mail (thanks to all who sent this in):

I remember clearly the first time I feared for my life. My father was visiting my mother and their new baby in hospital, leaving my ten-year-old sister and me at home taking care of the younger children.

The other two babies, aged one and two, were asleep and the original Godzilla film was on television. We were so absorbed that we didn't hear my father come in.

Hearing my baby sister Farah grizzling in the cot, he strode over to discover her nappy had leaked and her clothes and bedding were a mess. The room shrank as my father loomed, more terrifying than Godzilla, very real and very angry.

Predictably, the verbal and physical abuse was directed solely at me, but although I was used to his assaults, on this night the violence took a terrifying new turn. To my horror, he grabbed a big knife from the kitchen. Roaring that he was going to butcher me like an animal, he pulled my head back by my hair, exposing my neck, and held the knife across my throat.

I was barely conscious, but aware these were the final moments of my life. My sister fell weeping to her knees, begging my father not to kill me. He released me and left us both cleaning up the mess, sobbing in fright. My father had almost murdered me. I was six years old.

I grew up being called a bitch, a bastard and an idiot. I answered to a variety of names that roughly translated into the same thing. Sali, harami, haramzadi, kameeni were the insults in Urdu that I was most familiar with. Bhahenchode (sisterf***er) and maaderchode (motherf***er) were ones I heard frequently, but only understood years later.

Read it all.

They've done a lot of research on it, but what it is they're still not sure. (Thanks, Bob.)

There I go again, making light of a serious, serious problem. Sherene Hassan, an executive committee member of the Islamic Council of Victoria, is enraged -- enraged -- that people like Ayaan Hirsi Ali who speak about female genital mutilation and honor killing as if they're Muslim problems, when people other than Muslims practice them.

I know how she feels. The other day a friend of mine was going 90 in a 60 zone, and cars were still zooming past him. When the highway patrolman stopped him for speeding, he pointed out to him that there were plenty of cars going faster -- and that meant he wasn't speeding, right? Right?

"Islamophobia is a disease," by Sherene Hassan in the Herald Sun, with thanks to Doc Washburn:

...Things were looking up for Muslims. I noticed with some relief that we had managed to avoid the headlines for four consecutive weeks.

This dramatically changed in the aftermath of Ayaan Hirsi Ali's scathing attack on Islam's treatment of women two weeks ago.

Now more than ever, Islam has become inextricably linked with misogyny.

Ali's chilling account of the mutilation she was forced to endure as a child rang alarm bells across the nation, and rightly so.

This deplorable act warrants nothing less than unequivocal condemnation.

But the Islamophobic onslaught by talkback callers after her visit was disturbing.

You may have missed Ali noting that female genital mutilation predated Islam because this was almost never emphasised. This, however, does not make it any less true.

Evidence from mummies suggests that female circumcision originated in the Nile valley 4000 years ago.

To this day, it is practised in parts of Africa by some Muslims and Christians and animist tribes.

So what? If Christians and animists practice female genital mutilation in Africa, that should be energetically opposed in all possible ways. However, making sure to point out that some Christians and animists also practice this barbarity does nothing to mitigate the destructive force of the approval given to it by some high Islamic authorities. While many say that there is nothing in Islam which requires female genital mutilation, one of Sunni Islam’s “Four Great Imams,” Ahmad ibn Hanbal (from whom the Hanbali school of Islamic jurisprudence takes its name) quotes Muhammed as saying “Circumcision is a law for men and a preservation of honour for women.”

The Shafi'i school of Islamic jurisprudence considers female genital mutilation obligatory. The Hanbalis consider it not obligatory but sunnah -- accepted practice. The Hanafis consider it "a mere courtesy to the husband" ('Umdat al-Salik e4.3).

This gives female genital mutilation an official sanction that it does not enjoy in other contexts, making it much more difficult to eradicate. But Sherene Hassan, instead of acknowledging all this and trying to deal with it, just points the finger at others.

Nevertheless, Ali's broader message especially as popularly understood, remains clear.

Islam is responsible for perpetuating this vicious practice as evidenced by the Somali imams in her village.

