June 2011 Archives

New sheath, same scimitar. "New Name, Same Old Focus for Islamic Bloc," by Patrick Goodenough for CNS News, June 30 (thanks to Sayyid):

(CNSNews.com) – The bloc of mostly Muslim-majority states has a new name and logo but, despite the momentous upheavals across the Arab world, “Palestine” and religious “defamation” continue to top its agenda.

Meeting in Kazakhstan this week, foreign ministers of the 42 year-old Organization of the Islamic Conference endorsed a decision to change its name to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).

Also being dropped is the OIC logo featuring a red crescent and the words “Allahu Akhbar” (Allah is greater) in Arabic. In its place is a green crescent, a globe, and a representation of the Ka’aba – the cube-shaped structure in Mecca which Islam says was built by Abraham and Muslims revere as their religion’s most sacred site.

The OIC called the move “a drastic positive change in the performance of the organization to uplift its effectiveness as an international system dealing with political, economic, cultural and social development issues.”

The summit host, Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nazarbayev, described the OIC as “the U.N. of the Islamic world.”

I thought the UN of the Islamic world was the UN.

Despite the rebranding, however, OIC secretary-general Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu’s speech to the gathering made it clear that the key focus remains unchanged for an organization established in 1969 with “liberating” Jerusalem as its primary goal.

Leading the list of situations around the Islamic world addressed in the speech was the Palestinian issue. Ihsanoglu condemned Israeli policies and appealed for all countries to support an initiative at the U.N. in September to secure recognition of a Palestinian state “on the borders of 1967 with East Jerusalem as its capital.”

The OIC head had more to say on the Palestinian question than he did on any other country situation – the civil wars in Libya and Yemen, political turmoil in Syria and Bahrain, the imminent division of Sudan, the conflict in Afghanistan, or calls for reform from Morocco to Jordan. Iran received not a single mention.

Also receiving much attention at the meeting in Astana was the issue that has dominated OIC activism at the U.N. in recent years – “Islamophobia” and the associated campaign to outlaw religious “defamation.”

Ihsanoglu in his speech reaffirmed that it was “a matter of extreme priority for the OIC.”

“Islamophobia represents a contemporary manifestation of racism and the phenomenon must be addressed in that context,” he added, alluding to the OIC’s drive to amend an existing, binding anti-racism treaty, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, so that it also covers religion.

Islam isn't a race, but they're trying to make it one.

Should the campaign succeed, the amended convention would place legal restrictions on “matters regarded by followers of any religion or belief as sacred.”

In other words, it will become illegal to speak about Islamic jihad and Islamic supremacism.

Critics say this would silence legitimate criticism of Islamic teachings and authorities, further endanger non-Muslim minorities, and amount to enforcing blasphemy laws similar to those in place in OIC member state like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

During the meeting in Kazakhstan, an OIC body called the “Islamophobia Observatory” released its fourth annual report, stating that the 12-month period ending in April had seen an increase in the frequency and intensity of “Islamophobic events, acts and utterances.”...

And there will be more, too, in the future, as long as the jihad continues.

"The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter." -- Qur'an 5:33

It looks as if these brothers' apparent support for the Christian Gbagbo over the Muslim Ouattara constituted "waging war against Allah and His Messenger."

"Brothers crucified by Ouattara forces in Ivory Coast," from Barnabas Aid, June 8 (thanks to Marty):

Two peasant brothers were brutally crucified on “the example of Christ” as forces loyal to Ivory Coast President Alassane Ouattara continue to target perceived supporters of his ousted Christian predecessor, Laurent Gbagbo.

Raphael Aka Kouame died of his injuries; incredibly his younger brother, Kouassi Privat Kacou, survived the ordeal. The pair were badly beaten and tortured before being crudely nailed to cross-shaped planks by their hands and feet with steel spikes on 29 May.

The brothers were falsely accused of hiding weapons in their home village of Binkro, which has been targeted by Ouattara supporters as the birthplace of a key enemy. They are looking for Prefect Koko Djei, President of the General Council of Oumé and an official in Gbagbo’s Ivorian Popular Front party, who is accused of distributing weapons to young Oumé men. The brothers repeatedly denied any involvement in a weapons cache, but their pleas were ignored.

After crucifying the brothers, Ouattara’s men took them on an extensive search of Binkro, but they found only a store of medical equipment and supplies, which they looted. The seriously wounded pair were then taken to prison in Oumé, where Raphael died in the night....

Jihadists yet again play clueless and ignorant Westerners for fools. "Srebrenica was an Inside Job" by Andy Wilcoxson in the Balkan Report, June 15:

In the wake of the July 1995 fall of the Srebrenica enclave, thousands of Muslim soldiers and draft eligible men were killed or went missing. Some were captured and summarily executed by Bosnian-Serb forces, and others died in combat.

Western governments, news media, and the U.N. War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague have assiduously misled the public about the nature of the massacre; at the same time they have remained conspicuously silent about the role U.N. officials and the Muslim regime in Sarajevo played in orchestrating the massacre.

Srebrenica's Fall Could Have Been Prevented

Yasushi Akashi, who at the time was the special envoy of the U.N. Secretary General in the former Yugoslavia, said the U.N. had "limited capabilities" and could not prevent the fall of Srebrenica. He told the Associated Press, "There was a hundred of U.N. troops versus thousands of Serb troops. What could we have done?" [1]

According to the Dutch battalion of U.N. peacekeepers who were deployed in Srebrenica, quite a bit could have been done. They were authorized to call in air strikes if the enclave was attacked, and when it was attacked they did indeed call in air strikes, but they were blocked by the U.N. until it was too late.

According to the debriefing of Dutch Battalion personnel, "The battalion was counting on massive air support...air support was requested around 10.30 hrs. [on July 11, 1995] Then, despite all of its promises, the U.N. still failed to release air power."

The Dutch Battalion's report states that, "Both the battalion staff and the rest of Dutchbat are convinced that the fall of the enclave can be attributed to a distinct lack of support from the air; the limited close air support did not arrive until the battle was actually over." [2]

Even without the U.N.'s help, Bosnian-Muslim president Alija Izetbegovic's regime could have intervened to stop the fall of the enclave and subsequent massacre, but they chose not to act either.

Sefer Halilovic was the commanding officer of the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina during the war. He was the most senior officer in Izetbegovic's military and he testified under oath at the UN war crimes Tribunal in The Hague that "the command of the 2nd Corps and the General Staff knew when the operation on Srebrenica started, but from a series of testimonies, the people who were in Srebrenica, both from military and political structures, we can clearly see that they asked for help, both of the command of the 2nd Corps and the command of the General Staff and President Izetbegovic, but that they did not receive that assistance. To answer your question whether they had the power and materiel to help, to come to the help of Srebrenica, I think that they did." [3]

Even though Srebrenica was abandoned by its supposed protectors at the U.N. and by its own government in Sarajevo, the Muslim forces based in Srebrenica should have been able to defend the enclave themselves. Instead, on July 12, 1995, they fled the enclave with the rest of the able-bodied men and abandoned Srebrenica's women, children, and elderly to the mercy of the attacking Bosnian-Serb forces.

Although UN Military Observers (UNMOs) were uncertain of the exact number of Muslim military personnel in Srebrenica, they believed "that at least half had side arms as well as heavy machine guns, light mortars, and anti-tank weapons including rocket propelled grenades and more modern ones." [4]

The Command of the 2nd Corps of the Army of Bosnia Herzegovina (ABiH) prepared a report detailing the operation Srebrenica's men undertook to flee Srebrenica across Bosnian-Serb territory to Tuzla. Their report said, "Numbers were not established when the column was formed, but some estimates put the number in the column at 10,000 to 15,000 people, including approximately 6,000 armed soldiers, not counting soldiers from Zepa." [5]

According to UN Military Observers, at the time of the attack the Bosnian-Serb Army's "Drina Corps was known to be stretched in terms of resources" and the strength of the Bosnian-Serb units surrounding Srebrenica was "1,000 to 3,000 infantry with up to 20 tanks as well as artillery and multiple launch rocket systems." When Srebrenica fell, the UNMOs estimated that the local Bosnian-Serb brigades "probably have around 1,500 infantry in total" and together with reinforcements from units stationed in adjacent areas, the total strength of the Bosnian-Serb forces around Srebrenica was "probably no less than 2,000 infantry." [6]

Even if they hadn't been abandoned by the UN and by their own government, 6,000 armed Muslim soldiers should have been able to fight off 1,000 to 3,000 Serb infantry men.

When the Bosnian-Serbs attacked the enclave, UN Military Observers were stunned that the Muslim army didn't attempt to defend it. In their report they state: "The ABiH had the force ratios to defend the enclave particularly considering its hilly, wooded nature." They went on to write, "The advantages militarily seem to have been with the [Muslim] defenders to at least hold out for longer and have inflicted greater losses on the Bosnian-Serb Army than believed. However, the ABiH leadership seems to have actually acted against their own interests to carryout a successful defense." [7]

Dutch Battalion personnel in Srebrenica were surprised when Muslim troops in the enclave did not avail themselves of the weapons they were offered. On the morning of July 6^th 1995 battalion personnel "Informed the Bosnian government forces that, if the Bosnian-Serb Army crossed the enclave boundary, the arms in the weapon collection point in Srebrenica would be released. Later, when this situation did indeed occur, the Bosnian government forces did not avail themselves of this opportunity." [8]...

There is much more. Read it all.

A "pro-Palestinian activist" discovers that the point of the Gaza flotilla is not humanitarian aid after all, but aid for the Hamas jihad. Hasna El Maroudi was naive in the extreme if she ever thought that the flotilla was about "self-rule" for the Palestinians in some way distinguishable from the genocidal Islamic jihad against the Jews, but this article is nonetheless illuminating. Note especially, besides the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas ties, the repeated dishonesty of the flotilla organizers. Here is an English translation of "Afscheid van de Gaza-vloot," by Hasna El Maroudi in Joop, June 29 (thanks to Leonid):

Parting with the Gaza Flotilla
Why I am not sailing aboard the Dutch ship after all

I have been to the Greek island of Corfu over the past few days. I got to know the activists and journalists intending to sail to Gaza and received training on non-violent resistance from Anne de Jong, a passenger in the previous flotilla.

Although I had intended to report on the sail for Uitgesproken Vara and Joop, I was going first and foremost as an activist. I want Israel to lift the illegal blockade on Gaza and give the people that which they are entitled to have: Self-rule.

And that is also the issue for me: The population there. The Palestinian youths who published a document last year in which they expressed their longing for leading a normal life. I didn’t go for any political movement or for those in power.

When I decided to subject myself to the sail and the long list of preparatory engagements and training sessions it entailed, I presented the organizers with one single crucial demand: I wanted to know exactly who would sail with me on the Italian-Dutch ship and requested to have the opportunity to meet them all in advance before embarking on the trip.

I did not want to be surprised by the presence of figures or organizations with which I did not want to become involved. I was told that my demand was self-evident: There would be team-building and “we are going to have it in Greece.”

Despite assurances to the contrary, the Italian activists who were supposed to sail with us were nowhere to be seen upon our arrival in Corfu. More crucially, the Dutch delegation was isolated on the island. The rest of the flotilla was in Athens.

I repeatedly I asked to receive a tentative list of all the passengers. Realizing that many difficulties had been put in the organizers’ path, I did not expect to receive a complete list of participants. I would have been satisfied with the available information. None such information was given. Despite my insistence on receiving the list in advance, it was given to me when I decided to return to Holland. Too late.

But there was more going on. The ship’s funding remained unclear. Also regarding this point I repeatedly asked for information but as answers I was told of a loose web of associations under different umbrella and daughter organizations. The Nederland Gaza Association [the organizers of the Dutch boat ride] claims to be fully transparent. To me, this means publication of subsidies.

If this complicates fundraising and scares off donors, so be it. It’s the only way to show an already-suspicious Netherlands that you have nothing to hide.

The presence of Amin Abou Rashed suggests there is something to hide. He, too, sailed last year to Gaza with the flotilla, and he was arrested by Israel. According to various media, he is Hamas’ top figure in the Netherlands. He is also affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood. How much of this is true, I do not know. How much of this is not true, I know even less. That is the problem, and it creates an atmosphere of suspicion.

Over dinner Anne de Jong insisted that it was all lies and that Amin is a terribly nice man with an unbelievable amount of love for the Palestinians. However much I wished I could believe her and those blue eyes of hers, I could not do it. Simply because his involvement with the flotilla was kept secret until the arrival to Greece. And not only vis-à-vis the rest of the world, but also when it came to the flotilla participants. I find this to be detrimental.

On this dangerous action, the participants are laying their lives on the line. It is therefore only fair that they be provided with the relevant essential information.

Amin was there the day the Dutch delegation received a non-violence training but hung in the background. Wilfred van de Poll, a journalist for Trouw, spoke briefly with Amin about his presence and role within the organization. “The brain behind the flotilla” as the man elected to be described, arranged the purchase of the boat. He also provided for the lion’s share of funding, according to Anne de Jong. If he played such a vital role, then why was it kept secret and why couldn’t I know who or what he was?

Our activists were told that the goods [aboard the ship] will be distributed by UNHCR, but it later turned out that this was not 100 percent certain. Few organizations beside UNCHR are capable of performing this task in Gaza. In fact, only one other such entity remains. Hamas. And I wanted to have nothing do with them.

The bottom line is very simple. In a mission such as this one, the activists must be able to fully trust one another, like firefighters entering a burning building. My trust in the organization only diminished the further we progressed....

Good. I hope eventually you will wake up to the monstrous evil of the jihad against Israel in its totality.

Here is a video clip from a Danish documentory series about the police. In this short clip, a police officer chases a Toyota north of Copenhagen. When the Toyota drives into a Muslim ghetto, the officer encounters another problem: He cannot get out of his car in an area like this.

Muslim parallel societies are truly a direct attack on our countries.

These guys were "served with deportation orders after being convicted of burglary, threats to kill, robbery and dealing in class A drugs." But to send them back to Somalia would violate the "prohibition of torture and of inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." Do the British people have any right to be protected from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment?

"Somali criminals must stay in UK, rules European Court," from the BBC, June 29 (thanks to all who sent this in):

The UK must not deport two Somalis convicted of serious crimes because to do so would endanger their lives, the European Court of Human Rights says.

The Strasbourg judges said the UK's duty to protect the two from torture or inhumane treatment was "absolute".

The pair, aged 24 and 42, were served with deportation orders after being convicted of burglary, threats to kill, robbery and dealing in class A drugs.

The ruling sets a legal precedent for 214 similar UK cases involving Somalis.

Abdisamad Adow Sufi (24) and Abdiaziz Ibrahim Elmi (42) are being held at immigration detention centres in the UK.

In 2007 they appealed to the Strasbourg court, arguing that they would face death or serious injury if the UK deported them to the war-ravaged capital Mogadishu.

The seven judges accepted that there would be a violation of Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) of the European Convention on Human Rights if the pair were sent back to Mogadishu.

The court ruling said the judges "reiterated that the prohibition of torture and of inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment was absolute, irrespective of the victims' conduct".

"Consequently, the applicants' behaviour, however undesirable or dangerous, could not be taken into account."

The court told the UK to pay Mr Sufi 14,500 euros (£13,000) and Mr Elmi 7,500 euros (£6,716) for costs and expenses....

Editor's Note: I think it may be of interest to some readers who recall Aymenn Jawad's public attack on me last March to note that Aymenn has written to me and apologized, and has recently sent me the article below. Our differences and minor disagreements should not interfere with our common work in defense of human rights, although they often do among the petty, the small-minded, the vindictive and the pathologically competitive. -- RS

Lesley Hazleton: Karen Armstrong II
by Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi

It is not uncommon, as we go through our lives, for us to meet certain individuals who like to call themselves “spiritual seekers.” Apparently suffering from pathological narcissism, they feel a constant need for some sort of spiritual “nourishment” (i.e. a hopelessly vague outpouring of emotions), and accordingly flutter like bees from the flower of one religion to the next, tasting the nectar only for a brief time before moving on. They constitute a clear contrast, then, from normal people who can satisfy themselves for most of their lives with adhering to one religion or none at all.

Readers may recall -- as a prime example of this unstable “spiritual seeker” personality -- the egregious Karen Armstrong, who around four years ago entered into a feud with Robert Spencer over a highly dishonest review she wrote for the Financial Times, in which she attacked Spencer’s book The Truth About Muhammad. For example, Armstrong, who is herself the author of two hagiographical works on Muhammad, falsely accused Spencer of not citing earlier verses of the Qur’an -- such as 29:46 -- that counsel tolerance towards Christians and Jews. In fact, Spencer cited 29:46 twice in his book (pg. 17 and pg. 51).

Much of Armstrong’s howling against Robert is rooted in her own anti-Christian bigotry, especially her hostility against the Catholic Church. Meanwhile, Islam has apparently done much to aid her “convalescence”: supposedly, she is recovering from a bad religious experience during her time as a nun, or something. As she put it in an interview with Al-Jazeera on December 20, 2005:

“I really admire the Muslim tradition so much…it was the study of Islam and Judaism, but Islam particularly, that brought me back to a sense of what religion could be at its best…I have absorbed so much of Islam that it has become a part of me…I would describe myself as convalescent; recovering from a bad religious experience by the study of these other traditions which continue to inspire me and feed me.”

Reread the parts highlighted in bold, and before your eyes unfolds a picture of a deeply and hopelessly confused woman.

At the most extreme, “spiritual seekers” turn out to be clinically diagnosable psychopaths such as David Wulstan Myatt, who has been noted before here at Jihad Watch as a neo-Nazi-Satanist-turned-jihadist. Prior to this, Myatt had also practiced Buddhism and Taoism, but now seems to have left Islam for his own harmless lunatic philosophy, which he dubs “The Numinous Way.” This is based on rather bizarre readings of the fragments of pre-Socratic philosophers like Heraclitus.

Today, however, it seems that a successor to Karen Armstrong has arisen in one Lesley Hazleton. Echoing Armstrong's disdain for Christianity, Hazleton has little problem with writing books like Jezebel that disparage Biblical figures, yet thinks it necessary to become an Islamic apologist and to deflect all rational scrutiny of traditional, orthodox interpretations of core Islamic texts. A case in point is a talk she gave to TED (Technology, Entertainment, Design), entitled “On Reading the Koran.” What follows is a fisking of the main misleading distortions in her dreadful lecture:

"You may have heard about the Koran's idea of paradise being 72 virgins.”

On the contrary, it has been noted here and elsewhere that the concept of 72 virgins derives not from the Koran, but from the Hadith:

“None is made to enter Paradise by Allah Most High except Allah Most High shall marry him to seventy-two wives, two of them from the wide-eyed maidens of Paradise and seventy of them his inheritance from the People of Hellfire, not one of them but her attraction never lags nor his arousal ever wanes.” This was narrated by Ibn Majah, Ibn `Adi in the Kamil, and al-Bayhaqi in al-Ba`th wal-Nushur.

As-Suyuti described the above chain of transmission as “fair” in al-Jami al-Saghir.

If Hazleton imagines that this idea is not taken seriously anywhere, how does she explain the fact that in 2004, a would-be Palestinian suicide bomber by the name of Husam Abdu was convinced by his handlers that he would get 72 virgins in Paradise if he were to blow himself up? None of this is to say that the concept of 72 virgins is the correct or dominant view of Jannah across Islamic sects; yet the notion of virgins in Paradise is undeniably well-grounded in mainstream Islam and is found in the Qur’an. Hazleton dismisses as “old-fashioned orientalism” the image of the houris of Jannah as virgins with large eyes or big breasts. Let the Qur’an speak for itself. Take various renderings by Muslims of sura 52, ayah 20:

YUSUF ALI: They will recline (with ease) on Thrones (of dignity) arranged in ranks; and We shall join them to Companions, with beautiful, big and lustrous eyes.

PICKTHALL: Reclining on ranged couches. And we wed them unto fair ones with wide, lovely eyes.

SHAKIR: Reclining on thrones set in lines, and We will unite them to large-eyed beautiful ones.

Are Yusuf Ali, Pickthall and Shakir “old-fashioned orientalists,” Lesley?

Meanwhile, in 78:33, we do find that some Muslim translators are so embarrassed about the Arabic word “كَوَاعِبَ” that they disguise its true meaning. For context, we should give 78:31-34, rendered as follows by some non-Muslim translators and two Muslim translators:

Arberry: Surely for those who fear God awaits a place of security, gardens and vineyards and maidens with swelling breasts, like of age, and a cup overflowing.

Rodwell: But, for the God-fearing is a blissful abode, Enclosed gardens and vineyards; And damsels with swelling breasts, their peers in age, And a full cup.

Al-Hilali and Khan: Verily, for the Muttaqûn, there will be a success (Paradise); Gardens and grapeyards; And young full-breasted (mature) maidens of equal age; And a full cup (of wine).

Note: words in brackets indicate Al-Hilali and Khan’s explanatory parentheses.

In his tafsir on the Qur’an, Ibn Kathir, endorsing the authority of Ibn Abbas, Mujahid and others, writes that 78:33 “means round breasts. They meant by this that the breasts of these girls will be fully rounded and not sagging, because they will be virgins, equal in age.” Is Ibn Kathir likewise an “old-fashioned orientalist,” Lesley?

Anyway, on to her next deception:

“And where the Bible is addressed exclusively to men, using the second and third person masculine, the Koran includes women -- talking, for instance, of believing men and believing women -- honorable men and honorable women.”

As is to be expected, the “feminist” Lesley Hazleton glosses over Qur'anic verses such as 4:34, which affirms:

YUSUF ALI: Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).

PICKTHALL: 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.

SHAKIR: Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.

The emphasis here is clearly on obedience and male superiority. It is noteworthy that Yusuf Ali and Shakir seem rather embarrassed by the traditional import of the verse, and are thus less blunt than Pickthall. Though Yusuf Ali puts the word “lightly” in brackets after “beat them” in reference to disobedient wives, it should be pointed out that the original Arabic implies nothing of the sort. It just says, “Beat them.” It would be nice if this verse were viewed as only applying to a specific historical context in traditional theology. Yet, for example, the 13th century classical commentator Mahmud Al-Alusi in his commentary Ruhul Ma’ani gives four reasons that any Muslim man may beat his wife: “if she refuses to beautify herself for him,” if she refuses sex when he asks for it, if she refuses to pray or perform ritual ablutions, and “if she goes out of the house without a valid excuse.”

The result of this traditionally interpreted divine sanction is the widespread prevalence of wife-beating in Muslim countries. For instance, Amnesty International reports that “according to the Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences, over 90% of married women report being kicked, slapped, beaten or sexually abused when husbands were dissatisfied by their cooking or cleaning, or when the women had ‘failed’ to bear a child or had given birth to a girl instead of a boy.” Again, pace what many of our opponents like to claim, we are not saying that Al-Alusi's interpretation of 4:34 is necessarily the correct or only view taken amongst theologians of the verse. Nevertheless, it is simply wishful thinking to deny any connection between the ayah and abuse of women in the Islamic world today.

Finally, we come to Lesley Hazleton’s distortion of the traditional doctrine of offensive jihad:

“Or take the infamous verse about killing the unbelievers. Yes, it does say that, but in a very specific context: the anticipated conquest of the sanctuary city of Mecca where fighting was usually forbidden. And the permission comes hedged about with qualifiers.”

It is of course true that taken at face value from an outsider’s perspective, 9:5, to which Lesley is referring, appears to have a specific historical context in referring to the conflict between Muhammad’s followers in Medina and the pagans at Mecca. Nonetheless, the ninth sura, normally considered in traditional theology to be amongst the last verses revealed in Muhammad’s career, is interpreted in the orthodox schools of fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) as the culmination of the doctrine of jihad and as abrogating previous verses that may counsel peace. In particular, 9:29 is seen as offering unbelievers three choices: conversion, subjugation under Islamic law and payment of the jizya poll tax, or death. This has been documented numerous times at Jihad Watch, and I see no reason for repetition. Yet suffice it to say that there is a clear continuity between these broad elements of traditional theology on the subject of aggressive warfare and the justifications that modern-day jihadists invoke for their actions.

For example, my aunt’s husband in Baghdad was kidnapped in early 2007 by Tanzim Qaidat Al-Jihad fi Bilad Al-Rafidayn (“Al-Qa’ida in Mesopotamia” -- AQM), which demanded ransom money of $1 million from my family as jizya to fund their jihad. Though he was released after three weeks for only $40,000, others did not get off so easily, such as the Chaldean Catholic Archbishop of Mosul -- Paulos Faraj Rahho -- who was similarly taken hostage by AQM the following year so as to allow the group to levy jizya from the Christian communities in Mosul. His murder took place in February or March 2008.

