June 2010 Archives

Pamela Geller discusses our new book, The Post-American Presidency, in this boffo new vlog. Book coming July 27 from Simon & Schuster. Pre-order now.

And don't miss the toon!

In his book Son of Hamas, Mosab Hassan Yousef says, "I am the son of a people who have been enslaved by corrupt systems for many centuries" (p. 248). One of those corrupt systems, in his view, is the Israeli government: "I was a prisoner of the Israelis when my eyes were opened to the fact that the Palestinian people were as oppressed by their own leaders as they were by Israel....Delivered from the oppression of Europe, Israel became the oppressor" (pp. 249-250).

Israel is the oppressor of the Palestinians? It sounds as if Mosab Hassan Yousef hasn't modified his old Hamas views all that much -- for if the Palestinians would cut out the jihad against Israel, they would immediately find that Israeli "oppression" would end. But he doesn't seem to take that into account.

This doesn't mean I think he should have been deported. That he was considered for deportation at all is another blot on the much-marred record of the Obama Administration. But I am surprised that the Jewish groups that are so earnestly championing his cause don't seem to have read his book very closely.

UPDATE: Pamela Geller adds: "I heard him on the radio yesterday speak of the Israelis killing children, which took me aback."

"Judge agrees to grant asylum to ex-Israeli spy," by Elliot Spagat for AP, June 30 (thanks to all who sent this in):

SAN DIEGO -- The son of a Hamas founder who became a Christian and an Israeli spy will be granted U.S. asylum after he passes a routine background check, an immigration judge ruled Wednesday.

Mosab Hassan Yousef got the news during a 15-minute deportation hearing after a U.S. Department of Homeland Security attorney said the government was dropping its objections.

The agency denied Yousef's asylum request in February 2009, arguing that he had been involved in terrorism and was a threat to the United States.

Attorney Kerri Calcador gave no explanation for the government's change of heart....

In his book, Yousef describes growing up admiring Hamas and hating Israel, leading him to buy a couple machine guns and a handgun in 1996. He said the guns didn't work and that he was arrested by Israeli forces before he killed anyone....

On Fox News, Leon Panetta, the present Director of the C.I.A., spoke about Anwar Al-Awlaki, the Muslim with American citizenship who, though born and raised in the United States, now from his perch in Yemen inspires other Muslims to commit acts of terrorism against Americans.

Panetta noted that Al-Awlaki "had declared war on the United States." This statement, and Panetta's general tone, drew criticism from Robert Spencer here.

I am not convinced that Panetta is akin to one more Brennan or Benjamin, someone who deliberately is avoiding the issue of Islam. He is forced to work within a system that does not, as Obama claims, allow for all sorts of views, but rather, one in which handed down from on high is a view that requires our high officials to misrepresent the nature and scope of the Islamic threat. For Panetta's statement about Al-Awlaki, while true, is also misleading, for it implies that this is surprising, that Al-Awlaki is, if not unique, at least a very unusual case. One would not have understood, that is, that Islam itself has "declared war" on the United States. For Muslims are inculcated with the idea that only one division of humanity matters - that between Believers and Unbelievers, Muslims and Infidels, and that between the two a state of permanent war (though not always open warfare) exists. In other words, it is possible by emphasis on one thing, and omission of a larger understanding, to mislead - and Panetta, who is one of the better members of the Administration, may have unwittingly misled.

For to do so would be "helping others in sin and transgression."

The Assembly of Muslim Jurists in America says on its website: "AMJA recognizes that human brotherhood is the basic principle that should govern the relations between all peoples and nations. Therefore, the pursuit of peace and goodwill between all nations should be a desirable objective for all members of the human family. In this light, AMJA rejects any ideology or effort that aims to put the United States of America and Islam in conflict." Apparently it intends to achieve this goal by making sure that U.S. troops cannot achieve anything in Islamic countries.

Expect Honest Ibe Hooper of CAIR to issue a thundering denunciation of this forthwith. Honest Ibe?

"US Muslim jurists forbid aid to aggressive troops," from Iran's Ahlul Bayt News Agency, June 30 (thanks to Will):

The Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America (AMJA) issued a fatwa prohibiting offering aid to foreign troops in Muslim countries whether on the personal or the business levels. The assembly, made up of jurists and scholars in charge of issuing fatwas for Muslims in the United States and headed by Sheikh Salah al-Sawy, received several inquiries about the stance of Islam on business deals with coalition troops in Iraq or NATO forces in Afghanistan, especially companies that transfer foodstuffs and other supplies to military bases.

The question was posted on AMJA fatwa bank, reads: "Is it permissible to participate in taking food to the American and foreign soldiers working in Muslim lands?" and the answer is, "That would not be permissible, for that would be helping others in sin and transgression."

The fatwa, number 3062 to be issued by the assembly, stipulated that Muslims are not to help foreigners on personal or business basis as long as their presence in Muslim countries is linked to occupation....

"Muslims should help anyone involved in benevolent acts regardless of their nationality, religion, or political affiliation and whether they are civilians or soldiers."

This, the fatwa added, is not the case with foreign troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and which are occupying those countries against the will of their people and, therefore, engaging in any type of interaction with them endows their presence with legitimacy and makes those who deal with them accomplices in the crime.

"The organisation is now part of the conflict management strategy the Indonesian military exercises to maintain its power." Yes, in modern, moderate Indonesia! "Indonesia army behind Islamist thugs, lawmaker says," by Presi Mandari for AFP, June 30:

JAKARTA (AFP) - An Indonesian lawmaker on Wednesday accused the security forces of secretly supporting Islamist vigilantes as a kind of paramilitary force to intimidate opponents and commercial rivals.

Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle lawmaker Eva Kusuma Sundari said extremist vigilantes known for violent attacks on bars, minorities and human rights advocates had direct links to military and police generals.

"The organisation is now part of the conflict management strategy the Indonesian military exercises to maintain its power," she told AFP, referring to the stick-wielding fanatics known as the Islamic Defenders Front (FPI).

"There are several military personnel who still 'use' the services of the FPI... I suspect they maintain and protect the FPI because they still have interests with them."

The FPI, which has thousands of members, is known for threatening, intimidating and physically attacking Indonesians with almost complete impunity despite repeated calls for the government to ban the organisation.

On Sunday it threatened "war" against the Christian minority in the Jakarta suburb of Bekasi and urged all mosques in the city to create armed militias....

I'm happy to say that with this morning's mail, I was just able to add the book on the right (heh) in the photo above to my shelf of books that I've written, cowritten, and edited. It is, of course, The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration's War On America by Pamela Geller with Robert Spencer (Simon & Schuster), which will hit the shelves of your local bookstore on July 27.

You can pre-order it now here.

"Sheer brilliance! Sharp, well-written and to-the-point. The ultimate patriot's handbook. Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer lay bare Barack Hussein Obama's radical agenda and how to stop it. No true American's library will be complete without this book."

--Brad Thor, #1 New York Times bestselling author of Foreign Influence

"This book is a chilling analysis of how the policy of President Barack Obama is chipping away at the very foundation of America's leading role in the world. It exposes his philosophy of near universal 'moral equivalency': a philosophy that is a dead ringer for the cultural relativism that has been poisoning Europe for the past decades. America is the last man standing and it is vital that the people of Europe adopt the attitude of proud American citizens and learn that it is not shameful to be proud of one's heritage. This book is incredibly fascinating and at the same time holds a deeply disturbing message we
should all take to heart."

--Geert Wilders, Dutch MP

"Barack Obama is the most radical individual ever to occupy the White House. This excellent book by Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer explains exactly what that means and why its implications are fraught with such dangers for this great Republic."

--David Horowitz, author of Radical Son

"Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer are two of the most incisive analysts of events at home and abroad, and you could not ask for better guides to where 'hope,' 'change' and czars are taking us -- and what Americans can do about it."

--Mark Steyn, New York Times bestselling author of  America Alone

"In The Post-American Presidency, Pamela Geller shines her laser on President Barack Obama -- his life, his values, his friends and his perceptions of the country he leads. What she reports will disturb not only every American who believes in that America is the Shining City on the Hill and that the American people are what Abraham Lincoln referred to as 'the almost chosen people.' It should also disturb people around the world who recognize that the international system stops working when the American Atlas shirks the burden of its uniqueness."

--Caroline Glick, author of The Shackled Warrior

"With their characteristic attention to detail, clarity and fearlessness, Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer assay the wreckage. The Post-American Presidency is must reading for every concerned American who needs to know why we're in this perilous moment, and where we're headed if we don't take our exceptional country back."

--Andrew C. McCarthy, National Review legal affairs editor, author of Willful Blindness and Grand Jihad

You can get info on the other books pictured here.

This will be an uphill battle, because the Baghdad government has pro-Sharia constituencies that are far more numerous and powerful than the Iraqi Christians. "Iraqi Christian Leaders Call on Baghdad Government to Defend Minority Rights," from Al-Bawaba via AINA, June 30:

On Saturday, the CSI co-sponsored 2nd All-Iraqi Christian Leadership Conference issued an eight-point appeal urging the Baghdad government to help Iraq's dwindling minority community survive inside the country. Convening on Saturday, June 26 just outside Mosul in the town of Kara Kosh (Hamdaniya), 76 Iraqi Christian leaders from a variety of churches, political parties and civil society groups, together with representation from other minorities, called for:

1) Constitutional amendments to strengthen minority rights and legislation for the implementation of constitutional guarantees;

2) Adequately financed and rationally conceived programs designed to facilitate the voluntary return of the country's refugees;

3) National Commission for Minority Affairs to promote peaceful dialogue between religious and ethnic groups;

4) A University in Nineveh Province;

5) Security for vulnerable minority communities;

6) Fulfillment of Iraq's obligation to respect international human rights instruments;

7) Increased representation of Christians in the federal and state parliaments; and

8) Increased investment in the infrastructure of previously marginalized areas populated mainly by minorities.

Dr. John Eibner, CEO of CSI's U.S. affiliate warned that the prospect of extinction still faces Iraq's ancient Christian community, and would do so until violent persecution ceases and basic human rights are guaranteed in word and deed...

Since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein in 2003, nearly half of Iraq's approximately one million Christians have been forced by violence to flee the country, while many other remain in Iraq as destitute Internally Displaced People....

William Warda, President of the Hammurabi Human Rights Organization (HHRO) claimed that neither the Iraqi nor the American governments are acting with sufficient energy and foresight to end the violent persecution of Iraq's Christians and to create conditions for the return of refugees....

I was recently interviewed by Folks Magazine's founder and editor-in-chief, U. Mahesh Prabhu. The whole interview is here, along with some prefatory material that embarrassingly praises me overmuch, but if you can get past that, the interview may be of some interest -- although I see in retrospect that I was a bit terse. Here is a section:

UMP: There is something called as "Stealth Jihad" your site often refers to it. Can you describe it in few words?

RS: Stealth jihad is the attempt through non-violent means to achieve the same goal as that of the violent jihadists: the imposition of Sharia upon non-Muslim states.

UMP: Fighting Islamists in USA seems easier than in India. Do you buy that point?

RS: Not necessarily. In both countries the problem of jihad has been drastically misdiagnosed by the authorities, leading to numerous policy errors.

UMP: With multimillion petrodollars the Arab Shaikhs have been funding these pro-Islamist organizations for a long time now. Given their financial muscle and infrastructure do you think their antagonists stand any chance?

RS: Yes. We certainly stand a chance. We have the truth on our side.

UMP: How many Muslims in the world, do you think, are "moderate Muslims"?

RS: It depends on how one defines "moderate." If by it you mean those who are not engaged in violent jihad, then the number is huge. If you mean those who actively disapprove of violent jihad and Islamic supremacism in general, and are working against the jihad imperative, the number is minuscule. If you mean those Muslims who simply aren't concerned with such matters, the number is considerable. [...]

UMP: Which is more dangerous - Terrorism Jihad or Stealth Jihad?

RS: They are two fronts of the same war and two aspects of the same initiative, so it is impossible to distinguish between them in this way....

Read it all.

In Human Events yesterday I discussed the recent life sentences given to the father and brother of Aqsa Parvez. They murdered her for Islamic honor:

Muhammad Parvez and his son Waqas murdered Aqsa Parvez, Muhammad's daughter and Waqas's sister, on December 10, 2007, because she wasn't behaving the way a good Muslim girl should. Last Wednesday, a Canadian court gave them both life sentences for this honor killing. But what is being done to stop the next Islamic honor killing in North America? Next to nothing.

The Koran commands women to "draw their veils over their bosoms" (24:31). While there are varying interpretations of this among Islamic authorities, Islamic traditions attributed to Muhammad amplify this to require that a woman should cover her head in public. Muhammad Parvez was determined to force Aqsa to do so, and to make sure she conformed to other Islamic norms as well. That she didn't, enraged him: "This is my insult. My community will say you have not been able to control your daughter. This is my insult. She is making me naked."

Aqsa ran away from home, telling friends that Muhammad Parvez had sworn on the Koran to murder her if she did so. But on that December day, Waqas brought Aqsa home from her school bus stop. Less than an hour later she was dead.

Muhammad Parvez clearly believed that by murdering his daughter he was doing the right thing from an Islamic standpoint. And he had abundant reason for getting that idea. A manual of Islamic law certified as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy by Al-Azhar University, the most respected authority in Sunni Islam, says that someone who kills his child incurs no legal penalty under Islamic law. Syria in July 2009 scrapped a law limiting the length of sentences for honor killings, but "the new law says a man can still benefit from extenuating circumstances in crimes of passion or honour 'provided he serves a prison term of no less than two years in the case of killing.'"

In Jordan in 2003, the Parliament voted down, specifically on Islamic grounds, a provision designed to stiffen penalties for honor killings. Al-Jazeera reported that "Islamists and conservatives said the laws violated religious traditions and would destroy families and values."

This is why honor killings keep happening -- because they are broadly tolerated, even encouraged, by Islamic teachings and attitudes. Yet no authorities are calling Islamic leaders to account for this. The life sentences given to Muhammad and Waqas Parvez give Muslim spokesmen in Canada and the United States a new opportunity to speak out. They have a new chance to acknowledge that Islam's shame/honor culture and devaluation of women has created communities in which abuse of women is accepted as normal. They could call for a searching reevaluation of the meaning and continued relevance of material from the Koran and Sunnah that devalues and dehumanizes women, and call in no uncertain terms for Muslims to reject explicitly and definitively the literal meaning of such texts. They could call for sweeping reform and reexamination of the status of women in Islam. They could call upon every mosque in the West to institute classes teaching against honor killing and directly challenging the teachings and assumptions that give it justification....

But they won't. Read it all.

In these remarks Panetta continues the atomization of the global jihad that is essentially official Obama Administration policy. He will recognize that Anwar al-Awlaki has declared war on the U.S., and that al-Qaeda has declared war on the U.S., but he and others in the Administration and the State Department establishment will neither acknowledge nor consider the implications of the fact that the belief system held by al-Awlaki and al-Qaeda is also held by untold millions of Muslims worldwide, including in the United States.

"Panetta: American-Born Cleric Linked to Terror Plots Has 'Declared War' on U.S.," from FOXNews.com, June 27 (thanks to all who sent this in):

CIA Director Leon Panetta said Sunday that the American-born cleric tied to several recent terror plots on U.S. soil has "declared war" on the United States and will be treated as a terrorist despite his U.S. citizenship.

Panetta denied claims that Anwar al-Awlaki is on an "assassination list," but said al-Awlaki -- who is believed to be hiding in Yemen and taking on an operational terrorist role -- is engaged in a campaign to encourage attacks on the United States.

"We have a terrorist list and he's on it," Panetta said.

Speaking with ABC's "This Week," Panetta affirmed that several terror plots can be traced back to the radical cleric, who last month called for the killing of American civilians in a video released by Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula....

The mastermind of this jihad plot was a cargo handler at JFK Airport -- because no one would dream of preventing Muslims from taking such sensitive jobs around airplanes, or even questioning them about their beliefs and loyalties before hiring them. That would be "Islamophobic," and who cares if one of these jihad plots ultimately succeeds? The main enemy for most people is the chimerical charge of "bigotry." That, not jihad terrorism, must be avoided above all things. "JFK terror plot suspect pleads guilty to lesser charge," by Janon Fisher for the New York Post, June 29:

On the eve of his criminal trial, Abdel Nur, a Guyanese national charged in an international plot to blow up fuel lines at JFK Airport, pleaded guilty to providing material support to terrorists.

Nur, 60, who was extradited from Trinidad to stand trial in the case, acted as a go-between with the plot's alleged mastermind, Russell Defreitas and the radical Islamic group in the Caribbean, Jamat al Muslimeen.

Defreitas, a cargo handler at JFK, and four other men sought funding to carry out a bomb plot on the Buckeye pipeline and fuel tanks at the airport in 2007.

"I provided guidance in order to assist them in their plan to attack the fuel line at JFK airport to cause major economic harm to the United States," Nur told the judge in his plea.

Under the plea agreement, Nur avoided the possibility of life in prison if convicted. He now could face 15 years in prison.

"I became aware that individuals who I had known ... were developing a plan that had as its goal the use of an explosive device or material to destroy or extremely damage fuel tanks or fuel pipelines at the John F. Kennedy international airport," Nur told the court, reading from a statement.

The goal was to "cause major economic loss in the United States," he said....

One would have thought that the Vast Majority of loyal, patriotic American Muslims would celebrate Mahmoud Omar as a hero. Why don't they? Why does a man who helped the FBI against jihadists say, "I lost my people. I lost my religion"? And why don't authorities ask that question, and seek answers to it? "From star FBI witness to ostracism, loss," by George Anastasia for the Philadelphia Inquirer, June 27 (thanks to all who sent this in):

This is not the way Mahmoud Omar thought things would play out.

Omar, the Egyptian-born FBI informant who was the key prosecution witness in the Fort Dix terrorism trial, is sitting at the kitchen table in his two-bedroom apartment trying to make sense of what has happened to him.

He has an eviction notice for overdue rent, an application for welfare, a foundering export business, and an uncertain immigration status.

The South Jersey apartment is sparsely furnished. There is little food in the refrigerator.

Omar is living week to week, sometimes day to day, with his American-born wife, Jessica, who grew up in Maple Shade, and their two children, a daughter, 6, and a son, 3.

"How can this be?" he asks, his eyes flashing anger, dismay, and disappointment. "It was a good case. I help. Now I have what?"

His heavily accented voice trails off. "Nothing."

Chain-smoking cigarettes, Omar, 41, was talking publicly for the first time about his experience as an informant enlisted by the FBI as its point man in the Fort Dix investigation, and about the impact the case and its aftermath have had on his life.

Eighteen months after a federal jury in Camden convicted all five defendants, the star witness is unsure of his future and has doubts about his past. [...]

"I lost my people," Omar said during one in a series of rambling interviews over the last month. "I lost my religion. And I can do nothing about it."

Unless you come from his culture, he said, it is almost impossible to understand what that means.

For Omar, his ability to function in America was built around a network of friends, relatives, and associates in the Muslim community.

That network, he said, no longer exists for him.

He has been ostracized because of what he did.

No matter, he said, that the five men he helped convict were accused of plotting to kill American soldiers. In a twisted way, he said, their actions are understandable in the Muslim community.

"For Muslims, we are all brothers, and I betrayed a brother," he said.

Omar does not go to a mosque anymore, he said, because he knows he will not be welcome.

No one had told him that. But, he said, touching his chest, "I know in here."

"Muslim people don't believe these kids did anything," he said. "And they are never going to believe it. They don't want to believe it." [...]

To many of them, he said, he is a traitor.

Back in this country, relatives and former business associates want nothing to do with him.

"The people I did business with are gone," he said. "They say, 'You made your choice. You helped the American government. Why should we help you? Let the American government help you.' " [...]

The Inquirer hauls out a dhimmi professor who blames the U.S. for Omar's ostracism by the Muslims:

William Granara, a professor of Arabic studies at Harvard University, said it appeared Omar was experiencing a "conflict of loyalties" not uncommon in the immigrant experience.

But for many Muslim immigrants, it is intensified because of "the sense of disempowerment and alienation" that the community feels.

That, Granara added, might explain how some Muslims would look at Omar and say, "How can you do this at a time when America is treating us this way?" [...]

What way, exactly? At a time when America is making you freer, more prosperous, and safe from physical danger than you would be in virtually any Muslim country on earth?

Non-Afghan anti-moonshining police

"O ye who believe! Strong drink and games of chance and idols and divining arrows are only an infamy of Satan's handiwork. Leave it aside in order that ye may succeed. Satan seeketh only to cast among you enmity and hatred by means of strong drink and games of chance, and to turn you from remembrance of Allah and from (His) worship. Will ye then have done?" -- Qur'an 5:90-91

What fun they'll have in Europe. Sharia Alert: "Afghans busted in local liquor factory," from Reuters, June 29 (thanks to Maxwell):

KABUL (Reuters) - Afghan police raided an illicit liquor factory capable of producing dozens of litres of alcohol a day and arrested a moonshiner and two young helpers, officials said Tuesday.

The factory in the western part of the capital, Kabul, was equipped with imported machinery and surrounded by 15 barrels and dozens of bottles waiting to be filled.

"We have saved hundreds of young boys from drinking this dirty stuff," said Mohammad Sabir, a police official at the scene, pointing at barrels filled with fermenting grapes....

Drinking alcohol was strictly banned during the rule of the Taliban from 1996-2001 when violators could be hanged in public....

According to police, manufacturers and producers of illicit alcohol can be jailed for up to three years.

More fashion jihad, although this one seems to be directed more at the mixing of the sexes than at the fashion show itself. What fun they will have in Paris. Sharia Alert: "Police arrest models after fashion show," from Reuters, June 28 (thanks to Block Ness):

KHARTOUM (Reuters) - Sudanese police briefly detained more than 20 models, make-up artists and designers after a rare mixed-sex fashion show in Khartoum, participants said Saturday.

Amateur models taking part in the "Sudanese Next Top Model Fashion Show" told Reuters they were rounded up late Thursday by Sudan's public order police, a body known for its crackdowns on indecent dress and drinking in the Muslim north....

All of the detainees were released Friday but at least six were told to report to the police Sunday to face unspecified charges, said one participant.

"They came to the club after the show and arrested between 20 and 30 people -- not just models, but people doing the make- up, the people who provided the clothes," said the participant, who asked to remain anonymous.

"There was nothing bad about the clothes. There were wedding dresses, traditional Sudanese clothes, suits, clothes from local shops and tobs (traditional Sudanese wraparound dresses)."

Other participants said there had been fashion shows before in Sudan, many of them held in private. But Thursday's event was thought to be one of the first public events to feature male and female models sharing the catwalk.

Pro-jihad mainstream media bias is universal and relentless. And the Telegraph is one of the more modest offenders. "Telegraph Caught Recycling Gaza War Photo to Distort Today's Reality," from Honest Reporting, June 29 (thanks to Andy Infdl):

Why does the Daily Telegraph choose to reuse an image from the 2009 Gaza conflict to inaccurately portray the present day?

Photo bias is one of the most insidious forms of anti-Israel media bias and HonestReporting has addressed a number of recent examples, including AFP/Getty and Reuters wire services. Sometimes, however, the newspapers themselves are responsible for misusing imagery.

The following story and accompanying photo appeared in the UK's biggest selling broadsheet, the Daily Telegraph, on 17 June 2010:

Although there is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza and even more aid is pouring in from Israel, the Telegraph's photo gives the impression that Gaza is a warzone.

We weren't convinced. Unable to locate this AP photo in searches of recent images from the wire services in Gaza, we dug a little deeper until we found the very same photo with its original caption taken on 14 January 2009 during Operation Cast Lead...

Read it all.

The fashion show was "Christian" in the sense that it was held in a Christian village. Hamas would make sure that Christians would abide by Islamic Sharia norms. "Wherever there are Christians there's moral decline."

Sharia Alert: "Christian fashion show angers Muslims," from the Irish Sun, June 28 (thanks to Twostellas):

A fashion show held in the Christian village of Beit Sahour, near Bethlehem, has been condemned by Muslims in the area.

The fashion parade, which was permitted by the Palestinian Authority has drawn strong opinions from Hamas and other Palestinian factions.

Top Hamas political figures in the West Bank, have condemned the show as immoral and said it never should have happened in an area under Israeli occupation.

Saying the parade had violated Islamic values and laws, local Hamas officials said that such events were considered by Islam to be a fahisha, or major sin.

President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad were strongly criticised "for supporting the fashion show, and spreading moral corruption in the West Bank."...

Palestinian Web sites were flooded with postings following reports of the parade, with writers denouncing the show with comments such as "Wherever there are Christians there's moral decline" and "Were it not for the presence of Muslims in Palestine, Palestine would have become like Paris. One big brothel."

It is true that Muhammad in a hadith says that women should cover everything but face and hands. The face veil is on shakier Islamic ground. Nonetheless, Fillon's appeal is likely to fall on deaf ears, as do all such appeals from non-Muslim leaders. "French PM urges Muslims to reject 'hijacked Islam,'" by Elizabeth Pineau for Reuters, June 28 (thanks to Twostellas):

PARIS, June 28 (Reuters) - Prime Minister Francois Fillon urged France's Muslims on Monday to reject full face veils as a sectarian caricature of Islam, a week before parliament debates a law banning burqas and niqabs in public.

Inaugurating a mosque in a northwestern Paris suburb, he said French Muslims should combat a tiny radical minority using face veils as a way to combat the integration of a tolerant Islam that respects the separation of church and state.

"The Islam of France, the Islam you practice daily, has nothing to do with this caricature that dims the lights of your faith," Fillon, the most senior French politician to inaugurate a mosque in decades, said to applause from the crowd.

"You should stand in the front line against this hijacking of the religious message ... it's up to you to make intelligence triumph over obscurantism and tolerance over intolerance."...

"This minority practice, which flouts the basic rules of living together and scandalises our citizens, amounts to radical behaviour that does not reflect the reality of Islam," he said.

The prime minister also endorsed Muslim victimhood claims in a big way, while saying nothing about jihad or Islamic supremacism:

The prime minister made clear he recognised Muslims' concern about a growing trend of anti-Muslim feeling they saw in France, noting that six mosques had been defaced or attacked last year and several Muslim graves vandalised early this year.

"Thirty percent of all acts of racist violence (last year), mostly threats, were made against Muslims," he said.

Mohammed Moussaoui, president of the French Muslim Council (CFCM), said Fillon was welcome after the tensions raised by the national identity and veil debates. "His presence is a gesture of recognition and respect," he told the daily La Croix.

And that respect, of course, is always and everywhere a one-way street.

Meanwhile, the Socialist mayor of Argenteuil reinforces the Leftist/Islamic alliance:

Philippe Doucet, Socialist mayor of suburban town of Argenteuil, where the mosque stands, said the conservative prime minister was making up for the "political mistake" of launching what became emotional debates about identity and veils.

In the trial of the veiled driver, the defendant's lawyer accused the police of racial profiling and said no law barred drivers from wearing niqabs with only a slit open for the eyes.

"The niqab is no worse than the helmet worn by Formula 1 drivers who spin around the circuits at 320 km/h and yet who can still look in their rearview mirrors," he said.

Yeah, they're just the same.

The honor murderers got the wrong house. In any case, here is yet more evidence of the broad tolerance for honor murders in Islamic communities in the West. "Innocent couple died 'after wrong house was fire-bombed in bungled honour killing,'" from the Daily Mail, June 29 (thanks to Ray):

An innocent couple died in a house fire at the hands of assailants who got the wrong address in a botched honour killing, a court heard today.

Abdullah Mohammed, 41, and his wife, Aysha Mohammed, 39, were overcome by smoke and fumes after an accelerant was poured through their letterbox and set alight.

Their killers were ordered by another man to avenge his family's honour but instead of firebombing 135 London Road in Blackburn, Lancashire, they started the blaze at 175 London Road, the court heard.

Mr Mohammed was found unconscious in his bedroom along with his wife and two of their three children in the early hours of October 21 last year.

He died the same night while his wife died a week later. Their 14-year-old daughter and nine-year-old son survived.

Opening the case at Preston Crown Court, Brian Cummings QC said: 'The prosecution allege that Sadik Miah, Mohammed Miah (no relation) and Habib Iqbal were directly responsible for starting the fire that night and the prosecution further allege that these three were acting on behalf of Hisamuddin Ibrahim who had effectively put them up to it.

'The prosecution say, on behalf of his family, Hisamuddin Ibrahim wanted to kill a man by the name of Mo Ibrahim (no relation) to punish him for damaging the family's honour for having an affair with his married sister, Hafija Gordi.'...

Here is yet more evidence of the welcoming attitude toward Sharia, even in its most draconian aspects, on the part of Western governments. "US and UK failing to take Iraq's gay pogrom seriously: Both countries deny any Iraqi state involvement in anti-gay militias, but LGBT supporters suggest otherwise," by Paul Canning in The Guardian (Comment Is Free), June 23 (thanks to Bob):

Last week, 12 Iraqi police officers burst into a house in Karbala, beat up and blindfolded the six occupants and bundled them off in three vans, taking the computers they found with them. The house was then burned down by unknown people.

The house was a new "emergency shelter" run by the Iraqi LGBT organisation.

Two days later, one of the men turned up in hospital with a throat wound saying he'd been tortured. Iraqi LGBT has ordered those in its other two safe houses to move immediately.

The group says the police action is consistent with other state attacks on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people in Iraq. It has information that the other five - two gay men, one lesbian and two transgender people - have been transported 100 miles north to the interior ministry in Baghdad, where they'll be interrogated (ie tortured) to find out more about the group. Then, going on past experience, they'll probably be handed to militias loyal to Shi'a clerics Grand Ayatollah al-Sistani and Muqtada al-Sadr (both of whom have called for homosexuals to be put to death) and their mutilated bodies will turn up later.

But it is also clear from past experience that there is unlikely to be a sustained international outcry from gay people, governments or others about this latest incident.

Last year, the US state department, following representations by Rep Jared Polis, said that it was investigating reports of trials and executions of LGBT people - including for membership of the Iraqi LGBT group - as well as reports of arrests, beatings and rape by interior ministry security forces. Polis said that at least one gay man has been executed by the government for "membership of a banned organisation" and that "egregious human rights violations ... [are] being carried out by Iraqi government officials from the ministry of the interior".

But this was immediately undermined by the US embassy in Baghdad. Patricia Butenis, its chargé d'affaires, said: "We have no evidence that security forces are in any way involved with these militias."

This official dismissal is echoed in the British foreign office's latest human rights report that does acknowledge persecution in Iraq but claims that "official figures do not show a significant overall increase in violence against, or systematic abuse of, the homosexual community by fundamentalists or militia groups". It makes no mention of allegations of state involvement and repeats claims by Iraq's human rights minister and the interior ministry that murders of LGBT people "will be prosecuted" (none have) and that "homosexuality is not a criminal offence in Iraq". Iraqi LGBT, however, has two documents from a judge ordering arrests of homosexuals in Babel province earlier this year; those arrested have disappeared....

Read it all.

Still summoning faux outrage and fanning the flames of war, trying to isolate Israel for defending itself from the Jihad Flotilla: "Turkey closes airspace to some Israeli flights," by Suzan Fraser for Associated Press, June 28 (thanks to JCB):

ANKARA, Turkey - Turkey has closed its airspace to some Israeli military flights following a deadly raid on a Gaza-bound aid ship, the Turkish prime minister and officials said Monday. An official said civilian commercial flights were not affected.

Recep Tayyip Erdogan told reporters in Toronto that Turkey imposed a ban on Israeli flights after the May 31 raid on a Turkish ship that was part of a six-vessel international aid flotilla, according to the state-run Anatolia news agency. The prime minister, who is in Canada to attend a summit of the Group of 20 major industrial and developing nations, did not elaborate.

A Turkish government official said, however, that the ban was for Israeli military flights and that commercial flights were not affected. It was not a blanket ban and each flight request would be assessed case-by-case, the official added. The official spoke on condition of anonymity, in line with government rules that bar officials from speaking to journalists without prior authorization....

"Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain..." -- Qur'an 9:111

"'Prince of Jihad' given five years in Indonesia," from AFP, June 29 (thanks to all who sent this in):

JAKARTA -- An Indonesian publisher and Islamist blogger known as the "Prince of Jihad" was sentenced to five years in jail Tuesday for abetting suicide attacks on two luxury hotels in Jakarta last year.

Women robed from head-to-toe in black Islamic dress shouted abuse at the judges as the sentence -- lighter than the seven years sought by prosecutors -- was handed down in the South Jakarta district court.

Mohammed Jibril Abdurahman, publisher of extremist literature and a militant blog, was arrested at his Ar-Rahmah media company weeks after the JW Marriott and Ritz-Carlton hotel bombings that killed seven people on July 17, 2009.

Jibril, the son of a radical cleric, was convicted of concealing information about terrorist crimes and falsifying documents, and could have faced a maximum 15-year sentence.

"He was proven guilty of providing assistance and facilities and concealing information about terrorist crimes," chief judge Haryanto said....

Just one question: Why is any of this being allowed to proceed on Iran's timetable? If the goal is still to keep nuclear weapons out of the hands of a state sponsor of jihadist terrorism, that approach ought to seem just a bit counterproductive. "Iran ready to resume nuclear talks in August, president says," from CNN, June 28:

Tehran, Iran (CNN) -- Iran is prepared to resume talks over its nuclear program but will wait until late August as punishment for recently imposed U.N. sanctions, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Monday.

The outcome of the talks will depend on whether Western powers hold Israel to the same standards over its nuclear program, Ahmadinejad said at a news conference.

How about Iran holds itself to the same standards as Israel? Let Iran be a tiny country in a vast, hostile territory, that only wants to protect the minute sliver of land it can call its own, but still adheres to vastly higher standards of human rights, democracy, and an open society than is remotely expected of any of its neighbors. And that includes the neighbors who are client states of Iran -- Syria, Hamas's Gaza, and Hizballah's state-within-a-state in Lebanon.

"Western countries have no problems with Israel's nuclear bombs," Ahmadinejad said.

The U.N. Security Council imposed additional sanctions on Iran in early June, expanding an arms embargo and tightening restrictions on financial and shipping enterprises related to "proliferation-sensitive activities."

The 12-2 vote with one abstention came after the United States and other Security Council members expressed their concern over Iran's lack of compliance with previous U.N. resolutions on ensuring the peaceful nature of the nation's nuclear program.

The resolution on further sanctions was introduced by France, Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States. Brazil and Turkey voted against the measure and Lebanon abstained.

The United States pressured some nations to vote against Iran, Ahmadinejad said at Monday's news conference.

The Security Council also asked the U.N. secretary-general to create a panel of experts to monitor implementation of the sanctions.

Iran has disavowed any intentions of developing nuclear weapons and says its program is for peaceful purposes.

Well, except for that one ayatollah who recently went off-message.

As is so often the case with the Balkans, analysts are quick to attribute the problem of jihadist activity to the influence of "Wahhabism," though without accounting for why the Wahhabists' teachings resonate so readily with what we were told were peaceful, secularized, tolerant Muslims. To suppose otherwise, of course, raises the specter of there being something about Islam, even among our modern, moderate "friends and allies" that is not of the Wahhabists' invention, but nonetheless generates acts like the one described below.

In any event, however, the West in general, and NATO countries in particular, are dismally willing to stand idly by while Saudi petrodollars fund an Islamic revival, complete with its inherent problems of Sharia law and jihadist doctrine, in the Western pet project comprised by the Muslim components of the former Yugoslavia. At the root of that inaction are two issues: the economic blackmail of dependence on oil, and the politically correct article of faith that Islam must be a "Religion of Peace"... if people would just stop "misunderstanding" it.

"Bosnia: Suspected Islamist bombing 'the beginning' say experts," from AdnKronos International, June 28:

Sarajevo and Belgrade, 28 June (AKI) - Sunday's bloody bombing of a police station in Bosnia in a suspected radical Islamist attack is only the beginning of a wave of violence in Bosnia, terrorism experts said on Monday.

Police have arrested at least five people over the attack in the central town of Bugojno, in which one person was killed and six wounded.

Among those arrested was Haris Causevic, who admitted planting the explosive device near a police station in the town 75 kilometres northwest of the Bosnian capital, Sarajevo.

Causevic is believed to be a member of the fundamentalist Islamic Wahabi Islamist movement. Benevolence towards Wahabism by Bosnian authorities have allowed it to radicalise supporters and plot violence, according to Galijasevic and other terrorism experts.

Local politicians have for too long treated Wahabi groups propagating violent Islam with excessive tolerance, Bosnian terrorism expert Dzevad Galijasevic, told Adnkronos International (AKI).

"This (attack) was to be expected and it is just the beginning," Galijasevic, who is a Muslim, told AKI.

"Bosnia has a very stormy period ahead," he warned.

Galijasevic said about five percent of Bosnia's 1.5 million Muslims had been indoctrinated by Wahabi ideology, but the number of their supporters may be about 12 per cent of the population.

Though Wahabism is considered a radical religious movement in Bosnia, Wahabis are playing a central role in terrorist activities in the Musim-majority country, according to Galijasevic.

"Their activities have nothing to do with religion," he said.

There had been scores of murders and terrorist activities in Bosnia, but local authorities have played these down as "isolated incidents and ordinary crime," Galijasevic said.

"Bosnia-Herzegovina simply isn't ready to explicitly call it terrorism, although western intelligence agencies are pefectly aware of what's going on," he stated.

Galijasevic claimed radical Islam had a strong supporter in wartime Bosnian Muslim president Alija Izetbegovic and current Muslim member of the joint state presidency Haris Silajdzic, who condemned Sunday's bombing as an attack on the state.

Galijasevic heads a non-governmental southeast European counter-terrorist organisation with Serbian expert on terrorism Darko Trifunovic and a Croatian Domagoj Margetic.

They have frequently warned that Bosnia has become a European hotbed of radical Islam and Al-Qaeda-linked terrorist activities.

Trifunovic agreed that most of Bosnian Muslim leaders have ignored the activities of radical Islamists and played down their terrorist activities.

Not to mention playing down their having anything to do with "religion."

"We have been highlighting this problem for years, but no one paid attention," he told AKI.

Attacks such as the one in Bugojno were the "logical consequence" of ignoring the security threat posed by Wahabism, he said.

"I'm afraid this is not the end," Trifunovic said.

The imam of the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero, Feisal Abdul Rauf, is an open proponent of Sharia. This is what that means.

"Iran: SKSW/WLUML Statement on planned stoning to death of young mother in East Azerbaijan Province," from Women Living Under Muslim Laws, June 18 (thanks to Banafsheh):

The Global Campaign to Stop Killing and Stoning Women and the International Solidarity Network, Women Living Under Muslim Laws urge all concerned to immediately contact the Iranian officials to express their concern over the planned stoning to death of Sakineh Mohammadi-Ashtiani. On 15 May 2006, Sakineh Mohammadi-Ashtiani was convicted of having an 'illicit relationship' with two men and was sentenced to 99 lashes by Branch 101 of the Criminal Court of Osku, in East Azerbaijan Province. Then, in a September 2006 trial of a man accused of murdering her husband, Mohammadi-Ashtiani was once again accused of committing 'fornication while married'. During this trial, Mohammadi-Ashtiani retracted the 'confession' she supposedly made during pre-trial interrogation, alleging that she had been coerced to confess under duress, and declared her innocence. Two of the five judges found her not guilty, pointing to the lack of evidentiary proof in the case against her, and noting that she had already suffered 99 lashes due to her previous sentencing. Even though double jeopardy is illegal in Iran, the other three judges, including the presiding judge, found Sakineh guilty on the basis of the 'judge's intuition', a provision in Iranian law that allows judges to make their own subjective and arbitrary rulings based on a 'gut feeling', even in the absence of clear or conclusive evidence. Mohammadi-Ashtiani was sentenced to death by stoning on 10 September 2006.

A mother of two young children, Mohammadi-Ashtiani has asked for amnesty from the Judiciary twice, but both times her requests have been denied.

Mohammadi-Ashtiani's lawyer, Mohammad Mostafaie, states that with all the complexities and confusion over her case, his client should not be executed, let alone stoned to death, and that her repentance is enough to warrant a pardon. Mostafaie has pleaded the Head of the Judiciary, Head of the Provincial Judiciary and members of the Amnesty Body to commute Mohammadi-Ashtiani's sentence to one that enables her to return to her life and children. In previous cases, Ayatollah Shahroudi, the former Head of the Judiciary in Iran, has commuted stoning sentences with the approval of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamene'i.

The newly proposed draft of the Islamic Penal Code of Iran contains provisions for annulling stoning sentences when the execution of such a sentence would damage the reputation of the Islamic Republic and lead to the degradation of Islam.

The Stop Stoning Forever Campaign, a grassroots initiative in Iran, has been urging Iranian officials to repeal the stoning law since its formation in 2006. There is no mention of stoning in the Qur'an and many prominent Ayatollahs, or religious scholars, have spoken in support of a ban on stoning in Iran. Many Muslim nations such as Malaysia, Indonesia, Tunisia, Algeria and others have banned death by stoning. Despite calls for abolition from around the globe, stoning is still legal in Iran and judges continue to issue and implement stoning sentences.

The Iranian Constitution forbids the use of torture. Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) demands that "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment."

As a state party to the ICCPR, Iran has also made an explicit and unreserved commitment under article 6(2) that if the death sentence is imposed it is to be "only for the most serious crimes." The UN Human Rights Committee (in the case of Toonen v Australia) has made it clear that treating adultery and fornication as criminal offences does not comply with international human rights standards.

Turkey in the EU: A gun to Europe's head

Turkey would immediately become the largest state in the EU. Rapidly Islamizing Ankara would be calling the shots for people in Berlin, London, Paris, and Rome. 70 million Muslims or more, including an untold number of active Islamic jihadists, would be able to enter Europe easily and travel around it freely. European Death Watch Alert: "Belgian EU presidency would support enlargement," from the Telegraph, June 28 (thanks to Lazybuddha):

Belgium will support the enlargement of the European Union to include Croatia, Iceland and Turkey during its forthcoming presidency of the bloc.

Olivier Chastel, the Belgian secretary of state for EU affairs, in a joint news conference with Spanish counterpart Diego Lopez Garrido, raised the possibility of the opening of a new chapter in negotiations with Turkey in the coming months after Spain, which currently holds the EU presidency, backed Ankara's bid despite resistance from France and Germany.

Belgium takes over the six-month rotating EU presidency from Spain on July 1.

The EU began membership talks with Turkey in 2005 but the process has made slow progress. Only 12 of the 35 policy chapters, which all EU candidate countries must successfully negotiate prior to membership, are open....

Only this time the attacker was not a Nazi, but a Muslim. "Israelis, 22 and 18, attacked in Berlin," by Benjamin Weinthal in the Jerusalem Post, June 28 (thanks to Larry):

A Berlin police spokesman told the Jerusalem Post on Monday that two young Israelis were violently attacked in a Berlin disco because of their nationality. The spokesman said the attack prompted the police to issue a statement terming the attack as "anti-Semitic."

According to statements from two male Israelis aged 18 and 22, a Palestinian man was responsible for the assault. He asked the 22-year-old Israeli about his nationality, who replied that he is a citizen of Israel.

The Palestinian perpetrator choked the 22-year-old and punched him in the face. A Berlin police statement said that as the 18-year-old Israeli rushed to help his friend he was also struck by the Palestinian.

The assault took place in the Berlin district of Friedrichshain, a location popular among young Germans and Israelis for its lively bar and club culture.

The Palestinian fled the disco and tossed a beer glass at the 18-year-old Israeli. The police spokesman told the Post that the authorities are searching for the alleged assailant. In a bizarre twist, the disco's 43-year-old bouncer used pepper spray against the two Israelis,who eventually fled to their hotel and notified the police about the assault. The injured Israelis received treatment in a hospital....

As Barack Obama abandons the country that is on the front line of the global jihad. "US-Israeli relations suffer 'tectonic rift,'" by Adrian Blomfield in the Telegraph, June 27 (thanks to ZOA):

A senior Israeli diplomat has warned that the Jewish state's relationship with the United States has suffered a "tectonic rift".

The sobering assessment comes a week before Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, meets President Barack Obama at the White House.

There had been hope the two could lay to rest a row that erupted between the two allies in March but the new comments have raised fears of long-term damage.

Michael Oren, Israel's ambassador to Washington, told foreign ministry colleagues at a private briefing in Jerusalem that they were facing a long and potentially irrevocable estrangement.

Sources said Mr Oren told the meeting: "There is no crisis in Israel-US relations because in a crisis there are ups and downs. [Instead] relations are in a state of tectonic rift in which continents are drifting apart."...

According to Mr Oren, attempts to gain leverage over President Obama through some of his "pro-Israel" aides - believed to be a reference to Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief-of-staff, and Dennis Ross, a senior State Department official - had failed....

"This is one of the most dangerous cells we have uncovered."

"7 nabbed for cab-driver murder," from the Jerusalem Post, June 28 (thanks to all who sent this in):

Seven Israeli Arabs affiliated with al-Qaida and Global Jihad have been arrested for allegedly murdering a taxi driver last year, and carrying out a series of terrorist attacks, the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) revealed on Monday.

In a joint police-Shin Bet operation, Ahmed Ahmed, 21, Jalib Janam, 26, Wassim Allam, 23, Khidar Ziddana, 22, Ahbed Abu-Salim, 19, Adi Azzam, 23, and Oman Kakhibi, 22, all Nazareth residents, were arrested between May 11 and June 21. All seven were indicted Monday at the Haifa district court.

Dep.-Cmdr. Avi Elgrisi, Head of Amakim Police's Central Unit told The Jerusalem Post that "this is one of the most dangerous cells we have uncovered." The investigation was initially focused on two suspects, before being widened to include seven other suspects, he said, adding that police are expected to make more arrests in connection with the investigation.

The seven said that they founded a group called Aljahabiyya and claim to follow Salafism, an extremist Sunni Islamic movement. Aljahabiyya was formed two years ago, and inspired by and affiliated with al-Qaida and Global Jihad. The group underwent a process of radicalization, using material found on the Internet, including pictures of weaponry and instructions to prepare explosives and perpetrate terrorist attacks. The seven downloaded al-Qaida propaganda movies and speeches by Osama Bin Laden.

"They accessed the Internet for jihadi ideology and indoctrination, and used it as an information source to listen to extremist clerics," Elgrisi said.

Aljahabiyya admit to murderring [sic] taxi driver

The group allegedly carried out attacks to avenge the murder of Arabs by Jews in Israel, and confessed to plotting to kidnap IDF soldiers and taking their weapons.

Ahmed, Janam and Zidanna were involved involved in the murder of taxi driver Yafim Weinstein, who was killed on November 30, 2009, as well as other attacks. In their interrogation, the three confessed to ordering Weinstein to a kibbutz near Nazareth, where one shot the taxi driver, and others assisted in destroying evidence. They reenacted the murder and led investigators to the place they hid the murder weapon used to kill Weinstein.

Weinstein, 54, a Nazareth Illit resident, was found murdered in his cab outside Kfar Hahoresh in November, leaving behind a wife, children and a grandchild. Details of the investigation were under a gag order until Monday morning.

Cell members traveled to al-Qaida training camp

The Shin Bet also found that after the murder, Ahmed and Janam attempted to travel to an al-Qaida training camp in Somalia to join the fighting against the Christian "heretics" as well as against the US, but were barred from entering Somalia at the Kenyan border.

Three others planned to kidnap a Nazareth resident and behead him on video, but did not do so. Elgrisi said that they had even dug a grave for the Christian man who "insulted the prophet Muhammad."

