"[According to the website], urban cells should seek economic targets, such as Jewish investments in Muslim countries, international companies, international economic experts, exports from 'Crusader countries' and raw materials being 'stolen from Muslim countries by the enemies'."
Surprising? No. But the communique provides a useful display of tactics, ideology, and imaginary grievances like the "theft" of oil. "Jihadist cells urged to kill Canadians," by Ian MacLeod for CanWest News Service, July 28:
OTTAWA - A virulent al-Qaida website has issued a new call for followers to kill Canadians and other westerners and attack oil and economic targets.
The message on the password-protected al-Ekhlaas.net forum was posted July 7, the third anniversary of the London transit massacre. The website is a notorious and favoured site of hardcore jihadists.
Experts are debating the significance of the latest al-Ekhlaas threat calling for the targeting of Christians, especially those from Canada the United States, Britain, Spain, Australia and Italy.
Most unsettling, perhaps, is the instructional nature of the posting. Details of the Arabic-language posting, entitled "Clandestine work inside the city," were recently translated and reported by the Jamestown Foundation, a conservative Washington think-tank.
Under the nom de guerre Abu Hajar Abdul Aziz al-Moqrin (the former leader of al-Qaida's Saudi wing killed in 2004), the posting explains how a four-unit jihadist cell should be properly trained in urban terror warfare before activation.
An urban cell needs a commanding unit, an intelligence unit, a logistics unit and an execution unit, it explains. The units are to communicate indirectly through using the dead letter box technique (or "save draft" drop box on a shared e-mail account.)
Further, the intelligence cell that collects information on a target must not know the purpose of the information. The cell that secures weapons and equipment must not know the target or the time of execution.
Al-Moqrin warns jihadists not to attack religious figures because it harms the cause. Instead, urban cells should seek economic targets, such as Jewish investments in Muslim countries, international companies, international economic experts, exports from "Crusader countries" and raw materials being "stolen from Muslim countries by the enemies," with al-Moqrin calling for attacks on oil wells, pipelines and oil tankers.
Human targets, according to the Jamestown synopsis, should be prioritized as follows:
1. Jews: Jews from Israel and the United States have priority over Jews from Britain and France.
2. Christians, especially those from Canada, the United States, Britain, Spain, Australia and Italy.
3. Apostates, particularly Muslim leaders who keep close ties with Jewish and "Christian governments," such as Egyptian President Husni Mubarak and the leaders of the Gulf States.
4. Secular individuals, including "spies and security officials" who "protect Jews and Christians."
Terrorism experts are divided on the message's import.
"The reference to Canada is fairly peripheral and embedded in a broad anti-'kufar' (non-believer) strategy targeting Jews, Christians, apostate Muslim leaders, and 'secular officials'," says Wesley Wark, a security expert and visiting research professor at the University of Ottawa's Graduate School of Public and International Affairs.
"The main interest in the story would seem to me the effort taken on some jihadi websites to try to encourage professionalism and clandestinity in terrorist operations.
"This is surely a response to the knowledge that home-grown and loosely affiliated terror networks will normally be lacking in operational knowledge and experience, especially around surveillance and security. The website is another reminder that the Internet is a powerful tool for jihad and al-Qaida and recognized by them as such." [...]
The latest message, Rudner said Monday, should be viewed with real concern, but not alarm, for three reasons:
- al-Ekhlaas is a legitimate militant Islamist website;
- the call to target oil and energy infrastructure and individuals is specific;
- and, the message may be a formal warning required by Sharia law before jihadists can attack.
Must as I hate contradicting the expert, I'm alarmed!
Must = much. Still on my first cup of coffee.
Maybe they'll try something "spectacular" during the Commie Olympics.
I see that Jews head the list of targets - that doesn't surprise me, not after I've just read the first part of Bostom's "The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism", nor after reading here on jihadwatch the story about the Muslim man who - declaring 'I'm a Muslim and I hate Jews' - assaulted a Canadian Jewish teenage girl.
Question: why do Canada, the United States, Britain, Spain, Australia and Italy head the list of 'Christian' targets?
Can anyone think what those six countries might have in common - viewed not through our eyes, but through the lens of Jihad?
Mr Ibrahim: do you have an opinion?
The United States and Great Britain have troops in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Spain, Australia, and Italy also had much smallar amounts of troops in Iraq (the Spanish troops were pulled out after Aznar lost and Zapatero won, the Italians are now almost gone, and think the Australians are gone), but are involved in Afghanistan.