They insisted on it, she said, to "keep girls pure". Ali is far less forthcoming about the Christian and animist tribes who do the same.

But it seems we are only comfortable thinking of female genital mutilation as an "Islamic practice."

The same might be said of so-called honour killings, which as fate would have it, also found their way into the headlines last week.

The Daily Telegraph in Britain revealed that 20-year-old Kurd Banaz Mahmod was murdered and buried in a back garden because her parents disapproved of her relationship with an Iranian man.

The report drew a link between honour killings and Islam. It said some Muslim communities in Britain practised sharia law and there was an increase in observance of sharia law partly because of "the rise of Islamic fundamentalism".

But, here again, we are talking about a pre-Islamic multi-faith phenomenon.

Honour killings have their roots in ancient Hammurabi and Assyrian law.

In the UK, officials state that Italian and Greek migrant families have committed similar atrocities.

Is that so? I suppose it's possible, but in any case, here again: Italian and Greek migrant families are almost certainly Christian, and thus are transgressing the Christian prohibition of murder when they commit honor killings. By way of contrast, you may recall that the Jordanian Parliament declined on Islamic grounds to stiffen penalties for honor killings. Unless and until Sherene Hassan confronts this, no amount of "Islamophobia"-crying will do anything to end female genital mutilation and honor killing among Muslims.

And so it begins: the application of the "right of return" rhetoric that has worked so well in Israel to Spain, another land that belongs by right to the Dar al-Islam, and now must be reclaimed from the infidels. This demand will probably be granted, with no Spanish politician savvy or courageous enough to demand reciprocal favorable terms for the descendents of dhimmis who were exiled from the crumbling Ottoman Empire when their people were judged to be kafir harbi -- infidels at war with Islam -- and were given the choice of conversion or exile, or in many cases conversion or death. No one will demand reciprocal terms for the descendents of dhimmis who have streamed out of the Middle East to escape the institutionalized discrimination and harassment they lived under there for centuries.

All I want is a villa in Tsesmes, bought and paid for by the Turkish government, along with 24-hour guards to safeguard me from angry jihadists there. As soon as the Turks come across, I will support this call in Spain.

"Citizenship call from Spain's uneasy Muslim past," by Jason Webb for Reuters, with thanks to all who sent this in:

MADRID, June 21 (Reuters) - A call for descendents of Muslims expelled from Spain in the seventeenth century to be given preferential terms for Spanish citizenship has highlighted the country's uneasy relationship with its Islamic heritage.

The proposal was made at a meeting this week in Cordoba, a city in Andalusia which was the centre of Islamic civilization in the Iberian peninsula during nearly eight centuries of Moorish rule of much of what is now Spain and Portugal.

In 1609, Spain's King Philip III ordered all Muslims to leave his kingdom, leading to the expulsion of about 300,000 people. Their descendents today mainly live in North Africa and still regard themselves as "Andalusians", after the old name for Muslim Spain -- "Al Andalus"

Giving them preferential terms for Spanish citizenship would be an act of symbolic reconciliation, said Mansur Escudero, head of Spain's Islamic Board, the biggest group representing Spanish Muslims.

"The Andalusians who live in North Africa, most of them in Morocco, in Tunisia, in Libya, they're part of those societies and aren't going to want to come to Spain," Escudero said.

"It would be more of an emotional, moral gesture, a recognition of an historic injustice," he told Reuters, adding that some "Andalusian" families still preserved keys to houses they left behind four centuries ago.

Sephardic Jews, whose ancestors were expelled from Spain in 1492, already have a special right to obtain Spanish citizenship after two years legal residence in Spain, a privilege also available to citizens of Spain's former colonies.

And the Left chimes in to help out their allies:

A small left-wing party, Izquierda Unida, has backed the call for preferential citizenship for descendents of Spanish Muslims. The governing Socialists, who have promoted an "Alliance of Civilizations" between the West and Islam, have yet to give their response, Escudero said....

The victim, whom the muttawa targeted for being seen with an unrelated woman, "went into custody a healthy man. He got out in a funeral procession."