The men also threw stun grenades and Molotov cocktails at Jewish- and Christian-owned businesses and homes in the town. They burnt Christian tour buses, and dealt in arms.

They also stabbed a pizza delivery man in Nazareth Illit, stealing his scooter and NIS 100....

Oddly enough, it was actually fifteen Islamic jihadists killed by the bomb they were making inside their mosque. I expect that just before the bomb went off, several members of the Vast Majority of Peaceful Muslims were rushing toward them to tell them that they shouldn't be making a bomb inside a house of worship of the Religion of Peace™.

Premature Detonation Alert: "15 insurgents killed by their own bombs in Afghan mosque," from Deutsche Presse-Agentur, June 27 (thanks to Mackie):

Kabul - Eight Arab, five Pakistani and two Afghan militants were killed when bombs they were making exploded prematurely inside a mosque in eastern Afghanistan, the Interior Ministry said Sunday.

The insurgents were assembling bombs in Desi Mosque of Yousifkhela district in the south-eastern province of Paktika on Friday, the ministry said....

Another prominent "moderate" turns out to be something else. "Voice of Hate," by Jared Sorhaindo in FrontPageMagazine.com, June 28:

On June 17, Georgetown University held the event "Evangelicals & Muslims: Perspectives on Mission & Partnership" at its Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding. The last of its four panel discussions wrestled with the question: "Can Muslims and Christians be Partners in Reconciliation and Conflict Transformation?"

The crowd, at least 100 strong, consisted largely, if not exclusively, of professors and students. The panelists were Muqtedar Khan, professor of international relations at the University of Delaware and director of its Islamic Studies program; Louay Safi, of Indiana University and Purdue University; Chris Seiple, president of the Institute of Global Engagement; and David Shenk, a consultant for Eastern Mennonite Missions.

Khan, who spoke first, refused to appear on a 2007 academic panel with an IDF veteran who had served in the West Bank, yet somehow maintains a veneer of moderation. A fairly charismatic speaker, he got off the ground quickly by claiming a moral equivalence between Pat Robertson and Osama bin Laden. "We must condemn the extremists in our midst," he said, patting himself on the back for denouncing bin Laden. While Robertson has undoubtedly made controversial statements, comparing him with bin Laden, whose terrorist organization has murdered thousands of people in the United States and abroad, is appalling and absurd.

Khan labored to prove his ecumenical bona fides by asserting that evangelicals and Muslims are the two most marginalized groups in the United States. If one needs proof, he noted rather bizarrely, just look at the make-up of the U.S. Supreme Court, whose members represent neither group. Khan failed to note the obvious demographic error with his analogy: surveys indicate that evangelicals make up at least a quarter of the country's population (or over 70 million people), while reliable figures placed the Muslim population at about 1.4 million in 2008. The audience nodded and murmured with approval at this statistical sleight-of-hand.

And, of course, what's a panel discussion on religion without the gratuitous insertion of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? In Khan's own words, "Muslims and Christians make up two-thirds of the world's population. What is a major, if not the major, thing they have in common?" Why, their "partnership in pain" under Israeli occupation. Evangelical Christians, Khan added, must reject the pro-Israel majority of their brethren, who, through their support of Israel, are helping to inflict the "greatest oppression that Muslims suffer." No mention was made of the pain of Palestinian Christians under their Muslim brethren, nor of the oppression suffered by Muslims at the hands of their co-religionists.

The other participants spent so much time speaking in general banalities and quoting from the Bible and the Quran on brotherhood, justice, peace, and love that they sounded more like imams or priests giving sermons than academics. The talk became annoying when moral equivalence was drawn between Muslim and evangelical fundamentalists. For example, according to Seiple, Muslims today are the "Samaritans of the Bible to the majority of evangelicals - we have not treated them with love and respect." This trope has long since grown tired.

Khan dropped his mask of moderation even more explicitly during the question and answer period. He initially claimed that one must "submit" and be humble in order for justice to prevail. Furthermore, justice is only something that God can provide; we humans are impotent. It wasn't long, however, before he blatantly contradicted himself: "How can we ask [the Palestinians] to forgive the Jews for what they have done? You cannot. There must be justice first." He argued strenuously that Israel's treatment of the Palestinians has had a "profound impact on Muslim psychology" and that all Muslims, particularly in Palestine, are powerless. That claim set up this apologia for violence: "The capacity for compassion comes with power" - in other words (of course he would not say this outright), because Islam is allegedly powerless, violence in its name is at least somewhat understandable....

Read it all.

In "The Two Faces of the Ground Zero Mosque" in Pajamas Media (via MEF), June 22, our great friend Raymond Ibrahim exposes yet more duplicity from the Ground Zero Islamic supremacist mega-mosque organizers. Sign the petition here.

Depending on whether Islamists address Americans or fellow Muslims, the same exact words they use often relay diametrically opposed meanings. One example: when Americans hear Muslims evoke "justice," the former envision Western-style justice, whereas Muslims naturally have Sharia law justice in mind.

Islamists obviously use this to their advantage: when addressing the West, Osama bin Laden bemoans the "justice of our causes, particularly Palestine"; yet, when addressing Muslims, his notion of justice far transcends territorial disputes and becomes unintelligible from a Western perspective: "Battle, animosity, and hatred--directed from the Muslim to the infidel--is the foundation of our religion. And we consider this a justice and kindness to them. The West perceives fighting, enmity, and hatred all for the sake of the religion [i.e., Islam] as unjust, hostile, and evil. But who's understanding is right--our notions of justice and righteousness, or theirs?" (Al Qaeda Reader, p. 43).

Of course, that Osama bin Laden--slayer of 3,000 Americans and avowed enemy to the rest--exhibits two faces, one to Americans another to Muslims, is not surprising. Yet the reader may well be surprised to discover that the controversial Cordoba Initiative, which plans on manifesting itself as the largest American mosque, situated atop Ground Zero--that is, atop the carnage caused by none other than bin Laden--also has two faces, conveying one thing to Americans, quite another to Muslims.

The very name of the initiative itself, "Cordoba," offers different connotations to different people: In the West, the Andalusian city of Cordoba is regularly touted as the model of medieval Muslim progressiveness and tolerance for Christians and Jews. To many Americans, then, the choice to name the mosque "Cordoba" is suggestive of rapprochement and interfaith dialogue; atop the rubble of 9/11, it implies "healing"--a new beginning between Muslims and Americans. The Cordoba Initiative's mission statement certainly suggests as much:

Cordoba Initiative aims to achieve a tipping point in Muslim-West relations within the next decade, bringing back the atmosphere of interfaith tolerance and respect that we have longed for since Muslims, Christians and Jews lived together in harmony and prosperity eight hundred years ago.

Oddly enough, the so-called "tolerant" era of Cordoba supposedly occurred during the caliphate of 'Abd al-Rahman III (912-961)--well over a thousand years ago. "Eight hundred years ago," i.e., around 1200, the fanatical Almohids--ideological predecessors of al-Qaeda--were ravaging Cordoba, where "Christians and Jews were given the choice of conversion, exile, or death." A Freudian slip on the part of the Cordoba Initiative?

At any rate, the true history of Cordoba, not to mention the whole of Andalusia, is far less inspiring than what Western academics portray: the Christian city was conquered by Muslims around 711, its inhabitants slaughtered or enslaved. The original mosque of Cordoba--the namesake of the Ground Zero mosque--was built atop, and partly from the materials of, a Christian church. Modern day Muslims are well aware of all this. Such is the true--and ominous--legacy of Cordoba....

Read it all.

They did it last month, too. Details of the earlier attack here. "UN summer camp in Gaza vandalized," by Ibrahim Barzak for AP, June 28:

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip -- Two dozen masked men vandalized a U.N. summer camp for children in Gaza early Monday, burning and slashing tents, toys and a plastic swimming pool. It was the second such attack in just over a month.

There was no immediate claim of responsibility for the attack, but Islamic extremists have accused the main U.N. aid agency here of corrupting Gaza's youth with its summer program of games, sports and human rights lessons for 250,000 children.

The U.N.'s main competitor in running summer camps is the ruling Islamic militant Hamas movement, which says it reaches some 100,000 children. The Hamas camps teach Islam and military-style marching, along with swimming and horseback riding.

"The Hamas camps teach Islam"? Did AP just say that? Did they forget that we're supposed to believe that Hamas teaches a twisted, hijacked version of the Religion of Peace™, which is absolutely benign in all its Western manifestations?

In a statement on Monday's attack, the U.N. said about two dozen armed and masked men targeted a seaside camp in central Gaza, one of dozens of U.N. sites across the Palestinian territory.

The assailants tied up an unarmed guard, then tried to set fire to two tents and a perimeter fence made from tarp-like material. Wielding knives, they slashed a plastic swimming pool, blow-up slide and toys.

Of course, the UN blames Israel:

John Ging, the local U.N. chief, called it a "cowardly and despicable" attack and said the site would be rebuilt quickly.

Hamas police condemned the attack and said it was investigating.

Ging said the attack was the latest sign of growing levels of extremism in Gaza. He said it provides further evidence "of the urgency to change the circumstances on the ground that are generating such extremism."...

U.N. camps have been targeted by suspected Islamic extremists since their launch in 2007....

In recent months, Hamas has become increasingly assertive in trying to impose its strict version of Islam on everyday life in Gaza.

However, the Islamists have also avoided open confrontation with the U.N. Relief and Works Agency, which provides services for two-thirds of Gaza's 1.5 million people.

The U.N. avoids contact with Hamas, which is internationally shunned as a terror group.

At least for now.

Mansour Leghaei first graced our pages at Jihad Watch all the way back in 2004, when he "was discovered returning to Sydney with a 150-page notebook on tactics for warfare, intelligence and martyrdom." It included such tolerant nuggets of wisdom such as:

The enemies of Islam are to be categorised under three headings: 1, the infidels who do not accept the Koran as the Book of Heaven. 2, the oppressive and the unjust and whoever takes up arms against the Prophet. 3, heathens living in the Islamic countries who have broken the agreement to pay tribute to the Muslims."

Naturally, he claimed it had been taken out of context, and -- as is absolutely, positively, always the case when jihadist literature comes under outside scrutiny -- mistranslated.

Almost six years after this story first ran, Leghaei's time in Australia is up. Some in Australia hail him as an interfaith builder of bridges, but such outreach quite often covers more nefarious agendas -- see, for example, the smiling faces behind the Ground Zero mega-mosque project.

"Supporters gather as Islamic cleric deported," from ABC News (Australia), June 27 (thanks to Dumbledoresarmy):

A large crowd turned up at Sydney airport to farewell Sydney's most senior Islamic cleric, who was deported on Sunday night.

Sheikh Mansour Leghaei, a Shia cleric, was ordered to leave Australia after being declared a security risk.

Dr Leghaei boarded a flight to Iran on Sunday night and about 200 people from the Islamic Youth Centre at Earlwood turned up to support him.

He has lived in Australia for 16 years and says his deportation is unjustified.

Dr Leghaei says he has never been given an explanation as to why ASIO [Australian Security Intelligence Organisation] has deemed him a security risk.

"Whatever they think and whatever they may have is absolutely wrong," he said.

"There's an error somewhere. We tried our very best to help them and correct that error.

"They didn't let us, simply because the act does not allow us to do so."

Under Australian law, ASIO is under no obligation to tell Dr Leghaei why he is under suspicion.

Dr Leghaei's supporters say he is a leader of inter-faith relations between Muslims and Christians.

Now would be a good time to scroll back up and revisit that snippet from Leghaei's notebook.

The United Nations are said to have written to Australia's Immigration Minister asking that Dr Leghaei not be deported, but the request was denied.

Dr Leghaei had planned to fly out with his wife and daughter but leave behind his three sons.

Imam Feisel Abdul Rauf wants us to believe that he is moderate, tolerant, peaceful, the whole nine yards. Pay no attention to the lies, the deceptions, the advocacy for Sharia, the blaming America for 9/11 -- no, none of it matters. He is for peace. He is for tolerance. He is for understanding. And so now, in a brilliant open letter, Pamela Geller calls his bluff. Taking his self-definition at face value, she calls on him to act upon it -- by canceling plans for an Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero.

"Dear Imam Rauf and Daisy Khan...............A Heartfelt Plea," by Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs, June 27:

Dear Imam Rauf and Daisy Khan,

The remains of another seventy-two people were discovered on Friday not far from where you plan to build a thirteen-story Islamic center and mosque. Here we are, close to ten years after the largest jihadist attack ever to take place on American soil, and bodies, corpses, are still being recovered. Who knows how many body parts were found in the Burlington Coat Factory building when the landing gear crashed through all five floors? Thousands were never recovered. Their cemetery, their burial ground, is the area in and around Ground Zero.

Of course, as one of the leaders of the opposition to the painful and strangely thoughtless "Cordoba Initiative," my group SIOA will be pursuing legal avenues to stop or at least dramatically slow down the building of this mosque on the site that many consider to be a war memorial, while also staging mega-protests and sit-ins if and when construction begins, etc. But must it come to that?

You and I are New Yorkers. We are Americans, first. You, too, felt the devastating pain and anguish when the military arm of Islam (al qaeda) unleashed its attack on America on September 11th. The gaping hole at Ground Zero is a constant reminder of that terrible war.

Must we go legal? Must we stage more rallies with tens of thousands of Americans opposing the mosque? Can we not, as human beings, and in the interest of building bridges, mutual understanding and respect, implore you to reconsider your plans? I am sure your motivation to build bridges was a good one. But as you can see, it has had the opposite effect. The public outcry of millions of Americans make plain the wound that has been reopened and the terrible pain this is causing for families, for patriots, for Muslims of conscience. It is unbearable. This surely was not your intent.

Interfaith dialogue is a two-way street. I believe we should all be sensitive to each other. I don't see Muslims separately or apart, I see Americans. Period. Americans who love this country, and don't share the idea of "pure Islam" or "original" Islam that is found in Islamic countries. In many of the emails I receive, many Muslims understand the pain "Cordoba" inflicts -- not just the idea but the name itself (evoking Islamic conquest over the West).

I call upon your conscience, your goodness, your love of America, to move you to reconsider. More rallies will be staged -- tens of thousands will show. People might get hurt in a sit-in trying to stop the ground breaking of a mosque looking down on Ground Zero. Why? In the interest of building bridges?

Can we talk about this? Can we discuss this? Can the building have a church and a synagogue as well as a mosque? Or perhaps no mosque at all -- much the way community centers like the 92nd Street Y or the YWCA, to which you have compared your plan, don't have churches or synagogues.

As a man of the clergy, you must understand the pain this is causing for the victims who mourn their dead, for Americans who mourn their country's losses ........ You can not have wanted to create such sorrow.

What can we do to get you to withdraw this plan? Should we try to raise the money to release you from this tragic mistake? How can we help you? We want to work with you and do the right thing, build bridges and show each other mutual understanding and mutual respect. As a religious man, you would never mean to cause such overwhelming sadness and grief.

Imam Rauf, please withdraw this plan and show the world real understanding and kindness and empathy.

Sincerely yours,

Pamela Geller

Please sign this appeal to the Imam Rauf and Daisy Khan. Let them hear us.

Enraged over rumors that Muslims have been baptized, a new coalition of nine Muslim groups is trying to mobilize every mosque in Bekasi -- numbering in the hundreds -- to go to war against the Christians. But surely the Vast Majority of Peaceful Muslims in those mosques will put a stop to this, won't they? Won't they? "Muslim Groups Talk War Over 'Christianization,'" by Ulma Haryanto in the Jakarta Globe, June 28 (thanks to Nicolei):

In a move that could add to already simmering religious tensions in Bekasi, a new group calling itself the Bekasi Islamic Presidium is planning a roadshow aimed at persuading every mosque in the city to prepare for the possibility of "war" against "Christianization."

The group, consisting of nine members representing different Islamic organizations in the city, was formed on Sunday, the last day of the Bekasi Islamic Congress at Al Azhar Mosque that was convened to address the so-called Christianization problem.

Among its recommendations is the formation of Islamic militant groups, or laskar, within each mosque and the drafting of Shariah-based policies by the Bekasi administration.

"All Muslims should unite and be on guard because ... the Christians are up to something," Mur­hali Barda, head of the Bekasi chapter of the hard-line Islamic Defenders Front (FPI), told the Jakarta Globe.

"Apparently they want to test our patience. We are planning to invite them for a dialogue to determine what they really want. If talks fail, this might mean war," he warned.

Murhali claimed that a certain Christian foundation had been relentlessly baptizing groups of people in the city, which has seen a number of religious conflicts in recent months.

"The last one was on Wednesday. A number of buses were seen dropping off people, some wearing jilbabs, at a house in Kemang Pratama district in Bekasi. When our people interrogated the security guard, he said they came from Jakarta and were there to be baptized," he said.

However, Bekasi Police Chief Sr. Comr Imam Sugianto denied there had been a mass baptism. "All of them were students and they were at that house for recreation. They all went there for a swim," he said.

Abdul Qadir Aka, secretary general of the proselytization board at FPI Bekasi, said the militant groups were important.

"When the need arrives we will have units that can be mobilized," he said. "We cannot just depend on the FPI. We have hundreds and even thousands of mosques in Bekasi. Imagine what we can do together."

The units, he said, would also serve as "morality police" targeting activities such as drinking alcohol, prostitution, casual sex and gambling, all forbidden in Islam.

Saleh Mangara Sitompul, the secretary of the presidium and also a member of the Bekasi branch of Muhammadiyah, Indonesia's second-largest Muslim organization, said: "Their task is to prevent and guard Bekasi Muslims [against vice], and as a communication and coordination forum to elect a trustworthy leader" for Bekasi Muslims.

But Abdul stressed that the units would not be armed. "The only thing close to a weapon that we have are the poles on our banners," he said, laughing.

"Unless necessary," he added in a more serious tone. "But then there already are armed units" in the national Army.

The group also says it will forward to the Bekasi administration several policy recommendations that are compliant with Sha­riah law. "We hope that the recommendations to the government can serve as a guide for them so that there will be no religious defamation or interreligious conflicts," Saleh said....

And the stealth jihad advances apace. "White House welcomes Shariah finance specialist: Obama selects Muslim expert in Islamic transactions as fellow," by Chelsea Schilling for WorldNetDaily, June 25 (thanks to all who sent this in):

The Obama administration has announced its appointment of 13 White House fellows - and the first person featured on its short list is a Muslim attorney who specializes in Shariah-compliant transactions....

White House fellows spend a year as full-time, paid assistants to senior White House staff, the vice president, Cabinet secretaries and senior administration officials.

Samar Ali of Waverly, Tenn., is the first name appearing on the White House list. She is an associate with the law firm Hogan Lovells - a firm that claims to have advised on more than 200 Islamic finance transactions with an aggregate deal value in excess of $40 billion.

According to Ali's biography posted on the White House website, "She is responsible for counseling clients on mergers & acquisitions, cross-border transactions, Shariah-compliant transactions, project finance and international business matters. During her time with Hogan Lovells, she has been a founding member of the firm's Abu Dhabi office."

Hogan Lovells lists Ali's experience "advising a Middle Eastern university in the potential establishment of a Foreign Aid Conventional and Shariah Compliant Student Loan Program and advising a Middle Eastern client in relation to a U.S. government subcontract matter."

"Our team members are at the forefront of developments in the Islamic finance industry," Hogan Lovells boasts. "We help set standards for the sector. We have also advised on numerous first-of-their-kind transactions, such as the first convertible Sukuk, the first equity-linked Sukuk, the first Shariah-compliant securitization, the first international Sukuk al-mudaraba and Sukuk al-musharaka, the first Sukuk buyback and the first Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency guaranteed Islamic project financing."

Ali also clerked for Judge Gilbert S. Merritt of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit and Judge Edwin Cameron, now of the Constitutional Court of South Africa.

Promoting Islam and Shariah

The White House notes that Ali also led the YMCA Israeli-Palestinian Modern Voices for Progress Program and is a founding member of the first U.S. Delegation to the World Islamic Economic Forum. Ali was listed as a member of the British delegation to the World Islamic Economic Forum in 2009 and as a U.S. delegate in 2010.

Shariah Finance Watch blog noted, "[I]t was at the World Islamic Economic Forum where key leaders declared Shariah finance to be "dawa" (missionary) activity to promote Islam and Shariah."

In fact, the president of Indonesia, H. Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, delivered a March 2, 2009, keynote address to Islamic leaders at the World Islamic Economic Forum in Jakarta during which he called for Islamic banks to do "missionary work in the Western world."

"Islamic banking should now be able to take a leadership position in the banking world," he said. "Islamic banks have been much less affected by the financial meltdown than the conventional banks - for the obvious reason that Shariah banks do not indulge in investing in toxic assets and in leveraged funds. They are geared to supporting the real economy."

He added, "Islamic bankers should therefore do some missionary work in the Western world to promote the concept of Shariah banking, for which many in the West are more than ready now." [...]

In his July 2008 essay, "Financial Jihad: What Americans Need to Know," Vice President Christopher Holton of the Center for Security Policy wrote, "America is losing the financial war on terror because Wall Street is embracing a subversive enemy ideology on one hand and providing corporate life support to state sponsors of terrorism on the other hand."

Holton referred to Islamic finance, or "Shariah-Compliant Finance", as a "modern-day Trojan horse" infiltrating the U.S. He said it poses a threat to the U.S. because it seeks to legitimize Shariah - a man-made medieval doctrine that regulates every aspect of life for Muslims - and could ultimately change American life and laws....

There is much more. Read it all.

Feel the love. Sunni/Shi'ite Jihad Update: "Police find 11 beheaded bodies in Afghan south," from Reuters, June 25 (thanks to all who sent this in):

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan (Reuters) - The bodies of 11 men, their heads cut off and placed next to them, have been found in a violent southern province of Afghanistan, a senior police official said on Friday.

A police patrol discovered the bodies on Thursday in the Khas Uruzgan district of Uruzgan province, north of the Taliban stronghold of Kandahar, said police official Mohammad Gulab Wardak.

"This was the work of the Taliban. They beheaded these men because they were ethnic Hazaras and Shi'ite Muslims," he said.

The Taliban were not immediately available for comment about the incident. The militants usually dispute claims by Afghan and foreign security forces.

Hazaras, who make up roughly 15 percent of Afghanistan's population of around 30 million, largely follow the Shi'ite sect of Islam, a minority in Afghanistan, rather than the Sunni Muslim Taliban, who are also primarily ethnic Pashtuns.

Hazaras faced widespread oppression from the Taliban when the Islamists ruled most of the country during the 1990s. Mass graves containing the bodies of Hazaras have been found since the militants were overthrown in late 2001.

Violence in Afghanistan is at its worst levels in the 9-year war, with the Taliban stepping up their campaign of suicide bombings and assassinations, particularly in their Kandahar heartland....

Here we go again: Islamic apologists in the West and non-Muslim Western analysts insist that jihadists and Islamic supremacists misunderstand the Religion of Peace™. Meanwhile, the jihadists and Islamic supremacists insist that it is their opponents who are misunderstanding the Religion of War. "Enemies of Islam are exploiting religion and morality: Leader," from the Tehran Times, June 27 (thanks to all who sent this in):

TEHRAN -- Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei says that the enemies of Islam are exploiting religion and morality.

It is essential that efforts are made to enlighten public opinion and maintain vigilance in Iranian society and the Islamic world because the enemies of Islam are exploiting religion and morality as their tools, Ayatollah Khamenei stated in a speech to a large gathering of people commemorating the birth anniversary of Imam Ali (AS) in Tehran on Saturday.

When they seek to deceive the non-Muslims, the arrogant powers make use of issues such as human rights and democracy, and when they are trying to influence Muslim public opinion, they exploit Islam and the Quran, the Leader noted....

"With God's grace, the Iranian youths will see a day when the arrogant enemies will feel they no longer have the ability to bully the Iranian nation," Ayatollah Khamenei added.

"The era of the hegemonistic powers freely threatening other nations is over. The Iranian nation is now recognized as a powerful nation in the world," he said.

He went on to say that the powers of global arrogance, and above all the United States, have been disgraced in the eyes of the international community.

They are no longer able to prevent Iran from pursuing the path it has chosen, the Leader observed.

Or maybe Obama's America doesn't even really want to.

COMING SOON: SIOA DOCUMENTARY ON THE ISLAMIC SUPREMACIST MEGA-MOSQUE AT GROUND ZERO

SIOA is proud to present its first documentary: Standing for Freedom Against the Ground Zero Mega-Mosque. Currently in production, the Standing for Freedom Against the Ground Zero Mega-Mosque documentary will feature exclusive coverage of the June 6 SIOA protest against the mega-mosque that was attended by thousands and thousands of Americans.

It will document the fight and the great Americans who stood for what was right.

You'll get a front-row seat for speeches by SIOA's Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer, along with heroes of 9/11, 9/11 family members, human rights activists from India, Africa, the Gaza Strip, Egypt and elsewhere, and many others.

Standing for Freedom Against the Ground Zero Mega-Mosque also brings you the coverage of the Ground Zero mega-mosque controversy by CNN, ABC, and others, exposing the media's outrageous bias against SIOA and all those fighting for freedom against the mega-mosque -- plus exclusive interviews with Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer and former Muslims, giving an overview of the controversy, detailing with the dishonesty of the mosque organizers, and much more.

This documentary will be the historic record of how an Islamic supremacist mega mosque came to stand on the burial ground of Ground Zero after the largest Islamic attack in the United States, resulting in the murder of thousands of Americans.

Standing for Freedom Against the Ground Zero Mega-Mosque is the one documentary resource you need not only to stand up for America against this Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero, but to equip you to fight against Islamic supremacist initiatives in your own area.

We are taking pre-orders now! Standing for Freedom Against the Ground Zero Mega-Mosque is a limited edition, so order your copy today!

The end times have surely come: the UNRWA has actually blamed the Palestinians for bringing their own misery upon themselves. "UNWRA [sic] criticizes Palestinian infighting," from the Jerusalem Post, June 27 (thanks to Marc):

The UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) called on the different Palestinian factions Sunday to stop the infighting in order to solve a developing electricity crisis in Hamas-run Gaza.

"It is such a tragedy that, on top of all the other crises that we have in the Gaza Strip, we now have a crisis of electricity," John Ging, director of UNRWA in Gaza, was quoted by AFP as saying.

"It's an unbearable situation here at the moment, and it needs to be solved very quickly. It's a Palestinian problem, made by Palestinians, and causing Palestinian suffering. So let's have a Palestinian solution," he added....

Good luck with that.

If poverty really does cause terrorism -- a common assumption that has been thoroughly debunked in study after study -- then this should send terrorism in Indonesia. "Indonesia pays former terrorists to give up violent jihad," by Mark Dunn in The Daily Telegraph, June 28:

KEY terrorists involved in the 2002 Bali bombing and the attack on Australia's embassy are being paid cash incentives by Indonesia to turn their backs on extremism.

Three former senior Jemaah Islamiah operatives, Abu Dujana, Nasir Abbas and Ali Imron, have received financial incentives, including small cash payments, mobile phones and accommodation for their families, to "de-radicalise" them, according to terrorism expert Carl Ungerer.

And US security analyst Zachary Abuza has revealed that other JI terrorists and footsoldiers who have been, or remain, in jail are having their food and children's tuition fees paid for in an attempt to convince them to renounce violent jihad....

"They were small [payments] -- at first tuition money for kids, then for uniforms, food, and even some travel for families to visit their incarcerated relatives," Dr Abuza said.

"As far as I know, everyone going through the [de-radicalisation] program and co-operating is getting some aid, not just the big names.

"I am very sceptical of these programs as they are simply attempts to wean these guys off terrorism. They are still very radical and intolerant in their beliefs."

What a shock!

But he said some payments had helped challenge JI's radical teachings. "The [Indonesian] Government has helped them publish memoirs and other tracts to counter the jihadi narrative," Dr Abuza said.

"It is important to support the families to get them out of, or away from, JI's social infrastructure.

"Families have been the key of the success -- if it means conjugal visits, or jail house marriages or some small payments to families and it leads to guys renouncing terrorism, it's OK."...

Dr Ungerer said "incentives" such as food, accommodation and payments of several thousand dollars to key JI imams or leaders was aimed at addressing perceived "economic grievances" which may be a factor in those individuals' extremist views.

We'll see.

Where might he get that idea? Qur'an 5:41 calls them "listeners for the sake of falsehood," or "men who will listen to any lie." 5:64 says they are "accursed" for allegedly saying Allah's hand is fettered. 5:82 says "Strongest among men in enmity to the believers wilt thou find the Jews and Pagans." And of course, those are just a few examples of Islam's pervasive antisemitism, all in just one chapter.

"Turkish man plotted to kill rabbis," from the Jerusalem Post, June 25 (thanks to Larry):

The individual, Ismet Rencber, had been tracked after mailing a threatening anonymous letter to the main synagogue in Istanbul and was stopped by security forces upon his arrival at a relative's home in the city's suburbs.

Rencber, a mason from the city of Kars in eastern Turkey, denied that he intended to kill any Jews, but told investigators that he "hated Jews."

In 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan vowed to combat anti-Semitism in his country in the wake of IDF Operation Cast Lead. "There has been no anti-Semitism in the history of this country," Erdogan told members of his party at the time. "As a minority, they're our citizens. Both their security and the right to observe their faith are under our guarantee....

At what price?

This editorial speaks about the possibility of a jihad attack in New England, but what it says is true of everywhere in the United States, as well as Europe. "Time bombs: Terrorists in New England," from the Union Leader, June 27 (thanks to Orville):

Last Monday, Faisal Shahzad pleaded guilty to trying to explode his SUV in Times Square. He also acknowledged that he came to Massachusetts to collect $5,000 in financing for the plot. Federal prosecutors say the money was from the Pakistani Taliban.

If there are Taliban members in Massachusetts, might they shop at Rockingham Park Mall in Salem or enjoy a Sunday afternoon at Hampton Beach? Might some even live in New Hampshire? [...]

The federal government cannot keep home-grown terrorists out of the country. But it can keep a vigilant eye on those with known terrorist sympathies and "connect the dots." It can make it harder for foreign nationals who would slay us in the name of their god -- or who have participated in mass murder -- to get here. It can do these things if Congress and the occupant of the White House have the will.

Alas, a few months shy of the 9th anniversary of 9/11, it remains easier to pass undetected into the United States than to get into a rock concert without a ticket. And the current administration in Washington opposes states, overwhelmed with illegal immigrants, taking border security into their own hands.

What will it take for our government (of both parties) to get serious about keeping terrorists out of our communities? A blown up subway train or city bus? A lost shopping mall or sports stadium? Washington waits, but the terrorists are already here.

According to the CIA World Factbook, Nepal is currently Hindu 80.6%, Buddhist 10.7%, Muslim 4.2%, Kirant 3.6%, other 0.9%. That's from the 2001 census. And so the U.S. Government under the rule of Barack Obama is reaching out to...the Muslims.

"DeLisi in mosque," from The Himalayan Times, June 25 (thanks to herr Oyal):

KATHMANDU: US Ambassador to Nepal Scott H DeLisi said his country was committed to further engagement with the Muslim community in Nepal for cementing mutual relations and interests.

Addressing a special event organised by Madrasa Islamiya School in Ghantaghar today, DeLisi said, "I am delighted that we have begun to build this relationship and I look forward to expanding our outreach programme in the months and years ahead."

Earlier, the US Embassy had organised the outreach programme for the country's Muslim community in December 2009, reaching more than 3,000 individuals in 19 areas. Stating that such contact between Nepali and US communities was a must to better know each other, DeLisi said he had served in Pakistan with a predominantly Muslim population.

"I have seen the strengths and challenges of Muslim communities first hand. Through our outreach, I hope to learn more and expand mutual understanding and partnership with the Muslim community in Nepal," he mentioned.

The outreach campaign was organised in collaboration with the Teacher Educators' Society, Nepal (TESON) to support dialogue with local Muslim communities, with whom the US Embassy historically had limited contact....

And no doubt they support Hitler's genocidal aspirations for the Jews, as these coalesce so nicely with Islamic antisemitism.

Photo courtesy The Religion of Peace.

Punjab's government defies the double-game-playing Pakistani government and openly supports a banned jihadist group. "VIEW: Punjab government funding Jamaat-ud-Dawa," by Naeem Tahir in the Daily Times, June 26 (thanks to Kisan):

The United Nations Security Council imposed sanctions on JuD, declaring it a global terrorist group. Pakistan's government also banned the JuD on the same day and issued an order to seal the JuD offices in all four provinces.

The chief minister of Punjab has allocated funds of Rs 86 million to the suspected terror nursery of Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD) in Muridke, defying the ban on the organisation by the federal government. The JuD is alleged to have been involved in the Mumbai attacks. What message will be delivered to India at a time when peace is being talked about? Is this how we bridge the trust deficit? On the other hand, an almost Rs 100 million cut has been made in the funds for culture and youth affairs. The Punjab budget 2010-11 of the chote Mian Sahib speaks of his preferences.

These matters have been reported by two important newspapers in the country. Others in the media are either in a state of disbelief and total shock, or have grown insensitive to whatever happens and have just given up. [...]

Funds to the JuD of Muridke are being provided by the CM of the largest province in the federation, while the amir of JuD is also the founder of Lashkar-e-Tayyaba (LeT). According to media reports, the JuD and LeT have been accused by the US of training the gunmen of the November 2008 Mumbai attacks. [...]

In the US anti-terrorism circles, it is also known as Jamaat ud Dawa il al Quran al Sunnah (JDQ). A detainee at Guantanamo Bay, Abdul Rahim Muslim Dost, who is a poet and a journalist, is said to have stated during his interrogation that "the JDQ has a military wing and practises assassination".

An Indian journalist, Harinder Baweja, who was provided access to the Muridke centre of JuD, quotes the following dialogue with his guide: "Do you support Lashkar-e-Tayyaba?" Response: "We used to." Question: "You used to?" Response: "Yes, we were like-minded, but the group was banned after Indian propaganda following the attack on parliament, which was done by Jaish-e-Mohammed and not the Lashkar. We used to provide logistic support to them, collect funds for them and look after their publicity." Question: "Did you also provide them with arms?" Response: "They must have bought weapons with the money we gave them. They were obviously not using the money to buy flowers for the Indian army." The author further says that Amir Ajmal Kasab confessed to having received training at Muridke.

After all this, Punjab is officially providing funds to JuD on some pretext. With this kind of background, how can the Khadim-e-Aala Punjab, the chote Mian Sahib, be so naive as to commit public funds to such an organisation? In his defence, one can only say that he may have been busy with his usual 'lunch and lassi' while some motivated bureaucrat slipped in the funding support to the JuD quietly, and our CM knows nothing about it. Hard to believe! But what else should we think?

The only alternate theory is that the CM has sympathies with the JuD. He is prepared to turn his face the other way from their terror activities, and even the most recent attack on the Ahmedis. Accordingly, the CM likes to ignore his law minister's contacts with jihadi organisations and supports the nurseries of terrorists. Finally, the CM is prepared to confront the federation against the ban on the JuD! Suspicions also arise about the billions of rupees kept as block provisions in the budget, which are in fact additions to the CM's discretionary funds. Where will these funds end up?

One wonders what the representative of the federal government to Punjab, the governor, thinks of this funding and the defiance of the federal ban. Does he also endorse the cut in the funds for culture and youth affairs? Is there anything in his powers to correct this situation?

Or does he even care to do so?

A huge convention expected to attract 10,000 Misunderstanders of Islam to Toronto should wake Canadians up to the nature and magnitude of the threat they face, but it probably won't -- witness this very article, in which Licia Corbella hauls out the slippery and untrustworthy Tarek Fatah (I didn't quote that section below) and props him up against Zakir Naik and these 10,000 of Naik's fellow Islamic supremacists, as if the two opposing sides were equal in heft. "Islamist hatefest should open Canadians' eyes," by Licia Corbella for the Calgary Herald, June 26 (thanks to Banafsheh):

More than 10,000 people are expected to attend the Journey of Faith Conference in Toronto on July 2, 3 and 4. That may sound benign, but that fact alone should alarm this entire country.

The conference, sold as one of the largest Islamic conferences in North America, headlines speakers with such vile and repugnant views, that to repeat them almost smacks of satire and farce.

The big draw for the event was, until earlier this week, Dr. Zakir Naik, a popular Indian Muslim televangelist, who has -- thanks largely to the alarm raised by Tarek Fatah, founder of the Muslim Canadian Congress -- been denied a visa to come to Canada.

Naik, billed as an expert on the Qur'an on the conference website, has said "every Muslim should be a terrorist," that gays and lesbians should be sentenced to capital punishment, that a man has the right to beat his wife, though he warned his devoted followers to avoid leaving a mark or hitting her on the face, and, surprise, surprise, he says that Jews are the "staunchest enemy" of Muslims. He is, ironically and comically, the founder of Peace TV. You couldn't make this stuff up. It's as Orwellian as, well, Orwell's 1984 in which the Ministry of Truth promoted slogans like: "War is Peace," "Freedom is Slavery," "Ignorance is Strength."

Despite being denied a visa to Canada and being banned from Britain where he was to attend a "Peace" conference there, Naik was still listed as the headline speaker on the event website until Friday morning and he dominates the benign-looking posters covered in Barbie-doll pink splashes of colour that are apparently still hanging in Toronto subway stations.

This is how he was described on the Journey of Faith website until Friday morning: "A medical doctor by professional training, Dr. Zakir Naik is a renowed (sic) international orator on Islam and Comparative Religion. Dr. Zakir Naik clarifies Islamic viewpoints and clears misconceptions about Islam, using the Qur'an, authentic Hadith and other religious Scriptures as a basis, in conjunction with reason, logic and scientific facts."

According to many Muslims, however, it is Naik and his ilk who reinforces misconceptions of Islamic viewpoints....

Yes. Except they never quite get around to explaining the exact nature of those "misconceptions," or to combating the influence of Naik and others like him among Muslims.

The conference organizers sought out Naik because he's considered an expert on the Qur'an and that's the theme for this year's event -- "The Holy Qur'an."...

Now, however, that the jig is up and his livelihood -- so reliant on the wilful blindness of the tolerant West -- is being jeopardized, Naik is saying his comments about terrorism were taken out of context. You be the judge. Here are Naik's exact words from a 2007 video: "But if you ask my view, if given the truth, if he (Osama bin Laden) is fighting the enemies of Islam, I am for him. If he is terrorizing the terrorists, if he is terrorizing America the terrorist, the biggest terrorist, I am with him. Every Muslim should be a terrorist." [...]

Saying repugnant things is -- and must be -- allowed in Canada. However, urging people to break the law by beating their wives, becoming terrorists and advocating the killing of gays and lesbians are not acceptable forms of speech. It's one thing to say, "I hate (fill in the blank)," and quite another to urge people to kill them.

And so it was right to deny Naik entry to Canada, but much of the rest of the show will go on. The only thing that could stop it is if no one showed up. If many people do, then the conference slogan, "Peace: the solution for humanity," is a smokescreen to attempt to keep the West blind to a dangerous ideological war that is raging before our very eyes.

Yep.

"It is extremely difficult to reform terrorists because we are trying to destroy years of indoctrination and misinterpretation of Islam." One wonders why it is so difficult. If their misinterpretation of Islam is so clear, one would think it wouldn't be all that hard to explain that to the likes of Abdullah Sonata and other jihadists, who are generally very devout and anxious to the right Islamic thing.

Unless, of course, the "misinterpretation of Islam" that the jihadists use to justify their actions and make recruits is based on a broad, mainstream tradition in Islam -- a tradition that is yet to be successfully challenged on Islamic grounds by self-proclaimed moderates.

"Terrorist 'Rehab' a Failure: Minister," from the Jakarta Globe, June 26 (thanks to Nicolei):

The government's deradicalization program aimed at getting convicted terrorists to renounce violence has been declared a failure in the wake of this week's arrest of suspect Abdullah Sonata, who was released from prison in 2009 on good behavior.

"We have to say that generally the program has failed," Minister of Justice and Human Rights Patrialis Akbar said on Friday. "There are convicts who have successfully been re-integrated back into society, leaving behind their old ways. But successes are few compared to those who remain unreformed."

"It is extremely difficult to reform terrorists because we are trying to destroy years of indoctrination and misinterpretation of Islam," he said. "We will solicit help from psychologists, experts, criminologists and clerics to determine the best means to reform hard-core terrorists."

Sonata, 32, was arrested on Wednesday for his suspected involvement in a plot to carry out Mumbai-style attacks in Jakarta that police said targeted several high-profile figures, including President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono. [...]

Local terror deprogramming efforts have been led largely by police, unlike similar programs in Saudi Arabia, Malaysia and Singapore. The main thrust behind the police efforts is getting prisoners to give up violence and co-opting them as informers. While officers provide financial help to reformed inmates and their families, little is done to challenge their radical religious beliefs, such as the goal of imposing Islamic rule. [...]

Sonata was arrested in 2005 for possession of weapons and for hiding Noordin M Top, the slain terrorism mastermind.

Behind bars, Sonata was viewed as a shining example of how criminals can change. "He was a nice person, cooperative with our rehabilitation program," said Noor Huda Ismail, executive director of the Inscription Peace Foundation, established in 2008 to turn terrorism inmates around. "But in the end, he was a failure."

I wonder why!

Yet another Islamic charity turns out to be an engine of the jihad. Note also the involvement of the dhimmi former Congressman. "Former director of Islamic charity pleads guilty," by Mark Morris for McClatchy Newspapers, June 25 (thanks to Dr. A):

KANSAS CITY, Mo. - The former director of a Missouri Islamic charity admitted in federal court Friday that he sent more than $1 million to Iraq in violation of U.S. sanctions.

Mubarak Hamed, 53, also pleaded guilty to conspiracy and a tax violation for misusing the charity's tax exempt status and lying to the Internal Revenue Service.

Hamed served as executive director of the now-defunct Islamic American Relief Agency-USA from 1991 until October 2004, when federal agents raided the charity's Columbia, Mo., offices and carted off truckloads of documents and computers.

The same day, the U.S. Treasury Department froze the charity's assets and said it was part of a global network of similarly named charities that supported terrorists, including Osama bin Laden, al-Qaida, the Taliban and Hamas.

U.S. Attorney Beth Phillips said in a written statement that the guilty plea represented a landmark moment in the nine-year criminal probe of the charity.

''Hamed compromised national security by secretly funneling more than a million dollars to Iraq,'' she said....

In pleading guilty, Hamed also admitted to a long string of facts in his plea agreement, many of which he and others had spent years denying. After contending that his charity was an entirely independent organization, he acknowledged Friday that it was part of an international organization headquartered in Khartoum, Sudan, that also used the initials IARA.

The African charity, according to federal officials, had frequent contact with the worst players in international terrorism.

Hamed also acknowledged that in 2001 he instructed an IARA spokesman to lie during a television interview, saying that a man who had purchased the satellite phone that al-Qaida used in the East Africa embassy bombings never had been employed by the Missouri charity.

In his plea agreement, Hamed acknowledged that he had personally hired the man to work in Columbia.

After a prosecutor read the factual recitation, U.S. District Judge Nanette Laughrey asked Hamed if the facts were true. Hamed hesitated for a moment and noted that he had not actually drafted the statement.

''I accept them,'' Hamed said.

''Well, they're either true or not true,'' Laughrey pressed.

''They're true,'' he replied softly.

Hamed is the third defendant to plead guilty in the case. In December, charity fundraiser Ahmad Mustafa pleaded guilty to arranging for the transfer of money from the U.S. to family members in his native Iraq.

Al Mohamed Begegni, a board member and the charity's treasurer, pleaded guilty in April to conspiring to violate Iraq sanctions.

Two remaining defendants are scheduled to begin what is expected to be a lengthy trial on July 6: Abdel Azim El-Siddig, the charity's vice president for international operations, and former U.S. congressman Mark Deli Siljander.

Siljander is accused of taking $75,000 from IARA to help the charity have its name removed from a U.S. Senate Finance Committee list of organizations that allegedly supported terrorism. Prosecutors contend that money had been stolen from a U.S. Agency for International Development grant that IARA was supposed to have used for relief projects in Mali, Africa.

Siljander has said the money from IARA was to have helped support his work on his book, ''Deadly Misunderstanding: A Congressman's Quest to Bridge the Muslim-Christian Divide.''

In his plea agreement, however, Hamed said that contention was ''utterly false.''

''Hamed never discussed with Siljander the writing of a book, and would not have spent $75,000 of IARA's funds for such a purpose,'' according to the statement.

Siljander served as a Republican member of Congress from 1981 to 1987 and later opened a Washington public relations firm. Lance Sandage, a lawyer representing Siljander, declined to comment on Hamed's plea agreement....

They said they were switching to the halal menu to satisfy demand, but there didn't turn out to be that much demand after all. Dhimmitude doesn't pay: "KFC forced to ditch halal-only menus after disappointing sales," from the Daily Mail, June 26 (thanks to all who sent this in):

KFC has scrapped its policy of serving halal food only in some of its takeaways, following customer protests.

One hundred of the fast food chain's restaurants removed non-halal items from their menus last year in an attempt to attract Muslim customers.

But thousands of regular customers complained, including Alan Phillips, who was furious when the Burton-on-Trent branch refused to serve him his favourite Big Daddy chicken burger with bacon and cheese topping.

He was told it was forbidden to keep bacon on the same premises as halal meat and he would have to travel five miles to the nearest non-halal restaurant.

Now KFC has admitted five of its outlets - including Burton - are reverting to standard menus following poor sales....

A spokesperson for KFC blamed low demand. He said: 'We introduced our trial in areas where we expected a large demand for halal restaurants, and as with any trial, we continually evaluate results, and adapt as necessary.

'There are always areas which are more successful than others, and despite positive feedback, a few stores haven't met our forecasts, so for that reason, we have decided to stop trialling halal in five restaurants as of 19th July.

'We are continuing our trial in other areas and are still offering halal in 96 restaurants, and will review the trial over the coming months.'...

All pork products are forbidden by Muslim law, so participating outlets have to take them off the menu.

In March, Mr Phillips, who was refused a Big Daddy Burger in Burton, said the policy was 'extremely unfair' on non-Muslim customers.

He said: 'It was like they were saying I couldn't buy bacon because it might offend people.

'I have many friends who are black, white and Muslim but they wouldn't be forced to eat non-halal meat.

'I have no problem with them selling halal meat, but I would like the choice.'...

But in Sharia, there is no choice.

(Actually Teller is not involved in this, but I couldn't resist playing on their bit "Penn and Tiller get killed.")

Penn Jillette, the famous debunker, won't say anything about Islam, because he is afraid that if he does, he will get killed. Then he has the breathtaking audacity or lack of self-reflection to try to portray his admission of this as some kind of act of moral courage, because it might please Islamic jihadists: "It might, but you have to say what you believe, even it if pleases somebody you disagree with."

But of course he isn't saying what he believes when it comes to Islam, and he is tacitly admitting that terrorism works by refraining from talking about Islam because of the possibility of a violent reaction.

That's plain cowardice.

Note, however, that although he has contempt for Christianity, he refuses to play any fashionable moral equivalence games, and instead acknowledges that Christians generally don't react to his scorn the way Muslims would.

"A uniquely Weekly ranking of the personalities who define Las Vegas," from the Las Vegas Weekly, June 24 (thanks to Reason Magazine):

Are there any groups you won't go after? We haven't tackled Scientology because Showtime doesn't want us to. Maybe they have deals with individual Scientologists--I'm not sure. And we haven't tacked Islam because we have families.