Would Lesley Hazleton care to explain why she thinks that Osama Bin Laden, Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Tehreek-e-Taliban and a whole host of jihadists, their organizations and cheerleaders amongst Muslims, are all “misunderstanders” of Islam? The point is that non-Muslims are not supposed to make a pretense of knowing what constitutes “true” or “pure” Islam. However, it is useful to see where the jihadists find the basis for justifying what they do. To point out and shed light on their sources is not hateful; nor does it constitute essentializing the entire Islamic religion. If anything, it is pseudo-intellectuals such as Lesley Hazleton and Karen Armstrong who are guilty of the very essentialism they accuse us of practicing. Some readers may well disagree with me at this point, and if you wish to discuss the matter further, you can ask Robert for my e-mail and engage in private correspondence with me.

That said, there is no doubt that Lesley Hazleton, who has proven to be another one of those irritating “spiritual seekers,” has simply taken up Karen Armstrong’s mantra. Hence we can all agree her flimsy apologetics must be exposed.

English Defence League chief Tommy Robinson has just sent this statement to SIOA regarding the conflict within the EDL. I am pleased to see this statement and will continue to monitor the situation closely.

The English Defence League was formed two years ago. One of the fundamental beliefs that this movement was built on was its support for Israel’s right to defend itself. In our first demonstrations, we went to Birmingham, and we flew the flag of Israel, the Star of David. In the first public speech I ever gave, I wore the Star of David in Leeds. The reason for this is because Israel is a shining star of democracy. If Israel falls, we all fall. This is what our movement has been built on for two years.

The English Defence League will not be deterred from its support for Israel and the Jewish people. Recently, in the EDL there have been internal arguments, which are nothing more than that. Every large family has its disagreements, but when push comes to shove, we all stand on the same side.

Meanwhile, some people on the fringes of this movement wish to direct it toward their own agenda. This will never happen. Israel is a beacon of democracy amid repressive Arab states. Recently some people have jumped on the EDL bandwagon and tried to use our platform to express anti-Semitic views. These statements are not in accord with the fundamental beliefs of the English Defence League. These people are not welcome, never have been welcome, and never will be welcome within the EDL. We reject all anti-Semitism. The EDL stands where it always has stood, which is side-by-side with Israel.

We repudiate any individual, group or writing that favors anti-Semitism, neofascism, and any race-based ideology. Any rogue elements within the EDL who go against our mission statement and our beliefs will be removed from the organization; we are determined to remain true to our mission. Anti-Semitism will not ever be tolerated within the EDL.

The EDL stands for freedom. It always has, it always will. We want the Jewish people and all free people to remain free forever, and we all stand together in this fight against Islamic jihad.

He said it. Shaykh Muhammad Hassan must be a greasy Islamophobe. But he quotes Muhammad, the prophet of Islam. So apparently Muhammad himself was a greasy Islamophobe.

"Shaykh Muhammad Hassan: Islam Prefers a Strong, Immoral Warrior," from Translating Jihad, June 28 (thanks to Weasel Zippers):

Popular Egyptian Salafi Shaykh Muhammad Hassan explains in this video clip posted on YouTube on 12 June why Islam prefers strong, immoral men over weak, righteous ones. He quotes from Imam Ahmad, Ibn Taymiyya, and the Prophet Muhammad to support his view. Subtitled video is above, transcript below (see the original Arabic clip here):

If there are two men, and one of them is stronger spiritually, while the other is stronger physically, (the latter) is more beneficial to that nation. In war, for example, the strong man offers his courage, even if he is immoral or licentious. The weak man (only) offers his impotence, even if he is faithful.

Listen to the response of Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him), for the Shaykh of Islam (i.e. Ibn Taymiyya) based his ruling on this fatwa from his Shaykh, the Shaykh for the Sunnis, Imam Ahmad. Imam Ahmad was asked about two men, who were leaders in a raid. One of them was a strong, immoral man. The other was a weak, righteous man. With which one would he go into battle? Imam Ahmad said: “As for the strong, immoral man, his strength benefits the Muslims, while his immorality only hurts himself. But as for the weak, righteous man, his righteousness only benefits himself, while his weakness hurts the Muslims.” Thus the Imam said he would go to battle with the strong, immoral man. I hope this answer is clear. The Prophet (peace be upon him), said the same thing in the two Sahihs (Muslim and al-Bukhari), “Allah will support this religion through an immoral man.”

More indication of how mass immigration of Muslims enriches Western societies. "Italy: Moroccan immigrant murders wife for being 'too Western,'" from AKI, June 28 (thanks to all who sent this in):

Padua, 28 June (AKI) - A Moroccan carpenter living in northern Italy is suspected of stabbing his wife to death because she wanted to leave him and begin a more liberated and western life with another man.

Police suspect 36-year old Zrhaida Hammadi of killing his 33-year-old wife Fatima Chabani at their apartment in the city of Padua near Venice by stabbing her repeatedly in the neck and shoulder, severing her jugular vein.

Neighbours telephoned the police after hearing blood-curdling screams from the apartment late Sunday, but the police said they found Chabani already dead and Hammadi awaiting their arrival, sitting motionless in a chair with his head bowed.

The couple were married in 2002 and had a six-year-old son. The family moved to Padua in January from the surrounding province in Italy's northeast. Members of the local Moroccan community described Hammadi as "a quiet, decent and hard-working" man.

The couple reportedly had frequent rows and police are probing Hammadi's' claims that his wife was seeing another man.

On Tuesday, a cultural mediator in Padua, 30-year-old Tunisian Muslim immigrant Maher Selmi sparked controversy by claiming that it was right to stone "adulteresses" to death.

Moroccan women's activist and member of Italy's parliament Souad Sbai deplored Chabani's "chilling" slaying and the remarks by Selmi, who is a graduate in Italian language and literature.

"This is the latest outrage against an innocent young woman whose only crime was her desire to live peacefully," said Sbai.

Sbai is a member of parliament for the ruling conservative People of Freedom party and president of the Association of Moroccan Women in Italy.

Her group made an unsuccessful application to form the civil plaintiff in the murder trial of three male relatives of a twenty-year-old Pakistani woman, Hina Saleem found buried in the garden of her family home with her throat slit and her head facing Mecca in August 2006.

Hina had 'dishonoured' the family by dressing in western clothes, working in a pizzeria in the northern town of Sarezzo and living with her Italian boyfriend and refusing and arranged marriage

In February, 2010, Italy's Supreme Court said Hina's father Mohammed Saleem must serve the entire 30-year prison sentence handed to him for her murder, ruling that he acted "out of a distorted, pathological sense of parental possession" rather than for religious and cultural reasons.

What an odd ruling. Where does Italy's Supreme Court think that Mohammed Saleem got his "distorted, pathological sense of parental possession" other than from his religion, which stipulates that there is no punishment for a parent who kills his child?

Hina Saleem's shocking murder is one of several "honour" crimes which have brought the issue of Muslim cultural integration in Italy into stark relief in recent years.

El Ketaoui Dafani a Moroccan immigrant cook is currently standing trial for the murder of Sanaa Dafani in northeastern Italy in September 2009 after he discovered she had a relationship with an older Italian man....

Muslim morality gangs like the one that beat up these girls are increasingly active in various countries, and are willing and even eager to brutalize people on the basis of rumor alone. Numerous Christians in Pakistan have fallen victim to the same phenomenon: accused of "blasphemy" on spurious grounds and beaten or even killed without anything approaching a fair hearing.

"Sri Lanka mosques exonerate 'pornography girls,'" by Swaminathan Natarajan for BBC Tamil, June 29 (thanks to Twostellas):

Mosques in the eastern Sri Lankan town of Kattankudi have made public announcements exonerating two teenage girls accused of watching pornography.

The loudspeaker announcements were made following a court order.

A group of men allegedly beat up the 17-year-olds last week after they came out of an internet cafe in Kattankudi, a mostly Muslim town.

The father of one of the girls says they were accused of watching pornography - a charge the girls deny.

Mohammad Yusuf Abdul Razak told the BBC that the issue had been blown out of proportion because of an earlier announcement made from mosque loudspeakers that that two girls had been viewing pornography.

Mr Razak said that a group of men forcefully took his daughter and the other girl to a local house and beat them up, before taking them to a local Islamic office.

"After that, an announcement was made from a mosque using loudspeakers that two girls were caught doing wrongful things," Mr Razak said.

After hearing this announcement, Mr Razak says, a large crowd gathered and started to denounce the girls.

Police finally intervened and the girls were taken to hospital for treatment for their injuries, he said.

Local Muslims deny making announcements regarding the girls from a mosque. But they agreed on Wednesday to comply with court orders to broadcast the exonerations.

"Today we made announcement from about eight or nine mosques covering the whole area of the Kattankudi town," said Mosque Federation Chairman Mohammad Ibrahim.

"The crux of the message is the girls have not been found guilty of any wrongdoing and are innocent. Local people should help those girls and their family to live in peace."

Police are yet to trace the main accused. But Mr Razak said that he was happy with the retraction.

"I want to thank the judge for restoring our honour," he said.

Indeed. It's a better way to go about doing that than, say, honor killing.

In Big Government yesterday, Pamela Geller and I announced a new initiative for freedom and human rights. "Freedom Collapses in Europe – So We’re Taking It to the Seas," by Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer, June 29:

In a capitulation to Islamic supremacists and violent radical Leftists, French and European Union authorities have canceled a free speech rally that we had planned with a coalition of American and European human rights organizations in Strasbourg, the seat of the European Parliament.

Our human rights organizations Stop Islamization of America (SIOA) and its sister group, Stop Islamisation of Europe (SIOE) were planning to hold their first-ever transatlantic summit in Strasbourg, France, on July 2.

The SIOA/SIOE summit was dedicated to the defense of the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and the equality of rights of all people before the law – all principles denied by Islamic law.

But the Strasbourg police could not guarantee our safety. When the thugs of the Antifa group and Islamic supremacist organizations announced plans to hold a violent counter-demonstration and to do everything they could to disrupt our activities, the authorities canceled permission for our demonstration and conference, instead of standing up to these violent neo-fascists and their Islamic supremacist allies.

Strasbourg authorities told us that they could not guarantee our safety at the conference and demonstration location, the Place de la Republique. Efforts were made to hold the demonstration nearby, but the authorities still considered security to be too much of an issue.

Muslims and Leftist fascists previously burned down a hotel in Strasbourg during a NATO summit, and burned a large number of cars in a car park during riots in the same city.

We are not intimidated, and will demonstrate in the future, just as we did in Harrow, Copenhagen and Aalborg. This planned Strasbourg demonstration and conference will be rescheduled.

This incident shows yet again that freedom and democracy are being denied in Europe. But we are not giving in. On the contrary: when our governing authorities are refusing to protect freedom, we have to do it ourselves. That’s the impetus for our Freedom From Jihad Flotilla.

The SIOA/SIOE Freedom From Jihad aid flotilla is intended to be a direct response to the capitulation of French, European, and American authorities to Leftist and Islamic supremacist forces of oppression and injustice. It is set to launch after our national Rally for Freedom at Ground Zero on the tenth anniversary of the Islamic jihad attacks that murdered three thousand Americans.

The Audacity of the Infidel will launch on September 11 from the New York harbor closest to the World Trade Center site. On board will be freedom fighters from all over the world, united in defense of human rights and human dignity against Islamic supremacist oppression.

The mission is the first attempt by free citizens anywhere in the world to come to the aid of non-Muslims persecuted for their faith in Muslim countries. It is a direct response to the heavily-armed Leftist/jihadist flotilla that attempted to violate Israel’s legal maritime blockade of Hamas-ruled Gaza on May 31, 2010. In that incident, Turkish jihadists onboard one ship attacked Israeli soldiers without provocation; nine jihadists were killed in the battle. The Freedom From Jihad Flotilla is also a response to the Audacity of Hope flotilla that is soon to set sail to continue the jihad against Israel, with plans to use chemical weapons against Israeli forces.

The Freedom From Jihad Flotilla will offer aid to persecuted Christians, Hindus, and other non-Muslims, and call upon the international community to recognize Muslim persecution of non-Muslims as a violation of international law, to be punished with strict economic sanctions and other appropriate action.

The first stop will be Greece, in recognition of the Greek victims of jihad in Anatolia for well over a thousand years. The Freedom From Jihad Flotilla will then sail along the Turkish coast, where speakers will pay homage to the millions of victims of the Armenian and Greek genocides in Turkey.

There is more.

On June 7 I was interviewed publicly before a live audience in Cleveland, Ohio, by David Zanotti of The Public Square. Then on June 9 in Nashville, Tennessee, we did it again, this time along with Dr. George Grant. Here is the second 60-minute radio program distilled from those two live interviews, featuring the Nashville session with Dr. Grant. You can listen to the first program here.

The Public Square 60 Minute Program Hosts: David Zanotti and Wayne Shepherd Producer: Alan C. Duncan

www.thepublicsquare.com

This week on The Public Square Long Format Program:
The Public Square is airing Part Two of the Islam and the West Policy Briefings. The American Policy Roundtable recently held two policy briefings in Cleveland, Ohio and Nashville, Tennessee on the topic of Islam. Two special guests joined the forum: Mr. Robert Spencer, Director of Jihad Watch and author of ten books on Islam, along with Dr. George Grant, author of "The Blood and the Moon: Understanding the Historic Struggle between Islam and Western Civilization" and founder of Franklin Classical School.

These two experts in the field will share with you an in-depth conversation on Islam along with answering excellent questions submitted from the audience. You won't want to miss this program! (This is program two of a two part series. This broadcast features the Nashville event.) Listen to program one here.

An update on this story. Obviously, an investigation is promised to be forthcoming. "Leading Palestinian activist arrested in London," by Alan Travis for the Guardian, June 29:

The home secretary, Theresa May, has ordered "a full investigation" after a leading Palestinian activist in Israel entered Britain despite a travel ban.

Sheikh Raed Salah, leader of the Islamic Movement in Israel, was detained at 11pm on Tuesday and taken to Paddington Green police station in west London.

May has said the UK Border Agency is taking steps to deport him. "We do not normally comment on individual cases but in this case I think it is important to do so. I can confirm he was excluded and that he managed to enter the UK. He has now been detained and the UK Border Agency is making arrangements to remove him. A full investigation is now taking place into how he was able to enter."

Salah's solicitor, Farooq Bajwa, said Salah had no knowledge of any ban and had made no attempt to conceal his identity when he entered Britain on Saturday. He had addressed a meeting in Leicester on Tuesday night and been due to attend a Palestine Solidarity Campaign meeting in the House of Commons on Wednesday evening attended by Labour MPs Jeremy Corbyn and Richard Burden.

It is understood that the Home Office accepts Salah was open about his identity when he arrived. The investigation is believed to be about how the exclusion order could have been made but not served on Salah before his arrival and how UKBA officials waved him through once he landed.

The decision to arrest Salah followed an appeal by the Conservative MP for Finchley and Golders Green, Mike Freer, to May in the Commons on Monday that Salah be banned from Britain because of his "history of virulent anti-semitism".

"I have been questioning the propriety of providing a platform to a speaker who reportedly peddles the conspiracy theories of Jewish involvement in the 9/11 plots," Freer said. "I am pleased he will not be speaking in parliament."...

We consistently see the juxtaposition of armed jihad and social services in groups like Hamas and Hizballah, and other organizations in the Muslim world, because the Islamic tradition does not set off charitable work as strictly non-combatant in the way that is expected of the Red Cross, United Way, and other Western groups. Rather, Qur'an 9:60 includes those fighting "in the cause of Allah" as being eligible for zakat.

Therefore, charitable work in the Western sense cannot be handily split off from such groups' overtly militant activities, and the former activity must never be used to excuse or downplay the group's participation in the latter, though apologists often plead, for example, that "Hamas also provides social services..."

The group in question here is cut from the same cloth. "Saudi Arabian charity in Pakistan offers education - or is it extremism?" by Declan Walsh for the Guardian, June 29:

The imposing orphanage looms on the edge of Islamabad, housing 250 poor boys from across Pakistan who receive tuition, board and meals, and daily instruction in Saudi-style Islam.

A plaque over the doors identifies the generous benefactor: the International Islamic Relief Organisation, a government-sponsored charity from Saudi Arabia that the US accuses of spreading extremism and funding al-Qaida.

America may be widely despised in Pakistan – a new poll gives it 12% approval, but there is far greater tolerance for Pakistan's regional ally, Saudi Arabia, in all its controversial manifestations.

Saudi influence is pervasive, from the soaring minarets of Islamabad's Faisal mosque – the largest in Asia – to the corridors of power, where Saudi officials enjoy privileged access. In the past decade Riyadh has subsidised Pakistan's oil supply, offered gilded exile to the opposition leader Nawaz Sharif, and even attempted to solve its extremist woes.

When trouble erupted at the hardline Red Mosque in Islamabad in 2007, the Saudi ambassador was drafted in to broker peace.

But Saudi money and influence have attracted hostile scrutiny from western countries, particularly the US. Worries centre on a flood of charity donations, mainly earmarked for education, some of which finds their way into weapons and military training.

A senior western official in Islamabad said the main worry was Saudi funding for Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Pakistani militant group responsible for the 2008 Mumbai attacks. Funding appeared to have stopped since the Mumbai attacks, he said, but the group continues to solicit private money from conservative Saudis under the guise of charitable donations.

The IIRO has also come under scrutiny. In 2009 the US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, privately warned that US intelligence had discovered the IIRO and two other state-backed charities "continue to send money overseas and, at times, fund extremism overseas", according to diplomatic cables released through WikiLeaks.

Files from Guantánamo Bay published this year show at least six detainees had been employed by IIRO, which US officials described as a "tier one terrorist NGO".

The accusations are denied at the Islamabad orphanage. "Our only business is education", said one employee who declined to be named. "We educate young boys, send them back into society, where they perform well."

Saudi money has been flowing into Pakistan since the 1980s, when state and private donors funded an explosion of madrasas. Many come from the Ahle Hadith school of Islam, a strict version of the faith that is close to the Salafist faith taught in Saudi Arabia.

The amount or nature of donations is shrouded in secrecy, as most come through the undocumented hawala traders, although a western official estimated it at "tens of millions of dollars".

Saudi Arabia's defenders say they are being unfairly maligned as terrorists. "Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have had exemplary relations since the day our country was born," said Maulana Abdul Aziz Hanif, vice-president of the Ahle-Hadith community in Pakistan.

The faith was growing in popularity, Hanif added, with "thousands" of mosques across Pakistan – the Punjabi city of Gujranwala alone has 500. He denied ties with Lashkar-e-Taiba, which fights in the name of the faith. "We want nothing to do with them," he said.

Secular critics say Saudi money and influence have had a corrosive influence on Pakistani society, encouraging a tide of conservatism: more veiled women, Islamist televangelists, and public shows of piety than ever before.

"All this hardline Islam is traceable to Saudi Arabia," said Pervez Hoodbhoy, a physics professor and outspoken critic of what he terms "Saudisation".

He recently published a picture showing a group of female students at his university in the 1980s, all bare-headed. A picture taken recently shows a cluster of heavily veiled females.

Most Pakistanis are reluctant to criticise Saudi Arabia, home to Islam's holiest shrines.

And the WikiLeaks files also show the Saudis have stepped up cooperation with the US in flushing out militant financiers. Officials insist its charities are now strictly above board. The IIRO, for instance, played a prominent role in emergency relief for victims of last year's epic floods.

Still, some coincidences are striking. The Islamabad orphanage, set up in 2002, is not a madrasa – it follows the government curriculum. But its founding principal was Sultan Amir, a retired Pakistani intelligence officer known as the "father of the Taliban"....

The judge said they were "motivated by hatred for Jews." Yes, and... An update on this story. "New York synagogue bomb plotters jailed," from BBC News, June 29:

Three men convicted of plotting to set off bombs at a New York City synagogue and shoot down military planes have been sentenced to 25 years in prison.

James Cromitie, David Williams and Onta Williams were arrested in 2009 after planting what they thought were bombs at a Jewish temple.

Federal Judge Colleen McMahon said the men were motivated by hatred for Jews.

But their lawyers said they were duped by a paid FBI informant and never posed a threat.

The men were convicted in October of conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction and other charges following testimony from FBI informant Shahed Hussain, who met Cromitie at a mosque north of New York City.

A fourth man, Laguerre Payen, was also convicted but his sentencing was postponed pending a psychiatric evaluation.

'Ticking time bombs'

Prosecutors said the men tried to detonate what they thought were explosives at a Jewish centre in the Riverdale section of the Bronx borough of New York, and plotted to fire missiles at New York Air National Guard planes at a base north of New York.

In surveillance video played at trial, the men were seen examining a shoulder-fired missile launcher in a warehouse.

Jurors also heard recordings of Cromitie, the alleged ringleader, ranting against Jews and saying he wanted to exact revenge against the US for military aggression in the Middle East.

Judge McMahon acknowledged the men never posed a legitimate threat, as they were under surveillance during most of the case and never possessed genuine explosives or weapons.

Lawyers for the men argued the federal government had manufactured the crime, saying the four defendants were motivated by small amounts of cash and meals the informant provided.

But prosecutors had called the men "ticking time bombs".

"This would have been a colossal terrorist attack and the fact that it was all fantasy really doesn't matter because in their minds, they thought it was real," Assistant US Attorney David Raskin said.

"Ticking time bombs" is right. And in that regard, the sting operations that are decried as "entrapment" have been a crucial tool in steering those with the intent to commit mass murder into a controlled "off-ramp" from active plotting into jail. These operations have saved lives across the country by taking jihadists out of action from Springfield, Illinois, to Dallas, Portland, Baltimore, and Lubbock, Texas.

Iran has received plenty of help from North Korea, and appears again to be borrowing the concept of "space program" projects to cover a test of long-range missile technology. This time, for good measure, they're throwing in some monkeys.

In the mindset of the Islamic Republic of Iran, they're probably used to seeing "apes and pigs" (see also Qur'an 2:62-65; 5:59-60; and 7:166) beating them into outer space.

"Iran space monkey likely to spark nuclear fears from the West," by Eman El-Shenawi for Al-Arabiya, June 29:

Iran says it plans to send a monkey into space next month as part of its space program, potentially sparking fears from Western countries about the progress of Iran’s missile arsenal.

Five monkeys are undergoing tests, and one will be selected for the flight on board a Kavoshgar-5 rocket, state-run news agency IRNA reported on Monday, quoting the head of Iran's Space Agency.

But the experiment is likely to alarm Israel and its Western allies, who are concerned that Iran is pressing on with its plans for nuclear arms.

The fear is that Iran’s long-range ballistic technology used in Iran’s space program to propel satellites into orbit could also be used to launch atomic warheads.

Tehran has denied such suggestions, saying its nuclear work is purely peaceful and adding that it seeks only energy-producing reactors, IRNA reported.

Last year, Iran announced it had launched a rocket carrying a mouse, turtle and worms into space.

In August 2010 the country’s president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said that Iran planned to send a man into space by 2017.

Commence Operation Weather Balloons And A Lawn Chair.

Last week, Iran launched its second domestically built satellite into orbit, the Rasad 1, which it said was designed for transmitting images and for weather forecasting, according to Reuters reports.

More on this story. If nothing changes, there will be more hand-wringing at the U.N., another incremental increase in sanctions accompanying another resolution, and the process will repeat itself until we awaken one morning to word of an Iranian nuclear test. "Iran 'carrying out secret nuclear missile tests'," by James Kirkup for the Telegraph, June 29:

The claim comes as the Iranian regime mounts a visible show of its military technology with 10 days of missile tests. One tested this week was capable of reaching Israel or the Gulf states.

Mr Hague told the Commons that Iran "has been carrying out covert ballistic missile tests and rocket launches, including testing missiles capable of delivering a nuclear payload".

Those tests were in clear contravention of United Nations Security Council resolutions forbidding Iran from developing a military nuclear programme, he said.British officials said that the nuclear tests took place separately from the current, publicly declared tests.

Britain believes that since last October, Iranian forces have carried out three secret tests of missiles that could be used to carry nuclear material.

Britain has reported those tests to the United Nations, but has not previously made them public.

Iran has an active nuclear programme, which it insists is entirely for civilian energy use. But Western governments say that it is trying to develop enriched uranium, which would be required to construct a nuclear warhead.

Liam Fox, the Defence Secretary, has suggested that Iran could be in possession of a viable nuclear weapon as soon as next year, although most experts believe it could take longer. Mr Hague's claim will fuel speculation that Tehran is stepping up its nuclear weapons programme amid growing concern about the so-called "Arab Spring" which is challenging authoritarian regimes across the Middle East. So far, the Iranian regime has suppressed pro-democracy protests at home.