By Donna Abu-Nasr for the Associated Press:

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia - A judge on Saturday postponed the trial of three members of Saudi Arabia's religious police for their alleged involvement in the death of a man arrested after being seen with a woman who was not his relative.

The judge did not set a new date for the trial, the first of its kind in this conservative nation, but assured the man's family the postponement was just procedural, according to a family representative.

Ahmed al-Bulaiwi, a retired border patrol guard in his early 50s, died in custody shortly after his June 1 arrest by religious police in the northern city of Tabuk.

"He went into custody a healthy man. He got out in a funeral procession," his cousin, Audah al-Bulaiwi, who is representing the family in court, told The Associated Press by phone from Tabuk.

The police became suspicious after they observed the woman getting into his car near an amusement park, according to accounts published by the local media. Under the kingdom's rules, a woman cannot drive, and can only go out in public with her father, brother, son or husband.

An investigation showed that al-Bulaiwi, who supplemented his pension by working as a driver, was asked by the family of the woman, who was in her 50s, to drive her home, according to press reports.

Al-Bulaiwi's cousin said the trial was postponed because the documents he presented to the judge were incomplete. While Saudis are allowed to appoint lawyers, many choose to send a family representative instead.

A statement by the governorate of Tabuk this week did not say how long the trial would last, what the charges against the men were or what punishment they could face if found guilty.

Still, the case was seen as a major setback for the Commission for the Propagation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice, a feared government body that employs the religious police. It has long been resented for intimidating people and meddling into the most minute aspects of their lives.

The religious police, informally known as the muttawa, patrol public places, including malls, to ensure that women are covered in the mandatory black abaya, or cloak, that the sexes do not mix in public, that shops close five times a day for prayers and that the men go to the mosque and worship.

The muttawa don't wear uniforms, but are recognizable by their long beards and their robes, shorter than the ones normally worn by Saudi men.

The Tabuk governorate said al-Bulaiwi died as a result of a severe drop in blood pressure and failure of the respiratory system.

Those tend to accompany death. Bet his heart stopped, too.

"Militant calls for attacks on targets in Egypt," from Reuters:

DUBAI - A man described as a leader of Al Qaeda’s wing in Egypt called for attacks on Israeli and Western targets in the Arab world’s most populous country in support of the Palestinian Islamist group Hamas.

‘O heroes, strike ... all the Zionist-Crusader targets in the land of Egypt without shedding the blood of Muslims,’ Mohamed Hakaima, a former leader of Egypt’s Gama’a Islamiya militant group, said in a statement posted on the Internet.

Egyptian experts on Islamist groups say they doubt Al Qaeda has an organised presence in Egypt or that Hakaima, who is believed to be in Afghanistan, has followers in the country.

Kamal Habib, a former Gama’a leader, told Reuters on Sunday: ‘I don’t believe that Al Qaeda has a presence in Egypt. I don’t think that Hakaima has any supporters in Egypt.’

Are you sure about that?

‘Al Qaeda does not have a presence in the organisational sense. There may be some people who believe in the ideas of Al Qaeda,’ added Habib, who is now an expert on Islamist groups.

He's an "expert." Apparently that's all Reuters needed to accept his opinion at face value, at least while the "Super Genius" of the desert Southwest was busy chasing roadrunners.

The deputy leader of Al Qaeda, Egyptian Islamist Ayman Al Zawahri, named Hakaima last year as one of a group of Gama’a members who had joined force with Al Qaeda.

But Egyptian experts said that Hakaima was not a major player and they cast doubt on Zawahri’s claim that the numbers who had joined amounted to a ‘big faction’.

Jay already posted about this article here, but I thought it merited highlighting as yet more evidence of the utter insanity of the course that Bush, Rice, and Olmert are following.

By Ali Waked for Ynet News:

"Dozens of officers in the (Fatah-affiliated) security forces are suspected of cooperating with Hamas during the Islamist group’s takeover of the Gaza Strip,” a senior Palestinian security official said Sunday.