The list could have been different. Another Muslim, writing from within Europe, might have added Denmark or The Netherlands, but had all the others as well. Another Muslim, in the Maghreb, might have put France at the top of his list, but had all the others as well. Still another, writing from Moscow or the Caucasus, might have added Russia, and put it at the top of the list. A Turk, smarting in Cologne or Berlin from some act by the authorities, might have put Germany at the top of his list.
No Infidel nation-state ultimately escapes whipping, or being the target of Islam. And there are a thousand reasons: troops sent to this place, or to that; economic aid, sent to this regime, or to that; the exercise of free speech by the citiznes of this place, or of that; the refusal to allow unlimited building of mosques and campaigns of Da'wa, in this place, or in that; the rounding-up of suspected terrorists, or those suspected of supporting terrorists, in this place or in that; the failure to show Islam sufficient respect -- the respect due to it, which is of course the respect that Muslims themselves give to it, and in the end would require the removal of most of the legal framework, and political institutions, and social arrangements, of every Infidel society, for that framework, those institutions, those arrangements, flatly contradict, in letter and spirit, the letter and spirit of the Shari'a.
There is no end to the reasons that might be adduced.
And in the end, no reason at all need be given, for in the end, they are Believers, and we are Infidels, unwilling to yield, unwilling to succumb.
And since Islam inculcates in its adherents, those "slaves of Allah," the notion that between Believers and Infidels a permanent state of war (though not always of open warfare) must exist between the two, that is enough to explain Muslim hostility (sometimes coated with a thin veneer of hard-to-maintain outward affability, or even, at times, a false hint of sweet reasnableness), and the behavior that naturally, and often murderously, flows from it.
domain names have to be renewed once a year it might be worthwhile to keep track of when it and its variants come up for renewal and grab them her is the whois for it
Registry Whois
Domain Search:
Domain Name: al-ekhlaas.net
Status: clientDeleteProhibited, clientRenewProhibited, clientTransferProhibited, clientUpdateProhibited
Registrar: COMPUTER SERVICES LANGENBACH GMBH DBA JOKER.COM
Whois Server: whois.joker.com
Referral URL: http://www.joker.com
Expiration Date: 2009-01-05
Creation Date: 2006-01-05
Last Update Date: 2007-12-01
Name Servers:
ns1.al-taw7eed.com
ns2.al-taw7eed.com
Hugh,
Your brief commentary can be summed up in a few words: Islam, the religion of the perpetual offended.
Thanks for the excellent comentary.
Human targets, according to the Jamestown synopsis, should be prioritized as follows:
1. Jews: Jews from Israel and the United States have priority over Jews from Britain and France.
2. Christians, especially those from Canada, the United States, Britain, Spain, Australia and Italy.
3. Apostates, particularly Muslim leaders who keep close ties with Jewish and "Christian governments," such as Egyptian President Husni Mubarak and the leaders of the Gulf States.
4. Secular individuals, including "spies and security officials" who "protect Jews and Christians."
Unless I missed something, this list includes just about everyone but Muslims in the target countries. I'm sure the Wiccans, Hindus, and others were omitted in error and should not feel safe.
Got to remember WHO the Muslims worship, and it is NOT the GOD of the Jews/Christians, despite what is said to the contrary by the more moderate elements.
Question: why do Canada, the United States, Britain, Spain, Australia and Italy head the list of 'Christian' targets?
Another possibility:
Four are English-speaking nations (province of Quebec excluded) that have historically resisted Islam, though Britain is changing that. None were ever part of the caliphate or of the many Islamic empires.
Spain evicted the Muslims in 1492, a sin that must be avenged, to say nothing of its original participation in the Iraq war.
Italy has the seat of the Roman Catholic Church - the Vatican.
All have strong militaries. The only way to hit them is through their civilian populations.
Terrorists, muslim terrorists, are beyond the pale and should be given no mercy.
Shot down like dogs in the street.
Sent to Allah heaven with extreme prejudice.
If found alive, should be soon executed or confined to Algore or John Edwards house.
OT, but here's an article about Obama's possible actions once he's president. I can only hope the author is being tongue-in-cheek.
http://islam-watch.org/MAsghar/Proud-of-Barack-Obama.htm
A previous article on the "reasons" for Muslim resentment and rage:
Fitzgerald: 95 things that fuel Muslim extremism
“The American presence in Iraq fuels Muslim extremism.”