Meaning, you won't attack Islam because you're afraid it'll attack back ... Right, and I think the worst thing you can say about a group in a free society is that you're afraid to talk about it--I can't think of anything more horrific.

Of course, it might please some Islamic fundamentalists to hear you say that you won't talk about them because you're afraid ... It might, but you have to say what you believe, even it if pleases somebody you disagree with--that issue comes up all the time in moral discourse.

You do go after Christians, though ... Teller and I have been brutal to Christians, and their response shows that they're good fucking Americans who believe in freedom of speech. We attack them all the time, and we still get letters that say, "We appreciate your passion. Sincerely yours, in Christ." Christians come to our show at the Rio and give us Bibles all the time. They're incredibly kind to us. Sure, there are a couple of them who live in garages, give themselves titles and send out death threats to me and Bill Maher and Trey Parker. But the vast majority are polite, open-minded people, and I respect them for that....

Comments by David G. Littman: NGO Representative to the UN - Geneva: Association for World Education / World Union for Progressive Judaism

* * * * *

Having already posted a text on the usual "Palestine and other occupied Arab territories" here, and another on the Syrian Blood-Libel renewal - also item 9 ("Silence that Dreadful Bell") here, we are now making available our last 2 statements delivered under item 8 ('violence against women') & item 10 (Haiti & Israel's humanitarian aid).

It is necessary to repeat ad nauseam the taboo Sharia-Shafi'i 'connection' to FGM in certain countries, such as Egypt (96%) and northern Sudan (90%) - a total of half (29) OIC countries; and other traditional-religious types of 'violence' against women, including stoning, 'honor-killing' and 9 year old girl marriages, thereby shaming those who still refuse to admit reality.

As we had not planned to speak under item 10, that statement was delivered impromptu - the last NGO speaker under the last item on the agenda - with a few notes and facts. It was striking that, once again, even on the question of humanitarian aid to Haiti, Israel's rapid "Operation Blessing" contribution went unmentioned, although it was unique in many humane respects. Our 'suggestion' would be a good 'start' for world humanitarian peace activists to envisage.

At this 14th session, we were not interrupted by a 'point of order on any oral statement. This shows that NGOs must remain firm as we wrote over a decade ago - especially now as the pressure grows. Below is the 1st paragraph and the conclusion of our article: "Islamism Grows Stronger at the United Nations." (Middle East Quarterly 6, N° 3, Sept. 1999, 59-64.)

In recent years, representatives of some Muslim states have demanded, and often received, special treatment at the United Nations mostly via the Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR). As a result, non-diplomatic terms such as "blasphemy" and "defamation of Islam" have seeped into the United Nations system, leading to a situation in which non-Muslim governments accept certain rules of conduct in conformity with Islamic law (the Shari`a) and acquiesce to a self-imposed silence regarding issues touching on Islam. This pattern of behavior has emerged with regard to a host of issues - Salman Rushdie, Muslim antisemitism, Islamic alternatives to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), a "defamation of Islam" resolution, and the actions of the Sudanese government.

Conclusion

The new rules of conduct being imposed by the OIC, and acceded to by other states, give those who claim to represent Islam an exceptional status at the United Nations that has no legal basis and no precedent; it therefore gives ample reason for apprehension. Will a prohibition of discussion about certain political aspects of Islam become generally accepted at the United Nations and beyond, contradicting "the right to freedom of opinion and expression", promised by Article XIX of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? Unless farsighted states, both Muslim and non-Muslim, make it their business to assert and reassert the need for freedom of speech, this precious liberty is at risk of being eroded throughout the system of international organizations.

* * * * *

ASSOCIATION FOR WORLD EDUCATION
WORLD UNION FOR PROGRESSIVE JUDAISM

UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL - 14th session (31 May - 18 June 2010)
President: Ambassador Alex Van Meeuwen (Belgium) - 32nd Plenary Meeting
Statement by Representative David G. LITTMAN - Tuesday (@5:00), 15 June 2010

Follow-up to and implementation of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action:
Integrating the human rights of women throughout the United Nations system (item 8)

[Words in brackets not spoken in 2 minutes - unable to complete George Washington quotation]

It is exactly two years [8th session - 16/6/2008] since the 'Sharia-gate Shipwreck' took place at the Council on this very item concerning the follow-up to the DPA re: 'violence against women'. [Then we spoke for AWE & IHEU - today for AWE & WUPJ]. A reminder of that 'Affair' may well permit a better understanding of a major taboo subject which, if not constantly challenged here, will lead us all along that slippery self-censorship path that began with the [19 April] 1997 Commission 'Blasphemy Affair'. We have analysed it at great length in several articles.

On 16 June 2008 we were stopped on a 'point of order' by a State Member after 22 seconds, to be followed by 24 more points during a 90 minute 'show' that still fascinates bloggers worldwide. Fortunately, the Council president, Canada and the EU came to the rescue - and Germany also after Egypt's delegate defamed Christianity by stating: "Islam will not be crucified at this Council."

We began by stating: ["In the context of integrating the human rights of women throughout the United Nations System, we wish to draw attention to four examples of widespread 'violence against women' that we believe merit far greater attention from the Council."]

Regarding FGM, our detailed written statement [1st interruption by Egyptian delegate Amr Roshdy Hassan occurred here; 2 dozen more, including a 40 minute and a 2nd 5 minute recess for the president to discuss with the OIC] [E/CN.4/Sub.2/2005/NGO/27: Background on "Traditional or Customary Practices" /Female Genital Mutilation and the Arabic text (and translations), certified by Al-Azhar University, authoritative source for Shafi'i school of Sunni law widely adhered to in Egypt] discusses the reasons why 96% of Egyptian women are still subjected to FGM despite State legislation in 1997 outlawing the practice. [(Sara Corbett, "A Cutting Tradition", New York Times, Sunday Magazine, 20 January 2008). "Almost 90% of the female population in the north of Sudan undergo FGM which, in many cases, is practised in its most extreme form known as infibulation" - we are quoting from the 2004 Report of Special Rapporteur Halima Warzazi (E/CN.4/Sub.2/2004/41, §24)]. UNICEF figures indicate that over 3 million young girls are mutilated each year in 32 countries, 29 of which are Member States of the OIC. [We believe that only a fatwa from Al-Azhar Grand Sheikh Sayyad Tantawi - replacing the ambiguous fatwas of 1949, 1951 and 1981 - will change this barbaric, criminal practice, which is now growing even in Europe."]

We then raised the subject of "honour killings" which are on the increase worldwide [and the stoning of women for alleged adultery, still current in Iran, Sudan and several other OIC countries - in Iran they are buried up to their waists in pits and blunt stones are used, thereby increasing their agony in death - articles 100, 102 and 104 of the Iranian Criminal Codes confirm this ghastly barbarism.] The marriage of girls 9 years old was denounced, with reference to Noble Peace Prize Laureate Shirin Ebadi's denunciation of Iran's law by which a girl is considered an adult and liable to punishment, even execution at 9, and a boy of 15. She rejects the concept of cultural relativism. Such crimes and reasons for them should not be treated as taboo subjects here. It is time for more and more States and NGOs to speak out despite any politically or religiously-correct arguments which have no place in this Human Rights Chamber - referred to by some as the "conscience of humanity". To conclude, Mr. Chairman, ..... it is taken from George Washington [when 16 years old], future President, which he copied from the Rules of Civility & Decent Behaviour... : It is well worth remembering today:

"Labour to keep alive in your breast [**] that little spark of celestial fire called conscience."

Sir, let us all say - Amen.
-----------------------------
** Chairman, gavelling the speaker & cutting him off (2 min. 21 sec.): "I am sorry to interrupt - your time is up."

* * * * *

WORLD UNION FOR PROGRESSIVE JUDAISM
ASSOCIATION FOR WORLD EDUCATION

UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL - 14th session (31 May - 18 June 2010)
Vice-Chairman: (Slovenia) - 33nd Plenary Meeting
Statement by Representative David G. LITTMAN - Tuesday (@5:45), 15 June 2010

Technical assistance & capacity-building: Situation of human rights in Haiti (item 10)

The Haiti tragedy: What was done and what should now be done 'together'

[Last Statement under item 10; UN webcast impromptu text - with comments in square brackets: 2 min. 17 sec.]

As the representative of the World Union for Progressive Judaism and the Association of World Education, representing over two million persons worldwide, we wish to make an observance and a recommendation concerning the great tragedy in Haiti.

Allow me, however, to remind delegates of that pertinent and memorable saying by the Greek philosopher Anaximander 2500 years ago: Nothing Comes from Nothing!

As we have had occasion to reiterate in another context, words are one thing - and they flow here, and elsewhere, like the Mississippi - but facts and reality is something else. We regret that - perhaps for reasons of modesty, or otherwise - the State of Israel has not taken the floor on the Haiti tragedy, although it was a massive Israeli delegation that arrived - 236 members - the first on that 15th of January [2010], on a Friday night - to do what could be done under what was called:

"Operation Blessing": 319 successful surgeries; 16 births; 3 Caesareans and 4 rescues - one of the most effective humanitarian operations. [* See Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs website]

[According to Israel's FM website; of the 236 member delegation, 218 were soldiers and officers and 18 were civilians; a 5 year old child was brought to Israel for treatment, successfully.]

Many States with massive funds provided us with words in many domains, but when it came to Haiti - and not just Haiti - they were "absent", as we say here [at the Human Rights Council].

Now is the time for a real 'Dialogue of Civilizations' - in this Room of the Alliance of Civilizations. Why not have countries like Israel, among the most advanced, top medical capacities in the world - and in other scientific fields - join hands with those with all that money but not the capacities to use that money in such a way. And that might lead to a dialogue that would eventually allow all to understand the 'other' - especially in Haiti.

I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
--------------------------------

Of course, he meant that they should go help in the "peace process."

Video thanks to Mark.

Seeing Obama's weakness, Pakistan sheds its mask yet again and offers Karzai a deal including one of his chief rivals, a key al-Qaeda ally. And since Karzai himself has spoken about joining the Taliban, and making peace with it in a power-sharing arrangement, it is hard to see what the downside would be for him. "As US falters, Pak plays Haqqani card in Kabul," by Jane Perlez, Eric Schmitt and Carlotta Gall in the Times of India, June 26 (thanks to Puneet):

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan is exploiting the troubled United States military effort in Afghanistan to drive home a political settlement with Afghanistan that would give Pakistan important influence there but is likely to undermine American interests, Pakistani and American officials said.

The dismissal of Gen Stanley McChrystal will almost certainly embolden the Pakistanis in their plan as they detect increasing American uncertainty, officials said.

Pakistan is presenting itself as the new viable partner for Afghanistan to President Hamid Karzai, who has soured on the Americans. Pakistani officials say they can deliver the network of Sirajuddin Haqqani, an ally of al-Qaida, who runs a major part of the insurgency in Afghanistan, into a power-sharing arrangement. In addition, Afghan officials say, the Pakistanis are pushing various other proxies, with Pakistani army chief Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani personally offering to broker a deal with the Taliban.

Washington has watched with some nervousness as Gen Kayani and ISI chief, Lt Gen Ahmad Shuja Pasha, shuttle between Islamabad and Kabul, telling Karzai that they agree with his assessment that the US cannot win in Afghanistan, and that post-war Afghanistan should incorporate the Haqqani network, a longtime Pakistani asset. In a sign of the shift in momentum, the two are scheduled to visit Kabul on Monday.

"They know this creates a bigger breach between us and Karzai," the American official said. Though encouraged by Washington, the thaw heightens the risk that US will find itself cut out of what amounts to a separate peace between the Afghans and Pakistanis, and one that does not necessarily guarantee its prime objective in the war: denying al-Qaida a haven.

Expect that amiable stomach-stapled beekeeper, Honest Ibe Hooper, or Brave Ahmed Rehab, or some other possessor of the Secret Decoder Ring that helps them render "slay the idolaters wherever you find them" (Qur'an 9:5) as "have interreligious dialogue and build bridges with the idolaters," to go to London forthwith to straighten Anjem Chaudary out about how he is misunderstanding Islam.

But of course, in reality they will not do that, and neither will any other self-professed "moderate Muslim." They reserve their ire for when the kuffar dare to note that Islam is not a Religion of Peace™. Then they rain down the charges of "Islamophobia," "hate," "bigotry" and the like. But when a Muslim says it, they utter nary a peep. Just as the Islamic apologists who claim that I have gotten Islamic doctrine all wrong, wrong, wrong, and write soporific refutations of my work, never seem to notice, or to mind, when Islamic supremacists misunderstand Islam in, lo and behold, exactly the same way I have. Nor do those Islamic supremacists seem to be beset by indignant moderates eager to refute them within their own communities.

Video thanks to Pamela Geller.

Meet the new general, same as the old general

A great deal is being made of Obama's firing McChrystal and replacing him with Petraeus. But let's not get carried away: this is not General Grant being appointed commander of the Union armies. Both McChrystal and Petraeus represent the same point of view: that the U.S. Military in Afghanistan should be devoted to a gigantic social work exercise that is supposed to win the hearts and minds of Islamic supremacists, but which will actually only weaken us at their expense.

"PRUDEN: Sacking the general doesn't change much," by Wesley Pruden in the Washington Times, June 24:

President Obama rids himself of a particularly clueless general, but his fundamental problem remains. The clueless general is Stanley A. McChrystal. His fundamental problem is himself. [...]

The president obviously still thinks a few more speeches can spike the guns of war. Mr. Obama has already banished "terrorism" from the world, or at least that naughty word, replacing it with something more or less benign that he calls "man-made disasters." Even as he was calling the general home to be cashiered, one of his special envoys was busy making nice with the authors of "man-made disasters." Rashad Hussain, the special envoy to the Organization for the Islamic Conference, a Saudi front financed and led to "protect" Jerusalem from the Israelis, says the president should henceforth be called the "Educator-in-Chief on Islam." The president's White House dinners, celebrating Ramadan and other Islamic holidays, demonstrate that Islam is now as American as apple pie (or even a BLT on toast, or a plate of ham and eggs).

Mr. Hussain praised the president for sending Valerie Jarrett, a senior aide, to a session of the shady Islamic Society of North America. He told the Woodrow Wilson International Institute for Scholars in Washington that the United States will support an Islamic effort in the United Nations to "criminalize defamation of religion," i.e., "criticism" of Muslim violations of human rights. "The [Organization for the Islamic Conference] and the Obama administration will work together in the U.N. on the issue of defamation of religion, especially in Europe," he said. Since the U.N. is not notably concerned with criticism of Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists or Whirling Dervishes, it's clear enough where the U.N. means for this to go.

The week's events demonstrate that President Obama either doesn't understand his wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the nature of radical Islam vs. the West, or all of the above. Sacking a general doesn't change any of that.

And obtaining false documents to enter the U.S. "Congresswoman Raises Red Flag on Hezbollah-Cartel Nexus on U.S. Border," for FOXNews.com, June 25:

Iran-tied terror group Hezbollah may be colluding with drug cartels along the U.S.-Mexico border, a Republican congresswoman warned, calling on Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to establish a special task force to figure out how to "clamp down" on this "national security" threat.

The Lebanon-based group has long-standing and documented ties to South America and its drug gangs, but reports have recently surfaced that it may be expanding its influence to Mexico and the U.S. border.

In her letter to Napolitano, Rep. Sue Myrick, R-N.C., called on Homeland Security to find out and report more on the extent of the problem. She cited several troubling developments that would point to Hezbollah creeping closer to and inside the United States, with the help of Mexican drug gangs.

"It is vital we know what is happening on our border, especially as crime and violence continue to rise there and as terrorist plots and threats are increasing inside the U.S.," she wrote.

Myrick outlined a complex set of potential threats and evidence of their existence. She said "Iranian agents and members of Hezbollah" are thought to be learning Spanish in Hugo Chavez-run Venezuela before trying to obtain false documents to enter the United States as purported Mexicans. She said Hezbollah, known for its tunnel-digging skill, could be receiving drug money from cartel operations in exchange for help forging better tunnels across the U.S. border for trafficking.

She said gang members in prisons in the American southwest are starting to show up with tattoos in Farsi, implying a "Persian influence that can likely be traced back to Iran and its proxy army, Hezbollah."...

Myrick cited the opinions and findings of former intelligence officials and others in her detailed letter. One of them was a "high-ranking Mexican Army officer" whom she said believes Hezbollah could be training Mexican drug cartels to make bombs.

"This might lead to Israel-like car bombings of Mexican/USA border personnel or National Guard units," she wrote. ...

In Annie Hall, Woody Allen's character Alvy Singer says: "Lyndon Johnson is a politician. You know the ethics those guys have? It's like-uh, a notch underneath child molester."

As for reporters, I wouldn't say that they're that bad. Heck, I'll even grant that they're a notch above child molester. But particularly when it comes to Islam and jihad, they're generally agenda-driven, short-sighted, and above all, simply dishonest. Not so much in terms of outright lies, but in terms of spin: by omission and juxtaposition, by what they say and what they don't say, and by how they choose quotations as well as by how they frame them in a story, they attempt to lead the reader to the conclusion they wish him or her to draw.

The best of them are so good at this that most readers don't even notice that they are being manipulated and propagandized; it is something always to bear in mind when reading anything in, say, the New York Times and the Washington Post. But it is not just the likes of the Times, the Post, and the Economist that have mastered this craft; wannabe Woodwards and ambitious hacks all the way to backwaters like the Washington Independent are doing their bit as well, eager to prove that they have imbibed the relativist multiculturalist gas that permeates everything as deeply and fully as has anyone in New York or Washington.

And so we come to the illustrious Dave Weigel, late of the Independent and now also late of the Washington Post, who did a puff piece about libelblogger Charles Johnson some time ago, trying to bolster the credibility of Johnson's ridiculous false charges against Pamela Geller and me. Now his relentless animus against conservatives -- as if it's "conservative" to want to protect the West from an ideology that would destroy the freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and equality of rights for all -- has been exposed.

Weigel is no worse than most of them. He was just not as bright, or as clever at concealing his biases. May this happen to the lot of them now.

"BREAKING: Weigel Resigns," by Matt Dornic in MediaBistro, June 25 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

FIRST ON FBDC: FishbowlDC has confirmed that WaPo conservative-beat blogger Dave Weigel has resigned after a slew of his anti-conservative comments and emails surfaced on FishbowlDC and Daily Caller over the last two days.

A spokesperson for the Post said the paper will not offer additional comments but confirmed that the writer's resignation was accepted.

Will the Islamophobia never end? "Hooded gunmen kill 4 commuters in Philippines," by Jim Gomez for Associated Press, June 24 (thanks to Weasel Zippers):

MANILA, Philippines - About 30 hooded attackers, believed to be Abu Sayyaf militants, shot and hacked horrified victims as they ran for their lives in the southern Philippines, police said Thursday. Four people died and six were wounded in the ambush on a village road.

The suspected al-Qaida-linked militants apparently were trying to divert government troops from a weekslong offensive in a nearby town, said Antonio Mendoza, police chief for the island province of Basilan.

Most of the victims were commuters in a passenger jeep going home from Basilan's capital of Isabela City. The attackers were positioned on a hill and opened fire with rifles. Two passengers died instantly and others jumped from the jeep to flee, Mendoza said.

"They were fired upon as they ran. One of the attackers hacked a 10-year-old boy, who survived," Mendoza told The Associated Press....

But deep down, they really, really want peace! Note that this is Fatah TV. Fatah is the "moderate" Palestinian Authority faction that the U.S. government favors with money and even military training. "PA TV host to children: Jews are 'our enemies' - Israeli soldiers are 'wild animals,'" by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook for Palestinian Media Watch, June 25:

The host of a program about prisoners on official Palestinian Authority television described Jews as "our enemies" and Israeli soldiers as "wild animals" when she interviewed young children.

Her comments were made during two recent episodes of the PA TV program For You, which features interviews with the families of Palestinians imprisoned by Israel. In an interview with the young sister of a prisoner serving a 13-month sentence, the PA TV host asked the girl if the Israeli soldiers bother the family when they visit her brother in prison. When the girl agreed, the host added: "They're wild animals, right? Aren't they wild animals?"

In another episode, the same host interviewed the four-year old son of a prisoner serving a 15-year sentence. She asked who imprisoned his father, and the boy answered, "The Jews." As in the other interview, the host prompted the child: "The Jews are our enemies, right?" The boy nodded in response.

It is worth noting that the boy did not say that "Israelis" imprisoned his father, but specified that it was "the Jews."...

Read it all.

Two weeks ago, during the aftermath, or more aptly in the wake, of the Mavi Marmara, and the Hamas-and-Al-Qaeda-linked I.H.H.'s propaganda stunt, a number of commentators had their say on Turkey, that is, Turkey in its malevolent present incarnation under Erdogan and his AKP party.

Quite a few people seemed to think they knew why Erdogan was behaving as he was behaving.

There was, for example, quick-off-the-mark Tony Blair. Tony Blair, you may need reminding, has always been an enthusiastic - because uncritical, and unthinking - supporter of Turkey's admission to the E.U. In 2005, just after a vote in Austria that suggested some lack of enthusiasm (could memories of two Ottoman attempts to seize Vienna have anything to do with it?) for Turkey's admission, it was Blair who thought he should remind everyone in Europe, and reassure the Turks too, that Turkey simply had to have a "future" inside the E.U.

In The Guardian for 30 September 2005, under the headline "Blair insists that Turkey's future in the EU," appeared this:

And they do it despite the fact that interest in jihad and violence runs through the kid's life. More claims of victim status and evasion of responsibility: "Parents of accused NJ terrorist blame FBI for son's interest in jihad," by Matthew Van Dusen and Peter J. Sampson for The Record, June 25 (thanks to Twostellas):

At age 6, Mohamed Alessa declared to his parents that he would someday become the first Muslim president of the United States -- "President Mohamed," he would be called.

Today, a 20-year-old Alessa sits in a cell at a New York detention center, charged with conspiring with his best friend, Carlos Almonte, 24, of Elmwood Park, to wage violent jihad on Americans overseas.

But even at a young age, his parents said their son suffered from the uncontrollable rages that would plague him throughout his teens and fuel run-ins with school officials and law enforcement.

In their first interview together, Mahmood and Nadia Alessa, of North Bergen, detailed their son's psychological problems, his troubled teen years and their belief that the FBI pushed two innocent young men into a terrorist mold.

"It's like they're against these two kids, they want them to be terrorists," Nadia Alessa said of federal authorities. "These kids [don't] know what's going on, they don't know anything."

They also said many of the government's claims against their son are dead wrong and that authorities have mistaken his anger problems and grandiosity for something much more serious.

They said a 2007 trip to Jordan, which the FBI believes was a failed attempt to join the insurgency in Iraq, was a chance for Mohamed Alessa to study abroad. The Alessas also said he was traveling to Egypt on June 5 to meet a 19-year-old Swedish Muslim he planned to marry, not as a way station to jihad in Somalia, as the government alleges.

The Alessas also said they did not provide the FBI with the October 2006 tip that started the government's investigation.

They said their son, an animal lover who once kept 13 cats, is a misguided young man who had been monitored by the FBI since age 16 and was encouraged by an undercover agent to act like a terrorist.

This claim, which others in North Jersey's Muslim community have repeated, irks FBI officials.

Michael Ward, the special agent in charge of the FBI's Newark division, said agents often consult the Muslim community and ask for help in turning young lives around.

But Ward said that when troubled teens get into their 20s and go from "aspirational to operational," there is only so much that outreach can accomplish. He stressed that he was not specifically addressing the investigation into Almonte and Alessa.

"They evolved, they went deeper into the radicalization process, and I don't believe that, here at these last stages, there's anything we could've done," Ward said of the two young men.

Exodus from Kuwait

Nadia Alessa, a Palestinian from the West Bank, gave birth to her only child in July 1989 while visiting friends in North Bergen.

She and her husband, an ethnic Palestinian from Jordan, then returned to Kuwait, where he owned a billboard advertising business.

After Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in August 1990, the family was evacuated by American officials to the United States because Mohamed was a citizen.

"The United States saved my life," Mahmood Alessa said.

As a child, their son displayed "anger management" problems that a battery of psychologists and psychiatrists tried to treat. Still, he bounced in and out of almost a dozen different Catholic, Muslim, local and boarding schools, they said.

In February 2005, North Bergen High School officials placed him on home instruction because he presented safety concerns for other students and staff, district spokesman Paul Swibinski said.

In August 2005, his mother said he was arrested in Jersey City for defacing a Coptic Christian church with the words "allahu akbar," which means "God is great" in Arabic. He was released without charges, she said.

He moved to the alternative school KAS Prep in September 2005 and became even more belligerent. He allegedly threatened to blow up the school, a claim Nadia Alessa said was a lie told by another student. Mahmood Alessa said his son came home and cried after fellow student told him, "you look like [al-Qaida leader Osama] bin Laden."

Officials at KAS Prep reported Mohamed Alessa's threats to the New Jersey Department of Homeland Security.

In January 2006, police officers -- the Alessas weren't clear on what agency -- came to the modest second-floor apartment, arrested their son and put him in the Hudson County Juvenile Detention Center in Secaucus for one month for his threats.

A judge dismissed him as "a stupid kid," Nadia Alessa said, and released him.

'It's almost like a fad'

Mohamed Alessa claimed he had exclusively read the Quran while in juvenile detention and emerged a self-professed pious Muslim.

He asked his mother, who does not wear traditional garb or head coverings, why she didn't cover herself.

"My son is not that religious," she said. "He like to talk, he like to show. What I think, both of them, they're having a problem. They want to be famous."

His brand of piety seemed to preclude regular attendance at mosque, and he resisted efforts by local Muslim elders to help him.

Walid Bejdough, a former spokesman for the Islamic Center of Passaic County, said Mahmood Alessa asked him several years ago to counsel his son to come to mosque and stay out of trouble.

Bejdough arranged to meet the young man, but Mohamed Alessa never showed up.

Mohammad Abbasi, a spokesman for the North Hudson Islamic Educational Center, said he met Mohamed Alessa for the first time at a Teaneck mosque just before he was arrested.

He said he didn't come across as pious or observant but noted, "It's almost like a fad for kids ... his age."

Abbasi also questioned whether the FBI should have followed the young pair. Agents had come to him before about problem kids, he asked, why not with these two? [...]

Almonte and Mohammed Alessa were arrested on June 5 at John F. Kennedy International Airport and charged with conspiring to kill, maim and kidnap outside the United States. Mahmood Alessa said he can't sleep and has lost weight because he has been unable to contact his son since the arrest.

He and his wife have received only one communication from jail, a handwritten letter from Almonte, whom they regard as a second son. In it, he writes, "All I want is for me and Mohamed to have a decent life. I know we don't deserve this."

Comments by David G. Littman: NGO Representative to the UN, Geneva: Association for World Education / World Union for Progressive Judaism

* * * * *

Conclusion: Winston Churchill (14 June 1941 broadcast to USA): "United we stand. Divided we fall. Divided, the dark age returns"

We have described the usual Commedia dell'arte ("Comedy of the... Council") on "Palestine and other occupied Arab territories" (item 7) here. After item 8 "violence against women" (statement will follow), came item 9 on racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia & related forms of intolerance.

We seized that opportunity to address an 'event' that occurred during our absence the previous week, following which we sent an 'Urgent Appeal' twice to the High Commissioner and the HRC President (see below): How could this blatant revival of the Syrian blood-libel accusation be totally ignored - except by Executive Director of UN Watch Hillel Neuer and Israel's Ambassador Aharon Leshno-Yaar? The U.S. Mission condemned it on its website, but not at the Council. See also here.

* * * * *

Syrian Blood-Libel insinuations revived at the Human Rights Council (8 June)

WORLD UNION FOR PROGRESSIVE JUDAISM
United Nations Human Rights Council -14th session (31 May - 18 June 2010)
Representative: David G. Littman - Tuesday (@ 5:45) 15 June 2010 (31st Plenary Meeting)
President (Chair): Ambassador Alex Van Meeuwen (Belgium)

Item 9: Racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related forms of intolerance...
[Statement prepared impromptu, as the item was announced for debate on the morning of 16 June]

We expected that item 9 on racism would be debated tomorrow [as scheduled]. We are unprepared, but we are nonetheless grateful to have the chance to denounce here -as a historian - last week's blood libel accusation - racist as it was - pronounced once again by the delegation of Syria; and the fact that there has still been no reaction and no condemnation by this Council or even a statement by the president.

[On 8 June (18th plenary meeting), Syrian delegate Rania Al Rifaiy declared (there was no 'point of order') that "Israel was a State built on hatred, discrimination and oppression, and a paranoid feeling of superiority"; she then adding a blood libel quip: "Let me quote a song that a group of children on a school bus in Israel sing merrily as they go to school: `With my teeth I will rip your flesh, with my mouth I will suck your blood."' This was denounced by UN Watch, by Israel, but no other State or NGO referred to it; it was covered by Canwest and in two Canadian papers.]

As the main representative of the World Union [for Progressive Judaism] 20 years ago, I well remember the flagrant blood libel launched on 8 February 1991 by the delegate of Syria who waved above her head the book by Syria's Defence Minister [Major-General Mustafa Tlass], The Matza of Zion [unleavened bread], from which I had quoted, as a flagrant example of defamation of religion, racism and a culture of hate - in relation to the 1840 Blood Libel at Damascus. Here are the words [from that book by Tlass]:

"The Jews can kill you to use your blood for his Zionist bread...May Allah protect us."
[The exact words used were: "The Jew can kill you...and take your blood in order to make his Zionist bread...I hope that I have done my duty in presenting the practices of the enemy of our historic nation. Allah aid this project."]

Her answer was to wave the monstrous book and appeal to the Commission to understand why Zionism relates to racism.

"The Zionist regime has sent a letter to the U.N. saying that the presence of Iranian and Lebanese ships in the Gaza area will be considered a declaration of war on that regime and it will react to it." And apparently Iran doesn't want war -- yet.

"Iran will not send aid ship to Gaza," from CNN, June 24 (thanks to Benedict):

Tehran, Iran (CNN) -- Iran will not send a ship carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza as it had planned to do on Thursday, according to a report from the official news agency of Iran.

The Islamic Republic News Agency quoted Hossein Sheikholeslam, secretary-general of the International Conference for the Support of the Palestinian Intifada, as saying: "The Iranian ship carrying humanitarian aid will not go to Gaza."

IRNA said that Sheikholeslam told reporters in the northern city of Rasht that the ship had originally been scheduled to depart for Gaza on Thursday, but that its departure was postponed until Sunday because of restrictions imposed by Israel.

He added that officials then decided instead to cancel the trip altogether, shipping to Gaza the goods by other means, IRNA said.

"The Zionist regime has made helping the people of Gaza, who are under siege, a political issue and we do not wish to politicize this kind of humanitarian aid because first and foremost we want the siege of Gaza to be broken," he said, according to the news agency. "The Zionist regime has sent a letter to the U.N. saying that the presence of Iranian and Lebanese ships in the Gaza area will be considered a declaration of war on that regime and it will react to it."

He added: "In order to deprive the Zionist regime of any excuse, the aid collected for the oppressed people of Gaza will be delivered to them by other means without mentioning the name of Iran."

In a posting on the Israel Defense Forces website, the chief of the general staff said Israel has "a natural right to inspect and to prevent the flow of weapons into the Gaza Strip."...

"Strongest among men in enmity to the believers wilt thou find the Jews..." -- Qur'an 5:82

"Youths" at it again in Europe. At least this time AP manages to summon up a shred or two of integrity, and identifies them as "Arab" -- although that in itself is not quite accurate, since one was evidently a German Muslim.

"Youths attack Jewish dance group in Germany," by Kirsten Grieshaber for Associated Press, June 24 (thanks to all who sent this in):

BERLIN - Arab youths threw stones at a Jewish dance group during a street festival in Hannover, injuring one dancer and forcing the group to cancel its performance, German police and dance officials said Thursday.

The teenagers also used a megaphone to shout anti-Semitic slurs during the attack Saturday, Hannover police spokesman Thorsten Schiewe said.

"I don't remember such a dramatic attack in Germany in recent times," said Michael Fuerst, the head of the Jewish community of the state of Lower Saxony.

Six suspects have been identified -- five Arabic immigrants and one German -- and police are looking for the other three, police said. The six range from nine to 19 years old and have been questioned by police....

Stephan Kramer of the Central Council of Jews in Germany condemned the attack.

"This latest incident shows something we have not experienced before: A growing radicalization of young Muslims, which affects not only the Jewish community but the entire German community," Kramer told The Associated Press....

Alla Volodarska of the Progressive Jewish community of Hannover dance group said its members were still in shock.

"What happened is just so awful," Volodarska told the AP. "The teenagers started throwing stones the moment our dance group was announced, even before they started dancing."...

Of course he got off scot-free. Insane, of course, as Muslims are almost always ruled to be whenever they are violent. "The All Mighty," by Alastair Taylor in The Sun, June 23 (thanks to Paul):

A ZOMBIE-like fanatic with "superhuman" strength fought off NINE cops and a police ROTTWEILER as he chanted the name of Allah, a court was told yesterday. The religious maniac - clad in Islamic garb - shrugged off baton blows and CS gas as he marched down a street with a 12-inch carving knife.

Cops fearing he was on a deadly mission resorted to "potentially lethal force" by ramming him with a police van but STILL he stayed on his feet, a jury heard.

Barefoot Alderrahim El-Harti, 42, finally had to be battered unconscious by frantic officers raining blows on his head.

By then he had plunged his knife into one constable - who was saved by his body armour.

Fellow PC John Bowerman said at Sheffield Crown Court: "He seemed to have superhuman strength and resistance."

PC Mark Adams told how he yelled to a colleague in a van: "Run him over, we have go to stop him somehow."

He said of burly El-Harti, who had been spotted near his Sheffield home in the early hours: "He was chanting in a foreign language. I heard the word 'Allah'."

Police emptied two cans of CS gas at him. PC Adams said: "The spray was dripping from his face. It had no effect." The police dog simply cowered after El-Harti tried to stab it, the trial heard.

Following El-Harti's arrest two psychiatrists concluded he was not responsible for his actions due to mental illness....

And in a classic example of mainstream media misdirection, the Daily Express thinks that the most important thing you need to know about this maniac is that he is a "dad":

"Dad believed he was 'half animal half human' at time of police attack," from the Express, June 24:

A DAD who believed he was 'half animal half human' after stabbing police officers when they tried to arrest him was insane at the time of the attack.

Alderrahim El-Harti, aged 42, of Albert Road, Heeley, heard voices telling him the officers were demons. He was cleared of wounding and wounding with intent by a jury at Sheffield Crown Court who returned a special verdict he was not guilty by reason of insanity....

The court heard El-Harti's family had a history of mental illness and his behaviour had become more and more bizarre.

Even the Qur'an didn't help:

His wife bought him an MP3 player which he used to play Koranic readings to try to drown out the voices. He paid increasing visits to his mosque and carried a knife to protect himself because he thought Satan was there.

"The voices increased in volume and he was unable to cope," said psychiatrist Dr John Kent. He said he 'totally lost touch with reality'.

But deep down, they really, really want peace! "Another 2 mortar shells fired from Gaza, 9 total," from the Jerusalem Post, June 24 (thanks to Joseph):

Another two mortar shells were fired from Gaza Thursday evening and landing near one of the Negev kibbutzim close to the Strip.

No injuries or property damage was reported to have occurred.

In total, nine mortar shells were fired by terrorists from Gaza on Thursday.

Pakistani authorities and experienced players of the double game keep up appearances for the gullible West. "US 'jihad seekers' awarded 10 years imprisonment by Pak court," from ANI, June 24 (thanks to all who sent this in):

Islamabad, June 24 (ANI): A Pakistani anti-terrorism court on Thursday awarded 10 years imprisonment to each of the five US terror suspects who were arrested from Punjab province's Sargodha District in December 2009.

Waqar Husain Khan, 22 (Virginia), Ahmed Abdullah Mani, 20 (Virginia), Ramay S Zamzam, 22 (Egypt), Iman Hasan Yamar, 17 (California), and Omar Farouk, 24 (Virginia) were arrested on charges of plotting terror attacks across Pakistan, The News reports.

The five 'jihad seekers' had visited a religious seminary linked to the outlawed Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) in Hyderabad and were on their way to terror camps based in the volatile Waziristan region....

A religious seminary? Full of Misunderstanders of Islam? Why, it's...inexplicable, if you buy into the mainstream view of Islamic terrorism's relationship to Islam.

The jihad seekers had pleaded innocence, saying they were being 'set up' and tortured by the FBI and the Pakistani police in custody. (ANI)

Al-Qaeda advises its operatives always to claim torture when in non-Muslim custody.

Big surprise here. "Kyrgyzstan: violence provoked by Islamic militants," from AP, June 24:

BISHKEK, Kyrgyzstan -- Kyrgyzstan's security agency claims relatives of the country's toppled president have colluded with Taliban and other Islamic militant movements to provoke ethnic violence in the ex-Soviet nation.

It's statement Thursday says former President Kurmanbek Bakiyev's relatives met in Afghanistan last month with representatives of Taliban, the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan and other militant groups to discuss plans to trigger unrest in Kyrgyzstan. The agency alleges Bakiyev's clan promised to pay Islamic extremists to stir up violence....

Dhimmi pseudojournalists abound. In "Toronto Star: Don't judge Karla Homolka. She loves her sister Tammy more than you do," June 22, the brilliant and courageous Ezra Levant righteously skewers the Toronto Star's politically correct abetting of Islamic honor killing (thanks to Kathy Shaidle):

Can you believe this disgusting man, comparing Aqsa Parvez's murder -- an "honour killing" because she refused to dress like a chattel owned by the males in her family -- to the heartwarming, light-hearted culture clashes in Bend it Like Beckham or Yiddish stories?

Honour killings? It's a problem every immigrant has! It's part of the great American dream, really!

Other than the 3% of Canadians who are Aboriginal, the rest of us are immigrants or children of immigrants. Have you ever heard of this sort of honour killing before, in our nation's 400-year history?

Or Coyle's claim that the 41-year age gap between father and daughter was the cause?

Is he serious?

Jim Coyle and the Toronto Star are racist. Abiding honour killings is racist. It's sexist. It's anti-feminist. It's precisely the thing the Star claims to be against. But they're not. They'd rather be politically correct than stand up for the rights of women and children.

They'd rather be politically correct than stand up for secular values like gender equality.

They'd rather be politically correct -- and for Aqsa Parvez to be dead -- than to offend Parvez's murderous brother and father.

Even after the murder is done, even as the grave was still fresh, the Star still clings to their bigotry.

And it is bigotry. Accepting this extreme, deadly misogyny is bigotry: the soft bigotry of low expectations. Jim Coyle and the Star don't think Muslims can be any better. They don't think they can hold them to higher standards. So they excuse and explain.

This is the kind of free speech restriction that the Organization of the Islamic Conference wants Western countries to adopt. "'Google, Yahoo, YouTube offend Muslims,'" from AFP, June 24 (thanks to Twostellas):

Lahore - A Pakistani court has ordered the authorities to block access to nine websites including Google, Yahoo and YouTube for allegedly offending Muslims with blasphemous material.

Judge Mazhar Iqbal ordered Pakistan's Telecommunications Authority to block the websites due to "material against the fundamental principles of Islam and its preaching," according to a copy of the judgement obtained by AFP.

Pakistan shut off Facebook for nearly two weeks last month in a storm of controversy about a competition to draw the Prophet Mohammad and has restricted access to hundreds of online links because of blasphemy....

Retired civil servant Siddique Mohammad had petitioned the court through Rehman for the ban on nine websites - Google, Yahoo, Amazon, MSN, Hotmail, YouTube, Islam Exposed, In The Name of Allah and Bing.

A spokesman for the Internet Service Providers Association of Pakistan warned that the order could strangle Internet access for millions....

Uh, yeah.

"Once Gabriel promised the Prophet (that he would visit him, but Gabriel did not come) and later on he said, 'We, angels, do not enter a house which contains a picture or a dog.'" -- Bukhari volume 4, book 54, number 450

"Abdullah (b. Umar) (Allah be pleased with them) reported: Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) ordered the killing of dogs and we would send (men) in Medina and its corners and we did not spare any dog that we did not kill, so much so that we killed the dog that accompanied the wet she-camel belonging to the people of the desert." -- Muslim book 10, number 3811

Sharia Alert from Islamic Britannia: "Is a religious bus ban on my dog right?," by Judith Woods in the Telegraph, June 22 (thanks to Daniel):

On two occasions last week my dog was barred from London buses, not because she's particularly fierce or big, but on religious grounds. A friend and I had taken her to the park, and as I went across to the grocer, my friend took Daisy, a Manchester terrier, to the bus stop.

As they tried to board the bus, the driver stopped her and told her that there was a Muslim lady on the bus who "might be upset by the dog". As she attempted to remonstrate, the doors closed and the bus drew away.

When a second bus arrived, she again made to embark, but was stopped again - this time because the driver said he was Muslim. I know that Muslims consider dogs to be unclean, but last time I looked this wasn't a Muslim country and London Transport was a non-denominational organisation....

At least ostensibly.

Early in Al-Hurra's life I met with an official of the network, and we had a wide-ranging and detailed discussion which appeared to be most promising. But I never heard from them again, and they clearly went in a direction much different from the one which I had suggested, which was much like the one ably delineated by Hugh here. I advised them to offer American Constitutionalism and genuine pluralism as an alternative to Sharia -- and said they would draw in many Muslims who would prefer to live free than to live under Sharia.

But clearly they had no interest in challenging Sharia. See, for example, "U.S. Government Gave Airtime to Terrorists, Official Admits," by Justin Rood for ABC's The Blotter, May 22, 2007:

Al Hurra television, the U.S. government's $63 million-a-year effort at public diplomacy broadcasting in the Middle East, is run by executives and officials who cannot speak Arabic, according to a senior official who oversees the program.

That might explain why critics say the service has recently been caught broadcasting terrorist messages, including an hour-long tirade on the importance of anti-Jewish violence, among other questionable pieces....

Or maybe Al-Hurra officials are just too naive, too trusting, and too filled with Armstrong/Esposito nonsense about Islam to be anything but asleep at the wheel.

And so now we hear that the whole thing has been a waste of money. But actually the waste of money has been the least of al-Hurra's sins. Much worse has been the official dhimmitude and abetting of the global jihad. But then again, when it comes to suicidal stupidity and jihad-abetting on the part of the U.S. government, al-Hurra is only a minor player.

"Has the U.S. Wasted $700 Million on an Arabic-Language TV Station?," by Noel Brinkerhoff for AllGov, June 24:

Alhurra, the U.S. government's answer to the popular Middle East network Al Jazeera, has cost American taxpayers $700 million since its inception during the Bush administration. But Alhurra has failed to grab enough viewers in the region to make it a worthwhile investment going forward, says a report from a U.S. Senate committee.

"Given the crowded media environment of the Middle East, either greater resources must be devoted to marketing and promotion or additional programming changes must be enacted in pursuit of increasing (Alhurra's) market share," reads the report from the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. "Should these efforts fail to improve the overall viewership levels, policy makers will have to decide if continuing Alhurra's operation is worth the costs."

The Arab language network, which broadcasts out of a studio in Springfield, Virginia, has an annual budget that exceeds the combined funding for U.S. government networks targeting Asia, Cuba and Iran. But it has only garnered an audience share of 2%, while receiving about $1 million a year for marketing its television and radio programming....

Comments by David G. Littman: NGO Representative to the UN, Geneva: Association for World Education / World Union for Progressive Judaism

* * * * *

Returning on 11 June from the Big Apple after a Canadian lecture tour, we were again caught in the final week of the Human Rights Council's 14th Session, delivering two
NGO 2 minute statements during a mind-boggling 'Disneyland Debate' under item 7:
"Human Rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territories" .

http://webcast.un.org/ramgen/ondemand/conferences/unhrc/fourteenth/hrc100614pm1-eng.rm?start=02:00:07&end=02:02:48

http://webcast.un.org/ramgen/ondemand/conferences/unhrc/fourteenth/hrc100614pm1-eng.rm?start=02:18:45&end=02:21:13

UN Special Rapporteur Richard Falk excelled as a senior Princeton Humpty Dumpty. Wiki reminds us that "On February 16, 1979, two weeks after the return of Ruhollah Khomeini to Iran, Falk wrote an op-ed for the New York Times, "Trusting Khomeini". He criticized President Jimmy Carter's accusations of "religious fanaticism" and media descriptions of Khomeini as being backward, antisemitic, and guilty of " theocratic fascism." Arguing Khomeini was being judged unfairly, he concluded "the depiction of Khomeini as fanatical, reactionary and the bearer of crude prejudices seems certainly and happily false ... To suppose that Ayatollah Khomeini is dissembling seems almost beyond belief. ... Having created a new model of popular revolution based, for the most part, on nonviolent tactics, Iran may yet provide us with a desperately-needed model of humane governance for a third-world country."

UN Watch's Hillel Neuer noted that Falk is also an 'expert' on "...the work of David Ray Griffin whose notorious books argue that the World Trade Center was not attacked by terrorists, but was rather 'an inside job'. Falk has played a key role in promoting Griffin's conspiracy tracts."

When asked a question by the dynamic Hillel Neuer on this and that in his Report, Falk rang loudly that 'dreadful bell' of silence...on both his 9/11 lunacy and his 'boycott Israel' scheme. It reminded me of that 19th century nursery rhyme of Humpty Dumpty, portrayed as an egg:

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall, Humpty Dumpty had a great fall. All the king's horses and all the king's men Couldn't put Humpty together again.

Indeed, all the UN horses and all its horsemen cannot put Falk together again. And, faced with his Princeton-like UN 'glory', the opinion of Alice (in Wonderland), from Lewis Carroll's Through the Looking-Glass, might help us unravel the riddle:

I don't know what you mean by 'glory,' " Alice said. Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. "Of course you don't--till I tell you. I meant 'there's a nice knock-down argument for you!' " "But 'glory' doesn't mean 'a nice knock-down argument'," Alice objected. "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean--neither more nor less." "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things." "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master -- that's all. [ch. 6:6]

The OIC-dominated Council is now the 'master', with "a nice knock-down argument." Below are our two verbatim statements as delivered under item 7 (UN webcast above)

* * * * *

We shall return with our oral statements under item 8 ('violence against women'), item 9 (racism and Syrian blood-libel revival) and item 10 (Haiti, Israel & humanitarian aid)

A slap at Spain and France, a vote against their own security (you never know who or what might be under the thing), and a step toward Eurabia. "Council of Europe votes against ban on burka," from the Telegraph, June 24:

MPs from 47 countries have unanimously voted against a general ban on the wearing of the burka in public.

The Parliamentary Assembly of Europe's human rights watchdog, the Council of Europe, passed a resolution warning that if governments imposed such a ban they would be denying women ''who genuinely and freely desire to do so'' their right to cover their faces.

But while the Assembly opposed a general ban, it left the door open for targeted laws against the burka, pointing out that legal restrictions may be justified ''for security purposes, or where the public or professional functions of individuals require their religious neutrality, or that their face can be seen''.

The vote came in Strasbourg amid continuing controversy in France over efforts to introduce a general burka ban.

The Muslim Council of Britain has attacked President Nicolas Sarkozy as ''patronising and offensive'' after he declared: ''The burka is not a sign of religion, it is a sign of subservience. We cannot accept to have in our country women who are prisoners behind netting, cut off from all social life, deprived of identity.''...

However, the parliamentarians added: ''No woman should be compelled to wear religious apparel by her community or family. Any act of oppression, sequestration or violence constitutes a crime that must be punished by law.''