According to the official, some senior officers have been suspected of cooperating with Hamas even prior to the decisive round of clashes with Fatah. He said the officers received money from Hamas in exchange for transferring information on the deployment of Palestinian Authority forces in the Strip.

The official added that suspicions grew when the positions of forces loyal to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas fell to Hamas gunmen one after the other without much resistance.

“These suspicions were in the air, but during the fighting the extent of Hamas’ infiltration into the Palestinian security forces became abundantly clear,” the official said.

Still more evidence of Britain's wholesale cultural abdication. "British High Court Wrestles With Symbol of Premarital Purity," by Alan Cowell in the New York Times, with thanks to Michelle Malkin:

LONDON, June 22 — At a time of passionate debate over religious clothing and emblems, a 16-year-old member of an evangelical Christian movement protested in court on Friday because her school has refused to allow her to wear a so-called purity ring, symbolizing her commitment to premarital chastity.

The case offered a counterpoint to a broader discussion concerning Muslim women who wear the full-face veil known as the niqab. But it also revealed stirrings of resentment among some members of Britain’s Christian majority, who say they are the victims of discrimination over how they display their faith.

The young woman, Lydia Playfoot, said her school, at Horsham, south of London, had told her that the ring broke the school’s rules on uniforms and jewelry.

But Ms. Playfoot argued that the prohibition breached her right to express a religious belief. Not only that, she said in a statement to the court, Sikh and Muslim pupils were permitted distinctive dress to show their religious identity.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is on his way to the "Sharm Summit," where he will officially cave in to the international demand to strengthen the Fatah terrorist organization. Caving in to demand actually might not be the appropriate phrase, as Olmert is willing to capitulate all on his own. Israel will agree to send more money, guns and armored vehicles to a group that has not for one second ceased its terror activities. Israel will also start dismantling the same checkpoints which have saved so many lives.

Fatah is expected to demand even more. "Abbas to demand release of Barghouti," by Khaled Abu Toameh for the Jerusalem Post:

Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas is expected to demand the release of hundreds of Fatah prisoners from Israeli jails during Monday's summit in Sharm e-Sheikh, PA officials said.

The officials also said Abbas would call for supplying the Fatah-controlled security forces with more weapons to thwart attempts by Hamas to try to take over the West Bank.

"We want thousands of rifles, hundreds of armored vehicles and a lot of ammunition," one PA official told The Jerusalem Post. "We also want Jordan and Egypt to help train our forces in the West Bank."

Another official said that Abbas and his aides would ask Israel torelease senior Fatah operative Marwan Barghouti and hundreds of Fatah prisoners to enhance Fatah's status. "We will also ask Israel to remove most of the checkpoints in the West Bank and to increase the number of Palestinians who are permitted to work in Israel," he said. "These measures are needed to boost Fatah's standing in the West Bank and to prevent Hamas from establishing bases of support there."

He said Abbas would also ask Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to instruct the IDF to stop pursuing Fatah gunmen and to refrain from raiding Palestinian cities and villages in the West Bank.

Nice stuff. Doesn't anyone in the Bush or Olmert Administration see the insanity in the whole process? How long can Israel continue to support and arm a terrorist group that is bent on the destruction of its benefactor?

The newest Israeli aid package is being marketed as an anti-Hamas campaign. Taking into account this piece, which specifically states that Fatah officers aided Hamas in the Gaza coup, it is just surreal. "‘Fatah officers cooperated with Hamas in Gaza,’" by Ali Waked for Ynet:

"Dozens of officers in the (Fatah-affiliated) security forces are suspected of cooperating with Hamas during the Islamist group’s takeover of the Gaza Strip,” a senior Palestinian security official said Sunday.

According to the official, some senior officers have been suspected of cooperating with Hamas even prior to the decisive round of clashes with Fatah. He said the officers received money from Hamas in exchange for transferring information on the deployment of Palestinian Authority forces in the Strip.

Taking Fatah under your wing is bad enough; aiding Fatah against Hamas while Fatah actually aids Hamas is downright insanity. Is there any nation in the world that arms its enemy in the time of battle? Did the US send money and arms to Germany and Japan during World War II? Did the US send nukes to the Soviet Union during the Cold War?

