August 2010 Archives

And so he set out plotting to bomb a Bronx synagogue -- because, after all, the Qur'an says that the Jews are the worst enemies of the Muslims (5:82). More on this story. "NY temple plot jury hears suspect rant about Jews," by Tom Hays for Associated Press, August 30:

NEW YORK (AP) -- A man accused of plotting to bomb New York synagogues and shoot down military planes ranted against Jews and mused about "taking down" targets in the United States, according to audio tapes played Monday at his federal trial.

The tapes were secretly recorded by a paid informant testifying against James Cromitie and three other men who were arrested in 2009 on their way to the synagogues.

The informant, Shahed Hussain, met Cromitie in 2008 after being sent by the FBI to infiltrate a Newburgh, N.Y., mosque....

A mosque? But...but...wasn't it teaching peace and tolerance?

"Muslims want to take the U.S. down," Cromitie says on one tape played for the jury. "Believe me, we can do it with our regular Muslims here."

Cromitie also bemoans American military ventures in the Middle East.

"What do we do to make it stop?" he says. "We start taking things down here, you understand?"

He adds: "I will kill 10 million (Jews) before I kill one Muslim."

Cromitie, 43, and three men recruited as lookouts - Onta Williams, 34, David Williams, 29, and Laguerre Payen, 28 - have pleaded not guilty to charges of conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction and conspiracy to acquire and use anti-aircraft missiles to kill U.S. officers and employees.

Prosecutors allege that with Hussain's encouragement, the men hatched the scheme to blow up two synagogues in the Bronx with remote-control bombs. They also wanted to use surface-to-air missiles to shoot down planes at the Air National Guard base in Newburgh, a city north of New York City.

The men obtained what they thought were explosives and a missile system but were actually inert devices supplied by the FBI, prosecutors said. They were arrested on May 20, 2009, when they went to the synagogues to plant the fake bombs.

The defense claims the men were entrapped by Hussain, a 53-year-old Pakistani immigrant who helped the FBI make hundreds of hours of video and audio tapes of the defendants that are the centerpiece of the case.

Of course! Wouldn't anyone, when enticed, start rattling on about killing Jews? Apparently that is the idea that the defense wants the court to buy.

On tape, Hussain advises Cromitie that to be a good Muslim, he can't kill out of anger toward Jews. However, he says, dying for "the cause" of Islam is righteous.

"It must be in jihad," he says.

How long will the political elites ignore the will of the people? "Poll: Most NYers want developers to move mosque," from AP, August 31:

ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) -- A new poll finds 71 percent of New Yorkers want the developers of an Islamic center and mosque near ground zero to voluntarily move the project.

The Quinnipiac (KWIHN'-uh-pee-ak) University poll released Tuesday finds the same amount of New Yorkers want Attorney General Andrew Cuomo to investigate funding of the project....

The poll finds 53 percent of registered voters feel the Muslim developers shouldn't be allowed to build two blocks from ground zero. About the same percentage of voters say they have a right to....

Please join Pamela Geller and me for our rally against the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero on September 11, at 3PM at Park Place and West Broadway in lower Manhattan.

Speakers will include 9/11 family members, former U.S. Ambassador to the UN John Bolton (via video statement); Dutch freedom fighter Geert Wilders (LIVE!); journalist Andrew Breitbart (either live or via video stream); NY Senate candidate Gary Berntsen; war hero and NC Congressional candidate Ilario Pantano; nationally syndicated conservative talk show host Mike Gallagher; actress and activist Susan Olsen (Cindy Brady on TV's Brady Bunch); NY Congressional candidate and 9/11 first responder Michael Grimm; Muslim Iranian activist Ray Kafi; Coptic Christian activist Joseph Nassralla; Jordan Sekulow of the ACLJ, other freedom fighters and proud Americans.

September 11 is a solemn day, and rally will be as solemn as the occasion warrants. We will begin with a brief memorial service for the victims of the 9/11 jihad attack. A rabbi and a minister will offer prayers for the victims' families and for our nation.

Some have criticized our decision to hold the rally on September 11 itself. But when we saw that Daisy Khan, one of the leaders of the Park 51/Cordoba Initiative group that is behind the mosque, said that they intended to break ground for the Ground Zero mosque on September 11, 2011, we believed that it was important for us to reclaim the date of September 11 from these deceptive Islamic supremacists. We determined to take a stand to help ensure that that date will forever stand as an occasion of American mourning and American resolve -- not as a commemoration of an Islamic jihad victory.

As befits a solemn rally on a date that should stand forever as a symbol of America's determination to defend freedom and justice, we urge all those planning to attend not to bring inflammatory signs. These can and will be used by the Leftist tools of Islamic supremacism in the media to smear our rally as a gathering of racists and hatemongers. Remember why we are there: to stand for those who fell on that terrible day, and to declare that no victory mosque will deface the site where they fell. Your signs, if you choose to bring any at all, should be positive affirmations of American values, free of obscenities, epithets, gratuitous insults, racial references, and the like. Do not by your signs, your words, or your actions dishonor the dead and give ammunition to the enemies of freedom.

Join us. And when you do, keep in mind where we are, and why we are there.

Our expenses for this are enormous. The staging and video screen for the speakers who will be joining us remotely costs over $12,000 alone. We also have to hire a large number of security guards: our speakers need to be guarded from the proponents of "tolerance" and "multiculturalism." Both of us have received recent, specific death threats from the supporters of the "moderate" Ground Zero mosque. And we need people patrolling through the crowd, ejecting plants and agitators trying to create an incident that the Leftist media can exploit to tar opponents of the mosque as racists and bigots. We need money for posters, fliers, press releases, food and lodging for speakers, and more.

It's a massive undertaking, and we need your help. Our total expenses for this rally could exceed $50,000. Politico is answering Nancy Pelosi's authoritarian, un-American call to investigate opponents of the mosque, and is nosing around our finances -- all they'll discover is that we have no huge donations, and are relying on the support of free Americans to make this rally a reality. Please consider giving $100. If we could find just 500 people who could each give that amount, we would be able to meet most or all of our expenses. If you can't give $100, please give what you can and what you think this cause warrants. Donations to Jihad Watch will be devoted to the mosque rally, and are tax-deductible.

Make your tax-deductible donation here. Supporters from outside the United States can donate through Paypal.

Thank you for your stand for liberty.

But deep down they really, really want peace. "Four killed as terrorists open fire near Kiryat Arba," by Yaakov Katz for the Jerusalem Post, August 31:

Victims, shot while driving, include 2 men, 2 women, one reportedly pregnant; attack comes before Netanyahu and Abbas set to meet in Washington for peace talks.

Four Israelis were killed Tuesday night in a devastating shooting attack in the West Bank believed to have been aimed at torpedoing the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks set to kick off on Wednesday in Washington DC.

The four, from the settlement of Beit Hagai, were driving near the entrance of Kiryat Arba when they came under heavy gunfire. The IDF was investigating two possibilities - that Palestinian terrorists had laid an ambush alongside the road or that the shots were fired from a passing car....

The four were two couples - one aged 25 and the other 40. One of the woman was pregnant. According to eyewitness reports, the terrorists succeeded in hitting the passengers in their initial fire but then approached the car and shot them [sic] occupants at close range....

"Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war...When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them....If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them." -- Muhammad (Sahih Muslim 4294)

Gaddafi invited Europe to accept Islam yesterday. Now he has asked it to pay the jizya. Will he follow through with the third option as well?

"Gaddafi: Europe will 'turn black' unless EU pays Libya £4bn a year," by Nick Squires in the Telegraph, August 31 (thanks to Lazybuddha):

Col Muammar Gaddafi has warned that Europe runs the risk of turning "black" unless the EU pays Libya at least €5 billion (£4.1 billion) a year to block the arrival of illegal immigrants from Africa.

His remarks, made during a controversial three day visit to Italy, were condemned as "unacceptable blackmail" by Italian MPs, who likened the demand to the protection money that mafia gangs demand from businesses....

Jizya is a much more apt analogy.

A month after the Hamas-linked Islamic supremacist hate group CAIR tried to intimidate the FBI into apologizing for inviting me to speak in Virginia some time ago, Politico noticed the story and asked the FBI about it. The FBI, which is on to CAIR, wouldn't throw the wolves any red meat.

"FBI defends invitation to Islam critic," by Ben Smith at Politico, August 31:

The FBI is defending its invitation to a prominent critic of Islam in America, who is also one of the leaders of the fight to stop a downtown Manhattan mosque and Islamic Center.

The Council on American Islamic Relations complained late last month that Robert Spencer, who runs the Jihad Watch site and is co-founder of Stop the Islamization of America, had spoken to the Tidewater Joint Terrorism Task Force, a combination of state, federal, and local law enforcement centered in Norfolk, Virginia. 

Spencer, along with his confrontational stand toward the New York project, has long been at odds with Muslim leaders for alleging  links between American Muslim leaders and extremism. He has also been a critic of the religion of Islam itself, suggesting that the historical Mohammed, for instance, did not exist, and that the portrayal of him in the Qaran [sic] is of a "con man."

Highly compressed and tendentious. A fictional con man? This is what happens when ideologically biased reporters in a hurry try to summarize positions they don't understand.

"Our nation's law enforcement personnel should not receive training from the head of a hate group that seeks to demonize Islam and to prevent American Muslims from exercising their rights as citizens," said CAIR National Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper, who also noted that Spencer and blogger Pamela Geller recently published a book subtitled, "The Obama Administration's War on America."

But the chief division for the Norfolk FBI field office, Phil Mann, defended the invitation to Spencer.

"We invite speakers who represent a variety of viewpoints and the special agent in charge of the Norfolk office has invited local Muslim leaders to speak to his staff.  That doesn’t mean we enodrse [sic] our [sic] adopt the view of any particular speaker," Mann said. "Broad knowledge is essential for us to better understand and respond to the threats that we face. Knowledge also helps us defeat ignorance and strengthen relationships with the diverse communites that we serve."  [...]

Spencer responded to a question about CAIR's attack with a link to his own press release on the matter, dismissing CAIR as a "hate group" and citing praise of his work from prominent conservatives. 

Smith doesn't tell his readers, of course, that CAIR operatives have repeatedly refused to denounce Hamas and Hizballah as terrorist groups. Nor does he mention that CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case. Or that several of its former officials have been convicted of various crimes related to jihad terror. Or that two of its other officials have made Islamic supremacist statements. Nor does he mention that CAIR also was involved in the Flying Imams' intimidation suit against the passengers who reported their suspicious behavior.

CAIR's attempt to intimidate the FBI and JTTF and dictate their choice of speakers contained numerous false charges, defamation, distortions, and outright lies about me, SIOA, and Pamela Geller.

CAIR has a long record of duplicity and deception. Although it has received millions of dollars in donations from foreign Islamic entities, it has not registered as a foreign agent as required by the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), despite spreading Islamic supremacist propaganda within the United States.

Although it presents itself as a civil rights group, CAIR actually has numerous links to Islamic supremacist and jihad groups. CAIR founders Omar Ahmad and Niwad Awad (who still serves as CAIR's executive director) were present at a Hamas planning meeting in Philadelphia in 1993 where they and other Hamas operatives conspired to raise funds for Hamas and to promote jihad in the Middle East. CAIR has steadfastly refused to denounce Hamas and Hizballah as terrorist groups.

Several former CAIR officials have been convicted of various crimes related to jihad terror:

* Ghassan Elashi, founder of CAIR's Texas chapter, in 2009 received a 65-year prison sentence for funneling over $12 million from the Islamic charity known as the Holy Land Foundation to the jihad terrorist group Hamas, which is responsible for murdering hundreds of Israeli civilians
* Mousa Abu Marzook, a former CAIR official, was in 1995 designated by the U.S. government in 1995 as a "terrorist and Hamas leader." He now is a Hamas leader in Syria.
* Randall Royer, CAIR's former civil rights coordinator, in 2004 began serving a 20-year prison sentence for aiding al-Qaida and the Taliban against American troops in Afghanistan and recruiting for Lashkar e-Taiba, the jihadist group responsible for the 2008 Mumbai jihad massacres.
* Bassem Khafagi, CAIR's former community relations director, was arrested for involvement with the Islamic Assembly of North America, which was linked to al-Qaida. After pleading guilty to visa and bank fraud charges, Khafagi was deported.
* Rabih Haddad, a former CAIR fundraiser, was deported for his work with the Global Relief Foundation (which he co-founded), a terror-financing organization.

In 1998 Omar Ahmad, CAIR's co-founder and longtime Board Chairman, said: "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."

After he received unwelcome publicity as a result of this statement, Ahmad denied saying it, several years after the fact. However, the original reporter, Lisa Gardiner of the Fremont Argus, stands by her story.

CAIR's spokesman Ibrahim Hooper once said: "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."

So I asked Smith why he didn't tell his readers any of this. He responded by saying that he already had told his readers about CAIR, just yesterday, in fact -- and directed me to this piece, which, as you'll see, says nothing about CAIR's Hamas ties or anything else, but instead actually touts CAIR, weirdly, as an "alternative" to Hamas. Smith explained in an email to me: "I understand that you're asking me why I didn't restate the entire case against CAIR, and their response, your response to them, and so on, in my blog item. This is a complaint of a form I get five or ten times a day. I write a blog, and mostly take little bites of stories. I was writing a small item about your appearance -- and your prominence around the mosque issue, and your stance toward obama [sic], make that of modest interest to me, and to readers in general I think, beyond the context of CAIR's complaint -- to speak to the FBI. There are a lot of things I don't write every day, and the history and controversies around CAIR were, indeed, among them."

Every day, or any day. Par for the course for the mainstream media.

Compassion. "90-year-old Saudi to get 100 lashes," from Emirates 24/7, August 31 (thanks to Twostellas):

A 90-year-old Saudi man will be lashed 100 times with the whip after he was convicted of smashing the windscreen of a judge's car to retaliate against a previous verdict against him, a local newspaper reported on Tuesday.

The court in the central town of Taif found the old man guilty of damaging the judge's car while he was preaching at a local mosque during open-air Friday prayers, Sahafaonline Arabic language paper said.

The man told court that he had done so in reprisal for an earlier sentence against him by the judge, the paper said. "The court sentenced the man to 100 lashes and seven days in prison," it added.

This is a political statement as much as a religious one, since Islam has and always has had a political character. Another take on this story. "Europe should convert to Islam: Gaddafi," from AFP, August 31:

ROME: Libyan leader Moamer Gaddafi's visit to Rome to mark the second anniversary of a friendship treaty with former coloniser Italy stumbled into controversy on Monday after he said Europe should convert to Islam.

Gaddafi made the comments on Sunday during a lecture to a group of 500 young women hired and paid by an agency to attend his lecture.

"Islam should become the religion of all of Europe," one of the women quoted Gaddafi as saying in the Italian press.

The agency paid the women, mainly students who hire themselves out for advertising of publicity events, 70 or 80 euros (90 or 100 dollars) to attend and said it would not pay girls who gave their names to the press.

It also told them to dress conservatively for the lectures.

About 200 women on Monday gathered at the Libyan cultural centre in Rome to attend a second lecture.

One of the women present said that Gaddafi had said at the gathering that "women are more respected in Libya than in the West" and offered assistance in finding Libyan husbands.

"Islam is the last religion and if we are to have a single faith then it has to be in Mohammed," he said, according to the participant....

In Human Events this morning, I explore what might be behind Bloomberg's spurious claim of the moral high ground in the debate over the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero:

[...] And in the spring of 2009, Bloomberg opened a news bureau in Abu Dhabi, joining its existing offices not only in Dubai, but in Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia. And Bloomberg Chairman and Managing Director Peter T. Grauer announced plans to expand Dubai operations still more: "Central to our growth strategy is the doubling of staff strength in Dubai office, our 10th regional hub, from 48 to 100 people within a year.... We will be investing not just in more people but also in infrastructure to support clients in the region."

Grauer revealed that while Bloomberg was taking a bath worldwide, business was booming in the Middle East: "Despite the difficulties faced by the financial sector in the economic turmoil, our terminal sales in the region grew by 2% in the past nine months, when globally we faced a major setback." Khaleej Times reported that "the New York-based company has drawn up a five-year plan that will see it achieving a two-fold increase in revenue from the Middle East region by 2014."

Imagine how quickly that revenue stream would dry up if Bloomberg sided with the people whom Rauf and other leaders of the Ground Zero mosque initiative are busy smearing as "Islamophobes" and "bigots." When his company is doing poorly worldwide except in the Middle East, it couldn't have been hard for Bloomberg to see on which side his bread was buttered.

Business decisions are business decisions. But if Bloomberg was making a business decision when he came out so strongly in favor of the mega-mosque, he would have been more honest, and admirable, if he had just said so. He might even have retained some respectability if he had simply said that his business commitments in the Middle East made for a conflict of interest, and recused himself from the debate over the Ground Zero mega-mosque. But that conflict of interest does make his moral dudgeon over the mosque opponents appear hollow and hypocritical. It isn't easy to be a saint, and it's even harder when the material rewards for striking a saintly pose are as ample as they are for Saint Bloomberg of Brookline.

There is more.

Said one lawmaker: "If I went to Tripoli to demand that Libyans convert to Christianity, what are the odds that I would return in one piece?"

More on this story. "Italians attack Muammar Gaddafi over Islam comments," by Nick Squires for the Telegraph, August 30:

Italians have reacted with indignation after Muammar Gaddafi lectured 200 young actresses and models on the superiority of Islam, a day after saying that Europeans should all become Muslim.

Silvio Berlusconi's increasingly close relationship with Col Gaddafi is becoming a source of embarrassment for the Italian prime minister, according to opposition MPs and even members of the government.

On Monday, the Libyan leader recruited the women through a modelling agency to join him and Mr Berlusconi, in viewing a photography exhibition at a Rome cultural institute which traced historical links between the two countries.

Telling them that Islam was the "ultimate religion", Gaddafi insisted that "if you want to believe in a single faith then it must be that of Mohammed," according to one of the women who sat through the lecture.

Afterwards the two leaders were due to attend a cavalry school to watch a display of riding involving 30 thoroughbred Berber horses imported specially from Libya, followed by a state dinner.

On Sunday night, during an encounter with 500 young women hired by the same agency, Col Gaddafi handed out copies of the Koran and told them that Europe should convert to Islam.

"If I went to Tripoli to demand that Libyans convert to Christianity, what are the odds that I would return in one piece?" said Rocco Buttiglione, the president of a centre-Right Catholic party, the UDC.

Italy was becoming a "Disneyland"-style theme park for Gaddafi's "senile vanities", said Fare Futuro, a political foundation linked to Gianfranco Fini, a senior government power broker with whom Mr Berlusconi recently had a dramatic falling out.

Rosy Bindi, an MP from the main opposition party, said that the spectacle of hundreds of Italian women being bussed in at Col Gaddafi's whim was a "humiliating violation" of their dignity.

And mighty creepy.

Who's vetting the former inmates for security risks, or jihadist indoctrination while in prison? Or would that also be Islamophobic?

"Muslim extremists plotting to paralyze rail networks during London Olympics," from Asian News International, August 30 (thanks to Twostellas):

London, Aug 30 : Terrorist outfits are plotting a rail mayhem to coincide with the London 2012 Olympics, it has been revealed.

Muslim prisoners are getting calls from terrorist masterminds instructing them to do Trackwork courses so that they use a prison-training scheme to sabotage train networks from the inside, reports the Daily Star.

It has been reported that the jailed extremists are joining NVQ courses run by the training firm Trackwork, which is backed by Network Rail.

They are expected to use their qualification to land jobs maintaining Britain''s railways after their release.

Within a period of six months in 2007, 500 ex-cons started rail jobs and 400 stuck with them.

A 39-year-old inmate, who has been released from Lindholme Prison, claims they see it as a perfect way to infiltrate the system and mount a terror attack.

"Many prisoners have mobile phones. And in the 14 months I was inside I heard six Muslims getting calls from terrorist masterminds instructing them to do Trackwork courses," the paper quoted the inmate as saying.

"I heard the 2012 Olympics talked about. I didn''t hear anything about blowing up trains, but I did hear of plans to halt the network. They thought bringing the network to a standstill would cause more devastation than actually killing people," he added.

The Network Rail said providing jobs to the released inmates was the biggest factor in stopping them re-offending and costing taxpayers billions.

On September 11, 2010, we're going to stand for America.

Don't spit in our face and tell us it's raining. Over seventy percent of Americans oppose the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero. We oppose it because it is an insult, an offense to the memories of those who were killed in the name of Islam at the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. We oppose it because it will be understood all over the Islamic world as a victory mosque marking that heinous mass-murder nine years ago. And we oppose it because the mosque leaders have an ever-lengthening record of dishonesty -- dishonesty about their intentions, their funding, their support for jihad terrorism, and more.

We oppose the mega-mosque because we believe in the freedom of speech, which the Ground Zero mosque Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf has called for restricting. We stand for the freedom of conscience and the equality of rights of all people before the law, which the Sharia that Rauf defends and propagates would deny to free people.

A giant mosque looking down at the cemetery of Ground Zero from the location of a building that was partially destroyed in the 9/11 Islamic jihad attack on America is wrong. It is indecent. The Burlington Coat Factory building, severely damaged when part of one of the 9/11 planes crashed through its roof, is Ground Zero.

On June 6, we organized a protest against the mega-mosque that was attended by 8,000 to 10,000 people. And now we're inviting you to join us again on September 11 at 3PM, at the corner of Park Place and West Broadway in lower Manhattan. We chose September 11 because reports have indicated that the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf and Daisy Khan said that they would break ground on the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks: September 11, 2011.

We will honor the victims and all Americans, and fill Ground Zero with patriots. We will begin with a brief memorial service honoring the victims, and are not starting our rally until the morning memorial services for the victims are concluded.

Our rally will be on September 11 at 3PM in lower Manhattan, at the corner of Park Place and West Broadway.

Speakers will include 9/11 family members, former U.S. Ambassador to the UN John Bolton; Dutch freedom fighter Geert Wilders (LIVE!); journalist Andrew Breitbart (either live or via video stream); NY Senate candidate Gary Berntsen; war hero and NC Congressional candidate Ilario Pantano; actress and activist Susan Olsen (Cindy Brady on TV's Brady Bunch); NY Congressional candidate and 9/11 first responder Michael Grimm; Coptic Christian activist Joseph Nassralla; a spokesman for the ACLJ, and other freedom fighters and proud Americans.

Our expenses for this are enormous. The staging and video screen for the speakers who will be joining us remotely costs over $12,000 alone. We also have to hire a large number of security guards: our speakers need to be guarded from the proponents of "tolerance" and "multiculturalism." Both of us have received recent, specific death threats from the supporters of the "moderate" Ground Zero mosque. And we need people patrolling through the crowd, ejecting plants and agitators trying to create an incident that the Leftist media can exploit to tar opponents of the mosque as racists and bigots. We need money for posters, fliers, press releases, food and lodging for speakers, and more.

It's a massive undertaking, and we need your help. Our total expenses for this rally could exceed $50,000. Politico is answering Nancy Pelosi's authoritarian, un-American call to investigate opponents of the mosque, and is nosing around our finances -- all they'll discover is that we have no huge donations, and are relying on the support of free Americans to make this rally a reality. Please consider giving $100. If we could find just 500 people who could each give that amount, we would be able to meet most or all of our expenses. If you can't give $100, please give what you can and what you think this cause warrants. Donations to Jihad Watch will be devoted to the mosque rally, and are tax-deductible.

Make your tax-deductible donation here.

Thank you for your stand for liberty.

Yours in defense of freedom,
Pamela Geller
Robert Spencer

A very revealing AP puff piece on the horrors that "moderate" Muslims are supposedly experiencing in America today. "NYC mosque debate will shape American Islam," by Rachel Zoll for AP, August 29 (thanks to all who sent this in):

NEW YORK - Adnan Zulfiqar, a graduate student, former U.S. Senate aide and American-born son of Pakistani immigrants, will soon give the first khutbah, or sermon, of the fall semester at the University of Pennsylvania. His topic has presented itself in the daily headlines and blog posts over the disputed mosque near ground zero.

What else could he choose, he says, after a summer remembered not for its reasoned debate, but for epithets, smears, even violence?

And whose fault is that, exactly? Mosque supporters have consistently smeared mosque opponents as racists, bigots, hatemongers, "Islamophobes" -- the usual array of charges levied at those who are leading the fight to raise awareness of the jihad and Islamic supremacism, but it was a new thing to see these charges levied promiscuously at the 70% of Americans who oppose the mosque.

As he writes, Zulfiqar frets over the potential fallout and what he and other Muslim leaders can do about it. Will young Muslims conclude they are second-class citizens in the U.S. now and always?

No one, of course, is saying the Muslims are or should be second-class citizens in the U.S. We have raised legitimate questions about the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf's support for Sharia and Hamas, and about the symbolism of the Ground Zero mosque as a triumphal mosque. None of this has anything to do with Muslims being second-class citizens. It is simply asking that they accord to non-Muslims the consideration and respect that they demand for themselves. It is asking that they not engage in activity that amounts to sedition, in working to replace the Constitution with a system of laws that would deny basic liberties, and asking law enforcement and government authorities to be cognizant of the nature of Sharia and how it is at variance with those liberties.

"They're already struggling to balance, `I'm American, I'm Muslim,' and their ethnic heritage. It's very disconcerting," said Zulfiqar, 32, who worked for former U.S. Sen. Max Cleland, a Georgia Democrat, and now serves Penn's campus ministry. "A controversy like this can make them radical or become more conservative in how they look at things or how they fit into the American picture."...

Threat noted. But why would it do that? Islamic supremacists and Leftists know: no matter how much they lie about the words, deeds, and positions on various questions of mosque opponents, and no matter how much they defame and smear them, those who oppose the mosque are never, never going to strap bombs on themselves and blow themselves up at the next hand-wringing meeting about "Islamophobia." In other words, some people, no matter how hard you push them, never become "radicalized." Why is it that adherents of the Religion of Peace who supposedly reject the version of Islam of Al-Qaeda and its ilk as a twisting and hijacking of their peaceful religion might nevertheless adopt that version of Islam as their own if they believe that some people are being mean to them?

Eboo Patel, an American Muslim leader and founder of Interfaith Youth Core, a Chicago nonprofit that promotes community service and religious pluralism, said Muslims are unfortunately experiencing what all immigrant groups endured in the U.S. before they were fully accepted as American. Brandeis University historian Jonathan D. Sarna has noted that Jews faced a similar backlash into the 1800s when they tried to build synagogues, which were once banned in New York....

Yes, yes, of course. You may recall from the histories of those days that Jews in New York loudly proclaimed that they were there to take over, and numerous Jews in New York engaged in terror plotting. You remember the Fort Hood jihad shooting, the Arkansas recruiting center jihad shooting, the Christmas underwear bomb jihad attempt, the Times Square jihad car bomb attempt, the Fort Dix jihad plot, the North Carolina jihad plot, the Seattle jihad shooting, the JFK Airport jihad plot, and on and on. No, wait! Those weren't plots by 19th-century Jews in New York, but by 21st-century Muslims all over the U.S.! My mistake!

And no, the point is not that all Muslims in America are responsible for these and other jihad plots. The point is that when the Ground Zero imam and so many other Muslim leaders support Sharia, refuse to condemn Hamas and/or other jihad terror groups, and are manifestly dishonest, it makes the demand that Americans assume that they are different from the Muslims who were responsible for those jihad plots seem like sheer bullying, and a refusal to engage the legitimate concerns that people have about Sharia and the intentions of the Ground Zero mosque organizers.

Patel believes American Muslims are on the same difficult but inevitable path toward integration.

"I'm not saying this is going to be happy," Patel said. "But I'm extremely optimistic."

Yet, the overwhelming feeling is that the controversy has caused widespread damage that will linger for years.

No, all the jihad terror, all the supremacist declarations, all the lies and all the smears have caused widespread damage that will linger for years. And the Muslim advocacy groups behind the lies and smears, such as CAIR, just don't care about that damage -- because they can turn around after causing it and exploit any resulting "backlash" to reinforce their claim to privileged victim status.

American Muslim leaders say the furor has emboldened opposition groups to resist new mosques around the country, at a time when there aren't enough mosques or Islamic schools to serve the community....

Actually there are large mosques being built all over, for Muslim communities that have neither the numbers nor the money to sustain them. And that, too, raises questions that if you dare to ask, you're accused of "Islamophobia."

U.S. Muslims who have championed democracy and religious tolerance question what they've accomplished. If the "extremist" label can be hung on someone as apparently liberal as the imam at the center of the outcry, Feisal Abdul Rauf, then any Muslim could come under attack. Feisal supports women's rights, human rights and interfaith outreach.

Oh, and Hamas.

"The joke is on moderate Muslims," said Muqtedar Khan, a University of Delaware political scientist and author of "American Muslims, Bridging Faith and Freedom." "What's the point if you're going to be treated the same way as a radical? If I get into trouble are they going to treat me like I'm a supporter of al-Qaeda?"...

What's the point? Did he really ask that? How about this for a point: Muslims should not support Al-Qaeda because of human decency. Because of respect for human life. Because of the importance of human rights. Because the "radicals" are perpetrating great evil, murdering innocent people and working for the subjugation of women and non-Muslims, and the extinguishing of the freedom of speech and the freedom of conscience. And apparently all that is just fine with Muqtedar Khan, if you make him angry.

That's "moderation"?

Last Wednesday evening I debated Daveed Gartenstein-Ross of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies on Crane Durham's Nothing But Truth show. The debate topic was "Is Islam a religion of peace," and the debate centered upon the nature and existence of moderate Islam.

You can find a podcast of the debate here. It was a civil debate, albeit characterized by some sharp disagreements, and I note its civility with surprise and gratitude to Daveed and Crane.

I say that the civility came as a surprise to me because I'm so used to the Leftist/Islamic supremacist tactic of demonizing their opposition. Just the previous night, at an event in Washington, D.C., where Pamela Geller and I discussed our book The Post-American Presidency, during the question-and-answer period a man angrily demanded to know why I was lying about Islam, and persistently tried to shout me down as I explained, with copious specific references to the Qur'an and Hadith, as well as to numerous Islamic scholars, that I wasn't lying at all.

This is what they do -- and the recent and relentless media campaign against both Pamela and me is an example of it. There is no more discussion, no more give-and-take of ideas -- instead, Leftists and Islamic supremacists resort time and time again to their time-tested weapons of defamation, ridicule, and libel. It only manifests their utter intellectual bankruptcy, and if they think they're going to intimidate me into stopping what I'm doing (since they know that their demonization could inspire their more bloody-minded coreligionists to action), they're in for a surprise. However, they should be on notice: I am not going to give sanction in any way to their lies and smears. The truth will continue to come out here, as long as I am breathing.

And yet in a fine Orwellian twist, only opponents of people like Cromitie, a convert to and Misunderstander of the Religion of Peace, are called "hatemongers" and "bigots." Of course, they will say that it is because we tar all Muslims with the crimes of people like Cromitie, and pretend that they are all just like him. But of course this is a false charge. What they want to divert attention away from is the fact that people like Cromitie are motivated in their Jew-hatred by passages of the Qur'an such as the one that says that Jews are the worst enemies of the Muslims (5:82). They don't want you to know the roots within Islamic texts and teachings of jihad violence and Islamic supremacism, and so they claim that those who call attention to those roots are motivated by hatred and bigotry, and hope that the ignorant will believe that the roots of that violence and supremacism are elsewhere -- specifically in the sins of the West -- and that only "hatemongers" say otherwise.

"Plot suspect 'hated Jews,'" by Bruce Golding for the New York Post, August 28 (thanks to Weasel Zippers):

The alleged ringleader in a plot to blow up two Riverdale synagogues "hated Jews and Jewish people," a government informant testified today.

Muslim convert James Cromitie also "hated the American soldiers and the American government," Shahed Hussain said.

"He was full of hate against those subjects," the Pakistani immigrant said in Manhattan federal court....

Gratitude. "Norway 'bomb plot' underscores al-Qaida pitfalls," by Ian Macdougall for Associated Press, August 29 (thanks to all who sent this in):

OSLO, Norway - When police arrested a suspected al-Qaida cell in Norway last month they turned up the makings of a bomb lab tucked away in a nondescript Oslo apartment building.

An Associated Press investigation shows that authorities learned early on about the alleged cell by intercepting e-mails from an al-Qaida operative in Pakistan and -- thanks to those early warnings -- were able to secretly replace a key bomb-making ingredient with a harmless liquid when one of the suspects ordered it at an Oslo pharmacy.

Officials say the suspected plot against this quiet Nordic country was one of three planned attacks on the West hatched in the rugged mountains of northwest Pakistan by some of al-Qaida's most senior leaders. The other plots targeted the bustling New York subway and a shopping mall in Manchester, England....

The Norwegian plot's undoing, and that of its sibling plots in the U.S. and Britain, casts light on the potential pitfalls of al-Qaida's changing tactics in the decade since the massive, highly organized Sept. 11 attacks. In recent years, al-Qaida has grown increasingly decentralized and nimble, relying on amateurs to recruit local cells and carry out smaller-level attacks without extensive planning and hands-on training.

While such plots are harder to detect, they are also harder to manage -- and the slack remote control they often require leaves greater room for operational error and sloppy tradecraft.

All three plots were thwarted after suspected operatives exchanged e-mails -- sometimes poorly coded ones -- in and out of Pakistan.

Authorities say the ringleader of the Norwegian plot is 39-year-old Mikael Davud, an Uighur who came to Norway in 1999 as part of a U.N. refugee program and then became a Norwegian citizen eight years later. Uighurs, a largely Muslim ethnic group in China, claim oppression at the hands of authorities there.

Davud was arrested July 8 along with suspected accomplices Shawan Sadek Saeed Bujak Bujak, a 37-year-old Iraqi Kurd, and a 31-year-old Uzbek national, David Jakobsen. Both are permanent residents of Norway.

The trio denies any connection to terrorist groups....

Fiction? We'll see

As the stealth jihad becomes more obvious, my 2008 book Stealth Jihad is starting to look prescient to many who dismissed this threat at the time the book came out. And Newsweek, which famously called for surrender to the jihad back in March 2009, can't have that. "The Misinformants: What 'stealth jihad' doesn't mean," by Lisa Miller for Newsweek, August 28:

Here is the latest semantic assault from the party that brought you "Islamo-facism" (circa 2005) and "Axis of Evil" (2002). The term "stealth jihad" is suddenly voguish among politically ambitious right wingers who see President Obama's approach to terrorism as insufficient. If it sounds like a phrase from a military-fantasy summer blockbuster, that's on purpose: in its cartoonish bad-guy foreignness, "stealth jihad" attempts to make the terrorist threat broader and thus more nefarious than it already is. The only thing scarier than an invisible, homicidal, suicidal enemy with a taste for world domination is one who's sneaking up on you. In the words of former speaker of the House Newt Gingrich at a July speech at the American Enterprise Institute, "stealth jihad" is an effort "to replace Western civilization with a radical imposition of Sharia."

The term wasn't Gingrich's invention. It's the title of a two-year-old book by Robert Spencer, whose hyperventilating antiterror blog, Jihad Watch, is cited and circulated widely on the far right.

"Hyperventilating" is good. You see, folks, there isn't really any threat. There really isn't any stealth jihad, or jihad at all. Those who think that there is are just hyperventilating. Of course, among the hyperventilators who imagine an aspiration and effort among Muslims in America to subvert Constitutional freedoms and impose elements of Sharia are these:

"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

But the recent vicious debate over the proposed community center and mosque near Ground Zero gives Gingrich an excuse to use "stealth jihad" and its variants frequently--not just at the AEI but in an interview with this magazine. (In an essay on the conservative Web site Human Events, he referred instead to "creeping sharia.") Gingrich's like-minded peers have seized on the language, too. "Muslim Brotherhood operatives, like [Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the center's founder and leader] are extremely skilled at obscuring ... their true agenda," said Frank Gaffney, founder of the Center for Security Policy, on FOX's Glenn Beck show. "It's part of the stealth jihad."

Words matter, and if you say them often enough and with enough authority, they start to sound true--even if they're not. Abdul Rauf, for instance, has no affiliation with the Muslim Brotherhood and is an "operative" (another nefarious word) only in the sense that running a small, progressive interfaith nonprofit is an "operation."

Actually, on the copyright page of Rauf's book What's Right with Islam, it declares: "This edition was made possible through a joint effort of the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT) and the office of Interfaith and Community Alliance of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). Funding for this project was provided by IIIT." Both IIIT and ISNA are known to be Muslim Brotherhood groups. ISNA is an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation jihad terror funding case involving Hamas, which describes itself as the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine. And Rauf also refuses to denounce Hamas. So maybe he has no affiliation with the Brotherhood, but he hasn't shunned links with it, either.

As for his "stealth jihad," it's virtually impossible to imagine how such an event would--logistically--occur. Would the construction of an Islamic prayer site near Ground Zero inevitably lead American women to wake up one morning and find themselves veiled and confined to their homes? "The term is ever-so-slightly goofy," says Geoffrey Nunberg, a linguist at the University of California, Berkeley. The paranoia conveyed by "stealth jihad" brings to mind the anticommunist campaigns of Sen. Joseph McCarthy in the 1950s, Nunberg adds. Just as McCarthyites imagined a communist behind every lamppost, the word "stealth" conflates all Muslims with terrorists. In a stealth campaign you never know who your friends are.

Also, simply put, foreign words freak people out. "Jihad" and "Sharia" reinforce the sense among Americans that Muslims in general have an unfathomable world view. During World War II, formerly obscure words like "hara-kiri" and "kamikaze," which suggested the "warlike ferocity" of the Japanese, became common parlance, Nunberg says. "There was this sense of being confronted with this hostile, alien culture." The Japanese were "literally demonized," he says....

Actually, there is nothing unfathomable about Sharia, or about the imperative to introduce elements of Sharia into American life. And unless and until Muslim groups in America renounce all aspects of Sharia that are at variance with Constitutional principles and freedoms, and do so in deed, not just in word, then to be concerned that they might be acting to bring Sharia here -- when that's exactly what they say they're doing -- is not paranoia or demonization. It is a concern for and defense of the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, equality of rights for women, and other things that Newsweek just might miss once they're gone.

You remember all those Jewish and Catholic terror attacks. "New York imam: Politics behind mosque opposition," by Brian Murphy for Associated Press, August 29 (thanks to all who sent this in):

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) -- The imam spearheading a proposed Islamic center near the site of the Sept. 11 attacks in New York believes the fierce opposition is closely linked to the U.S. elections in November, according to comments published Monday.

"There is no doubt that the election season has had a major impact upon the nature of the discourse," Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf was quoted by the Abu Dhabi-based newspaper The National in an interview as part of his State Department-funded trip in the Gulf....

Some Republicans running for midterm elections around the United States have used the project as a campaign issue after national conservatives Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin announced their opposition. Kevin Calvey, a Republican running for Congress in Oklahoma, said the Muslim leaders associated with the mosque "are clearly terrorist sympathizers."...

AP doesn't mention, of course, that Rauf has refused to denounce Hamas.

Rauf compared the current struggles facing American Muslims to past religious-based prejudices and attacks against other groups, including Jews and Roman Catholic immigrants.

"And this is why it is important, the issue of radicalism is a threat to all of us," he was quoted as saying. "We have radicals in the Muslim world and we have radicals in the other faith traditions as well."

He said extremists from all faiths "feed off each other and need each other to sustain themselves."

"So we need right now to combat the radical voices. That's the only way we can win this struggle, and establish a peaceful world order, which is what everybody wants and everybody needs," he told the newspaper....

A follow-up to this video (thanks to all who sent this in).

American listeners might take issue with the comments about the First Amendment at 0:37. After all, we know who the dhimmis and useful idiots are because they keep talking, and are free to keep digging a deeper hole for their own credibility. What is most important is that we also remain free to continue calling them out on it. As ever, though, Condell's commentary is passionate, articulate, wide-ranging, and hard-hitting.

Shockingly, Silent Sharif isn't talking about this, either.

More on this story, in which Gamal lost his cool when the imam interviewed below invited the press to a mosque fundraiser. That imam grasps the fact that it's bad for business; is Gamal in too far over his head to care anymore? "Visiting Imam Advises Mosque Developer to Speak," by Linda Schmidt for MyFoxNewYork, August 29 (thanks to D.C. Watson):

MYFOXNY.COM - The imam who presided over a prayer service at the location of a planned Islamic center near Ground Zero says it is not in anyone's best interest for developer Sharif el-Gamal to keep quiet about the project.

Imam Abdallah Adhami says he advised el-Gamal to talk to reporters and to be open about the mosque project and its funding. So far, el-Gamal continues to refuse.

Originally, reporters were invited to attend a prayer service at the Park51 site Friday by the visiting imam. But el-Gamal denied access.

He has hired a pubic [sic] relations adviser, Lawrence Kopp, to do his talking for him, but Kopp isn't talking either -- at least for now. On Friday, Kopp declined an interview with Fox 5.

Meanwhile, el-Gamal released a statement saying "Americans should know that all funding for Park51 will be rigorously vetted by government agencies such as the U.S. Treasury Department."

He is getting support from hip hop mogul Russell Simmons, who has said the mosque should be built. His apartment directly overlooks Ground Zero and artwork in his windows stands for "We Should Co-Exist."

It's probably safe to assume Russell Simmons knows nothing about Sharia, and how it structures "co-existence" between Muslims and non-Muslims.

As for el-Gamal's other real estate holdings, the Buildings Department says an apartment building in Washington Heights has 13 violations and that he owes $21,000 in fines.

The imam also said that el-Gamal raised $10,000 in 15 minutes during Friday's prayer service.

...Again. Once was bizarre enough, but then again, the man is a qualified authority on bizarre behavior. "Gadhafi gives lesson on Islam to young Italians," by Nicole Winfield for the Associated Press, August 29 (thanks to all who sent this in):

ROME -- Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi gave a lesson on Islam and copies of the Quran to a few hundred young Italian women Sunday as he arrived in Rome for his fourth visit in a year.

It was the second time the Libyan leader -- who travels with female bodyguards and fancies himself a self-styled feminist -- had staged such an event for Italian women, who were recruited by a modeling agency and paid an undisclosed sum to attend.

Hope he didn't try to lecture on hairstyling. Anyway, what kind of modeling agency organizes this sort of thing?

Michela, who asked that her last name not be used, told Associated Press Television News that three of the participants converted to Islam on the spot.

Incredibly naïve, or the Gadhafian equivalent to "random" infomercial audience members?

"It was a really beautiful meeting and went very well," she said. "He is very easygoing and he gave us a copy of the Quran. Three girls converted themselves to Islam during the ceremony. It was a beautiful event."

Other participants, though, identifying themselves as Roman Catholics in this overwhelmingly Catholic country, said Gadhafi had urged others to convert and had dismissed Christianity as unimportant.

Last time, he told them: "Convert to Islam. Jesus was sent to the Jews, not for you. Mohammed, on the other hand, was sent for all human beings."

Never you mind that bit about "Go and make disciples of all nations" (Mt. 28:19). Gadhafi doesn't seem to think that's important.

Between 200 and 500 young women attended, arriving 10 buses at the Libyan ambassador's residence just as Gadhafi's plane was landing at Rome's Ciampino airport at the start of a two-day visit.

The visit, amid steadily improving business ties between Libya and its former colonial ruler, also marks the second anniversary of a friendship treaty in which Italy agreed to pay Libya $5 billion as compensation for its 30-year occupation, which ended in 1943.

Remember, this group could qualify for taxpayer-supported public financing. Looks like they need to pony up a little taxpayer support of their own.

Still more on this story. "Mosque big owes 224G tax," by Isabel Vincent and Melissa Klein for the New York Post, August 29 (thanks to all who sent this in):

The mosque developers are tax deadbeats.

Sharif El-Gamal, the leading organizer behind the mosque and community center near Ground Zero, owes $224,270.77 in back property tax on the site, city records show.

El-Gamal's company, 45 Park Place Partners, failed to pay its half-yearly bills in January and July, according to the city Finance Department.

The delinquency is a possible violation of El-Gamal's lease with Con Edison, which owns half of the proposed building site on Park Place. El-Gamal owns the other half but must pay taxes on the entire parcel.

The lease agreement, obtained by The Post, specifies that El-Gamal's company pay taxes on the property and submit receipts to Con Ed.