-- a conclusion concluded from the National Intelligence Estimate by many concluders in solemn conclusory conclave assembled.
Ninety-Five Other Things That Also Fuel Muslim Extremism:
1. Salman Rushdie’s “The Satanic Verses.”
2. The British government’s protection of Salman Rushdie.
3. The American coup against Mossadegh in 1953, cited by some Iranians as the direct cause of the takeover of Iran by the Ayatollah Khomeini more than 25 years later.
4. The remarks of Pim Fortuyn about Muslim attitudes toward liberal Dutch mores.
5. The movie by Theo van Gogh about the subjection of women in Islam.
6. The election of Ayaan Hirsi Ali to the Dutch Parliament.
7. Hindus passing by mosques as Friday Prayers end.
8. The failure of Americans in Iraq to sufficiently subdue the Sunni insurgents.
9. The failure of Americans in Iraq to sufficiently subdue the Shi’a militias.
10. The failure of Americans in Iraq to sufficiently subdue the Kurdish desire for independence.
11. The failure of Americans in Iraq to give Baghdad an instant makeover so that it resembles the most prosperous and advanced American city.
12. The failure of Americans to solve every economic problem in Iraq, to make Sunnis and Shi’a friends, to get the oilfields pumping at full capacity, and to make donations even beyond the many tens of billions spent directly on reconstruction in Iraq.
13. The failure of the Americans, in obtaining debt relief from all Infidel creditors for Iraq (but not from any of the Muslim Arab states), to persuade those same Infidel countries to supply another $50-$100 billion.
14. The refusal of the French state to permit the wearing of the hijab.
15. The insistence, by the French state, that texts by Voltaire, Montaigne, Proust, and other writers deemed or perceived to be anti-Islamic by Muslims, be assigned to students, as required reading, by the Ministry of Education.
16. The selling of alcohol by Christians in Basra.
17. The existence of Christians in Basra.
18. The continued functioning of Christian churches in Baghdad.
19. The Copts in Egypt who complain when Muslims attack their churches and other institutions, or kidnap and forcibly convert Coptic girls to Islam.
20. The Filipinos who try to hold private religious services in Saudi Arabia, land on which no non-Muslims should be present in any case.
21. The American airmen who were assigned to bases in Saudi Arabia and who showed insufficient obeisance to their Saudi masters, all daggers and dishdashas, with their sneers of cold command.
22. The obvious superiority of Western economies.
23. The obvious superiority of Western education.
24. The obvious superiority of Western medical care.
25. The obvious superiority of Western artistic achievement.
26. The obvious superiority of Western (fill in here whatever you like).
27. The failure of Muslims living in the countries of Western Europe to have a standard of living equal or superior to that of non-Muslims.
28. The continued refusal of non-Muslims in the West to institute a formalized long-term system of Jizyah, by which Muslims can be supported; they now must make do only with the benefits provided by Infidel taxpayers on a year-to-year basis.
29. The financial support given by the Americans to the Mubarak regime in Egypt that enrages the Muslim Brotherhood.
30. The financial support given by the Americans to successive Jordanian kings and kinglets, which enrages the Muslim Brotherhood.
31. The diplomatic and other support given by the Americans to the corrupt Al-Saud family of “Saudi” Arabia, which enrages Al-Qaeda and its local supporters.
32. The threats by some in the United States to withdraw support from the Mubarak Friends-and-Family Plan, which whips up anti-American sentiment among Egyptian Muslims.
33. The threats by some in the United States to withdraw support from Pakistan if it does not collaborate less meretriciously in the soi-disant “war on terror,” which whips up anti-American sentiment among Pakistani Muslims.
34. The temporary withdrawal of Infidel support for the “Palestinians,” who deserve to receive Infidel aid of every kind, and permanently.
35. The discussion by some in the West of ways to diminish, in order to prevent further global warming, the use of oil -– which discussion is seen as damaging Arab and Muslim interests, and must therefore be regarded as a deliberate attack on Islam.
36. The reference by Pope Benedict to a 14th century Byzantine emperor’s remarks in the course of a scholarly address at Regensburg.
37. The refusal of Pope Benedict to continue to apologize, and his apparent refusal to completely humiliate himself, before Muslims demanding such humiliation.