The Israeli Government is not the only guilty party here. The Bush Administration is just as guilty. Every last bullet and dollar that finds its way to the Fatah coffers has upon it the US seal of approval -- and I'm not even talking about the millions of dollars and tons of weapons that the US transferred directly. The same weapons that are currently in Hamas hands.

The insanity must stop. Israel is well on the road to financing its own destruction. However, it's not too late. The first step in restoring order is the removal of the Olmert Government. The lives of millions have been entrusted to his dhimmi hands. Not only is he not protecting them, he is putting every Israeli civilian in harm's way, at Israeli taxpayer expense. I am financing the next terror attack. I am supporting the next Qassam launch.

I will also pay for the next funeral.

Crossposted from The American Israeli Patriot.

The next segment of Sura 2, verses 75-105, continues the Qur’an’s criticism of the Jews. When you read statements by Hamas leaders or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad about Israel, remember that they view Israel and Jews through a Qur’anic prism. They have learned, if they have studied the Qur’an at all, that the Jews are the most perverse and guilty – as well as the craftiest and most persistent – enemies of Allah, Muhammad and the Muslims.

In verse 75 Allah asks the Muslims how they can hope that the Jews will come to believe in Islam, since “a party of them used to listen to the word of Allah, then used to change it, after they had understood it, knowingly?” In his Tafsir Anwar al-Bayan, the twentieth-century Indian Mufti Muhammad Aashiq Ilahi Bulandshahri notes that some commentators “have mentioned that the verse refers to the adulteration of the Torah. The Jewish scholars used to accept bribes from people to alter certain injunctions to suit their desires.” Expanding on this in connection with verse 79, Bulandshahri says that the Jews “commit a dual sin by altering Allah’s scripture and by accepting bribery as well.” This is a traditional view: the Tafsir al-Jalalayn says that the Jews “altered the description of the Prophet in the Torah, as well as the ‘stoning’ verse, and other details, and rewrote them in a way different from that in which they were revealed.”

As Fatah claims credit for Kassam attacks on Sderot, Olmert is mulling over giving them more weapons.

And in breaking news, the Chamberlain government in London has announced the transfer of armored vehicles and bulletproof vests to Hitler's Germany.

"Olmert considering transfer of military equipment to Fatah," by Ronny Sofer for Ynet News (thanks to James):

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is not ruling out the possibility of transferring military equipment, including armored vehicles and bulletproof vests to the Palestinians, he said during a security consultation on Sunday.

"Decisions on this matter will be made according to the recommendations of Major General Keith Dayton, who has been entrusted to build the Palestinian forces. Any recommendation by Dayton will be considered by the defense establishment. Only then will we decide," Olmert said.

Olmert's position on the matter opposes the position of many of the cabinet's minister. Among the opposing minister are newly appointed Defense Minister Ehud Barak, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, two Yisrael Beitenu ministers and Shas ministers.

National Infrastructure Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer said during the discussion, "Lessons should be learned from previous weapon transfers. All the weapons we have transferred to Fatah eventually made their way to Hamas and were turned against us."

Our moderate friends in the Palestinian Authority, Fatah, are among the jihadists claiming responsibility for a rocket attack. Send them more money, Mr. President! They want peace!

"Fatah faction, Islamic Jihad claim Kassam attack," from the Jerusalem Post (thanks to Looney Tunes):

A Fatah faction and the Islamic Jihad both claimed responsibility for Sunday morning's Kassam rocket attack on Sderot, which damaged a home and left three people lightly wounded.

"The principal goal, she said, was to produce 'true Muslim girls.'" Here again we see the jihadists proclaiming themselves to be "true" Muslims. This is a theological claim that they back up, as we have seen again and again, with copious citations from Qur'an and Sunnah. In response, self-proclaimed moderate Islamic spokesmen only issue vague condemnations of "terrorism" or of attacks on "innocent civilians," without ever explaining who an "innocent civilian" actually is -- an all-important question if they hope to blunt the force of the jihadist assertion that Americans, Israelis, etc., are not innocent civilians. And they do not respond to the jihadist use of Qur'an and Sunnah with their own theological arguments.