The International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA) last month raised "concern" about possible secret Iranian nuclear weapons development.

The IAEA said Iran was engaged in "high voltage firing and instrumentation for explosives testing over long distances".

Earlier this month, Mr Hague announced new sanctions against Iran and told MPs: "We will maintain and continue to increase pressure on Iran to negotiate an agreement on their nuclear programme."

A spokesman for the Iranian foreign ministry said: "None of the missiles tested by Iran is capable of carrying a nuclear warhead."

The Foreign Office stood by Mr Hague's claims, accusing Tehran of "provocative acts, directly contrary to Iran's obligations" under UN Security Council resolutions. UNSCR 1929 specifically prohibited Iran from ballistic missile activity capable of delivering a nuclear weapon, said a Foreign Office spokesman. [...]

Wahhabi Bomb:

Saudi Arabia has threatened to build nuclear weapons if it is established that Iran is close to developing them.

Prince Turki al-Faisal, a member of the ruling royal family and senior diplomat, warned that Iran developing nuclear weapon capability "would compel Saudi Arabia … to pursue policies which could lead to untold and possibly dramatic consequences".

Speaking at an unpublicised meeting at RAF Molesworth earlier this month, Prince Turki warned Iran was a "paper tiger with steel claws".

The Muslim Brothers "must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions." -- "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America," by Mohamed Akram, May 19, 1991.

One might think, in light of that, that this was an example of the old adage, Keep your friends close and your enemies closer. But it isn't. It is cluelessness and capitulation, and more fantasy-based policymaking -- as epitomized by the "intelligence" chief James Clapper, who claimed that the Brotherhood was "largely secular."

"Exclusive: U.S. to resume formal Muslim Brotherhood contacts," by Arshad Mohammed for Reuters, June 29 (thanks to all who sent this in):

(Reuters) - The United States has decided to resume formal contacts with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, a senior U.S. official said on Wednesday, in a step that reflects the Islamist group's growing political weight but that is almost certain to upset Israel and its U.S. backers.

"The political landscape in Egypt has changed, and is changing," said the senior official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "It is in our interests to engage with all of the parties that are competing for parliament or the presidency." [...]

Elliott Abrams, a deputy national security adviser handling Middle East affairs under former President George W. Bush, said he favored dropping the ban on formal contacts -- but approaching any actual dealings with great caution.

Abrams said positions espoused by some Brotherhood members -- such as favoring religious tests for public office, questioning the rights of women and limiting freedom of religion or speech -- were "anathema" to the United States.

The group says it wants a civil state based on Islamic principles, but talk by some members of an "Islamic state" or "Islamic government" have raised concerns that their goal is a state where full Islamic sharia law is implemented. The group says such comments have been taken out of context.

Of course! Aren't they always?

"It's critical ... that we make it very, very clear to Egyptians, if we are going to do a meeting, that we are no less opposed to the ideas they represent," Abrams said, noting that there are splits among Brotherhood members.

"We have to think about whether we can use meetings to deepen those splits and to help, quietly, those who are trying to moderate the positions of the Brotherhood," he added, saying the United States should choose its interlocutors with care and that the talks need not be conducted by the U.S. ambassador.

The U.S. official who declined to be identified said U.S. diplomats "will continue to emphasize the importance of support for democratic principles and a commitment to nonviolence, and respect for minority and women's rights in conversations with all groups, including the Muslim Brotherhood."

Yeah, that'll work.

UPDATE: See the important statement from EDL chief Tommy Robinson here.

--------------

Pamela Geller has a statement on the English Defence League with which I agree wholeheartedly:

EDL Shake-up

I was an early supporter of the EDL. I liked who they were and what they were doing. When the EDL first came on the scene, I noted their strong support of Israel: Israeli flags at their rallies, and forthright expressions of solidarity with the Jewish State in its resistance to the same relentless jihad that is advancing in Britain. Almost immediately there came the inevitable charge from the jihad-loving Left that the group was "neo-Nazi," "neofascist," "white supremacist," and more. So I started investigating. I found that they rejected the British National Party's racial orientation, and that they had members who were Sikhs, Pakistanis, gays and other minorities, and even, eventually, a Jewish division. The idea of pro-Israel neo-Nazis is a myth of the Left, and so the presence of the Jewish division was decisive. I was troubled by the photos of EDL members giving the Nazi salute, but discovered that the EDL was aware of neo-Nazi attempts at infiltration, and had a policy of expelling anyone who expressed any kind of antisemitic or neofascist sentiments. They even refused to allow people to be members of both the EDL and the BNP. So it seemed to me at the time that the EDL was a genuine anti-jihad group, strongly pro-Israel as every legitimate anti-jihad group must be, since Israel is at the front lines of the global jihad, and resolutely rejecting racism and any form of actual neofascism.

However, it has become increasingly clear that the EDL has morphed and diverged from its original course. They now have clearly been infiltrated by the worst kind of influences, something that had successfully staved off for years, and they're no longer staving it off. Roberta Moore, the leader of the Jewish Division, has broken with the EDL. Perhaps the decentralization of the group or the loose grip Tommy Robinson held on its tether is responsible for this terrible shift in the EDL's direction -- I don't know. But whatever the case may be, the EDL has done a Charles Johnson. And they are now unrecognizable to me. I am sure regular Atlas readers have noticed that some time ago I stopped covering their events -- I was waiting to see how things would shake out. I was waiting to see if the forces of good would recapture the heart and soul of the group. Alas, it was not to be.

Now that the person whom I most trusted in the EDL, Roberta Moore, has resigned, as she was increasingly uncomfortable with the neo-fascists that had infiltrated the administration of the group, I too am withdrawing my support from the EDL. I hope that genuine anti-jihadists in Britain will also leave the EDL and work with Roberta on starting a new group that will resist definitively and firmly all attempts to divert it from its mission of fighting against jihad and for human rights.

KUALA LUMPUR: Prime Minister (Najib) has sought the support of U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon for the International Freedom Flotilla II to Gaza, saying that the mission scheduled to set sail at the end of this month "only seeks to deliver humanitarian assistance to alleviate the sufferings of the Palestinians in Gaza.

...Najib also urged Ban to call upon the government of Israel not to use any force against the flotilla.

The superb Canadian blog Blazing Cat Fur has the details: "Islamic Ritual Prayer Conducted At Toronto District School Board Middle School," June 29:

I received this e-mail from Mark Harding. I phoned Valley Park Middle School, who in a panic directed me to call the TDSB directly @ 416-397-3000. The TDSB "Communications Dept." is so far incommunicado -they are away at a meeting. ....

"Islamic ritual prayers are done in my 13 year old daughter's middle school on every Friday.

Every Friday my daughter's school cafeteria changes into a mosque as dozens of Muslim boys and their imams (Islamic preachers) lead Islamic ritual prayers and no one else can even walk through the cafeteria.

Some imams (Islamic preachers) come from the outside of the school and lead Muslim students in the Islamic prayer and this happens at the school Cafeteria after the lunch on Fridays. All other non-Muslims are in classes in the afternoon when they are using the cafeteria as mosque. There is a mosque nearby but the Muslim kids pray in the school

School administration take part preparing the Cafeteria and making it into mosque every Friday and no one but Muslims can use the Cafeteria during the Islamic prayers on Friday....

There is more. Read it all, and contact the school -- Blazing Cat Fur has the contact info.

Why is this tolerated?

Video thanks to Benedict.

Caliphate dreams from the Muslim Brotherhood -- and they've never had a better opportunity to transform those dreams into reality than they do now. "Muslim Brotherhood Figure and Former Spokesman in the West: Establish a Global Islamic State," from MEMRI, June 24 (thanks to all who sent this in):

In a June 8, 2011 interview with the Egyptian daily Al-Shorouq, Dr. Kamal Al-Helbawy, former Muslim Brotherhood spokesman in the West, called upon the Arab youth to launch a new revolution that would eliminate the borders drawn by imperialist nations and bring about the establishment of a global Islamic state – "called 'The United States of Islam.'" According to Al-Helbawy, the Muslim Brotherhood is active in approximately 80 countries and strives to realize the dream of becoming a global organization.

Following are excerpts from the interview: [...]

"Here I must ask bluntly: Why did Israel say that Mubarak is a strategic treasure? Because his crimes act as a barrier against the resistance and the Muslim Brotherhood. In this atmosphere, it was hard to manage a global organization. Today, there is great hope that we can realize [this goal], since we witnessed the opening of the Muslim Brotherhood's new headquarters, attended by Brotherhood [activists] from all countries.

"The Muslim Brotherhood is organized in 80 countries, and they and the Islamists have a right to establish a global movement, much like global socialism or Zionism..."

"Why Shouldn't We Have A Country Called 'The United States Of Islam'... I Propose That the Arab Peoples... Take To the Streets With the Slogan 'The Arab People Wants To Remove the Borders [Between Its Countries]'

"Q: Regarding the global organization – will a Muslim Brotherhood member associate himself with the [global] movement or with his homeland? And what will happen should there be a contradiction between them?"

"A: There will be no contradictions. Our thinking and our affiliation are to the exalted Allah. Our affiliation is to Islam. The global state of Islam is our ideal...

"How will countries like Bahrain or Qatar defend themselves? Why shouldn't we have a country called 'The United States of Islam,' ruled by a white man or a black man...

"I propose that the Arab peoples who demonstrated for the sake of the revolution, so they could move from the stage of oppression and corruption to the stage of stability and security, organize themselves from now on and set a deadline – five or 10 years – [and] take to the streets with the slogan 'The Arab People Wants to Remove the Borders [Between Its Countries]'... These borders were drawn up by imperialist nations, making our rulers guardians of imperialist borders... [...]

"I say to our Salafi brothers: Why do you focus only on [external] appearance, on the beard, the miswak [tooth-cleaning stick noted in Islamic jurisprudence], and the jilbab [religious garment]? There are many things far more important to Muslim society – chiefly a military industry, which is a means and a tool of jihad, as Ibn Taymiyya said...

"If Ibn Taymiyya were among us, what would he think of [Iranian President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad's stance against Israel, while Arab rulers protect Israeli embassies and applaud the symbols of the Zionist entity?"

Guarding the infidels: The border fence between Morocco and Ceuta (a Spanish city located inside Morocco)

Illegal immigration: "We can no longer hold Europe's southeast flank"
by Nicolai Sennels

The "Arab Spring" has unleashed an unprecedented wave of illegal immigrants heading for Europe. The fall or weakening of several dictators has resulted in loosened security, which allows people to flee the Islamic societies. Hundreds of thousands of Muslims have already entered the EU, and hundreds of thousands more are on their way.

In 2008, 80,000 illegal immigrants entered Greece. The Greek authorities cried out for help, saying that "the country can no longer handle the task of guarding the European Union’s southeast flank." As a result, immigrant gangs have ravaged the historic center of Athens, "wielding swords, axes and machetes." A new report published by Reuters tells us that illegal immigration is setting new records, as "Illegal immigration to Europe is now on track to surpass the peak hit in 2008. The IMO says about 42,000 migrants have already crossed into Italy and Malta alone, surpassing the 40,000 total for the two countries in all of 2008."

The EU's foremost job is to protect its citizens

The most important task above all others for the EU -- now and for the coming years -- will be to build and maintain an effective and well-guarded border fence at relevant stretches of the Union's outer border. At the same time, the EU countries must work together at building and running refugee camps in areas outside Europe. In those cases where illegal immigrants cannot be sent back to their country of origin, they will receive shelter, food and medical care there.

According to the UNHCR, the cost of having one person in a refugee camp somewhere in Africa, for example, is 50 dollars / 33 euros per year. The price for having a refugee in a country like Denmark is 50,000 dollars / 33,000 euros. In other words, for every single refugee who is allowed to stay in Denmark, we can protect and feed one thousand refugees in a camp in an area where they understand the language and feel home in the culture.

Nicolai Sennels is a psychologist and author who writes from Denmark.

"Top Muslim clerics" will be there as well. One would think that "top Muslim clerics" would shun this hateful inciter of mass murder if what the governments of the West, law enforcement and the mainstream media tell us about Islam were true. But once again, no.

Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi has been praised by Saudi-funded dhimmi pseudo-academic John Esposito as a champion of a “reformist interpretation of Islam and its relationship to democracy, pluralism and human rights.” But numerous statements of Qaradawi demonstrate that he anything but a “reformist” or a genuine champion of “democracy, pluralism and human rights” – and is, in fact, positively Hitlerian in his Jew-hatred and bloodlust.

During the uprising against the Mubarak regime, a Muslim website published a chapter from Qaradawi’s book Laws of Jihad, including this passage: “One of the forms of jihad in Islam is jihad against evil and corruption within [the Islamic lands]. This jihad is crucial in order to protect society from collapse, disintegration, and perdition — for Muslim society has unique characteristics, and if these are lost, forgotten or destroyed, there will be no Muslim society.”

Qaradawi also enjoys a reputation as a moderate beyond just Esposito: the former Ground Zero mosque imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, who is himself widely assumed to be a “moderate” despite evidence to the contrary, has hailed Qaradawi as a “very very well known Islamic jurist, highly regarded all over the Muslim world.” And another Muslim leader whose moderate bona fides have been questioned, the vaunted “Muslim Martin Luther” Tariq Ramadan, wrote a foreword to one of his books in 1998, and former London Mayor Ken Livingstone welcomed him to the city in 2004 and praised him repeatedly, despite the fact that during that visit Qaradawi explained to the BBC that suicide attacks against Israelis were not actually suicide at all, but “martyrdom in the name of God.” (Qaradawi has since been banned from Britain, as well as from the U.S.)

And the things that Qaradawi tells the millions of Muslims that he reaches are anything but moderate. In January 2009, during a Friday sermon broadcast on Al-Jazeera, he prayed that Allah would kill all the Jews: “Oh Allah, take this oppressive, Jewish, Zionist band of people. Oh Allah, do not spare a single one of them. Oh Allah, count their numbers, and kill them, down to the very last one.” He also declared: “Throughout history, Allah has imposed upon the [Jews] people who would punish them for their corruption. The last punishment was carried out by [Adolf] Hitler.”

Why is such a man being allowed into Ireland?

"Controversial Muslim leader to hold conference in Ireland," by Cormac O’Keeffe for the Irish Examiner, June 29 (thanks to Twostellas):

A CONTROVERSIAL and highly influential Muslim religious leader, banned from Britain and US, is holding a five-day conference in Ireland with top Muslim clerics from here and abroad.

Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi is the head of the European Council for Fatwah and Research (ECFR), which is based in Dublin at the Islamic Cultural Centre of Ireland (ICCI)....

Speaking at an international conference on extremism and terrorism in Dublin, Usama Hasan, an Imam and lecturer in Britain, said Sheikh al-Qaradawi was "massively influential and probably the number one scholar in the Arab world".

That is an extraordinarily important statement, given the prevailing assumption in the West that jihadists and Islamic supremacists are only a Tiny Minority of Extremists™.

He said that the annual session of the ECFR was being covered by Arab press as it was a "very influential body".

He said Sheikh al-Qaradawi was a "very complex" character and described him as a "fundamentalist, but a progressive fundamentalist".

Mr Hasan, who is a senior lecturer in Middlesex University and a former militant, said Sheikh al-Qaradawi was banned from several countries because of his view on suicide bombings in Israel....

"Asian" is British dhimmi media code for "Muslim." However, the racial breakdown of this study -- "white" and "Asian" -- obscures the possibility that white Muslims could have been involved in some of these cases, and ignores utterly the Islamic legal justification for sex slavery of unbelievers, which has the result of making this sort of exploitation of Infidel children more acceptable. "More than 2,000 children 'victims of sex grooming,'" by Dominic Casciani for BBC News, June 29 (thanks to all who sent this in):

The first UK-wide study of street grooming of children has found more than 2,000 victims of systematic abuse.

The ethnicity of around half the offenders was not known but in the remainder a quarter of offenders were Asian and 38% were white.

The Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (Ceop) warned against focusing on ethnicity over the issue.

Head of Ceop Peter Davies said many local agencies were failing to give victims the support they needed.

The six-month assessment of the scale of "street grooming" was launched after a high profile case saw a number of Asian men convicted of sexually abusing girls in Derby.

Ceop said it had evidence of 230 gangs, mostly young men, who were identifying and grooming children for systematic sexual abuse. Some groups were large enough to be considered organised crime enterprises that were supplying victims to be raped by paying clients.

"This is a horrific kind of crime," said Mr Davies. "It involves systematic, premeditated rape of children and needs to be understood in those stark terms. It needs to be brought out of the dark."

But Ceop's report said that the available evidence was patchy. The review identified 2,083 victims and 2,379 offenders since the start of 2008.

Investigators were only able to establish reliable information about half of the offenders, the majority of whom were aged between 18 and 24.

In almost a third of the remaining cases, agencies had insufficient information to draw any conclusions about ethnicity. Of those that remained, 38% were white and 26% were Asian.

The report said that the majority of victims were white girls - although in a third of cases the ethnicity was not known.

Earlier this year, the former Home and Justice Secretary Jack Straw said that while offenders came from all backgrounds, there was a specific problem of young Pakistani men targeting white girls because they regarded them as "easy meat".

Peter Davies called for child protection agencies to do more to protect victims - and said that the UK needed more thorough and reliable research into what was going on.

"Focusing on the problem simply through the lens of ethnicity does not do it service," said Mr Davies....

In "Muslim polygamy – in Seattle" at WND today, Pamela Geller offers important revelations about accused jihad plotter Abu Khalid Abdul-Latif, and asks why law enforcement officials don't seem concerned about the prevalence of polygamy among Muslims in the U.S.:

Abu Khalid Abdul-Latif is accused of plotting a jihad terror attack against a Seattle military recruiting station. Abdul-Latif and another jihadi, Walli Mujahidh, have been charged with planning an attack on the Military Entrance Processing Station. The FBI said that they were trying to figure out "how they could kill the most military personnel and escape or die as martyrs," and talked about throwing fragmentation grenades into the cafeteria of the Station. After his arrest, the local Seattle media interviewed his niqab-wearing wife, Binta Moussa-Davis, who sobbed that Abdul-Latif was devout: "He just good Muslim. Perfect Muslim. He pray five times a day." Abdul-Latif was so devout, in fact, that he was seeking a second wife at a Muslim dating site on the Internet – right in Seattle, where polygamy is supposed to be illegal.

Abu Khalid Abdul-Latif was such a "perfect Muslim" that he wanted to travel to Yemen to sit at the feet of the jihad cleric Anwar al-Awlaki. Al-Awlaki mentored the Fort Hood jihad mass murderer, Nidal Malik Hasan, whom Abdul-Latif wanted to imitate. Devout Muslim al-Awlaki also provided succor and Islamic spiritual guidance to the Christmas underwear bomber and the Times Square car bomber.

Abdul-Latif's YouTube channel features a video in which he asks Allah to "show mercy to the mujahedeen who are fighting to help preserve the religion of Islam, and that he'll help suffice us, those of us who are not fighting right now, and bless those who at least have the desire to go struggle for the cause of Allah … whether that's jihad by hand, jihad by tongue, or jihad within ourselves." He praises al-Awlaki in that video as well.

This "perfect Muslim" and perfect husband also appears as the devout Muslim who placed this ad on a Muslim mate site, nikah.com, advertising for a second wife. (Nikah is the Islamic term for marriage.) It is interesting how Muslim polygamy is rampant in the United States, and yet no one speaks about it.

This aspiring mass murderer describes his devout self as "very religious." He says:

I am a very dedicated, strong, and intelligent Muslim, and I am looking for a second wife from in [sic] whom [sic] wouldn't mind sharing me with my current wife being that we are in compliance with the sunnah, and want to make a life from the most oppressive place on this earth "America ". I have been in Islam for over 6 years, originally from America, 30 years old, fully obedient to Allah, looking for a wife with intelligence, and who isn't attached to this Dunyaa. If you want more information, than [sic] please contact me.

Dunyaa is this world. Abdul-Latif is saying that he wants a wife who is more spiritually minded – one who would be happy to be the second wife of a devout Muslim mass murderer for Allah.

Abdul-Latif filled in the section headed "About My Expected Life Partner" in this way:

My partner is a strong Muslimah who never stands in between me and my Ebadah [slavery] to Allah, and who has Allah first in every level of life. She is obedient to Allah, her husband, follows Quran and Sunnah to a "T", is accepting of my current wife and son. She is between the ages of 16 and 30 years old, will not ask for an outrageous Mahr [price for buying a bride in Islam]. She is someone who even though it is her right, does not always tries to take from my pocket, is not greedy, is willing to help the household if necessary. Loves to study Islam on a daily basis, is educated, who can be trusted, who wants more children, and last but not least, who's [sic] only goal is to get into the Jannah-Inshallah [Paradise – Allah willing].

Abdul-Latif was openly seeking to enter into a polygamous relationship in Seattle. NPR reported as long ago as May 2008 that "no one knows how many Muslims in the U.S. live in polygamous families. But according to academics researching the issue, estimates range from 50,000 to 100,000 people." According to Refugee Resettlement Watch:

We have had "insiders" tell us that Muslim refugees are coming into the U.S. with multiple wives. The "extra" wives are listed as "sisters" or other close relatives and are settled in the same community as the "husband" by refugee resettlement agencies.

Read it all.

Karzai says NATO military equipment causes pollution. Would he rather have waited for a hot air balloon to help clear out the Taliban? An update on this story. "Attack on hotel in Kabul ends with deaths of 7 Taliban, 11 others," from CNN, June 28:

Kabul, Afghanistan (CNN) -- Seven Taliban attacked Kabul's Hotel Inter-Continental in a brazen, carefully orchestrated operation that began Tuesday night and continued into Wednesday, ending with their deaths and those of 11 other people some six hours after it began, police said.

"We are still searching the hotel; the death number may increase," said Chief of Criminal Investigations Mohammad Zahir on Wednesday morning. Twelve people were wounded or injured, he added.

"The situation is secure," Interior Minister Bismullah Khan said. By then, the top floor of the hotel was ablaze, but within a couple of hours, the flames were gone, though smoke continued to rise from the wreckage.

Two security personnel were killed in the attack, he said.

By dawn, security forces were allowing reporters to approach the hotel, and some guests were seen departing.

Saiz Ahmed, a U.S. citizen in Kabul for a Ph.D. project, was among them. "I'm sure none of us thought we were going to make it," he said after having stayed on the floor of his darkened bedroom for more than five hours listening to gunfire and occasional bomb blasts. "I wrote my little will -- just in case."

The Taliban penetrated the hotel's typically heavy security in the attack, and one of them detonated an explosion on the second floor, said Erin Cunningham, a journalist for The Daily in Kabul.

Rocket-propelled grenades were launched from the roof of the hotel toward the first vice president's house. A few moments later, the hotel was rocked by three explosions, one of which knocked her off her feet, Cunningham said. U.S. forces were on the scene, she added.

At about 2 a.m., four hours after the attack began, International Security Assistance Force helicopters fired at insurgents on the roof, killing as many as three of the gunmen, ISAF spokesman Maj. Tim James told CNN.

An hour later, ISAF said the Afghan security forces had cleared the roof and were clearing the rest of the hotel.

At 4 a.m., police believed that all the attackers were dead, "but one was alive and hidden, and he started to resist" and continued to do so until 6:20 a.m., Zahir said.

At least one of the attackers detonated his explosives, said Afghan Lt. Gen. Mohammad Ayoub Salangi, the city's chief of police.

A spokesman for the Taliban, Zabiullah Mujahid, said in an e-mail that the suicide attackers entered the hotel after killing the security guards at the entrance.

"One of the suicide attackers told us on the phone that they are in the lobby and chasing guests into their rooms by smashing the doors of the rooms," Mujahid told CNN in an e-mail he sent as the incident was unfolding....

There may be a language barrier evident in the wording, but the supremacism and sense of entitlement come through loud and clear. The documentary's makers have already made a major effort not to offend, avoiding any visual depiction of Muhammad, but they are assured of offending someone nonetheless. In particular, in this case, if they lean too Sunni, they will offend Shi'ites; if they lean too Shi'ite, they will offend Sunnis.

And if they lapse for a moment in hagiography or leave room for a shadow of doubt about Muhammad's prophetic credentials, they will offend still other viewers. James Thurber's observation applies: "You might as well fall flat on your face as lean over too far backward." "Iran attacks BBC for documentary series on life of prophet Muhammad," by Saeed Kamali Dehghan for the Guardian, June 28:

Iran's minister of cultural and Islamic guidance has attacked an upcoming BBC2 documentary series on the life of the founder of Islam, the prophet Muhammad, saying the "enemy" was attempting to "ruin Muslims' sanctity".

At least they left "prophet" lowercase, and not with the honorific capitalization so casually used by other news organizations.