The utility said it would have to review any possible lease violations.

The late taxes are the latest wrinkle in the controversial plan to put the 15-story mosque near the World Trade Center site.

Before any building can go forward, the developers also must get approval from the MTA because the 2 and 3 subway lines run under a portion of the Park Place property, The Post has learned.

El-Gamal's spokesperson insisted to The Post that the taxes had been paid and that the "subway lines do not pose a problem."

El-Gamal plans to tear down the two buildings on the Park Place site, which housed a Burlington Coat Factory store but have been empty since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, when one was damaged.

The Post revealed this month that El-Gamal owned only half the site. Gamal purchased the lease to the Con Ed property for $700,000 last year when he bought the other building on the site for $4.8 million.

He has told Con Ed he wants to buy the building at 49-51 Park Place, which Con Ed is appraising to determine fair market value.

El-Gamal insisted to The Post that the lease permitted him to demolish the property at any time.

But the lease agreement says El-Gamal must provide Con Ed with a copy of a financing commitment or other proof that money is available to "cover the estimated cost of demolition of the building and construction of the new building."

The thuggish, in-your-face aspect of the desire to build a mosque at Ground Zero has by now been amply documented: belying their claims to be building it only to affect reconciliation and peace, mosque leaders have smeared all opponents of the mosque as racists and bigots and refused all entreaties to put their mosque elsewhere.

And the thuggishness goes way back, apparently. The waiter-turned-millionaire developer (a transformation not yet satisfactorily explained) Sharif El-Gamal has said that "when you beat up someone physically you get exercise & stress relief," and it appears he spoke from experience. And the questions about his finances grow more urgent.

More on this story. "Park51 developer Sharif El-Gamal has a history of run-ins with the law," by James Fanelli in the New York Daily News, August 28 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

Years before his latest real-estate project ignited an uproar, Sharif El-Gamal racked up at least seven run-ins with the law, including a bust for patronizing a prostitute. "I regret many things that I did in my youth. I have not always led a perfect life," El-Gamal, 37, said in a statement to the Daily News.

His most recent arrest was for a Sept. 10, 2005, assault on a barber who sublet a Manhattan apartment from El-Gamal's brother, Sammy.

The brothers and another man went to the apartment that afternoon to retrieve back rent from Mark Vassiliev, criminal and civil court records show.

El-Gamal allegedly cursed at Vassiliev, called him the Arabic curse word "sharmouta" and punched him in the face, breaking his nose and cheekbones.

When he was arrested, El-Gamal denied he socked Vassiliev, but conceded, "[Vassiliev's] face could have run into my hand," court papers say.

"I am in real estate. I'm rich. Why would I do this? Why would I jeopardize my career? I'm not a thug," he told cops.

Really?

He was charged with misdemeanor assault and harassment. Charges were dropped in 2007 after Vassiliev sued.

El-Gamal eventually settled the civil case for $15,000 - and the 2008 negotiations provided a glimpse into his finances.

Vassiliev's lawyer, Erik L. Gray, said there was no indication El-Gamal had assets beyond a $1.1 million upper West Side pad he owned with his wife.

Even after El-Gamal inked the deal, he was slow to pay and the matter ended up in mediation - where his lawyer, Marshall Isaacs, told Gray there were money problems.

"He had told me [El-Gamal] was struggling financially and was having trouble coming up with the payment," Gray said. "It was based on the fact that he was in real estate and the real estate market was depressed."

El-Gamal agreed to fork over $1,360 in interest and fees but paid up in installments, Gray said.

If his 2008 cries of poverty were genuine, El-Gamal experienced a dramatic reversal of fortune a year later, scoring a $39 million mortgage to buy a W. 27th St. commercial building.

He had a partner, Egyptian-born businessman Hisham Elzanaty, who co-signed the loan. Elzanaty denied to discuss his dealings with El-Gamal.

In a deposition for the Vassiliev suit, El-Gamal testified he worked as a waiter from 1997 to 2001 when he "moved onto greener pastures."

In 2002, he became a commercial real estate broker and started his own company, Soho Properties, a year later.

El-Gamal began amassing a property portfolio in 2007, snatching up and managing apartment buildings in Harlem and Washington Heights.

He bought the property where he plans to build a $100 million Islamic cultural center, two blocks from Ground Zero, for nearly $5 million in July 2009.

The son of a bank executive, El-Gamal has said he turned to Islam after 9/11 and that his religious awakening followed a troubled youth.

He pleaded guilty in 1994, 1998 and 1999 to disorderly conduct in Manhattan....

The thug who lost his cool yesterday, snapping at the press and acting as if he had something to hide, apparently has a lot to hide.

Why would the Ground Zero mosque proponents employ what is, by all appearances, the worst possible man to conduct a supposedly open and transparent fundraising process? Obviously, it should call their sincerity into question. "No Answers from Developer of Mosque Near Ground Zero," by Charles Leaf for Fox NewYork, August 25:

MYFOXNY.COM - While Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf has dominated headlines about the proposed cultural center and mosque near Ground Zero in lower Manhattan, developer Sharif el-Gamal, 37, is actually the central figure behind the project.

Yet just a few years ago, el-Gamal was waiting tables in some fancy Manhattan restaurants.

Naturally, we wanted to talk to Sharif el-Gamal to learn more about the man and his plans, but apparently he didn't want to meet us. We made repeated requests for a sit down interview with him, left him multiple voice mail messages and he never returned any of our calls. We even went to his office and talked to colleagues, but we were turned away. He left us with no choice: We had to go find him.

El-Gamal is an American Muslim reportedly born to a Polish mother and an Egyptian father. He was raised in Brooklyn.

Today, el-Gamal's company, Soho Properties, owns the building where arguably the most controversial mosque in the world will be built. He bought the old Burlington Coat Factory building at 45 Park Place, two blocks from the World Trade Center site, for $4.8 million in cash in 2009.

We asked him where he got the money to put down on the property, but he stayed silent when we approached him.

His newfound notoriety was an extraordinary leap from his not-too-distant days as a waiter at Serafina, a trendy Upper East Side eatery, and at Michael's, an upscale celebrity-filled restaurant packed with a veritable who's who in media.

El-Gamal's former restaurant bosses and co-workers told Fox 5 that the young and opportunistic el-Gamal thrived on the buzz from bumping elbows with marquee names and relished the opportunity to schmooze the high dollar clientele.

"Customers would come in and ask for him, he had his regulars," said Cosmo Sammarone, a Serafina waiter.

El-Gamal left Serafina in 2002 and started selling real estate. But in just a year, he went from broker to business owner and launched his own real estate company, Soho Properties, in 2003. Records show he is the president and chief executive officer.

A long-time associate of his says el-Gamal isn't quite who he seems to be. The associate asked Fox 5 to protect his identity because he fears retribution.

"I was pretty much in shock when I saw him on the news as the developer," the associate said. "What I can say about Sharif is nothing good.

He said el-Gamal liked living in the fast lane, meeting celebrities in the restaurants were he worked, and partying with them at nightclubs.

"Very persuasive, master manipulator," he said of el-Gamal.

Today, el-Gamal's holdings included at least four buildings in Manhattan, including the site near Ground Zero, one in Chelsea, and two residential buildings in Washington Heights, where tenants seem to like him.

Records show el-Gamal bought the Washington Heights properties in 2007 for a little less than $3 million each.

Ken Brandman, president of N.Y. Commercial Real Estate Services, knows el-Gamal well. He, too, was a bit surprised to hear el-Gamal is the developer in the mosque near Ground Zero.

"I don't think he has a lot of money," Brandman said. "I'm sure he didn't buy it with his own money."

Soho Properties bought the site for the mosque for $4.8 million in cash. Just four months later, with Manhattan's real estate market collapsed, el-Gamal made an even bigger deal.

With credit super tight, and prices plummeting, he paid $45 million for a 12-story commercial building in Chelsea that sold three years earlier for $31 million.

"It seems like a lot of pay in a downturn, considering it went for considerably less during the boom," said Stuart Elliott, the editor of Real Deal magazine.

El-Gamal, the waiter turned mogul, plunked down another $5 million as down payment on the Chelsea building.

"Something's up with that deal," Ken Brandman said. "Unless someone gave him a lot of money, or he won the lottery, than somebody else put up the money."

Fox 5 News has learned that el-Gamal did have help from a man named Hisham Elzanaty. Mortgage documents show that Elzanaty is the guarantor on the $39 million loan el-Gamal's company secured to buy the building....

This is why they have to fabricate them. Remember: the thuggish Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has actually trumpeted fake anti-Muslim hate crimes in the past, in order to use them to score political points. They did this again just weeks ago in Georgia.

CAIR, an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas funding case, has claimed that "anti-Muslim hate crimes" have risen sharply in the U.S. since 9/11. In fact, the rate of such crimes has actually dropped. CAIR knows well that victimhood is big business: insofar as they can claim protected victim status for Muslims in the U.S., they can deflect unwanted scrutiny and any critical examination of how jihadists use Islamic texts and teachings to justify violence and supremacism.

That's most likely why CAIR and others have not hesitated to stoop even to fabricating "hate crimes." They want and need hate crimes against Muslims, because they can use them as weapons to intimidate people into remaining silent about the jihad threat.

"FBI data: Hate crimes against Muslims rare," by Michael Doyle in the Sacramento Bee, August 28 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

WASHINGTON -- Hate crimes directed against Muslims remain relatively rare, notwithstanding the notoriety gained by incidents such as recent vandalism at the Madera Islamic Center.

Jews, lesbians, gay men and Caucasians, among others, are all more frequently the target of hate crimes, FBI records show. Reported anti-Muslim crimes have declined over recent years, though they still exceed what occurred prior to the 9-11 terrorist attacks.

"We see hate crimes generally go in spurts, and are often in relation to international or domestic events," Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said Friday.

In 2008, 105 hate crime incidents against Muslims were reported nationwide. There were 10 times as many incidents that were recorded as anti-Jewish during the same year, the most recent for which figures are available....

And El-Gamal loses his cool, which seems to happen an awful lot, in a pattern going back many years.

Gamal was apparently caught off-guard here, and clearly acted as though he had something to hide. "Mosque Meeting in Disarray," by Sumathi Reddy for the Wall Street Journal, August 28 (thanks to all who sent this in):

The developer of the proposed mosque and cultural center near Ground Zero began fund raising for the controversial project Friday, collecting $10,000 in pledges following a well-attended prayer service at the downtown site.

"We've established a not-for-profit entity as of this week and as of now we are able to start fund raising and start collecting money on behalf of the project," said Sharif El-Gamal, head of SoHo Properties, following Friday's service.

The abrupt fund-raising effort followed religious services Friday and came at the end of a muddled event that drew a media mob, police officers and sign-wielding protesters and supporters to the site.

Mr. El-Gamal pleaded with the worshipers leaving the Park51 center for funds for the $100 million project. "Who's going to be the first person that's going to pledge 5,000 dollars? Don't be shy," he intoned. Invoking Muslims' holy fasting month of Ramadan, he added, "This is the month of giving."

As hands went up, he continued, sprinkling in Arabic phrases in his pleas. "We have real-estate taxes, we have electricity, we have inspections," he said. "We haven't even bought this building yet. We need everybody's help in what we're trying to do."

Mr. El-Gamal also urged members to volunteer their time if they couldn't offer money, saying different advisory committees would be announced on the website in coming days.

"I know nobody's going out to lunch after this so we can talk about it," he said. "Let's talk about it until we get 10,000 dollars." Within five minutes, he had raised $10,000 in promised funds. It was unclear if or when he was collecting the money. He advised everyone leaving the service to not talk to any media.

Oz Sultan, who handles media relations for Park51, said the center's fund-raising strategy would be developed within 45 to 60 days.

Imam Abdallah Adhami, a religious legal adviser and founder of the Sakeenah Foundation, was invited to preside over Friday's services at Park51. Representatives for Mr. Adhami had invited the press to attend the service. But Mr. El-Gamal and a representative for Mr. Adhami openly clashed as Mr. El-Gamal said he didn't want the media there.

There's a spectacular start to transparent fundraising.

"She does not work here," the developer told security officers at the mosque, referring to Mr. Adhami's representative.

"We feel betrayed about what's happened here," a news anchor said to Mr. El-Gamal.

"We feel very betrayed about what's happening in the press," he snapped back.

In a statement, Park51 apologized for the confusion at Friday's prayer service, saying the group normally allows visiting imams to invite one or two media members but that an outside consultant for Mr. Adhami had sent the invitation to a larger group.

Mr. Adhami said he consulted with Mr. El-Gamal last week and that this was his first visit to the mosque. "There's a serious disconnect among the various people involved," he said. "That's clear to anybody."

Mr. Adhami also indicated that fund raising after a religious service didn't appear appropriate to him. "It's not very dignified," he said.

Where Park51 will get the funds to construct a mosque and massive community center has become an issued raised by some elected officials.

Park51's partner, the Cordoba Initiative, has said that they haven't yet raised any money for the center but wouldn't rule out accepting foreign funds. The organizers have also insisted that they won't accept money from anyone with anti-American views or agendas and would be careful about which donations they can accept.

No worries: they say they'll be careful!

As if you didn't already know you have a personal stake in the outcome of this project. Imagine, as a New York taxpayer, a piece of your daily labor being appropriated to enable its construction.

When developers get a break that's made possible with public money -- say, for a football stadium -- there is rightful scrutiny of the merits of the project, and no one is branded a football-phobe. When a developer goes into a neighborhood, acting aggressively and without regard to the concerns of residents, part of the population affected by developer's plans will often organize to challenge it. And no one gets called a developer-phobe. In these regards, the project has gotten a free pass in some circles because it is a mosque.

It should not get a pass on public money. "Ground Zero Muslim center may get public financing," from Reuters, August 28 (thanks to all who sent this in):

NEW YORK (Reuters) - The Muslim center planned near the site of the World Trade Center attack could qualify for tax-free financing, a spokesman for City Comptroller John Liu said on Friday, and Liu is willing to consider approving the public subsidy.

It's not near Ground Zero. It was struck in the attack, by part of an instrument of the attack -- a hijacked plane. If this site had nothing to do with Ground Zero, why would Rauf & Co. be so hell-bent on planting a flag in it?

Of course, we know that's exactly the reason. And as Frank Gaffney pointed out, even Rauf had called it the "Ground Zero mosque."

The Democratic comptroller's spokesman, Scott Sieber, said Liu supported the project. The center has sparked an intense debate over U.S. religious freedoms and the sanctity of the Trade Center site, where nearly 3,000 perished in the September 11, 2001 attack.

"If it turns out to be financially feasible and if they can demonstrate an ability to pay off the bonds and comply with the laws concerning tax-exempt financing, we'd certainly consider it," Sieber told Reuters.

Spokesmen for Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Governor David Paterson and the Islamic center and were not immediately available.

The proposed center, two blocks from the Trade Center site in lower Manhattan, has caused a split between people who lost relatives and friends in the attack, as well as conservative politicians, and those who support the project. Among those who support it are the mayor, civic and religious groups, and some families of victims.

The mosque's backers hope to raise a total of $70 million in tax-exempt debt to build the center, according to the New York Times. Tax laws allow such funding for religiously affiliated non-profits if they can prove the facility will benefit the general public and their religious activities are funded separately.

The bonds could be issued through a local development corporation created for this purpose, experts said.

The Islamic center would have to repay the bonds, which likely would be less expensive than taxable debt.

New York City's Industrial Development Authority could not issue debt for the center because the state civic facilities law, which governed this type of financing for non-profits, was allowed to expire about two years ago.

Quoth Muhammad: "War is deceit." "Insurgents attack 2 bases in east Afghanistan," by Rahim Faiez for the Associated Press, August 28:

KABUL, Afghanistan - Insurgents wearing U.S. Army uniforms launched pre-dawn attacks Saturday on a major NATO base in eastern Afghanistan and a nearby camp where seven CIA employees were killed last year in a suicide bombing. NATO said there were no coalition casualties and the attacks were repelled.

Meanwhile, Afghanistan's presidential office condemned U.S. media reports that Afghan government officials have received payments from the CIA in return for information.

A former U.S. official told The Associated Press on Friday that the CIA has paid members of the Afghan government to track various factions within it. The practice has raised concerns at a time when the United States is pressing Afghan officials to make the government less corrupt.

The New York Times reported the agency is paying Mohammed Zia Salehi, the chief of administration for Afghanistan's National Security Council, for information. The Washington Post also had the report on Friday.

NATO said at least 21 insurgents were killed -- including four who were wearing suicide vests -- and five captured in Saturday's coordinated attacks.

Afghanistan's Interior Ministry put the insurgent death toll in the attacks at 24, with five captured and no casualties on the police side. The Defense Ministry said two Afghan soldiers were killed and three wounded in the fighting.

The assaults on the sprawling Forward Operating Base Salerno in Khost province and nearby Camp Chapman came around 3 a.m., just as area residents were rising for early morning prayers.

The area, about 60 miles (100 kilometers) southeast of Kabul near the border with Pakistan, is a hotbed of activity by the Taliban and other insurgent groups, including the December attack on Chapman that killed four CIA officers and three contracted security guards.

In recent months similar attacks have been launched against U.S. bases at Bagram, Jalalabad and Kandahar.

Afghan police said about 50 insurgents attacked using rifles, heavy machine guns, rocket-propelled grenades and other weapons, but had been repelled.

After being driven away from the bases, the insurgents approached the nearby offices of the governor and provincial police headquarters but were driven off, said Khost provincial police Chief Abdul Hakim Ishaqzai.

"Given the size of the enemy's force, this could have been a major catastrophe for Khost. Luckily we prevented it," he said.

Small arms fire continued through the morning, while NATO helicopters patrolled overhead.

NATO said two insurgents had managed to breach Salerno's perimeter, but were observed cutting the fence and killed immediately.

Dead insurgents were seen wearing camouflage jackets and pants seemingly identical to those warn by U.S. Army soldiers....

"Politicians from the ruling coalition cite radical imams, polygamy and failure to uphold women's rights by Muslims immigrants as obstacles to recognising Islam as an official religion in Italy."

All eminently reasonable concerns. Meanwhile, the standard response from "moderates" would be to insist these issues have nothing to do with Islam, but are in fact "cultural," despite the fact that, oddly enough, these same "cultural" issues and interest in waging jihad are found in locales far removed from one another.

So, the "radical imams" couldn't possibly be observing the commands and actions of Muhammad, or the teachings of the Qur'an.

Polygamy? Well, it doesn't really happen, except when it does. And the women? They love it, honest!

Failure to uphold women's rights? Why, Islam elevates women! Just try to overlook things like wife-beating (Qur'an 4:34: yes, it really says to beat them), a woman's testimony being equal to half that of a man (Qur'an 2:282), and child marriage after the example of Muhammad's marriage to Aisha, just to name a few.

But, the cleric interviewed below insists this is unfair. After all, look at all of the Islamic states affording the same recognition (as equals, not as dhimmis) and access to resources to Jews, Christians, Hindus... Oh, wait... "Italy: Islam denied income tax revenue," from AdnKronos International, August 27:

Rome, 27 August (AKI) - Mosques in Italy will not receive a share of income tax revenue the Italian government allocates to religious faiths each year. Hindu and Buddhist temples, Greek Orthodox churches and Jehovah's Witnesses will be eligible for the funds, according to a bill approved by the Italian cabinet in May and still must be approved by parliament.

Until now, the government had earmarked 8 percent of income tax revenue for Italy's established churches. The great majority of these funds go to the Catholic Church, although if they wish, individual tax payers may elect to give the money to charities and cultural projects instead.

The head of COREIS, one of Italy's largest Muslim groups, Yahya Pallavicini, said he was bitter that Islam had been denied the revenue from Italian income tax.

"Work should be begun on legally recognising those moderate Muslims who have for years shown themselves to be reliable interlocutors who are free of and [sic] fundamentalist ideology," he said.

Islam is not an established religion in Italy and there is only one official mosque in the country, Rome's Grand Mosque. Politicians from the ruling coalition cite radical imams, polygamy and failure to uphold women's rights by Muslims immigrants as obstacles to recognising Islam as an official religion in Italy.

Until now, only the Catholic Church, Judaism and other established churches including Lutherans, Evangelists, Waldensians and 7th-day Adventists have received the income tax revenue from the Itallain government.

There are between one million and 1.5 million Muslims in Italy and 130 mosques linked the Muslim umbrella organisation UCOII across the country.

Western education, that is. Islamic education, fine. "Nigeria killings raise fears of Muslim sect's return," from The Associated Press, August 27 (thanks to Twostellas):

MAIDUGURI, Nigeria -- The targeted killing of three police officers in northern Nigeria has investigators worried a radical Muslim sect may be making a violent comeback.

Two state police commissioners told reporters late Thursday that they suspect members of the Boko Haram sect committed the shootings....

Boko Haram -- which means "Western education is sacrilege" -- attacked police stations in July 2009, sparking a violent military and police crackdown. More than 700 died.

How is it that they attended this mosque, and so were apparently reasonably observant Muslims, and yet misunderstood Islam so as to think it had something to do with terrorism? Were they influenced by anything they heard at this mosque? What is being taught at this mosque? Does anyone know? Does anyone care? "Two terror suspects worshipped at Montreal mosque," by Brian Daly for the QMI Agency, August 27:

MONTREAL -- Terror suspects Misbahuddin Ahmed and Khurram Sher were arrested in Ottawa and London, Ont., this week in an alleged plot to bomb Canadian targets, but their origins can be traced to the Montreal area where they worshipped together and worked in the health-care field.

Both attended the same south shore mosque in Brossard, south of Montreal. They worked at Montreal hospitals, Sher as a pathologist and Ahmed as an x-ray technician. They even played on the same Muslim ball-hockey team....

Foudil Selmoune, the imam at the Islamic Community Centre south of Montreal, says the men were peaceful, non-violent and involved in their communities.

Sher once travelled to Pakistan to help victims of a devastating earthquake, and he participated in humanitarian fundraising events in Montreal.

A former McGill classmate, who didn't want to be identified, tells QMI Agency that Sher was a calm man who showed no signs of radicalization at school.

"It's a huge surprise," he said. "I never would have expected this. I can't believe that a calm guy like that could plan such violent acts."

He must be a decent fellow.

What a surprise: the group dedicated in its own words to "eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within" has connections to the "moderate" Ground Zero mosque. "Mosque's Saudi Patron," from Investor's Business Daily, August 26:

Islamofascism: New dots are emerging from the probe into who's behind the Ground Zero mosque, and the radical Muslim Brotherhood is coming into view.

While a couple of U.S. nonprofits -- the Cordoba Initiative and its sister, the American Society for Muslim Advancement -- are coordinating the New York project, they hardly give the full picture. A Saudi charity has sunk more than $300,000 into ASMA. It's called the Kingdom Foundation -- headed by Alwaleed bin Talal, the Saudi prince whose 9/11 relief check was rejected after he blamed the attacks on U.S. foreign policy.

Bin Talal is a major financier of Muslim Brotherhood fronts in the U.S. His foundation is run by Saudi hijabi Muna Abu Sulayman, who appears on ASMA's Web site as one of its "Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow."

"Her work," according to her official bio, "focuses on increasing understanding between Islam and the West through establishment of academic centers and programs, both in the Middle East and the United States."

Sulayman, who spends much of her time in the U.S., happens to be the daughter of Dr. AbdulHamid Abu Sulayman, "one of the most important figures in the history of the global Muslim Brotherhood," according to the Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Report.

So? The Egypt-based Brotherhood is the parent of Hamas and al-Qaida and the source of most of the jihadi ideology and related terror throughout the world today. Citing its secret U.S. archives, prosecutors say the Brotherhood has a plan to "destroy" America "from within," and is using its agents and front groups in the U.S. to carry out that strategy. Like the mafia, it's highly organized, and uses shells and cutouts to launder money....

This odd one came through Facebook. This "secret supporter" of mine is going to encourage Muslims to attack and stab me. Of course, the overheated rhetoric of Hamas-linked CAIR and other Islamic supremacists is directly responsible for this and a similar message Pamela Geller received from the same person.

Contrary to this message, we do not conceivably have responsibility for actions we don't condone. The idea that we do share any responsibility at all for the actions of any nutjob who may oppose the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero is actually a rather transparent attempt to marginalize and silence us. CAIR representatives like Zead Ramadan, on the other hand, know full well that when they charge us with "hatred" and vilify us in such lurid terms, they're inciting their more bloody-minded coreligionists.

Abdulaziz Sudani 27 August 2010 at 20:13 Subject: Keep up the good work

To everyones knowledge, recently an innocent muslim taxi driver was brutally assulted. The motive of the attacker was a deep hatred for islam and muslims. The story is available on the net for all to read. Personally I do not hold this young man resposible for his actions. I myself look to the roots of events. My analysis is that people Like Pamela Gellar and Robert spencer are the driving factors in generating fanatics like the one who carried out the assult on the taxi driver. I believe crimes should be punished. I am not calling on muslims to harm the young man but I am encouring muslims to retalite my attacking the roots of this ideology of hate; Pamela gellar and Robert spencer. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth etc. I have launched my campaign in the hope that Pamela Gellar and her aid Robert will suffer similar consequences to that of the taxi driver. In the coming months I will intensify my efforts in hope that someone will respond. I believe 24 hour security etc will not spare the likes of Pamela and Richard.

I am sure you have heard threats like this before and I believe you will hear many more in the near future. Keep up the good work and don't be put of. Always be on gaurd as these fanatics can strike at anytime. I am well aware that you know their nature and thinking pattern in great detail. Take care.

From a wellwisher and secret supporter
Stay Safe

Educated, well off, respected in the community. Decent fellows. Then, if poverty and lack of education didn't cause their jihad, there must be something else. And gee, this is always so awkward: if those factors can't explain it, there must be something else.

Something else, something else... ill-fitting shoes? Radio station renege on its promise of "less talk, more rock?" It could be anything, but, of course, Islamic texts and teachings!

An update on this story. "Update: Terror suspects respected members of community," by Ian MacLeod and Andrew Seymour for the Ottawa Citizen, August 27 (thanks to Jake):

OTTAWA -- The profiles of three alleged Islamist extremists whom police say posed "a real and serious threat" to Ottawa and national security are at odds with the notion that terrorists exist on the margins of society. Two of the accused men are professionals -- a doctor (and father of three) and an x-ray technician.

The third studied to be an electrical engineer. All are apparently intellectually mature individuals rooted in Canadian life. One even appeared on the reality program Canadian Idol. While much is still to be learned about them, poverty, deprivation and social alienation do not appear to have been part their alleged descent to homicidal hatred.

Yet it is that very ordinariness that has police and security experts concerned. How are they to spot potential terrorists before it's too late? In this case, police say the arrests thwarted possible terror bombings around Ottawa and against Canadian troops in Afghanistan. "This group posed a real and serious threat to the citizens of National Capital Region and Canada's national security," RCMP Chief Supt. Serge Therriault, head of criminal operations for the capital region, told an Ottawa news conference Thursday.

He said an RCMP-led national security investigation employing about 100 joint-forces officers for the past year was forced to move on the suspects this week to prevent "financial support" going to international terrorists for weapons to attack western coalition forces.

Raids on two west Ottawa addresses Wednesday uncovered more than 50 circuit boards police believe were intended to remotely trigger detonators for improvised explosive devices (IEDs). Also seized was what police described as a "vast quantity" of schematics, videos, drawings, instruction books and electronic components for IEDs. Investigators believe the suspects are part of a domestic terrorist group with links to international terrorism. The Canadian Security Intelligence Service was the first to begin investigating the individuals, though no details have been released.

"There are certain individuals in Canada who have adopted an ideology inspired by international terrorist groups who promote heinous violence to achieve their goals," CSIS Assistant Director Raymond Boisvert told the packed news conference. "This case reiterates the serious nature of this threat, which can result in tragic consequences if left unchecked." The spy agency at some point alerted the Mounties, who assigned the "Project Samossa" file to the Ottawa-based Integrated National Security Enforcement Team, one of four across the country dedicated to combating threats to the country. RCMP in British Columbia, Manitoba, Quebec and other parts of Ontario assisted. The alleged plot was in its early planning stages and "months" away from being operationally viable, Therriault said. "There remained, throughout, a varied degree of imminence to the threat, whether they were going to conduct an attack or not and how it was going to be done," he said.

It is not clear even whether specific Ottawa targets had been selected. "Because the plot was located here it was always a concern that targets were potentially located in this area," he said, adding more details will come out in court. With all of its political, diplomatic and other important national symbols, many undefended, Ottawa is a target-rich environment. The Internet, meanwhile, allows easy "electronic scouting" -- pictures, maps, histories and satellite images -- of many sites....

And certainly they've seen enough jihad to detect a pattern or two. But when we say it, we're Islamophobes. Or in the mind of Daisy Khan, "metastasized antisemites!"

"Somalia fears key Ramadan dates will bring more attacks," from the Mail & Guardian, August 27 (thanks to Twostellas):

Mogadishu's battered civilian population is bracing itself for further fierce fighting, with Islamist rebels expected to step up attacks on government-allied forces and African Union peacekeepers towards the end of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.

More than 70 people have died in the Somali capital since the start of the week, when the al-Shabaab militia declared a new "massive, final" war on the government. Among the victims were 33 people, including six MPs, who were killed in a massacre by al-Shabaab militants at a hotel on Tuesday.

Residents near the frontlines took advantage of a brief lull in fighting on Thursday to escape to safer areas or out of the city, ahead of an expected resumption in clashes.

"Everyone is very afraid of what is going to happen in the next few days," said Bashir Yusuf Osman, manager of the Peace hotel in Mogadishu, in a telephone interview. "People believe that there is no way to stop this fighting."

Amid the heaviest clashes in the battle-scarred city for about six months, the rebels have captured ground from government troops and their allied militias on several fronts. Six thousand African Union peacekeepers have however managed to protect the presidential palace and other important locations, such as the airport and seaport. The presence of the Ugandan and Burundian soldiers is likely to ensure that the fragile transitional federal government (TFG) survives the latest onslaught, according to Somalia analysts.

But security experts advising humanitarian organisations working in the country have warned that the rebels, who killed 73 people in suicide bombings in Uganda last month, could attempt further "spectacular attacks" to coincide with two important dates in the Ramadan calendar. The first is Saturday, the 17th day of the fast, a celebration of an important Muslim victory over unbelievers in the seventh century. Monday is the anniversary of the Prophet Muhammad's conquest of Mecca....

Just like that time Jesus led an army to slay his unbelieving enemies-- no, wait...

And for good measure, Mail & Guardian: whose prophet?

It's just plain bad for business to have non-believers, who are the vilest of creatures per Qur'an 98:6 -- the Qur'an being Allah's own words to a believing Muslim -- engaged in acts of mercy. Folks might stop and reconsider whether they're really so vile. Can't have that; no "good Samaritans" need apply.

It must stick in the Taliban's craw that Western, non-Islamic nations are bearing the brunt of demonstrating compassion and charity to Pakistanis in need, while the wealthy Islamic states of the Gulf have indeed been a day late and a dinar short.

But, jihadist priorities are jihadist priorities, and Islamic supremacism must come before all else, and the compassion and mercy of Islamic rule once again fails to perform as advertised. "Pakistani Taliban hint at attacks on aid workers," by Rasool Dawar for the Associated Press, August 26:

MIR ALI, Pakistan - The Taliban hinted Thursday they may launch attacks against foreigners helping Pakistan respond to the worst floods in the country's history, saying their presence was "unacceptable." The U.N. said it would not be deterred by violent threats.

The militant group has attacked aid workers in the country before, and an outbreak of violence could complicate a relief effort that has already struggled to reach the 8 million people who are in need of emergency assistance.

Pakistani Taliban spokesman Azam Tariq claimed the U.S. and other countries that have pledged support are not really focused on providing aid to flood victims but had other motives he did not specify.

"Behind the scenes they have certain intentions, but on the face they are talking of relief and help," Tariq told The Associated Press by telephone from an undisclosed location. "No relief is reaching the affected people, and when the victims are not receiving help, then this horde of foreigners is not acceptable to us at all."

By "certain intentions," he almost definitely means proselytizing, which the Taliban are quick to allege, and have already killed for. But aid workers need not utter a word to potentially provoke second thoughts about the sheer, unabashed evil the Qur'an attributes to non-believers.

He strongly hinted that the militants could resort to violence, saying "when we say something is unacceptable to us, one can draw one's own conclusion."

No kidding.

U.N. humanitarian chief John Holmes said the U.N. remained committed to helping flood victims in Pakistan.

"We will obviously take these threats seriously as we did before, and take appropriate precautions, but we will not be deterred from doing what we believe we need to do which is help the people of Pakistan ... who have been affected by the flood," he told a news conference at U.N. headquarters in New York.

Holmes noted that the Pakistani Taliban carried out a suicide attack against the office of the U.N.'s World Food Program in Islamabad last October, killing five staffers, and in March, militants attacked the offices of World Vision, a U.S.-based Christian aid group helping earthquake survivors in northwestern Pakistan, killing six Pakistani employees.

He said U.N. security experts will be working with U.N. agencies and international organizations "to assess what the risks are and to minimize them."

U.S. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said Washington is also taking the threat of attacks by militants seriously.

"We have information of the potential targeting of foreign relief workers in Pakistan, as well as government ministries," Crowley told reporters in Washington, adding, "It just underscores the bankrupt vision that these extremists have and we are conscious of that threat."...

But the question likely to be considered above Crowley's pay-grade is this: Whence the hatred of unbelievers?

Jihad Watch is continuing to experience a sharp rise in readership, as you can see from the graph above. When Jihad Watch reader James sent me this comparison, I was shocked, since Hot Air, of course, is a very, very well-traveled site. Click on the graph to enlarge it and go to the Site Analytics Compete.com site -- or just note that the blue line is Jihad Watch and the green line is Hot Air.

The rise in readership here at Jihad Watch indicates that there is growing dissatisfaction among the American people about the quality of reporting they're getting on jihad issues from mainstream media sources. When Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews feature a spokesman for a Hamas-linked Muslim Brotherhood front group, without notifying their viewers about the unsavory ties of the spokesman they're featuring, and when they allow that spokesman to defame Americans who are trying to defend Constitutional freedoms and generally accepted principles of human rights, more and more people are realizing that these people are not journalists, but propagandists, and propagandists of the worst sort.

So they are turning away, in droves. And they are coming here, where the truth is told, fully and honestly and without obfuscation. With over three million unique visitors and counting, August 2010 has been our biggest month ever -- topping last month, which was our biggest month ever up to that point.

Welcome to all new readers, and once again: Jihad Watch is a news and commentary site that brings you information about the global jihad effort that the mainstream media largely misreports or ignores altogether. Jihad Watch is a non-sectarian site committed solely to the defense of human rights -- the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, the equality of rights of women -- against Islamization and the denial of those human rights entailed under Sharia. We hold firmly to the wisdom of the non-establishment clause of the U.S. Constitution, and to the principles enshrined in the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights (which is not to say we hold to the statist assumptions underlying that document).

Jihad Watch welcomes all people -- Jews, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, atheists, sincere Muslims of conscience -- who recognize the threat to freedom that Islamic supremacism constitutes, and are determined to resist it. Comments are open and unmoderated, although offensive comments may be removed if we see them. Comments that are racist, genocidal, advocating vigilantism, etc., are unwelcome. Remember that when you write here you're not talking to your friends in your living room, but to an avid audience of predators looking for ammunition to use against the cause of liberty.

And above all, never give up, never give in.

Of course, so did the prophet of Islam: "Ibn Mughaffal reported: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) ordered killing of the dogs, and then said: What about them, i. e. about other dogs? and then granted concession (to keep) the dog for hunting and the dog for (the security) of the herd, and said: When the dog licks the utensil, wash it seven times, and rub it with earth the eighth time." -- Sahih Muslim 551

Note also that just as unclean as dogs are unbelievers.

Sharia Alert from the Islamic Republic of Iran: "Iran bans pet ads, brands dogs 'unclean,'" from NewsCore, August 27 (thanks to Weasel Zippers):

IRAN today banned all advertisements in the country for pets, pet shops, pet food and other pet products, claiming that people's love for their dogs and cats may lead to "evil outcomes".

The edict, announced by Iran's powerful Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance, is based on a fatwa issued by Grand Ayatollah Nasser Makarem Shirazi, 86, a hardliner who lives in Iran's holy city of Qom.

Declaring dogs in particular to be unclean under Sharia, he condemned Iranian dog owners for "blindly imitating the West" and warned that their infatuation would lead to "evil outcomes", according to the state-run Mehr news agency.

"Many people in the West love their dogs more than their wives and children," the Grand Ayatollah declared....

So what is being done now to make sure that no more prisoners are "radicalized" while incarcerated? What's that? Nothing at all, you say? To do something effective about it would be "Islamophobic," you say? Well, then, by all means cease and desist! Death before political incorrectness! "Britain faces new terror wave," by Duncan Gardham for the Telegraph, August 27 (thanks to Kris):

Britain faces a new wave of home grown terrorists as 800 radicalised Islamist prisoners are released from jail, a leading security expert warns.

Michael Clarke, a former government adviser and the head of the Royal United Services Institute, says he believes the security services could struggle to cope with a new generation of extremists seeking to carry out "lone wolf" attacks.

In a report published today, Prof Clarke says that, over the next five to 10 years, about 800 prisoners - in jail for non-terrorism offences - are due to be released on to the streets having been radicalised in jail.

They will be joined by convicted terrorists serving short sentences who, once freed, are likely to be just as committed to the cause of jihad as before they were jailed, the report claims.

Prof Clarke, who advised Gordon Brown as a member of the National Security Forum and is a visiting professor at King's College London, warns that this "new wave" will pose a significant challenge to the security services responsible for identifying and monitoring them.

While previous al-Qaeda tactics involved so-called "spectacular" attacks, the report warns that the terrorist group's leaders, such as Yemeni preacher and US citizen Anwar al-Awlaki, are encouraging individuals to launch less sophisticated but equally deadly attacks on crowded places.

Their targets have also changed from concentrating on aircraft to including attacks on trains, hotels and sporting events. The report will serve as a stark reminder to the Government and public that the threat from Islamist terrorism remains severe, even though there has not been a fatal attack on British soil since 2005.

The current government threat level stands at "severe", indicating a terrorist attack is considered "highly likely". The level was raised from "substantial" in January....

No doubt these relief organizations are acting this way because they're enraged by the "Islamophobia" kicked up by opponents of the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero. If it weren't for all that "Islamophobia," the lion would lie down with the lamb, Obama and Sarah Palin would run on the same ticket, and Pakistani Muslims and Pakistani Christians would lock arms and march confidently together toward that glorious neo-Andalusian future in which Islamic tolerance and peacefulness finally would be able to hold sway unimpeded by Zionists and the modern-day Jim Jones. "Pakistani Christians face aid discrimination: Vatican," from AFP, August 26 (thanks to all who sent this in):

VATICAN CITY: Christians affected by the devastating floods in Pakistan face "systematic discrimination" in the distribution of aid, the news agency of a Vatican missionary body reported Thursday.

The Fides news agency, a branch of the Vatican's Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, said aid was handled either by Muslim relief organisations or by government officials close to fundamentalists.

Both discriminated against Christians and other minorities in distributing aid essential to survival, it said.

About 200,000 Christian refugees in the Punjab province and about 600,000 Christians and Hindus in the Sindh province are affected by the phenomenon, Fides said, citing NGO sources on the ground.

"The Christian refugees are often ignored. They are purposely not identified and registered. Thus, they are automatically excluded from any health care or food, as they supposedly do not exist," said a local NGO worker cited by Fides....

Desperate to destroy me, hoping that if they do so they will be able to lie to the American people unimpeded, Zead Ramadan and the boys in the back room at Hamas-linked CAIR are pumping out the Big Lie that I am a modern-day Jim Jones -- despite my lack of a cult, a cult following, designer sunglasses, and Kool-Aid. If anyone is offering the Kool-Aid, it is Hamas-linked CAIR and Ramadan himself, when he terms "ridiculous" the idea that the Ground Zero mega-mosque is a "victory mosque."

Let's do a quick survey. How many victory mosques are there in the Islamic world? How many mosques are either built on the cherished sites of conquered peoples, or converted from the houses of worship of the religions of those conquered peoples? Many thousands. The Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa mosque stand on the site of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. The Umayyad mosque in Damascus and the Hagia Sophia in Istanbul were once great cathedrals. There are thousands of Hindu temples that were destroyed all over India, and mosques built on their sites. Zoroastrian temples in Persia were converted to mosques, as were churches and synagogues in the Middle East and North Africa. And in every one of these thousands of examples, the mosques were intended to be an expression of Islam's victory and superiority over the religion of the conquered people.

Meanwhile, how many "mosques of reconciliation" have been built at the site of Islamic jihad attacks? How many mosques have gone up where these jihads took place, in order to reach out in peace to unbelievers, and offer them dialogue in an atmosphere of mutual respect? Why, none. Not a single one. Nowhere. Ever.

But if you don't believe that the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero is going to be the first one of these reconciliation mosques, and that Muslims all over the world will understand it as such, and that it will stand for peaceful coexistance as equals with the kuffar, despite the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf's support for Sharia, which denies equality of rights to non-Muslims, and despite the incredible contempt mosque leaders have shown for the sensitivities of 9/11 family members and others who see this mosque as anything but a gesture of healing and reconciliation, then you're a bigot, a hater, a racist.

Drink your Kool-Aid, folks. Zead Ramadan of Hamas-linked CAIR is serving it on the house. Drink it up and go back for more.

Sounds as if Mochammad Achwan is some kind of Islamophobe. "Terrorist vows war on Indonesian police," from AFP, August 27:

A convicted terrorist who took over the leadership of an Indonesian Islamist group after the arrest of patriarch Abu Bakar Bashir vowed on Friday to wage violent jihad against the police.

Mochammad Achwan has been named leader of Jamaah Ansharut Tauhid (JAT), a radical Islamist group, to replace Bashir after the firebrand 78-year-old cleric was arrested this month for allegedly financing a terrorist organisation.

A shoemaker turned Islamist militant, Achwan was convicted for the bombing of the iconic Borobudur Buddhist temple in Java in 1985 and an attempted bombing of Bali's famous Kuta tourist beach in 1986.

He spent 15 years in jail before being pardoned in 1999 and released in 2000, but says he has no intention of giving up his Muslim "obligation" to wage violent jihad ("holy war") for the introduction of Islamic or sharia law.

"Why would I give up the fight after all these years? It's an obligation for all Muslims to fully apply the sharia. I'm here to make sure that happens," Achwan said in an interview with The Jakarta Post.

He said violence was permissible for all Muslims who had the right training, and rejected democracy in Indonesia, the biggest Muslim-majority country in the world.

"We have actually been under physical attack from the police's anti-terror squad Detachment 88. Those who can fight back are permitted to use violence as long as they have the necessary resources and capabilities," he said....

"For those who do not yet have the necessary resources to wage violent confrontation, they should wait and remain patient as their time will come. The battle still has a long way to go," Achwan said.

Zead Ramadan of Hamas-linked CAIR yucks it up with sycophantic pseudo-journalist Mark Jacobson of New York Magazine

You know you must be on the right track when Hamas-linked CAIR is frantically trying to keep people from reading what you say. But in doing so, they just show people where they can find the truth. Zead Ramadan, the top dog of the New York chapter of Hamas-linked CAIR, said this to Keith Olbermann on MSNBC:

RAMADAN: No, these are pathetic excuses for the hatred and the fearmongering that's been, you know, spewed over the area, you got to stop the Islamization of America with Robert Spencer , who's basically our modern day Jim Jones . And he's poisoning people over the Internet . And, unfortunately, these people who think they're on his side, he's throwing him under the bus. And they're making these ridiculous comments and they're going out there and they're attacking Muslims . In Brooklyn , just a couple of months ago, there was a Bangladeshi man on a construction -- he was a construction worker on a break from lunch and he was approached by three teens. And they asked him, are you a Muslim? And he said, yes, and they said go back to your bleeping country . Then they attacked him. And the man was in a coma.