The resolution was part of a report on Islam, Islamism and Islamophobia, which also called on European governments to work to educate Muslim women, their families and communities on their human rights and to encourage them to take part in ''public and professional life''.

It also called on Switzerland to repeal as soon as possible its general ban on the construction of minarets, which it described as discriminatory.

Of course!

The proverbial "world's smallest violin" is presumably haram. But it's playing nonetheless. An update on this story. "Terror charge Briton was 'lonely', court told," from BBC News, June 23:

A defendant who called for the deaths of the Gordon Brown and Tony Blair was a "lonely young man" who "wallowed" in extremist material, a court has heard.

Ishaq Kanmi, who posed as the head of "al-Qaeda in Britain" on a website in 2008, had a "miserable childhood", Manchester Crown Court was told.

Kanmi, 23, of Blackburn, has admitted professing to belong to al-Qaeda and inviting support for the terror group.

But Kanmi, to be sentenced, denied soliciting to kill the former PMs.

In May, when the defendant admitted other charges, the Crown Prosecution Service said it was willing for the counts relating to Mr Brown and Mr Blair to lie on file.

At the time, Kanmi also admitted collecting or making a record of information likely to be useful to a terrorist and three counts of disseminating terrorist publications.

'Flock to banner'

Andrew Edis QC, prosecuting, said that between May 2007 and August 2008 Kanmi was "carrying out a determined internet campaign designed to radicalise and recruit people to the cause of jihadi terrorism.

"Specifically, the first of the postings called for martyrdom operations against named persons including Gordon Brown and Tony Blair," he continued....

The foreign minister understands what should be abundantly clear across Europe: Aiding and abetting the segregation of a class that would fancy itself too "special" for civil law achieves the opposite of integration. "Støre bans Sharia councils," by Michael Sandelson for The Foreigner, June 24:

Jonas Gahr Støre, Labour's (Ap) Foreign Minister, has totally discounted the idea of establishing a Sharia council in Norway. He says a parallel court system is out of the question, arguing it does nothing to help integration.

Discrimination

"I believe desegregation is our society's biggest social challenge. We must have a common fundament [sic!] and a set of values anchored in universal principles of law if we are to succeed," he tells Aftenposten.

According the paper, Norwegian Imams and the National Courts Administration have already said they're open to the idea of establishing a council for civil matters such as divorce, inheritance, and domestic violence.

You can't spell "Norwegian" without "No."

Støre, head of Labour's integration panel that's to present its report at next year's Party Conference, argues there's no place for a parallel system that makes judgements based on Islamic law. His Party has also given the principle the thumbs-down.

"We're a constitutional state based on democracy, freedom of speech and religion, as well as equal opportunities and status," says Støre.

Norwegian law forbids cultural traditions that discriminate against women, such as forced marriage and female circumcision.

"Practices not part of Norwegian culture shouldn't be able to obtain legitimacy from alternative court systems," he says.

Those boundaries make the ensuing multicultural boilerplate slightly less discouraging:

Challenge

"[But] increased diversity means our society will need both established and new conflict management methods. Many within the immigrant communities can help to solve disputes at a low level. I welcome this."

Støre also hopes the integration panel's work will help open up the public desegregation debate, as well as challenging traditional fears of raising the matter in a non-discriminatory way.

"We must take the concerns of immigrants and ancestral Norwegians seriously, for example when an 80-year-old ethnic Norwegian woman fears the neighbourhood is changing, or the anxiety a 30-year-old Somali single mother experienced during her encounters with things that are purely Norwegian."

Following a trend of local burqa bans within the country. "Spain's Senate Votes to Ban Burqa," by Raphael Minder for the New York Times, June 23:

MADRID -- In a significant escalation of Spain's debate over how to handle radical Islam, the Senate on Wednesday narrowly and unexpectedly approved a motion to ban Muslim women from wearing in public the burqa or other garments that cover the whole body.

The vote, 131 to 129, was another setback for the Socialist government of Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, which had favored more-limited restrictions on Islamic clothing and has instead been pushing to curtail religious fundamentalism through better education.

The Spanish vote comes amid several national initiatives across Europe to restrict the spread of radical Islam and defend liberal values. [...]

The motion adopted by the senators calls on Spain to outlaw "any usage, custom or discriminatory practice that limits the freedom of women." It was drafted and led by politicians from the main center-right opposition People's Party. [...]

The Senate's position also came as a surprise because although Spain has become a major European entry point for Muslim migrants from North Africa, few of those immigrants wear either the burqa or the niqab, which does not cover the eyes. A similar argument has also been made by opponents of a burqa ban in countries like France, where only an estimated 100,000 women wear the burqa out of a Muslim population of about 5 million. France, however, already passed a law in 2004 to ban head scarves or any other "conspicuous" religious symbol from state schools in order to preserve their secularism.

The Spanish government is supposed to follow the Senate's motion. However, given that Socialist senators opposed the ban, the governing party is likely to seek ways to circumvent the vote....

Look for more claims of Islamophobia and deflection of responsibility to follow. "Canada cancels travel visa of Islamic preacher," by Rick Westhead for The Star, June 23:

NEW DELHI, INDIA--Canada has cancelled the travel visa of a controversial television preacher from Mumbai who was scheduled to speak at an upcoming religious conference in Toronto.

Officials from the Canadian High Commission in New Delhi telephoned popular Islamic televangelist Zakir Naik earlier this week to say the 44-year-old doctor's five-year, multiple-entry visa to Canada has been cancelled, said a colleague of Naik's at the Islamic Research Foundation in Mumbai. The visa was issued just last year.

Imprecise terminology there. Maybe "telejihadist" would describe him better.

A physician by training, Naik has become one of the most influential religious scholars in India. He was described as one of the 100 most powerful Indians in a recent survey by the Indian Express newspaper and is a polarizing figure. Naik been quoted as saying "every Muslim should be a terrorist" and that Jews are "our staunchest enemy." He's also condoned the death penalty for homosexuals and Muslims who convert from Islam to other religions.

Last week, he was barred from attending a conference in London after the British Home Ministry said the department had discovered evidence "of his unacceptable behaviour." Canada followed suit a few days later.

What may have prompted U.K. and Canadian authorities to stop Naik's entry was a video clip that has circulated on the Internet in which he says, "If he (Osama bin Lade) is fighting the enemies of Islam, I am for him. If he is terrorizing the terrorists, if he is terrorizing America the terrorist, the biggest terrorist, I am with him Every Muslim should be a terrorist."

But Naik's brother, Naik Mohammad, said the video clip, labelled 2007, was actually filmed in 1996, long before Bin Laden orchestrated the September 11 terror attacks.

Who labeled it for 2007? Zionists? Crusaders? Zionist-Crusaders?

"In modern democracies, you don't pass judgment without hearing from the party," Mohammad said in an interview. "My brother has never met Bin Laden and doesn't know him. But we aren't worried about this. A ban would not stand up to any legal test. When he said those things about Bin Laden, no one had heard of him and Bin Laden hadn't planned the 9/11 attacks."

Those who have found inspiration in Naik's teachings include Najibullah Zazi, an Afghan-American arrested last year for planning suicide attacks on the New York subway; Rahil Sheikh, accused in a series of train bombings in Mumbai in 2006; and Kafeel Ahmed, who died during a failed suicide attack on Glasgow airport in 2007.

An update on this story. "Last two 'Toronto 18' defendants found guilty," from the Canadian Press, June 23:

TORONTO -- Almost five years ago in Toronto's suburbs and beyond two plans were being hatched to terrorize Canada.

While chilling in their intent the schemes never got very close to fruition. One was short on details, both were deeply infiltrated by police.

The so-called Toronto 18 eventually split into two groups after the leaders had a falling out. One thing the groups still had in common was a misdirected paranoia.

They worried they were being watched by the authorities, but little did they know two of their trusted confidants were police agents.

At one meeting one of the plotters instructed a man who was actually an RCMP agent to take the battery out of his cellphone so their conversation couldn't be intercepted.

Another plotter gave an agent a test to see if he was a spy. He passed.

The story of the homegrown terror plot has only been told in bits and pieces because of various publication bans. But now, as a jury found Steven Chand and Asad Ansari guilty Wednesday of terrorist offences, the full story can be told. [...]

CSIS had been monitoring Amara and Ahmad for years because of anti-western Internet chatter.

Shaikh entered the hall and sat alone. A man with a scarf covering his face approached him and identified himself as Ilyas. It was Amara. They began to chat and soon Shaikh followed Amara to a table with Ahmad, Durrani and Nishanthan Yogakrishnan.

Shaikh made up a story that he had been stopped by CSIS while travelling. Ahmad said, "Well, if CSIS came to the door they know what I'd do," and made a shooting gesture.

Shaikh showed the group his firearms licence and Amara showed Shaikh a gun he had in his pocket, calling the bullets "cop killers."

Ahmad, then 21, began to recruit Shaikh with emotional arguments about the oppression of Muslims. Ahmad defined the enemy as Americans and said because of Canada's close connection to the U.S. it was also the enemy.

He told Shaikh they wanted to hold a training camp to bring people to a level of readiness at which they could help carry out terrorist acts.

The RCMP began to investigate Ahmad and Amara for terrorist activities around that time after being advised by CSIS that they posed a threat to the security of Canada.

Amara, then 20, was working at a Canadian Tire gas bar. He was a first-year electronics student at Humber College and a father to a baby girl.

Amara and Ahmad made good on their talk of a training camp in December 2005. Shaikh picked up Ahmad and Yogakrishnan, then 17, from Ahmad's apartment and they went to a Wal-Mart to buy shovels, propane canisters and other equipment for winter camping.

The camp leaders and recruits drove up to Washago, about 90 minutes north of Toronto, early on Dec. 18, 2005. One of the cars got stuck in the snow during the drive.

The young winter campers were woefully underprepared for the extreme cold, and went to Canadian Tire for more supplies -- including a stop at Tim Hortons.

Such Canadiana pops up frequently in the tale of the plot to wreak havoc on Canadian society. Another young camp attendee showed up wearing a red toque with the word Canada on it.

At the training camp participants donned camouflage gear, masks and goggles. They wriggled through the wintry woods, engaged in target practice using a handgun and paintball guns, and marched through the forest.

In the midst of those scenes were decidedly un-jihadi activities: wrestling and rolling about in the snow, and making a van spin in circles in the middle of the night in a deserted Canadian Tire parking lot.

During an obstacle course participants would be put through the paces as the trainers simulated live fire.

Not all attendees knew the terrorist purpose of the camp going in, but by the end it was clear, after Ahmad gave a fiery speech urging attendees to band together and sacrifice whatever was needed to defeat western civilization.

"Whether we get arrested, whether we (get) killed, we get tortured, our mission's greater than just individuals," Ahmad said.

"Rome has to be defeated and we have to be the ones that do it, no holding back. Whether it's one man that survives, you have to do it."...

Read it all.

Especially when the government is kowtowing to Islamic supremacists who, by opposing our bus ads, are effectively opposing religious liberty.

A relatively even-handed article about our lawsuit against Detroit: "Legal Battle Brews Over Ban on 'Anti-Islam' Bus Ads," by Mara Gay for AOL News, June 23:

(June 23) -- While a controversial ad campaign targeting Muslims is getting a cold shoulder in Detroit, its ads may soon be appearing on the side of Motown buses anyway.

A conservative legal group has asked a federal judge to force a Michigan bus company to run ads that offer support to Muslims who want to leave their religion, saying the ads are protected under the First Amendment.

"Fatwa on your head?" one of the slogans reads. "Is your family or community threatening you? Leaving Islam? Got questions? Get answers!"

The "Leave Islam Safely" ad campaign is paid for by the Freedom Defense Initiative, an anti-jihadist group co-founded by Pamela Geller, a New York woman who is also working to stop a controversial mosque from being built near New York's ground zero.

A controversial ad campaign in Detroit encouraging Muslims to leave their religion is being defended by a conservative legal group, who are asking a federal judge to force a bus company to run the ads, arguing their protection under the First Amendment.

The ads aren't new: They raised eyebrows when they ran earlier this year in New York. And in Miami, they were removed from buses after local Muslim leaders called them a "smoke screen for hatred," although a court ordered the ads reinstated.

But in metropolitan Detroit, which has a large Muslim population, the campaign has yet to get off the ground. Regional bus company SMART simply refused outright to run the ads.

"The only city so far that has dug their heels in is Detroit," said Robert Muise, a lawyer at the Thomas More Law Center in Michigan, the conservative legal group representing the Freedom Defense Initiative.

Muise has filed a motion for a temporary restraining order against SMART, arguing that freedom of speech gives the Freedom Defense Initiative the "right to engage in religious and political speech in a public forum."

And Geller isn't taking no for an answer. In a phone interview with AOL News today, she said she is determined to see the ads on Detroit buses.

"There's no question that I'm going to win this and those ads are going to run," she said.

Geller said the campaign is not anti-Islam but meant to offer support to people who want to leave the faith. "There are very few resources available to them, and their lives are threatened -- not just by their families but by their mosques and communities," she said.

Raheem Hanifa of the Council on American-Islamic Relations said that kind of sentiment is offensive. "The ads presuppose that Muslims are violent and irrational. That's just not the case," he told AOL News. "This is just another instance of fear-mongering and hate-mongering."

Tell it to Rifqa Bary, Mr. Hanifa.

However, SMART recently allowed an atheist ad to appear on its buses. "Don't believe in God? You are not alone," it read.

That means the bus company will have a hard time standing its ground, according to Don Herzog, a law professor at the University of Michigan and a constitutional scholar.

"It's a disaster when the government starts picking and choosing viewpoints," he told AOL News. "That's a First Amendment nightmare."

Geller told AOL News she's getting ready to launch the ad campaign in another major city, but would not say where.

"I believe I'm fighting for Muslims here," she said. "I have no problem with Muslims. I do have a problem with the violent ideology that inspires jihad."...

As Spain moves to outlaw the face veil, and the cries of "Islamophobia" inevitably rain down, remember this story and others like it.

"Two U.S. Soldiers Killed in Afghan Suicide Bombing," by Maria Abi-Habib and Habib Zahori in the Wall Street Journal, June 22 (thanks to Weasel Zippers):

KABUL--An Afghan woman detonated a suicide vest concealed beneath her burka, killing two U.S. soldiers and injuring scores of Afghan civilians in what government officials say is Afghanistan's first female suicide attack, officials said Tuesday.

The bomb ripped through a checkpoint manned by Afghan and U.S. forces in the province of Kunar, on Afghanistan's eastern border with Pakistan, at about five o'clock Monday evening. The blast wounded 17 civilians and three policemen in addition to killing the two American soldiers, according Afghanistan's Interior Ministry....

Jimmy Carter is disgrace to the presidency, a disgrace to America, and a disgrace to all free people. "Jimmy Carter Worries Court Ruling May Affect His Interaction With Terror Groups," by Patrick Goodenough for CNS News, June 22 (thanks to Weasel Zippers):

(CNSNews.com) - Former President Jimmy Carter has voiced concern that Monday's Supreme Court ruling on "material support" to terrorist groups may criminalize his "work to promote peace and freedom."

Carter, whose advocacy has entailed contact with groups designated by the U.S. government as "foreign terrorist organizations" (FTOs) - notably Hamas and Hezbollah - said he was disappointed by the court decision.

The high court, in a 6-3 decision, upheld a federal law that forbids providing "material support" to an FTO, ruling that it can be applied to U.S. organizations whose engagement with terrorists involves promoting non-violent solutions to conflicts.

The law, part of the post-9/11 USA Patriot Act, forbids the provision of any aid, defined as including "service," "training" or "expert advice or assistance," to a designated FTO.

Although the free speech challenge derived from organizations wanting to work with terrorist groups in and around Turkey and in Sri Lanka - the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) and Tamil Tigers (LTTE) - the ramifications may be most evident in 2010 in the Middle East, amid growing calls for Western governments to recognize and engage with groups like Hamas and Hezbollah.

Arguing that there can be no peace in the region without those groups' participation, Carter has reached out to Hamas and Hezbollah, rejecting criticism that doing so could be viewed as legitimizing their violent activities. Since the 1980s both groups have killed hundreds of people in suicide bombings and other terror attacks, most of them Israelis and Americans.

The administration's argument, presented by Solicitor General Elena Kagan (now a Supreme Court nominee) earlier this year, was in part that the intent of Congress was to block all assistance to terrorists, recognizing that any form of support - even imparting peaceful skills - might benefit and strengthen the organization.

Six of the justices concurred.

"At bottom, plaintiffs simply disagree with the considered judgment of Congress and the Executive that providing material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization - even seemingly benign support - bolsters the terrorist activities of that organization," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority.

In a statement reacting to the decision, Carter said, "We are disappointed that the Supreme Court has upheld a law that inhibits the work of human rights and conflict resolution groups."

"The 'material support law' - which is aimed at putting an end to terrorism - actually threatens our work and the work of many other peacemaking organizations that must interact directly with groups that have engaged in violence," he said.

"The vague language of the law leaves us wondering if we will be prosecuted for our work to promote peace and freedom."...

In "Standing for Religious Liberty - No Matter What: Our bus ad campaign draws fire from Muslims (and the uninformed)" in Hudson New York today, Pamela Geller and I respond to this criticism of our religious liberty bus ad campaign:

As we run ads on buses around the country offering help to Muslims threatened by other Muslims for leaving Islam, the reaction from Muslim spokesmen has been telling. While most Americans would assume that Muslims in America support religious liberty and thus would have no problem with our efforts, even ostensibly moderate Muslim individuals and groups have reacted with fury.

Muhammed Malik, director of the South Florida chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), charged of our religious liberty bus ad campaign that "freedom and liberty are buzzwords they use as a smoke screen for their hatred." Daisy Khan, wife of the imam of the supposedly moderate mega-mosque slated to be built at Ground Zero, claimed counterfactually that it was "ridiculous" to think that any Muslim who wanted to leave Islam was under threat in the U.S. Khan would apparently prefer that you didn't know about the many threats the now-famous apostate teenager Rifqa Bary has received on Facebook and elsewhere.

And now, writing in Hudson NY, Sufi Muslim Shireen Qudosi calls our religious liberty bus ad campaign "inadvisable" - but seems confused as to exactly why.

Qudosi, of course, is not in the same class as CAIR, an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas jihad terror funding case that has seen several of its officials convicted of various terror-related offenses. Nor is she comparable to Khan, whose "moderate" credentials have become increasingly tarnished by a steady stream of revelations demonstrating the dishonesty of her husband, Ground Zero mega-mosque organizer Feisal Abdul Rauf. (In the latest blow to his "moderate" street cred, Rauf refused to condemn Hamas as a terrorist group on a New York radio program.) However, Qudosi identifies herself as "a consultant on Muslim American Relations," which raises the same red flags as does the name "Council on American-Islamic Relations" - as if both Qudosi and CAIR assume that "Muslim" and "American" are two separate entities that cannot mix.

Qudosi clearly dislikes the religious liberty bus ad campaign, characterizing it as a manifestation of "America's brilliance" - not in its concern for Muslims under the threat of death for leaving Islam, but because "one of the liberating facets of American society includes a cultivated freedom of speech: no matter how frustrating or infuriating to anyone."

Why does Qudosi find the bus ad campaign "frustrating or infuriating"? Not because she denies that Islam mandates death for apostates. Unlike Daisy Khan, she admits that Islamic law mandates death for apostates: "external doubt of your faith can lead to a very miserable existence; and in more extreme families, it can lead to death." So why does she object to an initiative to protect such people? Because, she says, she doesn't think we "have thought of the long-term consequences of such an ad campaign." She quotes a passage from our website, RefugeFromIslam.com, that lists three email addresses, including our own, and concludes: "For serious apostates of Islam, or for those questioning their faith, a dialogue with two non-Muslims who ultimately do not understand the cultural position of this marginal Muslim community, does nothing to offer them a serious answer or recourse."

How Shireen Qudosi, whom neither of us have met, knows that we "do not understand the cultural position" of apostates from Islam is unclear. Frankly, having studied the subject matter for years, we are confident that ex-Muslims we regularly consult, including Nonie Darwish, Ibn Warraq, Wafa Sultan, Ali Sina, Amil Imani and others understand that "cultural position" well enough. Who better has charted that terrain?

But ultimately Qudosi doesn't think we're offering apostates enough help:

Where is the infrastructure to help navigate apostates? Where will these ex-Muslims go? Who will house them? Where's the financial backing? What of the psychological damage they suffer? And if there are no counselors, are there at least secular Muslims or other apostates that can help them transition to what is ultimately an entirely new world?

What is odd about all these questions is that she never asked them of us before writing her piece. She ignores the third email address listed in the section she quotes, but it goes to an organization that offers safe haven to Muslim apostates. We have at least ten safe houses in place now, and more are in preparation. Can and should more be done? Certainly. We are starting at the beginning of an effort no one has ever undertaken before.

Did Qudosi expect us to reveal the location of our safe houses and the gateway programs on our press releases? The safety of those living in the abject fear is our priority, not revealing the apparatus we have in place to Qudosi's satisfaction. Even she should know better. Sillier still is her recommendation that groups be included that are in, of all places, the United Kingdom. Ours is a U.S. campaign; our resources are American and Canadian.

No surprise here, except to those who are fooled by Honest Ibe Hooper's propaganda line at CAIR. "State police revoke appointment of Muslim chaplain," by Manya Brachear for the Chicago Breaking News Center, June 22 (thanks to Block Ness):

Officials from the Illinois State Police have revoked the appointment of a prominent Chicago-area cleric to be its first Muslim chaplain.

In a statement, state police officials said Sheikh Kifah Mustapha, the associate director of the Mosque Foundation in Bridgeview, could not serve as a volunteer chaplain "due to information revealed during the background investigation."

Last December, Mustapha was one of seven religious leaders trained in Springfield to become volunteer state police chaplains. State police said they discovered after all seven volunteers completed the training that detailed background checks had not been performed.

But shortly after Mustapha's appointment, Steve Emerson, executive director of the Washington-based Investigative Project on Terrorism, criticized Illinois law enforcement for ignoring Mustapha's history as an "unindicted co-conspirator" in the case against the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, once the nation's largest Muslim charity.

The foundation's two founding members were sentenced last year to 65 years in prison each for funneling millions of dollars to Hamas, a militant Palestinian group that the U.S. has labeled terrorist but also does social work. Mustapha raised money for the group in Chicago.

On Wednesday, the Council on American-Islamic Relations will hold a news conference to protest the revocation of Mustapha's appointment.

An as-yet unclear jihad money trail. "Would-be bomber got cash in Mass.: Details unclear on exchange, Taliban link," by Shelley Murphy and Martin Finucane for the Boston Globe, June 23 (thanks to Block Ness):

Two months before Faisal Shahzad tried to set off a car bomb in busy Times Square in New York City, he came to Massachusetts to pick up $5,000 in cash sent by a member of the Pakistani Taliban. But just how that transaction occurred is still unclear.

Shahzad acknowledged the trip while pleading guilty Monday in US District Court in Manhattan to attempting the botched attack on May 1....

But a lawyer for the two detained men, Pir D. Khan, a 43-year-old taxi driver, and his cousin, Aftab Ali Khan, 27, who shared an apartment in Watertown, said they both deny any connection to Shahzad or the Ta liban.

"They disapproved of that act,'' said Saher J. Macarius, a Framingham lawyer who represents the Khans on immigration charges, referring to the attempted Times Square bombing.

Macarius said he asked the Khans if they gave Shahzad money without realizing what it was for, and both said they did not handle money for him.

"They insisted that they have no connection with Faisal,'' Macarius said....

Shahzad, 30, of Bridgeport, Conn., admitted in court Monday that after receiving bomb-making training from the Taliban in Pakistan, he returned to the United States in February with $12,000 and a plan to carry out terrorist attacks on American soil.

But he quickly ran out of money, according to the indictment, so on Feb. 25 Shahzad traveled to Massachusetts to collect $5,000 sent by an unidentified accomplice who worked for Tehrik-e-Taliban. The indictment does not describe the money transfer. Then, on April 10, Shahzad picked up another $7,000 in Ronkonkoma, N.Y., that had been sent at the direction of the same accomplice....

Indeed. But this resolve is certain to be tested, and soon. "Israeli army chief vows to stop Lebanese, Iranian ships," from AFP, June 22 (thanks to all who sent this in):

JERUSALEM -- Israel's army chief vowed Tuesday to prevent Lebanese and Iranian aid ships from entering the Gaza Strip, saying the coastal enclave would not become an Iranian port, media reported.

"We have the right to inspect and prevent the flow of arms into Gaza," the Ynet news website quoted Israeli chief of staff Gabi Ashkenazi as saying.

"We can't let Gaza become an Iranian port," he said speaking at a Jewish seminary in northern Israel.

Earlier Tuesday Iranian Red Crescent officials said an Iranian aid ship is to leave the Gulf port of Bandar Abbas for a 14-day journey to Gaza at the end of this week, the ISNA news agency reported.

Lebanese civilian groups are also planning to send two ships to the Israeli-blockaded Palestinian territory via Cyprus.

"If a flotilla comes from Lebanon we will deal with it. If they are peaceful we will deal with it peacefully, if not we will deal with it as we need to," Ashkenazi said....

In "Islamic Law Comes to Dearborn" in Human Events today, Pamela Geller discusses recent events of grave concern in Dearborn, Michigan, where police have enforced the Sharia prohibition of non-Muslims proselytizing among Muslims:

Is it illegal to preach Christianity to Muslims in America now?

Acts 17 Apologetics, a Christian evangelistic group, was banned from passing out fliers at this year's Arab Festival in Dearborn, Mich., but they went to the festival anyway and ended up getting arrested.

On Saturday, I got this message from David Wood of Acts 17: "Muslims threatened to kill Nabeel [Qureshi, an ex-Muslim and David's colleague] and me if we showed up again at Arab Fest in Dearborn, so we went there yesterday. They didn't kill us. Instead, police arrested us and we got to spend a night in jail (along with two others who were video recording us)."

Wondering if they were arrested for passing out fliers in defiance of the ban, I asked David about the ban. He answered, "Yes, we're banned from handing out literature, but we didn't do that. We followed the rules, and still got thrown in jail. They flat out lied about us. We can prove they lied with the video footage (just like last year), but the police took our cameras and won't let us have the footage. There's major oppression of anyone who criticizes Islam."

Last year, Nabeel, David and friends went to the Arab Festival and filmed a video that went viral. It is amazing to see in that video what happened in America. It was free speech under siege.

Nabeel and David were harassed and intimidated, aided and abetted by law enforcement. Said David and Nabeel: "The conclusion of this video is a mob of festival security attacking our cameras, pushing us back, kicking our legs, and lying to the police. We ask you, is it a coincidence that the city with the highest percentage of Muslims in the United States is the city where Christianity is not allowed to be represented (let alone preached) on a public sidewalk?"

The video was shocking because it exposed the lack of freedoms for non-Muslims in America where Islam is involved. Muslims are given special rights, treated as a special class that gets special treatment.

And this year, these good, decent Americans were arrested based on Islamic Sharia law. Islamic law forbids Christians to preach to Muslims....

Read it all.

Sure, it is the British media that is responsible for this:

Dr. Naik recommends the death penalty for homosexuals and for apostasy from the faith, which he likens to wartime treason. He calls for India to be ruled by the medieval tenets of Shariah law. He supports a ban on the construction of non-Muslim places of worship in Muslim lands and the Taliban's bombing of the Bamiyan Buddhas. He says revealing clothes make Western women "more susceptible to rape." Not surprisingly, Dr. Naik believes that Jews "control America" and are the "strongest in enmity to Muslims."

This is a typical evasion of responsibility. Islamic supremacists never take responsibility for their actions. It is always someone else's fault -- and that goes for everything, including their very own words and deeds.

An update on this story. "Indian Islamic scholar to appeal against British ban," from AFP, June 23:

MUMBAI -- An Indian Islamic preacher who was banned from entering Britain due to "unacceptable behaviour" has vowed to appeal against the decision, which he blamed on the British media.

Mumbai-based television preacher Zakir Naik had been due to give a series of lectures in London and northern England but Britain's new Home Secretary Theresa May barred him last week.

"We have written to the UK home ministry, seeking them to revise their decision and revoke the exclusion order," a spokesperson for Naik told AFP on Wednesday.

Naik will take up legal proceedings in London if the government does not reverse its ban, he said.

On Tuesday Naik issued a statement accusing May of acting on British press reports which he said portrayed him as "preacher of hate" and a "terror-backer."

Naik has run into controversy for complimentary references to Al-Qaeda chief Osama Bin Laden, which he says were made in Singapore in 1996, prior to the September 11, 2001 attacks.

"It is not justified or sensible to use these quotes in the context of 9/11, when the atrocities had not taken place," Naik said....

In the video above, I questioned the MAS reps involved in this sale about their ties to the Brotherhood and related matters, and got, as you can see, a windy non-answer.

In reality, the MAS is the Brotherhood in the U.S., and the Brotherhood in the U.S. is a subversive organization:

"In recent years, the U.S. Brotherhood operated under the name Muslim American Society, according to documents and interviews. One of the nation's major Islamic groups, it was incorporated in Illinois in 1993 after a contentious debate among Brotherhood members." -- Chicago Tribune, 2004

The Muslim Brotherhood "must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah's religion is made victorious over all other religions." -- Mohamed Akram, "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America," May 22, 1991, Government Exhibit 003-0085, U.S. vs. HLF, et al. P. 7 (21).

And here we have a play for victim status based on the old shopworn charge of racism and bigotry, with no attempt whatsoever to deal with the real substance of the objections to the MAS and to this sale.

"Backers of Staten Island mosque go on offensive," by Amy Padnani for SILive.com, June 23 (thanks to Twostellas):

ISLAND, N.Y. -- Those opposed to a planned mosque in Midland Beach are consumed by bigotry and hatred, a Muslim American Society leader said yesterday.

Ibrahim Ramey, the human civil rights director for MAS' advocacy arm, the MAS Freedom National, accused some Staten Islanders of engaging in a "ferocious attack" against Muslims based on stereotyping and prejudice.

"When stripped of all the propaganda, innuendo, and flat-out lies, the issue is simply one of religious bigotry and hatred," he said, in a letter issued to the media.

Ramey went on to refer to residents' attitudes as contrary to what America stands for: "Is this really happening in America -- a nation that boasts of its religious tolerance and pluralism? Sadly, the answer is, yes." [...]

Ramey's letter went on to defend MAS as a peaceful organization, highlighting the group's affiliation with Religions for Peace, The Interfaith Alliance, Interfaith Workers Justice and the Temple of Understanding. He called upon people friendly and respectful toward all religions, who he referred to as the "better angels of the interfaith community," to stand up in support of MAS' mosque proposal.

Bill Owens, a Midland Beach resident who has been very vocal in his opposition to MAS, said the group was wrong to characterize residents as full of hatred.

"We're not racist or bigots," he said. "The five firefighters from our neighborhood, they didn't stop at the door of the World Trade Center and ask what sex, color and religion they were. They went into the building and perished. St. Margaret Mary's just had their eighth-grade graduation and there were Muslim children who graduated. We're not anti-Muslim, we're anti-terrorist. Everybody says we're Islamaphobes. No, we have a 'terrorphobia.'"

Owens went on to say that residents received a lot of support at their rallies protesting the mosque -- even from Muslims.

"We've had Muslims come up to us and say, 'Don't let this organization move in here, they're evil.'

"We're doing what we think is right in this neighborhood. Someplace, you have to make a stand. The only thing evil needs to be successful is for good people to do nothing."

----------------

Here's the text of Ibrahim Ramey's letter:

In Staten Island, New York, there is a ferocious attack, by some members of the community against Muslims who are seeking to purchase a property that would be used as a mosque and an Islamic center. The prospective seller, a local Catholic church, is now under intense pressure to back out of the original plan to sell the property, while anti-Muslim agitators have converged on the Staten Island neighborhood, claiming that the Muslim organization that is seeking to buy the property is a front group for terrorists, criminals, and other assorted "Anti-American" agents of mayhem and destruction.

Is this really happening in America -- a nation that boasts of its religious tolerance and pluralism? Sadly, the answer is, yes.

It does not matter to many opponents of the neighborhood mosque that the national organization supporting the project-the Muslim American Society -- is a legal, registered not-for-profit corporation with local chapters in some 35 states. They don't care that there are no indictments of the organization made by Homeland Security or the Department of Justice. And it makes no difference to them that this same group, while vilified by Islamophobes across the nation, still supported significant material contributions to the largely Christian victims of Hurricane Katrina in 2005 and the tragic earthquake in Haiti earlier this year....

Yes, but is it a Brotherhood entity?

In FrontPage this morning I discuss the Times Square car bomber's clear statements, and the denial surrounding them:

"One has to understand where I'm coming from. I consider myself ... a Muslim soldier." With these words, would-be Times Square car bomber Faisal Shahzad made it abundantly clear that when he parked his explosives-laden SUV in Times Square on May 1, he was waging Islamic jihad in accord with Islamic law that makes defensive jihad obligatory upon every Muslim: "I am part of the answer to the U.S. terrorizing the Muslim nations and the Muslim people," he declared Monday. "And, on behalf of that, I'm avenging the attack."

MSNBC's Contessa Brewer's hope, expressed on the air, that the Times Square bomber "was not going to be anybody with ties to any kind of Islamic country" has been definitively disappointed. Will she now host an in-depth investigation of the jihad doctrine and Islamic supremacism, explaining the concept of jihad warfare and Shahzad's real motivations to MSNBC viewers? Don't hold your breath - but Shahzad's explanation of his motives once again exposes the dangers of the mainstream media's ongoing refusal to discuss honestly the jihad against the United States.

Only Islamic theology makes sense of Shahzad's words and actions. In court Monday, Shahzad said he was retaliating against those who "attacked the Muslim lands." U.S. District Judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum responded by pointing out that those attackers were "not the people who were walking in Times Square that night. Did you look around to see who they were?"

Shahzad then explained: "Well, the people select the government. We consider them all the same. The drones, when they hit..."

Cedarbaum then interrupted him to ask: "Including the children?"

Shahzad responded: "Well, the drone hits in Afghanistan and Iraq, they don't see children, they don't see anybody. They kill women, children, they kill everybody. It's a war, and in war, they kill people. They're killing all Muslims."

The idea that the allegedly indiscriminate killing done by Americans in Afghanistan and Iraq gives Shahzad a license as a Muslim to kill Americans indiscriminately in Times Square comes straight from the Qur'an: "The recompense for an injury is an injury equal thereto" (42:40).

Nonetheless, the obfuscation and denial was especially egregious this time: Ezra Klein in the Washington Post led the way into fantasyland when he observed that Shahzad had defaulted on the mortgage on his home in Connecticut and that the property was now in foreclosure: "foreclosures generate an enormous amount of misery and anxiety and depression that can tip people into all sorts of dangerous behaviors that don't make headlines but do ruin lives. And for all that we've done to save the financial sector, we've not done nearly enough to help struggling homeowners."

Will Ezra Klein now issue a retraction, an apology, and an explanation of what it means to be a "Muslim soldier"?

Don't count on it. Mainstream media reporters reflexively deny and ignore the facts about Islamic jihad because they have completely bought into the idea that Muslims, as non-white, non-Christian, non-Westerners, cannot possibly be anything but victims. It appears to be impossible for the mainstream media to conceive of a paradigm in which Muslims can perpetrate any kind of evil at all. In the lenses through which they view the world, only white Judeo-Christian Westerners can do anything wrong.

The facts that there are white Western Muslims, such as Adam Gadahn, the first American to be charged with treason since World War II, and John Walker Lindh, the American Taliban, and that the jihad doctrine and Islamic supremacism are not racial issues, but constitute an ideological and societal challenge, are completely lost on them. Likewise the non-white victims of the jihad, such as the monumentally courageous and outspoken Sudanese ex-slave Simon Deng, and ex-Muslims such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Ibn Warraq, Wafa Sultan, Nonie Darwish, Ali Sina and Amil Imani, mean nothing to them.

Yet the more we remain in denial about how jihad attacks in the West happen, as well as attempted attacks such as the Times Square car bombing, happen, the more we will see of attacks like Faisal Shahzad's. Why? Because nothing is being done to prevent them. Instead of the denial we encounter from the mainstream media after every jihad attack and attempted attack in this country, we should be seeing frank and honest stories about authorities calling the American Muslim community to account. We should be seeing stories about authorities demanding transparent, open programs in American mosques and Islamic schools, teaching against the Islamic doctrines that inspired Faisal Shahzad.

But that won't happen. Political correctness has the mainstream media in a stranglehold. That will only ensure that nothing will be done to address this problem at its root, and that Faisal Shahzad's car bomb in Times Square will in a few years look positively trivial.

What fun they'll have in Europe. Sharia Alert from the Kingdom of the Two Holy Places: "Saudi court punishes group of men and women for mingling at a party with lashings, prison time," by Meena Hartenstein for the New York Daily News, June 22:

In Saudi Arabia, fighting for your right to party could get you beaten and thrown in jail.

A group of four men and 11 women were convicted Tuesday for socializing at a party, and sentenced to floggings and time in prison, judicial officials told The Associated Press.

Saudi law adheres to a strict interpretation of Islam that prohibits unrelated men and women from mingling with each other.

The officials, who spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity, said the revelers were caught partying together until the wee hours of the morning last month and were tried by a Saudi Court in the northern town of Ha'il.

Each member of the group was sentenced to an unspecified number of lashes and a prison sentence of one or two years, except for a female minor. She will be punished with 80 lashes but will not be sent to prison....

Moderation!

And authorities are worried that this horrific slaughter will "ignite tension" -- instead of calling upon the Muslim community to renounce once and for all any and all teachings involving any kind of violence against Infidels. "Ukrainian Boy, 5, Slaughtered 'Like a Goat' by Religious Fanatic," from NewsCore, June 22 (thanks to DJM):

A 5-year-old Ukrainian boy was slaughtered by an alleged religious fanatic as he played in a sandpit with his friends, Pravda reported Tuesday.

The stranger strolled up to little Viktor Shemyakin before pointing to a tree and saying: "Look, there is a bird up there."

When the youngster glanced upward the maniac plunged a knife into his throat, Pravda said.

The June 18 killing has threatened to ignite tension in the town of Dneprovka, in Ukraine's Crimea region, after it emerged that the 27-year-old knifeman was a suspected Muslim fanatic, the Russian online newspaper reported.

The victim's three-year-old sister Lena Shemyakina and her five-year-old friend were among a group of young children who witnessed the horrifying attack.

Viktor's mother, named only as Angelina, heard their screams and ran out of the house to find her child lying in a pool of blood.

Police arrested the prime suspect, named by Pravda as Server Ibragimov, three hours later at his parents' house, where he was reportedly hiding in the loft.

He allegedly confessed to the crime, telling police that he was ordered to kill the boy by spirits.

"The man screamed Allahu Akbar (Arabic for 'God is great') when killing the boy, "said a shocked local. "The kid was slaughtered like a goat."

Other residents of the town said that the man had serious mental health issues.

Of course. They always do.

The great Hillel Neuer of UN Watch (thanks to Steven).

You never know who might be in there

War is deceit, after all. And sometimes that calls for a burqa. "Pakistan detains German man near militant stronghold," by Adil Khan for Reuters, June 22 (thanks to all who sent this in):

BANNU, Pakistan (Reuters) - Pakistani security forces have detained a German man clad in a head-to-toe veil in the northwest as he was being driven from the militant bastion of North Waziristan on the Afghan border, police said on Tuesday.

The man, in his mid-20s, was caught at a security checkpost on the border between North Waziristan and Bannu city on Monday, Shafqat Khan, a senior police officer in Bannu, told Reuters.

"He was in a car with two tribesmen, one of them was also wearing a burqa. They were carrying a girl in a bid to pretend they're a tribal family," he said....

In "President Obama Rewards The Hamas Lobby" in Forbes today, Steven Emerson skewers Obama's anti-Israel, pro-jihad actions:

Why is the terrorist group more interested in attacking Israel than improving the lives of its people?

A ship packed with violent, radical activists tries to run a blockade aimed at preventing terrorists from receiving illicit material. Video shows them beating commandos with clubs as they land on the ship, pelting them with slingshots and carrying knives.

What is America's response? To demand that the nation whose soldiers were attacked conduct an investigation to "find out the facts."

It is clear Israel sought to peacefully secure the Mavi Marmara on May 31 as it approached Gaza. But the hardened activists, who openly discussed their desire for martyrdom, weren't going to let that happen. Fighting for their lives, the Israeli soldiers opened fire with their sidearms, killing nine people on the ship.

But that does not make the Obama administration's demand for an investigation from an ally any more sensible. It was the first such demand made by the U.S. of another country, let alone an ally, in recent memory. There was no call for a probe on Russia's treatment of Chechnyans, for Egypt's persecution of the Christian Copts or for the murderous rampages against the Ahmadiyan Muslim sect in Pakistan.

Just Israel made the history books. Israel, however, has proof of what really happened. It released at least five videos on YouTube showing Israeli soldiers being attacked as they landed.

Moreover, details emerged about IHH--the Turkish charity instigating the attack--and its long history of abetting Islamic terrorist attacks and Islamic terrorist organizations. Reports produced by MEMRI showed the violent attack at sea was planned by radicals vowing to go to their "martyrdom." By June 3 more YouTube videos appeared showing the efforts by the Turkish flotilla extremists to battle with the Israelis....

Read it all.

Of course, they're still jihadis and Islamic supremacists. But everyone is just fine with that. "U.N. to remove Taliban from blacklist: Karzai," from Reuters, June 22 (thanks to Block Ness):

KABUL (Reuters) - The United Nations has agreed to remove Taliban members who renounce ties to al Qaeda from a U.N. blacklist on a "gradual" basis, Afghan President Hamid Karzai's office said on Tuesday.

Senior diplomats from the 15-nation U.N. Security Council were in the Afghan capital on Tuesday, following a call for a review of the names of Taliban figures on its sanction list at a peace conference in Kabul earlier this month.

"The president asked the U.N. delegates to remove Taliban members from their blacklist and the delegates agreed to do so gradually and provided the members had no links to al Qaeda or other terrorist groups," Karzai's palace said in a statement....

A statement summarizing the June 2-4 meeting of 1,600 tribal and religious leaders in Kabul urged the Afghan government and foreign powers to "take serious action in getting the names of those in opposition removed from the consolidated blacklist."

Teaching children to love death. "Arab song for kids: Allah loves martyrs," by Roee Nahmias for Ynet News, June 22 (thanks to Sr. Soph):

Anti-Israel television for children: The Birds of Paradise band has released a new song in which children express their desire to be shaheeds (martyrs).

The song, sung by young children on the Birds of Paradise television channel, includes the lyrics, "When we die as shaheeds we'll go to paradise. No, don't say we're young. This life has made us old. Without Palestine, what significance is there to our lives? Even if they give us the whole world, we'll never forget her (Palestine)."

During the song, an older man appears. "Children, we must keep our religious commandments," he sings. "There is no god but Allah, and Allah loves shaheeds."

At the end of the song, the children sing, "Allah watch over the children of Palestine. Allah will make our prayers come true."...

And the Trinity, of course, is blasphemous from an Islamic standpoint. "Bekasi: Islamic extremists destroy an 'immoral and blasphemous' sculpture," by Mathias Hariyadi for AsiaNews, June 22 (thanks to Block Ness):

Jakarta (AsiaNews) - Islamic fundamentalists in the district of Bekasi, 30 km east of Jakarta, have obtained the destruction of a statue of "Three young women," because it was deemed blasphemous. The bare chest and symbols related to the number "three" - the Trinity of Christian nature - make the work of art "obscene" and "desecrate" the religion of Mohammed. The sculptor has expressed disappointment and disbelief at the destruction, ordered last June 19 by the local authorities, describing the act "stupid and misleading." The Bekasi district thus registers as a new episode of religious extremism after attacks on churches and Christian buildings. Theatre of a rapid urbanization, the area not far from the Indonesian capital has not been able to harmonise economic development and peaceful coexistence, especially between Christians and Muslims.

Recently, the Islamic Defence Front (FPI) pointed the finger at the statue of the "Three young women" (Tiga Mojana in local language), a work by the sculptor Nyoman Nuart, a native of Bali who is famous worldwide. The extremists have branded the work as "obscene and blasphemous" and have had it destroyed. The artist notes that the sculpture has nothing offensive to the religion of Mohammed, adding that "while being topless," the 17 meters high work of art has no sexual significance and does not intend to offend Islamic morality, also because the young women wear clothes typical of the region of West Java.

An even more "ridiculous" accusation is that the image seeks to convert people to Christianity: the three women, according to the extremists, recall the "trinity", and therefore had to be demolished. In fact, there are three women because there are three directions leading to the roundabout where the statue was erected. And each woman, according to the intentions of the author, was to symbolise a "welcome" to those who entered the district.

Following the wave of protests, the district chief imposed the statute's destruction. A decision, taken by the authorities, also opposed by the moderate fringe of Muslims, according to which "the work of one of the most respected artists in the area, has now gone with the wind." A local witness, under conditions of anonymity, told AsiaNews that every work of the art should be appreciated, as long as "there is nothing blasphemous or contrary to any religion."

These men were not arrested or cited. They were questioned. The FBI apparently had some reason to question them again recently. Hamas-linked CAIR is trying to intimidate the FBI into being afraid to question Muslims.

I myself have been questioned about my activities and allegiances after people have seen me in airports working on a website that prominently mentions "jihad." When CAIR and these Muslim men try to make a big deal of this, the underlying agenda is clear: they are trying to inhibit law enforcement personnel. They're trying to make sure that police and other investigators will be too intimidated and hamstrung by PC sensibilities to question young Muslim men about their actions, no matter where, no matter how suspicious.

Remember also that CAIR was involved in the attempt by six imams who were taken off an airplane after other passengers complained about their behavior to sue those passengers. If they had succeeded, people would have been afraid to report suspicious behavior by Muslims, for fear of getting sued. This is of a piece with that.

An update on this story. "Attorney accuses FBI of harassing 5 Muslim men," by Ken Ritter for The Associated Press, June 21 (thanks to Twostellas):

LAS VEGAS - A Muslim advocacy group representative accused the FBI on Monday of wrongly questioning five Muslim men in the Los Angeles area about praying in a shopping center parking lot in southern Nevada six months ago.

Council on American- Islamic Relations attorney Ameena Mirza Qazi in Los Angeles said she was concerned that federal investigators still think the men detained last December by Henderson police were "plotting something or were some sort of suspicious group."

FBI spokeswoman Laura Eimiller in Los Angeles said the men were interviewed by FBI agents "to clarify routine reports of suspicious activity" and were not arrested.

"None of the men have been accused of wrongdoing," Eimiller said.

Qazi, head of the CAIR Los Angeles chapter, said five of the men were questioned at their homes on Thursday morning.

"These young men were not engaged in any kind of suspicious activity," Qazi said. "The concern is that they are continuing to be penalized for asserting their First Amendment rights. I think they were wrongly questioned."...

Aweys: Beard dyed henna in imitation of Muhammad

"Short of complying with the instructions will attract punishment in accordance with the Sharia (Islamic) laws)." Sharia Alert from the Brave New Somalia: "Mogadishu men ordered to grow beard in 30 days," by Abdulkadir Khalif for the Daily Nation, June 21 (thanks to all who sent this in):

Men in the Somali capital Mogadishu, have been given 30 days to grow beard. The order was issued by Moalim Hashi Mohamed Farah, the Governor in the capital. It takes effect on July 20.