The three-part series, The Life of Muhammad, presented by Rageh Omaar, a Somali-born British Middle East correspondent for Al Jazeera English, is scheduled to be broadcast on BBC2 in mid-July and has been drawing increasing criticism from senior figures in Iran.

The documentary makers say it seeks to "retrace the actual footsteps of the prophet" from his birthplace in the Saudi Arabian city of Mecca, his struggles with his prophetic role and divine revelations, his migration to Medina and establishment of the first Islamic constitution before his final return to Mecca following armed conflicts.

But the Iranian culture minister, Mohammad Hosseini, who has not seen the programme, said in an interview on Monday that he was worried about the BBC film.

Speaking to Iran's semi-official Fars news agency, he said: "The BBC's decision to make a documentary on the life of [the] prophet Muhammad seems dubious and if our suspicions are proved to be correct, we will certainly take serious action."

Hosseini added: "What the enemy is trying to do in ruining the Muslims' sanctity is definitely much more than causing us to react and unfortunately, some Islamic countries are not taking this issue seriously. One way to show objections is to express condemnation of the West over their despicable actions." [...]

The BBC has stressed that its films are "a presenter-led documentary series" which "draw on the expertise and comments from the world's leading academics and commentators on Islam."

Tariq Ramadan of St Anthony's College, Oxford, Ziauddin Sardar, a London-based scholar, Tom Holland, a historian and Princess Badiya El Hassan of the Jordanian royal family are among those who appear in the documentary, which was filmed in various locations including Saudi Arabia, Jerusalem, Syria and Jordan.

The BBC has also made clear that its series is "in line with Islamic tradition" and "it does not depict any images of the face of Muhammad, or feature dramatic reconstructions of Muhammad's life".

Banning: you're doing it wrong, along with a few other things. One great irony here is that one of the cases depends on the notion that two prospective deportees would be in danger under Sharia in Somalia... even as Britain has imported Sharia and it becomes increasingly entrenched in the country. Where will one seek asylum from British Sharia?

"The joke of 'secure Britain': Vile banned militant extremist strolls through Heathrow immigration as 200 Somalian criminals are allowed to stay due to human rights," by Jack Doyle for the Daily Mail, June 29:

Britain's powerlessness to control who has the right to be in this country was glaringly exposed last night by two extraordinary cases.

In the first, an anti-Semitic preacher of hate whom the Home Secretary had banned from entering Britain was able to stroll in through Heathrow.

Last night, Raed Salah was giving a lecture organised by Islamist radicals to a large crowd in Leicester, and today he was due to speak at Westminster at the invitation of Left-wing Labour MPs.

In the second, a bombshell ruling by European judges blocked the deportation of some 200 Somali criminals back to their homeland.

The Strasbourg court said the men, including drug dealers and serial burglars, might be persecuted in war-torn Somalia, and that they must be allowed to stay to protect their human rights.

By that logic, Somalia is unlivable for anyone -- think of the non-criminals -- and they would be duty-bound to evacuate the entire territory.

So, irrespective of how heinous their crimes or the danger they present to the public, Britain has no power to expel them.

The ruling by the European Court of Human Rights stemmed from appeals against deportation by two asylum seekers convicted of a string of serious offences including burglary, making threats to kill and drug dealing.

But it will now also apply to 214 other similar cases which have been lodged with the court using Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Article 3, which protects against torture and inhuman or degrading treatment, is an 'absolute' right, meaning that it applies regardless of the offences committed.

The two men, who were both granted thousands in legal aid to fight their cases, will now be released from immigration detention centres and will be free to walk the streets.

They were jointly awarded more than £20,000 for costs and expenses.

Critics accused the Government of rolling over to the demands of the court, and branded the Human Rights Act a 'criminals' charter'.

Backbench Tory MP Douglas Carswell said: 'The pathetic truth is that we do not have control over our borders, and these cases quite clearly show that we do not control not only who comes in to the country but who we choose to remove. [...]

Abdisamad Adow Sufi, 24, entered the country illegally in 2003 using a fake passport. He claimed asylum on the grounds that he belonged to a minority clan persecuted by the Somali militia.

His claim was rejected by officials and an appeal tribunal said his account was 'not credible'.

Since then he has amassed a string of convictions for offences including burglary, fraud, making threats to kill, indecent exposure and theft.

The second Somali, drug addict Abdiaziz Ibrahim Elmi, 42, was granted asylum in 1988. Since then he has committed crimes including handling stolen goods, fraud, robbery, carrying a replica gun, perverting the course of justice, theft and dealing heroin and cocaine.

Attempts to deport him began in 2006 and his appeal was rejected by an immigration judge. A deportation order was stayed in 2007 pending the outcome of his Strasbourg case, and since then he has been convicted of possessing Class A drugs and charged with drug dealing.

The panel of seven judges ruled that because the level of violence in Mogadishu was so high there was a real risk of the men coming to harm.

In a unanimous judgment, the court also rejected the argument the men could leave the capital and return to safer parts of the country.

The judges said Sufi could not join his relatives because they lived in an area controlled by a strict Islamic group. If returned, he could face punishment according to their code – also a breach of his rights.

He would also be particularly vulnerable if forced to live in a refugee camp because of his 'psychiatric illness', the court said.

Elmi claimed he would be at risk of persecution if he moved to an area controlled by the same group, because he wore an earring, which might lead to them thinking he was gay.

Somalia or Tower Hamlets?

If they found out he was a drug addict and thief he could face amputation, public flogging or execution, he said.

The court ruled he had no experience of living in a strict Islamic area because he has been in this country for so long and would therefore be at risk of harm...

The Camelia Shehata case should be dead and buried now, but will remain a pretext for jihadist violence. Conspiracy theories, which don't have to make sense or be based in fact, will keep the grievance alive no matter what evidence or lack of evidence refutes them.

Nonetheless, the closure of the case is quite satisfying. "Egyptian Court Dismisses Muslim Case Against Christian Woman," by Mary Abdelmassih for the Assyrian International News Agency, June 28:

(AINA) -- The Egyptian administrative court of the State Council dismissed today the lawsuit filed by Muslim lawyers, demanding the disclosure of the whereabouts of Camilia Shehata, the wife of a Coptic priest, who was alleged to have converted to Islam and held against her will by the Coptic Church. In reaching its decision, the court said the Muslim lawyers failed to provide proof to support their claim of the detention of Camilia by the church.

Camilia's attorney, Dr. Naguib Gabriel, said "The only thing the Muslim lawyers delivered as proof for their claims were snippets of newspapers from the Internet."

The case lasted over four months, during which Dr. Gabriel submitted as proof unequivocal documents that Camilia was never detained by the church and she never converted to Islam as alleged. Among the documents was a power of attorney from Camilia for him to represent her at court. "This was issued by the public notary, by a Muslim employee and in which she wrote "Christian" beside her religious affiliation, while she could have easily written Muslim instead." said Gabriel. "If she was really detained by the church, she could have asked for help from the employee when she went to the notary," he added. Also, a certificate from Al-Azhar stating that she never converted to Islam was presented as evidence.

The prosecution also heard the testimony of Bishop Armiya, secretary to Pope Shenouda III, who denied the church had detained her. It also took the testimony of Anba Agapios, Bishop of Deir Mawass, Minya Governorate, who also refuted the charge.

Previously, the court had responded to the Muslim lawyers' demands regarding Camilia's conversion to Islam, saying the issue was the beliefs of people, but whether there was a detainment or not. Also, the Muslim lawyers had demanded Camelia appear in person before the court, which was refused by the court.

"Today's court ruling closes the curtain on one of the most famous and difficult cases in Egypt." said attorney Dr. Gabriel. "Muslims will not be allowed to demonstrate regarding this matter anymore, which they used as a pretext to create sectarian strife between Muslims and Christians."

The story of Camelia Shehata, which became a public issue for the last 11 months, started on July 19, 2010, when after a dispute with her husband, Father Tedaos Samaan, priest at St. Georges Church in Deir Mawas, she left home and went to Cairo to stay with relatives, without telling anyone of her whereabouts. "This was my biggest mistake," said Camilia in an interview with Al-Hayat Christian TV Channel from her hide-out with her husband and 2-year-old son.

Her husband, believing she was abducted by Muslims, like many other cases, came with some 3000 Copts from his congregation to protest her disappearance at St. Mark's Coptic Cathedral in Cairo.

State Security found her a few days later and handed her over to her sister who lives in Cairo. She later reconciled with her husband and the family has lived in hiding ever since, as Muslim demonstrations started to take place, demanding the return of "their sister in Islam, Camelia."

Faked photos of Camilia in a Hijab appeared on the internet and over 20 demonstrations were staged by Muslim, accusing the church of abducting new converts (females) to Islam and holding them against their will in churches and monasteries, where they were tortured.

Conspiracy theories don't have to make sense:

Camilia appeared in a video clip from her hideout, taken under utmost security by the independent daily El-Youm7, in which she denied ever converting to Islam (video). The Muslims said it was not Camilia but was her double who appeared, and carried on with their demonstration, the last of which was on April 30, when they encircled the Coptic Cathedral and the Pope's residence vowing that "Camilia must return." Camelia appeared for a second time on May 7, in a one-hour interview on Al-Hayat TV, in which she denied all Muslim claims of ever having met any of them or having been to Al Azhar with them. On both occasions she confirmed her Christian faith.

Echoes of the discourse here in the U.S.: treating people calling attention to the jihadists and their enablers as a bigger problem than the jihadists themselves. "Pakistan says stop "blame game" at U.S., Afghan talks," Hamid Shalizi and Michael Holden for the Associated Press, June 28:

KABUL (Reuters) - Pakistan called on Tuesday for the "blame game" to stop as the United States, Afghanistan and Pakistan met to discuss security in the region amid a Taliban insurgency and heightened tensions over cross border shelling.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai has condemned the firing of 470 rockets from Pakistan into his country over the past three weeks. Islamabad says only that "a few accidental rounds" may have crossed the border when it pursued militants who had attacked its security forces.

The escalation of fighting on the border between Pakistan's ethnic Pashtun tribal areas and Afghanistan has underscored the difficulties the three countries face in working together to reach a political settlement to the 10-year Afghan war.

"We need to end this blame-game," Salman Bashir, Pakistan's Foreign Secretary, told a news conference after a meeting of three countries in Kabul, without making any specific reference to border shelling.

"We need to take ownership for our own affairs. This problem will not go away if we keep on pointing fingers at each other, we have done it for too long."

Afghanistan has often blamed elements within the Pakistan government for supporting the Taliban insurgency.

Pakistan accuses Afghanistan of what it has done for years: giving jihadists a cross-border refuge:

Pakistan blames Afghanistan for giving refuge to militants on its side of the border, particularly in eastern Kunar province, leaving it vulnerable to counter-attack when it chases them out of its own tribal areas.

In an interview with BBC radio aired on Tuesday, Karl Eikenberry, the U.S. ambassador to Kabul, criticized Islamabad's efforts to deal with militants, saying it dealt well only with those who were a direct threat to Pakistan....

Hardcore Leftist dhimmi pseudo-journalist David Weigel here casts the Islamic supremacist Ground Zero Mosque Imam Rauf as a victim, lamenting that Rauf "got a brutal reminder of what happens when idealism meets religion and politics" and "went through the ringer" over the Ground Zero Mosque initiative. Meanwhile, the pitiable victim is so marginalized that his event in Colorado was attended by Paul Bremer, the former head of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq -- another influential figure who is clueless about the global jihad and Islamic supremacism.

True to form, Weigel doesn't tell his unthinking Leftist marks at Slate what Pamela Geller explains here:

It is clear that Rauf and other mosque leaders are not as moderate as they claim to be. Rauf has close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood...The Muslim Brotherhood is dedicated, according to a captured internal document, to “eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within.” Rauf’s book What’s Right with Islam says on the copyright page that “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 Muslim Brotherhood fronts, and ISNA was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation Hamas terror funding case.

Rauf refused to condemn Hamas until the public outcry became too great for him to ignore. He was a prominent member of the Perdana organization, which bankrolled the jihad flotilla sent against Israel last year, on which the "peaceful" passengers were chanting a genocidal and antisemitic Islamic jihad chant.

Also, Rauf has said that “the US and the West must acknowledge the harm they have done to Muslims before terrorism can end.” He has claimed that “Western active involvement in shaping the internal affairs of Islamic societies have contributed to the creation of terrorism done in the name of Islam.” In other words, defending ourselves against jihad terrorism just creates jihad terrorism, so we should stop defending ourselves.

Rauf has carried his blame game even farther, claiming: “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.” He even said on 60 Minutes shortly after 9/11 that Osama bin Laden was “made in the USA."

The Arabic translation of Rauf’s book What's Right with Islam is disturbingly entitled A Call to Prayer from the World Trade Center Rubble: Islamic Dawa in the Heart of Post-9/11 America. This indicates that he has planned for years to spread Islam and Sharia from the site of the 9/11 attacks -- belying his more recent claims that he intends the mosque to be a center for reconciliation and peace.

Geller adds: "In his book, Rauf supports and justifies Sharia law, and calls for restrictions on free speech in America. He has written another book that has gotten little notice: Islam: A Sacred Law—What Every Muslim Should Know About Sharia. In it he explains why God’s law is superior to manmade law, or that is, why Sharia is better than democracy."

Geller also notes that Rauf "snagged more than $2 million in public financing to renovate low-income apartments" that he owned in New Jersey, but never made the renovations. Where is that money?

He has also been completely dishonest about the mosque project itself. Now it is a community center nowhere near Ground Zero, but when it was initially announced Rauf was forthright, saying: “New York is the capital of the world, and this location close to 9/11 is iconic.” That statement has now been scrubbed from the online version of the New York Times article in which it initially appeared.

Rauf even threatened America over this project, saying that if the mosque were not built, “if we don’t do this right, anger will explode in the Muslim world....If we don’t handle this crisis correctly, it could become something very dangerous indeed.”

But to Dave Weigel, he is a poor victim. Pity poor Rauf! And pity even more the Slate readers who fall for this nonsense.

"Park51, Reconsidered," by David Weigel in Slate, June 28:

ASPEN, Col. -- I stopped by a luncheon here to listen to a guest who, since the last Ideas fest, got a brutal reminder of what happens when idealism meets religion and politics. He was Feisel Abdul Rauf, the man behind the Cordoba Initiative, who went through the ringer in 2010 when his hopes to build a Muslim community center near Ground Zero gave us the "Ground Zero mega-mosque" frenzy. (Rauf cheekily used that term to refer to the controversy.)

"Wherever I go in the Muslim world," he said, "it's the first question people want to ask me." In the Arab world, he said, people were dazzled by the story. "When President Obama gave speech on Ramadan, the banner headline in the Egyptian Gazette was" Obama supports GZ Mosque. The narrative, in some important ways, gave [America] a boost."

That word, "narrative," seemed to come up in Rauf's every other sentence. Many of America's problems with the Muslim world could be solved with a narrative shift. "if Christians were to regard Muslims as Unitarians with an Arabic liturgy," he said, quoting himself tongue-in-cheekly, "perhaps we'd get over some of this." And "we need films to show Muslims in a positive light. I've commissioned three scripts."...

Maybe he could commission a few Unitarians to blow themselves up in crowds of non-Unitarians; that would do a world of good to help the Christians that Rauf has in mind start equating Muslims with Unitarians.

"The biggest myth is the centrality of the Palestinian-Israeli issue to the region"

He might rue the day he longed for such a renaissance. But Ambassador LeBaron has no doubt imbibed many prevailing historical myths -- tolerant Muslim Spain; tolerant Ottoman Empire; 1001 Muslim inventions; the conflict between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs is over land, and has nothing to do with Islam's antisemitism and jihad doctrine; jihad is an interior spiritual struggle, and more -- that have led him to this view. No one has told him, and he has never read, about the jihad imperative to wage war against and subjugate unbelievers, or about the fact that non-Muslims have never enjoyed and can never enjoy equality of rights with Muslims in an Islamic state. So absent all that, what's not to like about an Islamic renaissance?

"U.S. Ambassador Joseph LeBaron: 'The Arab Spring is the Start of a Long, Uncertain Path to Structural Change in the Middle East,'" from Arabic Knowledge@Wharton, June 28:

[...] Arabic Knowledge@Wharton: What myths about the Middle East has the Arab Spring dispelled?

LeBaron: I think that the biggest myth is the centrality of the Palestinian-Israeli issue to the region. What we saw, first in Tunisia and then elsewhere, was extraordinarily revealing: Arabs focused on Arab issues in Arab states without reference to the United States, or Israel, or foreign policy. The focus was not outward but inward, on governance, the relationship between government and its citizens, on domestic reform associated with government, social justice, human rights, and the freedom of expression. That was extraordinary.

For decades, the assumption both inside and outside the region has been that the key to peace and stability in the region was a solution to the Palestinian-Israeli issue. But what 2011 has showed us is there are other issues of structural importance to peace and security in the Middle East.

Of course, there's great interest in the Palestinian-Israeli issue throughout the region. But the region moves in response to things far beyond this single issue that so convulses the Levant. If you look at the region, from Morocco to the Gulf, you'll see that other important forces are at play. We cannot ignore those. [...]

Arabic Knowledge@Wharton: Most of the oil-rich Gulf nations are trying to reduce their economic dependence on natural resources. What's your sense of that transition and where you do see it going?

LeBaron: Let me give you a 30-year perspective. Since I first came to the Gulf in 1980, I have seen the Gulf states pursue a pattern of growth that is leading, whether consciously or unconsciously, towards a highly ambitious goal: a renaissance of Arab and Islamic thought in science and technology. It's extraordinary, actually. The amazing thing is that both the resources and, increasingly, the vision are there to accomplish this renaissance....

It is time for a Freedom From Jihad Flotilla. Useful Idiots Update: "IDF in Arabic Video: This is a Flotilla of Hate," by Gil Ronen for Israel National News, June 28:

Major Avichay Adraee, IDF Spokesman in Arabic, issued a video message Monday stating Israel’s resolve to block any flotillas headed toward Gaza. [...]

The “aid groups” taking part in the flotillas are “groups working to undermine Israel’s legitimacy to defend its borders by land, air and sea. These organizations serve as a cover for Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood.”...

In FrontPage for Wednesday, I discuss the latest jihad/martyrdom suicide bombing in Afghanistan, and its larger implications:

Details are still unclear, but it appears that as many as six jihad/martyrdom suicide bombers descended upon the Intercontinental Hotel in Kabul Tuesday night. As many as ten people have been murdered, and the Taliban is thumping its chest in victory. The death toll could end up being much higher: a Taliban spokesman, Zabiullah Mujahid, exulted: “Our muj [mujahedin, warriors of jihad] entered the hotel, and they’ve gone through several stories of the building and they are breaking into each room and they are targeting the 300 Afghans and foreigners who are staying.”

The Taliban would kill Afghans as well as foreigners because they consider them to be complicit with the U.S.-backed government of Hamid Karzai. With Barack Obama’s announcement of a drawdown of U.S. troops in Afghanistan, they see an opportunity to assert their presence and power. The American troops will go, and their murder and mayhem will increase. Many will see in this an argument to keep the troops there, so as to preserve order – but what order prevails in Afghanistan today, after eight years of an American military presence there?

The Taliban’s continued ability to commit this murder and mayhem in Afghanistan is testimony to the failure of the American adventure there, the loss of thousands of lives of noble and courageous American military personnel who deserved better from those in command, and the wanton waste of billions of dollars. It was not a failure of power: we were not outgunned or outfought. It was a failure of will, stemming from a misdiagnosis of the problem. Two American administrations have spoken about bringing democracy and freedom to Afghanistan, and yet have not been able or willing to face the fact that the foremost obstacle to those goals was Islam, which respects neither.

Speaking about the vaunted “Arab Spring” a few weeks ago, Barack Obama declared: “The United States supports a set of universal rights. And these rights include free speech, the freedom of peaceful assembly, the freedom of religion, equality for men and women under the rule of law, and the right to choose your own leaders -– whether you live in Baghdad or Damascus, Sanaa or Tehran.”

But not Kabul, apparently. The Bush Administration sponsored the implementation in Afghanistan of a Constitution that enshrined Islamic law as the highest law of the land, such that no law could be made that contradicted it. The bitter fruit of that disastrously short-sighted decision began to appear early on: in 2006 the Karzai government put a convert from Islam to Christianity on trial for apostasy, a capital offense under Islamic law. When an aghast State Department protested, pointing out that Afghanistan’s shiny new Constitution guaranteed freedom of religion, Afghan officials patiently explained to them that it guaranteed freedom of religion within the bounds of Sharia.

Within the bounds of Sharia. That meant the institutionalized oppression of women and non-Muslims, the extinguishing of the freedom of speech, and – as was clear from the Abdul Rahman case and other apostasy cases that followed it — the denial of the freedom of conscience. Sanctioned by the Karzai government, not just by the Taliban.

There is more.

Seeking the promise of paradise to those who "slay and are slain" for Allah (Qur'an 9:111). This sort of thing will become more common as the Americans leave, of course, but there really wasn't anything that the Americans could ultimately have done to prevent it anyway. The idea of a stable, prosperous, Western-style free republic in Afghanistan was from the beginning a pipe dream, and it was inevitable that those who tried to implement this dream would run up against the buzz-saw of Sharia.

"Afghanistan's Intercontinental Hotel Under Attack by Suicide Bombers," from FoxNews.com, June 28:

The popular Intercontinental hotel in Kabul has come under a suicide bombing attack Tuesday, a U.S. official told Fox News. The attack is still ongoing.

Afghanistan news agency TOLOnews is reporting at least 10 people have been killed. That number has yet to be independently confirmed.

Up to six suicide bombers are believed to have attacked the hotel, Afghan police tell Fox News. Multiple explosions have been heard at the hotel.

The popular Intercontinental hotel in Kabul has come under a suicide bombing attack, a U.S. official told Fox News. The attack is still ongoing....

"It's an attack on the Intercontinental Hotel. There are several gunmen shooting," Kabul criminal investigations chief Mohammad Zahir told AFP....

Azizullah, an Afghan police officer who uses only one name, told The Associated Press at the scene that at least one bomber entered the hotel Tuesday night and detonated a vest of explosives.

Jawid, a guest at the hotel, says the attack occurred as many people were having dinner in the hotel restaurant. He says he heard gunfire throughout the several story building.

"I was running with my family," he said. "There was shooting. The restaurant was full with guests."

Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid claimed responsibility for the attack in a telephone call to The Associated Press....

Actually, we've already been told this again and again and again, but actions speak louder than words. "Muslim world must tell West Islam has nothing to do with terrorism: Kazakh President," from the Ahlul Bayt News Agency, June 28:

(Ahlul Bayt News Agency) - The Muslim world must establish direct dialogue with the West and make it clear that Islam has nothing to do with terrorism, said Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev.

"The problems in the relationship between the Muslim community and the rest of the world, first of all the West, rank among the most serious ones. The Muslim world has been associated in the West in the past few years mostly with its radical segment, inciting unfounded fear," Nazarbayev said at a session of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation's Foreign Ministers Council.

"The true meaning of Islam has nothing to do with the activities of the extremist structures, to say nothing of terrorist organizations. We must state unambiguously that Islam has nothing in common with political violence, extremism and terrorism," he said.

Nazarbayev urged the OIC member-countries to form a special website that would highlight the organization's activities, encourage the younger generation to turn to religion and Islamic culture, and popularize Islamic spiritual values.

"We need to establish an open and honest dialogue between the Muslim world and the West," he said.

That would be nice. When an honest Muslim spokesman is ready for such dialogue, call me.

STRASBOURG, FRANCE, June 28: In a capitulation to Islamic supremacists and violent radical Leftists, French and European Union authorities have canceled a free speech rally planned by a coalition of American and European human rights organizations in Strasbourg, the seat of the European Parliament.

The human rights organizations Stop Islamization of America (SIOA) and Stop Islamisation of Europe (SIOE) were planning to hold their first-ever transatlantic summit in Strasbourg, France, on July 2.

The SIOA/SIOE summit was dedicated to the defense of the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and the equality of rights of all people before the law – all principles denied by Islamic law.

SIOA Executive Director Pamela Geller said in a statement: “The Strasbourg police could not guarantee our safety. When the thugs of the Antifa group and Islamic supremacist organizations announced plans to hold a violent counter-demonstration and to do everything they could to disrupt our activities, the authorities canceled permission for our demonstration and conference, instead of standing up to these violent neo-fascists and their Islamic supremacist allies.”

Strasbourg authorities told SIOA and SIOE organizers that they could not guaranteee their safety at the conference and demonstration location, the Place de la Republique. Efforts were made to hold the demonstration nearby, but the authorities still considered security to be too much of an issue.