That is why the jihadists continue to portray themselves as "true Muslims." Those who think true Islam is other than how they characterize it continue to mount no effective response.

By Jane Perlez in the IHT (thanks to Kemaste):

ISLAMABAD: Dressed head-to-toe in an all-enveloping black burka, Ume Okasha joined a pack of students from her militant Islamic school and at midnight drove to a local massage parlor here in the Pakistani capital and rang the bell.

"There were about 25 Chinese women, dressed only in underpants and bras," recalled Okasha, 24, a muscular high school badminton champion. "They scattered but we managed to grab five."

The vigilantes shoved the skimpily clad Chinese masseuses - six, according to most accounts - into a car Saturday night, gave them shawls for modesty and hauled them back to the school as hostages, she said.

Under pressure from the Pakistani government concerned about the future of their friendly relations with China, the school released the women less than 24 hours later.

This was just the latest and most brazen escapade in a campaign by Jamia Hafsa, a sprawling Islamic boarding school, to embarrass the government of General Pervez Musharraf, who is considered a key ally by Washington in its war against terror.

The clerics who run the madrasa admire the Taliban and say they are friendly with Al Qaeda. They regularly denounce the Musharraf government as secular, corrupt and a lackey of the United States.

Such pronouncements are not unusual from Islamists in Pakistan, but the school, a complex of shabbily white-painted buildings almost cheek by jowl with the Parliament building, is right under the nose of the military-led government.

In efforts to taunt the authorities, the school leaders have organized a sit-in by the burka-clad female students at a children's library. Government security officers called in to disperse the sit-in were thwarted....

At the wing for female students next door, the principal, Hassan, 38, a large woman of soft voice but firm views, said she presided over about 4,500 students aged from 7 to their early 20s. The principal goal, she said, was to produce "true Muslim girls."...

Read it all.

"The clashes mark a shift in fighting away from the nearby Nahr al-Bared Palestinian refugee camp."

"Lebanon Islamist clashes spread," from the BBC:

At least 10 people have been killed in fighting between Lebanese troops and suspected Islamic militants in the northern city of Tripoli.

Two civilians, one soldier, a policeman and at least six Islamist gunmen are said to have been killed in the fight.

It came after the army raided an apartment of a suspected militant in the Abu Samra district on Saturday.

The clashes mark a shift in fighting away from the nearby Nahr al-Bared Palestinian refugee camp.

The latest violence began when gunmen fired at soldiers who were trying to raid their apartment, the Reuters news agency reported.

The army responded with an attack, blocking off the area and bringing in reinforcements. At least twelve people were wounded in the stand-off.

"There have been warnings that the peacekeepers could come under terror attacks, particularly from al-Qaida and its sympathizers. Media reports earlier this month said interrogations by Lebanese authorities with captured militants revealed plots to attack the force."

"Lebanon bomb kills 4 U.N. peacekeepers," by Sam F. Ghattas for the Associated Press:

BEIRUT, Lebanon - A bomb apparently targeting U.N. peacekeepers exploded by the side of a road in southern Lebanon on Sunday, killing four Spanish troops and injuring at least four, a senior Lebanese security official said.

The senior official in Beirut said a mine may have caused the explosion, but another security official based in southern Lebanon said a bomb detonated at the side of a road about four miles north of the Israeli border town of Metulla. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media.

The U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon, known as UNIFIL, confirmed the explosion and said there were casualties but gave no details.

In Madrid, the Spanish Defense Ministry confirmed at least two Spanish peacekeepers were killed and five injured.

Sunday's deadly explosion was the first time that UNIFIL has come under attack since it was reinforced last summer after the war between Hezbollah guerrillas and Israeli forces in Lebanon. The 13,000-member U.N. force from 30 countries along with 15,000 Lebanese troops patrols a zone along Lebanese-Israeli border.