It's a funny thing: Islamic jihadists, avowed Islamic jihadists operating explicitly in the name of Islam and jihad, took down the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001. But Hamas-linked CAIR's line, and the line of so many others, is that Islam and Muslims had nothing to do with 9/11, and anyone who suggests otherwise is an Islamophobic racist bigot. Yet Hamas-linked CAIR ops like Zead Ramadan have no compunction about linking me to incidents that I was not involved with and are against everything I have ever advocated. Tarring me with responsibility for incidents I had nothing to do with is fine; pointing out the very real connection between Islam and Muslims and 9/11 is "hateful."

You must be able to see through the game they're playing. Ramadan and his unsavory ilk are trying to claim victim status for Muslims so as to divert attention away from the increasingly dodgy statements and connections of the Ground Zero mega-mosque imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, and from the ongoing incidents of Islamic jihad violence worldwide. Ramadan is also trying to pretend that the opposition to the Ground Zero mega-mosque is all because of me (as others have done with Pamela Geller recently) -- and thus if they destroy me, or Pamela, they think they will have neutralized and discredited the opposition to the mosque. He gives us too much credit, and doesn't seem to realize that the seventy percent of Americans who oppose the mosques are tired of being smeared as racists and bigots by duplicitous thugs from groups that are linked to jihad terror up to their eyeballs and yet are still given a free pass by dhimmi pseudo-journalists like Keith Olbermann.

It's also noteworthy that Ramadan goes after me here, even though Pamela has been quite vocal against them on numerous television shows -- likely because if they keep going after a woman, it looks bad.

People are angry at Muslims and suspicious of them because of Pamela Geller and me? Has it ever occurred to Zead Ramadan that people may be angry at Muslims and suspicious of them because of...Osama bin Laden? Nidal Hasan, the Fort Hood jihadist? Faisal Shahzad, the Times Square jihadist? Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Christmas underwear jihadist? Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, who murdered a soldier at a Little Rock Army recruiting center? Adam Gadahn? John Walker Lindh? 9/11? The London jihad bombings? The Madrid jihad bombings? The Mumbai jihad bombings? The Beslan jihad massacres? The Bali jihad bombings? The thousands of jihad attacks that have taken place around the world since 9/11? Not to mention the arrogance and dishonesty of "peaceful" Islamic spokesmen like the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, his unctuous and glaringly insincere wife Daisy Khan, Honest Ibe Hooper, and Zead Ramadan himself? And so many others.

Anyway, who is more like Jim Jones, a mass-murdering cult leader? Me, or Zead Ramadan of Hamas-linked CAIR? CAIR operatives have repeatedly refused to denounce Hamas and Hizballah as terrorist groups. Olbermann appears unfazed by the fact that CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case. Several of its former officials have been convicted of various crimes related to jihad terror. Two of its other officials have made Islamic supremacist statements. CAIR also was involved in the Flying Imams' intimidation suit against the passengers who reported their suspicious behavior.

In contrast to all that, have I ever advocated violence against innocent Muslims, as Hamas has crowed about its attacks on Israeli civilians? No, quite the contrary. Have I ever advocated contravention of any Constitutional principles in favor of authoritarian rule, as Hamas-linked CAIR's Ibrahim Hooper and Omar Ahmad have done when they said they'd like to see the U.S. have an Islamic government, i.e., one ruled by Sharia, which denies the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and the equality of rights of women and non-Muslims? No, I have not.

Zead Ramadan can bloviate, lie, and defame and the ridiculous Olbermann will nod and thank him. But Americans can see through him. And that's why his smears are getting wilder. It's a sign of his desperation. He knows his evil, seditious game is almost up, and the day is fast approaching when the only one he will still be able to fool is Keith Olbermann.

In "Is Newt Gingrich Wrong to Talk About Sharia?" in Pajamas Media (via RaymondIbrahim.com), August 24, our friend Raymond Ibrahim discusses whether Sharia, as Lee Smith recently characterized it, is a "hopelessly abstract concept":

In a recent article appearing in Tablet, Lee Smith takes former House speaker Newt Gingrich to task for the latter's focus on sharia (i.e., Islamic law). The thrust of Smith's argument is that sharia is a "hopelessly abstract concept" and "a highly idealized version of reality that has little basis in fact"; that sharia is "a catchall phrase for legal principles that have rarely, if ever, existed in actual Muslim societies"; and that "the notion that something called 'sharia' was widely imposed throughout the lands of Islam is an Orientalist fantasy."

My first observation is -- even if all these charges were perfectly true -- so? It hardly matters what sharia really is; all that matters is what today's Muslims believe it is. And a great many believe sharia is tangible and codified, and that it can, and should, be implemented in society. More to the point, telling the apostate or adulteress -- who are regularly executed "according to sharia"-- that they are really being murdered by "principles that have rarely, if ever, existed in actual Muslim societies," is hardly reassuring.

Smith does acknowledge Islam's famous draconian punishments; he just prefers to call them hudud, and limits them to "Islamist outfits like the Taliban." Similarly, Smith offers a blitz tour on Islamic jurisprudence -- including the Hanbali, Hanafi, Maliki, and Shafi'i madhahib, the differences between usuli and akhbari, fiqh, ijma, 'aql, qiyas, and ahkam sultaniyya -- even as the reader wonders how these concepts are relevant to the discussion at hand: Islam in America, from a national security context....

Read it all.

Daisy Khan says they have nothing in the bank. So where do they have it? "The Tangled Web of the GZM Imam's Organizations Raises Questions," from IPT News, August 26:

The backers of the Ground Zero Mosque have virtually no money, one of the group's leaders says, and plan to create another nonprofit organization that would further complicate the already labyrinthine financial network surrounding the project.

Daisy Khan, one of the leaders of the project, told supporters over the weekend that the mosques organizers have "nothing in the bank" for their effort. Khan said there is no money and that she doesn't know of anything that has been raised.

Tracing the money going to the two nonprofit groups led by Khan and her husband and partner in the mosque project, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, requires a world map.

Federal tax records show Rauf and Khan direct the two groups supporting the mosque project - the Cordoba Initiative and the American Society for Muslim Advancement (ASMA). Those two organizations, along with Soho Properties, which owns the site of the proposed mosque and community center, are coordinating the project.

However, federal tax records show the Cordoba Initiative has not listed contributions from at least two charitable foundations that have supported its activities. In another case, a foundation gave money to Cordoba's sister group, the American Society for Muslim Advancement (ASMA), that was supposed to go to Cordoba; that money was also not listed in Cordoba's tax records.

Cordoba has failed to list almost $100,000 in charitable donations since 2007, federal tax records show.

Between 2006 and 2008, Cordoba's charitable tax filings with the IRS show a total of $31,668 in gross receipts. However, tax filings from two charities that have donated to Cordoba or ASMA show more than $130,000 to donations to Cordoba during that time....

Hmmm. And there is much more. Read it all.

Clearly the judges were "Islamophobic"

Maybe losing Canadian Idol drove him to seek revenge upon the kuffar. "Third terror suspect was 'Canadian Idol' contestant," by Michelle Shephard and Richard J. Brennan for the Toronto Star, August 26 (thanks to Dave):

OTTAWA--A third terrorism suspect- one who moonwalked across a Montreal stage during an audition for Canadian Idol - was detained early Thursday, the Star has learned.

Khuram Sher was arrested as part of an RCMP national security investigation, as police continue to investigate a possible cell allegedly plotting to attack targets at home.

Sher told judges on the popular reality show in 2008 that he hailed from Pakistan and was a fan of "hockey, music and acting."

He sings an off-tune rendition of Avril Lavigne's "Complicated" with - as the show's website describes - some "nifty" dance moves.

"Have you ever thought of being a comedian?" asks one of the judges of the 26-year-old.

Another remarks: "The dance moves were good, the singing, bad."

One source close to the investigation said Sher was actually a Canadian-born physician and graduate of McGill University - quite a different persona from goofy contestant wearing a traditional Pakistani shalwar kameez and pakul hat as he performs robot dance moves and a Michael Jackson moonwalk....

A physician. No doubt driven to jihad terrorism by his desperate poverty.

"'Bigot' slashes Muslim cabby," says the New York Post. "Rider Asks if Cabby Is Muslim, Then Stabs Him," says the New York Times.

That was enough for the Islamic supremacists and their Leftist dhimmi tools. Libelblogger and CAIR tool Charles Johnson's vile sycophants at Little Green Footballs were quick to blame Pamela Geller and me. And the Muslim Brotherhood went full-frontal with their hatemongering and defamation at their English-language Ikhwanweb site, with a photo of the cabbie who was attacked and the headline "Pamela, Robert .. Congrats!!"

There was just one problem with all this: the attacker was a Leftist employee of an organization that has gone on record as favoring the mosque. So whatever may have been his motivation in attacking this cab driver, one thing that almost certainly wasn't motivating him was rage over the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero.

And even if he were motivated by rage against the mosque, what would that have to do with us? Absolutely nothing. We are working on peaceful protests against the mosque, and trying to raise awareness among the American people about who is behind this effort and what its significance is. We have never advocated or condoned any violence or vigilantism -- unlike the mosque's own leader Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, who refuses to condemn the bloodthirsty jihad terror group Hamas. We are not responsible by any conceivable stretch of the imagination for everything any given opponent of the mosque does.

So what is going on here? Remember: the thuggish Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has actually trumpeted fake anti-Muslim hate crimes in the past, in order to use them to score political points. They did this again just weeks ago in Georgia.

CAIR, an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas funding case, has claimed that "anti-Muslim hate crimes" have risen sharply in the U.S. since 9/11. In fact, the rate of such crimes has actually dropped. CAIR knows well that victimhood is big business: insofar as they can claim protected victim status for Muslims in the U.S., they can deflect unwanted scrutiny and any critical examination of how jihadists use Islamic texts and teachings to justify violence and supremacism.

That's most likely why CAIR and others have not hesitated to stoop even to fabricating "hate crimes." They want and need hate crimes against Muslims, because they can use them as weapons to intimidate people into remaining silent about the jihad threat.

Was this attack on a Muslim cab driver in New York yet another faked hate crime designed to tar opponents of Islamic supremacism as bigoted people who are fomenting hate? It cannot be ruled out. I hope that New York investigators are honest enough and brave enough to say so if that turns out to be the case.

"The first Muslim ambassador to the United States, from Tunisia, was hosted by President Jefferson, who arranged a sunset dinner for his guest because it was Ramadan --- making it the first known iftar at the White House, more than 200 years ago." -- Barack Obama, speaking on August 14, 2010, at the "Annual Iftar Dinner" at the White House

Really? Is that what happened? Was there a "first known iftar at the White House" given by none other than President Thomas Jefferson for the "first Muslim ambassador to the United States"? That's what Barack Obama and his dutiful speechwriters told the Muslims in attendance at the 2010 "Annual Iftar Dinner," knowing full well that the remarks would be published for all to see. Apparently Obama, and those who wrote this speech for him, and others who vetted it, find nothing wrong with attempting to convince Americans, as part of their policy of trying to win Muslim hearts and Muslim minds, that American history itself can be rewritten. A little insidious nunc pro tunc backdating, to rewrite American history. And that rewrite of American history has the goal of convincing Americans, in order to please Muslims, that the United States and Islam, that Americans and Muslims, go way back.

As Obama so unforgettably put it in his Cairo Speech (possibly the most inaccurate, the most cavalier about historical truth, of any speech by any President in American history):

It's hard to imagine Time ever asking this in regard to Christianity in public life, in any country. No, this, they ask, because French secularism keeps butting heads with Islam. Never mind the screaming double standard. Some belief systems, after all, are "more equal than others."

Do they pepper in other examples? Yes. But would this article have been written if not for the demands of Islam on French society? Unlikely. "Are the French Taking Secularism Too Far?" from Time, August 23:

For most of the 105 years it's been in force, France's secularity law has endeavored to segregate private religious belief from the strictly agnostic sphere of public life -- usually without too much friction. But that relative harmony has given way to tension and conflict in recent years, as secularists have turned their attention to the spreading influence of Islam, now France's second largest faith.

Whereas secularism -- or laïcité -- traditionally sought to create a wall between religious expression and the public domain, critics claim its defenders have become far more militant. In some cases, that's creating a zero-sum showdown in which France's secularists, who dominate public life and debate, are exhibiting a quasi-evangelical zeal in imposing the values of laïcité on the private observance of religious minorities, particularly Muslims. [...]

Private observance? You'd think the French were going into people's homes and raiding the niqab drawer. No, this debate is about the imposition of Islamic law and sensibilities on public life. Anyway, for good measure, Time throws in a link inviting readers to:

(See pictures of Muslim modernity.)

The most controversial example of secularism's evolution is the pending French law to ban full-body coverings like the burqa and niqab, whose final passage is expected in October. But that headline-grabbing measure (which will affect only an estimated 370 to 2,000 women) was preceded by the 2004 prohibition of headscarves being worn by Muslim women in public schools. More recently, pundits, bloggers and others have entered a loud public debate over whether the serving of halal beef by fast-food outlets is also a violation of laïcité. Meanwhile, militants of extreme right- and left-wing groups have banded together under the banner of secularity to stage public gatherings in which attendants eat pork sausage and sip wine -- an attempt, organizers say, to send Muslims the message that their religion won't be tolerated within the tableau of French daily life.

A gross mischaracterization and oversimplification. See prior coverage of those events here and here.

That leads us to another fun Time sidebar:

(See pictures of what people eat around the world.) [...]

Later, as the article winds up for the big finish, one must question again whether this article would have been written, or if Diallo's organization would be so miffed, for the sake of anything other than Islam:

To some observers, such protests sound a lot like secular fundamentalism. "As secularists become more militant, their arguments have gotten less rational and have begun to ring with the righteous conviction you usually associate with religious forces they oppose," says Rokhaya Diallo, founder of Les Indivisibles, an association that celebrates the diversity of modern France. "My perception of secularity has always been one of protection, of the state and society defending individuals and minority religions from coercion. Now we frequently see the opposite at work."

But wait...

(See pictures of Paris expanding.)

Okay, now!

Both Diallo and secularism expert Baubérot attribute the trend to rising secularist concern about the spread of Islam's influence. That feeling, Diallo laments, has led "people from politicians to ordinary citizens to recognize secularity as an alibi to express increasingly Islamophobic attitudes." Baubérot says this is mostly a reaction to France's wider worries about where its society is headed -- so it uses the tradition of secularity to respond to what it regards as the challenge posed by Islam. Only time will tell whether France can establish with Islam the happy balance it generally maintains with other faiths -- or whether laïcité will become synonymous with the state's interference in how Muslims practice their faith....

Whether Muslims can practice their faith is not at issue -- all five pillars are eminently untouched. What is at issue is Islam's ability to impose itself and its strictures onto French life and society, including the practice of full veiling, and the imposition of halal meat on people who didn't ask for it. The article speaks of France's "happy balance" with other beliefs, but Islamic laws demand so much more in the way of accommodation.

As the great non-Frenchman Oliver Wendell Holmes once said: "Your right to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose."

Big surprise. "Another 'Moderate' GZ Mosque Supporter Can't Bring Himself to Call Hamas a Terrorist Organization," by the peerless Andrew C. McCarthy at National Review, August 25:

Last night, I was on David Asman's Fox Business Channel show, Scoreboard, debating Imam Dawoud Kringle of the New York State prison system, a GZ mosque supporter. Imam Kringle, who seems like a nice enough fellow, reeled off the usual talking points about how Islam forbids terrorism and, therefore, if someone commits an act of terrorism that act is, by definition, un-Islamic.

Then came the moment of truth: the very simple question, "Is Hamas a terrorist organization?" Have a look at the YouTube clip below. Like his friend Imam Feisal Rauf, Imam Kringle won't answer the question. I pressed him, pointing out that it is a very simple question. And it is: Quite apart from the fact that Hamas is formally designated as a terrorist organization under U.S. law, Hamas's own charter makes abundantly clear -- indeed, wears like a badge of honor -- that Hamas exists solely for the purpose of driving Israel out of Palestine by violent jihad. Yet the imam cannot bring himself to say Hamas is a terrorist organization....

Read it all.

On June 6, Pamela Geller and I organized a protest against the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero that was attended by 8,000 to 10,000 people to stop the 911 mega mosque. And now we're inviting you to join us again on September 11 at 3PM, at the corner of Park Place and West Broadway in lower Manhattan.

A giant mosque looking down at the cemetery of Ground Zero from the location of a building that was partially destroyed in the 9/11 Islamic jihad attack on America is wrong. It is indecent. The Burlington Coat Factory building is Ground Zero.

We chose September 11 because reports have indicated that the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf and Daisy Khan said that they would break ground on the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks: September 11, 2011.

We will honor the victims and all Americans, and fill Ground Zero with patriots on September 11.

We are beginning with a brief memorial service honoring the victims, and are not beginning our rally until the morning memorial services for the victims are concluded.

Speakers will include 9/11 family members, former U.S. Ambassador to the UN John Bolton; Dutch freedom fighter Geert Wilders (LIVE!); journalist Andrew Breitbart (either live or via video stream); NY Senate candidate Gary Bernsten; war hero and NC Congressional candidate Ilario Pantano; radio host Steve Malzberg; actress and activist Susan Olsen (Cindy Brady on TV's Brady Bunch); NY Congressional candidate and 9/11 first responder Michael Grimm; Coptic Christian activist Joseph Nassralla; a spokesman for the ACLJ, and others.

Steve Dansby, singer of Rita Jones' song "Salt In the Wound," will be performing that iconic tune live.

Hosting the rally are Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer of FDI/SIOA.

For transport, rides and caravan information, go here.

This has been going on longer than Obama has been in office. Has its Constitutionality ever been challenged? If not, why not? "US funds restoration of global Islamic sites," from AP, August 24 (thanks to Ted):

WASHINGTON - The good will tour of the Middle East by the imam behind the proposed mosque near ground zero is just part of the U.S. government's efforts to reach out to the Muslim world.

This year, the Obama administration will spend nearly $6 million to restore 63 historic and cultural sites, including mosques and minarets, in 55 nations, according to State Department documents.

Under a program established by Congress in 2001, the department will fund at least five projects in as many countries at a cost of more than $271,000.

The contributions include $76,135 for the 16th century Grand Mosque in Tongxin, China, and $67,500 for the 18th century Golden Mosque in Lahore, Pakistan. An additional $62,169 will be spent on restoring a 19th century minaret in Mauritania's ancient city of Tichitt; $50,437 for the Sundarwala Burj, a 16th century Islamic Monument in New Delhi, and $15,450 to restore the 18th century Gobarau Minaret in Katsina, Nigeria.

The amount spent on mosque restoration projects is a fraction of the total in the 2010 Ambassadors Fund for Cultural Preservation, which also will fund projects to restore Christian and Buddhist sites as well as museums, forts and palaces....

More mosques than churches. More on that soon.

In a review of The Crisis of Islamic Civilization by Ali A. Allawi in Middle East Quarterly, Spring 2010 (via RaymondIbrahim.com), our keen-eyed former Jihad Watch colleague Raymond Ibrahim discusses the reality of Islam's vaunted "Golden Age," and some contemporary implications:

Allawi, who at various times was Iraqi minister of trade, minister of defense, and minister of finance following Saddam Hussein's overthrow, ends his book with a plausible conclusion--that, by nature, Islamic civilization must either subsume or be subsumed--but only after long swathes of tangents, contradictions, and loaded assumptions.

As for the latter, Islam's purported golden age plagues Allawi, evinced by his obsession over "what went wrong?" He flatly rejects any answer that even remotely involves Islam per se as "patently absurd," arguing that Islamic civilization was at the vanguard of human progress in the medieval era. Of course, the oft-repeated and (overly-dramatized) question of "what went wrong?" is moot. It falsely assumes that if Islamic civilization was at the vanguard of progress in the medieval era, it should be so now.

Begrudging the West's meteoric rise, this position ultimately implies that Islam's birthright was somehow usurped. Yet just because Muslims refined the astrolabe--which, as with most Muslim accomplishments, was in the service of Islam (to fix prayer times), something even the most radical Muslim happily permits--does not mean Islam was destined to split the atom. Nothing went wrong. This becomes clear when one ceases comparing Islam to the West--ceases comparing apples with oranges--and compares Islam to itself, appreciating the many constants.

Numerous pages are devoted to exploring the thoughts of progressive Islamic thinkers, only to reveal their aberrancy vis-à-vis Shari'a norms and thus their failure to resonate with the Muslim masses. Indeed, Shari'a is the insurmountable wall, the dead-end that repeatedly foils Allawi's strategies or sophistries by his own implicit demonstrations.

Apologetics abound: Allawi minimizes the Islamic conquests; he trivializes the issue of blasphemy and apostasy charges, blaming the Western media for "sensationalizing" them; he portrays the dhimmi-status (existence as a subjugated religious minority) as something almost admirable; and there is a curious chapter questioning the West's apparently overdeveloped notions of human rights: "Muslims must themselves decide what human rights mean in Islam."...

Read it all.

Now this is rich. Here's our old friend Raymond Ibrahim at Pajamas Media (via RaymondIbrahim.com), August 19, with a new twist on the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero:

In a recent article, I argued that the Ground Zero mosque is counterproductive to Islam. The following day, on August 5^th, the Egyptian newspaper Al Masry Al Youm reported that none other than Al Azhar -- one of Sunni Islam's most authoritative institutions -- agrees. My translation of the relevant excerpt follows:

A number of Al Azhar ulema expressed their opposition to building a mosque near [where] the events of September 11 [occurred], convinced that it is "a conspiracy to confirm a clear connection between the strikes of September [11] and Islam." Dr. 'Abd al-Mu'ti Bayumi, a member of the Islamic Research Academy [of Al Azhar] told Al Masry Al Youm that he rejects the building of any mosque in this area [Ground Zero], because the "devious mentality" desires to connect these events [of 9/11] with Islam, though he maintains that Islam is innocent of this accusation. Instead, it is a "Zionist conspiracy," which many are making use of to harm the religion. Likewise, Dr. Amna Nazir, professor of doctrine and philosophy at Al Azhar, expressed her rejection that a mosque be built near the World Trade Center, saying: "Building a mosque on this rubble indicates bad intention -- even if we wished to shut our eyes, close our minds, and insist on good will. I hope it is a sincere step, and not a new conspiracy against Islam and Muslims."

Aside from the hackneyed "Zionist conspiracy" charge, Al Azhar has it right: from negative media attention to subliminal associations with the 9/11 strikes, the "9/11 mosque" has great potential to backfire on Islam. Many other Muslims agree. That Al Azhar has labeled it a "Zionist conspiracy"-- an appellation usually reserved for especially heinous charges attributed to fellow Muslims, such as the strikes of 9/11 -- is indicative of how absurd the mosque project must appear to them.

Lest Al Azhar be accused of feigning disapproval, bear in mind that its reaction is not a product of sensitivity to, or the desire to peacefully coexist with, the United States (which would be suspect). Indeed, Dr. Bayumi is an open advocate of suicidal jihad: "I say in all honesty that we recruit the people of Islam, and instill in them the spirit of the true Jihad, which is death for the sake of Allah, for the sake of our faith, and of the Al-Aqsa Mosque."

Now, here's the question: if Al Azhar scholars are fully aware of how detrimental the erection of a 9/11 mosque can be, why are American Muslims (such as of the Cordoba Initiative) still relentlessly pursuing it?...

Good question. Read it all.

"Christian buildings often constructed on sites of destroyed native temples in order to symbolize and emphasize the substitution of one religion by the other." That certainly happened in Christian history, but it happened much more frequently in Islamic history -- as with the Ground Zero mega-mosque today. "HS test 'slams' Christianity, lauds Islam," by Yoav Gonen in the New York Post, August 24:

State testmakers played favorites when quizzing high-schoolers on world religions -- giving Islam and Buddhism the kid-gloves treatment while socking it to Christianity, critics say.

Teachers complain that the reading selections from the Regents exam in global history and geography given last week featured glowing passages pertaining to Muslim society but much more critical essay excerpts on the subject of Christianity....

The most troubling passage came from Daniel Roselle's "A World History: A Cultural Approach," observers said.

The passage reads: "Wherever they went, the Moslems [sic] brought with them their love of art, beauty and learning. From about the eighth to the eleventh century, their culture was superior in many ways to that of western Christendom."

Meanwhile, an excerpt listing the common procedures used by Christian friars to introduce the religion in Latin America stated that "idols, temples and other material evidences of paganism [were] destroyed," and "Christian buildings [were] often constructed on sites of destroyed native temples" -- and built with free Indian labor, to boot....

The Muslim reading:

* "Wherever they went, the Moslems [sic] brought with them their love of art, beauty and learning. From about the eighth to the eleventh century, their culture was superior in many ways to that of western Christendom.

* "Some of the finest centers of Moslem life were established in Spain. In Cordova, the streets were solidly paved, while at the same time in Paris people waded ankle-deep in mud after a rain. Cordovan public lamps lighted roads for as far as ten miles; yet seven hundred years later there was still not a single public lamp in London!"

Source: Daniel Roselle, A World History: A Cultural Approach

The Christian reading:
Common Procedures used by Friars in Converting Areas in Spanish America:

* "Idols, temples and other material evidences of paganism destroyed."

* "Christian buildings often constructed on sites of destroyed native temples in order to symbolize and emphasize the substitution of one religion by the other."

* "Indians supplied construction labor without receiving payment."

* "In a converted community, services and fiestas were regularly held in the church building."

Source: Based on information from Charles Gibson, Spain in America

No doubt they're enraged over the opposition to the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero. That's why Muslims like Reza Aslan are seething with anger these days, isn't it? Or is it over the Israeli incursion into Gaza? No, that was last year's outrage. Have you noticed -- as I have often pointed out -- that the pretexts always shift, but the anger, and the resultant jihad, are constant? "Police arrest 4 in bomb attack in China's restive Muslim far west," from Associated Press, August 25 (thanks to Twostellas):

BEIJING (AP) -- Police have arrested four suspects in a deadly bomb attack on police auxiliary forces last week, a government spokeswoman said Wednesday, in the latest violence in China's restive Muslim far west.

The four were part of a "violent gang of six people" responsible for the attack in the city of Aksu, said Hou Hanmin, government spokeswoman in Xinjiang, China's Central Asian buffer province where Aksu is located.

In the attack last Thursday, the assailants drove a three-wheeled motorized vehicle into a crowd of people and then set off explosives. Eight people died, including two attackers and members of a civilian police auxiliary force, Hou said.

She and a report by the state-run Xinhua News Agency did not ascribe a motive. But Xinjiang has been beset by ethnic conflict and a sometimes-violent separatist movement by Uighurs, a largely Muslim ethnic group that sees Xinjiang as its homeland. Many Uighurs resent the Han Chinese majority as interlopers....

The renowned "moderate" Imam of the Ground Zero mega-mosque is suffering from some cracks in his facade of moderation. Pamela Geller broke the story here: among many other incendiary statements, Rauf said, "We tend to forget, in the West, that the United States has more Muslim blood on its hands than al Qaida has on its hands of innocent non Muslims." But the State Department, which is using taxpayer money to send this pro-Sharia, anti-free speech Imam on a tour of the Middle East, doesn't care. "State Department 'Aware' of Ground Zero Mosque Imam's Controversial Remarks," by Jake Gibson for FoxNews, August 24 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

WASHINGTON - State Department officials say they are aware of the controversial remarks Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf made in 2005. Rauf is the Imam of the controversial so-called Ground Zero mosque and is presently on a State Department funded outreach tour of Middle Eastern countries.

During a 2005 conference in Australia, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf compared the United States to Al Qaeda and said, "We tend to forget, in the West, that the United States has more Muslim blood on its hands than Al Qaeda has on its hands of innocent non-Muslims."

Rauf made the comments while speaking at the Bob Hawke Prime Ministerial Center during a question and answer session, as part of what sponsors say was a dialogue to improve relations between America and the Muslim world.

Rauf added, "You remember that the U.S. led sanctions against Iraq led to the death of over half a million Iraqi children. This has been documented by the United Nations."

"We are aware of those remarks," said State Department Spokesman P.J. Crowley. "I would just caution any of you that choose to write on this that once again you have a case where a blogger has pulled out one passage from a very lengthy speech, if you read the entire speech, you will discover exactly why we think he is rightfully participating in this international speaking tour."...

Crowley is lying, of course. Pamela Geller published the whole speech here.

Yet more jihad against schoolgirls in Afghanistan. "Afghan girls fall ill after apparent gas poisoning," from Reuters, August 25 (thanks to all who sent this in):

KABUL (Reuters) - About 40 schoolgirls became ill and were taken to hospital after a suspected gas poisoning in the Afghan capital Wednesday, another apparent attack by hardline Islamists opposed to female education.

The Taliban banned education for girls during their Afghan rule from 1996-2001, but have condemned similar attacks in the past. They have, however, set fire to dozens of schools, threatened teachers and even attacked schoolgirls in rural areas.

Wednesday's incident followed a similar pattern to other recent attacks at girls' schools involving an airborne substance which officials said could be some form of gas....

The Afghan government, however, did not suggest who may have been responsible for the apparent attack.

My guess would be Tim McVeigh.

That explains it.

Details here (thanks to Pamela Geller).

Alican T., Fatih K, and Filiz G. Ah yes, names redolent of old Bavaria. Doubtless these "Germans" do not have and never did have any allegiance to Germany. Eurabia Update: "3 Germans face terrorism charges linked to radical Islamic groups," from The Associated Press, August 25:

BERLIN -- German prosecutors say they have charged two men and a woman with supporting radical Islamic terror groups.

Prosecutors announced Wednesday that they charged two men, identified as 21-year-old Alican T. and 31-year-old Fatih K, and a woman, 28-year-old Filiz G., with supporting various terrorist organizations.

They say the three German citizens allegedly supported the radical Islamic Jihad Union and the German Taliban Mujahideen.

Alican T. and Filiz G. are also accused of recruiting members for al-Qaida and spreading propaganda material online....

What do Afghan police recruiters do to guard against increasing Taliban infiltration? Why, nothing, of course. Since there is no clear difference between the Afghan police and the Taliban in terms of their understanding of Islam, despite the near-universal assumption in the West that the Islam of the Taliban is a "hijacked" version held only by a Tiny Minority of Extremists, and since the Taliban infiltrators can deceive their enemies anyway, in accord with the principle of "war is deceit," this kind of thing is going to keep happening.

In any case, the scene of a jihadist murdering two dhimmi soldiers during a "mentoring session" is a grim parable that neatly encapsulates the entire U.S./NATO adventure in Afghanistan. "Afghan police recruit kills 2 Spanish officers," by Christopher Bodeen for Associated Press, August 25 (thanks to Bill):

KABUL, Afghanistan - An Afghan police recruit opened fire on Spanish trainers early Wednesday, killing two of them along with their interpreter.

The recruit was subsequently shot and killed by Spanish officers who had been conducting a police training course at their base in Badghis province, Spanish Interior Minister Alfredo Perez Rubalcaba said.

The officers were members of the Civil Guards, a paramilitary unit that falls under the command of the Interior Ministry.

The motive for the shooting wasn't known, although it bore the hallmarks of earlier attacks by Taliban fighters and their sympathizers who have taken advantage of a recruiting drive to infiltrate the Afghan security forces.

NATO confirmed the deaths and said they came during a "mentoring session" between its forces and the Afghan police....

Majid Khan Shkib, a member of the provincial council, said there were suspicions that Taliban fighters active in the remote area had infiltrated the local police force -- an increasingly common tactic among the insurgents.

Following the officer's shooting, hundreds of angry men gathered outside the walls of the Spanish camp, chanting religious slogans and hurling stones. Several members of the crowd were taken to a local hospital, but it wasn't clear how they had been injured....

Angry Methodists, no doubt.

Our SIOA campaign defending victims of honor killing ran its course in Chicago, but the false story went around yesterday that the ads had been pulled. "Yellow Cab Will Stop Running Anti-Islam Ads," said the Huffington Post, August 24, and explained:

Pamela Geller, who has been dubbed the "Queen of Muslim Bashers" and leads the "Stop the Islamization of America" movement, claimed the ads were directed toward Muslim women wanting to leave Islam--but ended up offending both cab drivers and passengers.

It's offensive to try to raise awareness about honor killings, so as to try to end the practice, you see. It makes one "Queen of the Muslim Bashers." The victims? Pah! To speak up for them is "anti-Islam"!

But in any case, the story is false. Here is a message my SIOA colleague Pamela Geller received from Verifone Media, the company that we dealt with to buy the ad space on the Chicago taxicabs:

Pamela,

Your end date for the Chicago campaign was July 28th 2010 (please review the contracts). There are currently still 3 tops with your ad on them in Chicago, however those are being taken down tomorrow. If anything, your campaign has received a longer run than it was supposed to, and his article about them being "pulled" is completely false. On another note, your ad's were on independent taxi owners cars and never on Yellow Taxi (the name of the company is yellow taxi) cars, although the vehicle might have been yellow. It appears this reporter is trying to create a story.

Let me know if you need anything else.

Jeffrey Weiss

VeriFone Media Solutions

A reporter trying to create a story? Why, it's unheard of!

Pamela has much more here.

"Canny operative"

"Muhammad Comes to Manhattan" by Mark Jacobson in New York Magazine, August 22, is just the sort of piece you'd expect from an ignorant Leftist journalist/propagandist who has his reservations about the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero, but his kneejerk cultural Leftism won't let him express them. So in this lengthy article he does his best to whitewash the unsavory thug developer Sharif El-Gamal and to make Pamela Geller and me look silly (although he had me laughing when he described me as "a canny operative who likely has the inside track on the State Department's Middle East affairs desk should the tea party win the White House in 2012").

Nonetheless, he does quote me at some length, and people who bother to check will see that what I'm saying is true. And people will know also that Sharif El-Gamal is lying, although Mark Jacobson doesn't bother to shed any light on the fact. Here is El-Gamal in Jacobson's article, pretending that the Ground Zero mosque location is just a coincidence, with nothing to do with Ground Zero:

"Listen," said El-Gamal, "do you have any clue how the Manhattan real-estate market works, what is involved? People seem to think that we picked that building to make some kind of point. But that is simply insane. This is New York; no matter who you are, you just don't choose a building, move in, and take over. Do you know how many places I looked at? I looked at Chambers Street. I looked at Vesey Street, Broadway, Greenwich Street, Warren Street, Murray Street. Maybe half a dozen more, I can't even remember now. It was only after all that that Park Place came up. Even then, it was the most grueling negotiation of my life. So many times I told myself, Wow, this just isn't worth it. One minute the deal was on, eight months later it was off. The whole thing almost drove me nuts."

But didn't he think twice before buying a building so close to ground zero? Didn't he suspect that he was putting himself at the center of a hornets' nest?

"No," said El-Gamal, who was born at Methodist Hospital in Brooklyn and, after some world travels in the company of his father, a Chemical Bank executive, attended New Hyde Park High School in Nassau County. "It never entered my mind," he said. "Not for a second."

Alas for the poor millionaire developer! He is caught out! Here is Daisy Khan on the location of the mega-mosque:

I think the building came to us, which goes to show that there is a symbolism there, and that there's a divine hand in it. That it's so close to the tragedy, that its close proximity is very symbolic for the fact that we really want to reverse what happened on 9/11.

And here from a New York Times article (now scrubbed of these statements about the mosque, interestingly enough) is the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf on the mosque location:

"New York is the capital of the world, and this location close to 9/11 is iconic," said the 61-year-old cleric, who is known for being a longtime critic of radical Islam. Being in a building "where a piece of the wreckage fell," he added, "sends the opposite statement to what happened on 9/11 ... We want to push back against the extremists."

So which is it, folks? Is the planned location of the mega-mosque just a coincidence, or a direct and conscious statement about 9/11? Shouldn't you have gotten your stories straight before you went to the media -- even the lapdog media like Mark Jacobson?

Remember this the next time you hear about Muslim prisoners or college students demanding halal food. Remember: in Muslim countries, non-Muslims must conform to Islamic norms. In non-Muslim countries, however, non-Muslims must conform to Islamic norms. Get the picture? "Protests erupt as Hindus are served beef in flood camps," from the Press Trust of India, August 24 (thanks to G.S.):

ISLAMABAD: Hundreds of minority Hindus rendered homeless by the devastating floods in Pakistan were served beef by authorities at a relief camp in Karachi, triggering protest from the community members.

The Hindus belonging to the Baagri and Waghari nomadic tribes, who numbered around 600, are among 4,000 flood victims of different faiths living in the relief camp in Lyari area.

"We are Hindus and consumption of beef is prohibited in our religion but we were given beef, which is unacceptable," Mohan Baagri, a Hindu living at the camp, said. Several women with traditional tattoos on their faces and wearing 'lehengas' left the camp with their children and demanded that they be shifted elsewhere.

Following the protest, officials of the minority affairs ministry of Sindh province rushed to the camp and intervened to resolve the issue.

"It was a misunderstanding. The food was for the residents of the camp but the authorities were not aware of their faith. However, we have made arrangements and they will now be given rations so they can cook their own food," said Dara Kazi, personal assistant to provincial minority affairs minister Mohan Mal Kohistani....

Civil rights. Sure. Just not for the victims of Islamic supremacism.

Our great friend the ace illustrator Bosch Fawstin explains here.

Not too long ago Christopher Hitchens wrote that opposition to the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero was just bigotry and racism -- the whole tired laundry list of Leftist cliches. But now he is deeply confused, for he has discovered that the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is not as "moderate" as the cappuccino bomb-throwers he hangs around with led him to believe. "A Test of Tolerance: The 'Ground Zero mosque' debate is about tolerance--and a whole lot more," by Christopher Hitchens at Slate, August 23 (thanks to Benedict):

Two weeks ago, I wrote that the arguments against the construction of the Cordoba Initiative center in lower Manhattan were so stupid and demagogic as to be beneath notice. [...]

From the beginning, though, I pointed out that Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf was no great bargain and that his Cordoba Initiative was full of euphemisms about Islamic jihad and Islamic theocracy. I mentioned his sinister belief that the United States was partially responsible for the assault on the World Trade Center and his refusal to take a position on the racist Hamas dictatorship in Gaza. The more one reads through his statements, the more alarming it gets. For example, here is Rauf's editorial on the upheaval that followed the brutal hijacking of the Iranian elections in 2009. Regarding President Obama, he advised that:

He should say his administration respects many of the guiding principles of the 1979 revolution--to establish a government that expresses the will of the people; a just government, based on the idea of Vilayet-i-faquih, that establishes the rule of law.

Coyly untranslated here (perhaps for "outreach" purposes), Vilayet-i-faquih is the special term promulgated by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini to describe the idea that all of Iranian society is under the permanent stewardship (sometimes rendered as guardianship) of the mullahs. Under this dispensation, "the will of the people" is a meaningless expression, because "the people" are the wards and children of the clergy. It is the justification for a clerical supreme leader, whose rule is impervious to elections and who can pick and choose the candidates and, if it comes to that, the results. It is extremely controversial within Shiite Islam. (Grand Ayatollah Sistani in Iraq, for example, does not endorse it.) As for those numerous Iranians who are not Shiites, it reminds them yet again that they are not considered to be real citizens of the Islamic Republic.

I do not find myself reassured by the fact that Imam Rauf publicly endorses the most extreme and repressive version of Muslim theocracy. The letterhead of the statement, incidentally, describes him as the Cordoba Initiative's "Founder and Visionary." Why does that not delight me, either?

Emboldened by the crass nature of the opposition to the center, its defenders have started to talk as if it represented no problem at all and as if the question were solely one of religious tolerance. It would be nice if this were true. But tolerance is one of the first and most awkward questions raised by any examination of Islamism. We are wrong to talk as if the only subject was that of terrorism. As Western Europe has already found to its cost, local Muslim leaders have a habit, once they feel strong enough, of making demands of the most intolerant kind. Sometimes it will be calls for censorship of anything "offensive" to Islam. Sometimes it will be demands for sexual segregation in schools and swimming pools. The script is becoming a very familiar one. And those who make such demands are of course usually quite careful to avoid any association with violence. They merely hint that, if their demands are not taken seriously, there just might be a teeny smidgeon of violence from some other unnamed quarter ...

As for the gorgeous mosaic of religious pluralism, it's easy enough to find mosque Web sites and DVDs that peddle the most disgusting attacks on Jews, Hindus, Christians, unbelievers, and other Muslims--to say nothing of insane diatribes about women and homosexuals. This is why the fake term Islamophobia is so dangerous: It insinuates that any reservations about Islam must ipso facto be "phobic." A phobia is an irrational fear or dislike. Islamic preaching very often manifests precisely this feature, which is why suspicion of it is by no means irrational.

From my window, I can see the beautiful minaret of the Washington, D.C., mosque on Massachusetts Avenue. It is situated at the heart of the capital city's diplomatic quarter, and it is where President Bush went immediately after 9/11 to make his gesture toward the "religion of peace." A short while ago, the wife of a new ambassador told me that she had been taking her dog for a walk when a bearded man accosted her and brusquely warned her not to take the animal so close to the sacred precincts. Muslim cabdrivers in other American cities have already refused to take passengers with "unclean" canines....

And much, much more of that kind of intolerance is to come, courtesy the idea of "tolerance" that prevails among the addled multiculturalist elite.

You don't want to get Reza Aslan angry. "European Islamophobia Finds A Home In The U.S.," by Reza Aslan for NPR, August 23 (thanks to Anne Crockett):

[...] No matter what your feelings are about the proposed community center, there can be little doubt that Islamophobia is on the rise in America.

A Washington Post poll released last year found that nearly half of Americans -- 48 percent -- have an unfavorable view of Islam. That's nine points higher than in the months after the Sept. 11 attacks. A new national survey by the Pew Research Center found that 30 percent of those who disapprove of President Obama's job performance believe he is Muslim.

Note the snake oil that Aslan is peddling. He pretends that Americans have some irrational hatred of Islam, and hopes that as he wrings his hands about "Islamophobia" that his enlightened NPR readers will not remember the Fort Hood jihadist who murdered thirteen people, or the Christmas underwear jihadist that almost took down another airliner, or the Mumbai jihad, or the London jihad, or the Madrid jihad, or the Bali jihad, or so many, many other jihads around the world since 9/11. He wants you to think that Americans have an unfavorable view of Islam that stems from irrational hatred, from bigotry and racism.

And he isn't even concerned that some readers will see through his game and view him with greater suspicion and reserve once they do, because even that he will turn around to his own advantage in that parlor game ever-popular among Muslims in America, The Quest for Privileged Victim Status.

What's more disturbing is that anti-Muslim sentiment seems to have gone mainstream, with fringe groups like Stop Islamization of America -- which is behind many of the protests in lower Manhattan and has been participating in similar anti-Muslim rallies across the country -- suddenly receiving regular air time on mainstream media outlets.

Stop Islamization of America is actually an affiliate of a European organization called Stop Islamization of Europe, an anti-Muslim hate group whose motto is "Racism is the lowest form of human stupidity, but Islamophobia is the height of common sense."

Actually SIOA hasn't adopted that slogan precisely because it can be misused by used car salesmen like Aslan, but its actual meaning should be clear to anyone who is not playing Gotcha or trying to portray freedom fighters in the worst possible light. SIOE is emphasizing that the resistance to Islamization is not racism, as is commonly charged, since the Islamic supremacist political ideology is not a race, and it is saying that concern about the advance of Sharia imperatives in the West is not an irrational fear, but a genuine concern for the preservation of European freedoms.

The connection between the two organizations is telling.

In Europe, the passage of laws curtailing the rights and freedoms of Muslims and the success of avowedly anti-Islam political parties have led to a sense of marginalization and disenfranchisement among Europe's Muslim communities. That in turn has led to what I believe is a sharp increase in radicalization among Europe's young Muslims.

So "radicalization" is a response to attempts to preserve European cultural identity and genuine pluralism. Got it. What specific laws curtailing the rights and freedoms of Muslims were passed in London before the July 7, 2005 jihad bombings, Mr. Aslan? What specific laws curtailing the rights and freedoms of Muslims were passed in Madrid before the March 11, 2004 jihad bombings, Mr. Aslan?

[...] The fear is that this may lead to the same kind of radicalization among Muslim youth in the U.S. that we've seen in Europe. It has already played into the hands of al-Qaida, which has for years been trying to convince American Muslims that the unfettered religious freedoms they enjoy is a mirage -- that the U.S. will eventually turn against its Muslim citizens.

Are we in danger of proving al-Qaida right?