Muslims and Leftist fascists previously burned down a hotel in Strasbourg during a NATO summit, and burned a large number of cars in a car park during riots in the same city.

SIOA and SIOE are not intimidated, and will demonstrate in the future, just as we did in Harrow, Copenhagen and Aalborg. This planned Strasbourg demonstration and conference will be rescheduled.

Geller added: “Once again democracy is being denied in Europe. But we are not giving in. On the contrary: when our governing authorities are refusing to protect freedom, we have to do it ourselves. That’s the impetus for our Freedom From Jihad Flotilla.”

“The SIOA/SIOE Freedom From Jihad aid flotilla,” Geller explained, “is intended to be a direct response to the capitulation of French, European, and American authorities to Leftist and Islamic supremacist forces of oppression and injustice. It is set to launch after our national Rally for Freedom at Ground Zero on the tenth anniversary of the Islamic jihad attacks that murdered three thousand Americans.”

The Audacity of the Infidel will launch on September 11 from the New York harbor closest to the World Trade Center site. On board will be freedom fighters from all over the world, united in defense of human rights and human dignity against Islamic supremacist oppression.

The mission is the first attempt by free citizens anywhere in the world to come to the aid of non-Muslims persecuted for their faith in Muslim countries. It is a direct response to the heavily-armed Leftist/jihadist flotilla that attempted to violate Israel’s legal maritime blockade of Hamas-ruled Gaza on May 31, 2010. In that incident, Turkish jihadists onboard one ship attacked Israeli soldiers without provocation; nine jihadists were killed in the battle. The Freedom From Jihad Flotilla is also a response to the Audacity of Hope flotilla that is soon to set sail to continue the jihad against Israel, with plans to use chemical weapons against Israeli forces.

The Freedom From Jihad Flotilla will offer aid to persecuted Christians, Hindus, and other non-Muslims, and call upon the international community to recognize Muslim persecution of non-Muslims as a violation of international law, to be punished with strict economic sanctions and other appropriate action.

The first stop will be Greece, in recognition of the Greek victims of jihad in Anatolia for well over a thousand years. The Freedom From Jihad Flotilla will then sail along the Turkish coast, where speakers will pay homage to the millions of victims of the Armenian and Greek genocides in Turkey.

The next stop will be Egypt. All Coptic Christians seeking to escape Islamic oppression will be saved. Subsequent stops will include Nigeria, Pakistan, Indonesia, and other areas where Christians are facing persecution from Muslims. The freedom flotilla will also include stops in Bangladesh, for Hindus facing Muslim persecution, and Thailand, for Buddhists facing the same persecution.

SIOA is the foremost organization in America dedicated to defending human rights, religious liberty, and the freedom of speech against Islamic supremacist intimidation and attempts to bring elements of Sharia to the West.

The SIOA Freedom From Jihad Flotilla will call upon the international community to act in defense of these basic human rights:

• The freedom of speech – as opposed to Islamic prohibitions of “blasphemy” and “slander,” which are used effectively to quash honest discussion of jihad and Islamic supremacism;
• The freedom of conscience – as opposed to the Islamic death penalty for apostasy;
• The equality of rights of all people before the law – as opposed to Sharia’s institutionalized discrimination against women and non-Muslims.

The Flotilla will call upon all free people of all races and creeds to stand with us to defend our freedoms against the radically intolerant ideology codified in Islamic law.

"Good women are obedient....As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them." -- Qur'an 4:34

"And if ye fear that ye will not deal fairly by the orphans, marry of the women, who seem good to you, two or three or four; and if ye fear that ye cannot do justice (to so many) then one (only) or (the captives) that your right hands possess. Thus it is more likely that ye will not do injustice." -- Qur'an 4:3

"If a husband calls his wife to his bed [i.e. to have sexual relation] and she refuses and causes him to sleep in anger, the angels will curse her till morning." -- Sahih Bukhari 4.54.460

"By him in Whose Hand lies my life, a woman can not carry out the right of her Lord, till she carries out the right of her husband. And if he asks her to surrender herself [to him for sexual intercourse] she should not refuse him even if she is on a camel's saddle." -- Ibn Majah 1854

Sharia Alert from modern, moderate Indonesia: "'Obedient wives club'", pretext for legalizing polygamy in Indonesia," by Mathias Hariyadi for Asia News, June 28 (thanks to Block Ness):

Jakarta (AsiaNews) - Civil society is divided between those in favour and against, the ruling class has expressed concern, while the fundamentalist Islamic wing strongly supports the initiative. What is certain is that the birth in Indonesia - after Malaysia – of the Obedient Wives Club (OWC), an organization in which women are completely subject to their husbands, even regarding their sexual demands, has not passed unobserved. Critics point out that the foundation of the club is only a "pretext" to legitimize polygamy in the country, opposed by the majority of the population and outlawed by former President Suharto, in power from 1967 to 1998.

On 19 June KlubTaat Suam Global Ikhwan was born, under the leadership of President Gina Puspita. The group has 50 women members already, even though the association claims about 300 have joined. The purpose is to teach Indonesian women how to be "good wives" in the eyes of the family and husband and at the same time reinforce the principles of the Islamic faith in wives.

For Mrs. Puspita, head of the club, the real aim is to inculcate in women the desire to "accept" polygamy, if the case is decided by the husband. And to do that, the president uses the example of the car: the husband is the driver and the woman should assume the attitude of "good" a passenger, in short faithful, submissive and obedient.

The attempt to introduce Islamic law through the principle of polygamy in Indonesia - opposed by civil society and prohibited by law - is denounced by women's rights activists. They remember how the OWC is the fruit of the same “source” that in 2009, gave birth to the controversial Polygamy Club, which was founded by conservative and fundamentalist Islamic group with ties to Global Ikhwan in other countries including Thailand and Singapore.

The powerful Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) has supported the establishment of the clubs and states that it is not contrary to the dictates of Sharia, or Islamic law. Gusrizal Gazahar, deputy head of the MUI of Padang in West Sumatra province, said that "it is the duty of every Muslim woman to obey her husband in everything."...

Who came out against reform last year? The "moderate," "largely secular" Muslim Brotherhood. "'Egyptian curricula states Jews, Christians are infidels'," by Oren Kessler for the Jerusalem Post, June 28:

Egypt’s school curriculum, laden with anti-Semitic and anti-Christian sentiment, must undergo drastic reform to comply with international standards, according to a new report to be presented this week at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

“Egypt has to conduct fundamental reforms in its curricula, which present a national identity based solely on the Islamic religion,” said Yohanan Manor, chairman and co-founder of the Institute for Monitoring Peace and Cultural Tolerance in School Education (IMPACT-SE), the Jerusalembased [sic] think-tank that compiled the report

“Egypt’s schools present Islam as the ‘only true faith,’ and believers in other religions – including Coptic Christians – as infidels,” he said.

Manor and his colleagues will present the report at the conference, “School Textbooks in the Greater Middle East: National Identity and Images of Self and Other,” to be held Tuesday and Wednesday at the Hebrew University’s Harry S. Truman Research Institute for the Advancement of Peace.

A year before the ousting of president Hosni Mubarak, Egypt’s government announced plans for comprehensive reforms to “purge school curricula of erroneous views and material that incites extreme violence.”

The government’s first step was to remove references to “jihad in God’s name.” These changes, the report found, have fallen far short of the comprehensive reform Cairo had pledged.

Anti-Coptic violence in Egypt reached a crescendo over the past six months. A bomb in an Alexandria church on Christmas Day last year killed 21 people, and anti-Christian attacks have grown in scope and frequency since Mubarak’s resignation in February. The new report by IMPACT-SE, formerly the Center for Monitoring the Impact of Peace, found that internecine violence is fueled largely by education.

But contradictory messages also run deeply through Egypt’s education system. In many textbooks Copts are denigrated as infidels, yet in those same works are praised for participating in Egypt’s independence campaigns throughout history. Students are taught that the Hebrew Bible and the Christian New Testament are holy books, but also taught that those same texts were “forgeries” penned by non-Muslims.

Therefore, in order to get an education, non-Muslim children in Egypt are a captive audience to being called infidels, forgers, and worse.

“Egyptian textbooks define Christians and Jews as infidels,” Manor said. “A year ago, Egyptian authorities admitted as much in a joint conference by Education Minister Dr. Ahmed Zaki Badreldin and the grand mufti of Egypt, Dr. Ali Gomaa.”

In April of last year, he said, the two officials announced reforms to purge the curricula of Quranic verses “encouraging jihad and the murder of polytheists and infidels.”

The press conference sparked an uproar in Egypt.

The Muslim Brotherhood flatly rejected any talk of education reform, while several news outlets took positions in favor....

In Human Events this morning I discuss the implications of Geert Wilders' narrow victory last week:

It is still legal to tell the truth in the Netherlands: Geert Wilders has been cleared. Wilders is the leader of the third-largest party in that country, and the protagonist in the largest Islamic challenge yet to the Western notion of the freedom of speech. He made a number of statements about Islam that, while entirely true and accurate, got him hauled into court on charges of “inciting hatred,” and the Netherlands came quite close to criminalizing the speaking of unpleasant truths. But Wilders was acquitted last week, and this bullet was dodged. Challenges to the freedom of speech, however, are still very much with us, and will only grow more virulent.

"It is my strong conviction,” Wilders remarked, “that Islam is a threat to Western values, to freedom of speech, to the equality of men and women, of heterosexuals and homosexuals, of believers and unbelievers." These things are all true and rather obvious: Every day brings fresh stories about the oppression of women and homosexuals in countries ruled by Islamic law. Then there is the escalating persecution of Christians in Muslim countries such as Egypt, Pakistan and Indonesia, and the suppression of free speech and open debate about Islamic supremacism and jihad violence all over the Islamic world—in accord with the provision of Islamic law that makes criticism of Islam and Muhammad a capital offense.

Nonetheless, this is the sort of statement that got Wilders prosecuted in the first place. And even as he was acquitted, the Dutch court affirmed the false and dangerous premises that made for that prosecution, including the idea that one could and should face legal action for saying things that others deemed offensive. Amsterdam Judge Marcel van Oosten said Thursday: “The bench finds that your statements are acceptable within the context of the public debate. The bench finds that although gross and denigrating, it did not give rise to hatred.”

Apparently van Oosten would not have hesitated to fine or jail Wilders if he had determined that his words gave rise to “hatred.” This is an extraordinarily dangerous legal concept. Who decides what constitutes “hatred”? If Wilders’ words were accurate, and yet Muslims nonetheless found them offensive, would van Oosten have fined Wilders anyway? It seems so. Yet if offending someone and inciting hatred is a crime, then anyone can claim that he was offended by speech that he would like to suppress....

There is more.

Only Zionist conspirators would see any alarming connection between a nuclear program wrapped in secrecy and subterfuge and a long-range missile program proceeding alongside it. "Iran unveils underground missile silos," by Ali Akbar Dareini for the Associated Press, June 28 (thanks to JCB):

TEHRAN, Iran – Iran on Monday unveiled underground silos that can carry missiles capable of hitting Israel and U.S. bases in the Gulf as it kicked off 10 days of war games, the country's latest show of military force amid a standoff with the West over its disputed nuclear program.

State TV broadcast footage of deep underground silos, claiming that medium- and long-range missiles stored in them are ready to launch in case of an attack on Iran. The silos are widely viewed as a strategic asset for Iran in the event of a U.S. or Israeli attack on its nuclear facilities.

Col. Asghar Qelichkhani, a spokesman for the war games, said the silos "function as a swift-reaction unit."

"Missiles, which are permanently in the vertical position, are ready to hit the pre-determined targets," he was quoted as saying by state TV.

An officer in Iran's powerful Revolutionary Guard, which is in charge of the missile program, said Tehran has constructed "numerous" underground missile silos which satellites can't detect. He did not elaborate.

The state television report broadcast footage of underground launching pads for the Shahab-3 missile, which have a range of more than 1,240 miles (2,000 kilometers)_ putting Israel, U.S. bases in the Gulf region and parts of southeastern and eastern Europe within reach.

The report also showed pictures of missiles being fired from one silo after a large metal roof opened to allow the missile to launch. The TV report said the missile silos are linked to a missile control center.

The commander of the Guard's Aerospace Force, Amir Ali Hajizadeh, touted the silos as a crucial asset in its standoff with the West, saying that with "these facilities we are certain that we can confront unequal enemies and defend the Islamic Republic of Iran."

Another unidentified Guards officer told state TV that "only few countries in the world possess the technology to construct underground missile silos. The technology required for that is no less complicated than building the missile itself."

Dear Leader lends a hand:

Israel, which views Iran's as an existential threat, has accused Tehran of receiving assistance from North Korea in building underground missile sites.

But Col. Qelichkhani said the silos are based on local technology developed by Iranian experts.

Of course they are. It would be embarrassing to need help on the Shi'ite Bomb and delivery system from an ally so knee-deep in shirk as the Kim-worshiping DPRK.

The Iranian war games, which began Monday, are dubbed "The Great Prophet Six" and include tests of long-range missiles such as the Sajjil, which boasts a range similar to that of the Shahab-3 missile....

Empty sabre-rattling? Possibly. But one will recall that the failed Times Square bomber, Faisal Shahzad, had links with Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan. "Taliban issues chilling threats against TEN targets in UK, U.S. and France to avenge bin Laden," from the Daily Mail, June 27:

The Taliban has issued a chilling threat to carry out a series of attacks against 10 targets in Britain, American and France to avenge the death of Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

'Soon you will see attacks against America and Nato countries, and our first priorities in Europe will be France and Britain,' deputy Pakistani Taliban leader Wali-ur-Rehman said in a videotape aired on Al Arabiya over the weekend.

The Tehrik-e-Taliban (TTP), or Taliban Movement of Pakistan, which swears allegiance to Afghan Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar, is blamed for many of the suicide bombings across the country and remains highly dangerous despite a series of army offensives against its strongholds in the north-west of the country, on the Afghan border.

It has not demonstrated an ability to stage sophisticated attacks in the West, however, and the TTP's one apparent bid to inflict carnage in the U.S. failed.

The group claimed responsibility for the botched car bomb attack in New York's Times Square last year.

But American intelligence agencies take it seriously. It was later added to the country's list of foreign terrorist organisations.

The video showed Rehman, described as more sober and experienced than other TTP leaders, flanked by armed followers walking through rough mountain terrain.

One would hope he's sober. Beer is haram.

The natural environment for a Muslima

The real question is, Why would a Muslima want to work at Abercrombie & Fitch in the first place? Wouldn't she find the clothing line, the advertising, and the whole atmosphere objectionable on moral grounds? Shouldn't she prefer to shun such an environment rather than want to work there at all, especially if she is pious and observant enough to want to wear the hijab? Unless, of course, the real point of her getting hired in the first place was to compel an American business to change its practices in order to accommodate Islamic norms, and thereby to assert once again that Islam must dominate and not be dominated. Stealth Jihad Update from San Francisco: "Abercrombie & Fitch sued over hijab firing," by Vivian Ho for the San Francisco Chronicle, June 28 (thanks to all who sent this in):

SAN MATEO -- A Bay Area Muslim woman sued Abercrombie & Fitch on Monday, claiming that the clothing retailer fired her when she refused to remove her religious headscarf while working at a San Mateo store.

Hani Khan, 20, sued after the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission determined that the chain had wrongfully fired her. Settlement talks failed to resolve the dispute.

Khan was fired in 2010 from Abercrombie's Hollister Co. store in the Hillsdale Mall in San Mateo for refusing to remove her hijab, or headscarf, according to the suit her attorneys filed in federal court in San Francisco.

Khan said that when she was hired in October 2009, store managers told her that her hijab would not be in conflict with Abercrombie's "look policy," as long as she wore it in company colors.

Abercrombie requires that employees dress in natural, "beachy" clothes such as jeans, flip-flops and a T-shirt, Khan said.

Then in February 2010, a week after a district manager visited the store, a company official told Khan to stop wearing the hijab, her suit says. She refused and was suspended, and a week later was fired. [...]

In a news conference Monday, Khan - wearing a bright purple hijab - said the experience with Abercrombie "shook my confidence. I didn't have that problem before."

Khan began wearing a hijab when she was in kindergarten and said she never had a problem while growing up in Foster City.

"After 9/11, all my neighbors, all my classmates, all my teachers - they supported me," Khan said. "No one had an issue then. For there to be an issue now, it was just completely out of the ordinary."

Khan's suit seeks to force Abercrombie to change its dress code to loosen restrictions on religious clothing. She is not trying to get her job back but is seeking back wages and unspecified damages.

Khan's lawsuit is not the first of its kind against the company. Two other former employees have filed suits, claiming that Abercrombie discriminated against them because of their hijabs.

"Abercrombie prides itself on requiring what it calls 'a natural, classic American style,' " said Araceli Martinez-Olguin, an attorney with the Legal Aid Society-Employment Law Center, which is representing Khan. "But there is nothing American about discriminating against someone because of their religion."

Yes. It seems tolerant to force Abercrombie & Fitch to change its dress code. It seems open-minded. In fact, it is accommodating an ideology that is radically intolerant, and when in power has never granted similar accommodation to those outside it.

It is a standard practice in the Western mainstream media to cast Muslim aggression against Christian minorities in the catchy, alliterative mold of reciprocal "sectarian strife." All the more so with Iran's own PressTV here.

PressTV and the deputy prime minister also know the value of a conspiracy theory, however old and tired it is. The first handy thing about conspiracy theories is that they don't have to make sense. The theory is its own explanation: there's a conspiracy. The second is that it enables deflection of responsibility. As long as the problem is something "they" are doing, who ever "they" are (usually Zionists and Americans), the solution to the problem is not reform, introspection, or heaven forbid, admitting faults or defects. One can simply rage against "them."

"Egypt blames US, Israel for sect strife," from PressTV, June 27 (thanks to Weasel Zippers):

Egyptian Deputy Prime Minister Yehiya al-Gamal has blamed the United States and Israel for being engaged in efforts to incite a religious strife to weaken the African country.

“The US and Israel are behind the religious sedition in Egypt [as] they realize this is the only way to break up the country,” said al-Gamal in televised remarks, quoted in a report by MENA news agency.

"Israel is trying to do this because Egypt is the most important power in the region," he emphasized.

Egypt is entangled with sectarian strife in the country following a historic revolution that toppled former President Hosni Mubarak.

Sectarian clashes between Coptic Christians and Saudi-inspired radical Salafists in the capital Cairo claimed 12 lives and injured 100 more in March.....

From one Facebook group set up in response: "Spread the message, we have to cut the tongues of those who defame our faith."

Sawiris apparently didn't get the Khomeini Memo: "There are no jokes in Islam. There is no humor in Islam. There is no fun in Islam." Therefore, never mind all the other more pressing issues going on in Egypt here of late. This is an outrage. "Egypt's business mogul Sawiris under fire for Islamic cartoons," from Al-Ahram, June 27 (thanks to all who sent this in):

Islamic lawyer Mamdouh Ismael and 14 lawyers submitted a complaint to the general prosecutor's office against Naguib Sawiris after he posted a cartoon of popular cartoon characters Mickey Mouse with an Islamic beard and dressed in a Jilbab and Minnie Mouse wearing a full Muslim veil on twitter. The post was accompanied with the comment: “Mickey and Minnie after”

Ismael said that the images were defamatory and ridiculed the Islamic faith. However, Ismael stressed that he is not going after Sawiris because he is a Copt.

Ahmed Mahmoud Kareema, Professor of Islamic Shariaa at Al-Azhar University, said that insulting religion is criminalized by the Islamic faith and Sawiris would not like it if the tables were turned and people mocked the clothes worn by Christian clerics, and, furthermore, had he mocked the clothes of Jewish rabbis, he would have been accused of being an anti-Semitic.

Following the incident, Sawiris who was attacked on social networking sites, insisted that he meant no harm and simply thought the images were funny. However, “Boycott Sawiris,” groups were launched on both Twitter and Facebook. The Facebook group titled, “We were also joking Sawiris,” urged people to boycott his products saying that “if you are really a Muslim, boycott his (Sawiris) products if you love your faith. Spread the message, we have to cut the tongues of those who defame our faith.”

After being repeatedly attacked for posting the photo, on June 24, Sawiris wrote on twitter, “I apologize for any who don’t take this as a joke, I just thought it was a funny picture, no disrespect meant! Assef (sorry).” The next day, he repeated the apology on Twitter, saying “I at least apologized as I had no intention to mock any religion.”

Sawiris is the founder of the liberal Free Egyptians Party, which was established after the 25 January revolution.

A small version of the cartoon can be seen here.

CAIR-California distributed this poster

The New York chapter of the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) presented a "'Know Your Rights' workshop" featuring Islamic supremacist lawyer Lamis Deek last Thursday in Brooklyn. Along with Hamas-linked CAIR, Brooklyn's Community Board 5 and Officer Marcus Johnson of the 75th Precinct were involved in the event -- and a SIOA operative was there. Our operative reports that Deek told the assembled Muslims not to offer the full, open and honest cooperation with police that Islamic supremacist groups in the U.S. always claim to give, but instead to repeat "Am I free to leave?" as the answer to every question and request.

[...] Deek didn't waste anytime in disrespecting Officer Johnson, who was just a few seats away from her. She went right into a tirade against the police and the FBI, complaining that Muslims were being targeted and entrapped. She was clearly trying to make the authority figures who risk their lives to prevent Islamic terrorism into the bad guys. She kept pointing out to the audience how scary it was to have the police knock at your door, as if it were a 9-point earthquake taking place! Office Johnson just said quietly, while listening intently. Deek's tone got so bad that it prompted a Community Board 5 representative, Manuel Burgos, to raise his hand in the middle of her speech. She tried to put him off until the Q & A, but he would not have it! He explained to her who he was and strongly said he "didn't like the tone" that was taking place. Burgos said that the Community Board and the local precinct work hand in hand together. Deek was silenced; she looked at her cronies next to her, who didn't know what to say either! In the end Burgos’s statement backfired, however, because Deek quickly softened her message by continually saying "with all due respect" to Officer Johnson when she spoke about the police. Meanwhile, during the speech, the Hamas-tied CAIR "police" went around taking pictures of the audience. A CAIR member went from corner to corner of the room taking pictures of the audience. I know he was a CAIR member because he had a badge on. Maybe they hoped we wouldn't notice.

The three main points the Deek-led conference made in regards to the police were the following:

1. If the police stop you, say nothing except "am I free to leave"?
2. If the police ask for your ID, say nothing except for "am I free to leave"?
3. Muslims are the victims. (How they love to play the victim card.)

Pamela Geller has the full report here.

Maybe this is why the TSA was so suspicious of Jean Weber. "Suicide bomber in wheelchair kills two in Iraq," from AFP, June 26 (thanks to Zulu):

BAGHDAD: A suicide bomber in a wheelchair attacked a police station north of Baghdad on Sunday, killing two people and wounding 17, nine of them policemen, officials said.

“A suicide bomber detonated his explosives vest at the entrance to a police station, killing two civilians and wounding 17 people, including nine policemen in Tarmiyah,” a town north of Baghdad, an interior ministry official said. A defence ministry official confirmed the report.

“The suicide bomber came up to the entrance in a wheelchair,” said Colonel Tawfiq Ahmed al-Jenabi, chief of the town’s police, who added he did not know if the attacker was genuinely handicapped....

New York Times' ridiculous lie: "Immigrant crime not visible in statistics"
by Nicolai Sennels

Denmark has decided to reinstitute national border control. With the euro losing credibility on the world market and the present Danish attack on the freedom of movement within the European Union, the two legs that the EU is standing on are both on their knees. The EU has put Germany in charge of threatening and bullying Denmark to drop its plans. The media is also doing its part to keep the Danes from protecting themselves from illegal immigrants, multiculturalism, weapons, drugs and organised crime. The International Herald Tribune and the New York Times lie through their teeth when they claim that official statistics do not support the claim that immigrants are a cause of rising crime rates:

"Many of her supporters (Pia Kjærsgaard, leader of Danish Peoples Party who introduced the idea of reinstalling border control) are like Rene Schultz, a 42-year-old furniture mover from Ishoj who is wistful for simpler times and blames immigrants for a rise in crime, though official statistics do not support this claim."

This is ridiculous, and so easy to disprove that it is hardly worth the work to do so. Here is a bit of the overwhelming amount of evidence:

Here is the official top-10 from the Danish State's Bureau of Statistics on criminals' national background in Denmark (and yes, it is adjusted for socioeconomic factors -- income and education):

1: Lebanon

2: Yugoslavia

3: Pakistan

4: Morocco

5: Turkey

6: Somalia

7: Iran

8: Iraq

9: Denmark

10: Vietnam

Seven out of ten inmates in Danish youth prisons have an immigrant background, and in the prisons of Copenhagen 45 percent of inmates do not have Danish citizenship. By the way: If you want to know which religion these prisoners adhere to, I suggest you take a close look at the above top-10.