Moalim Hashi is a member of Hizbu Islam, led by Sheikh Dahir Aweys, one of the Islamist groups opposing the Transitional Federal Government.

Talking to the local media via teleconference late on Sunday, Moalim Hashi stated that Somali women in the capital had already complied with the order of using the Hijab (heavy dress covering from head to toe). He added that it is time from men to comply with Islamic manners.

The clergyman ordered all men of adult age to grow beard and to trim moustaches.

He emphasized that his Islamic authority was aware of some men actually shaving the beards and even growing the moustaches, which is the opposite of the code the order demands.

"As from 20th of July, we are hereby ordering all men to obey the instructions of trimming the moustaches and growing the beards," said Moalim Hashi. "Short of complying with the instructions will attract punishment in accordance with the Sharia (Islamic) laws)," he added.

The order stressed that men shaving beards is effectively prohibited. "Time to cut beard off is over," remarked the governor.

Somali Islamist groups, namely Al-Shabaab and Hizbu Islam, have introduced several restrictions including, among others, ban on school bells, women wearing bras, movie houses, music, folk dances and football, particularly watching the World Cup currently taking place in South Africa....

On April 3, Hizbu Islam ordered all Mogadishu Radio and TVs to stop playing music and lyrics. The broadcasters complied, except Mogadishu Radio, a government-run media and Bar Kulan, a broadcaster that transmits its programmes from Nairobi in neighbouring Kenya.

Moalim Hashi promised to take action against the defiant Bar Kulan Radio when Islamists get to Nairobi.

The latest edict on beards by Hizbu Islam follows a similar order issued late last year by Al-Shabaab. The two groups control most of Somalia. "Men are ordered to grow their beards and trim their moustaches and anyone found violating this law will face the consequences," the group said. This can include flogging.

"To grow one's beard is a moral teaching left by our Prophet Mohamed, peace be upon him, so it is a duty to keep this religious practice alive and punish men who shave their beards and grow their moustaches."...

From 9/11 Families for a Safe & Strong America comes this letter to Congress from our old friend D.C. Watson: "Congress must defend 9/11's sacred ground and expose the Islamist imams," June 21:

Office of the Honorable John Boehner United States Congressman, 8th Congressional District (Ohio)

Office of the Honorable Mitch McConnell
United States Senator, Kentucky

June 21, 2010

Dear Congressman Boehner and Senator McConnell,

Thank you in advance for your time. I would like to ask if you will review and share with your congressional colleagues the following information which includes, but is not limited to, a collection of quotes and documented activities pertaining to a number of Islamic preachers (Imams) in America.

It is important to know that for them, being truthful to Americans would place their agenda in jeopardy; and when confronted, their strategy is to maintain that their words have been "taken out of context," to dismiss critics as fringe groups who irrationally fear Islam, and to throw out accusations of "anti-Muslim bigotry" and "intolerance".

They falsely play victim and have no legitimate defense; for it is their prejudices, religious intolerance, and ideological dogma that can threaten safety and civil society.

When the audience is the American public, these particular ideologists will speak of peace, dialogue and inclusiveness. When they are in front of their co-religionists, the conversation changes.

Imam Amir-Abdel Malik-Ali: Masjid Al Islam mosque, Oakland, CA

"We must implement Islam as a totality (in which) Allah controls every place... the home, the classroom, the science lab, the halls of Congress."

Imam Fawaz Damra: Former Imam in the Cleveland, Ohio area

"The first principle is that terrorism, and terrorism alone, is the path to liberation. The second principle is that "settlement is decided by the sword."

Damra was convicted of lying about his ties to Islamic terrorism, and set to be deported.

Imam Abdul Alim Musa: Al Masjid mosque, Washington, D.C.

"If you don't give us justice. If you don't give us equality. If you don't give us our share of America. If you don't stay out of our way and leave us alone, we're gonna burn America down."

Imam Muzammil Siddiqi: Islamic Society of North America

"We must not forget that Allah's rules have to be established in all lands..."

Imam Fouad ElBayly: Johnstown (PA) Islamic Center

On Dutch author Ayaan Hirsi Ali: "She has been identified as one who has defamed the faith (Islam). If you come into the faith, you must abide by the laws. And when you decide to defame it deliberately, the sentence is death."

Imam Mahdi Bray: Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation

Coordinated and led a Washington rally where he played the tambourine as one of the speakers sang, and the crowd repeated, "Let's all go into jihad, and throw stones at the face of the Jews."

Imam Muhammad Al-Asi: Former Imam at the Washington, D.C. Islamic Center

"Now, all our imams, our public speakers, should be concentrating on militarizing the Muslim public ... Only carrying arms will do this task." [also see this]

Imam Husham Al-Husainy: Karbalaa Islamic Education Center. Dearborn, MI

On U.S. soil, has held rallies in support of the terrorist organization, Hezbollah.

Imam Omar Shahin: Tucson, Arizona Islamic Center; President, North American Imams Federation; spokesman for the six 'Flying Imams'

"A Muslim must try his best to abide by the rulings of Sharia (Islamic law) whenever possible as much as he can. He should not allow himself to be liable to those western laws that contradict the clear-cut Islamic rulings."

Imam Siraj Wahhaj: Masjid Al-Taqwa mosque. Brooklyn, N.Y

"In time, this so-called democracy will crumble, and there will be nothing. And the only thing left will be Islam." On stoning women: "If Allah says stone them to death ... then you stone them to death, because it's the obedience of Allah and his messenger ... nothing personal." Read more about Siraj Wahhaj here.

Imam Hassan Mohamud: Islamic Da'wah Center, St. Paul, Minnesota

In a video produced to raise money for the center, Mohamud stated that, "This is a project that can save you from the hell of living in America."

Imam Zaid Shakir: Former Muslim Chaplain at Yale University

"Muslims cannot accept the legitimacy of the existing American order, since it is against the orders and ordainments of Allah."

Imam Warith Deen Umar: Former Muslim Chaplain, New York Prisons

"The 9/11 hijackers should be honored as martyrs." The "U.S. risks further terrorism attacks because it oppresses Muslims around the world." and "Without justice, there will be warfare, and it can come to this country, too."

Imam Jamil Al-Amin: Former Imam, Atlanta Community mosque (GA) (Incarcerated)

Al-Amin shot and killed Fulton County Deputy Ricky Kinchen as he was serving a warrant after Al-Amin refused to appear for his court date to answer charges of possessing a stolen car and impersonating a police officer.

Imam Zul-Qarnain Shahid: Muslim chaplain for the New York City Department of Corrections (and convicted murderer)

Smuggling box cutters into a Manhattan jail. Previously, Shahid was hired by the Department of Corrections as a chaplain in 2007 despite having served 14 years of a 15-years-to-life sentence for a December 1976 murder and robbery in Harlem.

Imam Luqman Ameen Abdullah (Deceased): Masjid Al-Haqq mosque, Detroit, MI

According to the official criminal complaint against him, Luqman Abdullah was a "highly placed leader of a radical fundamentalist Sunni group", whose mission was to "establish a separate, sovereign Islamic state within the United States, governed by Shari'ah law." Additionally, Abdullah, in the complaint (p.2 of the Affidavit), "called his followers to an offensive jihad, rather than a defensive jihad."

The tune seems to change when Imam Feisel Abdul Rauf of the planned 'Cordoba House' mosque at Ground Zero speaks, yet the underlying theme remains the same:

"We've approached the community because we want this to be an example of how we are cooperating with the members of the community, not only to provide services but also to build a discourse on how Muslims and non-Muslims can cooperate together to push back against the voice of extremism." Conversely, in Egypt on March 24, 2010, he said, "I do not believe in religious dialogue."

Imam Rauf asserts, "The Prophet Muhammad has been known as the first feminist. Gender equality is an intrinsic part of Islamic belief."

Yet that runs contrary to the predominant practices in Islamic nations and Shari'ah courts where typically a man's testimony equals that of two women, and where Muslim women are prohibited from marrying non-Muslims but Muslim men are permitted to marry Christians and Jews, as well as Muslims. (Sura 4:34 in the Qur'an details Islam's prescribed treatment of females.)

Imam Rauf has stated, "Muslim charities have been subject to undue scrutiny since 9/11."

In fact: The Holy Land Foundation, Global Relief Foundation, and the Benevolence International Foundation all identified themselves as "charities".

Imam Rauf has stated, "Islamic law and American democratic principles have many things in common", and that America is "Shari'ah compliant."

In fact, Islamic law (Shari'ah) is a supremacist, sexist, barbaric human rights violation that has no place in modern societies or in their court systems:

Punishments include imprisonment, flogging, amputation, and execution by beheading, public stoning, hanging, or firing squad.

Thievery is punishable by amputation of the right hand. Multiple amputations are carried out for the crime of highway robbery.

For persons convicted of less serious crimes, such as alcohol related offenses or being alone in the company of an unrelated person of the opposite sex, the offenders are caned.

Adultery is punishable by public stoning.

Crimes against Muslims receive harsher penalties than crimes against non-Muslims.

Those who do not embrace Islam and wish to convert to another religion have, according to Islamic law, forfeited their life and are to be put to death by the state.

There is not a radical and non-radical Islam. There is one Islam, and a matter of whether or not a Muslim takes at face value the verses of war and intolerance contained in the Qur'an (ex. 9:5, 9:29, 8:12, 5:51, 4:34). Fundamentalists, like the ones outlined above, also consider tolerant and non-aggressive Muslims to be "infidels."

With the facts out in front of them, there is nothing that Americans cannot accomplish, or repel. Yet our mainstream, lazy, useful idiot media has failed as a free press by refusing to properly provide vital information on this matter.

Robert Spencer, Daniel Pipes, Nonie Darwish, Brigitte Gabriel, Steven Emerson and others can fill in the many blanks left by imams and Islamic "civil rights" groups over the years. They are a valuable resource. It would benefit the nation if members of Congress were to move in their direction for the purpose of obtaining a deeper awareness of the existential threat posed by fundamental Islamic doctrine which, until undergoing some measure of reform, will continue to mar society after society by way of both violent and political jihad.

Our very way of life is under attack from within: from global-minded politicians currently holding seats in our own government (who equate being a public servant to being royalty), to those crossing into our country illegally and their supporters, to front groups posing as advocates, to the situation brought forth in this letter.

Does the United States Congress care enough about this country and the memory of the 9/11 victims, and have the courage to protect the World Trade Center site, the Pentagon, and the hijacked airliner crash site near Shanksville, Pennsylvania by making these sacred grounds off limits to any and all callous, egregious degradation? Please gather every true patriot within the people's halls and answer that question with a resounding "Yes".

Respectfully,

D.C. Watson, United States

cc:

9/11 Families for a Safe & Strong America

Office of the Honorable Peter King, United States Congressman, 3rd Congressional District (New York); Office of the Honorable Eric Cantor, United States Congressman, 7th Congressional District (Virginia); Office of the Honorable Patrick J. Tiberi, United States Congressman, 12th Congressional District (Ohio); Office of the Honorable Paul Ryan, United States Congressman, 1st Congressional District (Wisconsin); Office of the Honorable Mike Pence, United States Congressman, 6th Congressional District (Indiana); Office of the Honorable Frank Wolf, United States Congressman, 10th Congressional District (Virginia); Office of the Honorable Bill Shuster, United States Congressman, 9th Congressional District (Pennsylvania)

Office of the Honorable Jim DeMint, United States Senator, South Carolina; Office of the Honorable Jeff Sessions, United States Senator, Alabama; Office of the Honorable James Inhofe, United States Senator, Oklahoma

In Human Events this morning I discuss the New Yorker's recent attack on Ayaan Hirsi Ali:

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is an ex-Muslim who is guarded round-the-clock because of Islamic jihadist threats to murder her. She is also a fearless champion of human rights and especially the rights of women who suffer under the institutionalized discrimination mandated for them by Islamic law. One would think that she would be a heroine to the enlightened liberals of the New Yorker magazine. Think again: it turns out that for the New Yorker, multiculturalism trumps feminism, and so Hirsi Ali is just another "Islamophobe."

The liberal rag last week published an attack on Hirsi Ali that bordered on the obscene in its extenuation of evil and denigration of those fighting against it: "Islamismism: How should Western intellectuals respond to Muslim scholars?" by Pankaj Mishra. Mishra suggests that Hirsi Ali believes Islam's prophet Muhammad to have been "a pervert and a tyrant," and that Islam promotes terrorism and enslaves women, simply because she experienced "bigotry and intolerance among her former co-religionists," was "genitally mutilated as a child in Somalia," was "briefly radicalized," and so on. In other words, if she hadn't had such terrible personal experiences with Islam, she wouldn't regard it with such a gimlet eye today.

But actually, the question of whether or not Muhammad was a pervert and a tyrant has nothing whatsoever to do with Ayaan Hirsi Ali's experiences, whatever they may have been. The question of what Muhammad was can only be answered by consulting the early Islamic sources about Muhammad (and they do show indeed that he was a pervert and a tyrant). Even the question of whether Islam enslaves women cannot be answered by Hirsi Ali's personal experience, as illuminating as it may be of the condition of women in Islam. It has to be answered by reference to Islamic texts and teachings about women, and by a look at how those texts and teachings are put into practice in various parts of the Islamic world.

By making it all about Hirsi Ali's negative experiences, Pankaj Mishra abuses her again, by devaluing her judgment and implying that if she had been born into different circumstances, she would think something different about Islam. And it gets worse. Mishra compares Hirsi Ali's critique of Islam to European anti-Semitism: "Hirsi Ali, recording her horror of ghettoized Muslim life in Whitechapel, seems unaware of the similarly contemptuous accounts of Jewish refugees who made the East End of London their home after fleeing the pogroms."

Or in short, as the new saying goes, "Muslims are the new Jews." There is just one problem with this ghastly equation, which trivializes the mass-murders of Jews in Europe and defames Hirsi Ali: Jews never carried out terrorist attacks in Europe, and never boasted about how they were one day going to take over (in contrast to Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi's boast that Muslims would soon conquer Rome and all of Europe -- a boast that other Islamic leaders have echoed). The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was a forgery, and there was no factual basis for all the conspiracy theories about Jews scheming to control the world, any more than there is today....

Read it all.

And so we see yet again that Islamic jihadists identify themselves wholly and solely as Muslims; "moderate" Muslim spokesmen, meanwhile, deny that those jihadists have anything to do with Islam and seem most intent on making sure that non-Muslims do not refer to those jihadists in ways that have anything to do with Islam. Yet all the while, the "moderates" do not offer any alternative vision of Islam, or show any evidence that they're teaching against the jihadist form of Islam in their schools and mosques, and no one in the mainstream media seems to notice or call them on it.

More on this story. "NYC car bomb suspect pleads guilty, calls it `war,'" by Tom Hays and Larry Neumeister for Associated Press, June 21 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

NEW YORK - Calling himself a Muslim soldier, a defiant Pakistan-born U.S. citizen pleaded guilty Monday to carrying out the failed Times Square car bombing and left a sinister warning that unless the U.S. leaves Muslim lands alone, "we will be attacking U.S."

Faisal Shahzad entered the plea in U.S. District Court in Manhattan just days after a federal grand jury indicted him on 10 terrorism and weapons counts, some of which carry mandatory life sentences. He pleaded guilty to them all....

U.S. District Judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum challenged Shahzad repeatedly with questions such as whether he looked at the people in Times Square, especially the children, to see who they were or whether he really built the bomb by himself. He repeatedly insisted he acted without help from others in the U.S. and built the bomb "all by myself."

"One has to understand where I'm coming from," Shahzad said calmly. "I consider myself ... a Muslim soldier."

The 30-year-old described his effort to set off a bomb in an SUV he parked in Times Square on May 1, saying he chose the warm Saturday night because it would be crowded with people he could injure or kill. He said he conspired with the Pakistan Taliban, which provided more than $15,000 to fund his operation and five days of explosives training late last year and early this year, just months after he became a U.S. citizen....

"I was waiting to hear a sound but I didn't hear a sound. ... So I walked to Grand Central and went home," he said.

The judge repeatedly interrupted Shahzad, including when he said his plot was to retaliate against the U.S. and the forces of up to 50 other countries that had "attacked the Muslim lands."

Cedarbaum said: "But not the people who were walking in Times Square that night. Did you look around to see who they were?"

"Well, the people select the government," Shahzad said. "We consider them all the same. The drones, when they hit ... "

Cedarbaum interrupted again: "Including the children?"

Shahzad answered: "Well, the drone hits in Afghanistan and Iraq, they don't see children, they don't see anybody. They kill women, children, they kill everybody. It's a war, and in war, they kill people. They're killing all Muslims."

Later, he added: "I am part of the answer to the U.S. terrorizing the Muslim nations and the Muslim people. And, on behalf of that, I'm avenging the attack. Living in the United States, Americans only care about their own people, but they don't care about the people elsewhere in the world when they die."...

Of course, depictions of Muhammad are verboten to begin with, but given women's status in Islam, maybe that's why making Muhammad in any way "feminine" is taken as that much more of an insult. "Nepal bans school book after Muslim outcry," from Indo-Asian News Service, June 21 (thanks to Twostellas):

The Nepal government Monday banned a school textbook after growing outcry by Muslims over an 'objectionable' illustration depicting Prophet Mohammed as a woman-like figure and containing 'erroneous interpretations' of Islam.

It would be interesting to see what the problem was with the image that got it tagged as "woman-like."

This is the first time in Nepal, which has enjoyed religious harmony despite being a Hindu kingdom till 2006, that the government has banned a book after protests by Muslims.

The education ministry issued a statement asking schools not to teach from the controversial textbook - 'A modern approach to social studies' - brought out by New Nepal Publication.

It said that the book was not authorised by the department that supervises all school textbooks and added that it should not be taught in schools.

All school books authorised by the government respected religious and cultural sentiments, it said.

The first objections were raised by Muslim Association Nepal that called a press conference in the capital last week to object to the controversial book as well as two others.

Mohammad Nizamuddin, senior vice-president of the association, told IANS that the books gave wrong information about Prophet Mohammed, erroneously describing him as the 'founder of Islam'.

'We Muslims believe Allah created the universe and that the Islam religion existed since creation,' Nizamuddin told IANS. 'Because many people did not know this and other things about Islam, Prophet Mohammed came as the messenger of Allah to explain things to people.'

Not only is it radical historical revisionism, but a demand for textbooks to accept a matter of Islamic faith as fact.

The now banned book, meant to be taught in class 8, also carried an illustration of Prophet Mohammed looking like a woman.

Islam forbids idolatrous depictions and there is no authentic historical record to establish what Prophet Muhammad looked like.

Two other books have also come under fire for similar transgressions.

These are 'Nepal Social Studies' published by Athrai Publications and 'Asia's Social Studies' by Asia Publications.

Nizamuddin said that 'Nepal Social Studies' has also been banned and Muslim organisations would continue with their vigil for corrective measures against the third book as well.

Nizamuddin said the government had also announced it would form a committee to supervise textbooks and prevent such errors in future....

And he says he wanted to set off the bomb because the U.S. is "terrorizing the Muslim nations and the Muslim people." Now would be a perfect opportunity for ostensible "moderates" like Honest Ibe Hooper and Brave Ahmed Rehab to explain why they don't believe that the U.S. is terrorizing Muslim nations, and don't think Muslims should be waging jihad against the U.S. Honest Ibe? Brave Ahmed? Anyone? Anyone?

"Times Square car bomb suspect pleads guilty in NYC," from AP, June 21:

NEW YORK - A Pakistan-born U.S. citizen pleaded guilty to trying to bomb Times Square and says he is "part of the answer to the U.S. terrorizing the Muslim nations and the Muslim people."

Faisal Shahzad (FY'-sul shah-ZAHD') defiantly made the statement in federal court Monday as he pleaded guilty to a 10-count indictment charging him in the failed bombing.

He also says he actually tried to set off three separate bombs in an SUV parked near a Broadway theater May 1 to injure and kill people but that all three failed to ignite. The Bridgeport, Conn., resident was arrested two days later.

Shahzad (FY'-sul shah-ZAHD') said he was trained by the Pakistan Taliban in Pakistan in late December and early January before he returned to the United States in February to build his bomb.

Sentencing is Oct. 5.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

NEW YORK (AP) -- A Pakistan-born U.S. citizen pleaded guilty Monday to carrying out the failed Times Square car bombing, saying he wanted it known that unless the U.S. stops attacking Muslim lands, "we will be attacking U.S."

Faisal Shahzad, 30, entered the plea in U.S. District Court in Manhattan just days after a federal grand jury indicted him on 10 terrorism and weapons counts, some of which carried mandatory life prison sentences.

Shahzad made the plea and an accompanying statement as U.S. District Judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum began asking him a lengthy series of questions to ensure he understood his rights. She did not immediately accept the plea.

Cedarbaum asked Shahzad if he understood he might spend the rest of his life in prison. He said he did.

At one point, she asked him if he was sure he wanted to plead guilty.

He said he wanted "to plead guilty and 100 times more" to let the U.S. know that if it did not get out of Iraq and Afghanistan, halt drone attacks and stop meddling in Muslim lands, "we will be attacking U.S."...

In Sharia, non-Muslims are forbidden to proselytize among Muslims. But it is supposed to be legal to do so in the United States, even in Dearborn, Michigan.

An update on this story -- the next day.

I've been trying to tell you about this guy. You wouldn't listen. "Imam terror error: Ground Zero mosque leader hedges on Hamas," by Tom Topousis in the New York Post, June 19 (thanks to all who sent this in):

The imam behind plans to build a controversial Ground Zero mosque yesterday refused to describe Hamas as a terrorist organization.

According to the State Department's assessment, "Hamas terrorists, especially those in the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades, have conducted many attacks, including large-scale suicide bombings, against Israeli civilian and military targets."

Asked if he agreed with the State Department's assessment, Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf told WABC radio, "Look, I'm not a politician.

"The issue of terrorism is a very complex question," he told interviewer Aaron Klein.

"There was an attempt in the '90s to have the UN define what terrorism is and say who was a terrorist. There was no ability to get agreement on that."

Asked again for his opinion on Hamas, an exasperated Rauf wouldn't budge.

"I am a peace builder. I will not allow anybody to put me in a position where I am seen by any party in the world as an adversary or as an enemy," Rauf said, insisting that he wants to see peace in Israel between Jews and Arabs.

Rauf also would not answer a question about Egypt's outlawed Muslim Brotherhood.

"I have nothing to do with the Muslim Brotherhood. My father was never a member of the Muslim Brotherhood," he said, disputing a rumor....

Yeah, and I would continue to believe every word this man says, if I were you.

That point is not in dispute. "Synagogue bomb plotters had no knowledge of explosive devices: Defense," by Reuven Fenton in the New York Post, June 21:

The homegrown terrorists accused of plotting to shoot down military planes and blow up synagogues were bumbling idiots who knew nothing about explosive devices, their lawyers said yesterday.

Attorneys for the four men, busted last year on terrorism charges that included plans to bomb two Riverdale synagogues and shoot down military aircraft at Stewart Air National Guard Base in Newburgh, made their case for bail at a bail hearing in federal court in White Plains....

Defense lawyers argued that an FBI informant, entrapped James Cromitie, 44, and David Williams, 28, Onta Williams, 32 and Laguerre Payen, 27, bribing them with money and, in one case, a BMW.

"These four clients did not plan anything," said Susanne Brody, a lawyer for Onta Williams. "The government planned every step of the way."

Brody said they only practiced with missile launchers for a half-hour.

"You need a little more than the 30 minutes of training to operate this equipment."...

Prosecutor David Raskin argued that entrapment was a weak defense considering the defendants were prepared to blow up buildings....

Uh, yeah.

They are meeting in order to plot the next moves in the ongoing jihad against Israel, in anticipation of an Israeli strike against Iran. "Hizbullah, Hamas, Iran to meet in Damascus," from the Ma'an News Agency, June 21:

Bethlehem - Ma'an - Palestinian opposition factions, Hizbullah officials and a delegation of Iranians will soon meet in Damascus, the Kuwaiti Al-Anba daily newspaper reported on Monday.

The meeting, according to the anonymous source quoted in the paper, will take place in late June, under official Syrian patronage, in an effort to activate resistance in the region in light of an expected Israeli offensive against Iran or against Hizbullah in Lebanon....

"The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter." -- Qur'an 5:33

Generally when Islamic supremacists carry out a crucifixion, they do so on the already-dead body of an executed person.

Sharia Alert from the Kingdom of Misunderstanders of Islam: "Saudi Arabia Beheads and Nails Murderer's Body to Cross," from NewsCore, June 21 (thanks to Sr. Soph):

Saudi Arabia executed two murderers including a Yemeni whose body was nailed to a cross after he was convicted of killing a fellow countryman and his daughter, the interior ministry said on Monday.

Shaaban al-Nasheri was beheaded for shooting dead Dhayeh al-Manbahi after barging into his family home in the southwestern town of Jazan, the ministry said in a statement cited by the official SPA agency.

Nasheri was also found guilty of raping and killing Manbahi's daughter before shooting and wounding her sister.

Following his execution, the murderer's body was nailed to a cross in Jazan.

In the second case, Saudi national Mohammed al-Zahrani was decapitated in El-Baha, in the southwest, for shooting dead compatriot Said al-Zahrani over a land dispute.

The beheadings bring to 15 the number of executions reported in the ultra-conservative Gulf monarchy this year, according to an AFP count. In 2009, there were 67 reported executions in the kingdom, compared with 102 in 2008.

Memo to NewsCore: conservatives, even "ultra-conservatives," do not generally behead anyone.

Rape, murder, apostasy, armed robbery and drug trafficking are all punishable by death under Saudi Arabia's strict Islamic law. In extreme cases, the convict is executed and his body crucified in public.

But they have nothing to hide regarding their peaceful nuclear program, of course. Other inspectors will be just fine, you see. "Iran bars U.N. inspectors in escalating nuclear row," by Hossein Jaseb and Sylvia Westall for Reuters, June 21 (thanks to Maxwell):

TEHRAN/VIENNA (Reuters) - Iran has barred two U.N. nuclear inspectors from entering the Islamic Republic, adding to tension less than two weeks after Tehran was hit by new U.N. sanctions over its disputed atomic program.

Officials accused the two unnamed inspectors of providing wrong information that some nuclear equipment was missing in a report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) last month and declared them persona non grata.

They made clear Iran would still allow the Vienna-based U.N. watchdog to monitor its nuclear facilities, saying other experts could carry out the work.

"Inspections are continuing without any interruption," Iran's IAEA envoy Ali Asghar Soltanieh told reporters in Vienna.

But, "we have to show more vigilance about the performance of the inspectors to protect the confidentiality," he said, criticizing alleged leaks by inspectors to Western media.

Ali Akbar Salehi, head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, said Tehran had asked the IAEA to replace the two inspectors, the ISNA news agency reported.

There was no immediate comment from the IAEA, but a diplomat confirmed that Iran had notified the agency of the ban.

Iran has the right to refuse certain inspectors under its agreement with the agency, which has around 200 people who are trained to conduct inspections in the Islamic state. Iran denied entry to a senior U.N. inspector in 2006....

Iran denied that the equipment -- an electrochemical cell -- had disappeared from the research laboratory and said inspectors had incorrectly described the work taking place there.

"We gave documents, pictures, everything, which proved this was a mistake," Soltanieh said.

Salehi said Iran last week announced the two IAEA inspectors were banned for an "utterly untruthful" report.

"We asked that they would not ever send these two inspectors to Iran and instead assign two others," he added....

In FrontPage this morning I discuss the sentencing of Aqsa's father and brother for her murder, and some implications of the case:

Justice was done last Wednesday when the Muhammad and Waqas Parvez, the father and brother of Aqsa Parvez, received life sentences for strangling her to death in their home in Mississauga, Ontario, on December 10, 2007, when she was sixteen years old. But denial as to how a father and brother could have been moved to murder what should have been a beloved daughter and sister remains all-pervasive. If Canada, the United States and Europe are not going to be the sites of many more Islamic honor killings, that has to change.

Muhammad and Waqas Parvez murdered Aqsa because she would not conform to Islamic behavior codes for women. The Qur'an commands women to "draw their veils over their bosoms" (24:31), and in a hadith, Aisha, the favorite wife of Islam's prophet Muhammad recounts that he commanded that once a woman "reaches the age of menstruation, it does not suit her that she displays her parts of body except this and this, and he pointed to her face and hands" (Sunan Abu Dawud 32.4092).

Muhammad Parvez was determined to enforce this command on Aqsa, as well as to force her into an arranged marriage, and she was just as determined to resist. Ultimately she ran away, telling friends that Muhammad Parvez had sworn on the Qur'an to murder her if she did so. But on December 10, 2007, Waqas Parvez showed up at Aqsa's bus stop, and took the girl home.

Less than an hour later Muhammad Parvez called 911 to tell them he had killed his daughter. His calm after the killing, and his turning himself in, is common with Islamic honor murders and other killings and attempted killings: one notable example came in February 2009, after moderate Muslim leader Muzzammil Hassan beheaded his wife. He went to a police station, shook an officer's hand, and then shocked the unsuspecting policeman by telling him: "I want to tell you that I just killed my wife and I'm here to turn myself in." Similarly, when Mohammed Reza Taheri-Azar drove an SUV onto the campus of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and attempted to run over and kill as many students as possible (he killed none but injured nine), he appeared serene and even happy after the attack.

This calm may emanate from a sense that the perpetrators have that they have performed an act pleasing to Allah, and will be rewarded for it. And that also may lead us to where Muhammad Parvez got the idea that Aqsa deserved death for her non-Muslim attitudes, and that it was his right, even his responsibility, to kill her. For the fact is little recognized but unmistakable: Islam provides a broad justification for honor killings, such that a man like Muhammad Parvez would most likely believe that in murdering his daughter, he is not committing a heinous crime, but serving his god in a way that that god would regard as a positive good.

Ground Zero mosque Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, according to Adam Serwer of the American Prospect, says that "what Muslims want is to ensure that their secular laws are not in conflict with the Quran or the Hadith, the sayings of Muhammad." Robert Spencer points out that "for Muslims in the U.S., that will inevitably involve bringing Sharia here."

Possibly Adam Serwer didn't understand that when Rauf says "their secular laws" he means the "secular laws" under which Muslims have to live in the United States (or anywhere in the West). He is saying this:

"Muslims want to ensure that the legal code, the laws, under which they live in the West are not in conflict with the Qur'an or the Hadith." And that means the Sharia, which is the Holy Law of Islam, the codified embodiment of Qur'an and Sunnah (the Hadith being, along with the Sira, the written record of what constitutes the Sunnah).

This is a clear statement: Muslims are willing to obey the laws that do not conflict with the Sharia, but in the end they will be, and should be, unwilling to obey, and will work to undo, all those laws in this and other Western countries that they regard as being in conflict with the Sharia.

Among the provisions of the American Constitution that flatly contradict the Sharia or Holy Law of Islam are many of the individual guarantees as to freedom of speech, and free exercise of (non-Muslim) religions, and the Establishment Clause. Islam should, according to the Sharia, be the favored faith, with all others existing not by right but by Muslim sufferance. Sharia also contradicts the principles of the legal equality of the sexes, and Equal Protection of the Laws (through the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments).

"Friendship with dogs is a blind imitation of the West. There are lots of people in the West who love their dogs more than their wives and children."

That may be true. And so therefore, as far as the Grand Ayatollah Naser Makarem Shirazi is concerned, no one in Iran can have a dog as a pet.

There's Islamic supremacist logic for you.

Sharia Alert from the Misunderstanders of Islam Republic of Iran: "Iran cleric says dogs 'unclean' and not to be kept as pets," by Robin Pomeroy for Reuters, June 19 (thanks to all who sent this in):

TEHRAN (Reuters) - A senior Iranian cleric has decreed dogs are "unclean" and should not be kept as pets -- a move aimed at discouraging Western-style dog ownership in the Islamic state, a newspaper reported on Saturday.

Dogs are considered "unclean" under Islamic tradition but, while relatively rare in Iran, some people do keep them as pets.

By issuing a fatwa -- a religious ruling -- Grand Ayatollah Naser Makarem Shirazi has sent a clear message that this trend must stop.

"Friendship with dogs is a blind imitation of the West," he was quoted as saying in Javan daily. "There are lots of people in the West who love their dogs more than their wives and children."

Guard dogs and sheep dogs are considered acceptable under Islamic law but Iranians who carry dogs in their cars or take them to public parks can be stopped by police and fined.

The Koran does not explicitly prohibit contact with dogs, Shirazi said, but Islamic tradition showed it to be so. "We have lots of narrations in Islam that say dogs are unclean."...

"Once Gabriel promised the Prophet (that he would visit him, but Gabriel did not come) and later on he said, 'We, angels, do not enter a house which contains a picture or a dog.'" -- Bukhari volume 4, book 54, number 450

"Abdullah (b. Umar) (Allah be pleased with them) reported: Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) ordered the killing of dogs and we would send (men) in Medina and its corners and we did not spare any dog that we did not kill, so much so that we killed the dog that accompanied the wet she-camel belonging to the people of the desert." -- Muslim book 10, number 3811

A few years ago a prominent American moderate Muslim insisted to me that in Uzbekistan Islam was moderate, peaceful, and pluralistic. Islamic Tolerance Alert from Uzbekistan: "Uzbek authorities force Christians, including Jehovah's Witnesses, to go underground," from AsiaNews, June 21 (thanks to C. Cantoni):

Tashkent (AsiaNews/F18) - "For more than a year our Church has been trying to establish" that the decision to strip us of our permit was illegal; however, "All the courts either say it is not within their competence or remain silent" on the matter, a member of Samarkand's Central Protestant Church told the Forum 18 news agency. This illustrates how Uzbek authorities pursue a systematic strategy to deny religious groups the permit they need to exist, and then use it as a pretext to crack down on believers.

Under Uzbek law, religious groups are required to register and obtain a permit to legally operate and organise. Without a registration, religious activity is strictly forbidden, even in the privacy of the home. Anyone caught engaged in illegal religious activity can expect hefty fines or even prison.

Local sources told Forum18 that on 27 March 2009, the Central Protestant Church in Samarkand was stripped of its permit on the pretext that where they met for years was a residential property, unfit to serve as a church....

According to Forum18, this is the seventh Protestant Church to lose its permit in four years at the hands of the Regional Justice Department in Samarkand. The others are the Samarkand Church, the Miral Church, the Seventh Day Adventist Congregation, the Esther Church, Grace Church and Namdemun Church.

Usually, new applications for registration have not been approved--a situation that has forced many groups to go underground. Case in point: the Samarkand's Greater Grace Church applied for registration in 2000, a request that is still pending. Since then, Church members have been intermittently harassed and fined.

Even registered Churches are concerned that the authorities might strip them of their permit on any pretext. On 16 May, police raided the Protestant Church of Christ in Tashkent and arrested six members, who were held in custody for 15 days. Now, Church members fear they might lose their permit to operate.

Forum18 has called on Uzbek authorities to explain the situation, but has not received an answer yet, other than suggestions that the news agency address its questions to some other office.

The situation for Jehovah's Witnesses is even worse. Of 30 communities that exist in the country, only one has been officially recognised, in the city of Chirchik, near Tashkent.

Why doesn't the Vast Majority of Peaceful Muslims in India denounce and shun this hateful individual? How did he get to be so mainstream and influential?

Tiny Minority of Extremists Update, and an update on this story. "The Trouble with Dr. Zakir Naik," by Sadanand Dhume in the Wall Street Journal, June 20:

If you're looking for a snapshot of India's hapless response to radical Islam, then look no further than Bombay-based cleric Dr. Zakir Naik. In India, the 44-year-old Dr. Naik--a medical doctor by training and a televangelist by vocation--is a widely respected figure, feted by newspapers and gushed over by television anchors. The British, however, want no part of him. On Friday, the newly elected Conservative-led government announced that it would not allow Dr. Naik to enter Britain to deliver a series of lectures. According to Home Secretary Theresa May, the televangelist has made "numerous comments" that are evidence of his "unacceptable behavior."

The good doctor's views run the gamut from nutty to vile, so it's hard to pinpoint which of them has landed him in trouble. For instance, though Dr. Naik has condemned terrorism, at times he also appears to condone it. "If he [Osama bin Laden] is fighting the enemies of Islam, I am for him," he said in a widely watched 2007 YouTube diatribe. "If he is terrorizing the terrorists, if he is terrorizing America the terrorist, the biggest terrorist, I am with him. Every Muslim should be a terrorist."

Dr. Naik recommends the death penalty for homosexuals and for apostasy from the faith, which he likens to wartime treason. He calls for India to be ruled by the medieval tenets of Shariah law. He supports a ban on the construction of non-Muslim places of worship in Muslim lands and the Taliban's bombing of the Bamiyan Buddhas. He says revealing clothes make Western women "more susceptible to rape." Not surprisingly, Dr. Naik believes that Jews "control America" and are the "strongest in enmity to Muslims."

That last bit, of course, is from the Qur'an: "Strongest among men in enmity to the believers wilt thou find the Jews..." (5:82).

Of course, every faith has its share of cranks; and, arguably, India has more than its share. But it's impossible to relegate Dr. Naik to Indian Islam's fringe. Earlier this year, the Indian Express listed him as the country's 89th most powerful person, ahead of Nobel Laureate economist Amartya Sen, eminent lawyer and former attorney general Soli Sorabjee, and former Indian Premier League cricket commissioner Lalit Modi. Dr. Naik's satellite TV channel, Peace TV, claims a global viewership of up to 50 million people in 125 countries. On YouTube, a search for Dr. Naik turns up more than 36,000 hits.

Nobody accuses Dr. Naik of direct involvement in terrorism, but those reportedly drawn to his message include Najibullah Zazi, the Afghan-American arrested last year for planning suicide attacks on the New York subway; Rahil Sheikh, accused of involvement in a series of train bombings in Bombay in 2006; and Kafeel Ahmed, the Bangalore man fatally injured in a failed suicide attack on Glasgow airport in 2007.

Nonetheless, when the doctor appears on a mainstream Indian news channel, his interviewers tend to be deferential. Senior journalist and presenter Shekhar Gupta breathlessly introduced his guest last year as a "rock star of televangelism" who teaches "modern Islam" and "his own interpretation of all the faiths around the world." A handful of journalists--among them Praveen Swami of the Hindu, and the grand old man of Indian letters, Khushwant Singh--have questioned Dr. Naik's views, but most take his carefully crafted image of moderation at face value. [...]

Finally, unlike Hindu bigots, such as the World Hindu Council's Praveen Togadia, whose fiercest critics tend to be fellow Hindus, radical Muslims go largely unchallenged. The vast majority of Indian Muslims remain moderate, but their leaders are often fundamentalists and the community has done a poor job of policing its own ranks. Moreover, most of India's purportedly secular intelligentsia remains loath to criticize Islam, even in its most radical form, lest this be interpreted as sympathy for Hindu nationalism....

A lot of that sounds a great deal like the situation in the U.S.

In "Why Israel and the U.S. Are in Crisis" in the American Thinker today, Pamela Geller provides some important background to illuminate recent remarks by the former Spanish Prime Minister José María Aznar:

"Israel is a fundamental part of the West. The West is what it is thanks to its Judeo-Christian roots. If the Jewish element of those roots is upturned and Israel is lost, then we are lost too. Whether we like it or not, our fate is inextricably intertwined."

Former Spanish Prime Minister José María Aznar wrote that in the Times of London. It is powerful, magnificent. And I wish him great success with his "Friends of Israel Initiative," but I am deeply disturbed by the direction the narrative is taking -- such that friends of Israel such as Aznar now feel as if they must once again make the case for the legitimacy of Israel.

Why debate "Israel's right to exist" or "Israel's right to defend itself"? Why not debate France's right to exist, or Iran's, or Germany's?

How did it come to this?

There are definite points in history when things are on the cusp of real change. More specifically, there are defining moments when the direction of history can go either way.

When José María Aznar was Prime Minister of Spain, the world was a wholly different place, as recently as 2004. He served at a time when men -- not appeasers, shills, and tools for jihad -- were driving the bus. There was Bush, the inestimable John Howard (Australia), Blair (no great shakes, but light-years ahead of brick-brain Brown) -- and one of the best of the group was Aznar.

Yet this group did not seize the moment. They thought they had time and reason on their side. They did not. They blew it. "The greatest threat to mankind and civilization is the spread of the totalitarian philosophy," Ayn Rand wrote. "Its best ally is not the devotion of its followers but the confusion of its enemies." To fight it, we must understand it.

Yet Bush described Islam as "a religion of peace" in the wake of the Islamic jihadi attack on America. It wasn't that Bush was a shill for jihad; it was just that he was uninformed, and worse, not curious. He had whispering in his ear the stealth jihadist Grover Norquist and his band of Muslim Brotherhood brothers propagandizing the nonsensical meme that it was "just a few fringe extremists" who "hijacked" the religion" -- as well as the planes. Ten years and 15,511 Islamic attacks catastrophically demonstrate what a turning point that window of opportunity really was.

Grover Norquist is a powerhouse with deep pockets. Many Republicans are in his pockets and in his debt. Norquist's ties to Islamic supremacists and jihadists have been known for years. Just six weeks after 9/11, The New Republic ran an exposé explaining how Norquist arranged for George W. Bush to meet with fifteen Islamic supremacists at the White House on September 26, 2001 -- to show how Muslims rejected terrorism....

Read it all.

Sunni/Shi'ite Jihad Update from the Misunderstanders of Islam Republic of Iran: "Iran hangs man accused as militant leader," by Jingwen Zhang at AllVoices.com, June 20 (thanks to all who sent this in):

Abdulmalik Rigi, leader of Jundallah (Arabic for Soldiers of God), was hanged after being convicted of charges of murder, terrorism, armed robbery, civilian attacks, and collaboration with the CIA, along with other charges of heresy and corruption, both capital offenses under Islamic law.

That's based on Qur'an 5:33: "The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter theirs will be an awful doom."

Jundallah, Iran claims, is behind an insurgency that has destabilized the border region with Pakistan. The group also takes responsibility for recent bombings killing dozens, as well as abductions.

The group carries out a violent campaign against the Shiite government's supposed discrimination against Sunni Muslims.

Iran also accuses the United States and Britain of supporting and collaborating with Jundallah to weaken Iran, but the two countries deny the accusation.

Rigi, also called Abdol-Majid Rigi, was executed in Evin Prison in Tehran, with his victims' relatives watching on. In court, Rigi acknowledged that his crimes contradicted Islam and humanity and asked others not to repeat his mistakes.

And of course there was no coercion behind that!

"The terrorist measures of Malak Rigi and his group had taken away the sense of security from people," Ali-Reza Azimi-Jahed, commander of the Revolutionary Guard in Sistan-Baluchistan province, told state television. He hopes that the people would feel more secure now....

Unless they're Sunnis!

American traitor Adam Gadahn, the self-described "revolting geek of mass proportions," looks as if he has well imbibed Islam's doctrines, rooted in the Qur'an (3:28; 16:106) and several ahadith, regarding deceiving enemy unbelievers. He here retails nonsense about Obama, the best friend that Muslims, including Islamic jihadists, have ever had in the White House, and "Muslims-only concentration camps" in the U.S. But conspiracy paranoia is so rampant in the Islamic world that his words will probably find a wide audience.

War Is Deceit Update: "American-born al Qaeda spokesman appears in new video," from CNN, June 20 (thanks to all who sent this in):

(CNN) -- American-born al Qaeda spokesman Adam Gadahn appears in a new video purportedly from the organization, calling President Obama "snakelike" and saying he is "running the affairs of a declining and besieged empire."

In the video, posted Sunday on Islamist websites, Gadahn criticizes what he says is the United States' "aggression and interference" in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, and also criticizes moving his "captive brothers" from detention centers worldwide to "Muslim-only concentration camps in Illinois, Bagram [Airfield, Afghanistan] and elsewhere -- all in the name of protecting the American people from the threat of Muslim retaliation for American crimes."

He is apparently referring to a maximum-security prison in Thomson, Illinois, being considered by the government as a possible venue to house terror suspects.

CNN could not independently verify the authenticity of the 24-minute video, posted on websites known to carry such messages in the past and carrying the name of as-Sahab, al Qaeda's media arm. In it, Gadahn speaks in English; the video features Arabic subtitles.

"Yes, Barack," Gadahn says. "Just as our demands remain the same, the choice America and its allies face also remains the same -- either the possible restoration of your safety and security by ignoring the opposition of your tyrannical corporations and special-interest groups and restoring the rights you have stolen from Muslims and other persecuted and oppressed nations, or guaranteeing for yourselves a future of misery, insecurity and ultimately defeat, should you continue to ravage our countries, interfere in our affairs and trample on our dignity, liberty and sovereignty."

The solution to U.S. security, he says, does not lie in improving intelligence-sharing, "occupation" or supporting "despicable regimes."

Addressing Obama, Gadahn says, "I know that as you slither snakelike into the second year of your reign as a purported president of change, you are fighting, your hands full, with running the affairs of a declining and besieged empire, and in the process proving yourself to be nothing more than another treacherous, bloodthirsty and narrow-minded American war president."...

But deep down, they really, really want peace! "Hamas official: Palestinians should fire at Israel from West Bank," from Haaretz, June 20 (thanks to Maxwell):

Palestinians should initiate rocket attacks on Israel from the West Bank, Israel Radio quoted Hamas strongman Mahmoud Zahar as saying in an interview on Sunday, saying that such as move was necessary.

Asked whether rocket fire against Israel should be limited to launches originating in Gaza, Zahar told the East Jerusalem newspaper Al Quds that the fact that "such launches should happen in the West Bank as well [as Gaza] is inevitable."

Zahar criticized the Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority for fighting the "resistance," saying that it was not Hamas that took over Gaza, but in fact President Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah movement that had seized the power in the West Bank, aided by the Israeli "occupation."...

Wilders is right. There is no ethnic difference between Jordanians and Palestinians. In fact, there was no Palestinian nationality before the 1960s, when it was invented in order to reposition what was then universally known as the Arab/Israeli conflict. Up to the invention of "Palestinians," the Israelis were the tiny, besieged people amidst a huge number of hostile Arabs; after that invention, the "Palestinians" themselves became the tiny, besieged people against the big, bad Israelis.

Don't believe me? Fine. Maybe you'll believe PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein, who said this in 1977:

The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan.

It was a canny propaganda move, and it worked. Bravo to Wilders for calling the Jordanians (and "Palestinians") back to the truth. "Geert Wilders: Change Jordan's name to Palestine," by Roee Nahmias for Ynet News, June 20:

Geert Wilders, who leads the right-wing Party for Freedom (PVV) in Holland, said last week he believes Jordan should be renamed Palestine. The Jordanian government responded by saying Wilders' speech was reminiscent of the Israeli right wing.

"Jordan is Palestine," said Wilders, who heads the third-largest party in Holland. "Changing its name to Palestine will end the conflict in the Middle East and provide the Palestinians with an alternate homeland."

Wilders added that Israel deserved a special status in the Dutch government because it was fighting for Jerusalem in its name.

"If Jerusalem falls into the hands of the Muslims, Athens and Rome will be next. Thus, Jerusalem is the main front protecting the West. It is not a conflict over territory but rather an ideological battle, between the mentality of the liberated West and the ideology of Islamic barbarism," he said.

"There has been an independent Palestinian state since 1946, and it is the kingdom of Jordan." Wilders also called on the Dutch government to refer to Jordan as Palestine and move its embassy to Jerusalem.