I am a liberal, progressive, secularized American Muslim. But when I see that bigotry against my faith -- my very identity -- has become so commonplace in America that it is shaping into a wedge issue for the midterm elections, I can barely control my anger.

I can't imagine how the next generation of American Muslim youth will react to such provocations. I pray that we never find out.

Threat noted, Mr. Aslan. But instead of tossing veiled threats onto the cappuccino-stained pages of National Public Radio, shouldn't you, sterling moderate that you are, be working among those young Muslims to counter their tendencies to "radicalization"?

But of course, to do so would be to acknowledge that "radicalization" proceeds from wellsprings within the Islamic community itself, instead of as a response to provocation from without -- and that would contradict Aslan's entire victimhood narrative.

"In their neighborhoods, state authority holds no [s]way. Muslims are the ones who decide. The consequence: violence, vandalism, burning automobiles, attacks against police, firemen and paramedics." Eurabia Update: "Whoever Kills A Police Officer Enters Paradise," from Politically Incorrect, August 20 (thanks to Fjordman):

This statement is on the wall in the Göteborg suburb Hisingen. It is not randomly painted there, rather it is part of a program. In this video, young Muslims say that the police "should not play Allah." In their neighborhoods, state authority holds no way. Muslims are the ones who decide. The consequence: violence, vandalism, burning automobiles, attacks against police, firemen and paramedics.

This TV report from Swedish television was broadcast back last spring. But the conditions described therein are good examples of the developments in all of Europe...

There is much more. Read it all.

In "Inventing Moderate Islam" at National Review, August 24, Andrew McCarthy skewers the general tendency to dismiss as "Islamophobia" statements by non-Muslim analysts that are taken for granted as true when they're made by Muslim leaders:

'Secularism can never enjoy a general acceptance in an Islamic society." The writer was not one of those sulfurous Islamophobes decried by CAIR and the professional Left. Quite the opposite: It was Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the Muslim Brotherhood's spiritual guide and a favorite of the Saudi royal family. He made this assertion in his book, How the Imported Solutions Disastrously Affected Our Ummah, an excerpt of which was published by the Saudi Gazette just a couple of months ago.

This was Qaradawi the "progressive" Muslim intellectual, much loved by Georgetown University's burgeoning Islamic-studies programs. Like Harvard, Georgetown has been purchased into submission by tens of millions of Saudi petrodollars. In its resulting ardor to put Americans at ease about Islam, the university somehow manages to look beyond Qaradawi's fatwas calling for the killing of American troops in Iraq and for suicide bombings in Israel. Qaradawi, they tell us, is a "moderate." In fact, as Robert Spencer quips, if you were to say Islam and secularism cannot co-exist, John Esposito, Georgetown's apologist-in-chief, would call you an Islamophobe; but when Qaradawi says it, no problem -- according to Esposito, he's a "reformist."

And he's not just any reformist. Another Qaradawi fan, Feisal Rauf, the similarly "moderate" imam behind the Ground Zero mosque project, tells us Qaradawi is also "the most well-known legal authority in the whole Muslim world today."...

Read it all.

In Human Events this morning I discuss Nancy Pelosi's recent call to investigate those who oppose her political stance on the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero, and her lapdog, Politico's wannabe tough-guy reporter Kenneth P. Vogel:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi recently warned darkly about the planned mega-mosque at Ground Zero: "There is a concerted effort to make this a political issue by some." She added her voice to "those who have called for looking into how is this opposition to the mosque being funded."

After being barraged with questions by those incredulous that she was calling for an investigation not of the shady funding of the mega-mosque itself, but of its opponents--thereby continuing on a path toward criminalizing political dissent that Obama and the people around him have a disturbing tendency to favor--Pelosi dug in her high heels. She did grant that "there is a need for transparency about who is funding the effort to build this Islamic center," although she called for no investigation. Instead, she reiterated her call to investigate those who dissented from her political line: "At the same time, we should also ask who is funding the attacks against the construction of the center."

Will Pelosi investigate Howard Dean and Harry Reid, now that they have come out against the mosque at Ground Zero?

Pelosi doesn't seem to care where the $100 million to build the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero is coming from, despite the fact that the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf has reversed himself without explanation about whether or not he will be receiving foreign funding, saying in the U.S. that the funds to build the mosque would come from Muslims in America, and saying in the Arabic-language media that Muslim countries worldwide would be contributing to building the mosque. But that is all just fine with Pelosi. What she wants to know is where Pamela Geller and I got $9,000 to run an ad against the mosque on New York City buses.

Welcome to Obama's America, in which political opposition to the pet projects of the elites can get you investigated and who knows what else. Well, come and get me, Nancy. Do your worst.

And ready to do Pelosi's worst was Kenneth P. Vogel of Politico, who called me Thursday evening to ask me a series of questions about donations to our efforts against the Ground Zero mega-mosque. Vogel grew increasingly hostile and belligerent when I declined to answer, and seemed desperate to position himself as a two-bit TV cop. He even snarled at me at one point, "Look, you can make this hard, or you can make this easy." Apparently he has been watching too many reruns of "Hill Street Blues." Without question, Ken, let's do this the hard way....

Colin Powell and others have made much of the Muslims who have served with distinction. But this young man is basing his refusal to fight against other Muslims on the Qur'an and Islamic law. It would be refreshing to see a comprehensive refutation of his views by the American Muslim advocacy groups that dismiss as "Islamophobia" any suggestion that there is any difficulty in reconciling one's obligations as an American soldier, or American citizen, and one's obligations as a knowledgeable and committed Muslim. Will Honest Ibe Hooper or Brave Ahmed Rehab step up to the plate on this one?

"Muslim soldier with 101st Airborne says he won't go if deployed," by Kristin M. Hall for AP, August 24:

NASHVILLE -- A U.S. Army soldier wants to leave the military service as a conscientious objector based on his beliefs as a Muslim, but he says he's concerned he may be deployed to Afghanistan anyway.

Pfc. Naser Abdo, a 20-year-old infantryman assigned to the 101st Airborne Division, said Monday that if the military orders him to deploy, he will refuse to go despite the fact that it may result in a military charge against him....

Abdo said when he joined the Army more than a year ago, he initially felt he could be a soldier and a Muslim at the same time. But he said he now believes Islamic standards would prohibit his service in the U.S. Army in any war.

According to documents provided to The Associated Press, Abdo cited Islamic scholars and verses from the Quran as reasons for his decision to ask for separation from the Army.

"I realized through further reflection that God did not give legitimacy to the war in Afghanistan, Iraq or any war the U.S. Army would conceivably participate in," he wrote.

He also said he was harassed during basic training because of his religion, including hearing insulting comments about Islam and Muslims. He said that at times, he hasn't been able to make his daily prayers because of his military service....

A crime against my neighbor in Algeria. June 1986
by Kahina

Sara was 20, just finished her first year of collage in Batna. She was in love with a boy from school. But as her father had arranged a marriage for her with a Muslim man. Sara was to be married as soon as she turned 20 to this man who was 53 years old. His wife had died giving birth at home.

Her mother, still holding on in secret to their Jewish roots, would tell Sara of her ancestors, the Chawi Berbers of Numidia.

The day came for the marriage of Sara to General Djbar. Sara was preparing herself in her room, crying the whole time. Her mother was tormented that she had no say in her daughter's marriage or life because Sara's father had already arranged the marriage.

Sara's mother went down to start to prepare the henna for the festival. Sara packed her bags and jumped out the window. She ran to our house, where I would transport her to Constantine. I drove so fast, I felt like my heart was going to explode. We met her lover in the center of the city, where he had gotten papers for him and Sara saying they were married in order to get Sara into Tunis and then into France. They papers were forged, but were the only way we could get her out safe.

I drove home so that no one would miss me. It was a good 3 hour drive back to the mountains of Aures. Once I arrived everyone questioned me. I used the excuse that I went to get a gift. They saw the gift in the auto and did not question me any more.

But then I heard screaming coming from Sara's house. Everyone went to see what happened. We found Sara's mother black with bruises on her face and arms. Her husband had beaten her because Sara was gone. How was he going to explain this to the family and the man whom she was to marry? It was a disgrace to his honor.

Sara's brother started to ask around. They found out from a friend that Sara was with her lover from school. With the help of the police and military, they found Sara and her lover in the hotel that night in Constantine. Her father wrapped the rope around her neck and killed her. Her lover was shot for being in the same room with her while not married.

All of this went unreported. They held the funeral 3 days later and buried her a month later.

Sara's father killed his wife on the suspicion that she was the one who helped Sara escape. He did this to clear his family's name in the society.

I would never be the same again. It was the first time I would witness a honor killing, at the age of 16. I feared also for my well being.

Sara

I dream of a place where poets can sing their minds and hearts
and the songs of love are in all hearts....

Sara sang her song this night while the ground was still thirsty with blood....

I do not believe in peace anymore while bullets still rape the innocent of this night...

A demand for respect: "We demand you remove the crosses off the façades of your pharmacies and to respect our religion." Islamic Tolerance Alert from modern, moderate Morocco: "Moroccan pharmacies threatened over cross symbols," by Naoufel Cherkaoui for Magharebia, August 23 (thanks to Ray):

A recent web post warned Moroccan businesses against displaying signs in the shape of the cross.

A self-proclaimed "lover of al-Qaeda and Jihad" has given Moroccan pharmacy owners one month to remove cross symbols from storefronts or else face beheading.

"In 2009, crusade France lured owners of pharmacies with financial benefits and discounts in medications in return for placing the green cross along the green crescent," said a letter published in late July by several online forums. "We demand you remove the crosses off the façades of your pharmacies and to respect our religion," the web threat continued.

"Forewarned is forearmed," the unnamed writer said. "We give you and those who work with you an interval of one month to return to your true nature and nation."

The deadline expires August 28th....

Get the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf over there to set them straight. "Somali militants storm hotel, 31 reported dead," by Ibrahim Mohamed for Reuters, August 24 (thanks to all who sent this in):

MOGADISHU (Reuters) - Insurgents in army uniforms stormed a hotel in the Somali capital Mogadishu frequented by government officials on Tuesday, killing at least 31 people including legislators, the government said.

The hardline al Shabaab Islamists who have been fighting for three years to oust the fragile Western-backed "transitional government," and control most of the city, claimed the attack.

The Information Ministry said the 31 dead included six members of parliament and five government security personnel.

"The blood of the dead is leaking out of the hotel," said Information Minister Abdirahman Osman....

Why is everyone so sure that the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is a "moderate"? Because he says he is, silly, and why on earth should we doubt him? But he also says other things. Pamela Geller has an exclusive on the shocking details plus audio of Rauf's statements. Speaking in Australia in 2005, Rauf said these things and more:

"We tend to forget, in the West, that the United States has more Muslim blood on its hands than al Qaida has on its hands of innocent non Muslims. You may remember that the US-led sanctions against Iraq led to the death of over half a million Iraqi children. This has been documented by the United Nations. And when Madeleine Albright, who has become a friend of mine over the last couple of years, when she was Secretary of State and was asked whether this was worth it, said it was worth it."

Pamela Geller notes: "No mention of the 270 million victims of over a millennium of jihadi wars, land appropriations, cultural annihilation and enslavement. No mention of the recent slaughter by Muslims of Christians, Hindus, Jews, non-believers in Indonesia, Thailand, Ethiopia, Somalia, Philippines, Lebanon, Israel, Russia, China................ no candor, no criticism of Islam."

There is a great deal more, and it is damning. Be sure to read it all, and listen to the audio.

"Unrest ... caused by Muslim rebels seeking secession from predominantly Buddhist Thailand."

And what would happen if the proverbial Coyote ever caught the Roadrunner? Would there be peace, and would life then go on? It's much more likely the "rebels" seeking their own country to run would proceed to turn violently on one another over the implementation of Islamic law and the consequent legitimacy of any government.

This conflict is underway in Afghanistan, it is in somewhat early stages Bosnia as Saudi-inspired jihadists gain strength and support, and it has been raging in Somalia for years. Funny how that keeps happening. "Two killed, five wounded in Thai south unrest," from Reuters, August 23 (thanks to Sr. Soph):

YALA, Thailand - Suspected Muslim insurgents shot dead two people and wounded five others in three separate attacks in the space of one day in Thailand's restive south, police said on Monday.

The incidents all took place between Sunday night and Monday morning in Pattani, one of three provinces plagued by six years of bloody unrest, believed to be caused by Muslim rebels seeking secession from predominantly Buddhist Thailand.

A Muslim man, formerly a local politician, was shot dead and a village chief wounded when unknown gunmen opened fire as they drove a pickup truck to morning prayers on Monday, police said.

In another attack on Monday, a Buddhist couple were shot and wounded on their way to work at a construction site.

The previous night, a Muslim village official was shot dead in front of a school by mystery assailants, police Lietenant Mana Naktang said. Two bystanders were also wounded.

More than 4,000 people have been killed since a decades-old rebellion resurfaced in 2004 in the mainly Muslim provinces of Yala, Pattani and Narathiwat, which border Malaysia.

No group has claimed responsibility for the violence, for which there has so far been no known evidence of links to foreign militant networks.

Except ideology.

The attacks have ranged from drive-by shootings and sabotage to bombings and beheadings. Targets are usually Buddhists and Muslims associated with the Thai state, such as police, soldiers, government officials and teachers.

Once again it was Islamic jihadists, misunderstanding their peaceful religion. One wonders how many thousands of such stories are going to come across the transom before the learned analysts and the mainstream media begin to question their assumptions. And the answer is: no number of such stories will be sufficient, because their dogmas (Islam is a Religion of Peace that has been Hijacked by a Tiny Minority of Extremists, "Islamophobia" is a twin "extremism" paralleling "Islamic extremism," etc.) aren't based on evidence in the first place. "Blast kills at least 15 in Pakistan mosque," from Reuters, August 23 (thanks to all who sent this in):

WANA, Pakistan (Reuters) - A blast inside a mosque in Pakistan's South Waziristan tribal region on the Afghan border killed at least 15 people on Monday, Pakistani intelligence officials said.

Taliban insurgents, who have carried out similar bombings, have been keeping a low profile during Pakistan's flood crisis, which has overwhelmed the government.

"Apparently it was a suicide attack and Maulana Noor Mohammad was the target," said an intelligence official in Wana, referring to a pro-government cleric....

If you're looking to bolster your "moderate" credentials for public consumption, including in your project a founder of what has arguably been the single most problematic mosque in America is probably a bad idea. Probably.

"Ground Zero mosque modeled after notorious 9/11 mosque?" from WorldNetDaily, August 22:

The New York imam behind the Ground Zero mosque has struck a partnership with the founder of the so-called 9/11 mosque in the Washington suburbs that gave aid and comfort to some of the 9/11 hijackers, WND has learned.

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf counts the lead trustee of the Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Center among partners in his Cordoba Initiative, which features a 13-story mosque and a "cultural center" for his project to bring shariah, or Islamic law, to America.

Now, now, it's "Park 51" now, which is apparently meant less to sound like a triumphalist mega-mosque, and more like it would blast techno at all hours for spiky-haired hipsters in skinny jeans.

Families of 9/11 victims oppose construction of the proposed site so close to Ground Zero.

Jamal Barzinji, one of the founders of the radical Muslim Brotherhood in America, also founded Dar al-Hijrah in Falls Church, Va., which is run by the pro-jihad Brotherhood. The mosque has been tied to numerous terrorism plots, including the 9/11 attacks.

In December 2008, the Brotherhood's U.S. think tank -- the International Institute of Islamic Thought, or IIIT - hosted Rauf. During their meeting, IIIT's leadership, including Barzinji, "pledged cooperation and support" for Rauf's project, according to this screenshot of the description of the event from IIIT's scrubbed Web archives.

Rauf's partner Barzinji is a founder and director of IIIT, which is under active federal investigation for funneling funds to Palestinian terrorists. Its Herndon, Va., offices were raided by federal agents after 9/11.

The U.S. government has accused Barzinji of being "closely associated" with the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Hamas and other terrorist organizations. He has not been charged with a crime, however.

Barzinji personally authorized the development of Dar al-Hijrah, according to Fairfax County, Va., property records obtained by investigative journalist Paul Sperry, author of "Infiltration" and "Muslim Mafia."

Records also show the North American Islamic Trust, a recently named unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terror-financing case in U.S. history, holds the deed to the radical mosque. Barzinji is listed as a NAIT trustee on the document, and his signature appears on the deed.

In November 2008, Barzinji personally chaired a meeting at IIIT's Herndon headquarters to launch an abridged edition of Rauf's book, "What's Right with Islam Is What's Right with America," in which he calls for the establishment of a parallel system of justice in America run by Islamic jurists. Barzinji's brother's printing company published the digest.

Rauf's partnership with Barzinji and IIIT worries critics of the Ground Zero mosque in New York, who fear it will attract the kind of dubious foreign sponsorship and terrorist elements associated with Dar al-Hijrah.

Built in 1991 with $5 million from the Saudi Embassy, Dar al-Hijrah employed Imam Anwar Awlaki as its prayer leader from 2000 to 2002. Awlaki, aka Aulaqi, counseled two of the 9/11 hijackers in closed-door meetings, and is believed to have played a central role in the plot. The fugitive al-Qaida leader is now hiding in Yemen.

He also radicalized Fort Hood shooter Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, Christmas Day airline bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab and, most recently, Times Square car bomber Faisal Shahzad.

The U.S. last month designated Awlaki a "key leader of al-Qaida" and froze his assets.

"Anwar al-Aulaqi is extraordinarily dangerous," said Stuart Levey, Treasury undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence. "He has involved himself in every aspect of the supply chain of terrorism -- fundraising for terrorist groups, recruiting and training operatives, and planning and ordering attacks on innocents."

Dar al-Hijrah's leadership is closely tied to the radical Muslim Brotherhood, a worldwide jihadist movement....

There is more.

"International Burn a Koran Day" does a grave disservice to the cause of spreading awareness about Islamic teachings and the threat that Sharia poses to our way of life. It is a gift to Islamic groups who would so dearly love to portray all of us who criticize and question Islamic teachings (and triumphalist mosques) as frothing reactionaries.

Of all imagery to appropriate from the past century, that of book-burning is utterly disastrous, inviting comparisons with the Nazis' famous roundup of banned books, and creating an opening for Heinrich Heine's famous admonition: "Where one burns books, one will soon burn people."

The most substantive means of framing the conflict between Western values and Islamic law are productive, not destructive: Artwork, satire, commentary and criticism, to name a few.

Awareness is a mightier weapon than a bonfire.

As such, it would be better to read aloud from the Qur'an for all to hear of its hatred and subjugation of non-believers, the second-class status of women, cruel and unusual punishments, and open-ended calls to warfare in order to impose Islamic law.

Nonetheless, while Islamic advocacy groups are likely squealing with glee at such a free shot at playing the victim, at least one set of jihadists couldn't contain themselves: "Islamic Radicals Threaten Suicide Bombings Against Gainesville Church," by Adam Kirk for WOKV, August 23:

[...] One jihadist website vowed to conduct suicide bombings in Florida to avenge the Koran burning, while others predicted an increase in terrorist recruits as a result of such actions.

"By Allah, the wars are heated and you Americans are the ones who...enflamed it," says one such posting. "By Allah you will be the first to taste its flames." ...

This seems to be the case that never goes away, as authorities continue to charge accomplices and Misunderstanders of Islam. "German man faces terrorism charges in US plot," from the Associated Press, August 23:

BERLIN -- German prosecutors say they have charged a man with membership in a group that plotted to attack U.S. targets in the European country.

Prosecutors announced Monday the man identified only as Salih S. was charged Aug. 12 with supporting a terrorist organization and membership in a terrorist organization.

They say the German citizen is alleged to be a member of the radical Islamic Jihad Union who trained at a terrorist camp in Pakistan. He was first arrested in 2008 in Turkey and extradited in July.

Salih S. is accused of procuring GPS devices, night vision goggles and other items for Adem Yilmaz

Yilmaz was convicted with three others earlier this year of plotting a thwarted attack that a judge said could have killed large numbers of U.S. soldiers and civilians.

Yet another pseudo-journalist propagandist gets it wrong, perhaps willfully. Pamela Geller and I are organizing a rally against the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero on September 11. Details here. Speakers will include family members of 9/11 victims, Ambassador John Bolton, Dutch freedom fighter Geert Wilders (LIVE!), journalist Andrew Breitbart (either live or via video stream), NY Senate candidate Gary Bernsten, war hero and NC Congressional candidate Ilario Pantano, radio host Steve Malzberg, Michael Grimm, a candidate for Congress from New York's 13th district and a 9/11 first responder, a spokesman for the ACLJ, and others. For ride and caravan information, see here.

Preparations are in full swing for that, but earlier this evening the hard-Left pseudo-journalist Max Blumenthal got confused, or decided to confuse the issue, and sent out this tweet:

MaxBlumenthal: Pam Geller's pogromists harass, nearly assault black man mistaken as Muslim@Ground Zero rally. http://bit.ly/aN5Tkm

For the record, neither Pamela Geller nor I were at this clearly poorly organized and ill-conceived protest yesterday. Neither of us had anything to do with organizing it or planning it in any way. Geller declares:

Max Blumenthal, notorious Jew hater, is lying, slandering and making up racist propaganda against me again. I have no idea what this rally is. I have no idea who these people are. I have no idea who organized this rally. Clearly, whoever organized this was careless, unprepared, shooting from the hip and harmful to the cause of freedom and compassion. I wasn't even in the state, nor did I know anything about this half-assed effort. Check this out.

Worse still, the media, which never covered the big rally on June 6th is all over this ill-conceived botched mess of a protest that is being played in the media as "competing rallies" with a pro-mosque rally. Who organized this anti-mosque protest? Sharif El-Gamal?

This was very badly done, considering that the idea of two competing rallies flies in the face of reality -- 70% of the American people oppose the mosque. The narrative, as a result of this circus, is that the two sides are equivalent in size. And this is the angle being broadcast on an endless loop on all the media channels.

For Blumenthal, apparently, all foes of the mosque look alike -- or maybe it's just all Pamela Geller's fault no matter what, and if the facts don't fit, do what ever Leftist journalist does: make it up.

Of course, Islam knows not a thing about the hatred of Jews. Except for passages like the ones found below (linked from pro-Islamic sources), including:

Qur'an 4:46, which says Allah has cursed the Jews for their disbelief.

Qur'an 5:41, which says the Jews love a lie.

Qur'an 5:51, which commands: "O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust."

Qur'an 5:64, which says Jews' goal is mischief/corruption in the land. See 5:33 for the penalty for that.

Qur'an 5:82, which says "Strongest among men in enmity to the believers wilt thou find the Jews and Pagans."

Qur'an 9:30, which castigates the Jews for extolling Ezra as the son of Allah (what?).

Then there's the good old ahadith. Sahih (i.e., sound, or reliable in the Sunni tradition) Bukhari 4.52.177: "Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."

Bottom line: Is Daisy Khan accusing us of hating Muslims as much as Allah hates Jews?

Of course, Khan & Co. know this is not about hate. Accusations of hatred are a cheap shot, and a desperate shot aimed at stopping substantive discussions. But we won't stop asking questions and demanding answers.

Anyway, you will want to read this one sitting down. "Islamic center leader says site is not moving," from Politico, August 22 (thanks to E H):

Daisy Khan, one of the leading organizers behind the mosque and Islamic community center near ground zero in New York City, said Sunday that moving the project to another location is not currently on the table.

"Right now it's not, until we consult with all our stakeholders," Khan told ABC News' "This Week with Christiane Amanpour." She appeared on the program with Rabbi Joy Levitt, executive director of the Jewish Community Center in Manhattan and an adviser on the project.

Khan said she believed the project would be built.

"Of course, it has to go ahead," she said. "There's so much at stake."

Asked if America was "Islamophobic," Khan responded that it's like "metastasized anti-Semitism."

"It's not even Islamophobia, it's beyond Islamophobia -- it's hate of Muslims," she said. "And we are deeply concerned."

No, it isn't, Daisy:

"I let no man drag me down so low as to make me hate him." - Booker T. Washington

Far be it from the Associated Press, or in fairness, any mainstream news wire service, to portray anything contained in Islamic texts in a negative light. Here, rather, experts suppose that the Somali jihadists see that the Afghan Taliban had success with its tactics both in taking over the seat of government in 1996, and in maintaining a long-running jihad of asymmetrical warfare against NATO forces. This, they reason, is why the Somalis have apparently copied them.

But we know better. Armed jihad to impose Sharia law is not the Taliban's invention. It is the basis and the unifying factor of all jihad. Nor are the violations of human rights and dignity that are contained in Sharia the invention of the Taliban, the Iranian mullahs, the Wahhabis, and so forth. Most of the cruel practices mentioned below come "chapter and verse" from the Qur'an, with the remainder rooted in the ahadith deemed "sound" and "reliable" in the Sunni tradition.

In other words, they are not merely "cultural" or "tribal" practices, but the Qur'an has elevated them to the status of Allah's own commands. And that completes the picture the mainstream media cannot show in full, providing the reason why these practices are so entrenched in Islamic societies.

"Somali rebels increasingly resemble Taliban: floggings, music bans and possible al-Qaida links," by Jason Straziuso and Mohamed Olad Hassan for the Associated Press, August 22:

MOGADISHU, Somalia (AP) -- Men are forced to grow beards. Women can't leave home without a male relative. Music, movies and watching sports on TV are banned. Limbs are chopped off as punishment, and executions by stoning have become a public spectacle.

There are other texts that duplicate these prescriptions and elaborate upon them, but these are a useful starting place:

Growing beards: Sahih (i.e., "sound," "reliable") Muslim 2.498-501: Muhammad commanded it. Per Qur'an 33:21, Muhammad is the supreme example of conduct.

Women's rights: Qur'an 4:34: "Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them."

Muhammad's hostilty to music: See the Hadith Qudsi, ahadith in which Muhammad is said to transmit the commands of Allah.

Amputation: Qur'an 5:33 (waging war on Allah, spreading corruption in the land), and 5:38 (theft).

Flogging for adultery: Qur'an 24:2.

Stoning for adultery: Sahih Bukhari 8.82.816, which describes the verses of Rajam (verses about stoning) somehow going missing from the Qur'an, but affirms that Muhammad carried out stonings.

Somalia is looking more and more like Afghanistan under the Taliban -- two rugged countries 2,000 miles apart, each lacking a central government, each with a hard-line Islamist militia that cows the public into submission.

Al-Shabab in Somalia and the Taliban in Afghanistan -- their tactics increasingly mirror each other. Those tactics worked for the Taliban until the U.S. invasion overthrew it in 2001, and now they are making a comeback. Meanwhile, al-Shabab has gained control over large swaths of this arid Horn of Africa country.

In the latest adoption of tactics long used by the Afghan militants, al-Shabab is ordering households in southern Somalia to contribute a boy to the militants' ranks. Childless families have to pay al-Shabab $50 a month. That's Somalia's per capita income.

An al-Shabab commander attributed the shared tactics and ideology to the fact that both groups follow a strict form of Islam.

Indeed, and to the uninitiated, the fact that the two groups, thousands of miles removed from one another, have managed to "misunderstand" Islam so similarly, must seem remarkable.

"One more thing we deeply share is the hatred of infidels," the commander, Abu Dayib, told The Associated Press.

Some experts say the similarities are no accident.

"Al-Shabab is copying exactly whatever the Taliban was doing in the late 1990s, because they think the strategies the Taliban employed in Afghanistan were successful," said Vahid Mujdeh, the Afghan author of a book on the Taliban. "There is no doubt that the Taliban are like heroes for al-Shabab."...

But there is, obviously, so much more to it than that.

The mainstream media is making a big deal about the supposed "demonizing" of participants in the Ground Zero mosque project, and of the "backlash" that could result from supposedly dangerous talk, by which they mean criticism of the mosque, its backers, and of the agenda behind the whole affair that's plowed into Lower Manhattan on a steamroller named "Tolerance."

Meanwhile, in Muslim nations, open incitement against unbelievers leads directly to attacks on religious minorities, and the world yawns. "Muslim Cleric Calls for Jihad, Copts Attacked," by Joseph C. deCaro for Worthy News, August 21:

SHIMI, EGYPT (Worthy News)-- During Friday prayers, Imam Sheikh Tobah called for jihad against all Christians living in the Egyptian village of Shimi.

Christian Copts were assaulted over the next two days; 11 were hospitalized and many Copt youths were arrested.

The assaults began only hours after the Imam's incitement. Security forces took the first Copt victims to a police station where they were pressured into accepting "reconciliation" with their attackers, but no Muslims were arrested.

The apologist spin writes itself: Local Muslims promoting reconciliation with their neighbors!

"I was told by the security authorities that for the sake of the Holy month of Ramadan, everyone ought to make peace," said Reverend Ezra Nageh. (But) "I was against reconciliation, because I know that the culprits know that they can assault Copts, and in the end, it will boil down to Copts giving up all their rights with the reconciliation sessions."

The next day, Muslims again attacked the houses of the Copts; they beat the inhabitants and also any Copts found in the fields.

"We are forced into reconciliation and in less than 24 hours, we are assaulted again," said Ghali Tawfik, one of the Copt victims.

"They have humiliated us," said Maher Amin. "We were beaten and we could not do anything about it. We are weak and helpless and have to accept reconciliation. They will next come to our homes and rape our women, and we will not be able to do anything about it."

After Police released the Copt victims who were initially detained at the station, they then arrested three Copt youths on old charges and transferred them to (Egyptian) State Security, but Ezra said State Security is employing an old trick: detaining innocent Copts and fabricating crimes against them in order to force the church into accepting reconciliation.

"They attack us today and force reconciliation on us," said Ezra. "Are they waiting for us to be killed tomorrow and then they would think about the rule of law?"

Just in the past few days, the wealthy Gulf states and the Organization of the Islamic Conference have come fashionably late to the party after weeks of leaving aid groups, international media, and other people Allah hates for asking too many questions (Sahih Bukhari 2.24.555) wondering what the holdup was. Note in particular, at the summary linked above, the fabulous bonanza from Kuwait, of an astronomical $5 million dollars.

Non-Muslim nations continue to bear the brunt of demonstrating the compassion and generosity that the petrodollar-glutted Gulf nations won't. Meanwhile, in Pakistan: aid from non-Muslims? Bring it on! Send more! (Well, maybe not you, India.) Aid to non-Muslims? If you're lucky. And it's not the first time Muslims in Pakistan have attempted to coerce non-Muslims to convert by blackmailing them with hunger and the withholding of life's most basic essentials.

Quid pro quo, kuffar. "The politics of relief: Aliens in their own land," by Abdul Manan for the Express Tribune, August 18 (thanks to GS):

The government and local clerics refused to shelter around 500 flood-affected families belonging to the Ahmadiya community in South Punjab's relief camps. Not only that, the government also did not send relief goods to the flood-hit areas belonging to the Ahmadiya community, The Express Tribune has learnt during a visit to the devastated Punjab districts of Muzaffargarh, Dera Ghazi Khan and Rajanpur.

For its part, the government claims that all relief goods are being distributed among survivors without discrimination. And that all survivors have been sheltered in relief camps without distinction. The flood-devastated families from the Ahmadiya community have strongly criticised the government's "discriminatory attitude" even at a time when the entire country is reeling from the ravages of the worst flooding in living memory.

Of the 500 Ahmadi families, 350 belong to DG Khan, 60 to Muzaffargarh and 65 to Rajanpur district. According to Ahmadiya community leaders, over 2,500 members of their community have been displaced and are now living with their relatives while some of them have left for Rabwah, the community's headquarters.

Aziz Ahmad Khan, a local leader of flood victims from the Ahmadiya community in DG Khan, told The Express Tribune that all members of his family have complained of discrimination in DG Khan. He said 200 families from Basti Rindan and Basti Sohrani, 60 from Chah Ismaeel Wala, three from Rakh Mor Jangi, 18 from Ghazi Ghat and 12 from Jhakar Imam Shah of Ahmadpur. Khan alleged that 200 families, who have been displaced from Basti Rindan and Basti Sohrani by flooding, took shelter in a state-run school at Jhok Utra but within days the local administration forced them to leave the school. He said the local administration later told them that people from the surrounding areas did not want the Ahmadis in the relief camp. And that the administration could not allow them to stay at the camp as it could create a law and order situation....

Pakistan apparently found itself sufficiently embarrassed, at least in this case, for putting its jihad against India ahead of the suffering of its people.

This situation proves once again that the greatest vehicle for modification of human rights violations in the Muslim world -- albeit on a case by case basis, because most regimes would not willingly reform Sharia-based legal systems in a meaningful way -- is outside scrutiny and embarrassment over practices that are bad for business. Just ask the Saudi whose best hope of not getting his spine deliberately severed by doctors (hey, Hippocrates was a dirty infidel) is most likely the moral outrage and pressure of the non-Muslim world.

And that level of scrutiny requires a free press of the kind that would shrivel and die under Sharia, or under the gradual, incremental bowing to Islamic "sensitivities."

"Pakistan accepts flood aid money from rival India," from the Christian Science Monitor, August 20:

Pakistan has accepted an offer of $5 million of flood aid from neighbor and longtime rival India, in a move that could spark a political backlash at home.

In an interview with Indian news channel NDTV, Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi described the offer of aid, made last week, as a "very welcome initiative" which the government of Pakistan has agreed to accept, after taking some time to decide.

But it would have been better to say "thanks, but no thanks," according to Liaqat Baloch, secretary general of Pakistan's second-largest religious party, the Jamaat-e-Islami.

"Pakistan has many disputes with India, with reference to Kashmir, and the Indian Army engaging in brutality in occupied Kashmir," he says. "In the past, when Pakistan tried to support India after their natural disasters, India never accepted. Therefore it would be better if [our government] refused the aid with a big thank you."

Al Khidmet foundation, Jamaat-e-Islami's charitable wing, has been one of the most visible aid organizations in the flood-affected areas.

The two countries have made efforts in recent months to repair bilateral relations, which took a plunge following the 2008 Mumbai attacks. India blames those attacks on Pakistan-backed militants. The two countries have fought three full-scale wars, most recently in 1999.

The United States had urged Pakistan to accept India's offer of aid earlier this week. When Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh called his Pakistani counterpart to offer his condolences following the worst natural disaster in Pakistan's history, it was an event widely reported in the Pakistan media.

"In such times of natural disasters, all of South Asia should rise to the occasion and extend every possible help to the people of Pakistan affected by the tragedy," Mr. Singh said, according to a statement released by his office.

According to Badar Alam, editor of Pakistan's Herald magazine, the amount of aid pledged is "symbolic, but its effect is immense. It's a good confidence building measure between the two countries."

But, he warns, Pakistan's religious parties will try to spin the move "as a sign of weakness."

"They will see it as a capitulation to India, that our own government is so weak we have been forced to accept help from the historic enemy," says Mr. Alam....

You used to be part of India until you severed yourselves from it. Wouldn't that make you your own worst enemy? You have to admit, it works on a number of levels.

"Ambassador of death?" The Islamic Republic of Iran already has plenty of those. The next question: what did they reverse-engineer (a la Iran's indigenous fighter jet, appearing in so many ways to be a glorified F-5), or whose short-sighted help did they have in the design process?

"Iran unveils 'ambassador of death' bomber," from MSNBC, August 22:

TEHRAN, Iran -- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Sunday inaugurated the country's first domestically built long-range unmanned bomber aircraft, calling it an "ambassador of death" to Iran's enemies.

Speaking to a group of officials, Ahmadinejad said, "The jet, as well as being an ambassador of death for the enemies of humanity, has a main message of peace and friendship."

And death. Can't forget the death.

The goal of the aircraft is to "keep the enemy paralyzed in its bases," he said, adding that the jet is for deterrence and defensive purposes.

The president championed the country's military self-sufficiency program and said it will continue "until the enemies of humanity lose hope of ever attacking the Iranian nation."

The 4-meter-long unmanned plane, dubbed the Karrar, or striker, in Farsi, was inaugurated on the national day for the country's defense industry in a ceremony aired live on state TV.

No details were provided on the craft's capabilities.

In a speech at the unveiling ceremony, Ahmadinejad said Iran should seek the ability to make pre-emptive strikes against a perceived threat, although he said it would never strike first.

Odd to see an unveiling in Iran that doesn't involve someone getting arrested. Anyway, it's not as if manufacturing a grievance as casus belli would be difficult for the conspiracy-minded Islamic Republic.

How many in Somalia, and in this Somali neighborhood, never thought it would get this bad? How many more deluded themselves that Sharia, once implemented, wouldn't include any of the nastier practices?

Those who dismiss concerns about Islamization in the West are also those who would insist it could never really get so bad. The problem is, it does, and we have witnessed locales like Bosnia, Chechnya, and even Britain in the era of Sharia courts suddenly surprised at the number and power of the "extremists." "In Kenya's capital, Somali immigrant neighborhood is incubator for jihad," by Sudarsan Raghavan for the Washington Post, August 22:

NAIROBI -- Behind the blue gates of his Islamic school in Nairobi's Eastleigh neighborhood, Ahmed Awil cannot escape his country's civil war.

Schools and mosques where extremist views are taught are reshaping this Somali immigrant community that for years has lived peacefully in the capital of this predominantly Christian country. Moderate imams now compete with hard-line preachers pushing a strict interpretation of Islam. Bookstores sell anti-Western literature. Residents speak fearfully of militant spies, and children like Ahmed are taught to praise al-Shabab, an al-Qaeda-linked militia, for waging jihad in Somalia against the U.S.-backed government.

"My teachers tell us al-Shabab is fighting for our religion and for our country," said Ahmed, a skinny 11-year-old who fled Somalia after al-Shabab fighters slaughtered his neighbor and tried to recruit him. "Sometimes they ask us if we would like to go there and fight."

Eastleigh, a run-down enclave where tens of thousands of Somalis live, has become an incubator for Islamic extremism, Kenyan officials and community leaders say. It has also emerged as a micro-battlefield in the war on terrorism, attracting American funds.

"What most worries me is that this extremist ideology will continue to grow," said Dualle Abdi Malik, the director of Fathu Rahman, a moderate Islamic school. "We have to confront it before it is too late."

Somali immigrant communities across the Horn of Africa and Yemen have come under greater scrutiny since twin bombings last month targeted World Cup soccer fans in the Ugandan capital of Kampala. Al-Shabab asserted responsibility for the attacks, its first major international operation since it rose to power several years ago in Somalia.

Members of al-Shabab, which in Arabic means "The Youth," and other Somali militants freely travel to Nairobi to raise funds, recruit and treat wounded fighters, according to U.N. and Kenyan security officials. Somali-American jihadists have met contacts in Eastleigh before heading to Somalia to fight with al-Shabab.

"Eastleigh is a copy of Mogadishu," said Mohamed Omar Dalha, Somalia's social affairs minister, referring to the Somali capital. "Everything that happens in Mogadishu happens in Eastleigh, except the fighting."

Fertile ground for radicals

At the al-Huda Islamic bookshop, a closet-sized stall nestled near one of Eastleigh's radical mosques, several youths browsed the fare on a recent day. Koranic tomes pack the shelves. Recordings of lectures and debates that glorify the neighborhood's radical Somali preachers are sold openly.

"Our religion calls on us to kill everyone who does not believe in Allah and his Prophet Muhammed deeply," Abdulrahman Abdullahi, a black-clad imam, declares in one DVD. [...]

What kind of inflammatory literature would endorse such an open-ended call for violence against non-believers? Oh, wait:

Qur'an 9:5: "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful."

At the Ansaaru primary school, where Awil attends classes, boys and girls study biology, chemistry and geography. In religion class, they are taught that it is every Muslim's duty to "liberate" Jerusalem and its sacred al-Aqsa mosque, Awil and three other students said.

Sometimes, the students said, the teachers show them video clips of jihadists fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia.

"They tell us that al-Shabab hates Western countries like America," said Zakeria Omar, 11, a student. "And that it is all right to cut the throats of every citizen of these countries."...

Call him Inshallah-Indicted, perhaps. An update on this story. "Jihadist blogger thought to be creator of Al Qaeda website could be indicted on terrorism charges," by Meena Hartenstein for the New York Daily News, August 18:

A jihadist blogger accused of running an online how-to guide for Al Qaeda could be charged with terrorism very soon, sources say.

A federal grand jury has started reviewing evidence against Samir Khan, a 24-year-old who ran a militant Islamic website out of his parents' basement, and is now suspected of being behind the Al Qaeda magazine Inspire, NPR reports.

Inspire, a 67-page mag published online in June, slapped snappy titles on terrorist advice columns like "Make a Bomb in the Kitchen of Your Mom" and ran items like a packing guide for what to take on a jihad trip.

It instantly attracted FBI attention, and intelligence agents noted eerie similarities between Inspire and Khan's own blog, "Inshallahshaheed" which translates to "A martyr if God wills."

"There were choices in content and how it was created that echoed what Samir Khan had done with his blog several years back," a federal source said when the site surfaced.

Khan, who neighbors haven't seen in months, is said to have flown to Yemen in October. Last summer he told people at his local mosque that he was moving to teach English and learn Arabic, NPR reports.

Shortly after he left, Inspire popped up.

Authorities are now investigating if Khan actually left to join a terrorist group targeting Americans. They think he was recruited by Anwar al-Awlaki, the U.S.-born radical cleric who has been connected to the Fort Hood shootings and the attempted Christmas Day bombing of a plane headed to Detroit.

Intelligence officials believe Khan accepted an invitation from al-Awlaki to come to Yemen.

The grand jury is now deliberating whether there is enough evidence to charge Khan with "material support to a terrorist organization and conspiracy to commit murder overseas," sources close to the case told NPR....

Nothing to see here! Sit back, have some Muhammad conspiracy chocolate, and don't ask which seminar Kumar went to, who he is, who he met with while he was here, where he got his literature, or why he was so nervous. "Airport Weapon Arrest Reveals Jihadist Books," by Stephen Dean for Click2Houston, August 20:

HOUSTON -- A traveler from India has been arrested on a weapons charge at Bush Intercontinental Airport, and police said the man was carrying extremist books that refer to "jihad" and "infidels," Local 2 Investigates reported Friday.

"He had a ton of books," said one law enforcement official involved in the lunch-hour arrest.

The man also had a large amount of cash and a portable computer storage device capable of holding documents and data, officials said.

Police identify the passenger as Vijay Kumar, a resident of Mumbai, India.

He has been booked into a Houston jail on charges of possession of a prohibited weapon after brass knuckles were found in his checked luggage.

Law enforcement officials involved in the arrest said that Kumar was pulled out of the Terminal E security screening line for a closer look after TSA behavioral detection officers noticed he was sweating and fidgeting.

Officers said they then found the brass knuckles, as well as several books and diagrams in his carry-on luggage, including one book titled, "New Voices of Islam," and another espionage publication called "Spycraft."

Officers said many of the books were written in Arabic, but they did notice English publications that refer to "jihad" and "infidels." They also found diagrams that purport to describe U.S. military weaponry, according to law enforcement officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

FBI agents were called to the screening area where Kumar was being arrested. Agents are trying to determine the contents of a flash drive, or thumb drive, that was confiscated as he was arrested.

"It definitely raised our concerns," said one law enforcement official who was involved in the arrest. "Not your everyday passenger would have this sort of stuff, and it definitely poses a concern for anyone involved in airport security."

The incident raised an even higher security alert at Intercontinental Airport Terminal E for a short while because alarms sounded to indicate that explosive residue had been detected by a swab that was run over the passenger's bag.

The swab originally indicated that TATP (a homemade explosive) residue was present on the man's bag. A second and third test came up negative, so the first test was being treated as a false alarm.

Airport officials said other passengers were not affected by the incident, as most of the activity happened in a private screening area away from the Terminal E checkpoints.

Houston Police Department Criminal Intelligence Division officers are digging further into Kumar's background. They are being assisted by FBI agents.

Investigators said that Kumar claimed he was in Houston for some sort of "Islamic seminar."

It wouldn't be the first time an Islamic seminar in Houston drew some serious "misunderstanders."

In addition to the publications, thumb drive, and the brass knuckles confiscated by police, investigators said that Kumar had a large amount of cash that had not been declared to Customs officials as part of his travel.

Investigators told KPRC Local 2 Investigates that at least $8,000 in U.S. bills were found, along with thousands of dollars in a foreign currency. Federal law requires passengers to declare any time they are traveling with $10,000 or more, and officers point out there was no such declaration in this case.