Nicolai Sennels is a psychologist and author who writes from Denmark.

I tried to tell you. "Arab spring could become an Islamist winter," by Prem Shankar Jha in Tehelka, June 26:

[...] But what is most important is that there is an abundance of evidence that while the Assad regime is authoritarian and rife with cronyism, it is not unpopular. The Bush administration was the first to learn this. In January 2005, President George Bush withdrew the US ambassador from Damascus, imposed a number of unilateral sanctions and started a $5 million programme to activate opposition groups within Syria. But a year later, the US embassy was forced to report, in a cable posted by WikiLeaks this year, that it had found no “legitimate groups” within Syria that were prepared to take the money.

Undeterred, it shifted money to exile groups outside Syria. In 2007, the State Department gave $6.3 million through a series of dummy foundations to a London-based expatriate Syrian organisation called the Movement for Justice and Development (MJD). This, in turn, set up a TV station called Barada TV (after Damascus’ fabled river), which began beaming anti-Assad programmes to Syria in April 2009, and is now a principal source of ‘information’ on the current uprising.

What the Bush administration chose to overlook was that few of these exiles were externed democrats. According to a US embassy cable hacked by WikiLeaks, they were “moderate members of the Muslim Brotherhood”. To Indians, the wording should have a familiar ring, for it is identical to that used by the State Department to justify military aid to Pakistan.

The US continued to fund the MJD and Barada TV even after Barack Obama was elected and reversed Bush’s policy towards Syria. In all, it has spent an estimated $30 million on the project. This is the money and moral support that the Muslim Brotherhood uses in its attempt to stage a comeback in Syria.

IS THE uprising in Syria a Salafi plot? Or are the bearded Muslim men and hijab-covered women visible in the cell phone videos being aired by YouTube and other websites part of a much more broad-based protest against autocratic rule? A day-by-day analysis of the Syrian uprising suggests that while a demand for democratic reform is still embedded within the protests, it has been overwhelmed by a carefully programmed Islamist upsurge that is led by the Muslim Brotherhood, but almost certainly includes Salafi elements. Indeed their hand is visible in the uprising from its earliest sprouting.

First, Anas al-Abdeh, the head of the MJD, and many of its directors, are what a State Department cable called “liberal, moderate Islamists who are former members of the Muslim Brotherhood”. Second, Malik, the news director of Barada TV, is Anas’ brother and presumably also a sympathiser, if not supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood. Third, the administrator of the Facebook site, The Syrian Revolution 2011, which is the undisputed leader of the Internet campaign against Assad, is the head of the Swedish chapter of the Muslim Brotherhood.

With the onset of the Arab Spring at the end of January, it would have been surprising if these and other Islamists had not concluded that their moment had at last arrived. As in Egypt, the Islamists hid their agenda behind the veil of democracy. They felt that with five droughts in succession, rampant youth unemployment and a 100 percent rise in the price of wheat in the previous year, conditions in Syria were no different from those in Egypt. Therefore, they gave their first online call for a protest demonstration in Damascus before the Parliament building in mid-February.

The German site Politically Incorrect has an excellent commentary on the acquittal of Geert Wilders on Sharia-inspired "hate speech" charges: "A Historic Victory for Freedom!," by Frank Furter, translated by Anders Denken:

Dear PI Community,

We finally made it! The movement for Islam criticism is celebrating a great, and even historic, victory. Let’s thank those who dragged Geert Wilders into court. Those who were recruited primarily by various Muslim organizations were holding a gun to the heart of the Dutch judiciary. And the judges had to decide which values, which rights and which law was to apply in the Netherlands. Is it that law that is written down in the constitution of their land? Or that law that is gaining entry into the West with the influx of Muslims? They decided for Western law. Anything else would have been scandalous and would have forced the question of whether our Western ideas concerning law and order were only a collection of empty phrases.

The trial against Geert Wilders clearly brought to light just how greatly Western and Islamic values differ from each other. The supporters of multicultural society believe that all cultures lend themselves to combining into a flourishing society of diversity. On the surface, this seems to function where culture overflows in tradition and folklore. However, at the roots of a culture is more than just the question of what one should wear, eat and celebrate, and when, where and how. At their roots, cultures open up to the elementary questions of what one may do and not do, what is permitted and what is forbidden, what is right and what is wrong, what is good and what is evil.

And ultimately here is where Islam collides with the Western principle of free and basic democratic order. Indeed even parts of it are completely and diametrically opposed to this order. We, the readers and writers of the PI community have sufficient knowledge regarding this. The refusal of Islamic countries to recognize the human rights declaration formulated in the West already gives more than clear reference to all the facts that we never tire of stating again and again here: Islam is first and foremost a political ideology that is – as shown here today – irreconcilable with the values of our Western system of government. And it is this very ideology that stands in the way of integration with our free society by many Muslims. Islam stands on the principle of enslavement, strives for control, for uniformity, for society’s conformity to its own values and norms. Islamization is not just a rumor or invention by rightwing spin doctors, rather a menacing process of the worst kind to be fought against by anyone that holds the freedom of future generations near to their heart.

Wilders was accused because he said and did things that were completely normal according to the consensus of values in the Western world. He criticized Islam, perhaps even coarsely as is currently indicated in various media. But that is the perfect right of any single individual in the realm of our culture to do so!

We are allowed to criticize democracy, socialism, communism and national socialism anyway. We can even criticize Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Atheism and even Judaism, in spite of all the historic crimes of the Germans against the Jewish people. Why then should criticizing Islam be forbidden?...

Read it all.

The TSA: protecting us from 95-year-old wheelchair-bound leukemia sufferers. But hey -- at least they're not profiling Muslims, and that's all that matters!

"Elderly woman asked to remove adult diaper during TSA search," by Lauren Sage Reinlie for NWF Daily News, June 25 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

A woman has filed a complaint with federal authorities over how her elderly mother was treated at Northwest Florida Regional Airport last weekend.

Jean Weber of Destin filed a complaint with the Department of Homeland Security after her 95-year-old mother was detained and extensively searched last Saturday while trying to board a plane to fly to Michigan to be with family members during the final stages of her battle with leukemia.

Her mother, who was in a wheelchair, was asked to remove an adult diaper in order to complete a pat-down search.

“It’s something I couldn’t imagine happening on American soil,” Weber said Friday. “Here is my mother, 95 years old, 105 pounds, barely able to stand, and then this.”

Sari Koshetz, a spokeswoman for the Transportation Security Administration in Miami, said she could not comment on specific cases to protect the privacy of those involved.

“The TSA works with passengers to resolve any security alarms in a respectful and sensitive manner,” she said.

Weber’s mother entered the airport’s security checkpoint in a wheelchair because she was not stable enough to walk through, Weber said.

Wheelchairs trigger certain protocols, including pat-downs and possible swabbing for explosives, Koshetz said.

“During any part of the process, if there is an alarm, then we have to resolve that alarm,” she said.

Weber said she did not know whether her mother had triggered an alarm during the 45 minutes they were detained.

She said her mother was first pulled aside into a glass-partitioned area and patted down. Then she was taken to another room to protect her privacy during a more extensive search, Weber said.

Weber said she sat outside the room during the search.

She said security personnel then came out and told her they would need for her mother to remove her Depends diaper because it was soiled and was impeding their search.

Weber wheeled her mother into a bathroom, removed her diaper and returned. Her mother did not have another clean diaper with her, Weber said.

Weber said she wished there were less invasive search methods for an elderly person who is unable to walk through security gates.

“I don’t understand why they have to put them through that kind of procedure,” she said.

Koshetz said the procedures are the same for everyone to ensure national security.

“TSA cannot exempt any group from screening because we know from intelligence that there are terrorists out there that would then exploit that vulnerability,” she said....

How admirable: the lone sentinel, willing to take the heat to do what is necessary to protect us all. Except, of course, take into consideration in any way whatsoever the nature of the actual terrorist threat, the ideology behind it, and the likelihood that some groups are more likely to commit terrorist acts than others.

Weber said she plans to file additional complaints next week.

“I’m not one to make waves, but dadgummit, this is wrong. People need to know. Next time it could be you.”

That's fine. As long as it isn't Ibrahim Hooper or Ahmed Rehab or Nihad Awad or Reza Aslan, or Khalid Aldawsari, the would-be jihad mass murderer in Lubbock, Texas; or Muhammad Hussain, the would-be jihad bomber in Baltimore; or Mohamed Mohamud, the would-be jihad bomber in Portland; or Nidal Hasan, the Fort Hood jihad mass-murderer; or Faisal Shahzad, the would-be Times Square jihad mass-murderer; or Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, the Arkansas military recruiting station jihad murderer; or Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the would-be Christmas airplane jihad bomber; or any of their coreligionists who might want to launch a similar attack, then all is well.

Islamic supremacists give the film "Neither God nor master" a big thumbs down in their inimitable fashion. Sharia Alert from modern, moderate "Arab Spring" Tunisia: "Islamists attack Tunisia cinema over secular film," from AP, June 26 (thanks to JCB):

TUNIS, Tunisia (AP) — A gang of ultraconservative Islamists have attacked a movie theater in downtown Tunis because it was showing a film about secularism.

Note yet again that for AP, Islamic supremacists are "ultraconservative," and so likewise "ultraconservatives" are those in the West who dare to resist Islamic supremacist encroachment.

Around 100 bearded men shouting "God is great" smashed the windows of Cinema Afrique, where the movie "Neither God nor master" by France-based Tunisian director Nadia Feni was playing on Sunday.

An AP reporter saw eight of them forcing their way inside and attacking filmgoers, including prominent directors, before being apprehended by police.

Tunisia's former regime ruthlessly cracked down on political Islam. Since its downfall in popular protests, however, Islamists have become more active.

I tried to tell you.

Thierno Mbeugne claimed the Jehovah's Witnesses were handing out not only literature, but crosses. One small problem: one prominent teaching of the religion is that Jesus died hanging from a vertical, pole-like structure, and not a cross in its common understanding as a lowercase "t" shape.

So, what were the Jehovah's Witnesses handing out to Senegalese Muslims, then? Dowels? No, rather, this appears to be a lie expressly made up to incite the rampage, whether the imam got it on hearsay, or made it up himself. An update on this story. "Protesters burn church, destroy bar in Senegal," from the Associated Press, June 26 (thanks to Opinionated for the story, and flagging the cross claim):

Hundreds of Muslim protesters descended on a Jehovah's Witness temple and a bar in a conservative Muslim neighbourhood of the Senegalese capital, setting the buildings on fire.

It was a rare instance of religious extremism in this normally moderate Islamic republic.

Thierno Mbeugne, spokesman for the local imam association, said the head imam in the conservative Yoff district of Dakar had asked the youth to march on Sunday against what they considered as "acts of aggression against their faith".

Copy of The Watchtower = "act of aggression."

They were targeting the temple because they claim its members were proselytising, and the bar because it was selling alcohol.

He said the Islamic religious leaders did not endorse the violence, "but they do think that the youth were right" to destroy the church and the bar.

One of the rioters Mame Faye, 24, explained that the mob set upon the temple while churchgoers were praying inside before setting upon the bar.

Other witnesses, however, said that the hundreds of protesters burst into the establishment and began drinking the cans of beer. They then stripped the building, making off with the refrigerator, the air conditioners and the furniture. Then they set it on fire.

A doctor who spoke on the condition of anonymity said his clinic had treated 37 people, including several wounded police officers. One had a stab wound. The police used tear gas to disperse the crowd.

Mbeugne claimed that the head of the temple had been actively trying to convert locals. He said that under the cover of teaching English, she had started handing out crosses and Jehovah's Witness literature.

The more things change in the new, post-revolutionary Egypt, the more they stay the same. As Coptic Pope Shenouda III warned in 1976: "There is a practice to convert Coptic girls to embrace Islam and marry them under terror to Muslim husbands."

Here is another case in the recent surge in disappearances of Christian girls. "Tensions Rise in Egypt Over Two Missing Christian Girls," by Mary Abdelmassih for the Assyrian International News Agency, June 26:

(AINA) -- Tension is escalating over the case of 14-year-old Nancy Magdy Fathy, and her 16-year old cousin Christine Ezzat Fathy, who have disappeared and allegedly converted to Islam. Many parties are being pulled into the row over their future, including Al Azhar, the Church, activists and lately Islamist organizations, which are threatening violence against church.

The story of the missing girls became public after they disappeared while on their way to church on Sunday June 12. A the two day sit-in staged by Copts in front of the Minya Security Headquarters, demanding Nancy and Christine's return, focused attention on their story. Rumors in the media emerged as to their whereabouts, the identity of the perpetrators and whether the girls were actually traded to another Muslims gang.

Nearly two weeks after they disappeared, Nancy and Christine were found in Cairo wearing Burkas. They were incidentally stopped in the street by a police officer when he noticed that one of them had a cross tattooed on her wrist, as many Copts have. The girls told the policeman they converted to Islam and did not marry any Muslims sheikh as the newspapers said, but fearing the wrath of their parents, they sought shelter at the home of a Muslim man. He issued a report of the incident and let them go.

Forced converts have been told before that their parents or families hate them, have rejected them, or will hurt or kill them if they come back -- the same thing happened to Saba and Aneela Masih of Pakistan. It is a revealing projection of Islam's death penalty for apostasy.

Nancy and Christine subsequently surrendered at a Cairo police station.

An investigation into their disappearance was launched, as their parents accused two Muslim brothers from a neighboring village of abducting them. They were also asked about the video clip which appeared on the Internet, taken in Tahrir Square, where Nancy and Christine allegedly converted to Islam.

According to the investigators, the Christian minors said they converted to Islam of their own free will, and refused to return to their families, and even applied for protection from them. The prosecution decided to put them in a state care home and provide protection for them, until the completion of the investigation. Authorities also wanted an Al-Azhar scholar to determine if they really believe in Islam.

This has angered their families, who said their girls are minors and should not be subjected to such procedures. Both families and the Egyptian Federation of Human Rights Organization protested on Saturday, June 25 in front of the office of the prosecutor general, and demanded for their children to be returned to them.

Al Azhar and the Fatwa (religious edict) Committee denied that the two Coptic teenagers had converted to Islam, because they are still minors and have not yet reached 18 years of age, as is required by law. [...]

Nonetheless, the jihadists have their next pretext for violence:

The Egyptian daily newspaper ElYoum7 published a statement from the Islamist "Alliance for the support of New Muslim Women," in which the group threatened to carry out "extended protests" in all governorates in Egypt if Nancy and Christine are returned to the church. The Alliance emphasized in its statement the protests this time will escalate violently: "We will not retreat this time, until each captive is free and out of the monasteries in which they are held as prisoners." The statement also said "We say it openly, that we will not go back again to the era when newly converted Muslim women were delivered to the church, which wants to tempt them away from their religion, or forcibly detain them in reprisal for choosing freely their faith."

In the past the Alliance had staged over 20 demonstrations every Friday in support of Kamilia Shehata, the priest's wife whom they claim converted to Islam but was held captive by the church, despite of Al Azhar confirming that she never set foot there and her appearance twice in public to refute all their claims of her conversion...

He didn't say, "absolutely not." He didn't even say, "thanks, but no thanks." He thanked them and asked that Allah watch over them. " Cleric thanks followers for pledging to attack U.S. military in Iraq," by Chelsea J. Carter for CNN, June 26:

(CNN) -- Radical anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr thanked followers who offered to launch attacks against the U.S. military in Iraq should he reinstate his notorious Mehdi Army militia, according to a posting on his website.

The exchange between a follower and al-Sadr on his website comes as Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki is talking with members of his government about the possibility of requesting American troops to stay in Iraq beyond a year-end deadline to withdraw.

Al-Sadr vowed earlier this year to "escalate armed resistance" if the U.S. military does not pull its troops as scheduled, a move that could destabilize the country should the Mehdi Army repeat the bloody battles it waged against American and Iraqi forces during the height of violence.

"We intended to be martyred, if you intend to lift the freeze of Imam al-Mehdi Army to defend Islam, doctrine and Iraq. Our martyrdom will be restricted only on activities against the infidel occupier without harming the civilians or any public proprieties," an unidentified follower posted on the website on Friday.

Al-Sadr responded: "Thank you dears... May God preserve you and watch over you."

A U.S. military spokesman on Sunday told CNN that, "Muqtada al-Sadr's statement speaks sufficiently for itself about his attitude toward the use of violence as an alternative to democratic processes."

"It's the same attitude that has caused so much violence for the Iraqi people in the past," Col. Barry Johnson said. "We are not inclined to characterize it further at this point."...

The repeat offenses make it more difficult to claim he didn't really mean it. "Man accused of raising funds for terrorism," from BBCNews, June 26:

A man has been charged with raising funds for terrorism on three separate occasions last year.

Shabaaz Hussain, 27, from east London, is accused of providing money or property for terrorism purposes on 12 April, 6 July and 3 September 2010.

He is also accused of playing a part in preparing for acts of terrorism - not thought to be against the UK - between 1 January 2009 and 22 October 2010.

Mr Hussain will appear at Westminster Magistrates' Court on Monday.

He is facing five charges under the Terrorism Act 2000 and 2006.

The fifth charge made against Mr Hussain is making funding arrangements for the purposes of terrorism between 1 January 2009 and 22 October last year.

Sudanese president Omar al-Bashir, already wanted by the International Criminal Court for genocide, has stated his intentions to impose Sharia law and a campaign of cultural and linguistic Arabization on what remains of his country following the independence of South Sudan, which will be official on July 9. Bishop Elnail recognizes what is coming for what it is: "a war of domination and eradication."

"Bishop fears genocide in Sudan," by Karen Peake for Christian Today, June 22 (thanks to Zulu):

The Bishop of Kadugli is calling upon Christians worldwide to pray and fast ahead of South Sudan’s secession next month.

Bishop Andudu Adam Elnail has warned of a possible “genocide” in the Nuba Mountains region, where violence has broken out in recent weeks.

The region, home to many Christians, will remain under the control of Khartoum and the Muslim North when South Sudan gains its independence on July 9.

As Sudanese tanks and artillery move in, hundreds of thousands of Nuba are fleeing their homes and development agencies have withdrawn their staff.

UN officials and eyewitnesses escaping the bloodshed tell of elders being executed by the Sudanese Army and bombing campaigns that have destroyed churches and homes.

With Khartoum ordering the UN peacekeeping mission out, there are serious concerns that atrocities will spiral unchecked across the state of South Kordofan.

“Once again we are facing the nightmare of genocide of our people in a final attempt to erase our culture and society from the face of the earth,” said Bishop Elnail.

“It is not a war between armies that is being fought in our land, but the utter destruction of our way of life and our history, as demonstrated by the genocide of our neighbours and relatives in Darfur.

“This is a war of domination and eradication, at its core it is a war of terror by the government of Sudan against their people.”

He expressed concern for the future of Christians in the North, which President Omar al-Bashir declared will be ruled by Sharia law after July 9.

The bishop said that President al-Bashir’s refusal to recognise the legitimate presence of the Christian minority in the North was a “declaration of their determination to also end the remembrance of our Christian heritage that dates back two thousand years”...

In Khartoum, that would be known as jahiliyyah, trappings of the pre-Islamic period of "ignorance."

Boko Haram targets un-Islamic practices and institutions. They just attacked a beer garden in Maiduguri about two weeks ago, but only killed four that time. The group again lives up to the Ayatollah Khomeini's pronouncement 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."

And Boko Haram seems to share Khomeini's mentality from this quotation as well:

“If one permits an infidel to continue in his role as a corrupter of the earth, his moral suffering will be all the worse. If one kills the infidel, and this stops him from perpetrating his misdeeds, his death will be a blessing to him.”

And so over two dozen dead bodies are ever so preferable to the intolerable specter of people enjoying themselves on a hot summer Sunday evening. "Deadly bombing in north Nigeria," from BBC News, June 26:

A bomb attack in the north-eastern Nigerian town of Maiduguri has killed at least 25 people and wounded many more, officials say.

They say they believe the attack, which occurred in a beer garden, was carried out by the Islamic sect Boko Haram.

The group believes Muslims should withdraw from Western society.

It has claimed a number of bombings in north-eastern Nigeria, as well as an attack on police headquarters in the capital Abuja earlier this month.

Two men on motorcycles attacked a packed beer garden late on Sunday, officials said.

"The attackers believed to be Boko Haram members threw bombs and fired indiscriminate gunshots," a police officer told AFP news agency.

Senegal has long had a reputation for religious tolerance. Then again, so has Indonesia, demonstrating that no Muslim-majority country is invulnerable to the resurgence of intolerance, deceit, and eventual violence that accompanies a resurgence of interest in Sharia law (see also: Aceh).

Further illustrating the potential erosion of the vaunted tolerance of Senegal, the association of local imams said the head imam had asked the youth to "march" for some reason not named below, and that they "did not endorse the destruction, 'but they do think that the youth had reason'." Such indifference to violence against unbelievers is endemic in other purportedly "moderate" nations, even among those not taking up arms themselves, and it enables those who do.

"Hundreds of Muslim youth in Senegal burn a church, destroy bar in capital neighbourhood," from the Associated Press, June 26 (thanks to Ima Freeman):

DAKAR, Senegal - Witnesses say hundreds of Muslim youths burned a church in a neighbourhood on the northern part of the capital.

Mama Faye, 24, says she and hundreds of others on Sunday went to a Jehovah's Witness church on the fringes of their Yoff neighbourhood and interrupted a sermon with rioting. She says after churchgoers left they burned the church. She says they also destroyed a nearby bar.

Faye says riot police arrived and started clashing with the rioters on the streets.

A doctor at a local hospital said at least 37 people were injured in the clashes. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he is not permitted to speak to press.

Theirno Mbeugne, spokesman for a local imam association, said the head imam had asked the youth to march. He said the imams did not endorse the destruction, "but they do think that the youth had reason."

Abu Khalid Abdul-Latif was arrested for a jihad plot against a Seattle military recruiting station. His niqabbed first wife says he was a pious Muslim who prayed five times a day.

If the mainstream media had any interest in anything resembling actual journalism, there would be stories all over about why jihad terror plotters are always observant and knowledgeable Muslims. Instead of the inevitable handwringing over a non-existent "backlash," journalists should be challenging the leaders of the local mosque where Abdul-Latif's wife says he met fellow jihad mass-murder plotter Walli Mujahidh, asking them what exactly is being taught there.

The interview with Abdul-Latif's wife starts three minutes into the clip, after the segment with Peter King.

Video thanks to Peter.

It appears the two exploding lovebirds in this story, who went into the police station under the pretense of filing a report ("war is deceit," Muhammad said) were but the leading edge of a broader attack including men disguised in burqas who were "prepared for days of siege and hostage-taking" to obtain the release of jihadists held in the prison there.

This time, they failed. "Burqa-clad Taliban kill 10 police in Pakistan siege," from Agence France-Presse, June 26 (thanks to Zulu):

PESHAWAR: At least 10 policemen were killed Saturday when Taliban militants in suicide vests, some of them clad in burqas, laid siege to a police station in northwest Pakistan, officials said.

“Police have taken the control of the police station and 10 of our policemen were martyred in the attack and six attackers were killed,” Mian Iftikhar Hussain, information minister of northwestern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, told AFP.

Militants armed with guns and hand grenades had attacked Kolachi police station near the border with South Waziristan tribal district and taken a group of policemen hostage. Hussain said the burqa-clad attackers had hoped to secure the release of other militants.

“The attackers had come prepared for days of siege and hostage-taking to secure the release of other militants,” Hussain told AFP.

“When our armoured car entered the police station two suicide bombers blew themselves up and a third suicide bomber was killed by a rocket,” Hussain said.

“Police have found the bodies of three militants and the heads of three suicide bombers,” Hussain said, adding that half of the police station building had been destroyed and 11 policemen wounded.

Regional police chief Imtiaz Shah told AFP there was one woman among the suicide bombers. Shah said the siege began when attackers dressed in burqas pulled out guns at the station’s main gate and killed policemen deployed there.

The militants then damaged the boundary wall with hand grenades, enabling more rebels to follow them into the building.

About 17 policemen were on duty at the time and were taken hostage by the militants once they ran out of ammunition, the police chief said.

As security forces were called to the scene and cordoned off the police station, two of the attackers detonated their suicide vests, while three others were shot dead by security forces, Shah said.

District police chief Mohammad Hussain Khan said it was likely the attackers had come from the nearby lawless tribal belt.