38. The Israeli “occupation” of Sinai, Gaza, and the West Bank after the Six-Day War.
39. The Israeli “occupation” of Gaza and the West Bank after the Camp David Accords.
40. The Israeli “occupation” of the West Bank after the full withdrawal from Gaza.
41. The Israeli “occupation” of the sacred Arab and Muslim soil on which the only Jewish state was created in 1948.
42. The presence of Jews in the Middle East.
43. The presence of Jews, uncowed, anywhere in the world.
44. The presence of a strong, self-assured community of Christians in Lebanon.
45. The presence of Copts in Egypt, who sometimes act as if they, too, too, have a right to regard Egypt as their land.
46. The refusal of Italian authorities to prosecute, before her death, Oriana Fallaci.
47. The refusal of Italian authorities to ban Dante in schools because of the mention of Muhammad in The Inferno.
48. The refusal of Italian authorities to remove or cover over frescoes in Bologna that depict Muhammad in an unflattering manner.
49. The refusal of the government of Denmark to punish a Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, for daring to exercise the right of free speech.
50. The refusal of Hindus to abandon any claim to ancient sites, where Hindu temples once stood until destroyed by Muslim invaders.
51. The refusal of some Hindus to forget the history of India.
52. The refusal of some European governments to permit Muslim mosques of any size to be built wherever, whenever, and with whatever towering minarets and electronic amplifying equipment, as Muslims believe is their sacred right.
53. The attempts by some Western police to enter mosques where they have found, in the past, false passports and other documents, as well as weapons including guns and explosives, sometimes hidden in false ceilings.
54. The attempt to permit Europeans to continue, even outside Denmark, to exercise the so-called right of free speech, as has happened with Charlie-Hébdo and other French newspapers.
55. The refusal of the University of Geneva to renew the contract of Tariq Ramadan.
56. The public displays of piggy-banks, and of allusions in English pub names such as The Saracen’s Head, which may offend Muslims.
57. The discussions by some national authorities in Holland and state authorities in Germany of the need for more stringent qualifications for nationalization, and in some cases the institution of those more stringent qualifications.
58. The single mention by President Bush of the word “islamofascism” -– a word which Muslims all over insisted must never again be repeated by him, and which he never again repeated.
59. The behavior of American soldiers who have on several occasions returned deadly fire coming at them from mosques in Iraq.
60. The behavior of the British police in not notifying Muslim authorities well in advance of any planned raids on any suspected Muslim terrorists in Great Britain; this is a grave offense which has now apparently been rectified in order to win Muslim hearts and Muslim minds.
61. The belief that some in the West continue to hold, that Jews do have a historic as well as religious connection to the part of Dar al-Islam they call Israel.
62. The outrageous way in which Infidels refer to the Prophet Muhammad as if he is not universally regarded as the Perfect Man, uswa hasana, al-insan al-kamil.
63. The mention by Infidels of aspects of Muhammad’s life -– such as the Khaybar Oasis attack, the Banu Qurayza decapitation, the murder of Asma bint Marwan, the marriage to nine-year-old Aisha; these are not true, or if true, are not things which Infidels have any right either to discuss or even to know about.
64. The belief of some Infidels that those who give up on Islam, who are apostates and therefore traitors to Islam, could after their act of treason conceivably continue to know anything about Islam, given that Allah clearly takes away from such people all their previous knowledge of Islam at the very moment when they decide to apostasize.
65. The outrageous belief by some Infidels that nonetheless they may have reason to listen to the testimony of ex-Muslims as to the real contents of Islam.
66. The outrageous and insulting mention, by Infidels, of such words as “taqiyya” and “kitman.”
67. The outrageous mention, by Infidels, of the word “dhimmi,” about which they can not possibly have any accurate conception, and which they have no right to discuss in the first place unless they are Muslims.
68. The outrageous attempt to suggest that people are not born Muslims.
69. The outrageous attempt to suggest that the spread of Islam was ever undertaken through violence, when everyone knows it was a case of sudden mass conversion.
70. The refusal of this or that Infidel religious leader, political figure, writer, artist, comedian, or simply you, or simply I, to exhibit the proper attitude toward Islam, Islam, Islam.
71. The wherewithal provided by OPEC revenues that enables the Saudis, especially, to fund mosques and madrasas worldwide and thereby to naturally increase the numbers of “extremists” in the Lands of the Infidels.