A Justice Department official said it was not clear whether a federal hold would be placed on Kumar, which would allow him to be jailed longer while he is investigated further.

The weapons count could normally mean a quick release from jail after a fairly low bond is posted, but a federal hold would allow him to remain in custody as federal agents search for any potential terrorism ties or reason for concern.

UPDATE, August 25: As further information has come out, a few clarifications are in order. First, as should be obvious, this Vijay Kumar and the congressional candidate from Tennessee are not the same person. Second, the one who was arrested in the Houston airport described himself as non-Muslim, and working on a book. One However, the system worked in Houston: red flags were raised (behavior, brass knuckles, jihadist literature) and caught, though one hopes that was not part of the research for the book.

There, there. You're not going to get obliterated today; it's just later on where things could get a little dicey. You've got at least 12 months, so it all depends on if you're a glass-half-full or glass-half-empty kind of person, you see.

Seriously, though, whatever the timetable, is there any political will left to ensure the Islamic Republic of Iran never reaches the next milestone -- its first bomb test? An update on this story. "Iran '12 months from nuclear weapon' US warns as Bushehr reactor started," from the Telegraph, August 21:

The US sought to reassure Israel that Iran is still a year away from building a nuclear weapon, as Iran's leadership hailed the fuelling of its first nuclear power plant on Saturday.

Right. Just try not to think of the idea that the "dying" Lockerbie bomber could, theoretically, outlive your country as you know it, with the current word being that he could make it at least another two years.

Iranian television showed live pictures of Iran's nuclear chief Ali Akbar Salehi and his Russian counterpart watching a fuel rod assembly being prepared for insertion into the reactor at Bushehr.

"Despite all the pressures, sanctions and hardships imposed by Western nations, we are now witnessing the start-up of the largest symbol of Iran's peaceful nuclear activities," Mr Salehi told a news conference afterwards. He described the plant as "a symbol of Iranian resistance and patience".

The plant, built with Russian help, is expected to begin producing electricity in the next few weeks.

Also known in Moscow as Operation Really, We're 100% Sure This Won't Come Back to Bite Us.

Iran is suspected of wanting to build nuclear weapons. Successfully operating a nuclear reactor will be seen by many in the Middle East and wider afield as a significant step forward for its nuclear industry towards that goal.

Israel has often warned that it cannot live with a nuclear-armed Iran, and there are still fears that Israel could launch a pre-emptive military strike on Iran which could ignite war across the Middle East, although bombing an operative reactor could release deadly radioactivity.

As John Bolton warned about earlier this week in the report linked above.

Gary Samore, President Obama's adviser on nuclear issues, tried to ease tensions among Israeli officials by telling the New York Times that the process of converting nuclear material into a weapon that worked would take at least 12 months.

Russia insists that its help at Bushehr will not assist Iranian efforts to build a bomb. Russia will both supply Bushehr with fuel and take back the spent fuel - which could be used to make weapons-grade plutonium.

"The construction of the nuclear plant at Bushehr is a clear example showing that any country, if it abides by existing international legislation and provides effective, open interaction with the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), should have the opportunity to access the peaceful use of the atom," said Sergei Kiriyenko, Russian state nuclear corporation chief, at the news conference.

The United Nations Security Council passed a fourth resolution in June calling on Iran to stop its uranium enrichment, and imposing new sanctions.

Over the next two weeks, 163 fuel assemblies, equal to 80 tons of uranium fuel, will be moved inside the building and then into the reactor core.

The uranium fuel used at Bushehr is well below the more than 90 percent enrichment needed for a nuclear warhead.

Here's the problem: the Bushehr reactor is but one component of the Iranian nuclear program. It is ultimately, and at best, a front for other activities. As always, if Iran were truly only interested in the peaceful generation of electricity, why all the secrecy and subterfuge surrounding its nuclear program?

Iran says it plans to build other reactors and says designs for a second reactor in southwestern Iran are taking shape.

The Associated Press cracked the whip the other day, issuing a strict and specific set of guidelines, approved terminology, and "facts" to be used in its coverage of the Ground Zero mosque.

The AP's agenda is clear, and its policy statement amounts to a resolution to agitate in favor of the mosque and dismiss criticism and concerns about it out of hand.

It is an open and unapologetic statement of journalistic bias.

As Frank Gaffney says in what will be a handy companion to future AP reporting on the mosque, it amounts to a "Muslim Brotherhood narrative about the Islamic cultural center formerly known as the 'Ground Zero mosque'." A thorough deconstruction of AP's pravda, er, "truth," about the project is indeed in order. "Fact-Checking the AP 'Fact Check' On the Ground Zero Mosque," by Frank Gaffney for Big Journalism, August 20:

Stop the presses! This just in: The Associated Press "standards center" has issued a "staff advisory" on covering what is to be known from here on out as "the New York City mosque." From now on, the AP "staff" - and, therefore, everybody who still actually reads newspapers that still actually use the wire service's copy - is supposed to conform to what amounts to the Muslim Brotherhood narrative about the Islamic cultural center formerly known as the "Ground Zero mosque."

AP's Deputy Managing Editor for Standards and Production, Tom Kent, sent this "guidance" out to his colleagues, with inputs from Chad Roedemeier in the New York bureau and Terry Hunt in Washington: "We should continue to avoid the phrase 'Ground Zero mosque' or 'mosque at Ground Zero' on all platforms. (We've very rarely used this wording, except in slugs, though we sometimes see other news sources using the term.) The site of the proposed Islamic center and mosque is not at Ground Zero, but two blocks away in a busy commercial area. We should continue to say it's "near" Ground Zero, or two blocks away."

It was hit by landing gear from one of the hijacked planes. It was damaged by the instrument and the act of the attack, and is thus clearly part of the site of the attack. More on that here. As Gaffney observes, even Rauf seemed to grasp that:

Interestingly, among those who formerly used the now-proscribed descriptor "Ground Zero mosque" is none other than Feisal Abdul Rauf, its imam and chief promoter. He called it that even though the proposed venue has always been two blocks away from the World Trade Center site.

Perhaps Rauf used this moniker because his planned location for the mosque was part of the real estate attacked and damaged on 9/11 - the home of the Burlington Coat Factory until it was struck by a landing gear from a plane that struck one of the Twin Towers. Perhaps he used that term to brand his "Cordoba House" because body parts from the victims of those attacks have been found all over Lower Manhattan, including the old Burlington factory area, making it part of the hallowed ground.

Or perhaps, Imam Rauf called his project the Ground Zero mosque because he wanted to associate his 15-story, $100 million complex as closely as possible to the location where nearly 3,000 Americans and other innocent people - precisely because they were murdered there by people who wanted, as he does, to "bring shariah to America."

The last explanation would certainly conform to the triumphalist past practice of adherents to shariah, the barbaric, totalitarian political program that masquerades as a religion. Indeed, there is a tradition of constructing mosques at the site of previous Islamic conquests for example in Jerusalem, Istanbul and Cordoba, Spain. Yes, it was for Cordoba - where a Catholic church was converted into the world's third largest mosque by the Moorish conquerors of Spain - that Rauf wanted initially to name his Ground Zero mosque.

We can't get a clarification from Imam Rauf about precisely why he wanted to call his complex the Ground Zero mosque. He seems to be incommunicado as he is, just now, on an extended overseas stay, including stops in Malaysia and a U.S. taxpayer-underwritten trip to Middle East capitals. This foray could not be more convenient as the imam seeks to raise the nine-figure sum required to build his facility now being repackaged as simply an address: "Park 51."

In his absence, it has mostly fallen to Muslim Brotherhood operatives associated with fronts like the Council on American Islamic Relations and the Muslim American Society to tout the mosque. And all they want to do is get others - especially in the media and government - to drive home themes like those presented as "facts" by the Associated Press.

The Brotherhood has already succeeded brilliantly at this in the past. For example, the "guidelines" adopted in October 2001 by the Society of Professional Journalists explicitly call for its members to use spellings "preferred by the American Muslim Council, including 'Muhammad,' 'Quran,' and 'Makkah,' not 'Mecca' - at a time when the AMC was one of the most prominent Brotherhood fronts in the United States. [...]

It behooves us, therefore, to do a fact check on AP's "fact check":

AP: "A New York imam and his proposed mosque near ground zero are being demonized by political candidates -- mostly Republicans -- despite the fact that Islam is already very much a part of the World Trade Center neighborhood. And that Muslims pray inside the Pentagon, too, less than 80 feet from where terrorists attacked."

Before we get to Gaffney's response, there is one apparent difference at the Pentagon: That chapel is described as a space for all faiths, sounding rather like an airport chapel where, essentially, if you need a quiet place to pray to whomever it is you pray to, here's where you go. There are Bibles, and even a font for holy water, and there are reportedly Jewish and Hindu services, with Buddhist services possibly in the works as well. In other words, it is not a triumphalist Islamic structure intended to 1.) throw down a gauntlet on whether 9/11 had something to do with Islam, and 2.) force the national discussion on Islam into concluding it didn't, with dissenters branded as paranoid, unwashed bigots.

Gaffney continues:

THE FACTS: "Demonized" is a loaded term that denigrates the criticism Republicans and a growing number of Democrats - including Sen. Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader - have properly made of the site of the Ground Zero Mosque and, in some cases, of its Imam. The issue is not whether Muslims pray in proximity to Ground Zero - or the Pentagon's equally hallowed ground. Rather, it is whether they and the facility in which they pray are dedicated to the promotion of the seditious, anti-constitutional program of Shariah. If so, it is a problem. If not, not....

There is so much more. Read it all.

"This hate preacher has repeatedly said violently hostile things about the West that are totally against our society's values."

But he must have some followers and material support in France. It's not likely he'd sneak back in to preach to the wall. "France expels Islamist preacher for second time: minister," from Agence France-Presse, August 20:

PARIS -- France on Thursday expelled for a second time radical Islamic cleric Ali Ibrahim al-Sudani back to his native Egypt having already kicked him out in January, Interior Minister Brice Hortefeux said.

"This individual very recently reappeared on our territory despite an expulsion order in his name, carried out in January," Hortefeux said in a statement of the former imam of the Hamza mosque, at Pantin outside Paris.

"This hate preacher has repeatedly said violently hostile things about the West that are totally against our society's values," he said, adding that Sudani was on Thursday afternoon aboard a flight to Egypt.

Since 2002, France has expelled 125 radical Islamists, including 29 imams and preachers, the statement said. It did not say how Sudani managed to get back into France.

There is "no compulsion in religion" according to Qur'an 2:256. However, Islamic law abounds in subtle and not-so-subtle means of coercion (cf. Qur'an 9:29) to impose itself on non-Muslim or not-Muslim-enough societies. Hence, in practice, there is no compulsion in religion until the jihadist thugs are strong enough to make you an offer you can't refuse. And once Sharia's strictures are in place, there is not only compulsion in religion, but the power to imprison and kill to enforce it. Chechnya is rushing headlong in this direction.

"RPT-Women without headscarves targeted in Muslim Chechnya," by Amie Ferris-Rotman for Reuters, August 21:

GROZNY, Russia, Aug 20 (Reuters) - Many women in Russia's volatile Chechnya region said on Friday they had been harassed and some physically harmed by bands of men for not wearing headscarves during the Muslim fasting month of Ramadan.

Qur'an 4:34, in its letter and spirit, green-lights the idea of striking disobedient women.

Against the backdrop of a spreading Islamist insurgency, many fear that growing interest in radical Islam could fuel separatism in the volatile North Caucasus, where the Kremlin watches uneasily as sharia law eclipses Russian.

Residents and witnesses told Reuters that bearded men in traditional Islamic dress have been roaming the streets both on foot and in cars since Ramadan started on Aug. 11, demanding bare-headed women wear a headscarf.

"Two men came up to me, one furiously fingering a prayer bead, and said it wasn't pretty to have a bare head during Ramadan," 38-year old Markha Atabayeva told Reuters in the Chechen capital Grozny. "They instilled such fear in me".

Atabayeva was one of at least a dozen women who told of harassment or attacks. One of the women's assailants told Reuters "hundreds" of women had been warned.

Atabayeva said earlier she had seen a group of men with automatic rifles taunting women for not wearing headscarves.

A woman in her mid-30s said she was punched in the face by a man in Islamic dress after refusing to put on a headscarf he had given her.

The men's action follows a radical order earlier this week from Chechnya's spiritual leader to shut all cafes during the month of Ramadan, as well as paintball attacks on bareheaded women in June.

A number of other women described this week how men in cars threatened them with violence if they did not cover up. While some women carry headscarves in their bags, those without were encouraged to go home immediately.

The action targeting women highlights tension over efforts by Chechnya's firebrand Moscow-backed leader, Ramzan Kadyrov, to enforce Islamic rules that can violate Russia's constitution.

One of the assailants, who described himself as an "activist", told Reuters: "We are trying to warn women of their possible sins before God".

"We do this through force, fighting and battles," he said on condition of anonymity, adding that hundreds of Chechen women had been "warned" since the start of Ramadan.

Another assailant said they were working under orders from Chechnya's Centre for Spiritual-Moral Education, which Kadyrov set up 18 months ago.

Critics say that in return for keeping a shaky peace in Chechnya, site of two separatist wars with Moscow since the mid-1990s, Kadyrov is allowed to impose his vision of Islam.

Kadyrov's spokesman declined to comment on the action against women failing to wear headscarves. Alcohol is all but banned in Chechnya and women must wear headscarves in state buildings. Polygamy is encouraged by authorities.

It is a long-standing practice in Islamic warfare to invite the targeted population to convert before attacking. Indeed, it goes back to Muhammad himself:

"When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them. ... If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them...." (Sahih Muslim 19.4294)

Meanwhile, jihadist leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani is urging the Sikhs to relax and ignore the letters. Easier said than done. More on this story: "Kashmir: Islamic groups pressuring Sikhs to convert," by Nirmala Carvalho for AsiaNews, August 20:

Srinagar (AsiaNews) - Some Sikhs living in Kashmir have received anonymous letters recently, urging them to "embrace Islam, join the protests against civilian killings or pack up and leave the Valley." In one letter, the anonymous writer said, "Since you are benefitting from the joys here, why can't you share the grief and sorrow of Kashmiris as well? We know you are afraid of bullets" but "hold protests inside your gurdwaras [Sikh temples] or leave."

For decades, Pakistan and India have been at loggerheads over the mountainous region. The Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir now occupies the eastern half of the territory. For years, it has been the scene of a Muslim insurgency dedicated to the reunification of the greater Kashmir region under Pakistani rule.

Yesterday, hard-line separatist leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani tried to reassure Kashmir Sikhs. He told them to ignore the letters, and not feel threatened....

Of course, their dhimmi Obamaite union bosses will have something to say about this. "They won't build it! Hardhats vow not to work on controversial mosque near Ground Zero," by Samuel Goldsmith for the New York Daily News, August 20 (thanks to all who sent this in):

A growing number of New York construction workers are vowing not to work on the mosque planned near Ground Zero.

"It's a very touchy thing because they want to do this on sacred ground," said Dave Kaiser, 38, a blaster who is working to rebuild the World Trade Center site.

"I wouldn't work there, especially after I found out about what the imam said about U.S. policy being responsible for 9/11," Kaiser said.

The grass-roots movement is gaining momentum on the Internet. One construction worker created the "Hard Hat Pledge" on his blog and asked others to vow not to work on the project if it stays on Park Place.

"Thousands of people are signing up from all over the country," said creator Andy Sullivan, a construction worker from Brooklyn. "People who sell glass, steel, lumber, insurance. They are all refusing to do work if they build there."

"Hopefully, this will be a tool to get them to move it," he said. "I got a problem with this ostentatious building looming over Ground Zero."...

A few days ago I agreed to a debate on the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero on Ave Maria Radio's Kresta in the Afternoon, with host Al Kresta. They didn't have an opponent lined up yet, but that was fine with me: the facts are the facts.

So imagine when my surprise and delight when I was waiting for the show to start and Dawud Walid of Hamas-linked CAIR's Michigan chapter was announced as my debate opponent. CAIR operatives have been ducking me for years, ever since Honest Ibe Hooper and I had a delightful encounter moderated by, of all people, Keith Olbermann, on MSNBC way back in 2003 or 2004. Hearing Walid announced, I quickly opened my files on CAIR's connections with Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, the convictions of its officials on terror charges, its unindicted co-conspirator status, and the rest, and was loaded for bear -- CAIR bear.

But then Kresta went on the air and he was, well, crestfallen. He and his producer Nick Thomm told the story to the listening audience: they had contacted CAIR's national office in Washington, which referred them to Walid, who agreed to a debate and even posted on his blog that he would be appearing. They were chagrined to report that after all that, Walid had not shown up. He had vanished without notice or explanation.

Of course, CAIR operatives know that I will tell the truth about their unsavory gang of thugs, libel artists and seditionists. That's why they will not meet me in debate, whatever the forum, whatever the topic. But if they ever summon up some courage to defend their Islamic supremacist positions, I'll be right here.

Meanwhile, I expect you'll find Dawud Walid cowering in a corner with Brave Ahmed Rehab.

Brave Ahmed Rehab

Dhimmi pseudojournalistic pro-Islamic supremacist propagandist Manya Brachear of the Chicago Tribune's Seeker blog has turned over her column today to Brave Ahmed Rehab, the enemy of the freedom of speech who quailed and ran when offered a chance to debate with me at the ALA last summer, of Hamas-linked Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR).

Rehab, CAIR's Chicago top dog, spends the column smearing as bigots and racists the 70% of Americans who oppose the Ground Zero mega-mosque -- and of course in the process defames Pamela Geller and me as the leaders of the movement. Rehab never explains, of course, why Muslims worldwide won't see this as a triumphal mosque built on a site of conquest, like the Dome of the Rock or the Umayyad Mosque. He fills his column with irrelevancies about strip clubs in the Ground Zero area, despite the fact that strippers didn't take down the Twin Towers. He whines about collective guilt being applied to Muslims, despite the fact that the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf has not shown himself to be moderate in any genuine sense, but is, rather, an open proponent of Sharia, which denies equality of rights to women and non-Muslims and restricts the freedom of speech (as he has said would be a good idea in his book What's Right with Islam, and refuses to denounce Hamas.

But then again, so does CAIR. Brachear gave her column over to this CAIR thug despite the fact that CAIR operatives have repeatedly refused to denounce Hamas and Hizballah as terrorist groups. She appears unfazed by the fact that CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case. Its Several of its former officials have been convicted of various crimes related to jihad terror. Two of its other officials have made Islamic supremacist statements. CAIR also was involved in the Flying Imams' intimidation suit against the passengers who reported their suspicious behavior.

Who is next week's guest columnist, Ms. Brachear? David Duke?

Maybe the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf should stop by the Kashmir Valley on his U.S. taxpayer-funded tour and explain to these Islamic supremacists how they're getting their religion all wrong, wrong wrong. "Embrace Islam or leave Valley, Sikhs threatened," by M. Saleem Pandit for the Times of India, August 20 (thanks to all who sent this in):

SRINAGAR: Sikhs in the Kashmir Valley have received anonymous letters from Islamic militants asking them to either embrace Islam and join the protests against civilian killings or pack up and leave the Valley. The 60,000-strong Sikh community is the single largest minority group in the Valley.

An organisation of Kashmiri Sikhs said that several community members have received these letters. "Community members have received unsigned letters at various places," said All Party Sikh Coordination Committee (ASCC) coordinator Jagmohan Singh Raina. He said the community has decided to stay put and fight these "evil designs" at a meeting in Srinagar on Thursday.

Raina quoted a letter as saying: "When you are enjoying the joys here, why can't you share the grief and sorrow of Kashmiris as well? We know you are afraid of bullets... Hold protests inside gurdwaras or leave Kashmir." He added, "Some letters have asked Sikhs to embrace Islam."

Raina urged both factions of the Hurriyat, JKLF and PoK-based United Jihad Council to take serious note of the threats to maintain amity and brotherhood in the Valley....

I'm just waiting for Nancy Pelosi to open an investigation into the funding of Ground Zero mega-mosque opponents Harry Reid and Howard Dean. I expect Kenneth P. Vogel of Politico is already on the phone to Dean, doing his tough-guy act and snarling, "Look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way." Oh, let's do it the hard way, by all means, Kenny.

"Dean: 'Some' Dems demonizing N.Y. mosque opponents," by Jordan Fabian for The Hill, August 20:

Former Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said Thursday that some members of his party are "demonizing" opponents of the Lower Manhattan mosque.

Dean -- who surprised many political observers this week by saying that the planners should move the location of the planned Islamic center -- targeted Democrats and Republicans in an interview with MSNBC.

"I don't think -- I honestly -- I think some of my own folks at my end of the spectrum of the party are demonizing some fairly decent people who are opposed to this," he said. "And again, in no way am I defending the right-wing of the Republican Party. Sixty-five percent of the people in this country are not right-wing bigots. Some of them really have deep emotional feelings about this."...

It's amazing, but Howard Dean is actually talking reasonably -- although the problem of the mega-mosque at Ground Zero is by no means merely one of "deep emotional feelings."

The pro-Sharia, anti-free speech Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf begins his tour on the dhimmi dime. "'Ground Zero' Imam Starts US-Paid Middle East Tour," by Theunis Bates for AOL News, August 20 (thanks to Twostellas):

(Aug. 20) -- The Muslim cleric behind the planned "Ground Zero" Islamic center is in the Middle East, sent by the State Department on a trip intended to smooth relations between the U.S. and the Muslim world while adding to the uproar back home.

A day after arriving in Bahrain, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf told The Associated Press today that he hopes his tour would draw attention to the need for America and the Middle East to battle fundamentalism together.

"This issue of extremism is something that has been a national security issue -- not only for the United States but also for many countries and nations in the Muslim world," he said after leading Friday prayers at a mosque in Bahrain's capital Manama. "This is why this particular trip has a great importance, because all countries in the Muslim world -- as well as the Western world -- are facing this ... major security challenge."

What does he mean by "extremism"?

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, executive director of the Cordoba Initiative, greets worshippers inside a Muharraq, Bahrain, mosque. Rauf, the imam leading plans for an Islamic center near the site of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on New York, is on a U.S.-funded outreach tour to Bahrain, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates to talk about religious tolerance in America.

Rauf also plans stops in Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. Details about the imam's plans in each country have not been released by the State Department, although spokesman P.J. Crowley said Rauf would be giving a series of lectures on religious co-existence and life as a Muslim in America. He added that the imam might also discuss the Islamic cultural center that the cleric's organization, the Cordoba Initiative, plans to build in lower Manhattan, two blocks from the site of the World Trade Center.

"I wouldn't be surprised if he talks about the ongoing debate within the United States, as an example of our emphasis on religious tolerance and resolving questions that come up within the rule of law," Crowley said.

Of course, this is not an issue of religious tolerance, but Crowley is Obama's man.

Rauf's government-funded trip has come in for intense criticism from opponents of the so-called Ground Zero mosque. Earlier this week, Republican Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida and Peter King of New York expressed outrage that the State Department was funding a figure they consider to be a radical. (Rauf has been criticized for refusing to openly condemn the Palestinian extremist movement Hamas).

"It is unacceptable that U.S. taxpayers are being forced to fund Feisal Abdul Rauf's trip to the Middle East," their statement read. "The U.S. should be using public diplomacy programs to combat extremism, not endorse it."

The trip is expected to cost the State Department about $16,000.

However, this isn't the imam's first government-sponsored tour of the region. He traveled twice to the Middle East during the George W. Bush administration and once earlier this year....

Bush shouldn't have sent him out, either.

The State Department also tried to dismiss concerns that Rauf might use the tour to raise funds for the mosque. "This is what we tell anyone who participates in one of our expert trips: They're there to provide perspective on behalf of the United States, and they're not to engage in personal business as part of the program that they're participating in," said Crowley. "He has agreed to that."

And who's checking?

By "terrorism" they mean the preaching of the Gospel by this Christian student in the mosque. "Students Paralyse UI," by PMNews, August 16 (thanks to David):

Muslim students of the University of Ibadan, UI, this morning paralysed activities during a protest against the institution's refusal to expel a part four law student, Miss Seun Olubunmi Adegunsoye who preached gospel in the school mosque last Friday.

Adegunsoye of Mountain of Fire and Miracle Church, according to reports, preached at the mosque last Friday to the Muslim faithful.

While she was preaching, the Muslim students mobilised themselves, attacked the lady and beat her mercilessly.

The school's security men rescued her and took her away for questioning.

Sources saidhe institution's Vice Chancellor, Professor Olufemi Bamiro, appealed to the Muslim students not to foment any trouble, promising that the issue would appropriately investigated.

However, the Muslim students went haywire when they found out that the institution's bulletin which was released this morning did not report the incident and the punishment the school authority has meted out to the preacher.

The students who barricaded all the entrances leading to the premier university and carried placards prevented both academic and non-academic staff from gaining access into the school this morning.

Among the inscriptions written on their placard were: "No to terrorism. No religion should be allowed to terrorize us in our country"; "We will not take any unreligious act from any religious group"; "We will do everything possible to protect our religion"; "We will not accept insult from any religion"; "Olubunmi should be expelled from UI because she has done what is wrong"; "Olubunmi should be arraigned before a court of law for preaching in the mosque".

According to a leaflet signed by a student called Almin, they demanded that Adegunsoye be expelled from the school and charged to court.

Other demands include: Investigating religious leaders behind the lady, carry out medical examination on the lady to find out whether she is mentally sound, ban Christians from preaching in public places in the school, and punish anyone who facilitated her release from the school security net....

Take your pick: truth or lies

Sometimes it's just too easy. This started coming into the office in emails yesterday: "Incensed by Rampant Islamophobia, Muslim American Scholar Strikes Back."

Of course! The real problem Muslims have is not rampant jihad terrorism and Islamic supremacism, but "Islamophobia"! Pay no attention to all the jihad attacks committed in the name of Islam around the world, and the triumphalist actions and declarations of imminent Islamic conquest -- the real problem is not with them, but with people like me who report on them and show their root causes in the Qur'an and Muhammad's example (both copiously invoked by those same jihadists and Islamic supremacists)!

And so now to counter my bestselling 2006 book The Truth About Muhammad comes Moustafa Zayed's The Lies About Muhammad -- and I'm sure that that's exactly what his book is full of. I haven't read it yet (yes, Zayed, I've ordered it -- you're welcome -- and I expect to have a great deal of fun with it), but the press release announcing its publication contains one choice lie as a preview:

Zayed comments, "Today's Islamophobia is not a misunderstanding, or a difference in beliefs or opinions, but a deliberate fabrication and misinformation of clear facts perpetrated upon the American people." Zayed gave an example: In his book, Mr. Spencer brought a verse from the Quran, claiming that it proves that Islamic law mandates male witnesses of "sexual immortality" [sic!] in order to support the male criminal! It appears that Mr. Spencer has intentionally omitted the first sentence of the verse that shows it is only related to recording debts!

Unfortunately for Zayed, we can actually go to the Qur'an and evaluate the truth of his claim. There are several verses in the Qur'an that mandate four witnesses to establish a crime of zina, or sexual immorality. Let's look at each:

1. "As for those of your women who are guilty of lewdness, call to witness four of you against them. And if they testify (to the truth of the allegation) then confine them to the houses until death take them or (until) Allah appoint for them a way (through new legislation)." -- Qur'an 4:15.

That's the whole verse. Does the immediately preceding verse, 4:14, have anything to do with "recording debts"? No. It says this: "And whoso disobeyeth Allah and His messenger and transgresseth His limits, He will make him enter Fire, where he will dwell for ever; his will be a shameful doom."

2. "And those who accuse honourable women but bring not four witnesses, scourge them (with) eighty stripes and never (afterward) accept their testimony. They indeed are evil-doers." -- Qur'an 24:4.

Again, that's the whole verse. Anything in 24:3 about "recording debts"? Here it is: "The adulterer shall not marry save an adulteress or an idolatress, and the adulteress none shall marry save an adulterer or an idolater. All that is forbidden unto believers."

3. "Why did they not bring four witnesses to prove it? When they have not brought the witnesses, such men, in the sight of Allah, (stand forth) themselves as liars!" -- Qur'an 24:13.

Whole verse, yes. Anything in 24:12 about recording debt? Strike three: "Why did not the believers -- men and women -- when ye heard of the affair, put the best construction on it in their own minds and say, 'This (charge) is an obvious lie'?"

That last one is referring to the accusation of adultery against Aisha, Muhammad's child bride and favorite wife. Muhammad exonerated her after receiving these revelations that four witnesses were required to establish the crime, and her accusers did not have four witnesses. I invoke 24:13 in discussing this and its implications for Islamic law on page 67 of The Truth About Muhammad. Do I leave out part of the verse? No, actually I don't quote it at all, just refer to it by the number. Zayed is...lying.

And as for Islamic law: "When a person (who has reached puberty and is sane) voluntarily...accuses another person of adultery...then the accuser is subject to the penalty for accusing a person of adultery without four witnesses..." ('Umdat al-Salik O13.1).

The Lies About Muhammad. That's a good title, Mr. Zayed, because clearly your book is full of them.

Of course! The old "Baking Chocolate Crusade." Oldest trick in the Zionist-Crusader Conspiracy Handbook. "Americans use chocolate in plot to subvert Islam! - Iranian News Service," from Kodoom, August 16 (thanks to Buraq_is_Dead):

A fundamentalist Iranian News Service Jahan News, has discovered a new plot by American troops in Pakistan to subvert Islam. Jahan News claims that U.S. troops, to promote Christianity, distribute a free mixture of sweet milk chocolates and dark bitter chocolates to Pakistani kids, but wrap the bitter chocolates in labels imprinted with the name of the Islamic prophet, Mohammad, to leave a "bad taste" with children about Islam!

No, nobody's guilty. The bombs planted themselves, and the guns fired themselves. This story blames lack of training and a "dysfunctional" legal system, but those two factors are not nearly the whole story. At best, there is an attitude of complacency and lack of political will to overcome the "dysfunction": for many within the Pakistani government, dysfunction and corruption have served them well. At worst, and all too often, there is outright sympathy for the cause of the jihadists at appallingly high levels of government. "Pakistan: Lack of terror convictions hurts fight," by Sebastian Abbot for the Associated Press, August 20:

ISLAMABAD - Pakistani courts have yet to convict a single person in any of the country's biggest terrorist attacks of the past three years, a symptom of a dysfunctional legal system that's hurting the fight against the Taliban and al-Qaida at a critical time.

Police without basic investigative skills such as the ability to lift fingerprints, and prosecutors who lack training to try terror cases, are some of the main reasons cited. Another daunting challenge: Judges and witnesses often are subject to intimidation that affects the ability to convict.

How about outright sympathizers?

The legal system's failure to attack terrorism is critical because it robs Pakistan of a chance to enforce a sense of law and order, which militants have set out to destroy.

Not only to destroy what remains of Pakistan's civil society, but to impose Sharia and then crow that they were, therefore, the only ones who could "bring law and order."

It has "caused a sense of terror and insecurity amongst the members of society," said one of the country's top judges, Lahore High Court Chief Justice Khawaja Mohammad Sharif.

The legal failures also call into question the government's ability to fight terrorism in any way except by using the army in military offensives or -- human rights groups alleged -- through targeted extra-judicial killings.

The United States has said repeatedly that its success in Afghanistan and throughout the troubled region depends on strong help from Pakistan against militants. [...]

Old military adage: "Hope is not a method."

An Associated Press review found no convictions in the 20 largest and most high-profile terror attacks of the last three years.

Many of the Pakistani court cases connected to those attacks -- which have killed nearly 1,100 people_ have dragged on for years, or have yet to make it even past the investigation stage and into the courts.

The handful of cases that have been decided have all resulted in acquittals -- though many of these defendants remain in custody while they are investigated in other cases, court officials said.

By contrast, 89 percent of terrorism cases in the United States have resulted in convictions since the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, according to a report this year by the Center on Law and Security at the New York University School of Law.

The recent acquittals of suspects in two of the most high-profile attacks -- the 2008 truck bombing outside the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad and last year's commando-style raid on a police academy in Lahore_ have highlighted the problems plaguing the system.

The verdict in the Lahore police academy attack seemed to defy explanation....

Or does it?

Still looking to chip away territory wherever the opportunity seems to present itself. And why not? It's worked this far. "Montenegro: Radical Muslims placed under surveillance," from AdnKronos International, August 19:

Podgorica and Beograd, 19 August (AKI) - Montenegro's security agency is stepping up surveillance of radical Muslims suspected of links with fundamentalist Wahabi movement in the region. Police have been authorised to tap the phones of alleged members of a group based in several towns in Montenegro, reports said.

There some 100 to 120 Wahabis in the tiny Balkan country, according to the national security agency.

The move came after a local politician Dzemail Suljevic from the Serbian part of Muslim-majority Sandzak - which has districts in Serbia and Montenegro - last week urged Muslims from the region to form an autonomous province.

Sandzak stretches from the border with Bosnia and Herzegovina to Kosovo over an area of 8,403 square kilometres. Six of its municipalities of are in Serbia and five in neighbouring Montenegro.

The towns in Montenegro that secret police from Podgorica have placed under surveillance are ones that Suljevic said should be "added" to Sandzak. They include Plav, Gusinje, Rozaje and Bijelo Polje.

The country's Wahabis are believed to be financed by various Islamic charities, Montenegrin news agency MINA cited the national security agency as saying.

The idea of autonomy for Sandzak, which has sparked opposition from both Serbia and Montenegro, reportedly comes from radical imam Muamer Zukorlic. He is known for his hostility to the state-endorsed official Serbian Islamic Community (IZS) and his spiritual allegiance to Bosnia.

Meanwhile, in Sadzak's town of Novi Pazar, the Serbian flag was brought down from local elementary school and burned, while the Bosnian flag was left intact.

Police said late on Wednesday they had arrested three young men in connection with the incident.

An act of dhimmitude masquerading as "compassion" continues to pay dividends. Not for Scotland or the United Kingdom, of course, but for Libya and the convicted murderer who got a hero's welcome there.

An update on this story. "Lockerbie bomber expected to live for two more years, Libyan official says," by Damien McElroy for the Telegraph, August 19:

Libyan officials have said that the Lockerbie bomber is now expected to live for another two years with the help of treatment from regime's best doctors.

Col Mummar Gaddafi, the Libyan leader, has decreed that Abedelbaset Ali Mohmet al-Megrahi, a former intelligence agent, must receive the same level of medical care as afforded to state leaders.

High level Libyan officials told The Daily Telegraph that Megrahi is expected to live for at least two years, despite his release a year ago by the Scottish government on compassionate grounds that he had only three months to live.

On Friday, Megrahi's family are expected to mark the first anniversary of his return, from a prison sentence in Scotland for the mass murder of 270 people in the 1988 bombing of PanAm flight 103, quietly at the home.

Officials said his wife, mother, five sons and brothers, plan to gather for an Iftar meal to break the fast marking the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. The state media has been told to show pictures of Megrahi's return to mark the occasion.

He has recently begun second stage chemotherapy for prostate cancer.

A Libyan official on Col Gaddafi's staff said: "Megrahi is getting personal attention from the best doctors and [Gaddafi] has authorised his own attendants to supervise the cancer treatment at Tripoli Medical Centre."

Doctors have been ordered to procure the latest generation of cancer treating drugs from America and have earned Col Gaddafi's personal praise for their efforts. [...]

When not under going trice weekly treatments at the Tripoli Medical Centre, Megrahi spends his days on a hospital bed at home in Tripoli's upmarket Damascus district surrounded by the trappings of the privileged elite.

He lives in a large villa which is under 24-hour guard and there is normally a Humvee, white Toyata Land Cruiser and BMW 7 series in the yard. The Megrahi family has thrived as a result of his notoriety - in addition to the spacious villa in central Tripoli, Megrahi's sons have been granted lucrative jobs in the government....

This guy again. He can sure spin a yarn, too, as shown below, but his novel would lack continuity. "Yemen: Al-Qaeda no.2 urges '9/11' style Jihad against Israel," from AdnKronos International, August 19:

Rome, 19 August (AKI) - A top Al-Qaeda commander in Yemen has urged Arab military pilots to fly their planes into Israeli targets replicating the deadly 11 September 2001 attacks on American cities, the Daily Beast website reported.

The Yemen branch of Al-Qaeda's second-in-command, Saeed al-Shehri, purportedly issued the call in an audio message, the Daily Beast said.

In the message, Al-Shehri ordered jihadists to exploit a future war between the Jewish State and Iran.

An all-out regional war is expected to break out after Israel launches a strike again Tehran's nuclear facilities, al-Sheri said.

Iran's Shia government will blame Saudi Arabia for helping Israel attack its nuclear installations and will use this as an excuse to seize the holy Saudi cities of Mecca and Medina, he predicted.

After Israel took out its nuke facilities and Iran tied up its resources in retaliating?

Israel will seize fresh territory in the Middle East to establish "the greater state of Israel," he claims.

So the jihadists will lose again and demand a do-over?

The "Shura Council of the Mujahadeen in the Arabian Peninsula" has held a meeting to prepare for such a war, al-Shehri said.

He urged followers to assassinate Arab leaders, citing the example of the "tyrant Anwar Sadat," the Egyptian president murdered by Islamic radicals.

Shehri was held in the US prison camp at Guantanamo for six years after being caught in Pakistan in December 2001. After being sent back to his native Saudi Arabia, he fled to Yemen and helped set up Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.

Gee, that went well.

He has been a strategist for AQAP and terrorism experts say he was behind the plot to assassinate Saudi Arabia's deputy interior minister, Muhammad bin Nayef last year which only narrowly failed.

Cost of New York bus ads: $10,000
Cost of press release: $1,500
Cost of watching the lapdog media track the sources of these sums while ignoring the questionable funding of a $100 million dollar mosque: Priceless

I just got a call from Kenneth P. Vogel of Politico, asking me a series of questions about donations to our efforts against the Ground Zero mega-mosque, and growing increasingly hostile and belligerent when I declined to answer. Vogel even said to me at one point, "Look, you can make this hard, or you can make this easy" -- apparently he has been watching too many Law and Order reruns.

Well, Politico can be very proud of itself. Instead of looking into where the pro-Sharia, anti-freedom of speech, refuses-to-denounce-Hamas Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf and his thug developer Sharif El-Gamal are getting their $100 million to build the mega-mosque, when they haven't ruled out funding from Iran and Saudi Arabia, they're spending their time trying to trace the few thousands it will take Pamela Geller and me to mount our rally against the mega-mosque on 9/11.

Bravo, Politico. Do your worst. I'll reveal the secret: all our funding comes from the Vast Zionist Conspiracy. And when this all comes down, you'll be in the running for a Walter Duranty Award. Don't know who he was, Vogel? Look him up.

I hadn't planned to comment on this vicious little hit piece, but so many people have sent it to me that I suppose for the record it is worth pointing out its inaccuracies. "The poison behind the Ground Zero mosque furore: The hate-filled sites..."

Hate-filled sites: no, Atlas Shrugs and Jihad Watch are love-filled sites. The idea of their being "hate-filled" is rich, considering that we are the ones who are opposing the anti-woman, anti-free speech, anti-free thought, anti-equality of rights agenda of Islamic supremacists. One could call Andrew Brown "hate-filled" for carrying water for those types. In fact, I think I will.

"...of Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer have fuelled the fight against the Cordoba centre in New York," by Andrew Brown at The Guardian's Comment Is Free, August 18 (thanks to all who sent this in):

Who would have thought that the most successful joke in the history of Comment is free could become a template for far right hate groups in the US? Yet Ariane Sherine's atheist bus ads now have a grim imitator in New York, where a group calling itself Stop Islamisation of America (SIOA) has put up bus ads with a picture of a plane flying into the twin towers on one side, and on the other, an image of the proposed Cordoba centre.

The two people behind SIOA are Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller, who, between them, run two flourishing and hate-filled sites, Jihad Watch and Atlas Shrugs, which link into an undergrowth of far-right websites in Europe, including the skinheads of the English Defence League, but also to respectable rightwingers such as Douglas Murray of the Centre for Social Cohesion, and even the Catholic Herald.

Brown's guilt-by-association game here is as tired as it is beneath contempt. I suppose Andrew Brown is using the word "link" loosely, because at Jihad Watch I link neither to the EDL, nor to the Centre for Social Cohesion, nor to the Catholic Herald. This is not a judgment upon or repudiation of any of them; it is simply a statement of fact.

But probably Brown means that at one point or another I have linked to material from all of them. That is true. I've also linked to AP and Reuters. And to the libel and hate site Little Green Footballs. Brown is attempting to establish some kind of mutual collaboration, or some meeting of the minds. And I'm sure there are many things on which I agree with the EDL, and the CSC, and the Catholic Herald. But I am no more responsible for all of their positions than they are for mine.

Spencer is a Roman Catholic...

This is not entirely accurate, and Andrew Brown might have bothered to do a bit more research. It is careless and lazy of him not to get his facts straight.

...of eastern Orthodox extraction who, for the last 10 years, has propagandised the view that Islam is a religion that commands its adherents to violence, and that Muslims all round the world obey.

Certainly "slay the pagans wherever you find them" (Qur'an 9:5) does seem to have a bit of a violent tinge to it. And there are numerous authorities who say that such verses take precedence over more peaceful ones in the Qur'an. To take just one of many, many available examples, 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.

But Brown, like so many others, would prefer to believe that I make that sort of thing up all by myself. Judging by the number of Islamic jihad terror attacks around the world, my Zionist black arts are quite effective in convincing unwary Muslims to accept this idea.

But as for Brown's claim that I say that "Muslims all round the world obey" this command of violence, if he means that I say that all Muslims do, that's simply nonsense. If he means that Muslims the world over are violent, and finds that improbable, one wonders if he is catching the news lately out of Indonesia, Thailand, Nigeria, etc. etc. etc.

Jihad Watch, incorporating the earlier Dhimmi Watch, is a roiling cauldron of stories from all over the world to illustrate the treachery and violence of Muslims, the criminal weakness of liberals, and the twisted, hate-filled bigotry of anyone on the right who has ever quarrelled with him.

I like "roiling cauldron." Jihad Watch: A Roiling Cauldron. T-shirts should be issued, as soon as we run through our special Above It Are Nineteen: Jihadwatch.org t-shirt issue (and if you know what that refers to, I will have one made and sent to you). But whenever confronted with something like this, the only thing to ask Brown is this: what, exactly, on Jihad Watch is inaccurate? Where is there a false claim? Oh, many have tried to document one, and now there are whole websites devoted to windy tu quoques and inaccurate Arabic renderings trying to catch me out, but they have consistently failed. And you'll notice that Brown himself does not, and cannot, adduce even one example of any inaccuracy.

Geller is a libertarian who once worked on Wall Street.

No, she didn't.

For sanity and moderation, she makes Melanie Phillips look like Karen Armstrong.

For sanity and moderation, I'll take Melanie Phillips over Karen Armstrong in a heartbeat.

Geller and Spencer have just published a book together, The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration's War on America; her website currently contains 267 stories discussing whether the president is, in fact, a Muslim.

He's abandoning Israel. He has done nothing effective to stop Iran's nukes. He wants to ease restrictions on Islamic charities, which have been shut down for aiding jihad. He has aided the OIC's anti-free-speech campaign by co-sponsoring with Egypt a resolution calling for the criminalizing of religious hatred (in whose eyes? Judged by whom?) at the UN. If he isn't a Muslim, and I am not saying he is, what is the difference? He is serving the OIC's agenda.

To judge from their websites, the important political movement in England is the English Defence League (as Geller calls them, "the courageous English patriots of the much-maligned English Defence League"), and in Europe, the extremist Stop Islamisation of Europe group.

Geller hosted a talk in Washington given by Anders Gravers, the founder in succession of Stop the Islamisation of Denmark, and then of Europe, at which he explained the enemy master plan:

"The European Union acts secretly, with the European people being deceived about its development. Democracy is being deliberately removed, the latest example being the Lisbon treaty. However, the plan goes much further with an ultimate goal of being a European-Arabian super-state, incorporating Muslim countries of north Africa and the Middle East in the European Union. This is already initiated with the signing of the Barcelona treaty in 95 by the EU and nine north African states, and it became effective the first of January, 2010 - this year. It is also known as the Euro-Mediterranean co-operation. In return for some European control of oil resources, Muslim countries will have unfettered access to technology and movement of people into Europe. The price Europeans will have to pay is the introduction of sharia law and removal of democracy."