The Saudi Al-Watan carried Jordan's response to Wilders' speech. The kingdom's embassy in Hague was outraged, and said the Dutch ambassador would soon be summoned to explain.

Jordan's minister for media affairs and communications, Nabil Al Sharif, asked for clarifications. He described Wilders' declaration as "an echo of the voice of the Israeli Right" and "crows' screams".

"Jordan is an independent and secure country which supports the Palestinian issue, and these imaginings of finding them an alternate homeland are nothing but the delusions of a few people," he said....

A Christian girl kidnapped in Egypt tells her story. The Arabic-language Free Christian Voice (Sawt al-Masihi al-Hurr) carried this report, entitled "After her return, the young girl of the village of Fanus narrates the details behind the conspiracy to bully her family out of the village," on June 17. It was translated exclusively for Jihad Watch by Raymond Ibrahim.

The young girl of the village of Fanus exposes the details of the conspiracy prepared for her:

"As I was returning back to the house, they came upon me and put something on my mouth and stripped off the gold I was wearing. I fell unconscious -- until I found myself on one of the streets of al-Minya [i.e., outside of the village], totally oblivious of what had happened."

"The village elder gave my kidnapper money."

"The village elder said to me: 'We think you are too good for the Christian religion... Become Muslim and I will marry you, and sign over to you all my money and property, and provide you with an excellent life.'"

"The village elder entered our homes and beat us all...and he had people from his extended family of al-Dirabsa who came to the house with a drum in order to carry me in the streets in a wedding procession, saying: 'Look at the Christian who became a Muslim!'"

"I wish the village elder were judged and jailed, for he tormented us and forced us -- he and those who followed him -- out of our village. And the government is standing by his side, abandoning us."

Interview by Girgis Bashari -- exclusive to The Copts United

The kidnapping of the young girl of the village of Fanus, in the province of Samalut in al-Minya has exposed the various ways and conspiracies undertaken by Muslims in order to coerce young girls to enter into Islam -- after humiliating and degrading them. Based on the role played by the newspaper, The Copts United, which covers these matters and conspiracies, we had the following conversation with the young girl of the village of Fanus, whose name is Zinahum Nadi 'Adli Amin, after she returned [from her kidnapping]:

Q: Zinahum, how many Christians are in the village of Fanus? How many Muslims?

A: The village of Fanus has approximately twenty Christian households and six Muslim households. The village elder [sheikh al-'izba] is Muslim.

Q: That which happened to you, do you call it kidnapping, or did you runaway of your own will?

A: What happened to me involved a great conspiracy; nor did I imagine such a thing could ever happen to me.

Q: What was the conspiracy carried out against you? And who planned it?

A: On Saturday night, we had one of our female relatives over. I went out to get something cold [to drink]. I met four Muslim females from the village and stopped to greet them. As I was returning back to the house, they came upon me and put something on my mouth and stripped off the gold I was wearing. I fell unconscious -- until I found myself on one of the streets of al-Minya [i.e., outside of the village], totally oblivious of what had happened. Then, the world darkened before my face, and I did not know what to do. I was afraid to return home, lest my parents kill me, though what happened was against my will.

Q: Who kidnapped you? And who planned this conspiracy against you?

A: The person who kidnapped me is someone called Sayyid Khalif Ahmed 'Abd al-Rahman. The person who planned this conspiracy, I know him well: he is the village elder, Khalif 'Abd al-Majid. He comes from a large family, connected to [the tribe of] al-Dirabsa. He gave Sayyid money to kidnap me and incited many people against me.

Q: What is your evidence that the village elder plotted this conspiracy against you? And what was the purpose behind your kidnapping?

A: The purpose of kidnapping me was to force me to enter into Islam.

Q: How?

A: When I went to the police department in the morning [to report the kidnapping], the Hajj [Muslim honorific], Khalif, the village elder, came to me and said: "We think you are too good for the Christian religion." He said to me: "Become Muslim and I will marry you, and sign over to you all my money and property, and provide you with an excellent life -- just say before witnesses, 'I want to become Muslim.'" But I refused.

Q: Did they arrest the youth who kidnapped you?

A: Yes, they arrested him, but he was released.

Q: Why?

A: Because, when I was at the police department, I was unable to focus, due to my being drugged, and they said to me, "Say at the hearing, 'Nobody kidnapped me,'" and I said so. And because of this, he was released and not imprisoned. They wanted me to enter into Islam in any way.

Q: Were you threatened after you returned to your home?

A: They are currently furious and enraged because I returned to my family, refusing to become a Muslim. They threaten us and have blockaded our way in the village. None of us ventures outside. My father does not go to his work because he fears stepping outside. The village elder entered our homes and beat us all, cursing us; he beat my father with his slipper [i.e., ultimate humiliation]. He had with him ten cars full of people from his extended family of al-Dirabsa, who came to the house with a drum in order to carry me in the streets in a wedding procession, saying: "Look at the Christian who became a Muslim!" They said to my parents, "We're going to take your daughter no matter what, and afterwards you will never find her!" So, in fear, we abandoned our homes, and went to stay with my grandfather in the village of 'Amira near our village. There, the state security came to my parents and said to them: "Your daughter has become Muslim." Until now, we are not permitted to go out, and we are persecuted...and the village elder wants us to abandon our home. And he has sworn "by the right" [i.e., sworn to Allah], that if we do not quit the village, my family will never see me again. He said: "I will not rest, nor will I know peace, until I see her uncles shorn of their mustaches [i.e., demeaned and emasculated]. Thus they forced us to leave the village. But we will never forget it, and we will try to return to it in any possible way.

Q: Why did you not report the village elder regarding the fear and terror he caused you?

A: I wish that man were judged and jailed, for he tormented us, and forced us -- he and those who followed him -- out of our village. He is trying to break my spirit and my family's spirit any which way he can. And the government is standing by his side, abandoning us.

Q: What do you request now?

A: I thank the Lord for delivering me from this conspiracy. I ask that human rights [representatives] come and hear our complaint, and know what is happening to us and my family, and to investigate the situation, and that they subject the village elder to a trial, because of what he did to us.

Q: Did your gold return to you?

A: Yes, it returned today.

Q: Do you have a message that you would like to send to young Coptic girls like yourself?

A: I say to the girls who are like me: I am in great fear over you because of what's happening. What I have seen -- no one has seen. I used to be very open and trusting towards Muslim women, but they were plotting a catastrophe for me behind my back. They drugged me, and I never would have expected that from them.

"Moetillas." Heh.

In "The Jihad Flotillas: Melding Propaganda with Violence" in Big Government, June 19, Pamela Geller emphasizes some little-noted facts about the Jihad Flotillas and their context:

After the Israeli action against the Turkish jihad flotilla aroused more international condemnation of Israel, Iran is now sending two of its own Islamic jihad flotillas - Moetillas - to Gaza. The war ship convoy (which the media affectionately has called a "humanitarian flotilla" while the "aid workers" set out to slice and dice the Jews) operated by jihad gangs from thug countries is the new way to wage war in the twenty-first century, if you're not already busy blowing up buildings, trains, planes and other civilian targets.

The jihad flotilla. It melds propaganda together with violence, usually conducted separately, to wage war. The "aid ship" is the face of this century's warship, like lipstick on a pig.

Of course, all of this is possible because the world media is aligned with the terror force. So when the jihadists, with the help of their leftist whores, paint up their weapon-filled warships like $2 homicidal trollops and call them "aid ships," the media laps it up like a dog returning to its vomit.

There is no humanitarian crisis in the terror statelet of Gaza, and there is no such thing as a "Palestinian." It was historically just a geographical designation: there were Palestinian Jews and Palestinian Muslims before '48. But no state. No history. No nationality distinct from that of the other Arabs in the area. No flag of this fakestinian narrative. That land is Jewish land. That history is Jewish history. That flag is the star of King David.

The only humanitarian crisis in Gaza is the lack of humanity in Gaza. They elected Hamas, whose charter specifically demands in its first paragraph the destruction of the state of Israel.

Israel asked Egypt to block these warships, a.k.a. "aid ships," but Egypt has refused. And so now Egypt, which also shares a border with that terror statelet of Gaza, and which has, I might add, strictly enforced that border — more gravely and more violently than has Israel — is throwing in with the killers.

What happened to the peace Israel and Egypt established more the 30 years ago? Israel gave Egypt all of the Sinai, which Israel had captured from the Egyptians not once but twice, in 1956 and 1967. But at the end of the day, it always goes back to the Koran and Islamic anti-Semitism.

Egypt is the third largest recipient of US foreign aid, which it receives as a direct result of its having signed a peace treaty with Israel in 1979. But now Egypt feels free to do this because the world's policeman, the United States, has walked off the beat.

Barack Obama refused to speak a word against the Islamic regime of Iran as it viciously put down the nationwide rebellion of its own people, Iranians from all walks of life, whose crime was to march for freedom in response to a corrupt and stolen election. Now I guess the Iranian mullahcracy has taken a breather from killing, raping, and imprisoning its own people, as it was missing out on all the barbaric fun the Jew-killing jihadis were having on their Islamic jihad Moetillas....

Read it all.

You mean it didn't work? Then, these 25 are just the latest to fail to grasp Islam's peaceful message in the compassionate care of the Saudis. "25 Saudi Guantanamo Prisoners Return to Militancy," from Reuters, June 19 (thanks to Sr. Soph):

RIYADH (Reuters) - Around 25 former detainees from Guantanamo Bay camp returned to militancy after going through a rehabilitation programme for al Qaeda members in Saudi Arabia, a Saudi security official said on Saturday.

The United States have sent back around 120 Saudis from the detention camp at the U.S. naval base in Cuba, set up after the U.S. launched a "war on terror" following the September 11 attacks by mostly Saudi suicide hijackers sent by al Qaeda.

Saudi Arabia, the world's top oil exporter, has put the returned prisoners along with other al Qaeda suspects through a rehabilitation programme which includes religious re-education by clerics and financial help to start a new life.

The scheme, which some 300 extremists have attended, is part of anti-terrorism efforts after al Qaeda staged attacks inside the kingdom from 2003-06. These were halted after scores of suspects were arrested with the help of foreign experts.

Around 11 Saudis from Guantanamo have gone to Yemen, an operating base for al Qaeda, while others have been jailed again or killed after attending the programme, said Abdulrahman al-Hadlaq, Director General of the General Administration for Intellectual Security overseeing the rehabilitation.

He pinpointed strong personal ties among former prisoners but also tough U.S. tactics as the reason why some 20 percent of the returned Saudis relapsed into militancy compared to 9.5 percent of other participants in the rehabilitation programme.

And now, to blame the Americans, and discount any possibility that the Gitmo detainees might actually have been dangerous jihadists:

"Those guys from other groups didn't suffer torture before, the non-Guantanamos (participants). Torturing is the most dangerous thing in radicalisation. You have more extremist people if you have more torture," Hadlaq told reporters in a rare briefing about Saudi anti-terrorism efforts.

Despite the setback with Guantanamo prisoners, Saudi Arabia regards the rehabilitation scheme, which kicks in after militants have served a prison term, as a success.

"There is no doubt that there is an effect," Hadlaq said...

Uh, yes there is.

That would be Maryam as in Mary, the mother of Jesus. Clearly, the Christian women have not considered what Islamic law would do to their freedom to openly proclaim Mary as "Mother of God." Or Theotokos, or Regina Coeli -- all very, very haram, when it is blasphemous in Islam to imply that Allah has a son, and Islamic law makes blasphemy a matter of severe punishment.

Indeed, the Christians here are making themselves pawns for propaganda on behalf of a group that would demand from them conversion, subjugation, or war (per Qur'an 9:29) if they had their way. Just as the original Fraud Flotilla was a calculated attempt to sway world opinion, this one attempts more directly to arouse the sympathies of Christians who have no clue what Islamic law holds for unbelievers.

"Christian and Muslim women announce they will go to Gaza on board the ship "Mariam", Mary," from Asia News, June 19:

Beirut (AsiaNews) - In all likelihood the "Mariam", the Arabic name of Mary, has not yet left the Lebanese port where it is berthed. The ship is carrying a group of Christian and Muslim women who are intent on bringing aid, especially medicine, to the population of Gaza, and is already causing problems in Israel

You'll want to read this next bit sitting down:

Because it is one thing to attack a ship carrying more or less peaceful pacifists, another is to raid a ship voluntarily baptized with the name of Our Lady. "We are determined to go - says Rima Farah, spokeswoman for the group - and our weapons are our faith in the Virgin and humanity."

"The mission - she clarified yesterday - is of a humanitarian nature and will be conducted on board a merchant ship and not a tourist vessel." "A huge image of the Blessed Virgin will be raised on the ship and the boat will be loaded with medicines to treat cancer patients among the women and children." Religious songs, she added, will accompany them on their expedition.

The first sounding of the alarm caused by the "Mariam" was the Israeli defence minister, Ehud Barak's warning to Lebanon, which he said, "will be held responsible for any departure from one of its ports of vessels bound for Gaza". And the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs, Danny Ayalon, added that, unlike previous attempts to break the blockade imposed on Gaza, this time the people on board could be jailed and deported.

"The Mariam - commented Farah - has already begun to achieve its purpose, as Israeli leaders have launched warnings and threats." "We are not afraid," said the organizer of the expedition, Samar El-Hajj.

The ship, according to the woman, is "now ready" in an unnamed Lebanese port and will also welcome on board about thirty European pacifists and two score of journalists.

The protesters, meanwhile, gathered in prayer in a cave near the Shrine of Our Lady of Mantara (pictured) where it is said that Mary expected Jesus

The women's group claims to have no association with Hezbollah or with other political organizations. "We are not related to the 'Party of God', but the Mother of God."...

How cute. But again, what would the "Party of God" (Hizballah) like to do about your calling Mary the Mother of God?

Anyway, all is not well aboard the Maryam. In fact, Hizballah itself is balking at letting a female pop star join the campaign on account of her "nudity." There's your future, Lebanon, if you don't choose otherwise.

"Haifa Wehbe asks to join Gaza flotilla," from the Jerusalem Post, June 18 (thanks to Dumbledoresarmy):

Lebanese model and pop star Haifa Wehbe was banned by Hizbullah from boarding a female-only ship headed for Gaza, Kuwaiti daily Al-Seyassah reported on Friday.

Wehbe reportedly appealed to the leadership of the Islamist terrorist movement and political party and requested to join the Lebanese women who have signed up as passengers on the aid ship Mariam, which will sail to Gaza in the coming days.

The trip was organized by the Free Palestine movement in conjunction with Samar Hajj, whose husband Ali Hajj has been in jail for four years in connection with the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri.

According to the Kuwaiti paper, Hajj was told yesterday by Hizbullah leaders that Wehbe would have to be prevented from taking part in the journey on grounds that her "nudity ... and immodest dress will harm the reputation of all women participating in the trip."

The leaders further noted that the ever-popular Wehbe's presence was likely to "divert attention from the main objective of the trip."

Later on Friday, Hizbullah denied it was involved in preparations for the trip, saying the group had "decided from the very beginning to stay away from this humanitarian act in terms of organisation, logistic support and participation so as not to give the Israeli enemy any pretext to attack the participants."

Clearly, if it has a say in who goes on the ship, the group is involved.

Earlier this week, Hajj declared that the female activists were "all independent women who believe in breaking the siege on Gaza." She added that "This has nothing to do with Hizbullah, although it is an honor for us to be supporters of the resistance."

... for which they would be rewarded with subjugation under Sharia law.

Good news, in an update on this story. Meanwhile, of course, we wait to find out the grounds on which another group of Christians was arrested there, as BWI -- Breathing While Infidel -- is not yet against Michigan law.

If it's an Islamic festival, call it an Islamic festival. Otherwise, stop hiding behind the generality of "Arab-American" while persecuting Arab-Americans who also happen to be Christian, but refuse to be dhimmis in a free country.

"Local news: Pastor gets OK for handouts," from the Detroit Free Press, June 19:

A Christian pastor can distribute literature on the streets at this weekend's Arab-American festival along Warren Avenue in Dearborn, a three-judge panel of the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled.

George Saieg of California wants to hand out pamphlets aimed at converting Muslims.

The Thursday ruling overturned a District Court decision that supported Dearborn's policy, which said Saieg and anyone else must hand out literature only around their booths because of crowd control concerns.

"Crowd concerns."

The Ann Arbor-based Thomas More Law Center filed suit on behalf of Saieg.

This story just happened to appear directly under the preceding one:

Once-banned professor to address fund-raiser

Tariq Ramadan, a noted Muslim scholar, is to speak tonight in Dearborn at a fund-raiser for the Muslim Legal Fund, a Texas-based nonprofit. He is to speak about rights, duties and justice at the 6 p.m. banquet at the Hyatt Regency in Dearborn. Tickets are $30.

Ramadan was banned from visiting the U.S. under the Bush administration, but had his ban lifted this year by the U.S. State Department.

"The Islamic Center of Murfreesboro 's plans call for a 52,000-sq. ft. facility that would include a pool, gym, and school in addition to a mosque."

But only Islamophobes could wonder who's paying for it all. Only Islamophobes could think there's something odd about a mega-mosque in a town of 100,000 in middle Tennessee. And so this story makes every effort to make the locals who are opposed to it look like narrow-minded, reactionary xenophobes who jest plain don't cotton to people with different beliefs -- that's all it could be.

"Plan for Mosque in Tennessee Town Draws Criticism from Residents," by Bradley Blackburn for ABC News, June 18:

A plan to build an Islamic community center in the middle-Tennessee town of Murfreesboro sparked an eruption of ugly criticism on Thursday from some residents who don't want a mosque built in their backyard.

More than 600 people turned out for a meeting of the Rutherford County Commission Thursday night, with some sharing their opposition in public comments that at times turned intolerant.

"We have a duty to investigate anyone under the banner of Islam," Allen Jackson, the pastor of World Outreach Church, said at the meeting.

The implication: Jackson has no possible reason to object to the mosque except as pastor of World Outreach Church.

The Islamic Center of Murfreesboro 's plans call for a 52,000-sq. ft. facility that would include a pool, gym, and school in addition to a mosque. The center has had a facility in Murfreesboro since 1997, but says that with over 250 Islamic families in the community, it needs more space.

A whole lot of space, apparently.

"It is not a huge mosque as they are saying," said Imam Ossama Bahloul. "This place is too small for us and we have to move."

Murfreesboro has a population of just over 100,000, according the the U.S. Census Bureau. It is about 30 miles southeast of Nashville.

Would enough Music City Muslims even commute on a regular basis to fill the place?

Some at the Thursday meeting wore religious or patriotic-themed clothing, and no one defended the plan in two hours of public comments, the Tennessean newspaper reported.

"They seem to be against everything that I believe in, and so I don't want them necessarily in my neighborhood spreading that type of comment," said one man at the meeting.

Tracey Steven, who also attended, said, "Our country was founded through the founding fathers -- through the true God, the Father and Jesus Christ."

Some Cite Traffic, Housing Values as Concerns

Others opposed to the plan did so for more practical reasons, citing concerns about the effects on traffic and housing values. The mosque would be built in a primarily residential area.

"I was very surprised they would approve of that for any religion," said resident Jackie Archer.

Despite the outrage, county officials said Thursday that the plan will go ahead. They defended their decision by noting that the mosque plan met zoning requirements and it is illegal to reject a project for religious reasons....

"Daily Blic ran a photomontage of the leader of the Islamic community Muamer Zukorlic dressed in an Orthodox Christian bishop robe," and that's worth 100 million euros. One will recall the observation of the South African Motoon that provoked outrage in that country: "Other prophets have followers with a sense of humor!"

"Serbian Muslims demand 100 million euros over photomontage in daily," from Deutsche Presse Agentur, June 19:

Belgrade - Serbia's Islamic Community on Saturday protested against a photomontage published in the daily Blic and demanded a "symbolic" compensation of 100 million euros (124 million dollars).

Daily Blic ran a photomontage of the leader of the Islamic community Muamer Zukorlic dressed in an Orthodox Christian bishop robe.

"We are demanding an apology from the editors and owner of Blic daily and a symbolic compensation of 100 million euros," the community said in a statement.

If Blic refuses, it will face charges and the Islamic Community will call all citizens to boycott the daily, the statement added.

The Islamic Community said Muslims in Serbia were offended by the photomontage as it insults the deepest religious feelings of Muslims.

Blic editor-in-chief Veselin Simonovic said the daily meant no offense.

The majority of Serbia's population are Orthodox Christians, but Muslims have a stronghold in the south of the country.

Quite a glossing over of centuries of conflict there.

Let's revisit some sayings of the quotable Zakir Naik:

"People who change their religion should face the death penalty"

"If he [Osama Bin Laden] is terrorising the terrorists, if he is terrorising America the terrorist ... I am with him. Every Muslim should be a terrorist."

And he has said western women make themselves "more susceptible to rape" by wearing "revealing" clothing.

Clearly, this man is a moderate, persecuted by a rabid band of Islamophobes! Er, wait... An update on this story.

"Muslim Council of Britain condemns ban on Dr Zakir Naik entering UK," by Tristan Kirk for the Harrow Times, June 19:

The Muslim Council of Britain has denounced the decision to ban Dr Zakir Naik from the UK ahead of a peace conference in Wembley.

Dr Nair [sic] was yesterday banned from entering the country by Home Secretary Theresa May because of what she called "unacceptable behaviour", just over a week before he was due to address the Al-Khair Peace Conference at Wembley Arena.

In a statement, the council, a leading voice in the Islamic community, said it "deplores" Mrs May's decision and described Dr Naik as a "renowned Indian mainstream Islamic scholar".

It said: "The Home Secretary's action serves to demonise the very voices within the world ready for debate and discussion.

"The tour would have been a golden opportunity for young Muslims who are eager to hear the true messages of Islam which promote understanding between communities."

Really?

The council also accused Mrs May of succumbing to what it described as a "recent campaign of vilification against the scholar" in some media outlets.

Dr Naik has been quoted as saying "all Muslims should be terrorists", but he argues these comments from a 1996 lecture have been taken out of context.

But, of course.

He has issued a statement in line of his ban from the UK saying he is "disappointed" and restating that he aims to dispel myths surrounding his religion in his talks.

Dr Muhammad Abdul Bari, secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain, said: "This exclusion order demonstrates the double standards practiced by the government concerning freedom of speech.

"While preachers of hate such as Geert Wilders are free to promote their bigotry in this country, respected Muslim scholars such as Dr Naik are refused entry to the UK under false pretenses.

Mind you, what Geert Wilders' Fitna did was quote from the Qur'an.

"It is deeply regrettable this is likely to cause serious damage to community cohesion in our country."

A protest by the English Defence League and a counter demonstration by Unite Against Fascism, planned for the day of the Wembley Arena conference, are now in doubt following Dr Naik's ban.

It is still unclear whether the conference will take place at all, or whether Dr Naik will be able to appear via a videolink.

Relocated, so as not to offend Muslims. An update on this story. "Banned Paris "sausage and wine" party goes ahead," from Reuters, June 19:

(Reuters) - A "sausage and wine" party went ahead in Paris despite a police ban but was staged near the Arc de Triomphe instead of in a Muslim neighbourhood.

Friday's event had been criticised as highly provocative because it was planned for the day of weekly Muslim prayers and the World Cup soccer match between England and Algeria, a former French colony that is majority Muslim.

Even among the most dedicated soccer fans, that seems like a bit of a stretch to concoct a sense of insult. And Friday may be a day of prayer in the Muslim world, but in much of the Western world, it is a day of relief and celebration as the end of the work week. And so people party. It happens.

Friday was also the 70th anniversary of General Charles de Gaulle's 1940 "Appeal of June 18" from London calling on the French to resist the German occupation. The Internet page advertising the party had repeated references to resistance.

The mayor of Paris had said the event was "clearly inspired by extreme right-wing movements". Paris police banned the party because it risked sparking disturbances.

French daily Le Parisien estimated 600 to 800 people gathered on the Champs Elysees near the Arc de Triomphe to eat pork sausages and drink wine at what organisers called a "giant cocktail party".

The crowd appeared noticeably older than the revellers usually drawn to the more politically neutral flash mob drinking parties that have become popular in France.

One man wore a pair of horns and braided pigtails associated with French comic book hero Asterix, an ancient Gaul whose exploits centre around resisting Roman occupation.

"18 June 1940 France, Republic, Liberty, 18 June 2010 Resistance," read a large banner, with several participants waving French flags and holding aloft sausages.

Muslims do not eat pork and debates over a ban on the full face veil, polygamy and serving halal meat in fast food outlets in France have sparked bitter controversy in recent months.

The main organiser, Sylvie Francois, had said she wanted the event to be "a joyous protest" against the closing down of roads in the northern Goutte d'Or neighbourhood every day by Muslims praying in the street outside the overcrowded mosque there.

Of course, the decision to block the streets is simply a power play for a bigger mosque: Want your street back? Let us build whatever we want, wherever we want.

The event was announced on social networking site Facebook late last month and drew criticism from politicians and civic groups because the Facebook page contained thinly veiled anti-Muslim slogans.

The page for the Paris party features the slogans "Gathering of resisters", "Support the resistance" and "Bring your French flags and sausage". The group has more than 10,000 members.

A similar party planned for a largely Muslim area of Lyon in eastern France was cancelled after pressure from the police, the organiser said on the event's Facebook page.

You know you've got a problem when Ahmadinejad is the one momentarily sounding more "moderate" than the next guy (though that's all "moderation" is -- a position relative to others). And the photo above from May, which accompanied this report, shows Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati has some supporters... except that for all we know, the one on the right could be Rip Taylor with a bag of confetti.

"Ahmadinejad Rebuked By Hardline Cleri [sic] Over Hijab," from Radio Zamaneh, June 19:

Hardline cleric, Ahamd [sic] Jannati delivered unusual rebukes to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in his Friday Mass Prayers sermon in Tehran for his remarks on women's hijab.

In a live interview aired on Sunday, Ahamdinejad said he is against the harsh confrontation of Security Forces with people donning unacceptable forms of hijab (Muslim attire). He stressed that he is against such confrontations and will not condone it.

Iranian women, who are obligated by Islamic Republic laws to cover themselves from head to foot in public, have worn the compulsory outfit in different forms fashioning out unique styles. A recent wave of conservative backlash has charged various government bodies with confrontation of hijab transgressions.

More moderate sources have urged a more cultural recourse to resolving the offences against Islamic attire in public.

ILNA reports that Ayatollah Janati has rebuked Ahmadinejad for interfering in the business of the security forces. He suggested that if the government does not dare address the violations against appropriate hijab on the streets, it should start confronting it in government offices.

Priorities:

The conservative cleric argued: "The corruption that is spread by a woman with inappropriate hijab is worse [than] poison and as a result of it a young man who should be ready for jihad and self-sacrifice will be drawn to lust."

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was also criticized by Mashhad Friday Prayers Leader saying Ahmadinejad was not attentive to religious matters.

The member of the Assembly of Experts stated that the issue of hijab was a religious issue and not subject to people's will or acceptance..

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's recent moderate exclamations regarding adherence to hijab appears in complete contradiction to his policy of deploying female morality patrols to arrest women with inappropriate hijab after he first came to power in 2005.

But "he has to report to police twice a week." What could possibly go wrong? An update on this story. "Kosovo terror suspect wanted in U.S. released," by Fatos Bytyci for Reuters, June 18 (thanks to Sr. Soph):

A European Union judge in Kosovo has released from detention a Kosovo Albanian man wanted on U.S. terrorism charges but he must report to police twice a week, an EU mission spokeswoman said on Friday.

Bajram Asllani, 29, was arrested on Thursday by Kosovo and EU police after U.S. prosecutors in North Carolina accused him of providing material support to terrorism suspects and conspiring to kill and hurt people abroad.

"He has to report to police twice a week," Kristiina Herodes, a spokeswoman from the EU police and justice mission (EULEX) said. "The prosecutor will have a close look at the written decision by the judge and then will decide to appeal against the decision or not."

Two years after declaring independence, Kosovo's fragile peace is still maintained by some 10,000 NATO troops and 2,000 police, judges and prosecutors from the EU.

Despite the decision from the EU judge, Herodes said that now it is up to the Kosovo government whether Asllani will be extradited to the United States or not.

Asllani was accused of soliciting money from a group of men in North Carolina who were arrested last year for an alleged plot to attack a U.S. Marine Corps base in Quantico, Virginia, according to U.S. prosecutors.

The seven men arrested in North Carolina were also charged with conspiring to provide material support to terrorists and for conspiracy to murder, kidnap, maim and injure people overseas, including in Kosovo, Jordan and the Gaza Strip.

"I personally have asked to be extradited to the United States because I am not afraid of U.S. justice, I believe in justice because I am innocent," Asllani told local media in his town in Mitrovica after he was released.

He said that Americans are good people and he has nothing against them....

Actions speak louder than words.

What happened at last year's Arab Festival

I received this note from David Wood of Answering Muslims:

Muslims threatened to kill Nabeel and me if we showed up again at Arab Fest in Dearborn, so we went there yesterday. They didn't kill us. Instead, police arrested us and we got to spend a night in jail (along with two others who were video recording us). Interesting city. I feel a documentary coming on. Title: "Welcome to Dearborn."

Is it now illegal to preach Christianity in Dearborn, Michigan? Have Sharia rules been imposed there?

David added in a later note:

Yes, we're banned from handing out literature, but we didn't do that. We followed the rules, and still got thrown in jail. They flat out lied about us. We can prove they lied with the video footage (just like last year), but the police took our cameras and won't let us have the footage. There's major oppression of anyone who criticizes Islam.

I will provide more details as I get them.

UPDATE: Here is the account of Nabeel Qureshi:

Yes, you heard it here first, folks. David and I, along with Negeen and Paul Rezkalla, were arrested and spent last night in jail. It is a long story which we will elaborate in full detail when we can, and we will post footage when the police give us back our cameras.

But to take the edge off your curiosity, here are some basics: Paul, David, Negeen, and I went to the festival to see and comment on the situation. Thankfully, we recorded every second of our activity at the festival. At one point, we came across a festival volunteer who seemed to take issue with us simply being at the festival. We could tell he had a problem with us, and so we asked "What are we doing wrong?" He said "Put the camera and microphone down, and I'll tell you." (By the way, there was more to this conversation, but when you see the footage, I think you'll see I'm being fair in my summary.) So I obliged, handing the microphone to David and asking him to not record the man. I then approached him and said "No camera, no mic, tell me what we're doing wrong", he said "Get away from me!" (or something to that effect). Again, I obliged, and walked away.

About 20 minutes later, to shouts and cheers of "Allahu Akbar!" we were all being led away from the festival in handcuffs. From the brief description we were given by the police of why we were being arrested, it sounds like the festival volunteer said we surrounded him and didn't give him an opportunity to leave, thereby "breaching the peace." This is as blatantly false as an accusation can get.

Last year, security lied about us and we got kicked out of the festival. We had it all on tape, so we were able to vindicate ourselves. This year, a volunteer lied about us, and we got thrown into jail. But when we get our footage back, we'll be able to vindicate ourselves again.

Here's what gets me though: people are getting very offended by the simple fact that we're taking cameras with us wherever we go. But if it weren't for the cameras, no one would know the truth of what is happening in Dearborn!

And what is happening in Dearborn? Don't get me wrong, I met a ton of awesome people at the festival today. But it seems like every time we come to this city, we encounter people who would lie at the drop of a hat to advance their own agendas, regardless of whether they will be proven false! I have been many places throughout this country, but never have I seen such a predilection for deception. What is it about this specific city that makes people act this way?

I am worried about Dearborn, my friends, and I'm worried about our nation. Let us be in prayer. More details to come as our journey unfolds.

Bail has been posted for all four that were arrested. A hearing is set for Monday morning. At this point, it is still unconfirmed as to exactly why the four were arrested.

UPDATE from Answering Muslims -- David Wood being handcuffed:

And a statement from an eyewitness:

I, Richard Valencia from Dallas, TX, was a witness to the events that took place at about 9:15pm-9:25pm on June 18, 2010 in Dearborn, MI at the Arab Festival. Here it is as i saw it:

I saw Nabeel Qureshi in the midst of a crowd of about twenty teenagers and young adult Muslims. David Wood and Paul were video taping Nabeel and the young Muslims dialog. Police officers, about four, were present acting as a shield protecting Nabeel from a crowd closing in tighter. The entire dialog seemed very peaceful and productive. i did not hear the police officers tell Nabeel or David to stop. The conversation with Nabeel began to wind down. I was able to speak with Nabeel a little to encourage him. At this point the crowd began to break up and the police also walked away. Another young adult Muslim began conversing with Nabeel and the crowd began to come back together. Finally, the police officers returned, about five or six of them, and surrounded David, Nabeel, and Paul. I thought they were going to protect Nabeel and the other brothers, but without warning, the police, rather gently but still forcibly, began taking hold of the camcorders. They arrested all three of the men and escorted them away at the sound of applause by some of the surrounding Muslims.

U.S. taxpayer money sent to pay UNRWA salaries in Gaza ends up going to Hamas

"U.S. Will Contribute $60 Million to United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East," from State.gov, June 18 (thanks to John):

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton announced today that the United States will be making an additional contribution of $60.3 million to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) to support UNRWA's core budget and special projects in the West Bank, Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan.

The $60.3 million contribution will provide critical services, including health, to 4.7 million Palestinian refugees. Of this contribution, $5.7 million will support nine special projects, including reconstruction and rehabilitation of schools in Jordan, Syria, and the West Bank, an afterschool program for refugee children in Lebanon, and a referral system to help refugees facing gender-based violence....

What was it all about, really, that rally in Lower Manhattan a few weeks ago? I mean the one that was attended by thousands (though the police did not offer an official estimate, a policeman present told one of the organizers that he estimated the crowd at "5,000"). I mean the one where a man speaking loudly in Arabic was assumed by some to be conducting Da'wa on behalf of Islam, and responded to, by a few, in agitated tones. Yes, I mean that rally which Keith Olbermann both dismissed as too tiny for him to deign to notice ("300 people") and at the same time took careful notice of, because to the keith-olbermanns of this world, any opposition to Muslim demands must surely be a sign of "intolerance" by crazed right-wingers. And those who had angrily responded to the man speaking in Arabic (in truth, a Copt recently arrived from Egypt whose voice was raised in fury and fear against the Mosque, as a sinister symbolic beachhead of Islam) were seen as "whites" attacking someone who was "brown-skinned."

What the rally was all about was something we read about, when we read with affection and interest the Bill of Rights and come across that phrase about the right of the people "to peaceably assemble" and read, furthermore, about the right to a "redress of grievances." For in truth that is all it was: a gathering of many people who were mightily offended, cut to the quick, by the prospect of there being erected a giant mosque on a spot right near Ground Zero, site of the largest Muslim terrorist attack in history so far, and of the deadliest foreign attack on American soil, rivaled in casualties only by Pearl Harbor. Who were these people? There were many who were relatives of those who had died in the World Trade Center, and who found the idea of a 13-story mosque complex on what they regarded as hallowed ground not merely unseemly but a cruel outrage, no matter how it was decked out by its sly promoter, and so far only would-be begetter, one Feisal Abdul Rauf. Many of those relatives of the victims, those who showed up at the rally and those who did not but not because their quiet fury was any less, knew that this would be an offense.

Some news stories did, at least, decently convey the feeling of those relatives:

In "Unprecedented: Egyptian Government Suppresses Christian Doctrine" in Pajamas Media (via RaymondIbrahim.com), June 16, Raymond Ibrahim explains the latest enormity of the Egyptian government against the indigenous peoples of Egypt:

It is not enough that the Egyptian government facilitates persecution of the Copts, Egypt's indigenous Christian minority. Now the government is interfering directly with the church's autonomy concerning doctrine. According to the Assyrian International News Agency:

The head of the Coptic Church in Egypt has rejected a court ruling that orders the church to allow divorced Copts to remarry in the church. In a press conference held on Tuesday June 8, Pope Shenouda [III], reading from the statement issued by the Holy Synod's 91 Bishops, including himself, said: "The Coptic Church respects the law, but does not accept rulings which are against the Bible and against its religious freedom which is guaranteed by the Constitution." He went on to say "the recent ruling is not acceptable to our conscience, and we cannot implement it." He also said that marriage is a holy sacrament of a purely religious nature and not merely an "administrative act."

Though little reported in the West, this issue is rapidly boiling over. There is even talk that, if he does not submit to the court's ruling, the pope will (once again) be imprisoned. What is behind such unprecedented governmental interference with the Coptic Church's autonomy?

Reading Egypt's national newspaper, Al Ahram, one gets the impression that, by trying to make divorce and remarriage easier for Copts, the Egyptian government is attempting to "liberalize" Coptic society--only to be challenged by an antiquated pope not open to "reform." It quotes one Copt saying that the "Pope's limiting divorce and remarriage to cases of adultery is unfair. It is against human nature." Even the manager of the Centre for Egyptian Women's Legal Assistance claims that his position "exposes Pope Shenouda's desire to impose his will over the Christian community" (a curious statement, considering that some 10,000 Copts recently demonstrated in support of the pope, and that the Catholic and Orthodox churches--which guide some 1.5 billion Christians--hold similar views on divorce and remarriage).

At any rate, lest the reader truly think that the Egyptian government is becoming more "liberal," there are a few important facts to remember:

First, according to the Second Article of the Egyptian Constitution, Sharia law--one of, if not the most draconian law codes to survive the Medieval period--is "the principal source of legislation." This means that any number of measures contrary to basic human rights are either explicitly or implicitly supported by the Egyptian government, including polygamy, the obstruction of churches, and institutionalized discrimination against non-Muslims and females in general. Put differently, Sharia law can be liberal--but only to male Muslims, who (speaking of marriage and divorce) can have up to four wives, and divorce them by simply uttering "I divorce you" thrice (even via "text messaging").

Moreover, the Egyptian government--again, in accordance to Sharia law--prevents Muslims from converting to Christianity. Mohammad Hegazy, for instance, tried formally to change his religion from Muslim to Christian on his I.D. card--yes, in Egypt, people are Gestapo-like categorized by their religion--only to be denied by the Egyptian court. (Many other such anecdotes abound). In other words, while the Egyptian government portrays itself as "modernizing" the church's "archaic" position on divorce and remarriage, it--the government, not Al Azhar, nor some radical sheikhs, nor yet the Muslim mob--prevents (including by imprisonment and torture) Muslims from converting to Christianity....

Read it all.

Islamic law requires four male Muslim witnesses who actually saw the act to establish rape or adultery. Absent those witnesses, a woman who makes such an accusation is incriminating herself -- even in modern, moderate Abu Dhabi. "Woman who reported rape jailed for one year," by Hassan Hassan, Marten Youssef and Rym Ghazal in The National, June 14 (thanks to Will):

ABU DHABI // A teenager who alleged she had been gang-raped by five men but later recanted her claim has been sentenced to a year in prison for consensual sex.

The five she had initially accused were acquitted of rape by the Abu Dhabi Criminal Court today, but were found guilty of less serious charges.

The Emirati teenager LH, 18, was found to have consented to intercourse with YM, a 19-year-old military police officer who was also sentenced to a year in jail after the rape charge against him was changed to one of consensual sex by the judge.

Two further defendants, both referred to as HA, were sentenced to three months in prison for being alone in the company of a woman.

The fifth and sixth defendants were fined Dh5,000 (US$1,400) for violations of public decency.

The latter verdicts represented rare court rulings in which sharia'a law was directly imposed. Police rarely arrest people based on such charges alone; more often they are secondary charges typically connected to sex offences.

LH has been in custody since filing the complaint. She was never appointed a lawyer during the trial, and none of her family members ever appeared in court during the proceedings.

According to the forensics report submitted to the court LH reported the incident on April 23.

Genetic material recovered from the scene led the judge to convict YM of consensual sex, while acquitting HA.

The forensics report found that LH was not a virgin and that there was no genital bruising. It found 12 bruises ranging from 1cm to 7cm long on her upper lip, hands, thighs, knee and behind her left ear.

"Some of the bruises are new, two to three days old, and some of them are old, seven to 15 days old," the report said. The report attributed the bruises to body pressure or being hit with a solid material. During the trial, prosecutors claimed that LH had gone for a drive on May 2 with her male Emirati friend, HA, in Baniyas, where they had intercourse. Prosecutors said the fact she agreed to go with him alone in the car partly showed her consent to sex.

They said that, HA, 19, then called five of his friends - four Emiratis and one Iraqi - and invited them to join him in raping her in the backseat of his Nissan Altima. Charges against one defendant were later dropped.

On May 25, LH retracted her accusation of rape.

Despite this, only the Public Prosecution had the authority to drop the rape charges - which they did not.

Within two days of the incidentLH had been tested by the forensics unit at the Abu Dhabi Judicial Department. Evidence of assault was cited by the public prosecution in charging the men with rape. LH told the court that bruises on her body came from a beating administered by her brother because he suspected she had relationships with men....

Of course, everyone knows that the jizya, the tax levied upon non-Muslims and which they must pay with "willing submission, and feel themselves subdued" according to Qur'an 9:29 is a relic of history, never to be revived again. Everyone knows that now Islam is tolerant and peaceful, and accords full equality of rights to non-Muslims (except in every single Muslim country in the world).

And so this is just an "entry fee," not the jizya -- understand? Never mind that only Hindus will want to enter for this. Nothing to see here. Move along.

"BJP slams entry fee on Hindu pilgrims in Kashmir," from Sify News, June 18 (thanks to Maxwell):

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) Friday criticised the Jammu and Kashmir government for its decision to charge entry fee of Rs.2,000 per vehicle to the Amarnath and Vaishnodevi temples.

'The Jammu and Kashmir government's decision to impose fees on lakhs of pilgrims going for 'darshan' (visit) of Amarnath and Mata Vaishnodevi by their private vehicles is reminiscent of 'jaziya' (tax) imposed during Mughal period that was forcefully imposed on Hindu pilgrims to torture them,' BJP national general secretary Vijay Goel told reporters here.

The state government had issued a notification under Jammu-Kashmir Motor Vehicle Taxation Act 1957 to charge Rs.2,000 as entry fee valid for seven days. The same amount will be charged per day if the stay extends more than seven days.

'The Jammu and Kashmir government is playing with the sentiments of Hindu pilgrims. Instead of providing better amenities to the pilgrims the state government is making attempts to disturb the 'teerth yatra' (pilgrimage).'

He demanded that the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) ask the Jammu and Kashmir government to desist from practising 'such shameful politics'.

Doesn't Syed Ali Geelani know that Islam teaches tolerance? Has he been learning Islam from Islamophobes? When is Honest Ibe Hooper of CAIR going to catch a flight to Kashmir to straighten him out about the true nature of Islam?

But of course, Geelani is not against the pilgrimage. He knows all about how tolerant Islam is. He just wants to be tolerant for a restricted period of time. Or else.

"'Restrict Hindu Pilgrimages in Kashmir to 15 Days or Face Opposition,'" by Fayaz Wani for NewsBlaze, June 18 (thanks to Maxwell):

The hardline Kashmiri separatist leader Syed Ali Geelani has asked Indian administered Kashmir government to restrict the Hindu annual pilgrimage to 15 days or face opposition.

The annual Hindu pilgrimage to the Amarnath cave shrine in South Kashmir's Pahalgam area will commence next month. Thousands of Hindus from all over India will converge in South Kashmir during the two month pilgrimage.

"We are not against the Amarnath pilgrimage. We will continue to welcome the Hindu pilgrims as we have been in the past. Islam doesn't teach us to create hurdles in the religious rituals of non-Muslims but we urge the government to restrict the pilgrimage to 15 days from two months. This will help in safeguarding the fragile economy of the region," Geelani said while addressing people during a peaceful sit-in against human rights violations being committed by Indian soldiers.

Accusing Indian government of following double standards, the separatist leader said, "Only 150 pilgrims a day are allowed to pilgrimage to Gangortri in India's Uttar Pradesh state to safeguard environment. However, here in Kashmir, Indian government is following a different approach. It seems that destroying the environment and culture of a Muslim majority region is in the national interest of India."

He asked the government to restrict the Hindu pilgrimage in Kashmir to 15 days only. "If government fails to concede to our demand, we will be compelled to launch an agitation," he said....

The fascists hate Israel, the Communists hate Israel. Only free people love Israel. "Castro: Swastika has become Israel's banner," from AFP, June 11:

Former Cuban President Fidel Castro slammed Israel on Friday and compared its policies to those of Nazi Germany. He said Israel seems to have taken the swastika as its banner, and that it would "not hesitate" to send the 1.5 million Palestinians living in Gaza to "crematoriums".

The former communist leader published an article in local press in which he said, "The State of Israel's hatred towards the Palestinians is such that it would not hesitate to send 1.5 million men, women and children to the crematoriums in which millions of Jews of all ages were killed."...

What an evil liar the old murderer is, when it is the Palestinians, not the Israelis, who nurse genocidal dreams -- and broadcast them on their official television channel.

And meanwhile, Castro's comrades in India are itching to do business with the Islamic supremacists in Iran: "Don't let sanctions hinder Iran ties: CPI-M," from the Indo-Asian News Service, June 18 (thanks to Maxwell):

The Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) has accused the government of backing out of the Iran gas pipeline under US pressure and urged New Delhi to continue economic and energy ties with Tehran despite the latest UN sanctions.

"India had gone on record that it does not think sanctions are the way to tackle (Iran's nuclear) problem. But India had fallen in line with the US whenever Iran was targeted in the IAEA," said an editorial in the CPI-M's mouthpiece People's Democracy.

"The US keeps patting India on the back for this stance," it said.

The party accused the ruling Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government of succumbing to alleged US pressure over its ties with Iran.

"As a result of US pressure, India backed out of finalising the Iran gas pipeline project," the journal said.

"Even now the UPA government should realise that India's true interest lies in strengthening relations with Iran and extending our economic and trade ties especially in the energy sector.

"India should find ways to pursue this course without the sanctions becoming a hindrance," the CPI-M said....

Here again we see that real Nazis hate Israel, as they have always hated Jews. It is only in the sick and libelous fantasies and fabrications of CAIR's Honest Ibe Hooper, Charles Johnson and the like that anti-jihadists, who in fact recognize that Israel is on the front line of the global jihad, align with neo-Nazis.

"German legislator: Stop 'thriving Holocaust industry,'" by Dor Glick for Ynet News, June 18 (thanks to Maxwell):

BERLIN - "Stop cooperation with the state of Jewish scoundrels", "Don't give in to the thriving Holocaust industry." These statements were not said in the Tehran parliament, but in the German city of Dresden, during a parliament meeting in the state of Saxony.

Leader of the extreme right National Democratic Party (NPD) Holger Apfel stirred up a storm in the parliament on Thursday when he carried a speech titled "no to cooperation with scoundrel countries - and end cooperation between Saxony and Israel."

Most parliament members urged Apfel to change the title, fearing it would damage Saxony's image - but to no avail. Apfel, a former neo-Nazi, stepped up to the podium and carried out his hate speech, while being booed by other parliament members.

Even after his time was up, Apfel refused to step down from the stage and continued to denounce the "Jewish terror state." His speech was finally stopped after the chairman turned off his microphone and instructed ushers to escort Apfel out of the hall....

One wonders what he was up to when he lived in Brooklyn and New Jersey. "US asks Paraguay to extradite suspected Hezbollah financier," from AFP, June 16 (thanks to Fausta, who notes that Hamdan used to live in Brooklyn and New Jersey):

The United States has asked Paraguay to extradite a Lebanese national suspected of funneling money to the Shiite militant group Hezbollah from the South American nation, court sources said Wednesday.