72. The wherewithal of OPEC revenues that pay for an army of Western hirelings, including former diplomats (mostly English and American), former intelligence agents, former and present journalists (especially those covering the Middle East), public relations experts, businessmen eager for contracts in the Gulf, and many other fixers and middlemen. This helps delay the day of new energy policies that could conceivably diminish the OPEC oil revenues that fund the Jihad, and also prevents the unwary from regarding Saudi Arabia as anything other than a “staunch ally.”
73. The willingness of journalists to overlook obvious links between the practice of Jihad and the doctrine of Jihad, encouraged by journalists who still do not feel any obligation to learn about Islam. This encourages Muslims to make demands for changes in political and legal institutions in the West, or to insist that outspoken Infidels -- the Pope, Theo van Gogh, Jyllens-Posten -- must stop speaking or writing about Islam. Any such refusal to comply with Muslim demands engenders -- “fuels” -- Muslim “extremism.”
74. The refusal of the Buddhists in southern Thailand to stop being Buddhists.
75. The refusal of the Christians in the southern Philippines to submit to the demands to hand over lands to the Muslims of As Sayyaf.
76. The refusal of Christians in Sulawesi to stop holding church services.
77. The refusal of the Israeli government to stop trying to protect ancient archeological sites in Jerusalem, many of which have been severely damaged by the Muslim construction on and deep within the Temple Mount.
78. The refusal of Hindus in India to concede to Muslim demands for the full application of Shari’a to the Muslim community.
79. The refusal of Orthodox priests in monasteries in Bosnia and Kosovo to abandon the monasteries to Muslims who are clamoring to destroy them.
80. The outrageous insistence by the world’s Armenians and by many others that Turkey stop denying the mass murder of Armenians by Muslim Turks between 1915 and 1920.
81. The outrageous demands by many Infidel lands that outside forces be brought in to protect the non-Arab Muslims from the Arab Muslims in Darfur, despite the express opposition of both the government of the Sudan and the Arab League.
82. The outrageous demands by some Infidels that Muslims should be permitted to open mosques only on the basis of reciprocity -- that is, on the basis of similar permission being granted to non-Muslims in Muslim lands.
83. The outrageous refusal of some Infidel countries to prevent transmissions of Al Manar and other satellite channels run by terrorist groups.
84. The refusal of many Western countries -- Great Britain, Germany, Canada -- to yield to demands of local Muslims that they be made subject only to the Shari’a and not to the manmade laws of the Infidels.
85. The refusal by Australia to cease contributing troops to help their American allies in Afghanistan and Iraq.
86. The continued existence of Jews.
87. The continued existence of Christians.
88. The continued existence of Hindus.
89. The continued existence of Sikhs.
90. The continued existence of Buddhists.
91. The continued existence of followers of Confucius.
92. The continued existence of agnostics.
93. The continued existence of atheists.
94. Everything.
95. Nothing.
Some, especially in Lutheran lands, may be satisfied with these 95 theses. Others may prefer to round out the polemical embonpoint by adding another five items to the list. Still others may wish to keep adding to the list from the rich profusion of items offered by each day’s Jihad news -- items in keeping with the nature and quite unnecessary nurture of the belief-system of Islam. It took very little time to compose this list. It would not take much longer to add another hundred, two hundred, three hundred items to the list of things that “fuel Muslim extremism.”
[Posted by Hugh at October 10, 2006]
Thanks Hugh for your version of the 95 things.
Human targets, according to the Jamestown synopsis, should be prioritized as follows:
1. Jews: Jews from Israel and the United States have priority over Jews from Britain and France.
2. Christians, especially those from Canada, the United States, Britain, Spain, Australia and Italy.
3. Apostates, particularly Muslim leaders who keep close ties with Jewish and "Christian governments," such as Egyptian President Husni Mubarak and the leaders of the Gulf States.
4. Secular individuals, including "spies and security officials" who "protect Jews and Christians."
===============================
I've got an idea: at ALL public gatherings, such as sporting events, transportation centers, hospitals, etc., profile everyone entering; and all those who are islamic, make them wait while extensive security checks are performed on them. Of course, if they fail the security checks, haul them off to jail for safe keeping.
You see, the difference between the evil islamic system and Western Civilization is that we aren't going to hurt you for being a muslim, but we WILL make sure that you don't hurt us.
Hugh. thanks for posting that list of 95 things. It would be laughable if it wasn't so true. I especially like number 94.
Personofthebook, haven't you heard? Profiling isn't PC so we can only pull aside nuns and old ladies to search. Anyone "muslim looking" is off limits so as to avoid the notion of profiling and islamaphobia.