You'd have thought that listening without giggling to such ravings disqualified anyone from being taken seriously.

How unfortunate for Andrew Brown that giggling is not a substantive response to a substantive argument. While Brown giggles, Europe burns: consult Bat Ye'or's Eurabia, Bawer's While Europe Slept, Caldwell's Reflections On the Revolution In Europe, etc.

After that Brown's piece devolves into yet another discussion of the most famous dinner party ever. In reality, what happened was that I was having dinner with Murray and some EDL chaps dropped in, and they and Murray had words. Big deal. The one worthwhile or noteworthy aspect of the whole affair is that it keeps people like Richard Bartholomew and Andrew Brown preoccupied and out of more serious mischief.

Then Brown turns to skewering Damian Thompson of the Daily Telegraph for picking up on a story I posted here -- one which I quickly took down when it proved to be inaccurate, but which Thompson apparently didn't notice had been removed and ran with. Brown claims that Thompson has not "used anything from Spencer on his blog" ever since this episode. These things will happen, of course; I have written 23,568 posts here at Jihad Watch, along with 6 books and hundreds of articles since I started the site, and occasionally there will be a piece that turns out to be unfounded; in that case, I always take down the false information. Considering that Brown committed two howlers to print in the short space of this rather slight hit piece of his, I'd put my record up against his any day.

It's in the Qur'an: "We ordained therein for them: 'Life for life, eye for eye, nose or nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth, and wounds equal for equal.' But if any one remits the retaliation by way of charity, it is an act of atonement for himself. And if any fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (No better than) wrong-doers." -- Qur'an 5:45

Now you will tell me, "Wait a minute, Spencer, that's in the Hebrew Scriptures, too." So often I hear that the Bible and the Qur'an are equivalent in their messages -- something that only someone who hasn't read either one could say. But in any case, it's true: "an eye for an eye" appears in Exodus 21:22-25, Leviticus 24:19-21, and Deuteronomy 19:21. However, this phrase has always been understood in Judaism as limiting excessive vengeance, not encouraging it, and has never been taken in Jewish tradition as being a warrant for maiming anyone. It is likewise limited in Christianity by Jesus' statement: "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, do not resist an evildoer. If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also" (Matthew 5:38-39).

But in Islam, the literal force of the Qur'anic passage is paramount.

"Saudi court mulls verdict to cut defendant's spine," from Emirates 24/7, August 19:

A court in Saudi Arabia is seeking medical advice on whether it is possible to cut the spinal cord of a man as a punishment after he was indicted of causing paralysis to another man during a fight, a local daily reported on Thursday.

The court in the northwestern province of Tabuk has sent letters to hospitals in the kingdom asking them whether the punishment to cripple the defendant by severing his spine is medically possible, the Arabic language daily Okaz said.

The unidentified defendant hit Abdul Aziz Al Mutairi, another Saudi, with a cleaver during a fight more than two years ago and the trial has been delayed because Mutairi is insisting that his attacker suffer the same injury.

"The General Court in Tabuk has sent several letters to hospitals in and outside the region asking doctors about the possibility of cutting the spinal cord of the defendant after he was indicted of causing paralysis to another man," it said.

The paper quoted the 22-year-old Mutairi as saying the defendant had confessed in court to hitting him with the cleaver during their fight in Tabuk.

"King Khaled Hospital is of the opinion that it is possible to cut the spinal cord and cause paralysis medically through specialist centres," he said.

According to the paper, the verdict is pending responses from hospitals to the court's letters.

So there's no discussion of whether it is cruel and unusual punishment. After all, it's in the Qur'an.

While rumors persist that the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque leaders are in talks to move to another property, the thug Sharif El-Gamal insists that the triumphal mosque at Ground Zero will go up right there. "Mosque Developer Rejects Moving to New Location," from NBC New York, August 18 (thanks to all who sent this in):

The developer of an Islamic cultural center that would include a mosque two blocks from Ground Zero appear to have rejected Gov. David Paterson's offer to help them find a different site but a meeting may still be in the works.

On Tuesday, Rep. Peter King said he learned the governor planned to speak with the imam and developers of the mosque and cultural center later this week. Both King and Paterson are scheduled to discuss the issue on Larry King Live tonight.

Lead developer Sharif El-Gamal told NY1 yesterday no meeting had been scheduled yet. Since Paterson first offered to help broker a new location for the mosque last week, however, El-Gamal has insisted the subject was not up for debate, stressing the proximity of the planned center to Ground Zero was not an issue.

"Park51 is a community center. It is two blocks north of the World Trade Center site," El-Gamal told NY1. "In New York City, two blocks is a great distance. There are some buildings in New York that have their own zip codes. There is such a scarcity of space in New York, especially in Lower Manhattan. Keep in mind this is a small island, so we are nowhere near the World Trade Center site."...

So the mosque has nothing to do with the Ground Zero site, eh? In reality, El-Gamal is (surprise of surprises!) lying. Last December the New York Times reported that Ground Zero mosque Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf said, "New York is the capital of the world, and this location close to 9/11 is iconic" and was happy that the mosque would be on the site of a building "where a piece of the wreckage fell." Pamela Geller has recently noticed that the Times has now scrubbed Rauf's quote. It didn't fit the mosque leaders' new line, as reflected in El-Gamal's words above, and so down the Memory Hole it went.

Moorthy Muthuswamy explains in this provocative video.

She has been working with the company for two years and only now has filed suit. Hamas-linked CAIR is representing her. This is, in short, yet another stealth jihad attempt to assert the primacy of Islamic law and custom over American law and custom. "Muslim employee accuses Disney of discrimination," from the Orange County Register, August 18 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

A Disneyland Resort hotel employee accused Disney of discrimination for refusing to let her wear a Muslim head scarf at work in public.

Imane Boudlal, a restaurant hostess at the Storytellers' Cafe in the Grand Californian Hotel in Downtown Disney, said she has been sent home without pay four times this week after attempting to wear a hijab at work.

But Suzi Brown, a Disneyland Resort spokeswoman, said Boudlal was offered a behind-the-scenes assignment at the restaurant until a solution could be figured out. Brown denied that the company discriminated against Boudlal.

Wednesday afternoon, Boudlal was turned away for the fourth time from her public hostess job after holding a press conference to bring attention to the issue. About 50 supporters -- some of whom wore head scarves -- followed her to the front of the restaurant, praying and rallying as they waited for an answer and Disney visitors walked by. Boudlal again was told that she could take an assignment out of public view.

"I'm not going to accept to work in the back," said Boudlal, 26, of Anaheim.

In the press conference, Boudlal said she believes she was discriminated against because she looks Muslim. Boudlal said she sent a letter to Disney requesting that she be able to wear a head scarf. After they kept delaying a response, she decided to report to work with it.

"I'm not here to scare anyone," she said. "I'm here to do my job."

Yeah, sure.

On Wednesday, Boudlal filed a discrimination complaint with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and a letter demanding back pay from Disney, said Ameena Qazi, an attorney from Council on American-Islamic Relations, which is representing Boudlal. Qazi said she believes that Disney is breaking state and federal laws.

"The company values diversity and has a long-standing policy against discrimination of any kind," said Brown of Disney in the prepared statement.

"Ms. Boudlal has worked for the company for more than two years and recently made the request to wear a hijab, and we have been working directly with her on accommodations. In the interim, we offered reasonable accommodations to allow her to work during her scheduled shifts, which she declined."...

Disney is known for its strict dress code, called the Disney Look, which has been in place since 1957.

It won't be in place much longer.

Mosque yes, church no, say New York officials. "Decision Not to Rebuild Church Destroyed on 9/11 Surprises Greek Orthodox Leaders," from FoxNews.com, August 18 (thanks to all who sent this in):

Greek Orthodox leaders trying to rebuild the only church destroyed in the Sept. 11 terror attacks expressed shock this week after learning, via Fox News, that government officials had killed a deal to relocate the church.

The St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church, once a tiny, four-story building in the shadows of lower Manhattan, was destroyed in 2001 by one of the falling World Trade Center towers. Nobody from the church was hurt in the attack, but the congregation has, for the past eight years, been trying to rebuild its house of worship.

Though talks between the church and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey stalled last year, church leaders say they've been trying to kick-start discussions ever since. But amid debate over whether a proposed Islamic community center should go forward near Ground Zero, government officials threw cold water on the prospect of any deal with the church -- telling Fox News the deal is off the table.

Confronted with the Port Authority's verdict, Father Mark Arey, of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, said it's the first he's heard that.

"Negotiations did break off last year. We were expecting to hear from their lawyers -- we never did. We're still expecting to hear from them," he told Fox News. "We're disappointed. ... 130 Liberty Street was promised to us."

Arey was referring to the address, about 100 yards away from the original site, where the government earlier proposed relocating the church. The Port Authority and the church announced a deal in July 2008 under which the Port Authority would grant land and up to $20 million to help rebuild the church -- in addition, the authority was willing to pay up to $40 million to construct a bomb-proof platform underneath.

Within a year, the deal fell through and talks ended -- apparently for good, according to the Port Authority. [...]

George Demos, a Republican candidate for New York's 1st Congressional District, also has drawn attention to the negotiations. He released an open letter to President Obama Tuesday urging him to, as he did with the mosque debate, weigh in on the church discussions.

"While we may disagree on the appropriateness of the mosque, we can surely agree that it is an issue of national importance that the only house of worship actually destroyed on September 11, 2001, the St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church, be rebuilt," Demos wrote. "Mr. President, please stand up and defend our Judeo-Christian values, express your public and unwavering support for St. Nicholas Church, and ensure that it is rebuilt."

Father Alex Karloutsos, assistant to the head of the Greek Orthodox Church in America, Archbishop Demetrios, told FoxNews.com that the Port Authority "simply forgot about the church" at Ground Zero.

A Hamas leader recently approved of the mosque at Ground Zero, saying: "We have to build everywhere."

How many mosques have been built in this country already, thanks in large part to the nearly one hundred billion dollars that Saudi Arabia alone has spent to spread Islam over the past few decades, in the United States? How many tens of thousands of mosques in recent decades all over the countries of the West have been built, and how many madrasas? Who pays for such things as the mosque, for only 100 families, that cost fifteen million dollars, in Billerica, Massachusetts? Who pays for all of those lavish palaces all over the place, that could not possibly have been put up by those who go to them? Who pays for the campaigns of Da'wa targeted at prisoners? Who pays for the Qur'ans sent out by the millions in the Western world? Who understands that a mosque is far more than a "place of worship" as some fondly believe but is, rather, a place where far more than that goes on, where politics, and geopolitics, are inculcated, where -- at least in Western Europe and in south Asia -- again and again and again it has been observed that people are whipped up at the khutbas (the sermons at the Friday Prayers), so much so that maddened Muslims coming out of mosques have gone on rampages against non-Muslims.

A particularly memorable example is that of the helpless Hindu who, happening to pass by as Friday Prayers were being let out, was beaten to death by Muslims who were just coming out of that "house of worship." How many raids, on how many mosques, have been conducted in Western Europe, where false papers of all kinds, and weapons, and explosives, were found, some in false ceilings and other hiding places? When Erdogan said that "the mosques are our barracks," he was quoting a well-known line, one that expressed a view that many Muslims have -- the "mosque" is not only or merely a "house of worship" but the "barracks" in the permanent war that exists, that must exist, between Muslim and Infidel.

Logical: "Defence lawyers raised concerns about how the jury could be expected to read the woman's facial expressions if they could not see her face."

The reason for the case itself is also quite interesting: allegations that state funding was fraudulently obtained for an Islamic school. From either perspective (and the woman is a witness for the prosecution), the case is amply representative of the broader issue of Muslims living in Australia who are unwilling to integrate with society and to play by its rules. "Judge's orders: 'Muslim witness must remove burqa'," by Chris Robinson for the Australian Associated Press, August 19:

A Perth judge has ordered that a Muslim woman must remove a full burqa while giving evidence before a jury in a fraud case.

Judge Shauna Deane today ruled that the witness must remove her niqab, or burqa face covering when she gives evidence to the jury.

The judge said she did not consider it appropriate that the witness give evidence with her face covered.

However she stressed she was not making a decision which was making a legal precedent, it was simply her ruling in these circumstances.

Earlier a defence lawyer had argued that the Muslim woman should remove her burqa to give evidence in the fraud trial, just as she would have to appear without the covering in an Islamic court.

But District Court Judge Shauna Deane rejected the argument as not relevant, as the matter is not being heard in an Islamic court.

The judge heard lawyers' submissions on whether a 36-year-old Muslim woman should be allowed to wear a full burqa, also called a niqab, while giving evidence in a fraud trial.

The woman, an Islamic studies teacher, is due to give evidence for the prosecution in the fraud trial of a Muslim college director, Anwar Sayed.

In court, defence lawyer Mark Trowell, QC, said the woman's wish to wear the burqa was a "preference she has".

"It's not an essential part of the Islamic faith. If she was in an Islamic court she would be required to remove it,'' he aid.

Judge Deane replied: ``This isn't an Islamic court.''

Defence lawyers raised concerns about how the jury could be expected to read the woman's facial expressions if they could not see her face.

Prosecutor Mark Ritter, SC, told the court the woman wanted to give evidence but would feel uncomfortable without the burqa and that could affect her evidence.

"It goes beyond stress . . . it would have a negative impact,'' Mr Ritter said.

He said the woman, who has lived in Australia for seven years, had worn the burqa since the age of 17 and went without it only before her family and male blood relatives.

"Female modesty is a very important part of the religion,'' he said.

What is at issue here is whether Islamic prescriptions of "modesty" trump Australian ones.

Tasneem was an Islamic studies teacher at the Muslim Ladies College of Australia in Kenwick, south of Perth, in 2006.

The school is run by Muslim Link Australia, and Sayed is the director.

He is accused of fraudulently obtaining up to $752,000 from a total of $1.125 million in state and federal grants for the school by falsifying entrance numbers.

Continuing on a path toward criminalizing political dissent. In The Post-American Presidency, there is a good deal of evidence showing how Obama and the people around him have a disturbing tendency to favor measures leading to that. "Pelosi clarifies call for look at funding of anti-mosque critics," by Greg Sargent in the Washington Post, August 18 (thanks to Benedict):

Nancy Pelosi kicked off a bit of controversy on the right this morning when the news broke that she had told a local San Francisco radio station that she agreed with those calling for a look at how the groups opposing the "Ground Zero mosque" are being funded.

It was a bit unclear what she was referring to, and now her office sends over a statement from her clarifying what she meant and sort of standing by what she said:

"The freedom of religion is a Constitutional right. Where a place of worship is located is a local decision.

"I support the statement made by the Interfaith Alliance that 'We agree with the ADL that there is a need for transparency about who is funding the effort to build this Islamic center. At the same time, we should also ask who is funding the attacks against the construction of the center.'

"For all of those expressing concern about the 9/11 families, we call upon them to join us in support of the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act when Congress returns in September."

[...]

Either way, Pelosi doesn't seem to be calling for some kind of government investigation into the mosque's critics, as thrilling as that would be to some on the right.

"Thrilling" is hardly the word I would use, and I don't see how Sargent comes to the conclusion that she is just talking idly. In any case, as I said yesterday, come and get me, Nancy. I will gladly give you the records of the paltry sums behind my "campaign" against the mosque, as I am confident that they will be dwarfed by your expense account expenditures.

They said they were going to get funding only from American sources. So why not just rule this out? "Iran cash might fund mosque at Ground Zero," by Geoff Earle and Tom Topousis in the New York Post, August 19:

The developers of the Ground Zero mosque are refusing to flat out reject cash for the project from Holocaust-denying Iranian nuke nut Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

"I can't comment on that" was the reply of mosque spokesman Oz Sultan yesterday when asked specifically if the fund-raising would extend to Iran and Saudi Arabia. "We'll look at all available options within the United States to start."

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the leader of the project known as Park51, has said at meetings with downtown officials that he would raise money for the 13-story mosque from local Muslims, foundations and the sale of bonds.

But in an interview with a London-based Arab newspaper earlier this year, he admitted his fund-raising would also extend to Muslim nations around the world....

Grover Norquist, longtime enabler of Islamic supremacists, is at it again -- warning Republicans to stay away from the issue of the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero, claiming that it will hurt them in November despite the fact that polls show that 70% of Americans oppose the mosque.

"Some Republican figures urge candidates not to focus on NYC mosque issue," by Karen Tumulty in the Washington Post, August 18 (thanks to Bill):

"The support for criticizing a mosque is half a mile wide and an inch deep," conservative activist Grover Norquist warned. "And at the end of the process, the only people who will remember it are the people who feel threatened by this -- not just Muslims, but Sikhs, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists and Mormons."

Framing an issue that has the support of 70% of Americans as a losing issue is what makes Grover Norquist the strategic genius he is reputed to be, I guess.

The jihad against India is more important than aid to Pakistani flood victims.

"Accept Indian aid, no role for politics in disaster: US to Pak," from the Press Trust of India, August 19 (thanks to Sanjay):

Washington: Asserting that there is no role for politics in disaster response, the Obama Administration has said it expects Pakistan to accept the USD 5 million aid offer from India for its flood relief work.

"In terms of responding to a disaster, politics should play no role. You have a country (India) that's willing to help (Pakistan), and... we expect that Pakistan will accept," State Department spokesman P J Crowley said.

Last week, Minister of External Affairs S M Krishna had called on his Pakistani counterpart Shah Mehmood Qureshi and offered USD 5 million in aid for flood relief work.

Pakistan, so far, had not accepted the offer while at the same time its leaders have been sending SOS to the international community for more and more aid so as to meet the immediate needs of its millions of flood-affected people....

And from "The foreign hand strikes again," by Irfan Husain in Dawn, August 18 (thanks again to Sanjay):

While much of the world has responded to the UN appeal for funds with a certain lack of enthusiasm, the American response has been quick and effective. With nearly a score of heavy-lift helicopters, American troops are rescuing thousands of displaced people. Their commitment of around $80 million for flood relief is the biggest from any country by far. By contrast, Muslim states have not exactly queued up to help. People have asked me why the Pakistan government has not immediately accepted the Indian offer of five million dollars. Instead, we are told the government is "thinking about it". What's there to think about? Surely in a crisis like this, money is money, whatever its source. It would be highly irresponsible to play politics or score points at this juncture. And how can the government ask the international community for help when it picks and chooses which country it will accept money from?

The silly and stupid Washington Post piece on Pamela Geller and me that I discussed here was originally entitled "In flap over mosque near Ground Zero, conservative writers gaining influence." Now it is called "The pens of anti-Muslim conservatives impact N.Y.C. mosque debate mightily."

"Anti-Muslim" is a term that Islamic supremacists and their Leftist enablers like to use of people who are fighting for human rights against Sharia -- and it's easy to see why: it frames their opponents as "bigots" and "haters," takes the focus away from their anti-woman, anti-free speech, anti-free thought, anti-equality of rights agenda, and has the added bonus of stirring up their more bloody-minded coreligionists to violence.

And above all, despite the promiscuous Goebbels-style Big-Lie application of the term to me by the likes of Honest Ibe Hooper of Hamas-linked CAIR and his tool Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs, it simply isn't true. I am not "anti-Muslim." I am anti-Sharia, anti-jihad, anti-oppression, anti-terror, and so should be every free person. Several years ago I had a memorable exchange with Islamic supremacist blogger Yusuf Smith, a.k.a. "Indigo Jo," here. 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." Yusuf Smith 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.

Well, if that's being "anti-Muslim," Michelle Boorstein of the Washington Post, if she had a modicum of commitment to human rights, would be "anti-Muslim" also.

We have a Tiny Minority of Extremists who have Hijacked the Religion of Peace™. Chinese authorities have "criminal gangs." Both groups are simply Islamic jihadists. "Seven Killed in Suspected Terror Attack in Xinjiang," from Outlook India, August 19 (thanks to Sanjay):

Renewed violence struck China's restive Xinjiang province when seven people were killed and fourteen wounded in a suspected bomb attack today, local officials said.

The explosion took place on a three wheeled vehicle in Aksu city and the local officials blamed the blast on "criminal gangs", an abbreviation used by authorities for Muslim separatists.

Official Chinese newsagency Xinhua quoted a spokeswoman of the provincial government as saying that the blast was being treated as a criminal case and that one suspect had been apprehended....

Xinjiang has been beset by ethnic conflict and separatist violence for the past few years and last summer witnessed bloody clashes between the Uighurs, the largely Muslim ethnic group and the majority Han Chinese settlers which left 197 people dead.

In the wake of the riots, authorities in a major crackdown arrested hundreds of people and about two dozen people were sentenced to death for inciting ethnic riots.

The provincial Governor Nur Bekri in a speech just before the blast had blamed Islamic terrorists for recent unrest in the region and said authorities were faced with a complicated separatist struggle....

The Obama ship continues to sink. "Former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean comes out against proposed mosque at Ground Zero," from Newscore, August 18 (thanks to Anne Crockett):

Former Vermont Governor Howard Dean, in a surprise move Wednesday, became the second high profile Democrat to come out against the building of a cultural center and mosque two blocks away from Ground Zero.

"This is something that we ought to be able to work out with people of good faith," Dean said in an interview with WABC radio.

"We have to understand that it is a real affront to people who've lost their lives, including Muslims.

"That site doesn't belong to any particular religion ... So I think a good reasonable compromise could be worked out without violating the principle that people ought to be able to worship as they see fit."

Dean, one of the more liberal members of the party who ran unsuccessfully for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2004 before serving as head of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), suggested the mosque should be moved.

"Well I think another site would be a better idea, again -- but I would look to do that with the cooperation of the people who are trying to build the mosque," Dean said....

The General Manager of Al-Arabiya television, Abdul Rahman Al-Rashid, didn't get the memo about how he should be crying victimization and bigotry. "A House of Worship or a Symbol of Destruction?," by Abdul Rahman Al-Rashid in Asharq Alawsat, August 16 (thanks to all who sent this in):

[...] I cannot imagine that Muslims want a mosque on this particular site, because it will be turned into an arena for promoters of hatred, and a symbol of those who committed the crime. At the same time, there are no practicing Muslims in the district who need a place of worship, because it is indeed a commercial district. Is there a side that is committed to this mosque? The fact is that in the news reports there are names linked to this project that costs 100 million dollars!

The sides enthusiastic for building the mosque might be building companies, architect houses, or politicized groups that want suitable investments?! I do not know whether the building applicant wants a mosque whose aim is reconciliation, or he is an investor who wants quick profits. This is because the idea of the mosque specifically next to the destruction is not at all a clever deed. The last thing Muslims want today is to build just a religious center out of defiance to the others, or a symbolic mosque that people visit as a museum next to a cemetery....

Iran should be allowed to develop nuclear weapons and use them against Israel without any opposition, you see. "Iran condemns possible US military action," by Edith M. Lederer for Associated Press, August 18 (thanks to Choi):

UNITED NATIONS - Iran took its case against the United States to the United Nations on Wednesday and strongly condemned the top U.S. military chief for saying military action remains a possibility if the country develops nuclear weapons.

Iran's acting U.N. ambassador Eshagh Alehabib claimed in letters circulated to the secretary-general and presidents of the Security Council and General Assembly that Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, and other U.S. officials and lawmakers "threatened" to use military action under the "totally false" pretense that Iran is developing nuclear weapons.

Mullen said earlier this month that the U.S. military has a plan to attack Iran, although he thinks a military strike is probably a bad idea. Still, he said the risk of Iran developing a nuclear weapon is unacceptable and he reiterated that "the military option" remains on the table.

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warned Wednesday that Iran's response to an attack would not be limited to the region, suggesting Iran would target U.S. interests beyond the Persian Gulf.

"It's unlikely that they (U.S.) will make such a stupidity (to attack Iran) but all must know that if this threat is carried out, the field of the Iranian nation's confrontation will not be only our region," Khamenei told state TV. "The area of confrontation will be much wider."...

A typically silly mainstream media piece, but not as evil as some of them. "In flap over mosque near Ground Zero, conservative writers gaining influence," by Michelle Boorstein for the Washington Post, August 18:

Long before President Obama waded into the vociferous debate over a proposal to build a mosque near Ground Zero, a group of conservative writers and bloggers critical of Islam had seized on the issue and helped transform it into a national political spectacle.

While some have dismissed them as bigoted attention-seekers, their attacks on the proposed Islamic center in lower Manhattan have gained currency in recent weeks among some Republican leaders. And their influence appears to be growing.

They are organizing a Sept. 11 rally against the proposed Islamic center in lower Manhattan that will feature former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich. They advise the FBI and other government security agencies on the threats posed by Islamic radicalism, headline "tea party" events and attract millions of readers concerned or curious about Islam to Web sites with names such as Jihad Watch, Creeping Sharia and Stop Islamization of America.

"People on the Hill, their staff read these sites, they show their bosses. . . . They push these subjects into the spotlight, often at a time when major media isn't doing that," said Cliff May, a columnist and former spokesman for the Republican National Committee who runs a think tank focused on religious extremism and religious freedom.

The most colorful -- and perhaps most visible activist at the moment -- is Pam Geller, a former New York Observer publisher who has appeared in a bikini and a super-tight Superman costume challenging Islam.

It has become a favored theme of the Left's take on Pamela Geller to point out that she appeared in a bikini, etc., as if that fact in itself negates the validity of everything she says. And certainly taking that tack is easier for Michelle Boorstein than actually thinking about the arguments that Pamela makes and formulating some coherent response to them.

Through her blog, Atlas Shrugs, television interviews and appearances at political and civic rallies, Geller has become one of the chief organizers of opposition to the mosque as well as efforts to build other Muslim prayer centers around the country....

Geller has become a prominent voice in the debate despite the fact that she once promoted the view that Obama is Malcolm X's love child.

This is lazy propagandizing at its very finest masquerading as journalism. If Michelle Boorstein had bothered to do any research, she would have found this statement, which has only been up at Atlas Shrugs for nearly two years: "UPDATE: The 'Atlas says that Barack Obama is Malcolm X's love child' charge has gone viral among leftards and lizards. The only problem with it is that it is false. I am not the author of this post, and I posted it because the writer did a spectacular job documenting Obama's many connections with the Far Left. The Malcolm X claim is one minor part of this story, and was of interest to me principally as part of the writer's documentation that Stanley Ann Dunham could not have been where the Obama camp says she was at various times. I do not believe that Barack Obama is Malcolm X's love child, and never did -- but there remain many, many unanswered questions about his early life and upbringing."

She frequently warns that Muslims are trying to impose repressive sharia law on the United States,

One wonders if Michelle Boorstein has noticed that the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf of the Ground Zero mosque is an open proponent of Sharia who has called for restrictions on the freedom of speech in the U.S.

...refers to the president's holiday message to Muslims as "Obama Ramadamadingdong" and promotes a Web site, Religion of Peace, that claims to tally the number of people killed around the world by Muslim extremists.

Is there something wrong with the tally at Religion of Peace? Boorstein doesn't say -- and she doesn't say, of course, because she doesn't know. She just knows that the tally is so high, it doesn't fit in with her politically correct presuppositions. So it must be false. And in more sloppiness, Pamela Geller's article about Obama's Ramadan message was entitled "Obama Ramadanadingdong" (not "Ramadamadingdong"); Pamela did not refer to his speech itself by that name.

She has helped fund controversial taxi ads in Washington, New York and other cities asking: "Is your family threatening you? leaveislamsafely.com"

No mention from Michelle Boorstein of Islam's death penalty for apostates.

Geller often partners with Robert Spencer, a best-selling writer who is less flamboyant but perhaps more influential.

Spencer, the author of "Stealth Jihad: How Radical Islam Is Subverting America Without Guns or Bombs" and "The Complete Infidel's Guide to the Koran," has consulted on Islamic extremism with government security officials, including the U.S. Central Command, the U.S. Army Command, the FBI and the Joint Terrorism Task Force, according to his Web site, Jihad Watch.

The site, which was launched in 2003, had its busiest month ever in July, with 2.9 million visitors, up from 665,000 a year ago, Spencer said.

Jihad Watch is widely read in many quarters in Washington, particularly among conservatives.

Daniel Pipes, perhaps the most prominent U.S. scholar on radical Islam, said he considers Spencer a "serious scholar."

"I learn from him," said Pipes, director of the Middle East Forum, a conservative think tank, who writes a biweekly column for the National Review.

When Spencer lavished praise on Gingrich earlier this month, the Republican posted it on his Web site.

Gingrich is scheduled to speak at an anti-mosque rally on Sept. 11 being organized by Spencer and Geller. Also scheduled to speak is former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton, who wrote the forward for the pair's new book about Obama, "The Post-American Presidency."

Gingrich has actually dropped out. The rally will go on.

Charles Johnson, creator of the national security blog Little Green Footballs, called Spencer and Geller "very influential." Listening to Gingrich's comments about Islamic law, he said, "Newt sounded a lot like he got it from Pam Geller."

"The national security blog Little Green Footballs"? That's the funniest thing I've heard in weeks. A Rabelais, a Jonathan Swift at his most bitingly satirical couldn't have come up with a more unlikely description for that disgusting lie-and-hate factory. I have no doubt that Michelle Boorstein had at least the rudimentary decency as to leave Johnson's libelous charges on the cutting-room floor.

Their efforts to rally public opinion against the mosque appear to have had an impact. A CNN poll conducted this month showed that 68 percent of Americans oppose the idea of building a mosque two blocks from where the World Trade Center once stood.

While there is no new data on whether American views toward Islam have shifted since a spate of homegrown terror attacks and the furor over the mosque, Muslim American leaders worry that it has. They accuse the bloggers of fueling religious hatred.

Muslim Americans "are becoming fearful, uncertain, asking, 'What is the future?' " said Akbar Ahmed, a former Pakistani diplomat and current American University professor.

Ahmed believes the shaky economy, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and tension over immigration combined with the election of the first non-white president have left Americans anxious. "Islam at this moment in time focuses all the intensity and passion," he said.

Akbar Ahmed knows better -- which is probably why he keeps ducking discussion or debate with me.

Brian Levin, a hate crimes expert who used to work with the Southern Poverty Law Center, said the bloggers gain traction partially because they make points about American Muslim extremism that "the mainstream media consistently ignore."...

Video from June of a rowdy town meeting in Staten Island, N.Y., about a proposed mosque shows Spencer being cheered when he states his name. Those who turned out to oppose the mosque said they heard about the meeting through Geller's Facebook page.

Asked if his ability to make money -- through Web site donations, book sales and speaking appearances -- has improved, Spencer said, "It's changed a lot," but wouldn't elaborate. He said only that he and Geller were able to raise $50,000 in recent months for their bus and taxi ad campaign. ...

Yes, and we raised it through a large number of small donations from readers and concerned citizens. It is interesting, isn't it, that Michelle Boorstein and others in the mainstream media have no apparent concern about where the mosque organizers are getting their $100 million, despite their contradictory statements about it, but they are very, very concerned about the relative pittances we're dealing with.

Asked if he was being deliberately combative and provocative, Spencer chuckled.

"Why not?" he asked. "It's fun."

I am fairly sure that I did not say that in connection with my work, but rather in connection with my attempts to draw out Michelle Boorstein and convince her that running interference for Sharia was not in her personal best interests, but in either case, Michelle Boorstein doesn't know when her leg is being pulled.

She doesn't seem to care about where the $100 million to build the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero is coming from, despite the fact that the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf has lied about whether he will be receiving foreign funding. No, that's all just fine. What Pelosi wants to know is where Pamela Geller and I got $9,000 to run an ad against the mosque on New York City buses. (In reality, we scraped it together from $10 and $20 donations from free citizens, as we have with all our initiatives.)

Welcome to Obama's America, in which political opposition to the pet projects of the elites can get you investigated and who knows what else. Well, come and get me, Nancy. Do your worst.

"Nancy Pelosi, house speaker, wants investigation into Ground Zero mosque opposition funding," by Aliyah Shahid for the New York Daily News, August 18 (thanks to Twostellas):

Nancy Pelosi wants some answers.

The house speaker is calling for an investigation into groups protesting the building of the Ground Zero mosque.

"There is a concerted effort to make this a political issue by some," she told San Francisco's KCBS radio on Tuesday.

Pelosi added that she joins "those who have called for looking into how is this opposition to the mosque being funded."...

Pamela Geller has audio.

Contrary to his claims of moderation, the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, leader of the mega-mosque initiative, is an open advocate for Sharia, and calls for restrictions on the freedom of speech in his book What's Right with Islam. He has (like CAIR) refused to denounce Hamas. He 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. He is part of a group that helped fund the jihad flotilla against Israel.

But never mind all that! He's a Sufi!

"The Muslims in the Middle," by William Dalrymple in the New York Times, August 16 (thanks to Ralph):

[...] Feisal Abdul Rauf of the Cordoba Initiative is one of America's leading thinkers of Sufism, the mystical form of Islam, which in terms of goals and outlook couldn't be farther from the violent Wahhabism of the jihadists. His videos and sermons preach love, the remembrance of God (or "zikr") and reconciliation. His slightly New Agey rhetoric makes him sound, for better or worse, like a Muslim Deepak Chopra. But in the eyes of Osama bin Laden and the Taliban, he is an infidel-loving, grave-worshiping apostate; they no doubt regard him as a legitimate target for assassination.

Do they, now? Does William Dalrymple have any actual evidence of that, or is it just wishful thinking on his part? When Feisal Abdul Rauf goes on his State Department-sponsored tours of the Islamic world, does he have to travel with armed guards? Has he received specific threats?

For such moderate, pluralistic Sufi imams are the front line against the most violent forms of Islam. In the most radical parts of the Muslim world, Sufi leaders risk their lives for their tolerant beliefs, every bit as bravely as American troops on the ground in Baghdad and Kabul do. Sufism is the most pluralistic incarnation of Islam -- accessible to the learned and the ignorant, the faithful and nonbelievers -- and is thus a uniquely valuable bridge between East and West....

In reality, Sufis from al-Ghazali to the present day have taught the necessity of jihad warfare, and have participated in that warfare. And in January 2009, Iraqi representatives of the Naqshabandi Sufi order met with Khaled Mashaal of Hamas, praised his jihad, donated jewelry to him, and boasted of their own jihad attacks against Americans in Iraq.

But never mind all that. The Sufis are peaceful!

Because this will show Muslims, you see, that they don't have to start burning things and killing people when something bothers them. Why Kathleen Parker thinks they will follow the example of the despised and weak kuffar is unclear. Whenever Islamic supremacists have been confronted with the fact that Jews and Christians don't riot and murder over insults to their religion, they respond that that indicates that they don't care about their religion and aren't willing to defend it. Islamic supremacists have universally regarded Western tolerance as a sign of weakness, but Kathleen Parker knows it will be different if we tolerate the radically intolerant yet again.

"The Ground Zero mosque must be built," by Kathleen Parker in the Washington Post, August 18 (thanks to all who sent this in):

[...] The mosque should be built precisely because we don't like the idea very much. We don't need constitutional protections to be agreeable, after all. [...]

Reason tells us something else: The Muslims who want to build this mosque didn't fly airplanes into skyscrapers. They don't support terrorism. By what understanding do we assign guilt to all for the actions of a relative few?

"They don't support terrorism," but the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf refused to denounce Hamas and is part of an organization involved in sending the jihad flotilla against Israel. But he says he doesn't support terrorism, and that's good enough for Kathleen Parker.

Even so, as others have noted, civilized people and nations are careful to avoid trespassing on the sorrow, suffering and sacrifice we associate with hallowed grounds. As Charles Krauthammer pointed out, Pope John Paul II ordered Carmelite nuns to abandon a convent they had established at Auschwitz, among other examples.

We would like to think that others would be as respectful of our own horrors. And yet, we should beware what we demand lest others demand the same of us. Count the number of times we've heard "sensitivity" invoked the past several days. Muslims should be more sensitive to the families of those who perished, we've heard repeatedly. Even the Anti-Defamation League, defender of religious freedom, urged the mosque's leaders to situate the building farther from Ground Zero -- out of sensitivity.

Many couldn't agree more, and yet it goes without saying -- even if President Obama felt it necessary to state -- that American Muslims have the same right as any other citizens to practice their religion and to build on private property.

Some might wish that Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, who is behind the proposal, were more sensitive, though opinions are mixed. Others have argued that a moderate Muslim such as Rauf is just the sort of person we hope will help influence a more-moderate Islam. Might an Islamic center near the spot where the religion's worst adherents slaughtered thousands, fellow Muslims among them, be useful to that end?

These are all reasonable arguments. But the more compelling point is that mosque opponents may lose by winning. Radical Muslims have set cities afire because their feelings were hurt. When a Muslim murdered filmmaker Theo van Gogh in Amsterdam, it was because his feelings were hurt. Ditto the Muslims who rioted about cartoons depicting the image of Muhammad and sent frightened doodlers into hiding.

This is getting very close to saying that the mosque should be built at Ground Zero, otherwise Muslims might go beserk and start killing people, but it seems more likely that Kathleen Parker means that we will show the poor dears how they should act in such situations. Such naivete is breathtaking, but of course widespread.

The idea that one should never have one's feelings hurt -- and the violent means to which some will resort in the protection of their own self-regard -- has done harm rivaling evil. It isn't a stretch to say that the greatest threat to free speech is, in fact, "sensitivity."

This is why plans for the mosque near Ground Zero should be allowed to proceed, if that's what these Muslims want. We teach tolerance by being tolerant. We can't insist that our freedom of speech allows us to draw cartoons or produce plays that Muslims find offensive and then demand that they be more sensitive to our feelings.

More to the point, the tolerance we urge the Muslim world to embrace as we exercise our right to free expression, and revel in the glory and the gift of irreverence, is the same we must embrace when Muslims seek to express themselves peacefully....

Twisted logic. Romesh Ratnesar here notes that Muslims are angry at Al-Qaeda for killing other Muslims, in contravention of Qur'an 4:92, and concludes that "radical Islam" is therefore "receding," and that therefore the Ground Zero mega-mosque is nothing anyone should be concerned about.

It never seems to occur to him that there has been no significant or effective Muslim indignation over Al-Qaeda or others killing Infidels.

"'Ground Zero Mosque' Park51 Not a Triumph of Radical Islam," by Romesh Ratnesar for Time Magazine via Yahoo News, August 18 (thanks to Zed):

[...] And nine years after 9/11, the fight over the mosque near Ground Zero shows how obsessed we remain with an enemy that may no longer exist. [...]

The story of the past decade in the Muslim world is that of the widespread rejection - or "refudiation," to borrow a phrase - of terrorism. A study by the Pew Research Center earlier this year found that support in Muslim countries for suicide bombings has fallen precipitously from post-9/11 levels. One-third of Pakistanis believed terrorism was justified in 2002; now just 8% do. For all our anxiety about the rise of religious extremism, no government in the Arab world has been toppled by forces sympathetic to al-Qaeda since 2001. And though some militant Muslims surely wish us harm, their ability to actually inflict it has eroded; it has been more than five years since the last successful al-Qaeda attack in the West.

The Fort Hood jihad wasn't Al-Qaeda, you see, so it doesn't count. Neither does the Christmas underwear bomber's abortive jihad. Only Al-Qaeda counts, and Al-Qaeda is receding, so all is well. Got it?

The eclipse of al-Qaeda has come about largely through revulsion at the jihadists' indiscriminate slaughter of fellow Muslims, from Indonesia to Iraq. And yet we have failed to notice. A Gallup poll taken in June found that Americans still believe terrorism is a bigger threat to the future well-being of the country than health care costs, unemployment and illegal immigration. (Only the federal debt was deemed an issue of equal seriousness.) America's post-9/11 obsession with terrorism, the belief that we are locked in an epic ideological struggle with radical Islam, has stretched our resources to the limit and distracted us from higher-order priorities. National myopia poses a bigger challenge to the U.S.'s long-term stability than terrorism ever will.

What does this mean for the mosque near Ground Zero? However the dispute is ultimately resolved, its impact on the "threat" posed by radical Islam will be negligible. That's because the threat is receding on its own. Allowing a place of worship to be built in lower Manhattan will constitute neither an American triumph nor a defeat. It will simply tell the world that this nation, wisely, has decided to move on.

Tolerance. Bridge-building. Peace. Sharif El-Gamal is the multimillionaire who owns the 45 Park Place property where the mega-mosque is slated to go -- and he believes that "when you beat someone up physically you get exercise & stress relief." Reza's article opposing the mosque was posted here. "Muslim opponent of mosque reports threat," by Brian Lilley for CNews, August 18 (thanks to Geoff):

OTTAWA - She spoke out against the Ground Zero mosque, now a Canadian Muslim woman says she is being threatened. Raheel Raza, a founding member of the Muslim Canadian Congress, calls the idea of a mosque within 300 metres of Ground Zero "a deliberate provocation."

Last week Raza joined Maureen Basnicki a Canadian widow of 9-11 in attending a meeting about the mosque in New York City.

"They were very arrogant. They didn't answer questions," Raza told QMI Agency.

The meeting was hosted by Daisy Khan, the wife of the Imam promoting the mosque and Sharif El Gamal, the man whose property firm owns the land the mosque is to be built on.

Raza says she asked questions about who was financing the building, estimated to cost $100 million, and whether any of the money would come from countries other than the United States. There has been much speculation that the mosque is being funded through Saudi Arabian sources but at the Manhattan meeting Raza said there were no answers.

On Monday, back in Toronto, Raza says she received a call on her cellphone from a man who identified as Sharif El Gamal. "His tone was intimidating," said Raza. "He accused me of 'jumping into' the meeting he called and then said 'May Allah protect you.' I was shocked and hung up."

Raza says she took the phone call as a clear threat against her.

"Why would I need Allah's protection?" asked Raza.

Raza says El Gamal's tone was threatening and she took the phone call as a clear threat against her, and not as it is sometimes used, as a casual phrase meaning goodbye. Contacted at his New York office El Gamal initially didn't have much to say. "I'm confused by your phone call," he said before hanging up.

Contacted a second time El Gamal said "There was no phone call made by anybody" before again hanging up the phone to abruptly end the call.

Raza insists there was a call, "I saved the number on my cell." The number on Raza's cellphone matches that of El Gamal's Soho Properties offices in New York....

Instead of spending $100 million on a mega-mosque at Ground Zero, why doesn't the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf and financier Sharif El-Gamal take the $100 million and donate it to the Pakistani flood victims?

In doing so, they'd make up for the umma's indifference to those victims' plight, and create a great deal of good will -- which is what they keep claiming they're trying to do. And they'd be aiding their fellow Muslims.

It's a win/win situation!

Ramadan: the month of jihad. "48 killed in suicide attack outside Iraqi army recruitment center," by Mohammed Tawfeeq for CNN, August 17 (thanks to all who sent this in):

Baghdad, Iraq (CNN) -- At least 48 people were killed and scores were wounded Tuesday when a suicide bomber detonated his explosives-laden vest in central Baghdad as men were queuing up outside an Iraqi army recruitment center, the Interior Ministry said.

At least 129 people were wounded in the blast, which took place in the morning in the Bab al-Moudham commercial area.

The spokesman for the Iraqi military command in the capital, Maj. Gen. Qassim Atta, said Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki ordered a number of officers who were near the attacker to be detained for questioning.

Atta told Al-Iraqiya state television that Tuesday had been the final day of a weeklong recruitment drive and that a large number of recruits had been waiting to sign up when the attack occurred.

Atta said the bomber's vest was stuffed with 30 kilograms (66 pounds) of the plastic explosive C4, TNT and ball bearings.

The attack came amid the country's failure to form a government and the United States' troop drawdown ahead of President Barack Obama's August 31 deadline for ending all combat operations.

The U.N. Assistance Mission for Iraq, or UNAMI, condemned the act and expressed concern over continued acts of violence in the country, "including those perpetrated during the holy Muslim month of Ramadan that symbolizes the values of peace, tolerance, generosity and solidarity."...

Call it interfaith cooperation of sorts, as steaming Saudi Sunnis prove the Shi'ite Ayatollah Khomeini's assertion that:

Allah did not create man so that he could have fun. The aim of creation was for mankind to be put to the test through hardship and prayer. An Islamic regime must be serious in every field. There are no jokes in Islam. There is no humor in Islam. There is no fun in Islam. There can be no fun and joy in whatever is serious."