In a statement on its television station Al-Manar, Hezbollah denounced the attack, calling it a "suspicious act." The militant [group] has had good relations with UNIFIL since the troops were first deployed in Lebanon in 1978.

There have been warnings that the peacekeepers could come under terror attacks, particularly from al-Qaida and its sympathizers. Media reports earlier this month said interrogations by Lebanese authorities with captured militants revealed plots to attack the force.

Internet Jihad Update: Jihad leader Omar Bakri hasn't really left Britain at all. He just speaks to his followers via a webcast. "Internet spreads terror to Britain," by Andrew Alderson and Miles Goslett in the Sunday Telegraph (thanks to WriterMom):

It is 11pm on Tuesday and Omar Bakri Mohammed's loyal band of followers hunch over computers and laptops at secret locations across Britain to listen to his defiant message to the west.

Many are hoping that the Muslim cleric, who lives in the Lebanese capital Beirut after being banned from the UK, will spell out his views on the Government's decision to give Salman Rushdie a knighthood. Bakri does not disappoint them.

After listening to Bakri's lecture for more than two hours on a secretive internet chat room, one participant asks in a written question: "Is there a new fatwa against salman and the queen for giving [the knighthood]?"

Speaking with a heavy middle eastern accent, Bakri responds: "Salman Rushdie, no doubt what he did was an apostasy… not because he get knighthood but because he insulted the honour of the prophet Mohammed (with his book The Satanic Verses)… He is murtadd (a traitor for rejecting Islam) anyway so there isn't any need for a new fatwa… People like him deserve to get the capital punishment."

Bakri and his followers had their discussion on a webcast. The webcasts can run several times a week, and up to 70 people a night log in, each with an individual password.

The Sunday Telegraph monitored a range of extremist websites and chatrooms last week as part of an investigation into the spread of Islamist militancy on the internet. MI5, the security service, and Scotland Yard are increasingly concerned that the internet is being used by terrorists to incite attacks in Britain and to recruit volunteers.

We discovered extremists posting messages and images on a recently established, password-protected pro-Islamist site. It is on sites like this that Bakri's broadcasts are referred to openly, with advice on what time they begin and even requests not to "arrive" in the chatroom late. There are also dozens of photographs celebrating, among others, Osama bin Laden, and a tasteless message expressing "amusement" at photographs of American soldiers killed by terrorists.

Vigil, a privately funded intelligence group, believes much of the extremist material comes from al-Qaeda sympathisers in Britain.

[...]

The EU announced a month ago that it wanted to strengthen its monitoring of militant Islamist websites. "Terrorists use the internet not only as a means to communicate and spread propaganda, but also to radicalise, recruit and train terrorists, to spread instructions on how to carry out concrete offences and to transfer covert information," a meeting of ambassadors concluded.

Patrick Mercer, the former Conservative spokesman for homeland security, said of the growing use of the internet by militants: "This is a much greater threat than people realise. Radicalisation is taking place on a number of different fronts and more people are sympathetic than we dare believe. The only way to penetrate this is by the careful development of intelligence sources and a clear understanding of the radicalisation process."

Friend and Ally Update from IRNA (thanks to Twostellas):

Saudi Minister of Health Hamad bin Abdullah al-Manea said here Sunday Iranian progress in various fields of science, education and research is a matter of honor for the Islamic world.

Al-Manea made the remark in a meeting with Iran's Ambassador to Saudi Arabia Mohammad Hosseini.

Iranians have always played a leading role in global civilization, he said.

He added Saudi Arabia approves Iran's peaceful nuclear activities, adding it is surprising that the Zionist regime has stockpiles of nuclear warheads, without any protest from the international circles.

The minister called for broad cooperation with Iran on medicine, exchange of medical experts and use of capability on hydrotherapy.

Hosseini, for his part, said senior officials of the two countries have a strong resolve to expand bilateral relations, adding, "Tehran and Riyadh enjoy enormous potentials for bolstering bilateral relations."...

"The Islamic Republic of Iran is ready to transfer its valuable experience in various medical fields to Saudi Arabia," the envoy stated.