Mussa Ali Hamdan, 38, was arrested Tuesday in Ciudad del Este, part of the Triple Frontier, a region the United States has repeatedly cited as being exploited by militant groups that "finance terrorist activities."

Hamdan is accused of 31 crimes, according to Interpol. The US extradition request cites his alleged material support for Hezbollah "including falsified documents."

The suspect is also accused of counterfeiting US currency and conspiracy to commit passport fraud, according to the request....

Local media, citing local security officials, have said Hamdan was financing Hezbollah, which fought a devastating 2006 war with Israel and is blacklisted as a terror group by Washington....

They were previously charged for conspiring "to kill American troops in Iraq, assassinate two unnamed U.S. politicians and shoot shoppers in U.S. malls" -- all for Allah, of course.An update on this story. "2 charged in Mass. with conspiring to aid al-Qaida," from AP, June 18 (thanks to Block Ness):

BOSTON (AP) -- Two men accused in a terror plot to kill Americans face new federal charges that they conspired to provide personnel, advice, assistance and other services to al-Qaida.

A grand jury on Thursday added charges of conspiring to provide material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization in a superseding indictment against 27-year-old Tarek Mehanna of Sudbury, Mass., and 28-year-old Ahmad Abousamra. Authorities say Abousamra, who used to live in Mansfield, Mass., is now in Syria....

The suspects already face a 10-count indictment. Prosecutors say the men conspired to kill American troops in Iraq, assassinate two unnamed U.S. politicians and shoot shoppers in U.S. malls.

The scope of the plot just keeps getting wider. "Times Square car bomb suspect indicted in NYC," by Larry Neumeister for Associated Press, June 18 (thanks to all who sent this in):

NEW YORK (AP) -- Times Square bomb suspect Faisal Shahzad was charged Thursday with 10 terrorism and weapons counts in an indictment that accuses him of receiving explosives training and financial help from the Pakistani Taliban.

The indictment returned by a grand jury in U.S. District Court in Manhattan added five charges to the original case against the 30-year-old Shahzad and also detailed in greater depth his alleged financing, saying Shahzad had received a total of $12,000 from the militant group through cash drop-offs in Massachusetts and Long Island.

Shahzad is accused of plotting to build and detonate a homemade gasoline-and-propane bomb inside a used SUV among thousands of tourists on a busy Saturday night. He was charged with attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction among several terrorism and weapons counts.

"The facts alleged in this indictment show that the Pakistani Taliban facilitated Faisal Shahzad's attempted attack on American soil," Attorney General Eric Holder said in a release. "Our nation averted serious loss of life in this attempted bombing, but it is a reminder that we face an evolving threat that we must continue to fight with every tool available to the government."...

Backing what looks like the strong horse in this age of Obamaite appeasement. "China seeks mutual support, co-op with Islamic world," from Xinhua, June 18:

BEIJING, June 18 (Xinhua) -- Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi met here Friday with Secretary-General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, pledging to enhance cooperation with the OIC.

Yang said the OIC is playing a more and more important role in international and regional affairs, and China is willing to further enhance exchanges and cooperation with the organization.

"China and the Islamic world shared a long-term friendship," Yang said. China hoped that the two sides would continue to support one another on issues concerning each other's core interests....

Ihsanoglu hailed the traditional friendship and the broad prospects for cooperation between the two sides. He said the OIC attaches great importance to relations with China, and is ready to promote the development of friendly cooperation between China and the Islamic nations....

Convincing Iraqi Muslims not to work for the Great Satan. "Police: Iraqi interpreter for US Army killed," by Sameer N. Yacoub for Associated Press, June 18 (thanks to Maxwell):

BAGHDAD - An Iraqi interpreter for the U.S. military was gunned down on Friday by his son and nephew north of the capital after he refused their demands to quit his job, a police official said.

The attack occurred as at least 16 people were killed nationwide, a grim reminder of the dangers facing Iraqis despite a sharp drop in violence over the past few years.

Hameed al-Daraji was shot in the chest in his house in Samarra, 60 miles (95 kilometers) north of Baghdad, police Lt. Emad Muhsin said.

Muhsin said al-Daraji worked as a contractor and translator for the U.S. military since 2003 against the wishes of his family. His relatives were constantly fighting with al-Daraji to give up working with the Americans, but he ignored their pleas, he added.

Al-Daraji's son and nephew were arrested after the attack and confessed to being members of an al-Qaida group that sanctioned the killing, Muhsin said, adding that police were searching for a second son suspected of being an accomplice....

A welcome reversal of their initial decision to let this hatemonger into Britain. A small light of sanity breaks forth in Absurd Britannia: "Radical Muslim preacher banned from entering UK," from Reuters, June 18 (thanks to Raman and Mukund):

LONDON (Reuters) - Britain on Friday banned from entering the country an Indian preacher who has expressed radical views about Islam, including some that appear to justify acts of terrorism.

Conservative Home Secretary (interior minister) Theresa May said she had barred Zakir Naik, a 44-year-old television preacher based in Mumbai, for inflammatory remarks he was known to have made in the past.

Naik had been due to give a series of lectures in London and the city of Sheffield in northern England.

"Numerous comments made by Dr Naik are evidence to me of his unacceptable behavior," May said in a statement, without elaborating.

The Daily Telegraph on Friday reported Interior Ministry sources saying that 2006 website footage had shown Naik telling Muslims it was acceptable to embrace terrorism in certain instances.

According to the paper, Naik said Muslims should beware of people saying Osama bin Laden was right or wrong, adding: "If you ask my view, if given the truth, if he is fighting the enemies of Islam, I am for him.

"If he is terrorizing the terrorists, if he is terrorizing America the terrorist, the biggest terrorist, every Muslim should be a terrorist."

He is also reported by the paper to have suggested Western women make themselves "more susceptible to rape" by wearing revealing clothing.

"Western society has actually degraded (women) to the status of concubines, mistresses and social butterflies, who are mere tools in the hands of pleasure seekers and sex marketeers," the paper quoted him as saying.

May said: "Coming to the UK is a privilege not a right and I am not willing to allow those who might not be conducive to the public good to enter."...

A Home Office spokesman said the powers were used if an individual expressed views that "foment, justify or glorify terrorist violence in furtherance of particular beliefs" or "seek to provoke others to terrorist acts."

Jihad Watch reader Mukund notes that the U.S. Consulate had organized an interfaith meeting featuring Naik as one of the main speakers.

Ezzaz Aziz and his offensive necklace

"The Netherlands is a democratic country. I think it's nonsense that you can express one religion but not another. I feel a fire burning inside me because I don't live in a democratic country, but in a third world country." That's what it has come to.

"Conductor banned from wearing crucifix necklace," by Thijs Papôt for Radio Netherlands, June 16 (thanks to C. Cantoni):

An Amsterdam appeal court has ruled that the Amsterdam public transport service is within its rights to ban its conductors from visibly wearing a necklace bearing a crucifix.

The verdict backs an earlier ruling at the end of last year. Egyptian-born tram conductor Ezzaz Aziz appealed against the decision after the transport service suspended him for refusing to take off or conceal his necklace during working hours.

Mr Aziz objected to the fact that he was forbidden to wear his religious symbol, while Muslim women were allowed to wear headscarves. Mr Aziz claimed he was a victim of discrimination because headscarves are also an expression of religious belief.

"The judge didn't consider the equal treatment of two religions within one company - only whether the company rules applied. But that wasn't my intention. In the company we have two religions, and one religion is allowed to do what it likes and the other isn't allowed to do anything. That's why I appealed against the ruling."

Dress code

The court ruled that the public transport service wasn't guilty of discrimination because the rule wasn't against wearing religious symbols, but simply against visibly wearing necklaces. For security reasons the service's dress code bans employees from wearing any necklace outside the uniform.

The dress code allows the wearing of headscarves, as long as they bear the company logo. And the transport service points out that if Mr Aziz wants to express his religious belief, he's welcome to wear a ring or an earring with a crucifix.

Nevertheless, Mr Aziz says he's disappointed in Dutch justice. As a member of the Coptic Church, in Egypt he was barely able to express his religion. He expected things to be different in the Netherlands.

"The Netherlands is a democratic country. I think it's nonsense that you can express one religion but not another. I feel a fire burning inside me because I don't live in a democratic country, but in a third world country."...

But they didn't kill her, as they might have done in accord with Muhammad's dictum, "If anyone changes his religion, kill him," and the universal holding of all the schools of Islamic jurisprudence, that the apostate from Islam must be put to death. That means they must be moderates.

"Family of 17-Year-Old Somali Girl Abuses Her for Leaving Islam," from Compass Direct, June 15:

NAIROBI, Kenya, June 15 (CDN) -- The Muslim parents of a 17-year-old Somali girl who converted to Christianity severely beat her for leaving Islam and have regularly shackled her to a tree at their home for more than a month, Christian sources said.

Nurta Mohamed Farah of Bardher, Gedo Region in southern Somalia, has been confined to her home since May 10, when her family found out that she had embraced Christianity, said a Christian leader who visited the area.

"When the woman's family found out that she converted to Christianity, she was beaten badly but insisted on her new-found religion," said the source on condition of anonymity.

Her parents also took her to a doctor who prescribed medication for a "mental illness," he said. Alarmed by her determination to keep her faith, her father, Hassan Kafi Ilmi, and mother, Hawo Godane Haf, decided she had gone crazy and forced her to take the prescribed medication, but it had no effect in swaying her from her faith, the source said.

Traditionally, he added, many Somalis believe the Quran cures the sick, especially the mentally ill, so the Islamic scripture is continually recited to her twice a week.

"The girl is very sick and undergoing intense suffering," he said.

Her suffering began after she declined her family's offer of forgiveness in exchange for renouncing Christianity, the source said. The confinement began after the medication and punishments failed.

The tiny, shaken Christian community in Gedo Region reports that the girl is shackled to a tree by day and is put in a small, dark room at night, he said....

This is in accord with Islamic law for female apostates: that they be isolated and confined until they return to Islam.

Why didn't anyone at that Islamic religious convention stand up and say, "No! Islam is a Religion of Peace™! We revere the Christians as People of the Book!"?

"Muslims in Pakistan Kidnap, Rape Christian Girl," from Compass Direct, June 16 (thanks to Twostellas):

RAWALPINDI, Pakistan, June 16 (CDN) -- Five Muslims here kidnapped and raped a Christian girl after threatening to kill her unless her father allowed one of them to marry her. Lazarus Masih said one of his three daughters, 14, was kidnapped on May 29 by five men identified only as Guddu, Kamran, Waqas, Adil and Ali. Police recovered her on June 6 in a raid on the home where she was being held, though the suspects escaped.

"They threatened that if I don't get her married to Guddu, they would kill her," Masih said. "One of them said, 'We attended an Islamic religious convention, and the speaker said if you marry a non-Muslim or rape a non-Muslim girl, you will get 70 virgins in heaven."

He said that when he and his wife returned from work at around 11 a.m. on May 29, their 14-year-old daughter was not at home; his other daughters had been at school and said they did not know where she had gone.

During the family's search for her, they heard from Masih's brother-in-law, Yousaf Masih, that he had seen five Muslim men follow her earlier that morning.

"In the morning around 7:30 a.m., I saw that [name withheld] and another girl were sitting in a rickshaw and five Muslim guys - Guddu, Kamran, Waqas, Adil and Ali - followed the rickshaw," Yousaf Masih told the girl's father.

Family members said the suspects took her to a house near Islamabad, where they gave her a drug that rendered her unconscious, and raped her. A medical report confirmed that she was given drugs and raped....

"It could well lead towards eating the real thing."

The question is, why is this a story on the BBC at all? If Rod Adlington wants to produce turkey bacon, why should it be a controversy for anyone? The unspoken subtext of this article seems to be that Adlington should stop producing this product if Naveed Ashrafi's opinion wins out in the Islamic community. So what if the non-Muslim "pork-free market" and "the slimming market" wants turkey bacon? Apparently if Muslims don't want it, no one else can or should have it either. That Islamic supremacist conclusion is the only justification for this story; otherwise neither the BBC nor anyone else would care what Rod Adlington raises on his farm.

"Coventry farmer defends bacon substitute for Muslims," by Philip Churm for the BBC, June 18 (thanks to Twostellas):

A Coventry farmer has insisted he is reacting to demand from traders in trying to give Muslims a taste of pork by producing bacon-style rashers from halal-slaughtered turkeys.

Rod Adlington's attempts to imitate the meat, which Muslims cannot eat because of their religion, has seen a Muslim scholar voice concerns that it could lead to people eating real bacon from pork.

The turkey farmer told BBC Asian Network he was reacting to requests from convenience stores he supplies to and said they wanted a "really good turkey bacon".

"We kept being asked for it and so we decided to produce it," he added.

"There's a want for the product for the halal market, for the pork-free market and for the slimming market."...

Maulana Naveed Ashrafi, a Muslim scholar from Blackburn, said he was concerned as to where eating the turkey bacon rashers could lead to for other Muslims.

"It can ultimately lead to people who only eat halal food ending up eating the real bacon - bacon from pork," he said.

"The Islamic opinion on this subject would be to avoid eating such foods which have a remote resemblance (to pork) because it could well lead towards eating the real thing."

However, Dr Haifaa Jawed lectures in Islamic Studies at the University of Birmingham, said she did not believe there was a problem in eating bacon-style turkey rashers....

"If there is no bacon in that form of food or, if the meat is Islamically slaughtered, it should be ok."

But wait! I thought all the learned analysts had assured us that Muslims who left Islam were under no threat! Isn't that right, Dr. Bassiouni? Mr. Kruse? Ms. Heagney?

"Moroccan Islamists Use Facebook to Target Christians," from Compass Direct News, June 17:

RABAT, Morocco, June 17 (CDN) -- Moroccan Christians say Muslim extremists in the country are aiding and encouraging the government to pursue them by exposing and vilifying them on social networking site Facebook.

Facebook user Gardes Maroc Maroc has posted 32 image collages featuring dozens of Christian converts, calling them "hyena evangelists" or "wolves in lamb's skins" who are trying to "shake the faith of Muslims." That terminology on the website, which is in Arabic, matches that of Morocco's anti-proselytizing law, which outlaws efforts to "shake the faith of Muslims."

The online images depict Christian converts and their families from across the country and include details about their roles and activities in churches, their personal addresses and anecdotal stories attempting to malign them.

"These are some pics of Moroccan convert hyenas," reads one image.

Since March, the Moroccan government has expelled more than 100 foreign Christians for alleged "proselytizing." Authorities failed to give Christians deportation orders or enough time to settle their affairs before they left.

Observers have called this a calculated effort to purge the historically moderate Muslim country, known for its progressive policies, of all Christian elements - both foreign and national.

Amid a national media campaign to vilify Christians in Morocco, more than 7,000 Muslim clerics signed a statement denouncing all Christian activities and calling foreign Christians' aid work "religious terrorism."

On the Facebook page, Gardes Maroc Maroc makes a particularly strident call to Moroccan authorities to investigate adoptive parents of children from the village of Ain Leuh, 50 miles south of Fez. The user claims that local Christians under orders of "foreign missionaries" were attempting to adopt the children so missionary efforts would not "go in vain."

On March 8, the Moroccan government expelled 26 Christian foreign staff members and parents working at Village of Hope in Ain Leuh.

Now efforts against national Christians have gained momentum. One image on the Facebook page challenged the Islamic Ministry of Religious Affairs and Endowments, saying, "Evangelist hyenas are deriding your Ministry." The page with the images claimed that Christians had rented out an apartment belonging to that government ministry.

An entire page was dedicated to a well-known Christian TV personality in the Middle East, Rashid Hmami, and his family. The user also inserted pictures of hyenas next to those of Christians, presumably to indicate their danger to the nation.

National Christians Threatened

Moroccan Christians told Compass that authorities had begun harassing them even before the forced deportations of foreigners, and that pressure from officials only intensified in March and April.

Since the deportations started in early March, it seems that authorities, extremists and society as a whole have colluded against them, local Christians said. Dozens of Christians have been called to police stations for interrogation. Many of them have been threatened and verbally abused.

"They mocked our faith," said one Moroccan Christian who requested anonymity. "They didn't talk nicely."

Authorities interrogated the convert for eight hours and followed him for three weeks in March and April, he said. During interrogation, he added, local police told him they were prepared to throw him in jail and kill him.

Another Moroccan Christian reported that a Muslim had taken him to court because of his Christian activities. Most Moroccan Christians that spoke to Compass said the attitudes of their Muslim relatives had shifted, and many have been kicked out of their homes or chosen to leave "to not create problems" for their families.

Moroccan converts meet in house churches. Some of them have stopped meeting until the pressure subsides....

Congressman Frank Wolf (R-Va.), co-chairman of the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission, said that the Moroccan government has deported nearly 50 U.S. citizens.

"In spite of this, the U.S. government has pledged $697.5 million to Morocco over the next five years through the Millennium Challenge Corporation," he said. Wolf is advocating that the United States withhold the nearly $697.5 million in aid that it has pledged to Morocco.

"It is inappropriate for American taxpayer money to go to a nation which disregards the rights of American citizens residing in Morocco and forcibly expels Americans without due process of law," he said....

Indeed.

In the video above, I questioned the MAS reps involved in this sale about their ties to the Brotherhood and related matters, and got, as you can see, a windy non-answer.

In reality, the MAS is the Brotherhood in the U.S., and the Brotherhood in the U.S. is a subversive organization:

"In recent years, the U.S. Brotherhood operated under the name Muslim American Society, according to documents and interviews. One of the nation's major Islamic groups, it was incorporated in Illinois in 1993 after a contentious debate among Brotherhood members." -- Chicago Tribune, 2004

The Muslim Brotherhood "must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah's religion is made victorious over all other religions." -- Mohamed Akram, "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America," May 22, 1991, Government Exhibit 003-0085, U.S. vs. HLF, et al. P. 7 (21).

But Fennessy does not have the power to veto the sale, said Zwilling. That indicates that the Archdiocese of New York is behind this betrayal. "NY pastor no longer approves sale to Muslim group," from the Associated Press, June 18 (thanks to Twostellas):

NEW YORK -- The Staten Island pastor who signed off on a controversial plan to sell a former convent to the Muslim American Society has changed his mind. St. Margaret Mary R.C. Church Pastor Keith Fennessy sent a letter to Archbishop Timothy Dolan saying "after careful reflection" he's withdrawn his support for the convent sale. He also asked the New York Archdiocese to stop the deal from going forward.

Archdiocese spokesman Joseph Zwilling said...the pastor did not have the power to veto the sale. But he said the sale was not final until all approvals were met....

Turkey was once one of the nations of the world closest to Israel. But with the Erdogan regime working hard to destroy Turkish secularism and reimpose Sharia, that relationship had to end. "Turkey to cut 'all ties' with Israel," from PressTV, June 17 (thanks to Joseph):

After an Israeli attack on a Gaza-bound flotilla that left nine Turkish citizens dead, Ankara has introduced a roadmap to "completely" cut its ties with Israel.

After Israel failed to apologize or pay compensations for the killing of the Turkish citizens in its attack on the Mavi Marmara on May 31, Turkish Defense Industry Implementation Committee (SSIK) reviewed the country's military agreements and joint projects with Israel on Thursday.

The SSIK held a meeting chaired by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Thursday and decided to shelve 16 military agreements with Israel, including a $757 million plane and tank modernization project and a missile project worth over $1.5 billion.

Turkish President Abdullah Gul had earlier announced that a roadmap was to be prepared on the issue of sanctions against Israel.

"The roadmap details a process through which Turkey will completely cut its ties with Israel" in several stages, Turkey's Today's Zaman reported on Thursday.

According to the roadmap, the first step would be that Turkey's ambassador to Tel Aviv, who had been previously recalled, will not be sent back unless Israel sends a member to a UN investigatory commission that aims to look into the Israeli attack on the Gaza Freedom Flotilla.

Furthermore, the roadmap requires all military training and cooperation with Israel to be halted and states that an internal Israeli inquiry into the attack will in no way be recognized by Turkey....

But relax: it's "more an immigration violation than a national security threat." And who ever heard of Afghans getting involved in jihad activity, anyway? "EXCLUSIVE: Alert Issued for 17 Afghan Military Members AWOL From U.S. Air Force Base," by Jana Winter for FOXNews.com, June 17 (thanks to Will):

A nationwide alert has been issued for 17 members of the Afghan military who have gone AWOL from a Texas Air Force base where foreign military officers who are training to become pilots are taught English, FoxNews.com has learned.

The Afghan officers and enlisted men have security badges that give them access to secure U.S. defense installations, according to the lookout bulletin, "Afghan Military Deserters in CONUS [Continental U.S.]," issued by Naval Criminal Investigative Service in Dallas, and obtained by FoxNews.com.

The Afghans were attending the Defense Language Institute at Lackland Air Force Base in Texas. The DLI program teaches English to military pilot candidates and other air force prospects from foreign countries allied with the U.S.

"I can confirm that 17 have gone missing from the Defense Language Institute," said Gary Emery, Chief of Public Affairs, 37th Training Wing, at Lackland AFB. "They disappeared over the course of the last two years, and none in the last three months."

Each Afghan was issued a Department of Defense Common Access Card, an identification card used to gain access to secure military installations, with which they "could attempt to enter DOD installations," according to the bulletin. Base security officers were encouraged to disseminate the bulletin to their personnel....

A senior Defense Department official in Washington told Fox News he had no direct knowledge of the 17 men being AWOL. The official added that this is not the first time foreign trainees have gone missing, and suggested it was more an immigration violation than a national security threat....

An addendum to this post, featuring a line of liberated suffragettes.

Photo from the New York Post.

Not just "How high?" but "How fast?" A poll shows that the Islamic world wants Obama to back up his sympathetic and friendly words with actions. It isn't easy to turn the ship of state that quickly, but Obama is doing his level best. "Islamic world confidence in Obama is slipping: poll," from Reuters, June 17 (thanks to all who sent this in):

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A year after President Barack Obama sought a new beginning with the Islamic world in a speech from Cairo, confidence in the U.S. leader has dropped sharply in many Muslim countries, according to surveys released on Thursday.

U.S. favorability ratings in allies Egypt, Turkey and Pakistan hover at about 17 percent, while confidence in Obama in those three countries was 33 percent, 23 percent and 8 percent respectively, surveys by the Pew Global Attitudes project found.

Obama's favorability ratings in each of the Muslim countries fell between 2009 and 2010 as his plans for advancing the Middle East peace process stalled and he continued ahead with wars in two Muslim countries: Afghanistan and Iraq.

The sharpest declines came in Turkey and Egypt, where confidence in Obama dropped 10 percentage points and 9 points respectively. Confidence in Obama dropped 5 points or less in the other Muslim countries surveyed.

Other Muslim countries viewed the United States more favorably. Fifty-nine percent of Indonesians had a favorable view of the United States, as did 52 percent of Lebanese. But only 21 percent of Jordanians saw the United States in a positive light.

By comparison, people in Egypt and Jordan gave al Qaeda a higher favorability rating than the United States. Thirty-four percent of Jordanians had a positive view of the group that carried out the September 11, 2001, attacks, versus 19 percent of Egyptians.

Sixty-seven percent of Indonesians had confidence in Obama to do the right thing in international affairs, 43 percent of Lebanese and 26 percent of Jordanians, the surveys found....

The surveys were carried out in April and May in 22 different countries. Researchers questioned between 700 and 3,262 people in each country. Some of the surveys were conducted by telephone, others face-to-face. The margins of error ranged between 2.5 and 5 percentage points, Pew said.

SIOA's leaders Robert Spencer (left) and Pamela Geller (second from right)

Looking At the Left has a marvelous photo-essay of our SIOA freedom rally June 6 against the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero. There are many more photos there. You can see the variety of speakers and the large size of the crowd (contrary to mainstream media reports).

No, he didn't escape. A message from Hector Aleem's daughter, Mehwish Aleem:

It is to inform you all that Hector Aleem has been disappeared suddenly from Jail. We can't find him anywhere. When our lawyer sent legal papers in jail to get them signed by Hector Aleem then the Jail authorities told that Hector Aleem is NOT in jail and some agencies took him somewhere. We are trying for three days to confirm that where is daddy but no one is able to tell us anything. Our lawyer has searched him in each and every Police Station of Rawalpindi/Islamabad but we couldn't find him anywhere. Three days have passed now and we still don't have any clue about daddy. We don't know if he is being tortured somewhere or being kidnapped. Even Jail authorities can't tell where he is now. They just say, "Some agencies took him". But they don't tell us that where he is and who took him? Please pray for him and tell your friends and family to pray for daddy. If you got your blogs then please publish it in your blogs, and if your friends got any kind of blog then please tell them to publish this news. This is not fair that daddy is not even safe inside the jail, and we don't know where he is now.

Please keep on donating for Hector Aleem's lawyer, his legal expenses and his food and clothes. You can donate through Pay Pal or you can donate through any other way.

If you want to donate through pay pal then here is the link.

And if you want to donate through any other way then please contact Mohammad Shouman who is a group admin.

And also keep writing to Canadian Embassy in Islamabad for the Asylum of Hector Aleem and his family, you can write by yourself or you can print the petition, get it signed by your friends and family and send it to Canadian Embassy in Islamabad Pakistan.

Here is the link to the Petition.

Please keep praying for Hector Aleem, This is a very tense situation for us.

Hizb-ut-Tahrir openly works for the restoration of the caliphate, the supranational center of Islamic unity. In classic Islamic theology, only the caliph is authorized to declare offensive jihad against non-Muslim states for the purpose of subjugating them under the rule of Sharia, Islamic law. In the absence of a caliph, as has been the case since Ataturk abolished the caliphate in 1924, only defensive jihad may lawfully be waged -- which is why jihadis today always frame their activities in the context of alleged enormities of non-Muslim entities.

Note the book that the Islamic supremacists fear at 2:30 of the Australia video -- my own The Truth About Muhammad! (Thanks to Kamala for the heads-up.)

Thanks to Pamela Geller for the videos.

The unnamed "Kosovo Albanian male" probably had a role in this North Carolina jihad plot, which is known to have included Kosovar Albanian Muslims -- which must come as a shock to the dhimmis, the willfully ignorant, the useful idiots and the collaborators at places like Commentary and elsewhere, who have staked so much on the false assumption that Albanian Muslims in Kosovo are all moderate, peace-loving supporters of the United States.

"Kosovo terror suspect arrested on U.S. warrant," from RFE/RL, June 17 (thanks to George):

PRIŠTINA -- The European Union mission in Kosovo says anti-terrorist police have arrested a terror suspect wanted for extradition to the United States.

The EULEX mission said in a statement today that a Kosovo Albanian male was detained in the Kosovska Mitrovica region....

The statement said the suspect, who was not identified, is charged by U.S. authorities with having supported a planned terrorist attack in North Carolina.

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

"Kurdistan Is Urged to Ban Genital Cutting," by Namo Abdulla and Timothy Williams in the New York Times, June 16 (thanks to AINA):

SULAIMANIYA, Iraq -- Human Rights Watch urged Kurdistan's government on Wednesday to ban genital cutting of women and girls, a practice the organization said is widespread and dangerous there, but which they said Kurdish officials had failed to move aggressively to stop.

Human Rights Watch, an advocacy organization based in New York, interviewed 31 girls and women last year and combined its findings with recent surveys by other organizations that found that at least 40 percent of girls and women in Iraq's Kurdistan region had undergone the procedure, which typically involves cutting off external genitalia with a dirty razor blade.

One of the studies, of about 1,400 girls and women interviewed during 2007 and 2008, found that almost 73 percent of women 14 years and older said that at least a portion of their genitals had been removed....

"Although it has not been completely inactive, its efforts have been piecemeal, low key and poorly sustained," the report said of the Kurdish government....

Mariwan Naqshbandi, a spokesman for Kurdistan's Ministry of Endowment and Religious Affairs, dismissed the study, saying that it had distorted reality and that Kurdistan had "issues far more important" to confront.

"The report is extremely exaggerated," he said. "It is so unfair. It relied solely on some local reports. It relied on rumors."

He added: "Circumcision exists as an isolated occurrence, rather than as a phenomenon in Kurdistan. It only exists in certain places."

Human Rights Watch said Kurdish girls and women described genital cutting as being physically painful and psychologically scarring.

"Girls undergoing the procedure are forcefully held down, their legs pried apart, and part of their genitalia cut off with a razor blade," the report said. "Often the same blade is used to cut several girls. No anesthesia is applied beforehand and if anything at all is applied to the open wound afterwards, it is water, herbs, cooking oil or ashes."

In addition to wounds caused to women, risks include an increase in the rate of stillbirths and in the occurrence of babies with low birth weight, the report said.

It is not clear how common genital cutting is in the rest of Iraq, because it has not been the subject of a comprehensive study.

UPDATE: Mark Durie observes that the above translation of Umdat al-Salik is itself deceitful, as its editors have attempted (futilely) to soften the barbarism of the practice for non-Muslim consumption. Durie writes:

"The Reliance of the Traveller, a respected manual of Shafi'i jurisprudence, states "Circumcision is obligatory (for every male and female) by cutting off the piece of skin on the glans of the penis of the male, but circumcision of the female is by cutting out the clitoris" (section e4.3). [The English translation by Nuh Ha Mim Keller (certified by Al-Azhar University) disguises the true meaning of the Arabic text by offering the following bogus English 'translation': "For men it consists of removing the prepuce from the penis, and for women, removing the prepuce (Ar. Bazr) of the clitoris (n: not the clitoris itself, as some mistakenly assert)."

What race is Islam again?

In a sane world, with a sane France, the French government would be calling upon Muslims in the country to demonstrate with acts, not just words, that they oppose jihad terrorism, Islamic supremacism, and efforts to impose Sharia in whole or part upon France. Instead, they have bought entirely into the Islamic groups' "racism" victimhood claim, acting against "anti-Muslim racism" with no reciprocal action or request made to the Muslim community at all.

"French government signs convention on anti-Muslim racism," from KUNA, June 17 (thanks to Twostellas):

PARIS, June 17 (KUNA) -- French authorities signed here Thursday a "framework convention" with Muslim leaders to help log anti-Muslim racism in this country, the Interior Ministry said.

The framework convention was signed between Interior Minister Brice Hortefeux and the President of the French Council for the Muslim Faith (CFCM), Mohammad Mussawi, whose organization represents the majority of Frances almost six million Muslims.
Hortefeux, for his part, is responsible as Interior Minister for relations with Frances religious groups.

The agreement signed Thursday will lead to the "implementation of a statistical and operational follow-up on anti-Muslim acts," the Interior Ministry said....

This is not a joke. (Thanks to Jos.)

Just when you thought Absurd Britannia couldn't get any more absurd, there comes this news. I am not in favor of surveillance cameras in the first place, but if you're going to have them at all, and they're designed to fight against terrorism, then to cover them up in precisely the areas where terrorism is most likely to be being plotted is suicidally stupid.

"Plastic bags to be put over Birmingham 'terror cameras,'" from the BBC, June 17 (thanks to all who sent this in):

Bags are to be put over scores of surveillance cameras in parts of Birmingham with large Muslim populations, after local objections.

Safer Birmingham Partnerships (SBP) said 216 cameras were put up including covert ones, mainly in the Washwood Heath and Sparkbrook districts.

The cameras were financed through a counter-terrorism fund, but the SBP said they would tackle all crime.

And even after this the local Councillor, a Muslim, is acting as if the authorities have to prove themselves to the Muslims, not that Muslims have to show themselves to be loyal citizens who reject jihad terrorism and Islamic supremacism:

Councillor Salma Yaqoob said people had lost faith in the authorities.

'Sneaky handling'

The Respect Party councillor for Sparkbrook said: "In terms of reassurance it's going to take a lot more than plastic bags.

"The residents have lost faith with the authorities for their sneaky handling of the way they went about this and will not be reassured until they have been told the locations of the hidden cameras too."

SBP said 72 cameras had been placed covertly and would not be covered by the plastic bags....

The cameras were financed through the Association of Chief Police Officers' (Acpo) Terrorism and Allied Matters (TAM)....

"Plea papers filed after a Friday court hearing offer no clues as to why Al-Homsi and Ansari, one of her son's friends, spent early February buying pipes and gunpowder at Arlington hardware and sporting goods stores and assembling bombs in her apartment bedroom."

An update on this story, and the latest in the Kimberly al-Homsi saga.

"Arlington woman pleads guilty to federal charges after 3 pipe bombs found in truck," by Jason Trahan for the Dallas Morning News, June 16:

A 45-year-old Arlington woman, who has had past run-ins with counterterrorism agents, has pleaded guilty to federal charges after police found three pipe bombs in a pickup she was driving.

"A 45-year-old Arlington woman." Huh. That explains... nothing.

Kimberly Al-Homsi and Yasinul Ansari, her 18-year-old accomplice, both entered pleas before U.S. District Judge John McBryde in Fort Worth. They admitted to one count each of possession of an unregistered firearm, in this case homemade pipe bombs found in the truck in February.

They could each receive up to 10 years and a $250,000 fine when sentenced Sept. 24.

Plea papers filed after a Friday court hearing offer no clues as to why Al-Homsi and Ansari, one of her son's friends, spent early February buying pipes and gunpowder at Arlington hardware and sporting goods stores and assembling bombs in her apartment bedroom.

The afternoon of Feb. 13, a motorist called 911 to report that someone in a pickup had pointed a weapon at him on West Abram Street in Arlington.

Police found the truck and tried to pull it over, but the driver did not stop. The pursuit ended in Fort Worth after the truck carrying the pair hit ice at Rosedale Street near Loop 820.

Police found a toy gun inside, in addition to three pipe bombs in a bag.

Al-Homsi told federal agents that she and Ansari made the bombs in the bedroom of the North Arlington apartment using synthetic black powder, road flare material and match heads.

When authorities searched the apartment at Hunters Point apartments on Ruger Drive in Arlington, they found week-old receipts from Pep Boys auto parts store and Academy Sports and Outdoors.

Al-Homsi's history of provocative behavior has attracted the attention of not only local media, but also police and federal counterterrorism agents.

She first made headlines days before Christmas in 2005 when she waved a fake grenade at a motorist on Central Expressway in Dallas. She was charged with a bomb hoax and received probation.

On Feb. 25, 2007, Al-Homsi and a friend, Aisha Abdul-Rahman Hamad, were spotted at Dallas Love Field walking back and forth, apparently pacing off distances. When confronted, the women told officials they were looking for the Frontiers of Flight museum.

Two days later, they were at the airport again. Al-Homsi was sitting on the hood of a car looking through binoculars at airplanes. The women refused to let police search their car, authorities say.

On July 4, 2007, the pair was questioned after reportedly driving near the runways at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport.

About two weeks later, Al-Homsi called 911 to report that Hamad was threatening her with a knife. After a six-hour standoff, Arlington police arrested Hamad but also jailed Al-Homsi for possession of a homemade gun, black powder, shotgun shells and putty.

In interviews with reporters, Al-Homsi has claimed to have dual American and Syrian citizenship, as well as overseas weapons training. She also claimed to have known Wadih el Hage, the former Arlington tire dealer convicted of being a personal aide to Osama bin Laden.

Authorities say she has no terrorist ties.

Friends say she was born in the U.S., and had a father in the military. She is believed to have converted to Islam in college in Arizona, and eventually moved to Arlington. Her husband's family is from Syria, which she has visited, friends say, they insist that she is not a danger.

Honor killing in Canada: Aqsa Parvez was murdered for refusing to wear the Islamic hijab -- not that this has anything to do with Islam, of course! An update on this story. "Father, son get life terms in Aqsa Parvez slaying," from CBC News, June 16 (thanks to Michael):

Aqsa Parvez's father and her brother have been sentenced to life in prison after pleading to killing the 16-year-old in their Mississauga, Ont., home.

The sentence was handed down Wednesday in court in Brampton, near the home where the teen was strangled by Muhammad Parvez and his son, Waqas, in December 2007.

On Tuesday, the pair pleaded guilty to second-degree murder.

An agreed statement of facts released in court revealed that when Aqsa entered her teen years, she began rebelling against her father's rules, including his insistence that she wear traditional Muslim clothing.

"She was experiencing conflict at home over cultural differences between living in Canada and back [in Pakistan]," the statement said.

Religious differences.

Aqsa was in almost constant disagreement with her father and her seven older siblings.

She told her father she did not wish to wear the hijab, wanting instead to dress in Western clothes with the same freedoms as the other girls in her high school.

'Freedom restricted'

The statement revealed that Aqsa "did not have a door on her bedroom, her freedom to talk on the phone with friends was restricted, she was required to come straight home from school and expected to spend her evenings and weekends at home."

In September 2007, Aqsa told a counsellor at Applewood Heights Secondary School in Mississauga "that she was afraid her father wanted to kill her."

The school made arrangements for Aqsa to stay at a shelter, but she stayed only three days. Soon after, she was permitted to wear non-traditional clothes to school but the conflicts within the family continued.

Aqsa later spent time living with friends, but during that time her father and other members of her family asked her to return home.

On Dec. 10, 2007, Aqsa was taken from the school bus stop by her brother at approximately 7:20 a.m. Just 36 minutes later, her father called 911 and told police he had "killed his daughter."...

Peel Regional Police took Muhammad Parvez into custody and charged him with murder. But it was Waqsa Parvez who actually killed Aqsa, according to the statement of facts.

Waqas Parvez, 26, was charged on June 26, 2008. His DNA was found beneath his sister's fingernails.

If Muslim states really want to end "Islamophobia" in the West, here is an easy way they can do it without going to all the time, trouble and expense of running to the UN and trying to get laws passed that are at variance with the settled law and custom of Western non-Muslim states:

1. Focus their indignation on Muslims committing violent acts in the name of Islam, not on non-Muslims reporting on those acts.
2. Renounce definitively not just "terrorism," but any intention to replace the U.S. Constitution (or the constitutions of any non-Muslim state) with Sharia even by peaceful means. In line with this, clarify what is meant by their condemnations of the killing of innocent people by stating unequivocally that American and Israeli civilians are innocent people.
3. Teach Muslims the imperative of coexisting peacefully as equals with non-Muslims on an indefinite basis.
4. Begin comprehensive international programs in mosques all over the world to teach against the ideas of violent jihad and Islamic supremacism.
5. Actively work with Western law enforcement officials to identify and apprehend jihadists within Western Muslim communities.

If Muslims do those five things, voila! "Islamophobia" will no longer hold sway among Westerners!

Note also the pot-kettle aspect of these self-righteous denunciations of the human rights situation in the West by countries with such stellar human rights records as Pakistan.

"Muslim states seek UN action on West's 'islamophobia,'" by Robert Evans for Reuters, June 16:

GENEVA, June 16 (Reuters) - Muslim states said on Wednesday that what they call "islamophobia" is sweeping the West and its media and demanded that the United Nations take tougher action against it.

Delegates from Islamic countries, including Pakistan and Egypt, told the United Nations Human Rights Council that treatment of Muslims in Western countries amounted to racism and discrimination and must be fought.

"People of Arab origin face new forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related forms of intolerance and experience discrimination and marginalisation," an Egyptian delegate said, according to a U.N. summary.

And Pakistan, speaking for the 57-nation Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), said the council's special investigator into religious freedom should look into such racism "especially in Western societies".

Acting for the OIC, Pakistan has tabled a resolution at the council instructing its special investigator on religious freedom "to work closely with mass media organisations to ensure that they create and promote an atmosphere of respect and tolerance for religious and cultural diversity".

The OIC -- and its allies in the 47-nation council including Russia, China and Cuba -- dub criticism of Muslim practices and linking of terrorism waged under the proclaimed banner of Islamism as "islamophobia" that pillories all Muslims.

Never mind, of course, that it is Muslims, not non-Muslims, who have done that "linking" of terrorism to Islam by explaining and justifying their terrorist actions by reference to Islamic texts and teachings.

BOUND TO PASS

Diplomats say the resolution, which also tells the investigator to make recommendations to the Human Rights Council on how its strictures might be implemented, is bound to pass given the majority the OIC and its allies have in the body....

In "New Fatwa Calls on Men to Drink Women's Breast-Milk" at Pajamas Media (via RaymondIbrahim.com), June 4, our old pal Raymond Ibrahim explores this fatwa, which has been in the news again of late:

Last month, I wrote a PJM article dealing with some of Islam's "problematic" practices, specifically those attributable to the Muslim prophet Muhammad. One of these -- the Muslim phenomenon of "adult-breastfeeding," or rida' al-kabir -- is making headlines again, precisely three years to the day since it last created controversy in (and inevitable mockery of) the Islamic world. According to Gulf News:

Exactly three years ago, on May 22, 2007, an Egyptian scholar was disciplined by Al Azhar University, one of Islam's most prestigious institutions, after he issued a fatwa calling upon women to breastfeed their male colleagues. Dr. Izzat Attiyah said that his fatwa offered a way around mixing of the sexes in the work place since breast-feeding established a maternal relation even if the beneficiary was not the woman's biological son or daughter.

Now, a high-ranking Saudi, Sheikh Abdul Mohsin al-Abaican, a consultant at Saudi Arabia's royal court, has issued a fatwa asserting that

women could give their milk to men to establish a degree of maternal relations and get around a strict religious ban on mixing between unrelated men and women. [Because] a man who often entered a house and came in contact with the womenfolk there should be made symbolically related to the women by drinking milk from one of the women. Under the fatwa, the act would preclude any sexual relations between the man and the donor woman and her relatives.

Sheikh al-Abaican thus "modernizes" Dr. Izzat's position -- that the man must breastfeed directly from the teat -- by suggesting that "the man should take the milk, but not directly from the breast of the woman. He should drink it and then becomes a relative of the family, a fact that allows him to come in contact with the women without breaking Islam's rules about mixing."

(So much for simply being in control of oneself without going through bizarre rituals.)

At any rate, where do all these "adult breastfeeding" ideas originate? As usual: Muhammad. A canonical hadith tells of a woman who once asked Muhammad what to do about the fact that a young boy who had been living with her and her husband had grown into manhood: that a non-relative adult male was freely residing with them, seeing his wife without her veils, was upsetting to the husband. So the prophet told her to "breastfeed" the man. Shocked, she responded saying that he was a grown man; Muhammad said -- according to some traditions, while laughing -- "I know." The woman breastfed the man, and reportedly her husband was no longer upset, as the act of breastfeeding turned him into a kinsman. Muhammad's favorite wife, Aisha -- the "mother of the believers" -- frequently relied on this practice to meet with non-related males (one of the greatest debates of her time revolved around how many "breastfeeds" were enough --one, five, or ten -- to make a man a "family-member." See here for more hadiths).

The importance of this breastfeeding business has less to do with its sensationalist quality and more to do with what it says about the overbearing and intrusive nature of Sharia law in Muslim life. Muslims cannot escape adult breastfeeding simply because it is contained in Islam's most canonical hadiths (including Sahih Muslim and the Sunan of Abu Dawud and Ibn Maja). Moreover, it has been addressed -- and endorsed -- by such Islamic authorities as Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn Hazm. To reject this hadith is to reject the sources and methodology of usul al-fiqh -- in short, to reject Sharia law....

Indeed. Read it all.

Note that AFP uncritically refers to the Arabic Network for Human Rights Information as a "human rights group," although it would never do the same for an anti-jihad human rights group like SIOA. Only supporters of genocidal jihadis like those of Hamas can be truly called "human rights activists."

"Egypt rights group protests France's blocking Hamas TV," from AFP, June 16 (thanks to all who sent this in):

CAIRO -- An Egyptian human rights group condemned on Wednesday a decision by France to block broadcast by Hamas-run Al-Aqsa TV for alleged "incitement to hatred."

The Arabic Network for Human Rights Information "strongly condemns the decision (taken by France) for allegedly 'inciting hatred,' without sufficient clarification of whether it was for a specific program or specific content that included this alleged incitement," a statement said.

It added that this was "in violation of legal rules that require mentioning the reasons for that action in a clear manner."

Al-Aqsa TV itself protested the decision on Tuesday.

The deputy head of the Gaza-based station told AFP it had been informed that the Paris-based Eutelsat would stop carrying the channel within two days, a move he said would lead to the loss of 70 percent of its viewers.

"We were told that the reason behind the decision to stop broadcasting Al-Aqsa was 'incitement to hatred,' without any explanation," Mohammed Thuraya said.

"This is the unfair result of pressure from the Zionist lobby on the American administration, which in turn pressured France and Eutelsat," he said, adding that the decision had "no legal or moral justification."...

In "Pay Pal's Jihad Against Journalistic Liberty and Freedom of Thought" at Big Journalism today, Pamela Geller recaps the PayPal imbroglio:

Last Friday, the PayPal accounts for my blog AtlasShrugs.com and my organizations Stop Islamization of America (SIOA) and the Freedom Defense Initiative (FDI) were suddenly and without warning "restricted." After a recent review of my account, Paypal said that it had been "determined" that I was "currently in violation of PayPal's Acceptable Use Policy. Under the Acceptable Use Policy, PayPal may not be used to send or receive payments for items that promote hate, violence, racial intolerance or the financial exploitation of a crime."

Huh?

Hate? Violence? Racial intolerance? Financial exploitation of a crime? SIOA is an advocacy group devoted to defending the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience and the equality of rights of all people. Atlas Shrugs is a news site and a political blog. I am not responsible for the bad news in the world. I just report on it.

I posted this news at Atlas Shrugs over the weekend and received over a thousand letters of support, along with hundreds of ccs of PayPal account cancellations. The people spoke! I love that.

And so on Monday, a very pleasant and rather deliberately clueless executive named Leslie called me from PayPal to say it was all a big misunderstanding and Atlas would be reinstated (and the subsequent restriction of SIOA and FDI removed also). [...]

It is a victory that they came back crawling, but needless to say, I am not going back to PayPal. I told Leslie that, too. She wished I would reconsider. But no. I am sticking with GPal -- the G stands for guns!

The real story is that we stood up, and the weasels backed down. We will fight each battle this way. We will not let them stigmatize us for standing up against Islamic supremacism and its war against free speech and free people.

Hate speech? It's love speech, baby.

Oh, yes. Read it all.

They're laughing because everyone knows Sharia could never, ever come to Oklahoma, right?

Actually, Americans in general are getting used to a lot more Sharia, bit by bit, piece by piece, than they realize.

Preemptive strike: "Islamic Sharia Law to Be Banned in, ah, Oklahoma: Oklahoma Calls Ban on Islamic Law a 'Preemptive Strike,'" by Joel Siegel for ABC News, June 14 (thanks to all who sent this in):

Oklahoma is poised to become the first state in the nation to ban state judges from relying on Islamic law known as Sharia when deciding cases.

The ban is a cornerstone of a "Save our State" amendment to the Oklahoma constitution that was recently approved by the Legislature.

The amendment -- which also would forbid judges from using international laws as a basis for decisions -- will now be put before Oklahoma's voters in November. Approval is expected.

Oklahoma has few Muslims - only 30,000 out of a population of 3.7 million. The prospect of sharia being applied there seems remote. But a chief architect of the measure, Republican State Rep. Rex Duncan, calls the proposed ban a necessary "preemptive strike" against Islamic law coming to the state.

"I see this in the future somewhere in America," Duncan, who chairs the state House Judiciary Committee, told ABC News. "It's not an imminent threat in Oklahoma yet, but it's a storm on the horizon in other states."

Sharia - which means "path" in Arabic - governs many aspects of Muslim life and influences the legal code in a majority of Muslim countries.

There are many interpretations of what Sharia means, but in some countries strict interpretations "are used to justify cruel punishments such an amputation and stoning as well as unequal treatment of women in inheritance, dress and independence," according to the Council on Foreign Relations.