"Role reversal Saudi comedy provokes anger among male population," by Richard Spencer for the Telegraph, August 17:

A role reversal comedy shown on Saudi television in which a woman marries four husbands has hit the very nerve it satirised - male pride and double standards.

The comedy was an episode in Saudi Arabia's most celebrated satirical series, Tash Ma Tash or No Big Deal, a take-off of social prejudices shown annually during the holy month of Ramadan.

The central character takes four husbands, explaining herself using the conventional arguments Saudi men use to exercise their legal and religious privilege of marrying four times.

When she remarries for the first time she complains that her existing husband has stopped caring about his looks after five years, and is preoccupied with work.

The next marriage is for a dare with friends, and the fourth marriage, to a Syrian, she explains by saying that she is now bored with Saudi men.

Then she decides she wants to marry for a fifth time, making the four husbands draw lots to see who will be divorced and plunging them into a morass of jealousy.

Conservative imams, currently on the defensive as King Abdullah attempts to modernise some social attitudes in the country, have been predictably hostile, while men on internet bulletin boards have attacked the series as promoting prostitution.

"What this does is hurt us," said one imam, Sheikh Saad Al-Buraik. "In the name of comedy, they make fun of our religion and beliefs." There are regular calls to ban Tash Ma Tash, but it is said to be one of King Abdullah's favourite programmes. Last week, an episode also provoked controversy, portraying two men who visit the brother of their dead mother, a foreign-born Arab, only to discover he is a Christian priest.

The shock lies in discovering that despite his religion, they come to respect him for his honesty and generosity.

And that's drawn fire as well, with Reuters reporting:

"A Muslim is allowed to praise only the one true religion -- Islam," said Eissa al-Ghaith, a judge at the Justice Ministry, in remarks carried by al-Madina newspaper on Sunday.

Independent Islamic scholar Abdulwahab al-Salhi said the "indecent lot of 'Tash Ma Tash' ... used drama to destroy Muslims' stable religious principles by portraying Christians as believers and not apostates."

Based on Injaz' behavior, he may be called yet another in a line of "insane" defendants who have committed acts of jihad. But one can't look at Islamic popular culture in the Mideast, and at the content of the Qur'an (2:65, 5:51, 98:6), and ahadith themselves, and claim that mentality originated between his own ears.

"Palestinian 'threatens to kill Jews as he takes hostages at Turkish embassy'," by Mark Weiss for the Telegraph, August 17:

An armed Palestinian man held two hostages at the Turkish embassy in Tel Aviv on Tuesday, threatening to "kill any Jews" and demanding political asylum before he was shot by security guards.

Nadim Injaz, a resident of the West Bank city of Ramallah, threatened to blow up the building if he was not allowed to leave Israel, according to a recording played on Israeli radio.

In a call to Channel 2 TV, a man the station identified as the attacker said: "If they don't let me leave this country now I will burn down the whole building. I will burn everything."

He said he was demanding asylum in Turkey and protection from "these murderers the Zionists, the murdering Jews". At the same time, he said that Palestinian leaders, including Mahmoud Abbas, "should die."

He was later shot and wounded by security guards at the embassy, Turkish officials said. Seven hours after he forced his way into the building, the attacker was escorted out and bundled into an Israeli ambulance.

A lawyer told Israel Radio that the hostages, the consul and his wife, had escaped. It was not clear whether they escaped before or after the man was shot.

Mr Injaz has claimed that he used to work as a collaborator with the Shin Bet Israeli intelligence agency. He sought asylum at the British embassy in Tel Avivi in 2006.

Israeli officials have denied his story.

Israeli police said Mr Injaz was recently released from prison after serving time for his previous embassy attack. They said at that time that he was an informer and a criminal with a record of property and drug offenses who had encountered financial and legal troubles.

The incident appears not to be related to the recent tension between Israel and Turkey following the May 31 Israeli naval commando raid on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla in which 9 Turkish activists were killed.

Mr Injaz told Israeli reporters over recent days that he had been asked by the Israelis a number of years ago to assassinate Marwan Barghouti, a prominent Palestinian activist who headed the Fatah Tanzim organisation.

He has claimed that the Israelis tried to kill him after he refused to assassinate Barghouti.

Mr Injaz is currently in Israel without a visa and he has said he fears for his life if he is deported to the West Bank by Israel.

Israeli foreign ministry officials were in contact with Turkish embassy staff on Tuesday night in an effort to end the affair. Israeli anti-terror units were also positioned outside the embassy building, and police sealed off the area.

"Pyatigorsk lies to the north of the most unstable mountainous regions of the Caucasus and is a genteel town normally untroubled by such violence."

Now, one may suppose, it's "restive." "Two blasts rock Russia's Caucasus region," from Radio Netherlands Worldwide, August 17 (thanks to Twostellas):

Two blasts hit Russia's Caucasus on Tuesday, one killing a policeman at a checkpoint and the other wounding about a dozen at a street cafe, in the latest attacks to rock the turbulent region.

In the first attack, a young man blew himself up near a checkpoint in the region of North Ossetia, killing himself and a policeman, officials said.

Hours later, at least 11 people were wounded in a suspected car bomb explosion outside a cafe in the spa town of Pyatigorsk, popular with Russian holidaymakers, in the foothills of the Caucasus mountains.

The Kremlin calls the Caucasus unrest its biggest domestic problem and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin last month announced an ambitious drive to foster prosperity by enticing investors to the violence-torn region.

In North Ossetia an unidentified man walked up to the checkpoint close to the administrative border with neighbouring Ingushetia and detonated his charge, leaving one officer dead and wounding two others, Samir Sabatkoyev, spokesman for the regional interior ministry, told AFP.

"He detonated an unidentified explosive device," Sabatkoyev said. "He blew himself up," he added, noting it was "apparently" a suicide attack.

The two wounded policemen had "serious injuries", added Maria Gatsoyeva, a spokeswoman for regional investigators, speaking from the regional capital Vladikavkaz.

North Ossetia lies to the north of the breakaway Georgian region of South Ossetia, recognised by Russia as independent after the brief 2008 war with Georgia over its status.

The area is part of the country's most volatile North Caucasus region, scene of the simmering guerrilla war between Russian forces and separatist rebels, and deadly attacks in the republics of Chechnya, Ingushetia and Dagestan are a near-daily occurrence.

The explosion in Pyatigorsk, called a "terrorist act" by the regional prosecutor, appeared to target a cafe.

"According to preliminary information, around 4:15 pm (1215 GMT) an improvised bomb hidden inside a Lada car exploded near one of the cafes on Kirov street," the regional prosecutor said in a statement.

The blast wounded 11 people according to the prosecutor, with one person in critical condition, although Russian news agencies put the toll as high as 30, with 29 hospitalised.

Glass windows within a radius of 200 metres (219 yards) around the outdoor cafe were broken and cars parked by the cafe were damaged by the power of the blast.

"At first it was thought that it was a gas explosion but then it became clear that a car parked outside the cafe had exploded," a local police source told ITAR-TASS.

"All the wounded were customers of the cafe," the source added.

Pyatigorsk lies to the north of the most unstable mountainous regions of the Caucasus and is a genteel town normally untroubled by such violence....

The central question here is: do the "moderates" here have the political will, support of the population, and is it their own genuine intention, to prevent the outright Islamization of Bosnia? Time will tell.

And a follow-up question: do said "moderates" have a better defense than to glibly insist the chapters and verses quoted by the "radicals" were "taken out of context?"

We get that one a lot, of course, when we report on jihadists' own reliance on Islamic texts and teachings to motivate and defend their acts. Oddly, enough, such bland pronouncements just never seem to halt the jihad. It keeps happening, and we keep reporting on it. "Bosnia: Radical Muslims urge boycott of security forces," from AdnKronos International. August 17:

Sarajevo, 17 August (AKI) - Radical Wahabi fundamentalists have been leafleting mosques throughout Bosnia Herzegovina urging Muslims not to join the country's police and army.

AdnKronos is frequently a useful source, but one can't help but note what amounts to a George Carlin-esque attempt at softening the blow of a succinct term like "jihadist" by stretching it out over more syllables. By the year 2020, they should be up to a good paragraph or so in the mainstream media.

"Those are forces devoted to a fake god who we should fight against with all of our powers," read the leaflets, which Wahabis have been putting in mosque collection boxes.

Members of Bosnia's Muslim community dismissed the leaflets as a "desperate and insane appeal".

The leaflets also contained several passages from the Koran which had been "misinterpreted" and "used out of context", they said.

Funny how that keeps happening.

Similar leaflets were found in mosque contribution boxes just before the bombing of a police station in the central Bosnian town of Bugojno on 27 June that killed one policeman and injured six others.

Wahabi leaflets first appeared in Bosnia when the government decided to contribute to NATO forces in Afganistan and Iraq. The leaflets accused the government of "betraying our Islamic brothers" in these countries.

Bosnia's imams are said to be deeply concerned by the bombing in Bugojno and the reappearance of wahabi pamphlets. Bosnian mosques are not well protected and it is impossible to monitor people entering them, according to the imams.

The Wahabi movement first appeared in the Balkans during the 1990s wars, when 'mujahadeen' from Islamic countries came to Bosnia to fight on the side of local Muslims.

Wahabi cells have been radicalising supporters, running training camps and plotting violence in recent years, according to a number of terrorism experts

Bosnia state security agency OSA director Almir Dzuvo said in July there were some 3,000 well equipped radical Islamist militants in Bosnia, who posed a serious terrorism threat to the country.

While Gaza is lavished with attention, money, and weapons for a vastly exaggerated "crisis" that is of Hamas' engineering and staging (those poor people have to smuggle in luxury cars!), tens of millions of Muslims are suffering in Pakistan after the floods -- hungry, wet, and under the threat of outbreaks of cholera and dysentery. The response from Islamic nations in the Arab world? Beyond lackluster, while the U.S., Britain, Japan, and other non-Muslim countries bend over backwards.

The question for the Muslim governments of the petrodollar-glutted Gulf: Are you racists, regarding the needs of your non-Arab brethren as less important, or would you just rather be waging jihad?

An update on this story, though it's not so much an update as it is more of the same. "Islamic nations snub UN plea to help flood victims," by James Bone and Zahid Hussain for the Times Online, August 17 (thanks to Sr. Soph):

Islamic nations are shunning a United Nations appeal for the worsening Pakistan floods, amid tensions with President Zardari.

Western countries have rallied to Pakistan's aid, with the US and Britain the leading donors in the drive to raise $US460 million in the first 90 days. Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, is expected to attend a special meeting of the UN General Assembly on Thursday to show solidarity with Pakistan, diplomats said.

Not a single Islamic nation appeared yesterday on the UN's latest list of donors, despite efforts to reach out to them.

The US had pledged $US62million, followed by Britain with $US26 million, bringing current commitments to $US204million - less than half of the UN's goal.

Japan came third with $US13 million, followed by lesser pledges from 18 other countries. The World Bank promised a $US900 million loan.

With 20 million people affected by the floods, the disaster has touched the lives of more people than the Haiti earthquake earlier this year, the 2005 Kashmir earthquake, and the 2004 Boxing Day tsunami. UN officials lament, however, that the aid response is falling short. "The response so far has been strong but we do need for it to be sustained and continue," said Nicholas Reader, a spokesman for the UN's humanitarian co-ordinator.

Mr Reader noted that Islamic nations such as Saudi Arabia had traditionally given aid directly to Pakistan rather than through the UN. "The money we track is ... given to the multilateral process and given through UN appeals," he said. "It does not track the money that is given bilaterally."

Analysts blamed Riyadh's strained relations with President Zardari for the apparent indifference of the oil-rich Saudi Government. "King Abdullah has never liked Mr Zardari, for various reasons," said a former Pakistani diplomat.

"One is Mr Zardari's closeness to the Americans. His being a Shia may also be a factor."...

Stopping Iran's progress is about to get a lot harder, as John Bolton observes below. If the political will to stop Iran from developing the capability to build nuclear weapons hasn't been there so far, it is reasonable, unfortunately, to expect the world's complacency to continue until (and after) Iran tests its first bomb. "Bolton: Israel has until Aug. 21 to stop Bushehr," from the World Tribune, August 16:

Former U.S. envoy to the United Nations, John Bolton, asserted that Israel has until Aug. 21 to attack Iran's nuclear facilities. He said from that point on Bushehr would become an operating nuclear reactor and effectively immune to any air strike.

"Once the rods are in the reactor an attack on the reactor risks spreading radiation in the air, and perhaps into the water of the Persian Gulf," Bolton said.

In an interview with the U.S. television network Fox, Bolton said his assessment was based on the assumption that neither Israel nor the United States wanted to generate a massive nuclear fallout that could harm Gulf Cooperation Council states. He said the launch of operations at the 1,000 megawatt reactor at Bushehr would block the prospect of any air strike on Iran's nuclear facilities.

"If they're going to do it that's the window that they have," Bolton said on Aug. 13. "So most people think that neither Israel nor the United States would attack the reactor after it's been fueled."

On Aug. 16, Iranian Vice President Ali Salehi said a second uranium enrichment facility would be built in 2011. Salehi said the enrichment facility would be one of 10 nuclear sites.

Bolton has been one of the strongest advocates of an Israeli or U.S. air strike on Iran's nuclear facilities before Teheran begins weapons production. He had spent much of his career as a State Department arms control analyst who focused on Iran's nuclear program.

Russia has announced that Bushehr would be loaded with nuclear fuel on Aug. 21. Officials said this would mark the start of operations of the $1 billion facility, deemed civilian.

But Bolton said Bushehr, despite oversight by the International Atomic Energy Agency, could produce plutonium for nuclear weapons. He said such a process would be rapid.

"In the normal operation of this reactor, in just a fairly short period of time, you could get substantial amounts of plutonium to use as nuclear weapons," Bolton said.

The United States has long opposed Russia's completion of Bushehr. But over the last year, the administration of President Barack Obama has quietly allowed Russia's state-owned Atomstroyexport to build the reactor as part of efforts to persuade Iran to stop uranium enrichment.

"The U.S. urged them not to send the Iranian's fuel rods," Bolton said. "They did that. I think this is a very delicate point, as I say, it closes off to the Israelis one possible target for pre-emptive military action."

Choosing his words very carefully, and revealingly so. It's not just the story reproduced below, but other sources from Reuters to RTTNews, that show he condemns the fact that there was no trial, but stops short of condemning the idea of Sharia punishments (lashes or stoning) for "adultery," and of condemning the cruel, unusual, and barbaric punishment that stoning is. There are, after all, influential clerics to please.

The Taliban are flourishing in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Corruption is omnipresent, Sharia is enshrined in the constitution of Afghanistan, and al-Qaeda's top leadership continues to go about its business while the president of Afghanistan panders to the jihadists and their sympathizers.

But let's all step back, take a deep breath, and remember why this conflict began, and what we're fighting for.

The right to build roads?

No, that can't be it. Surely, there must have been something else... An update on this story. "Stoning deaths by Taliban condemned by Afghan president," by Jill Dougherty and Mati Matiullah for CNN, August 17:

Kabul, Afghanistan (CNN) -- Afghan President Hamid Karzai condemned the stoning deaths of a young man and woman in northern Afghanistan over the weekend, calling the executions by the Taliban "unforgivable."

"Executing these two young people without trial is a crime, an act of inhumanity, and is counter to Islam," the president said in a statement Tuesday.

Again: Not a word about the idea of stoning, or execution for adultery.

The Taliban stoned to death a man and a woman in northern Afghanistan for allegedly having an affair, officials said Monday.

The stoning took place Sunday in Dasht-e-Archi district, in the village of Mullah Qali -- a village dominated by the Taliban in Kunduz province.

The pair was accused of having an illicit sexual relationship, a spokesman for the Kunduz governor said.

The woman was about 20 years old and the man was about 27, said Mohammed Ayuob, district governor of Amam Sahib, which is also in Kunduz province. The woman was engaged, and the man was married to another woman. The two had been held by the Taliban for about a week, Ayuob said.

More on this recent incident, along with the Islamic Defenders Front's persecution of Ahmadi Muslims in the days leading up to Ramadan.

Despite the title of the article, which implies a more reciprocal level of activity, the "pushing back" occurring here is but a demonstration held on Sunday, and the ongoing, determined defiance of religious minorities whose only "provocation" is to go on living their lives according to their constitutional rights.

It is not so much pushing back as standing one's rightful ground. But even that is too much of an affront to Sharia, as shown by the violent response even to the demand for the right to worship in a field. "Religious minorities in Indonesia push back," by Irwan Firdaus for the Associated Press, August 15:

BEKASI, Indonesia -- Tired of government inaction, Christians and other religious minorities in Indonesia are pushing back against rising violence by Islamic hard-liners.

For months, Christians in the industrial city of Bekasi have been warned against worshipping on a field that houses their shuttered church. They've arrived to find human feces dumped on the land and sermons have been interrupted by demonstrators chanting "Infidels!" and "Leave now!"

But last week, tensions finally exploded.

That makes it sound like a mutual venting of "tensions," but read on. The Christians became vocal, and the Muslims became violent:

Twenty worshippers were met by 300 Islamic hard-liners, many of whom hurled shoes and water bottles before pushing past a row of riot police. The mob chased down and punched several members of the group.

"The constitution guarantees our right to practice our religion!" Yudi Pasaribu of the Batak Christian Protestant Church said, vowing to return every Sunday until their request for a place of worship, made more than two years ago, is approved.

"And we want to do that on our own property, in our own church."

Indonesia, a secular country of 237 million people, has more Muslims than any other in the world. Though it has a long history of religious tolerance, a small extremist fringe has become more vocal in recent years.

Hard-liners have also become more violent, according to the Setara Institute for Peace and Democracy, a human rights group, which said there have already been 28 attacks on religious freedom in 2010, including everything from preventing groups from performing prayers to burning houses of worship.

The institute said there were 18 such incidents in all of 2009 and 17 in 2008.

Though most Indonesians are moderate and oppose violence, critics say President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono's government has been slow to intervene because it relies heavily on the support of Islamic parties in parliament.

If this goes unchallenged, just how "moderate" are they?

Acting on the orders of local officials, police helped hard-liners forcibly close several mosques owned by Ahmadiyah, an Islamic sect they call "deviant," last month in Manis Lor, a village in West Java province. [...]

Hundreds of people held an interfaith rally in Jakarta over the weekend demanding the government take a tougher line.

"Those attackers have to be arrested, otherwise they will feel their actions are right," said Saur Siagain, a rally organizer, standing in front of a banner that said: "The president has to be responsible in guaranteeing freedom of religion." [...]

In a rare show of force, hundreds of police showed up to protect the Batak Christians on Aug. 8. But they made little effort to stop FPI members as they got increasingly vitriolic.

"The Batak Christians deserve to be stabbed to death," yelled Murhali Barda, who heads the FPI chapter in Bekasi. "If they refuse to go home we are ready to fight."

An argument broke out between Barda and three female members of the congregation. The hard-liners shoved and started punching them. All the while, men chanted from a truck and clerics made speeches saying "Leave. ... We will not let you perform prayers here!"

Starting 'em young:

The crowd, made up largely of children, cheered in response: "God is great!"

In Human Events this morning I discuss Obama's Ramadan gifts to the Islamic world:

Ramadan didn't fall around Christmas time this year, but Barack Obama came bearing gifts anyway. At an Iftar dinner Friday night at the White House (the third night of Ramadan), Obama endorsed the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero.

In doing so, he was in effect saying that Muslims could build a triumphal mosque marking Islam's superiority and victory--which is how the Ground Zero mosque will be viewed in the Islamic world--and can lie about their funding (as Ground Zero mosque Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf has done), and lie about their commitment to interreligious dialogue and harmony (as Rauf has also done), and refuse to denounce jihad terrorists (as Rauf has refused to denounce Hamas), and all that is just fine with the President of the United States.

For Obama, it's all about religious freedom. Apparently now the principle of religious freedom now gives religious groups an absolute right to build anything anywhere. Expect Shinto revivalists to build a shrine to the kamikazes at Pearl Harbor any day now, and self-proclaimed Christian Ku Klux Klansmen to build a chapel honoring the Confederate dead at the site of the murder of Martin Luther King. It's religious freedom! It's the American way!...

There is more.

The list contained "seven individuals, seven military members, two religious organizations, two publishing companies, a publishing executive and a media personality."

An update on this story. "Feds: US couple accused of domestic terrorism had 20 names on hit list," by Mark Thiessen for the Canadian Press, August 16:

ANCHORAGE, Alaska -- A rural Alaska couple accused of domestic terrorism had 20 names on a hit list and had moved to the operational phase.

That's according to new court documents filed against Paul and Nadia Rockwood of King Salmon. They have pleaded guilty to lying about the list and making false statements to the FBI.

Now, we get some hint as to what drove this "rural Alaskan couple":

Authorities say Paul Rockwood became a strict adherent to a violent Jihad-promoting ideology after converting to Islam.

Funny how that keeps happening.

The hit list contained 20 targets, none in Alaska and none named.

Officials claim the list consists of seven individuals, seven military members, two religious organizations, two publishing companies, a publishing executive and a media personality.

Sentencing is set for Aug. 23. He's expected to get eight years maximum, and his wife probation.

US News and World Report spreads false information. "The 'Ground Zero Mosque' Is Not a Mosque (or at Ground Zero)," by Robert Schlesinger at US News & World Report, August 16 (thanks to Dave Washburn):

Despite what you might have heard, a 13-story mosque is not going to be built at ground zero in lower Manhattan. For that matter, a 13-story mosque is not going to be built within a few blocks of ground zero. Rather a 13-story building is going up which will contain, among other things, a mosque.

This might seem like an academic distinction, but in the heated debate surrounding Park51, or as the building is known more commonly, the "ground zero mosque," it really is an important one.

First here are the facts: The building in question is planned to be a Muslim community center, a sort of YMCA (or, I suppose, YMMA). The plans are for it to have fitness facilities (swimming pool, gym, basketball court), a 500-seat auditorium, a restaurant and a cooking school, exhibition space, a library, art studios, a 9/11 memorial--the impudence! the outrage!--and childcare facilities (which no doubt will soon be referred to as a "Manhattan Madrasa"). And it's also going to house a mosque.

Actually, the YMCA doesn't have a church in it. The 92nd Street Y, to which the mosque organizers often compare their Ground Zero project, doesn't contain a synagogue. The Park51/Cordoba House will contain a mosque, as Schlesinger acknowledges, but he doesn't see how that destroys his analogy. If the mosque organizers want this to be simply a community center, why not take out the mosque? Or include a church and a synagogue?

But calling the entire building a mosque is a bit like referring to the Empire State Building as a 103-story Walgreens because the pharmacy chain has a store on the ground floor.

When people start coming out of Walgreens calling for the replacement of the U.S. Constitution with a legal system that extinguishes the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and the equality of rights of all people before the law, as the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf does when he defends Sharia and calls for its implementation, call me.

And for that matter it's important to keep in mind that it's not at ground zero. It's two blocks north of ground zero, on a street running parallel to the old World Trade Center site. ...

That's a false statement. If it is at 45 Park Place, replacing a building that was severely damaged in the 9/11 attacks -- as it is projected to be -- the mosque will be on Ground Zero, as I explained here.

Muhammad, you see, said to stone adulterers to death, not to send them to one of the world's most beautiful and beguiling nations. A update on this story. Sharia Alert from the Islamic Republic: "Iran won't send woman who faced stoning to Brazil," from AP, August 16 (thanks to all who sent this in):

TEHRAN, Iran - Iran will not send a woman who had faced death by stoning on an adultery conviction to Brazil, which has offered her asylum, the president said in a TV interview broadcast Monday.

The stoning sentence for Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani, a 43-year-old mother of two, has been lifted for now after it prompted an outcry from the United States and other governments as well as rights groups. Brazil, which has friendly relations with Iran, offered her asylum.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told state-run English-language Press TV he did not think there was a need to send her to Brazil and that he hoped the issue "will be solved," without explaining.

"There is a judge at the end of the day and the judges are independent. But I talked with the head of the judiciary and the judiciary also does not agree" with Brazil's proposal, Ahmadinejad said. "I think there is no need to create some trouble for President Lula and take her to Brazil," he added, referring to Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. [...]

Under Islamic rulings, a man is usually buried up to his waist, while a woman is buried up to her chest with her hands also buried. Those carrying out the verdict then throw stones until the condemned dies.

Haaretz published an erroneous story saying that the leaders of the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero were going to move the mosque elsewhere. In response, the Park51 group, that is, the mosque leadership, published the anti-Semitic tweet at the bottom of this series (thanks to Pamela Geller):

Park51: Correction, we will be publishing an official twitter response to the Haaretz story and the Hamas comments.

Park51: Official: Reports by Haaretz are completely false. We are committed to plans of building Park 51 to serve the community of Lower Manhattan.

Park51: We are also deeply thankful to the President of the United States and the Mayor of New York City for their support.

Park51: Official: Hamas does not and will not speak for Park51. Our mission is one of peace, understanding, tolerance and faith.

Park51: On a side note, if Haaretz likes publishing fables, perhaps they could go back to the Yiddish ones with parables #welikethosebetter

Pamela has the screenshot of the tweet here. Also she has a revealing look at some of the people Park51 follows on Twitter. Take a look.

Increasingly isolated, the dhimmi mayor sticks to his guns. He's being played for a fool by the the Islamic supremacist Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf and Daisy Khan, and if he reverses himself now, he'd be admitting that. "Ground Zero mosque cancellation would be 'sad day,' says Mayor Bloomberg," from AP, August 16 (thanks to all who sent this in):

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg says it would be "a sad day for America" if opponents successfully kill plans for a mosque proposed near the World Trade Center site....

But of course, the Islamic supremacists behind the Ground Zero mega-mosque have already shown that, contrary to their protestations of interest in creating interfaith harmony, don't care who they hurt. "Cordoba Mosque, Like Skokie March, Legal But Hurtful," by Judith Apter Klinghoffer at History News Network, August 16:

The most apt comparison between the debate surrounding the planned ground zero mosque is with the one which surrounded the planned Nazi marches in Skokie, a Chicago suburb inhabited by a large number of Jewish holocaust survivors. The US constitution guarantees the right of American Muslims to disregard the pain they will cause the victims of the Islamist terrorist attack on 9/11 just as the constitution guaranteed American Nazis the right to disregard the pain of the victims of the Nazi holocaust.

Not surprisingly, the supreme court upheld that Nazi right just as it would uphold the Muslim right. In Skokie the issues related to freedom of speech and assembly. The court held:

But our task here is to decide whether the First Amendment protects the activity in which appellees wish to engage, not to render moral judgment on their views or tactics. No authorities need be cited to establish the proposition, which the Village does not dispute, that First Amendment rights are truly precious and fundamental to our national life. Nor is this truth without relevance to the saddening historical images this case inevitably arouses. It is, after all, in part the fact that our constitutional system protects minorities unpopular at a particular time or place from governmental harassment and intimidation, that distinguishes life in this country from life under the Third Reich....

Barack Hussein Obama similarly reaffirmed the freedom of religion when he declared in the midst of the pomp and circumstance of the White House Iftar celebration:

But let me be clear. As a citizen, and as President, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country. And that includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in Lower Manhattan.

Responding to the unfavorable reception of his legalistic words, he added that he has yet to express an opinion as to the wisdom of building the mosque in that particular location. Obama's words clearly implied he did think the selection of the mosque unwise. Choosing another location would be much wiser. Let us remember that following their supreme court victory, the American Nazis compromised and agreed to march in Chicago, not Skokie. Muslim activists immediately understood the import of Obama's words and expressed their disappointment. The White House spokesman issued a statement standing by the legalistic statement.

Nothing is less genuine than the protestations of innocence by the Imam and his activist wife or the comparison of the Cordoba mosque to the 92 street Jewish Y. Radical Jews have never bombed the West side of Manhattan nor killed 3000 Americans in the name of Judaism. Of course, Muslims specialize in not taking responsibility to anything done by their own and insist that no one demand it of them. Both George W. Bush and Barack Obama seconded that demand and Americans, by and large, went along with it until now.

The provocative plan to build the Cordoba mosque is the result. Far from empowering moderates or deradicalizing Islamists, the appeasement policy pulled the rug from under the moderates and strengthened the hand of radicals. Why end terror and provocation when it merely adds to the official respect accorded to Muslims even in America? After all, Muslims are invited to Iftar celebration at the White House. Their Imams travel around the Middle East at State Department expense when they are not teaching American soldiers how to treat the enemy with respect.

I do not know if the mosque will be end up being built but my gut tells me that many Americans will never feel the same about their Muslim neighbors. The attention garnered in Skokie did not strengthen the American Nazi party. They won a Pyrrhic victory. Today there is a holocaust museum in Skokie. Still, the name of the village is forever entwined with that disgusting publicity stunt....

Read it all.

The Optimistic Conservative has an illuminating take on the Ground Zero mega-mosque and how Islamic supremacists gradually assert themselves ever more strongly. "God and Man at Ground Zero," by The Optimistic Conservative, August 13 (thanks to Doris):

Here's my bottom-line problem with the concatenation of events and trends surrounding the Ground Zero mosque: I see privilege being accorded to Islam, as against situations in which the civil authorities have de-privileged Christianity and Judaism. The reflexive animus against America's traditional major religions will be recognizable, in what I describe below, to every conservative. Yet in a situation where a very large group of Americans objects to the placement of a particular mosque, government authorities not only don't privilege the objectors, they castigate them as bigots and override their concerns. [...]

There are two relevant tales of Christian developments near Ground Zero. One involves a Greek Orthodox church, St. Nicholas', which was crushed by the collapse of WTC Tower Two on 9/11. St. Nicholas' Church was across the street from the World Trade Center. In 2008, a deal was announced with the New York Port Authority to rebuild the church two blocks from its original site. But civil authorities objected to the church's plans for a larger structure, with a dome and spire in the Greek Orthodox tradition. Their express concern was that the church not be taller than the World Trade Center Memorial.

There is no apparent concern about the Park 51 Islamic center being taller than the WTC Memorial (it is). It will not be built as a wholly new structure, of course. But on the other hand, the commercial skyscraper planned by the Port Authority will be a new structure, and it will tower over the WTC Memorial. The principles at work appear to be as follows: new commercial structures may be taller than the Memorial. An Islamic group may occupy a building that is taller than the Memorial and devote it to a religious purpose. But a Christian structure may not be built taller than the Memorial.

We must note about St. Nicholas' that the 2008 deal with the Port Authority entailed a contribution of $20 million from the Authority toward the new building. Certainly, public funding properly gives the Authority some leverage over the structure. St. Nicholas' hasn't been singled out for special public benefits, however; it was the only church that was destroyed by the 9/11 attack. Rebuilding it was simply proposed for public funding as part of the overall plan for the 9/11 site.

The Port Authority planned to build a platform and foundation for the church, because under the 2008 deal it was to sit on top of a garage and security screening area. In March 2009, Authority officials refused to allow the church to review the plans for the garage and screening area. At that point, talks regarding the church's rebuilding ground to a halt. [...]

The center will house a mosque, and mosques broadcast the call to prayer five times a day. This practice has become contentious in a number of American cities; in the Bronx, a masjid stirred vigorous community opposition last fall when it applied for an amplified sound permit for the purpose. The specific reason for requesting the permit was, apparently, that the call already broadcast outside the mosque was not considered loud enough to attract the attention of the faithful, and needed to be louder.

During the years I lived in Norfolk, Virginia, I lived not far from a masjid and I recall that in the 1980s, the calls to prayer were barely audible outside of about a block's radius. By the 1990s, they were being amplified, and could be somewhat annoying on a temperate evening when you wanted to have the windows open. I don't know if anyone ever formally objected to the noise. From a quarter mile away, I found it a bearable irritant. But I can understand why people closer to it might have found it objectionable - as I can understand why residents of the Bronx would, who have no alternative to hearing the adhan five times a day....

Read it all.

It's in "How the 'ground zero mosque' fear mongering began," by Justin Elliott in Salon, August 16 (thanks to all who sent this in):

To a remarkable extent, a Salon review of the origins of the story found, the controversy was kicked up and driven by Pamela Geller, a right-wing, viciously anti-Muslim, conspiracy-mongering blogger, whose sinister portrayal of the project was embraced by Rupert Murdoch's New York Post.

While I agree that my FDI/SIOA colleague Pamela Geller has been ably leading the charge nationally on this issue (as Daisy Khan herself has noted), Justin Elliott is kidding himself, and Salon readers, if he thinks the 70% of the American people who oppose an lslamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero are doing so because they have been manipulated by Pamela Geller or anyone else. The American people know that this is not a matter of religious freedom, but an insult to the memories of those who were murdered at Ground Zero on 9/11, and an Islamic supremacist manifestation of the Islamic tendency to build triumphal mosques on the cherished sites of conquered peoples.

Pamela comprehensively rebuts Elliott's smears here. And I'd just like to add one thing. Elliott says:

May 7, 2010: Geller's group, Stop Islamization of America (SIOA), launches "Campaign Offensive: Stop the 911 Mosque!" (SIOA 's associate director is Robert Spencer, who makes his living writing and speaking about the evils of Islam.)

I write and speak about the Islamic jihad doctrine, which mandates that Muslims wage war against non-Muslims and subjugate them as inferiors under the rule of Islamic law. I write and speak about the institutionalized mistreatment of women as mandated by Islamic law. I write and speak about how Islamic law calls for the murder of apostates from Islam. I write and speak about all the ways in which Islamic law contradicts principles of human rights that are otherwise universally accepted.

Which of these evils does Justin Elliott support? Or is it all of them?

Fighting for his political life, Reid sides against his boss and with the American people. "Reid: Build mosque elsewhere," from AP, August 16 (thanks to Urban Infidel):

WASHINGTON -- The Senate's top Democrat says a mosque should not be built near the site of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada on Monday became the highest profile Democrat to break with President Barack Obama, who on Friday backed the right for the developers to build a mosque near ground zero.

In a statement, Reid said the first amendment protects freedom of religion and he respects that, but the mosque should be built somewhere else....

The team is predominantly Muslim, but there is at least one non-Muslim player on it, and he is going along, so all is well. The only problem here is that it discourages non-Muslims from playing on the team, and reinforces the ever-reinforced and ultimately Islamic supremacist principle that non-Muslims must accommodate Muslim practices -- never the other way around. "Mich. school practices 11 p.m. to 4 a.m.," from ESPN.com, August 16 (thanks to all who sent this in):

DEARBORN, Mich. -- A Michigan high school football team is holding preseason practices in the middle of the night to help its Muslim players practice both faith and football.

The predominantly Muslim squad from Dearborn says the nocturnal regimen is a way for players to eat and drink while observing the holy month of daytime fasting known as Ramadan that started last week.

The August heat also played a factor in Fordson High coach Fouad Zaban's proposal to reverse the clock for a week of two-a-day practices.

Cutting practice wasn't an option at football-crazy Fordson, which is coming off a one-loss season and has won four state titles and three runner-up seasons since it was established in 1928.

But nobody wanted to lessen the significance of Ramadan in the Detroit suburb widely known as the capital of Arab-America.

The moonlight practice is tailored for Adnan Restum and fellow Muslim teammates.

Illuminated by the night lights on the football field, Restum recently joined a scrum of teammates at the end-zone water fountain, taking a break from a grueling preseason football workout to guzzle a drink.

In just a few hours, he wouldn't be able to take a sip. But the 17-year-old defensive tackle could rehydrate guilt-free during the 11 p.m. to 4 a.m. practice, and succumb to tempting boxes full of granola bars and chocolate milk, too.

"It feels really great," said Restum, who has been fasting since he was about 10. "If we're doing it during the day, we wouldn't have water and it would be really hot and everything."

Zaban proposed the late practices after realizing the rotating Ramadan would fall squarely during the start of a two-a-day practice schedule that launches football season.

Zaban, 40, a Muslim and former Fordson player, knows the high stakes. When Ramadan falls during football season, the players practice during daylight hours. But with August's heat and doubled practice schedule, concerns grew about players' health, particularly the high risk of heat stroke.

"We know how hot it's been this summer -- it's not safe," Zaban said.

Working it out meant getting the approval of school and district administrators and the blessings of players, parents and police. Then, there were the residents in the surrounding neighborhood, who would hear more noise and see the illuminated field. So he sent letters explaining the decision....

Defensive tackle William Powell, one of the team's few non-Muslims, initially thought the coach was "out of his mind," but he's come around. In fact, he's even fasted.

"I'm around 'em, so I've tried a couple times but it's hard," the 17-year-old said....

Question for the Tulsa Muslim community: Why does such a relatively small population need a dedicated Muslim women's shelter for domestic abuse? Where are husbands getting the idea that good women are obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded, and from those from whom you fear disobedience -- oh, wait... "Tulsa shelter helps abused Muslim women," by Bill Sherman for Tulsa World, August 15 (thanks to Twostellas):

She was pencil-thin and so weak from mental and physical abuse, she needed help getting up stairs.

Her husband kept her under video surveillance 24 hours a day, a virtual prisoner in her own home, and once held a knife to her throat.

This Jordanian woman found refuge in the Surayya Anne Foundation home, Tulsa's only Muslim women's shelter. She is now separated from her husband, who remains in Tulsa, and is back with her family in Jordan.

Since it opened in May 2009, the modest, three-bedroom, two-bath apartment in south Tulsa has housed 15 women, most of them Muslims, and their 10 children, some for a few days, others for a few months. [...]

Mary Al-Khaldi is house mother for the women. She lives in a nearby apartment and is available day and night to assist them. She also enforces a curfew, granting exceptions for such things as outside work and Ramadan evening prayers.

"It's great to be able to assist these ladies," she said.

Al-Khaldi said she was raised in a Pentecostal home in Oklahoma and converted to Islam 25 years ago. Her older brother abused her mother and was killed by her younger brother.

She married an Iraqi she described as a radical Muslim. "It took me 10 years to figure that out," she said.

"When he struck me when I was with child, I left him, but I didn't leave Islam."

Board member Allison Moore said women in the shelter are required to work or go to school, unless they have just had a baby, and to set aside money in a savings account to help them get back on their feet when they leave the shelter.

She said the foundation is raising money to buy a four- to six-unit apartment complex that will enable it to expand its services to families in need, including husbands.

The current shelter operates on a $46,000 annual budget, most of it from the Tulsa Muslim community.

Call it the "4:34 Fund."

The delayed execution will likely be taken as a gesture of compassion in some circles, but the Iranian authorities are still toying with the defendant, who doesn't know if her end will come the day after Ramadan ends, or at any arbitrary point after that, and at this point, whether she will be shot, stoned to death, or hung. And they are are playing a waiting game with the international community as well, biding their time to see the collective attention span wanes long enough to carry out the sentence.

Ultimately, they are attempting a balancing act between the imperative to carry out Sharia for the sake of the regime's credibility as an Islamic government, and managing the global public relations quandary that cruel and unusual punishment necessarily entails.

More on this story. "Final verdict postponed for Iranian woman facing stoning," from CNN, August 16:

Tehran, Iran (CNN) -- An Iranian court has delayed the final verdict of a 43-year-old woman sentenced to death by stoning, a human rights group said Sunday, two days after the country announced she will not be executed during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan,

The International Committee Against Stoning did not say how it got its information on the postponement of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani's final verdict, which had previously been scheduled to come down last Thursday.

The group said in a statement that the final verdict in Ashtiani's case is now expected on August 21, the date of her lawyer's next court appearance.

Iranian state TV broadcast a program about Ashtiani on Friday in which it said that she will not be executed during Ramadan, which began last week, the International Committee Against Stoning said Sunday....

There are several hundred clerics dealing with Karzai who would find this quite alright. "Taliban 'kill adulterous Afghan couple' in marketplace," from BBC News, August 16:

A man and a woman who allegedly had an adulterous affair have been stoned and killed in the northern Afghan province of Kunduz.

The punishment happened in a crowded bazaar on Sunday in the Taliban-controlled village of Mullah Quli.

The Taliban have not commented on the public killing, but it was confirmed by local officials and witnesses.

This month the Taliban also reportedly flogged and killed a pregnant widow in western Baghdis province.

Mohammad Ayub, the governor of Imam Sahib district in Kunduz, told the BBC on Monday: "The Taliban brought them to the local bazaar.

"They stoned them because they were accused of adultery. There was a big crowd of people who watched.''

Two witnesses from Mullah Quli told the BBC that the Taliban asked the villagers to attend the stoning through an announcement on loudspeakers in the mosque.

"There was a big crowd of people," one witness said. "The Taliban made the women wear black clothes and the men were made to stand. The Taliban started throwing stones.

"We were also asked to throw stones. After a while, the Taliban left. The woman was dead but the man was still alive.

"Some Taliban then came and shot him three times. The Taliban warned villagers if anyone does anything un-Islamic, this will be their fate.''

'Climate of fear'

A Kunduz-based official with the Afghan intelligence agency, the NDS, confirmed the account.

He told the BBC: "It shows that they [the Taliban] want to create a climate of fear."

According to news agency AFP, the woman was 23 years old and the man was 28.

A local tribal elder told the BBC that the couple had eloped and that the woman had been engaged, while the man was already married.

A jirga (tribal council) met and decided that the couple could come back to the village if the man paid compensation.

"The man returned after he was assured that he wouldn't be harmed," said the elder. "The Taliban arrested them as soon as they came back.''

A victory mosque -- and more are to come: "We have to build everywhere." Meanwhile, CAIR's chest-thumping over Obama's blessing on the mosque is here. "Hamas nod for gz mosque: Terror group's leader: 'Have to build it,'" by S.A. Miller and Tom Topousis in the New York Post, August 16 (thanks to all who sent this in):

A leader of the Hamas terror group yesterday jumped into the emotional debate on the plan to construct a mosque near Ground Zero -- insisting Muslims "have to build" it there.

"We have to build everywhere," said Mahmoud al-Zahar, a co-founder of Hamas and the organization's chief on the Gaza Strip.

"In every area we have, [as] Muslim[s], we have to pray, and this mosque is the only site of prayer," he said on "Aaron Klein Investigative Radio" on WABC.

"We have to build the mosque, as you are allowed to build the church and Israelis are building their holy places."

Hamas, he added, "is representing the vast majority of the Arabic and Islamic world -- especially the Islamic side."...

A phenomenon we have seen across the Islamic world, and have noted here at Jihad Watch since the site's inception nearly 7 years ago. And somehow, it keeps happening. "Attacks in Iraq Rise During Ramadan," by Anthony Shadid for the New York Times, August 15:

BAGHDAD -- Roadside bombs, booby-trapped cars and hit-and-run attacks reverberated across Iraq on Sunday, another violent day following insurgents' threats to escalate their attacks during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.

In the past two days, at least 19 people were killed in the attacks. While insurgents have sought to make dramatic gestures lately -- raising their flag in prominent Baghdad neighborhoods and burning the bodies of policemen they have killed -- more remarkable is the drumbeat of assaults day after day on Iraq's security forces.

United States military officials have said insurgents are seeking to target the police as the American military withdraws troops in an attempt to undermine the police's sometimes shaky standing with the public. In a statement before Ramadan, which began last week, insurgents vowed "to escalate their activities and further their strikes" during a month in which Muslims fast from dawn to dusk as a way to teach devotion, humility and sacrifice.

In one of the worst attacks on Sunday, assailants opened fire on worshippers leaving prayers at the Abid Wais mosque before dawn, killing three people and wounding two. The mosque is in Jurf al-Sakhr, a still-troubled region about 30 miles south of Baghdad.

In Baghdad, a booby-trapped bus exploded, killing three more people, and roadside mines in two other neighborhoods killed three civilians and two policemen. To the north, in Mosul, one of Iraq's most dangerous cities, gunmen attacked an Iraqi army checkpoint, killing an Iraqi soldier and wounding another. In Baquba, east of Baghdad, a leader of an American-allied militia was killed when his booby-trapped car exploded.

Sharia, that is. And a disastrous precedent exists in the language of the U.S.-backed, post-Taliban constitution:

"No law can be contrary to the beliefs and provisions of the sacred religion of Islam" (Chapter 1, Article 3).