Television footage showed thick black smoke billowing from the roof of the fortress-like police station and security forces and police firing at militants.

Taliban spokesman Ehsanullah Ehsan in a telephone call to AFP claimed responsibility, saying it was the latest in a series of attacks to avenge the killing of Al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden.

“We sent one male and one female suicide bomber to participate in the attack, because we want to liberate our people from the slavery of America,” Ehsan said....

The world breathed a sigh of relief that Pakistani jihadists had failed in their attempt to use nine-year-old Sohana Jawed to carry a bomb in an attack that would have killed her. Now, Afghan jihadists tried, and this time, it worked. Perhaps this was a copycat attack; in any event, Sohana's case is no longer an anomaly, but part of the jihadist playbook in the region.

Where is the outrage? As with yesterday's hospital bombing -- which reportedly hit a maternity ward the hardest -- all of Afghanistan, and indeed all of the Muslim world ought to be furious. If there ever were a time for righteous indignation, this would be it. But if protests over the Muhammad cartoons and the Florida Qur'an burning have shown us the ferocity of anger that something said to be "against Islam" can provoke, the relative silence in the face of these acts is deafening.

"Afghanistan: Eight-year-old girl 'used in attack'," from BBC News, June 26:

An eight-year-old girl has been killed after insurgents used her in a bomb attack on police in southern Afghanistan, the government has said.

The interior ministry said insurgents gave the girl a package and told her to take it to a police vehicle, detonating it as she approached.

No-one else was killed in the explosion, in Uruzgan province.

The incident came a day after an attack on a hospital which killed at least 38 people in the east of the country.

Dozens were injured. Elderly people, pregnant women and children were said to be among the casualties.

'No respect'

A statement by the ministry described the Uruzgan incident as a "crime and a shameful act".

The area where the alleged incident happened is very remote, and it was not possible to independently verify the reports.

"The child, pure-hearted and in good faith, took the bag and moved towards the police vehicle," it said.

"As she got close to the police vehicle, the enemy detonated the bomb by remote control, killing the innocent child."

The governor of Char Cheno district, where the attack took place, told the BBC the girl was from the nearest village.

She was told nothing would happen to her, he said, adding that the perpetrators had "no boundary, no respect for anything".

Correspondents say insurgents have recruited both adult women and recently male children to carry out suicide attacks, though the Taliban denies recruiting children.

If they had changed their minds, it would've been a Taliban couples' retreat. "Pakistan Taliban use husband, wife suicide bombers," by Ishtiaq Mahsud for the Associated Press, June 26 (thanks to JCB):

DERA ISMAIL KHAN, Pakistan – The Pakistani Taliban said Sunday the group had sent a husband and wife suicide squad to carry out an attack on a police station in northwestern Pakistan that killed 10 people, a rare instance of militants using a woman as a bomber.

The pair entered the police station in Kolachi on Saturday and said they were there to lodge a complaint, said Imtiaz Shah, a senior police official. Once inside, the two attacked with grenades and machine guns, triggering a five-hour standoff with police.

Both attackers, including the woman wearing an all-covering robe known as a burqa, eventually blew themselves up. They killed eight police officers and two civilians, said Mohammad Hussain, another police official.

"This shows how much we hate Pakistani security institutions," Pakistani Taliban spokesman Ahsanullah Ahsan told The Associated Press by telephone from an undisclosed location.

Ahsan claimed it was the first time the militant group had used a female suicide bomber.

However, Pakistani officials said a female suicide bomber wearing a burqa attacked a World Food Program food distribution center in northwestern Pakistan late last year, killing 45 people.

Perhaps that wound up being bad for business, and something they'd rather not remind people of.

The Pakistani Taliban claimed responsibility for that attack in Khar, the main city in the Bajur tribal area, but never claimed it was carried out by a female bomber. Still, that was believed to be the group's first attack by a female suicide bomber.

Male suicide bombers often don the burqa as a disguise. In 2007, officials initially claimed Pakistan's first female suicide bomber had killed 14 people in the northwest town of Bannu. But the attacker was later identified as a man.

Islamic militants in Iraq have used female suicide bombers several times because women in their all-covering robes are seen as able to pass more easily through security. Male security officers are often hesitant to search women....

All it takes is a rumor to spark a rampage against non-Muslims. The police, for their part, got around to responding three hours after the burning and looting ended. "Egyptian Muslims Torch 8 Christian Homes on Rumor of Church Construction," by Mary Abdelmassih for the Assyrian International News Agency, June 26:

(AINA) -- A mob of nearly 200 Muslims torched eight Christian homes on Saturday morning in the Upper Egyptian village of Awlad Khalaf. The attack was initiated by a rumor that a house which is being built by Wahib Halim Attia will be turned into a church. Two Christians and one Muslim were injured, no fatalities were reported.

Wahib Halim Attia obtained a license to build a house in the village on a 95 square meter plot. The house grew to an area of 350 square meters but was still on agricultural land that he owns. This gave rise to the rumor that he intended to build a church instead.

Father Weesa Azmy, the priest at St. George Church in the neighboring village of Negou Madam East, said that someone went to the City Council in Dar es Salam and told them about the irregularities in the house construction, and Wahib was ordered to remove the excess by June 24. "Instead Wahib carried on with the construction, which angered the Muslims, who decided to play God and take the law into their own hands; they attacked the construction site and other Christian homes."

According to Father Weesa, Muslims broke into the home of Ihab Tamer, who defended himself with a rifle. A Muslim who was there to help Ihab was injured by a bullet in his leg from Tamer's rifle. The matter was explained and resolved with the family of that Muslim.

According to eyewitnesses the Muslims, mostly Salafists and some youngsters, looted and torched eight homes belonging to Wahib Halim Attia and his two brothers, his three cousins and two other Copts, including Ihab Tamer.

The police arrived three hours after the looting and torching had ended.

Father Weesa said Ihab Tamer, who was in hiding after the shooting incident, contacted him and he advised him to give himself up to the police as he was acting in self-defense. "If someone sees people breaking into his home, surely he has to defend his family and himself."

The police told father Weesa, who did not witness the incident himself, that most of the attackers were teenagers between the ages of 10 and 14 years old. This was refuted by eyewitnesses. However, he said "if it is true that there were children and teens, then definitely someone else has sent them." He added he will not attend any reconciliation meetings and the rule of law must be upheld, on the Copt if found guilty and the attackers. Most of the teens and children were arrested by the police but no adults were arrested.

Police and security are now present in Awlad Khalaf village and the 30 Christian homes are being guarded, the Security Chief said tonight on the Egyptian State TV.

Completing the farce that this summit in Tehran has been. "Iranian president questions Holocaust, 9/11," by Dudi Cohen for YNet News, June 25:

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad questioned the September 11 terror attacks and compared them to the Holocaust on Saturday.

Speaking at an international conference on terrorism in Tehran, Ahmadinejad said: "If the black box of the 9/11 incident and Holocaust were opened, then some of the truth would be exposed, but the United States does not allow this."

He further added: "There are those who believe that the goal of 9/11 was to revive the Zionist regime, reinforce stability in the region, divert US public opinion from the poor economic state. In terms of reference and benefits, 9/11 is very similar to the Holocaust."

Among the participants in the conference were Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir who has been accused of war crimes and genocide in Darfur, and leaders of Pakistan, Afghanistan and Tajikistan.

Foxes hold a conference for henhouse-guarding enthusiasts:

Iran claims more than 60 countries were represented in the conference including UN envoys. Earlier this month, the Islamic Republic convened an international convention on nuclear disarmament....

You can't make this stuff up.

Ayatollah Pot, I believe you've met Ayatollah Kettle. This summit in Tehran has done a fine job of demonstrating yet again how uselessly vague the term "terrorism" is. It is the name of a tactic anyone can accuse anyone of using -- not so with jihad. And so it plays directly into the hands of Khamenei and kindred spirits to leave the discussion of jihad off the table.

Note also who takes the podium at this "counter-terrorism" conference: Sudanese president Omar al-Bashir, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court for genocide. That about says it all.

"Iran slams U.S. at conference on fighting terrorism," by Ramin Mostaghim and Alexandra Sandels for the Los Angeles Times, June 26:

A battered Peugeot sedan greeted visitors Saturday to a conference hall in north Tehran.

"Professor Massoud Ali Mohammadi, martyred in front of his house," explained an accompanying poster. It was a reference to the mysterious assassination last year of the Iranian physicist, killed when a bomb exploded near his car in Tehran. Iranian authorities have blamed the West for the killing.

The Peugeot was the symbolic scene-setter for a two-day conference in the Iranian capital on fighting terrorism. According to the Iranian media, officials from more than 60 countries and several heads of state flew in for the talks — among them Sudanese President Omar Hassan Ahmed Bashir, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court on war crimes charges.

The event was heavy on U.S.-bashing, generally reflecting Tehran's views about Washington's policy in the region.

In a message to the conference, Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei lashed out at the U.S. for drone strikes in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The attacks, he said, have "repeatedly" turned "wedding parties into mourning ceremonies." He echoed the official Iranian line that the U.S. and its allies are hypocrites, employing terrorist tactics that kill civilians while condemning others as terrorists.

"The United States, Britain and some Western governments, with a black record in terrorist behavior, have now added to their rhetoric the claim of fighting terrorism," Khamenei was quoted as saying by the semiofficial Fars News Agency. [...]

Sudanese President Bashir made a quick appearance at the podium, slamming Israel and the United States for "supporting terrorism," before jetting off on a trip to China, according to a journalist in his entourage.

Imagine if the shoe were on the other foot. A story like this could create an international incident. Instead, only a few Jewish and Israeli news organizations have picked up this report thus far. "Jewish graves vandalized at Mount of Olives," from the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, June 22 (thanks to Dumbledoresarmy):

JERUSALEM (JTA) -- More than a dozen graves at the Mount of Olives cemetery in Jerusalem were vandalized, the latest in a series of attacks on one of Judaism's oldest cemeteries.

On June 14, some 14 graves were damaged by Arab youths wielding sledgehammers, according to private security guards stationed at the iconic cemetery located in eastern Jerusalem. At least five of the damaged gravesites are those of Americans buried in the cemetery, according to Rabbi Moshe Bezalel Buzokovsky of the Chevra Kadisha.

The recent damage is in addition to vandalism sustained at the cemetery last month on Nakba Day, or Catastrophe Day, when Arabs mark the declaration of the state of Israel. During riots, Palestinians hurled large rocks and boulders toward the graves, chipping and breaking at least 15. Arab youths also vandalized or destroyed nearly 40 newly installed surveillance cameras in the cemetery, according to the International Committee for the Preservation of Har HaZeitim. Har HaZeitim is the Hebrew name for the Mount of Olives.

At the same time, local Arabs began illegally expanding a mosque to within 15 feet of the grave of Menachem Begin, according to the committee.

In the last year, efforts of the committee have resulted in the restoration of 2,000 of an estimated 40,000 graves that were destroyed prior to 1967 under Jordanian rule, an increased private security presence as well as the installation of 50 surveillance cameras and fluorescent lighting.

There are an estimated 150,000 graves on the Mount, where Jews have been buried since biblical times. Notable individuals buried there include the prophets Zechariah, Malachi and Hagai; famous modern rabbis such as Aryeh Kaplan and Ahron Soloveichik; Henrietta Szold, founder of Hadassah; Hazzan Yossele Rosenblatt; and British Parliament member Robert Maxwell.

Think of everything that has transpired in the past five years of your life. Through all of that, Gilad Schalit has been a captive of Hamas in Gaza. This openly criminal behavior by Hamas has been largely forgotten amid wishful thinking about including the group in the "peace process." It should serve to remind that Hamas is not a legitimate state entity, and has never behaved according to the standards befitting one. It should also serve to remind that Hamas' reason for existence remains the destruction of the nation whose soldier it has unlawfully imprisoned for half a decade.

"Israeli soldier marks 5th year in Hamas captivity," by Diaa Hadid for the Associated Press, June 25:

JERUSALEM (AP) — Gaza Strip militants vowed Saturday that an Israeli soldier captured five years ago would not "see the light" until Palestinian prisoners held by Israel were released.

In Israel, some 400 supporters of Sgt. Gilad Schalit gathered at the border crossing where he was seized by gunmen linked to Gaza's ruling Hamas movement on June 25, 2006.

They waved Israeli flags emblazoned with his likeness and demanded the government do more to secure his release. A relative read a letter from Schalit's grandfather faulting the state for failing to bring the 24-year-old home.

"The people involved talk to us from time to time, stroke our heads, but my beloved grandchild Gilad, through no fault of his own, is still rotting away in a Hamas dungeon like a common criminal," Zvi Schalit wrote.

In Jerusalem, Schalit's parents, his brother and his brother's girlfriend chained themselves to one another and to a railing on the side of a small road leading to the prime minister's residence.

"We are marking five years' anniversary of Gilad's captivity in the Hamas hands and we, as you can see, are also a family in captivity for five years," said Schalit's father, Noam Schalit.

Schalit, a tank crewman, was taken captive after militants tunneled under the Israeli border, killed two soldiers at a border post and dragged him bleeding into Gaza. Hamas has allowed no one to visit him and last offered a sign of life in October 2009.

Hamas' threat to continue holding him until its demands are met was delivered in a 39-second video posted Saturday on the group's website.

Hamas wants Israel to release hundreds of Palestinian militants, including the masterminds of attacks that killed dozens of Israelis. Israeli officials have balked, arguing that releasing the men would put more Israelis in danger.

In the northern Gaza town of Jabaliya, families of some of the estimated 7,500 Palestinian prisoners incarcerated in Israeli jails sat with pictures of their imprisoned sons emblazoned on birthday cakes. Number candles were planted on the cakes, signifying the 12 to 22 years the men had spent in Israeli prisons.

The White House and U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon issued statements calling for Schalit's immediate release.

Schalit holds dual French-Israeli citizenship, and Israeli media reported that the French ambassador to Israel brought Schalit's parents a letter from French President Nicolas Sarkozy assuring Schalit that "France will not abandon you."

Earlier this week, Hamas rebuffed an appeal from the International Committee of the Red Cross to prove Schalit was still alive. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu retaliated by saying Palestinian prisoners would be stripped of access to higher education and other unspecified privileges....

The hospital may not have been the originally intended target, as the driver set off his explosives when authorities tried to stop the car. In any case, he was on a mission of slaughter on the promise of paradise to those who "slay and are slain" fighting in the cause of Allah (Qur'an 9:111). Whatever the actual target was, outrage should be intense across the country, but will probably not rise to the same level of fury as when a man in Denmark draws a cartoon. "Afghanistan: Deadly attack on Logar hospital," from BBC News, June 25:

A deadly car bomb has hit a hospital in Afghanistan's eastern Logar province, with women, children and elderly among the casualties.

The provincial health director told the BBC that 27 people had died and 53 were hurt, adding the toll could have been higher as many people took away the bodies of relatives.

The facility was destroyed and people were buried under rubble.

Officials blamed the Azra district bomb on the Taliban, but they denied it.

A Taliban spokesman said they did not target civilians and that "someone with an agenda" was behind the blast.

'Burning people'

The BBC's Bilal Sarwary in Kabul says the Taliban always distances itself from attacks with large numbers of civilian casualties.

There has been confusion over the death toll from Saturday's explosion as earlier the health ministry said 60 people had died, while local and Kabul officials gave differing totals.

An intelligence official said the hospital may not have been the intended target, because the suicide bomber detonated the device as police tried to stop his car.

A large number of people had been gathering at the clinic for weekly treatment, many of them women, children and elderly people, said provincial official Din Mohammad Darwaish.

Doctors and nurses were also said to be among the dead.

A man who lives near the hospital, Abdul Rahman, told AFP news agency he lost seven relatives in the blast.

"I was at home, then I heard a big explosion," he said. "When I rushed to the site, I saw many dead and injured people.

"Many of them were burning, on fire. There were body parts everywhere."

Soldiers were sent to the scene to rescue those trapped beneath the ruins.

A statement by the public health ministry, quoted by AFP, said: "This inhumane act is unprecedented in the history of the conflict in our country and targeted a place where wounds are healed and patients receive treatment."...

They made this pledge at a counterterrorism summit in...Tehran! And I am sure they will follow through on fighting terrorism -- that is, against the U.S. and the Zionist entity.

"Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan to ‘jointly combat terrorism,’" from AFP, June 25 (thanks to Sr. Soph):

TEHRAN - The presidents of Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan agreed on Saturday to join forces in combating militancy as they attended a counterterrorism summit in Tehran under the cloud of an Afghan hospital bombing that killed 60 people.

The joint statement by the three neighbours also came hot on the heels of an announcement by US President Barack Obama that Washington will withdraw 33,000 of its 99,000 troops from Afghanistan by the end of next summer.

“All sides stressed their commitment to efforts aimed at eliminating extremism, militancy, terrorism, as well as rejecting foreign interference, which is in blatant opposition to the spirit of Islam, the peaceful cultural traditions of the region and its peoples’ interests,” the statement said.

“All sides agreed to continue meeting at foreign, interior, security and economy ministers’ level to prepare a roadmap for the next summit due to be held in Islamabad before the end of 2011,” added the statement carried by Iran’s official IRNA news agency.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai and his Iranian and Pakistani counterparts Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Asif Ali Zardari held three-way talks on Friday ahead of a six-nation counterterrorism conference on Saturday.

The three leaders discussed “ways of battling terrorism, extremism and drug trafficking,” IRNA said.

In his speech at the opening session of the two-day summit, Karzai said that despite his government’s efforts, militancy was on the rise both in his country and in the region.

“Unfortunately, despite all the achievements in the fields of education, infrastructure and reconstruction, not only has Afghanistan not yet achieved peace and security, but terrorism is expanding and threatening more than ever Afghanistan and the region,” the Afghan leader said.

The Pakistani president said: “Terrorists violate both human and divine values by inflicting death and destruction on fellow human beings. They have no religion.”

He said attacks had resulted in the deaths of 35,000 people in Pakistan, 5,000 of them law enforcement personnel, and material damage totalling $67 billion.

In his speech to the opening session, Ahmadinejad again accused Iran’s archfoe, the United States, of using the September 11, 2001 attacks as a “pretext” for sending troops to the region.

“In light of the way it was approached and exploited, September 11 is very much like the Holocaust,” the Iranian leader charged.

“The American government used the attacks as a pretext to occupy two countries, and kill, injure and displace people in the region,” he added.

“If the black box of the Holocaust and September 11 is opened, many of the realities will come to light. But unfortunately despite worldwide demand, the American government has not allowed it.”

Ahmadinejad has repeatedly courted controversy by questioning the accepted version of both the September 11 attacks, which killed nearly 3,000 people in the United States, and the Holocaust.

He has dubbed 9/11 a “big lie” and a “suspect affair” similar to the Nazi Holocaust, which he dismissed as a “myth” shortly after coming to power in 2005, triggering an international outcry.

In his message to the counterterrorism conference, which was also attended by the leaders of Iraq, Sudan and Tajikistan, Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei also spoke out against what he charged was Western abuse of the terrorist threat.

“The diabolical calculation of the dominating powers is to exploit terrorism as a tool to gain their illegitimate aims and they have used it in their plans,” he said in the message which was read out to the conference.

“In their view, terrorism is whatever threatens their interests. They consider those who are fighting for their legitimate right against occupiers as terrorists but do not consider their mercenaries and malicious groups who harm innocent people as terrorists.”...

German Interior Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich says Muslims must fight against "radicalization" in their own communities. In response, Muslim leaders in Germany pledged full, open, and honest cooperation with law enforcement -- naaah, just kidding! In reality, they whined about "Islamophobia," complained that the whole community was being victimized by the fight against jihadists, and demanded that the government work to make Muslims "feel at home" in Germany. Do they need to do anything to demonstrate their loyalty to the state and rejection of all areas of Sharia that contradict German law? Why, of course they don't, you greasy Islamophobe.

"German interior minister urges Muslims to combat militancy," from Deutsche Welle, June 25:

Germany's interior minister met with Muslim community leaders to discuss how they can prevent youth radicalization. Muslim leaders countered that the responsibility lies with the government.

German Interior Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich urged the country's Muslim community on Friday to do more to prevent the spread of radicalization among its youth. He told Muslim leaders at a meeting in Berlin that families must act early to prevent young boys from turning into jihadists.

"Neither the security authorities nor ordinary Muslim citizens can do much to help," when youths radicalize, he said. "It is up to the parents and the rest of the family to be observant about what their children are up to and how they are changing." [...]

"We want to stand up to the radicalization and misuse of religion together," he said. "All citizens of this country, no matter what our political tendency or religion, must take on the fight against radicalism and terror."

During the three-hour meeting, Friedrich referred to 21-year-old Arid Uka, a Kosovar man brought up in Germany, who killed two US airmen on March 2 when he attacked a bus of American military personnel at Frankfurt Airport.

Friedrich said Uka was radicalized "not in the classical environment of a mosque or Muslim society but on the Internet."

'Stigmatizing' Muslims

Germany's political opposition denounced the meeting, saying the government ran the risk of stigmatizing all Muslims.

"If we want to isolate extremists who are prone to violence, we must support moderate Muslims and make them feel welcome in Germany," said the center-left Social Democrats parliamentary leader Thomas Oppermann.

The head of the Central Council of Muslims in Germany, Aiman Mazyek, attended the meeting, but said he thought it had the wrong focus.

"We have over 2,500 mosques and there aren't even a dozen fringe groups," he said. "We have to make it clear they are a small and dwindling group and that by talking about them and hyping them, we just strengthen them.

"That should not be the aim of a conference like this," he added.

Mazyek said the government needed to work harder on making Muslims feel at home in Germany and to campaign against Islamophobia. He said lack of integration into society was the main cause for radicalization of Muslim youths.

Mazyek added that Muslim groups had already been cooperative in the government's bid to prevent terrorism. He said that the effort should not be a "one-way street."...

Indeed. In America, it is all done in a subversive, samizdat manner. The Left is complicit with the Islamic supremacists. The mainstream Right is full of cowards who won't touch these issues, or will only when doing so doesn't make them stand out in a crowd. And those who do try to encourage a real debate about the nature of Islam are defamed and vilified by Islamic supremacist hate groups and their allies. So a real debate about Islam in the public square remains almost as elusive in the U.S. as it is in Europe.

"In Defense of 'Hurtful' Speech," by Geert Wilders in the Wall Street Journal, June 24 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

Yesterday was a beautiful day for freedom of speech in the Netherlands. An Amsterdam court acquitted me of all charges of hate speech after a legal ordeal that lasted almost two years. The Dutch people learned that political debate has not been stifled in their country. They learned they are still allowed to speak critically about Islam, and that resistance against Islamization is not a crime.

I was brought to trial despite being an elected politician and the leader of the third-largest party in the Dutch parliament. I was not prosecuted for anything I did, but for what I said. My view on Islam is that it is not so much a religion as a totalitarian political ideology with religious elements. While there are many moderate Muslims, Islam's political ideology is radical and has global ambitions. I expressed these views in newspaper interviews, op-ed articles, and in my 2008 documentary, "Fitna."

I was dragged to court by leftist and Islamic organizations that were bent not only on silencing me but on stifling public debate. My accusers claimed that I deliberately "insulted" and "incited discrimination and hatred" against Muslims. The Dutch penal code states in its articles 137c and 137d that anyone who either "publicly, verbally or in writing or image, deliberately expresses himself in any way that incites hatred against a group of people" or "in any way that insults a group of people because of their race, their religion or belief, their hetero- or homosexual inclination or their physical, psychological or mental handicap, will be punished."

I was dragged to court for statements that I made as a politician and which were meant to stimulate public debate in a country where public debate has stagnated for decades. Dutch political parties see themselves as guardians of a sterile status quo. I want our problems to be discussed. I believe that politicians have a public trust to further debates about important issues. I firmly believe that every public debate holds the prospect of enlightenment.

My views represent those of a growing number of Dutch voters, who have flocked to the Party for Freedom, or PVV. The PVV is the fastest-growing party in the country, expanding from one seat in the 150-seat House of Representatives in 2004, to nine seats in 2006 and 24 seats in 2010. My party's views, however, are so uncommon in the Netherlands that they are considered blasphemous by powerful elites who fear and resent discussion.

That's why I was taken to court, even though the public prosecutor saw no reason to prosecute me. "Freedom of expression fulfills an essential role in public debate in a democratic society," the prosecutors repeatedly said during my trial. "That comments are hurtful and offensive for a large number of Muslims does not mean that they are punishable." [...]

Though I am obviously relieved by yesterday's decision, my thoughts go to people such as Danish journalist Lars Hedegaard, Austrian human rights activist Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff and others who have recently been convicted for criticizing Islam. They have not been as fortunate. In far too many Western countries, it is still impossible to have a debate about the nature of Islam....