Otherwise a good plan.
Good list, Hugh. Thanks. Helps confirm that Islam is the religion for people who refuse to grow up.
Great ‘Exsurge Domine’ Hugh, stick those 95 points on every mosque door, and let them quake.
We might also add that we understand thoroughly the atmospherics of Islam, especially their devious term “Jihad” (96) itself, which is not to be understood, as we are often told by Muslim apologists, as an ‘internal struggle’ but actually a struggle by Islam everywhere through all time to subdue into “submission” (which really means surrender) people everywhere on the globe, for all time. And not to forget their minaret ‘missiles’ (97) posted outside the mosques as tokens of their encroachment into the lands conquered, especially into the lands of those foolish infidels who let them be built on their soil, land forsaken and never to be reclaimed since they are now Ummah lands. Nor to belittle their hijabbed women (98), or burqaed women, as symbols of their Muslim ‘superiority’ while they cover themselves in isolation from the natural world of light and air, to venture out of their kitchens where held prisoners by their men, or bedrooms. All these are now understood by us, and the very fact we understand (99) is an ‘insult’ to Islam. Why, we even laugh at their ‘zakat’ and Sharia banking (100) which are designed not to better their own but to better conquer for their Mesopotamian moon god Allah, to bring the whole world down on its knees to Mohammad’s mad delusional ‘religion’.
Stick all those 100 points up on the mosque door and let the Ulema quiver with spittle and upraised finger... because we know. We understand them, and they have no place to hide from our enlightenment, which is irreversible. Put that Bull up for them all to see, and watch their antics of fury. We too can be amused by their craven ravings.
I am a proud Canadian that islamists listed Canada. l know our military although small in numbers have done great damage to the taliban in Afganistan, just as our small numbers in both WW1 and WW2 did great damage to the nazis. we are a nation that stands for freedom a TRUE NORTH STRONG and FREE! (including Quebec!)
Anyone here who has regular access to a University campus (I don't, unfortunately) could have a great deal of fun with Hugh's list of '95 Things That Fuel Muslim Extremism' (or, 95 Things That Make Muslims Mad').
Print it out in an elegant script, suitably embellished with at least one eye-catching image; make sure you put the jihadwatch website address at the bottom; and tack it up on all of those official and unofficial campus noticeboards where ads for student bands, ads for amateur plays, ads for meetings of student clubs, and other such things, tend to appear. See how long it takes the Muslims on campus to notice.
For maximum effect, I suggest that it be paired with another Hugh Fitzgerald Classic - the Twenty-Seven Deplorables, which I now haul out of my 'best of HF' file and re-post, here, for the reading pleasure of anyone who has joined us but lately and may not have encountered it.
"'Twenty-Seven Deplorable Things About Islam, or, Things I Find Appalling".
1) Muhammad is regarded by Muslims as a role-model for all time. Muhammad married Aisha when she was 6 and had sexual intercourse with her when she was 9.
I find appalling that Muslims consider this act of Muhammad to be that of the man who is in every way a role model, and hence to be emulated.
In particular, I am appalled that virtually the first act of the Ayatollah Khomeini, a very orthodox and learned Shi’a theologian, was to lower the marriageable age of girls in Iran to 9 -- because, of course, it was Aisha’s age when Muhammad had sexual relations with her.
2) I find appalling that Islam provides a kind of Total Regulation of the Universe, so that its adherents are constantly asking for advice as to whether or not, for example, they can have wear their hair in a certain way, grow their beards in a certain way, wish an Infidel a Merry Christmas (absolutely not!).
3) I find appalling the religiously-sanctioned doctrine of taqiyya -- would you like some quotes, sir, about what it is, or would you like to google “taqiyya” and find its sources in the Qur’an?
4) I find appalling many of the acts which Muhammad committed, including his massacre of the Banu Qurayza, his ordering the assassination of many of those he deemed his opponents, even an old man, a woman, or anyone whom, he thought, merely mocked him.
5) I find appalling the hatred expressed throughout the Qur’an, the hadith, and the sira for Infidels -- all Infidels.
6) I find nauseating the imposition of the jizya on Infidels, the requirement that they wear identifying marks on their clothes and dwellings, that they not be able to build or repair houses of worship without the permission of Muslim authorities, that they must ride donkeys sidesaddle and dismount in the presence of Muslims, that they have no legal recourse against Muslims for they are not equal at law -- and a hundred other things, designed to insure their permanent, as the canonical texts say, “humiliation.”