Thus, where there is any doubt or conflict in the Afghan government, Islamic law wins by constitutional fiat. What could possibly go wrong? Exactly what is reported in the story below: the demand for all the things we've been assured countless times don't really happen in Sharia law, like stonings, floggings, and amputation, as well as execution for apostasy from Islam. But these Misunderstanders of Islam are digging in and demanding them.

"Afghan clerics seek return to strict Islamic law," by Syed Salahuddin for Reuters, August 12:

KABUL (Reuters) - Afghanistan's largest gathering of clerics, who met to discuss reconciliation with the Taliban, has called for the revival of strict Islamic law as the country seeks ways to win militants away from a growing insurgency.

About 350 of the Islamic clerics, or ulema, met for three days this week, the meeting ending with a declaration calling on President Hamid Karzai to enact sharia, or Islamic law, including punishments such as stonings, lashing, amputation and execution.

"The lack of implementation of sharia hodud (punishment) has cast a negative impact on the peace process," said a 10-point resolution issued after the meeting.

"We the ulema and preachers of Afghanistan ... earnestly ask the government not to spare any efforts in the implementation of sharia hodud."

The resolution, seen by Reuters, was sent to Karzai's government.

The ulema have a long-standing and deep influence in traditionally conservative Afghanistan and have often stepped in to back uprisings or been used to bolster past governments. [...]

In other words, we're looking at constitutionally-backed Sharia blackmail.

In "What Obama Got Wrong About the Mosque," August 13, Sam Harris breaks with the Leftist pro-Islamic supremacism lockstep that usually prevails at the Daily Beast and offers some common sense about the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero:

After weeks of dodging the issue, at a White House Ramadan dinner Friday night, President Obama came out in support of Park51, the planned Muslim community center and mosque two blocks away from the World Trade Center site.The President says he wasn't endorsing the ground zero mosque--only defending the right to build it. Sam Harris on his failure to acknowledge that Islam is different than other faiths.

Should a 15-story mosque and Islamic cultural center be built two blocks from the site of the worst jihadist atrocity in living memory? Put this way, the question nearly answers itself. This is not to say, however, that I think we should prevent our fellow citizens from building "the ground zero mosque." There is probably no legal basis to do so in any case--nor should there be. But the margin between what is legal and what is desirable, or even decent, leaves room for many projects that well-intentioned people might still find offensive. If you can raise the requisite $100 million, you might also build a shrine to Satan on this spot, complete with the names of all the non-believing victims of 9/11 destined to suffer for eternity in Hell. You could also build an Institute of "9/11 Truth," catering to the credulity, masochism, and paranoia of the 16 percent of Americans who imagine that the World Trade Center was intentionally demolished by agents of the U.S. government. Incidentally, any shrine to conspiracy thinking should probably also contain a mosque, along with a list of the 4,000 Jews who suspiciously declined to practice their usury in the Twin Towers on the day of the attack.

The erection of a mosque upon the ashes of this atrocity will also be viewed by many millions of Muslims as a victory--and as a sign that the liberal values of the West are synonymous with decadence and cowardice.

Read it all.

Qur'an 4:34 states:

Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great.

The relevant aspects here are in bold above: good women are obedient. Wives, daughters, sisters, and so forth. If a Muslim man even fears disobedience (opening the door for divinely enabled paranoia), Allah provides beatings as an option.

And that's the bottom line. Allah says you can hit disobedient or potentially disobedient women. Stories like the one below are the consequence of Allah's compassion and mercy in the Qur'an upon the basest instincts of humankind: Lash out in violence when you don't get the respect and submission you feel entitled to.

"Muslim parents charged with beating Bordesley Green daughter over Facebook fling," by Jeanette Oldham for the Sunday Mercury, August 15 (thanks to Twostellas):

Parents of a Muslim girl have been charged with beating and imprisoning their daughter after they discovered she had been in an alleged secret relationship with a man she met on Facebook.

Husband and wife Abdul Aziz and Parveen Akhtar, of Bordesley Green, Birmingham, are in police custody after they were arrested by West Midlands Police.

Mr Aziz, 47, has been charged with false imprisonment, two counts of making threats to kill, and assault. Mrs Akhtar, 44, is charged with false imprisonment and two assault charges.

The couple are due to appear at Birmingham Crown Court for a plea and case management hearing on August 23.

It is understood the case relates to claims that the parents held their 19-year-old daughter prisoner at the family home on Fourth Avenue, Bordesley Green, for 11 days between April 24 and May 5.

The alleged victim is understood to have claimed that she was not allowed to leave the property during that time, and was kept under constant supervision, while the doors and windows of the house were kept locked.

The assault charges relate to claims that the parents allegedly assaulted their daughter. It is understood the victim claims she was punched, kicked and assualted [sic] with a broomstick.

It is understood the alleged events occurred after the parents, said to be traditional Muslims, learned of their daughter's relationship with a man she had apparently met through Facebook, the online social networking site.

Sources close to the case claim the parents had wanted an arranged marriage for their daughter.

The young woman is understood to have at one stage left her family home to stay with her boyfriend in London, although she later returned to live with her parents....

Bad idea.

This morning Politico has a story entitled "GOP takes harsher stance toward Islam" by Ben Smith and Maggie Haberman about the Republican Party's alleged slide toward "Islamophobia," complete with a tut-tutting quote about (what else?) tea parties and bigotry from Honest Ibe Hooper of Hamas-linked CAIR. Smith and Haberman do not, of course, see fit to mention that Hooper is the front man for a group that is an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas jihad terror funding case, or that several of its officials have been convicted of jihad terror activities, and that thus Hooper himself merits the title of "bigot" -- and much worse titles -- far more than do those who oppose him and his ilk in the name of Constitutional freedoms.

But that's not why I'm writing this. Nor am I writing it because the Republican Party is allegedly growing more realistic about the threat of jihad and Islamic supremacism. I'm glad to see some of its exponents talking sense about the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero, but that doesn't mean that they have any more of a realistic or informed appraisal of the roots of jihad terrorism, stealth jihad, and the like than they always did. The party appears to be pretty much as clueless as it has always been, but time will tell.

No, I am writing this because of an offhand remark that Smith and Haberman make: "...what is now nationally known as the 'Ground Zero mosque' - it is actually a few blocks north of the site..."

This has become a common weapon in the arsenal of mosque proponents. They will say that the mosque needs to be at 9/11 to demonstrate American religious liberty and as a gesture of healing to reverse the damage done on 9/11, as Daisy Khan has said. Then they will contradict themselves by saying that the mosque won't be at Ground Zero anyway, but a few blocks away, and so it doesn't really have anything to do with 9/11.

In the first place, the mosque will not be a few blocks away. I have been to the site, and can tell you: walk half a block down the street from the Burlington Coat Factory that is set to be the site of the mega-mosque, turn left, and you will see Ground Zero. Smith and Haberman have apparently never been to the site, as no one who has could characterize it as "a few blocks north." It is actually just 600 feet away from Ground Zero.

But also, and more importantly, the Burlington Coat Factory building is in a larger sense part of Ground Zero. The landing gear from one of the jetliners hijacked on September 11, 2001 flew into the building that the Islamic supremacists want to tear down to construct their mosque. That makes this building part of the 9/11 attack site, and will make the mosque -- in the eyes of the Islamic world -- exactly what the Dome of the Rock is: a mosque of victory built right on the site of the Muslim defeat of the Infidels. The Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque, built on the site of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, are declarations of the superiority of Islam over Judaism, and its victory over Judaism. The mosque at the Burlington Coat Factory site, built on the site -- not near it, but on it, because of that landing gear -- of the Islamic jihad attack on September 11, 2001, will be seen as a declaration of the superiority of Islam over the United States, and its victory over the American economic machine.

The Burlington Coat Factory building, 45 Park Place, which was severely damaged by that part of one of the 9/11 planes, is Ground Zero, as is the former World Trade Center site. That's why the Islamic supremacists want that building, and only that building, and why they have rebuffed Governor Paterson's offer to help them move elsewhere, and why they persist in their plans despite a rising chorus of public disapproval and public anguish that shows up their claims to be "building bridges" with this mega-mosque.

And policemen. "Three shot dead in Thai restive south," from Reuters, August 14 (thanks to all who sent this in):

YALA Thailand (Reuters) - Three people, among them a policeman, were killed in Thailand's troubled southern region Saturday in attacks blamed on Muslim separatists, police said.

A man and his wife were shot dead while riding a motorcycle to work in a rubber plantation in Yala, one of the three predominantly ethnic Malay Muslim provinces with a deep history of rebellion to the rule of faraway Bangkok.

In a separate attack in neighbouring Pattani province, a policeman was fatally shot by unknown gunmen while travelling to work. He later died in hospital, police told reporters.

More than 4,000 people have been killed in the last six years in the rubber-rich region bordering Malaysia, which was a Muslim sultanate until annexed in 1909 by Buddhist Thailand, which many locals say has long treated them like second-class citizens....

The pretexts shift, the jihad is constant.

Muslim authorities collude with the mob out of fear and/or conviction. Islamic Tolerance Alert from modern, moderate Indonesia: "Mob Threats Lead to Closure of Church Building in Indonesia," from Compass Direct, August 13:

JAKARTA, Indonesia, August 13 (CDN) -- Police and local government officials joined forces with a Muslim mob to close a church in North Sumatra Province on July 30, with church leaders forced to promise never to hold services at the site.

The Rev. Leritio Panjaitan of the Binanga HKBP (Huria Kristen Batak Protestant) Church on the Gunung Tua-Sibuhan Highway in Siboris Dolok Village, Sipirok, North Sumatra Province said government officials and mobs threatened to burn the facility if worship continued there.

Pastor Panjaitan said rejection of the church was aided by the presence of a Quranic boarding school, Darul Hasnah Madrassa, which appeared in the vicinity six months ago.

"I have received information that the leader of that madrassa [Islamic school], Dr. Gong Matua Siregar, has incited citizens to reject the presence of the church," Pastor Panjaitan said.

She said that a local government official admitted to her that the head of the madrassa had pressured him to close the church.

Pastor Panjaitan added that the church had applied for a building and worship permit long ago but that authorities had not acted on it, and that all necessary administrative requirements had been fulfilled....

Sharia forbids dhimmis to build new houses of worship.

Fallout. "3 Republicans Criticize Obama's Endorsement of Mosque," by Edward Wyatt in the New York Times, August 14 (thanks to all who sent this in):

[...] John Boehner, the Ohio Republican who is the House minority leader, said: "The decision to build this mosque so close to the site of ground zero is deeply troubling, as is the president's decision to endorse it."

"The American people certainly don't support it," Mr. Boehner said.

Representative Peter King, a New York Republican, said that while the Muslim community has the right to build the mosque, doing so needlessly offends too many people.

"President Obama is wrong," Mr. King said. "It is insensitive and uncaring for the Muslim community to build a mosque in the shadow of ground zero. While the Muslim community has the right to build the mosque they are abusing that right by needlessly offending so many people who have suffered so much. The right and moral thing for President Obama to have done was to urge Muslim leaders to respect the families of those who died and move their mosque away from Ground Zero. Unfortunately the president caved into political correctness."

Newt Gingrich, the former House Speaker, also condemned the proposed mosque and the President's comments.

"There is nothing surprising in the president's continued pandering to radical Islam," he said. "What he said last night is untrue and in accurate. The fact is this is not about religious liberty."

Mr. Gingrich said the proposed mosque would be a symbol of Muslim "triumphalism" and that building the mosque near the site of the Sept. 11 attacks "would be like putting a Nazi sign next to the Holocaust Museum."

"It's profoundly and terribly wrong," he said.

Has Gingrich been reading Jihad Watch?

Cleric misunderstands Islam, leads followers to misunderstand it as well. Happens every day. "Muslim Cleric Calls for Jihad, Coptic Christians Attacked in Egypt," by Mary Abdelmassih for AINA, August 14:

(AINA) -- On August 13 Sheikh Tobah, Imam of the village of Shimi 170 KM south of Giza, called during Muslim Friday prayers for Jihad against Christians living there. As a result the Christian Copts living in the village were assaulted over two consecutive days. Eleven Copts were hospitalized and many Coptic youths were arrested.

The assaults begain a couple of hours after the Sheikhs incitement. An argument between Copt Maher Amin, who was washing his taxi, and Mohamed Ali Almstaui, a Muslim extremist from the village, escalated into violence as Mohamad assaulted Maher. The altercation was stopped by bystanders. However, after the evening break of Ramadan fast, Ahmad, the brother of the perpetrator Mohamad, who is reported to belong to an extremist organization, together with twenty other men, went to Maher's family home, breaking down the door and assaulting him and his family with batons, including his old mother and his paralyzed sister, injuring them and breaking their furniture.

Security forces came and took away the Christian victims and kept them at the station in spite of their wounds, to pressuree them into accepting "reconciliation" with their attackers. None of the Muslims were arrested.

Saad Gamal, Egyptian MP for Elsaff, phoned from Gaza, where he is on a visit, and gave orders to the police to force reconciliation on the Coptic parties.

"I was against reconciliation, because I know that the culprits know that they can assault Copts, and in the end it will boil down to Copts giving up all their rights with the reconciliation sessions," said Reverend Ezra Nageh of St. George's Church in Elsaff.

"I was told by the security authorities that for the sake of the Holy month of Ramadan, everyone ought to make peace."

The next day, after the compulsory reconciliation between the Amin family and Almstaui family, a large number of Muslims were gathered by the Almstauis and attacked again the houses of the Copts, beaten the inhabitants, and went to the fields and assaulted the Copts there also.

"Why should they not do that, when they are told that the MP will defend them," said Rev. Ezra, adding the police have yet to issue a report about the incidents, because they were afraid of the MP. "So to whom should we go for help? MP Saad Gamal hates Christians, and President Mubarak pretends that he is not present or unaware of our plight."

Ghali Tawfik, one of the Coptic victims, said "We are forced into reconciliation and in less than 24 hours, we are assaulted again."...

Muzzammil "Mo" Hassan founded Bridges TV to project a positive, moderate image of American Muslims. And everything was going just great until he beheaded his wife in the Bridges studios. Now he wants to use the insanity defense, which was previously disallowed. But there is ample precedent for jihadists being declared insane in the U.S., so what's one more?

"Judge reserves Hassan ruling," by Matt Gryta for the Buffalo News, August 14 (thanks to Mark):

A judge Friday reserved decision on whether Muzzammil "Mo" Hassan can use an insanity-based emotional disturbance defense in his upcoming trial for allegedly beheading his wife.

Erie County Judge Thomas P. Franzyk previously barred the defense team from using such a defense.

Franzyk, who is slated to begin jury selection Sept. 7 in Hassan's trial in the 2009 beheading of Aasiya Zubair Hassan, did not indicate when he intends to rule on the motion argued by Hassan's lawyers, Jeremy D. Schwartz and Julie Atti Rogers.

Erie County District Attorney Frank A. Sedita III and Homicide Prosecutor Colleen Curtin Gable opposed overturning the order, which the judge issued Jan. 22 after repeated delays by Hassan's legal team in disclosing their planned defense....

Even a relentless ideologue such as he can see which way the wind is blowing. But will this hedging be enough to convince the gullible that he has not betrayed them? Probably. "Obama supports 'the right' for ground zero mosque," by Jason Kobely for AP, August 14 (thanks to all who sent this in):

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Barack Obama says Muslims have the right to build a mosque near ground zero in New York, but he's not saying whether he thinks it's a good idea to do so.

Obama's comment Saturday during a trip to Florida expanded on a statement he made at a White House dinner on Friday. At that event, he said Muslims have the same right to freedom of religion as everyone else in America.

Obama said Saturday that he didn't comment on the wisdom of putting a mosque near the site of the Sept. 11 attacks -- but rather was commenting on the right to build a mosque there.

"I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there," Obama said. "I was commenting very specifically on the right people have that dates back to our founding. That's what our country is about. And I think it's very important as difficult as some of these issues are that we stay focused on who we are as a people and what our values are all about."

The mosque would be part of a $100 million Islamic community center just two blocks from where nearly 3,000 people died.

Hamas-linked CAIR, meanwhile, is dead chuffed:

Nihad Awad, national executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, praised Obama's remarks.

"We welcome President Obama's strong statement of support for American Muslim religious rights and hope his remarks will serve as encouragement to those who are challenging the rising level of Islamophobia in our society," Awad said. "We urge other national political and religious leaders to speak out in defense of the freedom of religion and equality of all Americans enshrined in our Constitution."...

In "Obama Backs Ground Zero Mosque at Ramadan Celebration
" in Human Events, August 14, Pamela Geller explains why Obama is all wrong about the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero:

President Obama came out Friday evening in favor of the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at the hallowed ground of the 9/11 attack.

Obama told the ummah (at an Iftar dinner on the third night of Ramadan) that he supports a triumphal mosque on the cherished site where Islamic jihadists attacked.

If you had any doubt who Obama stood with on 9/11, there can be no doubt in our minds now.

Right after the 9/11 attacks, Obama blamed America, just like the Islamic supremacist Ground Zero mega-mosque Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf.

Then-state Sen. Obama said: "We should also examine the foreign policies of the U.S. to make sure that we occupy the moral high ground in these conflicts. In particular, we have to examine some of the root causes of this terrorist activity."

I believe he planned his announcement on the mosque all along. He waited until Ramadan. Symbolic.

He has now turned our Ground Zero protest on 911 into a mega-event. The very idea of a 15-story mega-mosque on that hallowed ground is indecent, offensive and outrageous.

If the Ground Zero mosque Imam Rauf and his wife Daisy Khan really wanted to "reach out" and "heal," they would give the $120 million that they're using to build this mosque to the first responders who are suffering from exposure to the toxic environment at Ground Zero after Muslim terrorists brought down the World Trade Center and slaughtered 3,000 Americans.

Is the President incapable of common decency?

At the Ramadan dinner, Obama echoed New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg in claiming that the mosque had to go at Ground Zero because of America's principle of religious liberty, saying: "Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country. That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in Lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable."

But Obama must know that this is not about religious liberty. No one has suggested abridging the 1st Amendment to stop the mosque, and to oppose the Ground Zero mosque is not to oppose the 1st Amendment. There are hundreds of mosques in New York, thousands in America.

This is not a religious issue. This is a national security issue. And an issue of national dignity and respect for those who were murdered at that site in the name of Islam....

Read it all.

Yahoo News has it:

NEW YORK, Aug. 14 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The human rights organization Stop Islamization of America (SIOA) strongly condemns Barack Obama's blessing of the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque to be built at the hallowed ground of the September 11, 2001 jihad terror attack.

SIOA founder and executive director Pamela Geller said in a statement that Obama "has, in effect, sided with the Islamic jihadists and told the ummah (at an Iftar dinner on the third night of Ramadan) that he believes in and supports what will be understood in the Islamic world as a triumphal mosque on a site of Islamic conquest."

Geller noted that in coming out in favor of the mosque, Obama confused the issue by framing it as one of religious liberty, when no opponent of the mosque is calling for restrictions on anyone's religious freedom; ignored the historical record showing that thousands of mosques have been built over the cherished sites of conquered peoples (notably the Dome of the Rock on the site of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem); and also ignored the clear evidence of the mosque backers' duplicity and refusal to condemn the jihad terrorist group Hamas.

"Obama must know," said Geller, "that this is not about religious liberty. No one has suggested abridging the First Amendment to stop the mosque, and to oppose the Ground Zero mosque is not to oppose the First Amendment. There are hundreds of mosques in New York, thousands in America. This is not a religious issue. This is an issue of national dignity and respect for those who were murdered at that site in the name of Islam. Mutual respect is a two way street."

"We, in the West," Geller continued, "are constantly being told to be sensitive to Islamic sensibilities regarding images of Muhammad and so-called 'blasphemy.' We are told that criticism of jihad violence is 'hate speech.' But where is the reciprocity? Where is the Muslim compassion for the grief and the pain of not just the 9/11 families but of all Americans? Every American was a target that day; the 9/11 families took the hit for us."

The Freedom Defense Initiative (FDI) and SIOA will be hosting a rally against the Ground Zero mega-mosque on September 11 at 2pm at Park Place, between Church Street and West Broadway.

The confirmed list of speakers includes 9/11 family members; former U. S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton; former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich; the Dutch Parliamentarian and freedom fighter Geert Wilders; Gary Berntsen, a candidate for the U.S. Senate from New York; Jordan Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice, which has filed suit to stop the Ground Zero mega-mosque; Michael Grimm, a candidate for Congress from New York's 13th district and a 9/11 first responder; and journalist Andrew Breitbart.

Hosting the rally are Geller, the popular blogger and columnist who publishes the acclaimed AtlasShrugs.com blog; and SIOA associate director Robert Spencer, the bestselling author and director of JihadWatch.org. Geller is the author (with Spencer) of The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration's War on America (foreword by Ambassador John Bolton), published by Simon & Schuster.

Free citizens are coming from all over the U.S. to attend the rally. Join the largest Caravan in America coming cross-country to the 9/11 Rally.

SIOA is one of America's foremost organizations defending human rights, religious liberty, and the freedom of speech against Islamic supremacist intimidation and attempts to bring elements of Sharia to the United States.

Join SIOA's Facebook page.

Obama is in effect saying that you can build a triumphal mosque marking Islam's superiority and victory -- which is how the Ground Zero mosque will be viewed in the Islamic world -- and you can lie about your funding, and lie about your commitment to interreligious dialogue and harmony, and refuse to denounce jihad terrorists, and all that is just fine with him.

"Obama's Support for Ground Zero Mosque Draws Fire," from FoxNews.com, August 14:

President Obama is under fire after jumping into the middle of a cultural clash Friday night in favor of building a mosque near ground zero, a stance that has elevated the contentious issue to the presidential level ahead of a difficult election season for Democrats.

Some victims' advocates and Republicans have strongly condemned Obama's support for the mosque, which would be part of a $100 million Islamic community center two blocks from where nearly 3,000 people perished when hijacked jetliners slammed into the World Trade Center towers on Sept. 11, 2001.

"Barack Obama has abandoned America at the place where America's heart was broken nine years ago, and where her true values were on display for all to see," said Debra Burlingame, a spokeswoman for some Sept. 11 victims' families and the sister of one of the pilots killed in the attacks.

Building the mosque at ground zero, she said, "is a deliberately provocative act that will precipitate more bloodshed in the name of Allah."

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y said the president is "wrong."

"It is insensitive and uncaring for the Muslim community to build a mosque in the shadow of ground zero," he said in a written statement.

"While the Muslim community has the right to build the mosque, they are abusing that right by needlessly offending so many people who have suffered so much," he said. "The right and moral thing for President Obama to have done was to urge Muslim leaders to respect the families of those who died and move their mosque away from ground zero. Unfortunately, the president caved into political correctness." [...]

While his pronouncement concerning the mosque might find favor in the Muslim world, Obama's stance runs counter to the opinions of the majority of Americans, according to polls. A CNN/Opinion Research poll released this week found that nearly 70 percent of Americans opposed the mosque plan while just 29 percent approved. A number of Democratic politicians have shied away from the controversy. [...]

Former Republican Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania told Fox News that Obama seems to misunderstand that Islam is not just a religion, but also a political doctrine. He also said the mosque is being run by a man who accused the U.S. of being an accomplice in the Sept. 11 attacks.

Santorum compared the ground zero mosque to a minister who wants to builds a church near the location where the Rev. Martin Luther King was killed but preaches racial separation and the notion that King brought his death upon himself.

"I don't think Barack Obama would say, 'Well we have religious tolerance, we're going to allow them to do that,'" he said. "That is the wrong way to look at this. This is not whether it's a legal right to do it. People have legal rights to do a lot of things in this country."

"We have the will of the American public," he said, noting the polls show most oppose the mosque. The imam is "ignoring the will of the American public, as by the way, Barack Obama is by siding with him."

Our June 6 protest

Stand up and join us at our FDI/SIOA 9/11 rally against the Ground Zero mega-mosque on September 11 at 2pm at Park Place, between Church Street and West Broadway.

Confirmed list of speakers joining Pamela Geller and me at the FDI/SIOA demonstration:

911 WTC families
Ambassador John Bolton
Newt Gingrich
Geert Wilders, Dutch Parliamentarian
NY Senate Candidate Gary Berntsen
Jordan Sekulow (ACLJ)
Michael Grimm, Staten Island House of Representatives, 911 First Responder
Andrew Breitbart

Join the largest Caravan in America coming cross-country to 9-11 Rally.

For those of you who do not use Facebook and want to join a carpool and the Caravan, send your info to starsandstripescaravan@yahoo.com. Give your name/email/state & city you are coming from. Include how many seats you need. Also let them know if you can help with gas/food etc... One of the admins of their group will post your need/ability to help and get back to you.

As expected. He says it is all about religious freedom. Actually, it isn't about religious freedom at all. It's about whether a triumphal mosque should be built at Ground Zero. Obama, like Bloomberg, is acting as if the Ground Zero mega-mosque is the only mosque in the U.S. "Obama throws support behind controversial Islamic center," by Dan Gilgoff for CNN, August 14:

Washington (CNN) -- President Obama threw his support behind a controversial proposal to build an Islamic center and mosque near New York's ground zero, saying Friday that "Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country."

"That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances," Obama said at a White House Iftar dinner celebrating the Islamic holy month of Ramadan.

The president's remarks drew praise from New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who announced his support for the Islamic center last week.

Bloomberg compared Obama's speech to a letter President George Washington wrote in support of a Jewish congregation in Newport, Rhode Island. "President Obama's words tonight evoked President Washington's own august reminder that 'all possess alike liberty,' " Bloomberg said in a statement.

"I applaud President Obama's clarion defense of the freedom of religion tonight," he said.

To learn more about the "ground zero" mosque, see CNN's Belief Blog

Critics of the proposed Islamic center quickly denounced Obama's remarks. "President Obama is wrong," said Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.). "It is insensitive and uncaring for the Muslim community to build a mosque in the shadow of Ground Zero. Unfortunately, the President caved into political correctness."

"While the Muslim community has the right to build the mosque, they are abusing that right by needlessly offending so many people who have suffered so much," King said in a statement. "The right and moral thing for President Obama to have done was to urge Muslim leaders to respect the families of those who died and move their mosque away from Ground Zero."

Obama, who said he was speaking both as a citizen and as president, invoked the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, which critics of the Islamic center cite as the main reason for preventing its construction.

"We must all recognize and respect the sensitivities surrounding the development of lower Manhattan," Obama said, according to his prepared remarks. "The 9/11 attacks were a deeply traumatic event for our country."

"The pain and suffering experienced by those who lost loved ones is unimaginable," he continued. "So I understand the emotions that this issue engenders. Ground zero is, indeed, hallowed ground."...

This is not a religious freedom issue. No one has ever understood the freedom of religion as granting an untrammeled license to build any structure anywhere, as long as it's religious. If the KKK announced plans to build a shrine at the site of the 16th Street Baptist Church, would Obama be talking about religious freedom?

"Obama to back religious freedom at Islam dinner," from AP, August 13:

WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama on Friday will speak up for religious freedom at a dinner celebrating the Islamic holy month of Ramadan, emphasizing that point just as New York City is immersed in a deeply sensitive debate about whether a mosque should be built near ground zero.

Obama has not yet spoken about the mosque controversy. The White House has been calling the matter solely a local one.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs would not directly say whether Obama would address the mosque when he hosts the iftar dinner that breaks the holiday's daily fast. But Gibbs quickly added that Obama believes strongly in the tenet of religious freedom and would be speaking out on that....

Why do Muslims engage in violent intimidation? Because it works. Until people are willing to stand up and defy it, it will continue to work. "Christians and Muslims from Algeria to Italy in the footsteps of Saint Augustine," from Asia News, August 13 (thanks to Twostellas):

Rome (AsiaNews) - A group of Christians and Muslims from Algeria, Morocco and France have planned a pilgrimage in the footsteps of Saint Augustine, their countryman, that will lead them to Milan and Pavia, where the remains of the North African saint of Hippo lie. There are several Muslim converts to Christianity among the group, some for over 40 years, others for just over a year.

It is the first time that Christians of North Africa have ever organized a similar pilgrimage. It will take them from August 26 to 28 to Milan, where Augustine was baptized by Ambrose in 387, to Pavia and the basilica of san Pietro in Ciel d'Oro (see photo), which houses his remains in time to take part in local celebrations, the feast of the saint on August 28.

The group has long desired to make this pilgrimage and had also wanted to include an audience with the pope. Among the pilgrims, 17 are of North African origin, 14 are converts from Islam and two are catechumens. There is also a future seminarian; the other 10 are of French origin, all accompanied by Fr Alexis Doucet, S.J.

To mark the occasion a medal bearing a Berber cross was coined, which will be handed to participants at the end of the pilgrimage.

Among the expressed intentions of the pilgrimage is that "Muslims who have heard the call of the Lord Jesus should not be prohibited from entering the Church." The idea refers to some episodes that have occurred in France and Algeria, where many Muslims who wanted to be baptized, have been impeded by priests and bishops, fearful of the consequences and overly precautious....

I was so pleased that a sitting politician actually came out against the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero that I completely overlooked this crucial aspect of Governor Paterson's offer of state land for mosque. His heart is in the right place in trying to get the triumphal mosque away from Ground Zero, but giving state land for this would amount to New York state sponsorship of Islam. "Shariah law in the U.S.: Gov. Paterson offers to make Islam the state-sponsored religion of New York," by Bryan Fischer at Rightly Concerned, August 13 (thanks to Miriam):

When Gov. David Paterson of New York stepped into the breach to offer a resolution to the exploding controversy over building the Ground Zero mosque, he quite deliberately offered to grant Islam a favored status under New York public policy that is denied to Christian churches.

Here's what the governor said (emphasis mine): "If the sponsors were looking for property anywhere at a distance that would be such that it would accommodate a better feeling among the people who are frustrated, I would look into trying to provide them with the state property they would need."

He added some mumbo-jumbo about a competitive bidding process, but that was obviously just for show. If he wants to provide state land for a mosque, trust me, he will find a way, and his liberal friends will back him to the hilt.

Offering to provide government property for a house of worship normally would provoke howls of outrage from our hypersensitive friends on the left, who see grotesque breaches of the wall of separation between church and state even where the wall of their fevered imaginations doesn't exist.

Can you imagine the firestorm that would have erupted had the good governor offered to find state property for a Christian church? He'd have been dragged into court by the ACLU so fast it'd give him a nosebleed....

Read it all.

Heading off a corrupting influence. "Taliban calls for boycott of Western aid as Swat Valley ravaged by floods," by Neil Tweedie in the Telegraph, August 11 (thanks to Mackie):

The Taliban has told victims of Pakistan's floods to boycott aid from "foreign infidels" as the UN called for $460 million in emergency aid to prevent a rise in the death toll.

"SMILE," orders the huge welcoming sign by the road, "you're in Swat!"

There isn't much to smile about here, though, in the mountainous far north of Pakistan, where until recently the Taliban ruled.

Last year, two million people fled their homes in the valley to escape heavy fighting as the Pakistani army sought to impose control over the area; now the floods have come to wreak even greater destruction. [...]

"We condemn American and other foreign aid and believe that it will lead to subjugation," said Pakistan Taliban Azam Tariq. "Our jihad against America will continue."

With the rhetoric came the offer of $20 million (£12.7 million) in Taliban aid, a doubtful promise and, in any case, a drop in the ocean.

Anthony Cordesman, who has advised the Obama administration on Pakistan, said the floods represent "a major opportunity" for Islamist groups.

"If we have to deal with a radicalised Pakistan, that raises the threat that is posed by terrorism by several orders of magnitude," he said.

The people of Swat, once a popular destination, are happy to accept any help. Thousands of men queue each day at food centres, some run by Islamic charities....

More reflections on Obama's ridiculous Ramadan ruminations. "Obama Ramadanadingdong," by Pamela Geller at Big Peace, August 13:

Barack Obama this week extended his "best wishes to Muslims in America and around the world" and wished them a "Ramadan Kareem." And he wrote, as he did in last year's Ramadan message also, about "the principles that we hold in common, and Islam's role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings."

Which principles do we hold in common? Death for apostates? The legitimacy of honor killing? I don't begin to know what Obama is talking about here. Other religions are not tolerated in Muslim countries. Churches and synagogues do not exist in some Islamic countries, notably our "ally" Saudi Arabia, and where they do exist, they are constantly targeted and in myriad instances attacked. Churches in Nigeria and Indonesia have been attacked just recently.

Where is the dignity of women living under Sharia? Women's rights under Islam are practically non-existent. Oppression, subjugation and gender apartheid define the treatment of women in Islam. Islamic anti-semitism defines the faith. Islamic aggression and intolerance of the Jews and the Jewish state have become the rallying cry of the ummah and the OIC-driven UN - abetted by Obama.

Obama also says that "Ramadan is a celebration of a faith known for great diversity and racial equality." Diversity? Where is the diversity? Non-Muslims are anging on in Muslim countries only as tiny, persecuted minorities. Maybe Obama doesn't know, or doesn't care, that the word abd in Arabic means both "black" and "slave," and that throughout Islamic history Arabs have exalted themselves above non-Arab Muslims. Even today in Darfur, Arab Muslims are terrorizing and killing non-Arab Muslims. [...]

The world's preeminent historian of Islamic anti-Semitism, Bat Ye'or, saw this coming last year when she commented on Obama's June 4, 2009 speech to the Muslim world in Cairo:

Pres. Barack Obama was elected, by an overwhelming majority, on a program in which America's rapprochement with Islam stands pre-eminent. This is a legitimate political aim in the quest for world peace. The questions are: how to achieve it, and why there is no reciprocal effort from the Muslim world represented by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). This body could express its regrets for over a millennium of jihad wars, land expropriations, enslavements, and humiliations of the conquered non-Muslim populations on three continents.

That's right: where is the mutual respect? Obama keeps reaching out to the Islamic world, and where are they reaching out to us? Where is the respect for the West and our unending patience and charity toward the Muslim world, and our increasing subjugation to Islamic law in the West? Defaming Islam is the great crime nowadays. Defaming Christianity and Judaism is the sport of the day, but dare to insult Islam and they'll smear and maybe even prosecute you, the way the Dutch are prosecuting Geert Wilders. Free speech be damned in the age of jihad.

The OIC will never apologize, of course, because there is no self-criticism or self-examination in Islam, but the leader of the waning free world would never think to mention that kind of thing in his Ramadan greetings. It wouldn't be in keeping with the spirit of the season.

Read it all.

Qur'an 5:14: "From those, too, who call themselves Christians, We did take a covenant, but they forgot a good part of the message that was sent them: so we estranged them, with enmity and hatred between the one and the other, to the day of judgment. And soon will Allah show them what it is they have done."

Qur'an 4:171: "O People of the Scripture! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor utter aught concerning Allah save the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah, and His word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers, and say not "Three" - Cease! (it is) better for you! - Allah is only One Allah. Far is it removed from His Transcendent Majesty that He should have a son. His is all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is sufficient as Defender."

Qur'an 4:157: "And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain."

Qur'an 5:116: "And when Allah saith: O Jesus, son of Mary! Didst thou say unto mankind: Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah? he saith: Be glorified! It was not mine to utter that to which I had no right. If I used to say it, then Thou knewest it. Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I know not what is in Thy Mind. Lo! Thou, only Thou, art the Knower of Things Hidden?"

Qur'an 19:35: "It is not befitting to (the majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son. Glory be to Him! when He determines a matter, He only says to it, 'Be,' and it is."

Qur'an 9:30-31: "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah (Himself) fighteth against them. How perverse are they! They have taken as lords beside Allah their rabbis and their monks and the Messiah son of Mary, when they were bidden to worship only One Allah. There is no Allah save Him. Be He Glorified from all that they ascribe as partner (unto Him)!"

Qur'an 9:29: "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

"Indonesian churches donate Koran for prisoners in Australia," from The Jakarta Post, August 13 (thanks to Twostellas):

The Indonesian Communion of Churches (PGI) and the Indonesian Bishops Council (KWI) donated on Friday 500 Korans for Indonesian citizens imprisoned in Australia, Antara reported.

Distribution of the Islamic holy books would be entrusted to Muhammadiyah, the country's second largest Muslim organization.

Coordinator of the action Damien Dematra said a Christian community in Australia had reported the need of Koran among Indonesian prisoners in the neighboring country.

He added that the donation demonstrated Indonesian Christians' opposition to a plan promoted by US-based Dove World Outreach Center to burn the Koran on Sept. 11 as part of the country's commemoration of the 2001 terror attacks.

Muhammadiyah chairman Din Syamsuddin praised the donation constituted mutual respect and harmony among people from different faiths in the country.

When might we see any of that respect and harmony flowing in the other direction?

Robert Spencer's dissection of the Obama Ramadan greetings here was lucid and unrelenting, but I'd like to add some observations, stopping first to note the funniest phrase in what was, otherwise, necessarily - given the nature of the material to work with - unrelievedly bleak: "Obama then retails a few platitudes lifted straight out of a ninth-grade World Religions textbook."

There was, to begin with the end, the final stark stop-talking-nonsense put-up-or-shut-up challenge to Obama and his speechifying crew, that is the challenge that they provide supporting evidence, chapter and verse, local habitations and names, for this assertion:

"And here in the United States Ramadan is a reminder that Islam has always been part of America and that American Muslims have made extraordinary contributions to our country."

This phrase is one more illustration of a larger problem: when it comes to Islam, Barack Obama apparently does not intend to abandon, bur rather to continue to employ, that Get-Me-Rewrite approach he used in his Cairo speech to the world's Muslims, possibly the falsest, least-true-to-history speech ever delivered by an American president. In trying to get or be, as he likes to say (with his handful of favorite phrases, this is certainly among them), "on the right side of history" (as if, you see, history has a pre-determined "right side" and we had all "better get on it" coute-que-coute or we will be judged accordingly), he, Barack Obama, is perfectly willing to rewrite history. That is, he is willing to rewrite history in the true, and not historical determinist sense -- that is, as the record of the past, as best as we can determine that record, and to make sense of it, to give the accumulated facts meaning. A little more undiluted Thucydides or Gibbon or Macaulay, and a little less watered-down historical materialism or castroesque ("history will absolve me") derivations thereof, might be nice.

The Washington Times sets the record straight on Obama's Ramadan message. "EDITORIAL: Obama's Islamic America: What country is he talking about?," from The Washington Times, August 12:

[...] That Islam has had a major role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance and the dignity of all human beings may come as a surprise to Muslim women. Young Afghan girls who are having acid thrown in their faces on the way to school might want to offer their perspectives. That Islam is "known" for diversity and racial equality is also a bit of a reach. This certainly does not refer to religious diversity, which is nonexistent in many Muslim-majority states. This is a plaudit better reserved for a speech at the opening of a synagogue in Mecca.

Most puzzling is the president's claim that "Islam has always been part of America." Islam had no influence on the origins and development of the United States. It contributed nothing to early American political culture, art, literature, music or any other aspect of the early nation.

Throughout most of American history, the Muslim world was perceived as remote, alien and belligerent. Perhaps the president was thinking about the Barbary Pirates and their role in the founding of the U.S. Navy, or Andrew Jackson's dispatch of frigates against Muslim pirates in Sumatra in the 1830s. Maybe he was recalling Rutherford B. Hayes' 1880 statement regarding Morocco on "the necessity, in accordance with the humane and enlightened spirit of the age, of putting an end to the persecutions, which have been so prevalent in that country, of persons of a faith other than the Moslem, and especially of the Hebrew residents of Morocco." Or Grover Cleveland's 1896 comment on the continuing massacre of Armenian Christians: "We have been afflicted by continued and not infrequent reports of the wanton destruction of homes and the bloody butchery of men, women and children, made martyrs to their profession of Christian faith. ... It so mars the humane and enlightened civilization that belongs to the close of the nineteenth century that it seems hardly possible that the earnest demand of good people throughout the Christian world for its corrective treatment will remain unanswered."

It also is customary in the United States to search for obscure contributions made by in-vogue minority groups as a feel-good way of promoting inclusion. One of the earliest Muslims to come to the United States was a 17th-century Egyptian named Norsereddin, who settled in the Catskills and was described by one chronicler as "haughty, morose, unprincipled, cruel and dissipated." Spurned by the princess of an Indian tribe that had befriended him, he managed through a subterfuge to poison her. He was later run down by the betrayed Indians, who burned him alive. It is not the kind of tale that makes it into politically correct history books.

No, but when I read that Norsereddin was "haughty, morose, unprincipled, cruel and dissipated," I thought they were talking about Honest Ibe Hooper.

Maybe Sharif El-Gamal, whose vague and misleading explanations of why Ground Zero needs an Islamic supremacist mega-mosque I discussed here, is feeling the pressure from the increasing public opposition that his group's arrogant and imperious stance has provoked.

"SoHo properties, developer of Park51 mosque near Ground Zero, willing to talk about moving," by Glenn Blain for the New York Daily News, August 13 (thanks to Block Ness):

Albany - Sponsors of the proposed mosque near Ground Zero are not slamming the door on Gov. Paterson's idea to build the center someplace else.

"We are open to a conversation to find out more on what the governor has in mind," the center, Park51, said in a Twitter post yesterday.

While mosque opponents charge the chosen site is insensitive to 9/11 victims, Paterson doesn't oppose the planned location.

He suggested earlier this week it might ease tensions if the center was further away from Ground Zero, and raised the possibility of offering state-owned land.

"I would hope that whatever spirituality exists would compel the developers to sit down and have this conversation," Paterson said on WOR's "The John Gambling Show" yesterday.

Mosque developer Sharif El-Gamal has said the group is interested in hearing from Paterson but added that "this has always been about serving lower Manhattan."

He did not return calls and emails yesterday.

Meanwhile, in another Twitter post, Park51 attacked GOP gubernatorial candidate Rick Lazio, a fervent mosque critic, as "islamiphobic."...

Still playing the same old tired game.

In "Free Speech Wins A Narrow Victory In New York" at Fox News.com today, Pamela Geller explains how we just won a narrow victory for the freedom of speech -- but the battle to defend it continues:

Last Friday, my organization the Freedom Defense Initiative (FDI), my colleague Robert Spencer and I filed a lawsuit against the city of New York for refusing my SIOA "Preservation of Ground Zero" bus campaign.

Unbelievably, New York City's Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) refused the campaign because it contained "9/11 images" and associated the Ground Zero mega-mosque with 9/11. (Full text of our complaint is here.)

But on Monday, the MTA recognized the justice of our position in our lawsuit, and agreed to run our ad as originally submitted. This is a great victory for freedom of speech.

Nonetheless, the fact that we even had to fight this battle shows how threatened the freedom of speech is in the U.S. today, and how anxious authorities are to kowtow to Islamic supremacism.

The mosque organizers have frequently associated the mosque with 9/11. But we couldn't. Through the MTA, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg was attempting to impose blasphemy laws (Islamic sharia laws) on the secular marketplace.

Last month, I signed a contract with CBS Outdoor to run a "Preservation of Ground Zero" bus ad campaign. The campaign was paid for in full.

The ad I submitted showed one of the planes about to crash into the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001 on one side, with the planned mega-mosque (which recalls the World Trade Center in its design) on the other. The inscription was simply, "Why There?"

The ad was refused. When I asked on what grounds, CBS Outdoor told me that the city said that "images of 9/11 were not allowed."

I said, "It is American history. How can it be banned? What about Pearl Harbor? Is that censored too? On what grounds are 911 images banned? It is unconscionable." The CBS Outdoor representative told me: "You can't run the [image of the] plane."

I asked CBS/MTA to provide me with the guidelines. They never did. And so I removed the plane and submitted a new ad with a note saying that I was still waiting for the MTA guidelines, and that I objected to their changing my artwork and my message in the process.

But CBS Outdoor refused my revised ad, because it showed smoke rising from behind the World Trade Center towers. They said I had to remove the smoke.

Even worse, when I spoke to CBS's representative concerning the second rejection of my Ground Zero bus ad, he said that the MTA "doesn't want to associate the new building" - that is, the Islamic supremacist Ground Zero mega-mosque - "with Ground Zero." He said: "The people behind the new building say it has nothing to do with Ground Zero."

I said, "But they are on record repeatedly as saying they want it there for Ground Zero 'healing' and 'outreach.' What do they (the Ground Zero mosque Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf and his wife Daisy Khan) have to do with running my ad? They dictate what can and cannot run?"...

Read it all.