There is actually no form of Sharia that doesn't contain those things. There are Muslim countries where these elements of Sharia are not enforced, but there is no version of Sharia itself that doesn't have them.

Sharia has gained a toehold in some western countries, notably Great Britain, where five sharia courts have been established to settle certain disputes among Muslims, with the government's blessing.

The proposed Oklahoma amendment is aimed, in part, at "cases of first impression," legal disputes in which there is no law or precedent to resolve the matter at hand.

In such cases, judges might look to laws or rulings in other jurisdictions for guidance. The proposed amendment would block judges in Oklahoma courts from drawing on sharia, or the laws of other nations, in such decisions....

Making more Muslim American citizens, cheap. And the way Turkey is going, it is increasingly unlikely that the children born in New York via this method will grow up to be ardent secularists. "New York hotel pioneers birth tourism," from Breaking Travel News, June 10 (thanks to Logans Warning):

A New York hotel is staking its claim to have invented a new hospitality niche - birth tourism. The Marmara Manhattan offers "an exclusive package for new mothers that wish to give birth in the USA", with the additional bonus of the newborn child gaining US citizenship.

The hotel, which is part of the Turkish hospitality chain, exploits the 14th amendment to the US constitution, which states that all children born on American soil "are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside".

The Marmara Manhattan, which is located in New York's Upper East Side, told The Times: "What we offer is simply a one-bedroom suite accommodation for $5,100, plus taxes, for a month, with airport transfer, baby cradle and a gift set for the mother." There are also medical fees of about £20,500.

However the price is a cheap and easy one to pay for US citizenship. Many will eventually use the newborn - known as an "anchor baby" - as a stepping stone for the immigration of extended family.

The hotel has so far sold 15 of the packages.

According to the US Citizenship and Immigration Services, the practice is entirely legal as long as the women can pay their medical bills.

However there are noises being made in Washington to close the loophole.
Gary Miller, a Republican congressman, told The Times: "They come to this country and have babies. The children are citizens. The children are eligible to go to school.

They receive food stamps and social programmes. The American taxpayers are paying for it....

Yep.

Wholesale persecution of Christians (especially converts from Islam) in Afghanistan, and the world looks the other way. Islamic Tolerance Alert from Liberated Afghanistan: "Appeal for Afghan Christians, sentenced to death for their faith," by Santosh Digal in AsiaNews, June 15 (thanks to Martin):

New Delhi (AsiaNews) - VijayKumar Singh, from the India Bible Publishers and the Delhi Bible Fellowship, has launched an appeal to the Christians of India and the world to pray and express their support for Afghan Muslim converts to Christianity who were convicted on conversion charges and sentenced to death on 31 May. Speaking to AsiaNews, Sing said, "We need Christians' help all over the world to stop the Afghan government from arresting Dari-speaking Afghan Christians and condemning them to death by public execution."

Christians' help and that of all people who have any interest in defending human rights.

Afghans consider their country to be 100 per cent Muslim. A local TV station, Noorin TV, recently broadcast a documentary showing photos and videos of secret "Afghan Christian Converts", which revealed names and showed the faces of alleged Afghan Christian converts.

This was enough to spark riots and demonstrations throughout Afghanistan with protesters demanding strong action to enforce the Afghan constitution, based on Sharia, arrest the culprits, and execute anyone who renege his or her religion in favour of another.

A number of prominent public figures also spoke out on the matter, calling for immediate action. One lawmaker even said that killing a Muslim who converts to Christianity was "not a crime".

But surely our man Karzai is against that sort of thing, right? Wrong:

Waheed Omar, the spokesman for Afghan President Hamid Karzai, told reporters that the president was "personally" taking an interest in this case, and had ordered his interior minister and the head of the country's spy agency to carry out a full investigation and "take immediate and serious action to prevent this phenomenon."

Reports from inside Afghanistan already tell of many arrests in recent days, as well as allegations of torture of those under arrest in an effort to extract forcibly the names of other Afghan Christian converts.

Singh also slams the "perplexing media silence" and demands a strong stance from Christians around the world.

In a letter, Obaid S. Christ, a member of a small group of about 150 Afghan Christian refugees and asylum seekers in India, writes that he and other Afghan Christians "are currently living in exile from their beloved homeland [. . .] forced to flee their country in order to save their life and the lives of their families, due to orders of execution issued against them by the Afghan government for choosing to convert to Christianity."

Recently, he writes, "The Afghan Home Minister and the Chairman of Afghan Intelligence told the Afghan Parliament that four Afghan Christians and one family had been arrested and that they were under investigation," and that "13 NGOs are recognized and suspended," and that the "names of Afghan Christians are listed and the Afghan Intelligence agency wants to arrest them." He adds, "Our houses are checked by police and intelligence people in Afghanistan, our families and parents (even though they are Muslim) are under investigation and even arrested, and all Afghan believers are missing".

For this reason, the Afghan Christian community is calling on every Christian "not to be silent or close his or her eyes whilst thousands of fellow believers are persecuted".

Afghan Christians are asking their fellow Christians to pray for them, "make their voice heard and get the international community to put pressure on the Afghan government to stop killing, persecuting and executing Afghan Christians," and give us instead "freedom of religion as well as respect and accept us as Afghan Christians."

Like a punch-drunk fighter dragging himself up off the canvas after yet another knockdown, Adam Serwer, Leftist blogger for the American Prospect, is back for more after this -- and once again provides a useful illustration of how the Left and their Islamic supremacist allies argue, or rather, evade argument. True to form for the Left, all Serwer has to dish out here is a repulsive stew of lies, smears, and juvenile twittery. Once again a Leftist jihad enabler fails abysmally to compete on the level of the evidence. "Spencer's (Still) Tenuous Evidence," by Adam Serwer in the American Prospect, June 14 (thanks to James):

Robert Spencer, the professional anti-Muslim activist who has been working to oppose the construction of an Islamic center near Ground Zero and a Mosque in Staten Island, takes issue with several of the claims I made in my post last week.

The term "anti-Muslim" is used to imply that I am "against" a group of people, personally, rather than against a supremacist and oppressive ideology. But in fact, oppression is oppression, no matter who is oppressed, or how much they love that oppression. I don't subscribe to Wilsonian pipe dreams of bringing democracy to the benighted masses, and in reality there is little one can or should do for the oppressed if they do indeed love their oppression and wish to remain under its boot, but the fact remains that I am not "anti-Muslim." Some years 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 it is not "anti-Muslim" to wish freedom of conscience and equality of rights on the Islamic world -- quite the contrary.

Anyway, Adam Serwer careens from this smear straight into some more:

I'll just start with the easiest claim Spencer disputes, that his colleague Pamela Geller -- who recently had the Paypal links on her site removed because the company started to view her site's hysterical Islamophobic content as hate speech...

Actually, Paypal reversed this outrageous decision. One would think, parenthetically, that if Adam Serwer had an ounce of foresight or capacity for reflection, he would realize that if businesses start refusing business to people on the basis of their political views, he could be next. What Paypal tried to do to SIOA, FDI and Pamela Geller could be done to him someday, should the political winds shift. Maybe he assumes that the political winds won't shift -- and indeed, even if they do, conservatives aren't going to move to marginalize and silence him the way Leftists, who have always manifested a taste for authoritarianism when in power, try to do to conservatives.

But it's more likely that he simply hasn't considered the implications of Paypal's attempt at politically manipulative mercantile thuggery. His side is winning, and that's all he cares about.

Then Serwer drags out the old Pamela Geller/Malcolm X canard again, brushing aside her explanation of why she ran that post and attempting to tar Geller with it in a rather spectacularly inept manner, culminating with "Geller is a birther, which for some reason doesn't bother Spencer either. Then again, Spencer and Geller have trouble finding friends at CPAC so maybe he's just not very choosy."

Coming from a man who identifies himself as "a Jew, the child of a white man and a black woman," who despite his Jewish self-identification has no trouble befriending Jew-hating members of the Muslim Brotherhood and retailing their deceptions uncritically, the bit about not being choosy about friends is rich. But it is ultimately just a juvenile jape, devoid of substance. CPAC, as Pamela explained here, is tied to Grover Norquist, a friend of Islamic supremacists who seems to have made sure the conference will not deal honestly with jihad-related issues. I will shed no tears for not having "friends" among Norquist and his ilk.

In any case, Serwer and his ilk would define Pamela Geller -- and me by association -- entirely according to the material they find most absurd or objectionable according to their own canons. If they weren't so utterly devoid of a moral compass when it comes to Islamic supremacism, and so hospitable to violent intimidation in connection with it, their dismissal of the entire corpus of her work based on a few misrepresented posts might be more plausible.

Spencer also claims that the link he posted to an Investigator Project on Terrorism report on the Muslim American Society works.

Someone should tell the ace journalist that he is referring to the "Investigative," not the "Investigator," Project on Terrorism.

(On Friday, I erroneously attributed the report to Spencer, it is a product of the IPT.) It does now. It didn't on Friday, and since I figured that Spencer was the type of person who would retroactively fix the link and then claim nothing had been wrong in order to cast doubt on my honesty, I saved a screenshot of the link not working...I actually think this tells you just about everything you need to know about Spencer, frankly.

Actually, it tells you everything you need to know about Serwer: that he is a dishonest, juvenile twit. Did I actually "retroactively fix the link and then claim nothing had been wrong in order to cast doubt on my honesty"? No. What I wrote in my initial post about Serwer about the broken link was this, in its entirety: "The link is in this post. It does work. Here it is again."

Anything in there about claiming the link always worked, or that Serwer was lying about it? Nope. Not a syllable. In fact, the link was broken at one point; a reader notified me of that fact, and I fixed it. Later, when I saw Serwer's report, I didn't think it necessary to try the reader's patience with a tedious and tangential explanation of a broken link and how it was fixed. Instead, I just provided the correct link, and moved on -- and Adam Serwer uses this to accuse me of accusing him of dishonesty.

Well, I wasn't then. I am now.

As far as the Muslim American Society is concerned, some of Spencer's claims are substantiated, although they don't prove what he seems to think they prove. Having read the Investigative Project on Terrorism report and the 2004 Chicago Tribune article to which Spencer links, it's clear that some of MAS' founding members were part of the Muslim Brotherhood. The former Secretary General of MAS, Shaker Elsayed, claimed at the time that the group had distanced itself from the Brotherhood, although a Brotherhood official in Cairo is quoted as saying this was done for political reasons. MAS today maintains that "MAS has no affiliation with the Ikhwan al Muslimoon (Muslim Brotherhood or the Ikhwan) or with any other international organization," which is exactly what I was told on Friday.

The Brotherhood itself, as I pointed out in this post, carries the link to the 2004 Chicago Tribune expose on its site -- that is, the Brotherhood itself now posts the story in which the Muslim American Society is identified as the principal American arm of the Brotherhood. Serwer even adds that a Brotherhood official in Cairo says that the Muslim American Society distances itself from the Brotherhood publicly for "political reasons." But he still rejects any link between the MAS and the Ikhwan -- and why? Because the MAS told him there wasn't one!

The tough, hard-nosed journalist really dug for the truth on that one.

And his naivete continues: "Hamas is a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, but so is the Islamic Movement in Israel, which has representation in the Knesset." Oh, well, then! They must be benign! Then about the evidence regarding Mahdi Bray's support for Hamas and Hizballah, Serwer says:

Other contemporaneous accounts Spencer cites of protests Bray attended, as well as excerpts from MAS publications and statements by MAS officials cited in the IPT report, show that some members of the organization hold anti-Semitic beliefs. Excerpts cited in the IPT report from MAS' publication, The American Muslim, vacillate between clear condemnations of terrorism and sympathy for groups like Hamas, legitimate critiques of U.S. policy and paranoid screeds. None of this proves MAS is actually tied to terrorists or intends to implement Taliban-style Sharia in the U.S., and neither the IPT report nor Spencer substantiate that claim. This stuff is troubling, but it's not criminal. Lucky for Spencer, holding tremendously ugly beliefs in this country is not a crime -- although Spencer would like to make it so, on the grounds that if we don't American Muslims will.

So apparently Serwer is granting that the MAS holds "tremendously ugly beliefs," including support for genocidal Jew-haters, and yet he is willing to take at face value their statements about not being affiliated with the Brotherhood. All right.

But as for his charge that I would like to make it a "crime" to hold "tremendously ugly beliefs in this country," it is, like so much of what he claims, utterly false. I have no interest in criminalizing Adam Serwer's beliefs. In reality, I'd be satisfied with the enforcement of existing laws. Section 2385 of the federal criminal code states that "whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government...shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction."

If this already existing law -- revised as of January 2, 2006 -- were applied to Islamic groups in the United States that are working to advance the scope of Sharia here, the stealth jihad could be stopped in its tracks. The clause "by force or violence" may appear to be an impediment to this, and that is a matter for legal scholars to study in light of the fact that Sharia denies the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and the equality of rights before the law of women and non-Muslims. Clearly the advance of such a legal framework in the U.S. is at odds with Constitutional principles and freedoms, and that will have to be addressed sooner or later.

Serwer, of course, will not be the one addressing them. Rather, he goes on to smear me and other anti-jihadists with the increasingly common "Muslims are the new Jews" theme, which carries with it the ugly implication that anti-jihadists must harbor dreams of genocide:

What's interesting though, is that remarks about "Zionist" conspiracies cited by the IPT report so closely resemble those of Spencer and his colleagues, who warn of "the Muslim Brotherhood's infiltration at the highest levels of the U.S. government." Spencer probably shouldn't be getting too huffy about instances of bigotry at angry protests either. Needless to say if Spencer wanted to buy a piece of land and build a church there, I'd defend his right to do so.

There's only one problem with this comparison: the "Zionist" conspiracies were fictional, while it is demonstrably true that the Muslim Brotherhood has infiltrated at high levels. See, for example, these accounts by intelligence insiders. Journalist Paul Sperry notes that Islamic supremacists have "infiltrated every security agency from the FBI to the Pentagon to the prison system, which is the top recruiting ground for al-Qaida right now, and they've also worked their way into the public school system." And see these statements of intent:

"We reject the U.N., reject America, reject all law and order. Don't lobby Congress or protest because we don't recognize Congress. The only relationship you should have with America is to topple it. . . . Eventually there will be a Muslim in the White House dictating the laws of Shariah." -- Muhammad Faheed, Muslim Students Association meeting, Queensborough Community College, 2003

"Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth." -- CAIR cofounder and longtime Board chairman Omar Ahmad, 1998 (denial noted and full story explained at link)

"I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future." -- CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper, 1993

"If only Muslims were clever politically, they could take over the United States and replace its constitutional government with a caliphate." -- prominent American Muslim leader Siraj Wahhaj, 2002

By contrast, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was a forgery, and there was no factual basis for all the conspiracy theories about Zionists scheming to control the world, any more than there is today.

And as for "instances of bigotry at angry protests," Serwer links to one of his earlier blog posts in which he smears the June 6 SIOA freedom rally against the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero on the basis of a misunderstanding between a Coptic Christian and some others at the rally. He ignores (of course) the statement in complete support of the rally and its goal by that Coptic Christian, Joseph Nassralla.

Serwer then claims that I have "absolutely no evidence" for asserting that the Ground Zero Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf's father was involved with the Muslim Brotherhood, and adds that "the claim that Rauf is connected to terrorism because his father was hypothetically a member of an Islamist organization is itself pernicious."

Of course, I never claimed that "Rauf is connected to terrorism because his father was hypothetically a member of an Islamist organization," but where in any of this have we seen Adam Serwer interested in honest reporting? In reality, I mentioned Rauf's father's link to the Brotherhood in response to a question about his father that was put to me by Sean Hannity on his show. In everything I've written about the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque, I've never drawn any conclusions from that link at all, or even mentioned it again. And in reality, I don't think that what his father was or wasn't necessarily has any bearing on what Feisal Abdul Rauf may be.

But was Rauf's father a Brotherhood member, or not? Serwer says that "Spencer has nothing on Rauf, or on Rauf's father, other than speculation. But he felt perfectly comfortable going on television and smearing the former as sympathetic to terrorism based on vague information he cannot confirm about the latter." He says this after rejecting the assertions made by journalist Alyssa Lappen here. He takes Rauf's word that his father was "giving lectures all over the world on the [Egyptian] government's dime," and therefore could not have been "fleeing the Egyptian government as a member of a banned organization."

On what basis does Serwer believe Rauf over Lappen? Only that he is more comfortable with Rauf's slickly packaged Islamic supremacism than with Lappen's advocacy for freedom, but consider this: Rauf has lied about his commitment to religious dialogue. He has lied about whether the Islamic center planned for the Ground Zero site will contain a mosque or not. And he has lied about whether or not the project is getting foreign funding. Caveat emptor.

Serwer is eagerly buying, of course, and smears Lappen in the process with a nifty bit of illogic: "As for Lappen, she writes that 'In short, Islam reveres death. Indeed, Islam orders its adherents to conduct jihad warfare, and promises paradise and 72 virgins to those who die in the service of Allah.' Right. Why bother trying to play six degrees of Sayyid Qutb if you ultimately believe all Muslims are terrorists anyway?"

Does Serwer not believe that "Islam reveres death"? He is probably unfamiliar with this Qur'anic verse: "Say (O Muhammad): O ye who are Jews! If ye claim that ye are favoured of Allah apart from (all) mankind, then long for death if ye are truthful" (62:6). Does he not believe that "Islam orders its adherents to conduct jihad warfare" and all the rest? He probably is also unfamiliar with the Qur'anic verse commanding Muslims to wage war against and subjugate Jews and Christians (9:29), and with the one promising Paradise (which is in the Qur'an indeed filled with those virgins) to those who "kill and are killed" for Allah (9:111).

But in any case, does the reality of such teachings mean that "all Muslims are terrorists"? Of course not. As I have pointed out ad infinitum, there is a spectrum of belief, knowledge and fervor among Muslims, as there is among any ideological group, religious or non-religious. Some take Islamic teaching very seriously, some don't, with every variation in between. Some are very knowledgeable about that teaching. Some aren't. I am not saying we can count on those who don't care to wage jihad against unbelievers to transform themselves into staunch allies of the U.S., but that doesn't mean they're all giving aid and comfort to Osama and company either. Some are merely indifferent to all this.

But in any case, Serwer manifests a consistent readiness to take the claims of Islamic supremacists at face value while regarding those of their opponents with extreme skepticism:

Spencer utilizes a rhetorical trope in which he pretends that his targets' plans for world domination have already been revealed, and everyone would know the truth if it weren't for the nation of millions holding him back. He writes that it is "known to be the position" of MAS to bring Sharia to the U.S. See if you can find that on their website.

Gosh, Adam, it ain't there! That must mean that the MAS is full of loyal Constitutionalists! Serwer is probably ignorant, of course, of the internal Muslim Brotherhood document naming the MAS as one of its allied organizations, and declaring that the Muslim Brothers "must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah's religion is made victorious over all other religions." -- Mohamed Akram, "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America," May 22, 1991, Government Exhibit 003-0085, U.S. vs. HLF, et al. P. 7 (21).

In that same fashion, he also says that Rauf is "an open proponent of Sharia," and that I "ignore" this. What Spencer means by "ignores" is "pick up the phone and ask him about it," and here is what Rauf said to me:

Rauf says that this is a "complete misunderstanding" and that what he meant was that the U.S. allows Muslims to freely meet their own religious obligations. "The thing that people mistake, is that we're trying to impose Sharia law in America, there are aspects of Sharia law that we are allowed to practice. Like Jews practice their dietary laws, we practice them without contradiction."

A "complete misunderstanding." All right. But Rauf is an open proponent of Sharia, and judging from his honesty on other issues (as explained above), perhaps Serwer will pardon me for not being as sanguine as he is about Rauf's truthfulness when he assures this naive and ignorant reporter that he doesn't want to bring Sharia to the U.S. After all, Rauf says that "what Muslims want is to ensure that their secular laws are not in conflict with the Quran or the Hadith, the sayings of Muhammad." For Muslims in the U.S., that will inevitably involve bringing Sharia here.

But Serwer has no clear idea of what that means anyway:

"Sharia" is Islamic law. In repressive societies like that of Afghanistan under the Taliban, it is indeed brutal and repressive. In say, Turkey, the legal structure is studiously secular, and Sharia only matters to the extent it governs the personal affairs of the religious. Islamophobes like Spencer have dutifully exploited the former incarnation because it allows them to fearmonger in free conscience, because he assumes and hopes that his audience understands and associates Sharia with Taliban style injustice and oppression. The Sharia of Rauf is not the Sharia of the Taliban, and Spencer conflates the two because it is the only way to justify interfering with Muslims' ability to build sites of worship where they please under the freedoms guaranteed to all Americans under the Constitution.

This paragraph is so staggeringly intellectually incoherent that it is hard to know where to begin. First Serwer notes that the Taliban adheres to Sharia while Turkey currently does not, and then says that "Islamophobes like Spencer have dutifully exploited the former incarnation" of Sharia, that is, that of the Taliban, "because it allows them to fearmonger in free conscience." But of course Turkish secularism is not an "incarnation" of the Sharia at all, but rather the absence of Sharia, so what it demonstrates about the nature of the Sharia itself is precisely nothing.

Nonetheless, apparently Serwer believes that the (increasingly tenuous) existence of Turkish secularism somehow demonstrates that "the Sharia of Rauf is not the Sharia of the Taliban," but he offers no actual evidence for that assertion at all. He does not produce, and cannot produce, any statement from Rauf condemning Sharia-mandated stoning, or amputation, or denial of women's rights, or the Sharia-mandated death penalty for apostates. He just takes for granted that Rauf's Sharia must differ from the Taliban's, because he likes Rauf and dislikes his opponents, and Adam Serwer knows that Adam Serwer is an enlightened, tolerant, progressive liberal, and so he can't possibly be putting himself into the position of being a shill for authoritarian oppressors, now, can he? Why, of course not!

But that is exactly what he is, and worse:

As for myself, I am a Jew, the child of a white man and a black woman. I am quite familiar with intolerance and what it looks like. In this instance, it looks like Robert Spencer, whose dark admiration for those he claims as enemies is expressed in the sincere flattery of imitation. Spencer doesn't simply reflect their conspiracy theories or their wish for a society in which equality under the law is abolished, he also clearly imagines himself some kind of martyr.

Look closely at what Adam Serwer is saying here. He is charging me with "imitation" of those whom I "claim as enemies." In other words, he is saying that in resisting Islamic supremacism and Sharia, and in fighting to defend the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and equality of rights for women, I am the equivalent of mass murderers who glory in the deaths of innocents. This is a moral myopia of immense proportions and a monstrous defamation not just of me but of every anti-jihadist -- Pankaj Mishra does the same thing to Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

The point here is in no sense personal: I am not affected in the least by what Adam Serwer or anyone else says about me. The point is that we have grown accustomed to these casual exercises in moral equivalence, yet they are as abominable as it would have been in 1942 to equate Churchill with Hitler, or Roosevelt with Mussolini. Adam Serwer is writing in the service of people who would strip him of his rights at very least, and probably do far worse to him besides. The fact that he is serving as their useful tool will not make them go easier upon him in the end, and it should only sharpen the moral indignation that every American who reveres human rights should feel toward this collaborator with evil.

Video thanks to Annoyances and Irritations.

So says Bruce Bawer. "When it comes to the right to speak one's mind about Islam, the record of the last few years makes it clear which direction the West is moving in." Indeed. The official fictions are ever more strictly enforced. It is only a matter of time. But...the truth will always remain the truth, and it will come out in other ways.

"I've Become an Enemy of the People for Speaking the Truth About Islam: I've now been singled out, in a report commissioned and funded by the government of Norway, as a perpetrator of Islamophobia. Am I about to be hauled into court?," by Bruce Bawer in Pajamas Media, June 15 (thanks to Aaron):

When it comes to the right to speak one's mind about Islam, the record of the last few years makes it clear which direction the West is moving in. In France and Italy, Oriana Fallaci is put on trial for disparaging Islam. In Canada, Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant are hauled before "human rights commission" tribunals for criticizing Islam in print. In Australia, an Islamic organization sues two pastors for "vilification of Muslims." In Britain, a Daily Telegraph columnist is arrested on charges of hate speech for having written negatively about Islam, and the Archbishop of Canterbury proposes that Parliament pass stronger laws against such speech acts. And in the Netherlands, Geert Wilders, the head of the Freedom Party, which performed so well in the June 9 general elections that Wilders may end up in the governing coalition, still faces trial for having made a film about the Koranic foundations of terrorism.

Then there's Norway, where I live, and where the last few days have seen yet another dark development. By way of background, permit me to begin by quoting myself. On pages 230-31 of my book Surrender: Appeasing Islam, Sacrificing Freedom I sum up the more alarming aspects of Norway's Discrimination Law, passed in 2005:

It forbids "harassment on the grounds of ethnicity, national origin, ancestry, skin color, language, religion, or beliefs," and, in turn, defines harassment as "actions, omissions, or utterances [my emphasis] that have the effect or are intended to have the effect of being insulting, intimidating, hostile, degrading, or humiliating."

In other words, it's illegal just to say certain things. [...]

Which means that a handful of far-left organizations have been given enormous power to silence those they disagree with.

Or to silence those who speak about things they don't want you to know about, like the truth about Islamic jihad and Islamic supremacism. Read it all.

Unlike Syria and Jordan, Canada provides for an automatic life sentence. An update on this story. "Guilty plea in Aqsa Parvez honour killing," by Michelle Mandel for the Toronto Sun, June 15:

The father and brother of Aqsa Parvez have pleaded guilty to murdering the rebellious 16-year-old in an abhorrent honour killing.

Muhammad Parvez, 60, and his son, Waqas, 29, pleaded guilty to second-degree murder Tuesday in the Dec. 10 2007 strangulation of Aqsa and they face an automatic term of life in prison.

At the time of her shocking murder, which Peel Police have described as a "planned and deliberate act," the Grade 11 Mississauga student was estranged from her Muslim family because she was bristling at their restrictions. She had moved in with a friend's family and no longer wore a hijab in her Applewood high school in Mississauga.

In an agreed statement of facts read by Sandra Caponecchia, court heard Aqsa, who had already been promised by her family in an arranged marriage, ran away from home twice because of her lack of freedom. With assistance from her school counselor, she stayed at a shelter the first time and with a friend the next. Despite her father allowing her to wear Western clothes and begging her to return, she refused to come back.

She had told her friends that her dad had sworn on the Koran that he would kill her if she ran away again.

On Dec. 10, her brother Waqsa confronted her at the school bus stop and she was taken away in the Parvez van at about 7:20 am. Just over 30 minutes later, her father called 911 and said he "killed his daughter" using his hands.

Police found her fully clothed in her basement bedroom, lying face up and with no vital signs. An autopsy determined she'd died from "neck compressions."

Her mother Anwar Jan told police that she questioned her husband about why he'd killed her.

"He said this is my insult. My community will say you have not been able to control your daughter. This is my insult. She is making me naked."

When asked if she disagreed with what he'd done, Aqsa's mother refused to protest his actions. "I cannot say anything. Whatever he thinks, he knows about it. "

Waqsa, a tow truck driver, told a co-worker that he intended to kill his sister and his father would take the blame. "Waqas explained ...that his sister was causing the family embarrassment and he had to do it."

He later told the friend that the guilt was killing him. "He admitted choking her until she died and said that there was no evidence against him," the Crown said in the agreed statement. "Waqas also explained how what happened was partly Aqsa's own fault because he had tried twice to talk to her and he even offered to get her own apartment and pay for it so she didn't have to work and she rejected his offers."

Her mother, dressed in a white hijab and black cloak, looked on and wiped away tears as Justice Bruce Durno said the two killers face at least 10 years in prison before being eligible for parole. The father, dressed in a blue sweatshirt, and his son, his hair slicked back in a ponytail, showed little emotion as they listened to the lengthy recounting of the heinous family murder.

The elder Parvez came to Canada as a refugee from Pakistan in 1999 and eventually brought his wife and eight children. Aqsa was the youngest and just 11 when she arrived here.

All but three of the siblings were wed in arranged marriages to cousins in Pakistan who later joined them in Canada....

Of course, it was to be held in a "heavily Muslim neighborhood" -- a provocation, to be sure. And yet I can't help but wonder what might have happened if a Muslim group in France had announced that it was going to do something in a non-Muslim area that many non-Muslims found offensive. (That would not be the same thing as holding the halal event in the same area, as described in the article below.) I expect that the same police who banned this party would be protecting the Muslims physically and lecturing the non-Muslims about "tolerance."

"French police ban planned street party serving pork and wine in heavily Muslim neighborhood," by Pierre-Yves Roger for Associated Press, June 15 (thanks to all who sent this in):

PARIS (AP) -- French police have banned a street party whose organizers planned to serve alcoholic cocktails and pork sausages in a heavily Muslim neighborhood of Paris, authorities said in a statement Tuesday.

Police said the party, called "Sausage and Booze," could have been viewed as a provocation in the Goutte-d'Or neighborhood of northern Paris, where many Muslims pray on the streets because there are not enough mosques. Alcohol and pork are forbidden by Islam and the party had been slated for just after Friday's main Muslim weekly prayers.

Organizers said they were holding the party to protest Islam's encroachment on traditional French values in the neighborhood. Muslim groups had announced a counterparty serving halal, or religiously approved, food.

Police banned both events.

"Because of the organization, location, day and timing chosen, as well as the counterparty plans, this event ... creates grave risks of public trouble," the police statement said. Police also said they met at length with organizers on Tuesday before announcing the ban.

French rights group SOS Racisme praised the ban on the party, which they called it a "flagrant call for hatred."

The woman who organized the party on Facebook and gives her name as Sylvie Francois denies any ties to the extreme right. She told the free daily Metro newspaper on Tuesday that she had launched the party as a way to "express exasperation."

She complained that the "Islamization" of her working-class neighborhood was "more and more ostentatious," and complained that Muslims now block several streets during Friday prayers.

"It offends my concept of the republic's secularism, I feel increasingly excluded in the neighborhood," Francois said....

Lieberman is certainly closer to the truth than is Obama, and the Senator is to be applauded for that. But his formulation still opens the door for the advance of Islamic supremacism and Sharia in the U.S. "Lieberman: Obama Wrong on Radical Islam," by Jim Meyers in Newsmax, June 15:

The new National Security Strategy released by the Obama White House last month refuses to recognize that our nation is at war with violent Islamist extremism, according to Sen. Joseph Lieberman.

The Independent Democrat from Connecticut writes in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece that the 2006 National Security Strategy correctly identified America's enemy as transnational terrorists who "exploit the proud religion of Islam to serve a violent political vision." The new Security Strategy omits that statement.

The administration is wrong to eschew those words and the term "violent Islamist extremism" and instead use "violent extremism," which is too broad and includes elements that are not at war with the U.S., Lieberman notes.

Administration officials would argue that the term "violent Islamist extremism" bolsters our enemy's propaganda assertion that the West is at war with Islam, but that logic is "completely unsound," Lieberman declares.

"Muslims in fact understand better than anyone else the enormous difference between their faith and the terrorist political ideology that has exploited it . . .

"We must encourage and empower the non-violent Muslim majority to raise their voices to condemn the Islamist extremist ideology as a desecration of Islam."

George W. Bush and his administration did their level best between September 12, 2001 and January 20, 2009 to encourage and empower the Vast Majority of Peaceful Muslims to act against the Tiny Minority of Extremists who had Hijacked the Religion of Peace™. What did they have to show for it as they passed the baton to Obama and his administration? Pakistan's double game -- and an array of Muslim Brotherhood-linked organizations in the U.S. that have paid lip service to condemning terrorism, but haven't done a single thing actually to fight against the jihad doctrine or Islamic supremacism among Muslims in the U.S.

Almost ten years after 9/11, and Lieberman is still talking about having to "encourage and empower the non-violent Muslim majority to raise their voices to condemn the Islamist extremist ideology as a desecration of Islam." Yet they've been encouraged and empowered for ten years, and what is the result? How much encouragement do they need? When, if ever, will people like Lieberman -- to say nothing of Obama -- start to wonder if this endless failure of the non-violent Muslim majority to do anything effective against the jihadists might say something about their real priorities and loyalties?

The White House is also wrong to identify America's enemy in the war on terror as simply al-Qaida and its affiliates, Lieberman states.

"Defining the enemy by reference to al-Qaida implies that this war in primarily about destroying an organization, rather than defeating a broader political ideology. This war will not end when al-Qaida has been vanquished . . . but only when the ideology of violent Islamist extremism that inspires and predates it is decisively rejected. That ideology motivates many other groups and individuals . . .

"We must recognize the nature of the fight we are in, not paper it over."

Uh, yeah.

I'll say it again: Syria recently scrapped a law limiting the length of sentences for honor killings, but "the new law says a man can still benefit from extenuating circumstances in crimes of passion or honour 'provided he serves a prison term of no less than two years in the case of killing.'"

That's right: two years for murder. And in 2003 the Jordanian Parliament voted down on Islamic grounds a provision designed to stiffen penalties for honor killings. Al-Jazeera reported that "Islamists and conservatives said the laws violated religious traditions and would destroy families and values."

What's more, a manual of Islamic law certified as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy by Al-Azhar University, the most respected authority in Sunni Islam, says that "retaliation is obligatory against anyone who kills a human being purely intentionally and without right." However, "not subject to retaliation" is "a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring's offspring." ('Umdat al-Salik o1.1-2).

In other words, someone who kills his child incurs no legal penalty under Islamic law.

That's why these honor killings keep happening -- because they are broadly tolerated, even encouraged, by Islamic teachings and attitudes. Yet no authorities are calling Islamic leaders to account for this.

"Mother stabbed daughter in 'honour crime': Police," by Andrew Chung in the Toronto Star, June 14 (thanks to all who sent this in):

MONTREAL - Favouring her left forearm, on which spots of blood had soaked through the white bandage, the woman stood in the prisoner's box looking crushed, accused of stabbing her own daughter in what police say was an "honour crime."

After her lawyer, Tom Pentefountas, asked to delay the formal laying of charges so his client's psychological fitness for trial could be determined, the woman's husband stood up in the back of the court and shouted to the judge: "Please sir, my wife is innocent!"

He soon began to weep, completing the picture of a family utterly torn asunder by what transpired early Sunday morning.

The 19-year-old daughter remains in hospital with knife wounds to the head, shoulders and arms.

It's believed that the daughter came home late, Pentefountas, a prominent name in the Montreal legal community, indicated to the court.

One source said she is believed to have returned home after 3 a.m. The assault happened just after 8, according to police.

Police based their theory that it was an honour crime on "what we saw at the scene of the crime," said Olivier Lapointe, spokesperson for the Montreal Police Service, and especially on interviews with people inside the house and the victim herself.

It appeared related to the "behavior of the victim," Lapointe said.

The woman, 38-year-old Johra Kaleki, faces charges of attempted murder, aggravated assault and assault with a weapon....

The family, which is Afghan in origin, moved to the neighbourhood in Dorval, near Montreal's main airport, about five years ago, according to neighbour Emery Dora.

The family was pleasant, but "mostly kept to themselves," Dora said. For instance, the father and the girls would play together but not with other children in on the street. The father, Ebrahim Ebrahimi, wouldn't let a younger daughter play soccer with other girls in their backyard, Dora added....

Why wouldn't they let them play with the kuffar children? "O ye who believe! The idolaters only are unclean." -- Qur'an 9:28

The unpleasant business involving PayPal's classification of Stop Islamization of America, the Freedom Defense Initiative and AtlasShrugs.com as "hate sites" is now resolved in our favor, with PayPal removing the classification and restoring the accounts.

That doesn't mean, however, that everything can or should go on as before. The Left's ongoing strategy is to rule its opposition outside the bounds of acceptable and reasonable political discourse. This is the long-term goal behind all the accusations of "hatred," "bigotry," etc.

And make no mistake: this effort is fiendishly obscene. It is to classify as "bigotry" the resistance to an ideology that would extinguish the freedom of speech and the freedom of conscience, as well as equality of rights before the law for women and non-Muslims. It is like calling Winston Churchill a bigot for resisting Nazism.

PayPal abetted that. And there is no doubt that they're on the wrong side of history and share the enlightened Left's sympathy for Islamic terror and Sharia, with their support for Islamic supremacism in other manifestations.

They reversed themselves in this instance after they received a flood of cancellations and indignant emails from Atlas Shrugs readers who admire Pamela Geller's joyful and indefatigable commitment to freedom and justice and Constitutional values, but that's not enough. As defenders of freedom, we cannot and must not go hat in hand to these aiders and abettors of tyranny, jump through their hoops, and beg them for their favors.

William Jennings Bryan said it in 1896 in a vastly different context, but every word applies here:

We do not come as aggressors. Our war is not a war of conquest; we are fighting in the defence of our homes, our families, and posterity. We have petitioned, and our petitions have been scorned; we have entreated, and our entreaties have been disregarded; we have begged, and they have mocked when our calamity came. We beg no longer; we entreat no more; we petition no more. We defy them!

We beg no more. We entreat no more. We petition no more. We defy them. We are not the aggressors. We are not haters. We are not racists. We are not bigots. We are not neofascists. Those who claim otherwise are knowingly or unknowingly abetting a monstrous evil. We withdraw our sanction from them.

And thus I have removed the PayPal link from Jihad Watch. I've installed a GPal link in its place, and ask you please to sign up with GPal and make a donation to our work. There is so very much work to do, to defend our freedom and our civilization. Please help us, and join us.

The New Yorker carried last week an attack on freedom fighter Ayaan Hirsi Ali that borders on the obscene in its extenuation of evil and denigration of those fighting against it. "Islamismism: How should Western intellectuals respond to Muslim scholars?," by Pankaj Mishra in the New Yorker, June 7 (thanks to Jules):

Was the prophet Muhammad a pervert and a tyrant? Does Islam promote terrorism and enslave women? Does Islam oblige its followers to wage jihad on Westerners whose roots lie in the secular Enlightenment? Should Muslims consider converting to Christianity? For the Somali-born writer Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the answer to all these questions is a resounding "Yes!" Hirsi Ali, who renounced Islam in her thirties, speaks from experience of bigotry and intolerance among her former co-religionists: she was genitally mutilated as a child in Somalia, briefly radicalized by a preacher of jihad in Kenya, nearly forced into a marriage, threatened with death in the Netherlands by the Muslim assassin of her collaborator, the filmmaker Theo van Gogh, and is still hounded by murderous fanatics in her new home, America....

There is a great deal wrong with this right at the outset. Pankaj Mishra is suggesting that Ayaan Hirsi Ali believes "Muhammad was a pervert and a tyrant," and that Islam promotes terrorism and enslaves women, and all the rest of the charges above, because she experienced "bigotry and intolerance among her former co-religionists," was "genitally mutilated as a child in Somalia," was "briefly radicalized," and so on. In other words, if she hadn't had such terrible personal experiences with Islam, she wouldn't regard it with such a gimlet eye today.

But actually, the question of whether or not Muhammad was a pervert and a tyrant has nothing whatsoever to do with Ayaan Hirsi Ali's experiences, whatever they may have been. The question of whether Muhammad was this or that can only be answered by consulting the most trustworthy sources about Muhammad -- although one will get two different answers depending on whether one is searching for what Muhammad actually said and did, or for what Muslims believe he said and did, as they are not the same thing. Even the question of whether Islam enslaves women cannot be answered by Hirsi Ali's personal experience, as illuminating as it may be of the condition of women in Islam; it has to be answered by reference to Islamic texts and teachings about women, and by a look at how those texts and teachings are put into practice in various parts of the Islamic world.

By making it all about Hirsi Ali's negative experiences, Pankaj Mishra abuses her again, by devaluing her judgment and implying that if she had been born into different circumstances, she would think something different about Islam. Of course, in some ways we all would think differently if we were born into different circumstances. But to make one's judgments entirely the result of one's experiences, rather than one's reasoned reflection, is to render them worthless as guides for anyone else. And that, apparently, is exactly what Pankaj Mishra is trying to do to Ayaan Hirsi Ali here.

"Nomad" is unlikely to earn Hirsi Ali many Muslim admirers. Neither will her recent support for the proposed French ban on face veils and the Swiss referendum outlawing minarets. In denouncing Islam unreservedly, she has claimed a precedent in Voltaire--though the eighteenth-century scourge of the Catholic Church might have been perplexed by her proposal that Muslims embrace the "Christianity of love and tolerance." In another respect, however, the invocation of Voltaire is more apt than Hirsi Ali seems to realize. Voltaire despised the faith and identity of Europe's religious minority: the Jews, who, he declared, "are, all of them, born with raging fanaticism in their hearts," who had "surpassed all nations in impertinent fables, in bad conduct and in barbarism," and who "deserve to be punished." Voltaire's denunciations remind us that the Enlightenment was a much more complex and multifaceted phenomenon than the dawn of reason and freedom that Hirsi Ali evokes. Many followed Voltaire in viewing the Jews as backward, an Oriental abscess in the heart of Europe. Hirsi Ali, recording her horror of ghettoized Muslim life in Whitechapel, seems unaware of the similarly contemptuous accounts of Jewish refugees who made the East End of London their home after fleeing the pogroms.

Or in short, as the new saying goes, "Muslims are the new Jews." There is just one problem with this ghastly equation, which trivializes the mass-murders of Jews in Europe and defames Hirsi Ali: Jews never carried out terrorist attacks in Europe, and never boasted about how they were one day going to take over (in contrast to Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi's boast that Muslims would soon conquer Rome and all of Europe -- a boast that other Islamic leaders have echoed). The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was a forgery, and there was no factual basis for all the conspiracy theories about Jews scheming to control the world, any more than there is today.

There is no open-ended, universal imperative in Jewish Scripture calling upon Jews to wage war against non-Jews and subjugate them under their rule (and the verses from Deuteronomy and Joshua that are always invoked to claim that there is such an imperative have never been understood that way by Jewish or Christian exegetes). But there is such an imperative in the Qur'an, and throughout Islamic history the mainstream understanding of that imperative has been that it is something incumbent upon the Islamic community as a whole. Imran Ahsan Khan Nyazee, Assistant Professor on the Faculty of Shari'ah and Law of the International Islamic University in Islamabad, in his 1994 book The Methodology of Ijtihad, quotes the twelfth century Maliki jurist Ibn Rushd: "Muslim jurists agreed that the purpose of fighting with the People of the Book...is one of two things: it is either their conversion to Islam or the payment of jizyah." Nyazee concludes: "This leaves no doubt that the primary goal of the Muslim community, in the eyes of its jurists, is to spread the word of Allah through jihad, and the option of poll-tax [jizya] is to be exercised only after subjugation" of non-Muslims.

I suppose Nyazee is an "Islamophobe"?

What's more, neither Ayaan Hirsi Ali nor anyone else is talking about rounding up Muslims and gassing them to death, or deporting them wholesale, or any such. It is a peculiar leap of logic to say that because one group was falsely accused of supremacist designs and was persecuted as a result, therefore any other group accused of supremacist designs must be falsely accused, with the accusers nursing genocidal aspirations.

The implied slur on Hirsi Ali's character, and that of all anti-jihadists, is unconscionable -- and then Pankaj Mishra compounds it by condescendingly suggesting that he understands her family better than she does, and that jihad terrorism is a consequence of bigotry and poverty. That common assumption brushes aside the many studies that show that jihadis are generally better educated and wealthier than their peers. And it manifests an abysmal ignorance of the "sense of history" Mishra scolds Hirsi Ali for not having: Mishra shows no sign of being aware of the demonstrable fact that today's jihad terrorists are motivated by the same Islamic teachings that have motivated jihad warriors throughout history, and that are based on statements in the Qur'an and Sunnah about Infidels and the Muslim's responsibility to fight them, not on the relative poverty or lack thereof of the Islamic world.

Whitechapel has much in its past--oppression, bigotry, poverty, radicalism--that would have helped Hirsi Ali understand not only the neighborhood's newest inhabitants but also her own family. But "Nomad" reveals that her life experiences have yet to ripen into a sense of history. The sad truth is that the problems she blames on Islam--fear of sexuality, oppression of women, militant millenarianism--are to be found wherever traditionalist peoples confront the transition to an individualistic urban culture of modernity.

This amateurish sociology is disproven by even the most casual glance around the globe at wherever non-Muslim "traditionalist peoples confront the transition to an individualistic urban culture of modernity." One wonders how Pankaj Mishra would explain why Muslim Pakistani immigrants have caused so much trouble in Britain, and Indian Hindu immigrants so little, when their ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds are so similar.

Many more young women are killed in India for failing to bring sufficient dowry than perish in "honor killings" across the Muslim world. Such social pathologies no more reveal the barbaric core of Hinduism or Islam than domestic violence in Europe and America defines the moral essence of Christianity or the Enlightenment.

No culture or group has a monopoly on evil. Neither Ayaan Hirsi Ali nor anyone else is saying that only Muslims perform evil acts. I have no idea if Mishra's assertion about the number of murders of Hindu girls with insufficient dowry is correct, but the problem with honor killing is sanctioned by Islamic law and custom, thus making it very difficult to stamp out in Islamic communities. Hindu dowry-killing is not sanctioned by Hindu teaching. It is against the law in India. In Islam, however, the situation is quite different: Syria recently scrapped a law limiting the length of sentences for honor killings, but "the new law says a man can still benefit from extenuating circumstances in crimes of passion or honour 'provided he serves a prison term of no less than two years in the case of killing.'"

That's right: two years for murder. And in 2003 the Jordanian Parliament voted down on Islamic grounds a provision designed to stiffen penalties for honor killings. Al-Jazeera reported that "Islamists and conservatives said the laws violated religious traditions and would destroy families and values."

What's more, a manual of Islamic law certified as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy by Al-Azhar University, the most respected authority in Sunni Islam, says that "retaliation is obligatory against anyone who kills a human being purely intentionally and without right." However, "not subject to retaliation" is "a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring's offspring." ('Umdat al-Salik o1.1-2).

In other words, someone who kills his child incurs no legal penalty under Islamic law.

That's why these honor killings keep happening -- because they are broadly tolerated, even encouraged, by Islamic teachings and attitudes. Yet no authorities are calling Islamic leaders to account for this. And Mishra, instead of at least granting Hirsi Ali her due for speaking about this problem, obfuscates the issue with tu quoque arguments about Hindu practices.

Islamic fundamentalist groups have long terrorized many Muslim countries, especially those, such as Pakistan and Afghanistan, that were ravaged by blowback from the Cold War and the war on terror. These extremists, who now assault the West as well, have always lacked popular support within their own countries.

I guess that's why Hamas won the election in Gaza, and why Sharia was enshrined as the highest law of the land in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and why Pakistan has been playing a double game of aiding the Taliban on one hand while pretending to fight it on the other. It is why we see such a broad-based global Islamic movement dedicated to teaching against the jihad doctrine and Islamic supremacism, preventing Muslims from joining jihad groups, and inducing those who are in jihad groups to leave them.

Of course, there is no such global movement. The programs in Saudi Arabia, Yemen and elsewhere to "de-radicalize" jihadis have been shown to be useless and/or shams again and again, with high levels of recidivism. Mishra, you'll note, offers no evidence to back up his assertion that jihadis "have always lacked popular support within their own countries," and there is a reason for that: there is no such evidence.

The anarchic vivacity of contemporary Muslim societies--featuring such figures as Ali Saleem, Pakistan's cross-dressing television host, and Cairo's hijab-wearing sex therapist Heba Kotb, whose talk show is beamed across the Arab world--does not quite match Hirsi Ali's description