7) I find the mass murder of 60-70 million Hindus, over 250 years of Mughal rule, and the destruction of tens of thousands of artifacts and Hindu (and Buddhist) temples, some of the Hindu ones listed in works by Sita Ram Goel, appalling.
8) I find the 1300-year history of the persecution of the Zoroastrians, some of it continuing to this day, according the great scholar of Zoroastrianism, Mary Boyce, which has led to their reduction to a mere 150,000, something to deplore. There are piquant details in her works, including the deliberate torture and killing of dogs (which are revered by Zoroastrians), even by small Muslim children who are taught to so behave.
9) I find the record of Muslim intellectual achievement lacking, and I attribute this lack to the failure to encourage free and skeptical inquiry, which is necessary for, among other things, the development of modern science.
10) I deplore the prohibition on sculpture or on paintings of living things. I deplore the horrific vandalism and destruction of Christian, Jewish, Zoroastrian, Hindu, and Buddhist sites.
11) I deplore the Muslim jurisprudence which renders all treaties between Infidels and Muslims worthless from the viewpoint of the Infidels, though worth a great deal from the viewpoint of the Muslims, for they are only signing a “hudna,” a truce-treaty rather than a true peace-treaty -- and because they must go to war against the Infidel, or press their Jihad against the Infidel in other ways, on the model of the Treaty of al-Hudaibiyya, no Infidel state or people can ever trust a treaty with Muslims.
12) I deplore the speech of Mahathir Mohammad, so roundly applauded last year, in which he called for the “development” not of human potential, not of art and science, but essentially of weapons technology and the use of harnessing and encouraging Muslim “brain power” for the sole purpose of defeating the Infidels, as a reading of that entire speech makes absolutely clear. Here -- would you like me to read it now for the audience?
13) I deplore the fact that Muslims are taught, and they seem to have taken those teachings to heart, to offer their loyalty only to fellow Muslims, the umma al-islamiyya, and never to Infidels, or to the Infidel nation-state to which they have uttered an oath of allegiance but apparently such an oath must be an act of perjury, because such loyalty is impossible. Am I wrong? Show me exactly what I have misunderstood about Islam.
14) I deplore the ululations of pleasure over acts of terrorism, the delight shown by delighted and celebrating crowds in Cairo, Ramallah, Khartoum, Beirut, Damascus, Baghdad, and of course all over Saudi Arabia, when news of the World Trade Center attacks was known -- and I can, if you wish, supply the reports from those capitals which show this to have taken place. I attribute statements of exultation about the “Infidels” deserving it to the fact that Islamic tenets view the world as a war between the Believers and the Infidels.
15) On that score, I deplore that mad division of the world between Dar al-Islam and dar al-Harb, and the requirement that there be uncompromising hostility between the two, until the final triumph of the former, and the permanent subjugation, and incorporation into it, of the latter.
16) I deplore the sexual inequality and mistreatment of women which I believe I can show has a clear basis in the canonical Islamic texts, and is not simply, pace Ebadi and other quasi-”reformers,” a “cultural” matter.
17) I deplore the fact that Infidels feel, with justice, unsafe in almost every Muslim country, but that Muslims treat the Infidel countries, and their inhabitants, with disdain, arrogance, and endless demands for them to bend, to change, to what Muslims want -- whether it be to remove crucifixes, or change the laws of laicity in France, or to demand that “hate speech” laws be extended in England so as to prevent any serious and sober criticism of Islam.
18) I deplore the emphasis on the collective, and the hatred for the autonomy of the individual. In particular, I believe that someone born into Islam has a perfect right to leave Islam if he or she chooses -- and that there should be no punishment, much less the murderous punishment so often inflicted.
19) I find the record of Muslim political despotism to be almost complete -- with the exception of those Muslim countries and regimes that have, as Ataturk did, carried out a series of measures to limit and constrain Islam.
20) I deplore the fact that while Muslims claim it is a “universalist” religion, it has been a vehicle for Arab imperialism, causing those conquered and Islamized in some cases to forget, or become indifferent or even hostile to, their own pre-Islamic histories.
The requirement that the Qur’an be read in Arabic (one of the first things Ataturk did was commission a Turkish Qur’an and tafsir, or commentary), and the belief by many Muslims that the ideal form of society can be derived from the Sunna of 7th century Arabia, and that their own societies are worth little, is an imperialism that goes to culture and to history, and is the worst and most complete kind.
21) I deplore the attacks on ex-Muslims who often must live in fear. I deplore the attacks on Theo van Gogh and others, and the absence of serious debate about the nature of Islam and of its reform -- except as a means to further beguile and distract Infidels who are becoming more wary.
22) I deplore the emptiness of the “Tu Quoque” arguments directed at Christians and Jews, based on a disingenuous quotation of passages -- for example, from Leviticus -- that are completely ignored and have not been invoked for two thousand years, and I deplore the rewriting of history so that a Muslim professor can tell an American university audience that “the Ku Klux Klan used to crucify (!) African-Americans, everyone standing around during the crucifixion singing Christian hymns (!).”
23) I deplore the phony appeals of the “we all share one Abrahamic faith” and “we are the three monotheisms” when, to my mind, a Christian or a Jew has far less to fear from, and in the end far more in common with, any practicing polytheistic Hindu.
24) I do not think Islam, which is based on the idea of world-conquest, not of accommodation, and whose adherents do not believe in Western pluralism except insofar as this can be used as an instrument, temporarily most useful, to protect the position of Islam until its adherents have firmly established themselves, should be accepted in non-Muslim societies.
25) I deplore the view, in Islam, that it is not a saving of an individual soul that is involved when one conducts Da’wa or the Call to Islam, but rather, something that appears to be much more like signing someone up for the Army of Islam. He need not have read all the fine print; he need not know Islamic tenets; he need not even have read or know what is in sira and hadith or much of the Qur’an; he need only recite a single sentence. That does not show a deep concern for the nature of the conversion (sorry, “reversion”).
26) I deplore the sentiment that “Islam is to dominate and not to be dominated." I deplore the sentiment “War is deception” as uttered by Muhammad. I deplore what has happened over 1350 years, in vast swaths of territory, formerly filled with Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Hindus, Buddhists, much of which is now today almost monotonously Islamic. I do not think Islam welcomes any diversity if it means the possibility of full equality for non-Muslims.
27) I deplore the fact that slavery is permitted in Islam, that it is discussed in the Qur’an, that it was suppressed in 19th century Arabia only through the influence of British naval power in the Gulf; that it was formally done away with in Saudi Arabia only in 1962; that it still exists in Mali, and the Sudan, and even Mauritania; that it may exist in the Arabian interior, but certainly the treatment of the Thai, Filipino, Indian and other female house workers in Arab households amounts to slavery, and it is no accident that there has never been a Muslim William Wilberforce.
'I could go on, and am prepared to adduce history, and quotations from the canonical texts.
'And so are hundreds of thousands of Infidels who have looked into Islam, or in their own countries, have had a close look at the Muslim populations which have made their own Infidel existences far more unpleasant, expensive, and dangerous than they would otherwise be.
'If this be “Islamophobia” -- show me exactly why it is irrational (i.e. not based on facts or observable behavior, or a study of history), an “irrational” dislike or even hatred of Islam.
'If you cannot show that, then perhaps the word should not be invoked.
'But if you do invoke it, be prepared to have copious quotations from Qur’an and hadith and sira constantly presented to audiences so that they may judge for themselves, without the “guidance” of apologists for Islam, both Muslim and non-Muslim. '
- Posted by: Hugh Fitgerald, on www.jihadwatch.org, November 1, 2007 11:25 AM".
*That*, sir, is magnificent. It says it all.
If only someone, reading this, were able to publish Hugh's two splendid pamphlets in a campus newspaper, complete with suitable illustrations (whether graphic or photographic), and then stand back and watch the fur fly.
And if not...samizdat, my friends. Samizdat. (Even as I write this I am thinking: to which people among my acquaintance must I send copies..and why have I not sent copies, before now?? Mea culpa mea culpa mea maxima culpa!).
Final thought...street theatre. Is there a group on some campus somewhere, brave enough to stand in the middle of the square, or main quadrangle, or such location, at morning tea, or lunch, or afternoon tea time, and in a good clear voice, declaim one or both of Hugh's perfectly true and accurate discourses? For safety's sake you would need between ten and twenty people, preferably a group of varying backgrounds.
If you are a student or an academic, an 'action' of this kind would be an excellent way to test, once and for all, whether your particular institution still has anything that might be called 'freedom of speech'.