Indeed. Read it all.

"Good women are obedient....As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them." -- Qur'an 4:34

"If a husband calls his wife to his bed [i.e. to have sexual relation] and she refuses and causes him to sleep in anger, the angels will curse her till morning." -- Sahih Bukhari 4.54.460

"By him in Whose Hand lies my life, a woman can not carry out the right of her Lord, till she carries out the right of her husband. And if he asks her to surrender herself [to him for sexual intercourse] she should not refuse him even if she is on a camel's saddle." -- Ibn Majah 1854

Can we get a condemnation of the Dar al-Fatwa from any Islamic spokesman in the West? Honest Ibe Hooper? Boy Reza Aslan? Feisal "Man of Peace" Rauf? Anyone? Anyone? "Lebanon Sunni clergy reject domestic abuse law," from AFP, June 24 (thanks to all who sent this in):

BEIRUT — Lebanon's highest Sunni Muslim authority on Friday rejected a bill aimed at protecting women against domestic violence and marital rape, saying it would lead to the demise "of the family as in the West."

"Islam is very aware of and concerned with... resolving problems of poor treatment... but this should not happen by cloning Western laws that encourage the breakdown of the family and do not suit our society," said the influential Dar al-Fatwa in a statement on its website.

Dar al-Fatwa also slammed as "heresy" a clause in the bill that criminalises marital rape, accusing those behind the draft law of "inventing new types of crimes."

"This will have a negative impact on Muslim children... who will see their mother threatening their father with prison, in defiance of patriarchal authority, which will in turn undermine the moral authority" of fathers, it said.

"We must continue to follow sharia (Islamic law) as concerns the Muslim family," it added.

Recently I had the opportunity to be interviewed by FrontPage Magazine's editor Jamie Glazov. In case you haven't yet read it, the main thrust of the interview was regarding the ongoing persecution of minority non Muslims in Malaysia at the hands of the Muslim/Malay majority.  The lengthy track record of substandard treatment and discrimination of non Muslims in general and Christians in particular should make it clear to everyone what's going on in Malaysia and why.

Most of the comments that I received at FrontPage were supportive, but a few comments, apparently from Muslims, were not so charitable. One in particular, from someone called 'Ibrahim', stood out. Namely, his comment stood out in its dis-ingenuousness, its contempt of the truth, and flagrant twisting or outright omission of the facts. Given these characteristics (as well as the writer's mangled grammar), this writer is almost certainly not only a Muslim, but a fervent Muslim supporter of Malaysia's Muslim-controlled government. So in that regard, this comment stands as yet another useful peek into the cognitive dissonance that the counterjihad is up against.

So I've taken the liberty of reproducing most of 'Ibrahim's' comment here and showing just how many lies and distortions a taqiyya-spewing Muslim can pack into one (very long) paragraph.

...[The Anti Jihadist] did not not show the numbers of Christians persecuted in Malaysia and the years when they were persecuted.

The tragedy of May 13, 1969 was not between Muslims and non-Muslims and it had nothing to do with any religion and its adherents. The tragedy took place in the big cities like Kuala Lumpur, Ipoh and Penang between the political supporters of Democratic Action Party and those who opposed then when they celebrated their victory of the Malaysian general elections took place in that month and year.

The judges in Malaysian courts are all Muslims are not the fact of Malaysian judiciary system and practice. There are non-Muslim judges in Malaysian courts too.

The Malaysian Christian convert Lina Joy was not detained or prisoned (sic). She is free to her application to delete the word Islam from her Malaysian identity card, MyKad, was rejected by the courts in Malaysia, lower, high, appealed and federal courts since Malaysian law provided for Muslims to go to the Shariah Court to apply to change her religion from Islam to other religion.

Malaysian terrorist Azahari Husin did not kill any Christian in Malaysia since he was active in Indonesia before he was killed by Indonesian policemen.

Regarding the difficulty for the Christians to acquire land lots to build new churches, their difficulty was not due to the protests from the Muslims but they have to fulfill the laws and by-laws in the cities or towns where the churches were intended to be constructed.

By spreading the false news about Islam's persecution of Christians in Malaysia, it is very serious and bad strategy for Muslims and Christians in Malaysia because if Muslims and Christians happen to believe and react to such false news, the imagined attacks may become real.

Do not put Malaysia in the same categories with other countries where there wars or killings between Muslims and Christians like happening in Sudan and Nigeria and some other majority Muslim countries.

Another one of those "misunderstandings" seems to have cropped up again. Funny how that keeps happening. The crime this time? The priest received a license to renovate his church, and moved ahead with it. "Muslims Surround Church in Upper Egypt, Threaten to Kill Priest," by Mary Abdelmassih for the Assyrian International News Agency, June 24:

(AINA) -- Hundreds of Muslims surrounded the church of St George today in the village of Beni Ahmed West, 7 KM south of Minya, vowing to kill its priest Father George Thabet, who was serving the morning mass and was locked in the church with a number of parishioners. Security forces arrived five hours later and escorted Father George in a police car to the Coptic Diocese in Minya. "Father George looked as if he was the criminal, leaving his church in a police car." said one of the eye-witnesses. The Coptic youth who were attending mass remained inside church to defend it from Muslim attacks.

Eyewitnesses reported the Muslim mob, in their white dresses and long beards, chanted "We will kill the priest, we will kill him and no one will prevent us." One of their leaders said that they will "…cut him to pieces."

It was reported that no police or security of any kind was present during the events.

The attacks on St. George Church trace back to March 23, 2011, when Muslims had surrounded the 100-year old church, which held a renovation license, and ordered the church officials to stop construction immediately and undo what they had completed, otherwise they would demolish the church after Friday prayers. They had placed several demands on the church authorities, including the banning of Father George Thabet from Beni Ahmad village and gave him a time limit of 35 days, later extended to 50 days, to leave the village with his family. Muslims accused him of making extensions to the church and of causing sectarian strife. The Archbishop of Minya had sent a priest two months ago to assist Father George, in order to diffuse the situation, but the Muslims resumed their pressure on the church (AINA 4-9-2011).

Muslims started congregating near the church in small numbers since the evening of June 21, after learning that Father George is returning to the village. It is believed they were angry and wanted to kill him because he defied the ban they placed on him.

The archdiocese of Minya issued today a statement formally reiterating its strong dissatisfaction with the incident and denouncing the "return of the Salafists to besiege St. George's church again, some carrying weapons, threatening to kill the priest unless he leaves the village."

The statement rejected the interference in church affairs, saying the issue of care of the church is the responsibility of the church authorities alone, and not of any person or group. It called on government officials and security authorities to do their part in upholding the rule of law and maintaining security in the country.

The archdiocese refused any preconditions to negotiate with political and security officials, demanding the security forces disperse the demonstrations before any negotiations can take place.

After Father George left the church the Muslim mob remained until security arrived to disperse them. The Muslims threatened that if they do not hear from the military commander by tonight that the priest is banned from returning to the village, they will hold their Friday prayers tomorrow, June 24, inside St. George's church.

AdnKronos International and AsiaNews have also picked up this story. Their respective reports can be found here and here.

"At the White House, the documents were taken as positive reinforcement for President Barack Obama's effort to eliminate religiously charged words from the government's language of terrorism," like "jihad."

You can't challenge an ideology you can't name or acknowledge to exist. And to constantly misdirect efforts by insisting the enemy isn't what he says he is, is to fight an imprecise, misguided war that is needlessly wasteful of blood and treasure.

The connection between bin Laden's use of "jihad" and why the Obama administration thinks its non-use of it constitutes a victory isn't ever really stated here, unless they feared they would be validating al-Qaeda's position by calling them jihadists. But we all know how much al-Qaeda looks to Pennsylvania Avenue for validation. To call jihad for what it is would be to put a stop the semantic shell game, at home and abroad.

"Osama wanted new name for al-Qaida to repair image," by Matt Apuzzo for the Associated Press, June 24:

WASHINGTON (AP) — As Osama bin Laden watched his terrorist organization get picked apart, he lamented in his final writings that al-Qaida was suffering from a marketing problem. His group was killing too many Muslims and that was bad for business. The West was winning the public relations fight. All his old comrades were dead and he barely knew their replacements.

Faced with these challenges, bin Laden, who hated the United States and decried capitalism, considered a most American of business strategies. Like Blackwater, ValuJet and Philip Morris, perhaps what al-Qaida really needed was a fresh start under a new name.

The problem with the name al-Qaida, bin Laden wrote in a letter recovered from his compound in Pakistan, was that it lacked a religious element, something to convince Muslims worldwide that they are in a holy war with America.

Maybe something like Taifat al-Tawhed Wal-Jihad, meaning Monotheism and Jihad Group, would do the trick, he wrote. Or Jama'at I'Adat al-Khilafat al-Rashida, meaning Restoration of the Caliphate Group.

As bin Laden saw it, the problem was that the group's full name, al-Qaida al-Jihad, for The Base of Holy War, had become short-handed as simply al-Qaida. Lopping off the word "jihad," bin Laden wrote, allowed the West to "claim deceptively that they are not at war with Islam." Maybe it was time for al-Qaida to bring back its original name.

The letter, which was undated, was discovered among bin Laden's recent writings. Navy SEALs stormed his compound and killed him before any name change could be made. The letter was described by senior administration, national security and other U.S. officials only on condition of anonymity because the materials are sensitive. The documents portray bin Laden as a terrorist chief executive, struggling to sell holy war for a company in crisis.

At the White House, the documents were taken as positive reinforcement for President Barack Obama's effort to eliminate religiously charged words from the government's language of terrorism. Words like "jihad," which also has a peaceful religious meaning, are out. "Islamic radical" has been nixed in favor of "terrorist" and "mass murderer." Though former members of President George W. Bush's administration have backed that effort, it also has drawn ridicule from critics who said the president was being too politically correct....

The purpose of jihad in all of its forms is to impose Islamic law on all levels of society, from the individual to an entire country; only the means vary. Therefore, it is inaccurate to believe one can neatly parse off non-military means of jihad from its armed form, when the goal is the same.

Since Hizballah is a proxy for Iran's jihad against Israel, any talk along these lines recalls the takeover of the embassy in Tehran. Hizballah would like that. They'd like that a whole lot. And for any potential future conflict, Hizballah has publicly marked the embassy as a target. "Hezbollah: US Embassy in Lebanon spies for Israel," from the Associated Press, June 24:

BEIRUT (AP) — The leader of Lebanon's Shiite militant group Hezbollah has accused the U.S. Embassy in Lebanon of spying for Israel.

Sheik Hassan Nasrallah spoke Friday in a televised speech. He said his group has information that the U.S. Embassy is "a spy and recruitment center for Israel."

He says the group has discovered several cases in which the CIA recruited Lebanese agents to gather information about Hezbollah for Israel.

Hezbollah and Israel are sworn enemies.

But only Hizballah exists to destroy its "sworn enemy."

"It is part of a well orchestrated smear campaign against our security organizations." Of course it is. "Pakistan army rejects report on bin Laden's cellphone," by Kamran Haider and Myra MacDonald for Reuters, June 24:

ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - The Pakistan army condemned Friday a report in the New York Times that a cellphone found in the raid that killed Osama bin Laden contained contacts to a militant group with ties to Pakistan's intelligence agency.

The original report can be found here.

The newspaper, citing senior U.S. officials briefed on the findings, reported Thursday that the discovery indicated that bin Laden used the group, Harakat-ul-Mujahedeen, as part of his support network inside Pakistan.

The cell phone belonged to bin Laden's courier, who was killed along with the al Qaeda leader in the May 2 raid by U.S. special forces on bin Laden's compound in the garrison town of Abbottabad, the Times said.

Pakistan army spokesman Major General Athar Abbas said in a statement sent by text message that the military "rejects the insinuations made in the NYT story."

"It is part of a well orchestrated smear campaign against our security organizations," he said.

The army has been angered by media reports that elements in the Pakistani security establishment may have helped bin Laden hide in Pakistan.

"Pakistan, its security forces have suffered the most at the hands of al Qaeda and have delivered the most against al Qaeda; our actions on the ground speak louder than the words of the Times," Abbas said.

Yes, Pakistan's actions speak louder than words. And its selective approach has likely cost more of its own personnel in the long run.

In tracing calls on the cell phone, U.S. analysts determined that Harakat-ul-Mujahedeen commanders had called Pakistani intelligence officials, the Times reported, citing the senior American officials.

The officials added the contacts were not necessarily about bin Laden and his protection and that there was no "smoking gun" showing that Pakistan's spy agency had protected bin Laden.

Cross-pollination of jihadist tactics: the Iraq- and Afghanistan-style tactic of roadside bombs turns up in Thailand, along with spacing attacks to murder emergency personnel who respond, which is most often associated with al-Qaeda. "2 killed by roadside bomb in southern Thailand," from the Associated Press, June 24 (thanks to all who sent this in):

PATTANI, Thailand (AP) — Three hidden roadside bombs have killed two people and wounded 13 others in southern Thailand, and police believe Islamist militants are responsible.

Police Col. Nitinai Langyanay said the first bomb in Narathiwat province killed two irrigation workers Friday and wounded five others, while a second one about 1 kilometer (one-half mile) away wounded a soldier.

Bomb removal officers then tried to defuse a third bomb only three meters (yards) away from the second one but it exploded, wounding seven policemen. It is a standard practice of the insurgents to plant a second bomb to go off when security officials arrive to investigate an explosion.

More than 4,300 people have been killed in Thailand's three southern provinces since an Islamist insurgency flared in 2004.

One of the most interesting parts of this story, another case of "decent fellows" somehow gone wrong, is in the middle of the report. One defendant was apparently seeking a second wife on a "Muslim dating site." Under Islamic law, a man can have up to 4 wives. Under U.S. law, a man can have exactly one. The location and ownership of the dating site and the prevalence of its use (as well as that of similar sites) in this country for this purpose is well worth further investigation.

An update on this story. "Muslims at suspect's mosque shocked to learn of terror plot," from MSNBC, June 24 (thanks to Kenneth):

SEATAC, Wash. — The massacre at Fort Hood, Texas, and the war crimes prosecutions of U.S. soldiers helped to inspire a terrorism plot to attack a military recruiting station in Seattle, according to a federal complaint.

But many of those who lived alongside and worshipped with Abu Khalid Abdul-Latif say his arrest is not what they expected from someone they described as a quiet family man.

After the "shock" will come talk of fearing of "backlash," a tactic to stop the discussion and claim victim status.

Abdul-Latif, also known as Joseph Anthony Davis, and Walli Mujahidh, also known as Frederick Domingue Jr., were arrested Wednesday night. They're accused of trying to get machine guns and hand grenades for an attack on the station south of downtown Seattle. The FBI said a man that the two had told of the plot told police and became an informant.

Muslims at the mosque south of Seattle where Abdul-Latif worshiped described him as a family man who sometimes brought his wife and young sonp [sic]. One man said he saw him just last Friday.

But people said that their mosque in the city of SeaTac is a place of worship, not indoctrination, and that Abdul-Latif never spoke about violence against the government.

“I never heard of him doing bad things, never. He brings his child here and prays, he has a wife. I know he’s a family person,” Idris Shuar told NBC station KING5 of Seattle.

Neighbors of Abdul-Latif at the Hunt Club Apartments were surprised to hear about the arrest. They described him as a family man who liked to work on his cars. [...]

A Muslim dating website appears to display a profile of Abdul-Latif. The profile said he is married with a child and looking for a second wife to live with them in Washington....

Did Wife #1, interviewed at the MSNBC link in full niqab, know about that?

The federal complaint, written by FBI Special Agent Albert C. Kelly III and filed in U.S. District Court, paints Abdul-Latif as the leader of the effort. In conversations with an FBI informant, he spoke admiringly of the 2009 massacre at Fort Hood when a lone gunman killed 13 people, and of the war crimes charges against five Washington state soldiers accused of killing three Afghan civilians for sport last year.

"Abdul-Latif said that he was not comfortable with letting the legal system deal with these matters," Kelly wrote.

It was not a Sharia court.

Following the arrest, Mujahidh confessed, according to court documents, saying the attack was meant to stop the U.S. military "from going to Islamic lands and killing Muslims."

The attack would not target "anybody innocent — that means old people, women out of uniform, any children," Abdul-Latif allegedly said. "Just people who wear the green for the kaffir army, that's who we're going after."...

UPDATE: Clarification from the Religious News Service, which first issued the story, may be found here.

They say they have to respect local laws in any country they fly into. Exactly how many of those discriminate against Israelis and "Jewish-sounding" names? More on this story. "Airline to Jewish rumor: 'Delta does not discriminate.'," from USA Today, June 24:

Earlier today some Jewish and Christian readers in the blogosphere were fired up about stories that Delta Air Lines, in its new alliance with Saudi Arabian Airlines, might wind up enforcing a Saudi policy of not admitting Israelis and non-Islamic religious items like Bibles on their flights.

Delta spokesman Trebor Banstetter responded with its non-discrimination policy and posted on their blog:

This is so condescending:

We've gotten questions today from you, our concerned customers, following an article about Saudi Arabian Airlines joining SkyTeam (the global airline alliance that includes Delta as a member). After listening to many of your thoughts today, we'd like to take this opportunity to share some information and help to clarify some of the questions we know you have.

First and foremost, I think one of the most important things to mention here is that Delta does not discriminate nor do we condone discrimination against anyone in regards to age, race, nationality, religion, or gender.

That said, some have raised questions about whether Saudi Arabian Airlines' membership in SkyTeam means Delta is adopting any type of policies that could present barriers to travel for some passengers, including Jewish customers. For this particular concern, it's important to realize that visa requirements to enter any country are dictated by that nation's government, not the airlines, and they apply to anyone entering the country regardless of whether it's by plane, bus or train.

We, like all international airlines, are required to comply with all applicable laws governing entry into every country we serve. You as passengers are responsible for obtaining the necessary travel documents, such as visas and certification of required vaccinations, and we're responsible for making sure that you have the proper documentation before you board.

According to Religion News Service,

Saudi Arabia bans anyone with an Israeli stamp in their passport from entering the country, even in transit. Many Jews believe the kingdom has also withheld visas from travelers with Jewish-sounding names.

The USA Today commentary continues:

Maybe. Jewish leader Rabbi Irwin Kula was wary about inflaming concerns on this, saying he knows many professionals who are very open about their Jewish religious identity who fly to Saudi Arabia all the time for business.

As the rumor of no-Jews traveled the Internet all day, Detroit rabbi and blogger Jason Miller points out:

The issue here is one of principle. Delta isn't being forced to include Saudi Arabian Airlines into its Sky Team Alliance. In fact, Delta could stand on principle and refuse to include Saudi Arabian Airlines based on its discriminatory policy.

UPDATE: Clarification from the Religious News Service, which first issued the story, may be found here.

No right of return to occupied Yathrib. Not even if you work for the airline. Of course, this is the price of doing business in Saudi Arabia, whom petro-blackmail allows to function as one of the most backward and depraved closed societies on the planet. Delta, as one of the world's largest airlines since it took over Northwest and head of the SkyTeam Alliance that Saudi Arabian Airlines is joining, has passed up a golden opportunity to insist on a higher standard of ethics and service than the Saudi airline is willing to uphold.

As the saying goes, we realize you have a choice in airlines, at least in most areas of the country. "Delta Adopts Saudi Arabian Airlines' No Jew Policy," by Rabbi Jason Miller for the Huffington Post, June 23 (thanks to all who sent this in):

For a long time in Michigan, Northwest Airlines had its hub at Detroit Metropolitan Airport. That meant an essential monopoly on domestic flights in and out of Detroit. A few years ago Delta Airlines took over Northwest Airlines and now the vast majority of domestic flights at Detroit Metro are operated by Delta. That fact makes it especially troubling to learn that Delta will add Saudi Arabian Airlines to its SkyTeam Alliance of partnering companies and would require Delta to ban Jews and holders of Israeli passports from boarding flights to Saudi Arabia. The partnership was originally announced by Delta Airlines in a press release on January 10, 2011.

World Net Daily reported that this issue "first was presented to Congress, the public and others by talk radio host and former U.S. Rep. Fred Grandy, whose own battle against discrimination was documented when his former radio station demanded he tone down criticism of Islam on his program. He then left the station."

The article included correspondence from Kathy M. Johnston, Delta's coordinator of Customer Care, explaining that Delta does not discriminate nor condone discrimination against any protected class of passenger in regards to age, race, nationality, religion, or gender. However, she stated , Delta must comply with all applicable laws in every country it serves. That means that if the Saudi government denies Jews from entering its country and Delta brings them there on its flight they can be fined.

The issue here is one of principle. Delta isn't being forced to include Saudi Arabian Airlines into its Sky Team Alliance. In fact, Delta could stand on principle and refuse to include Saudi Arabian Airlines based on its discriminatory policy. No, it's not Delta's fault that the Saudi government is anti-Semitic, but it doesn't have to go along with it. It's as if the Saudis are telling Delta that when it comes to Jewish passengers it's name should become an acronym: "Don't Even Let Them Aboard."

Nice.

I know I'm not the only one who finds it troubling that Delta would go along with Saudi Arabia's policy of not allowing Jews on their flights. While I'm not planning a vacation to Riyadh any time soon, I would have a hard time flying with Delta knowing they are collaborating with the discriminatory government of Saudi Arabia.

The American Center for Law and Justice has already taken up this issue and I have no doubt that organizations like the Anti-Defamation League will not be far behind. I fly Delta a lot, both domestically and internationally. In fact, I've flown Delta flights to and from Israel twice in the past four years. Each time I arrive to my destination with Delta, I hear a flight attendant thank the passengers by saying, "We know you have a choice when you fly so thank you for choosing Delta." However, that's not entirely true. Here in Michigan, we often don't have much of a choice when we fly. It's usually Delta or nothing.

I have no doubt that this matter will not quietly go away. The Jewish community will not feel comfortable flying Delta knowing about its new association with Saudi Arabian Airlines.

In FrontPage this morning I discuss yesterday's great verdict:

In a great victory for decency and sanity, the Court of Amsterdam has acquitted Geert Wilders of all of the spurious “hate speech” charges that have been hanging over his head for several years now. This is decisive defeat for the Islamic supremacist forces that have been trying to destroy the freedom of speech and compel dhimmi Western governments to label the truth about Islam and jihad as “hate speech.” It is good to be able to report that it is still not illegal to tell the truth in the Netherlands and in the West in general – but we are not out of the woods yet.

Wilders remarked: “I am delighted with this ruling. It is a victory, not only for me but for all the Dutch people.” He could have added – and for all free people the world over, who can by this ruling stave off at least for awhile longer the attempts to criminalize speaking accurately about a radically repressive ideology that would use our self-enforced silence about its nature and intentions to advanced unopposed. Wilders continued: “Today is a victory for freedom of speech. The Dutch are still allowed to speak critically about Islam, and resistance against Islamization is not a crime. I have spoken, I speak and I shall continue to speak.”

This should be axiomatic. It should be commonsensical. It should be taken for granted by every free person in every free society: that to criminalize criticism of any ideology or belief system establishes that ideology or belief system in a protected class, and gives it carte blanche to do whatever it pleases in the society at large. Criminalizing speech or thought is thus a clear path to authoritarian government, and the death of any free society.

Yet no one seems to grasp that, or to care. And so Wilders’ case was a close-run thing. It was not certain that the verdict would go his way, and shameful that the case proceeded at all. Amsterdam judge Marcel van Oosten said Thursday that Wilders’ statements about Islam, which were in every case true and accurate, were “acceptable within the context of public debate.” How generous of Marcel van Oosten, to determine with all the weight of his judicial authority that speaking unpleasant and unwelcome truths was “acceptable within the context of public debate”!What van Oosten should have said, had he had any clear understanding of the real implications of this case, was that the idea that Wilders should have been prosecuted at all on the charges of offending Muslims, and inciting hatred and discrimination against them, was absurd on its face.

If offending someone and inciting hatred is a crime, then freedom fighters ought to be able to bring charges against the Leftists and Islamic supremacists who routinely demonize and defame them. But of course, it never works that way. “Hate speech” laws in the Netherlands and elsewhere in the West are designed wholly and solely to criminalize non-Leftist thought — as well as criticism of Islamic supremacism and jihad, which forces such as the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and its allies have been largely successful in convincing Western elites to regard as “racism.”...

There is more.

It's on for today at 1PM: Pamela Geller has the details:

Does being a Muslim mean you can get away with murder?

RALLY FOR JUSTICE FOR FATIMA at the NOW Conference
Friday, June 24th, 1:00 - 2:00

Embassy Suites Tampa - USF/Near Busch Gardens
3705 Spectrum Blvd.
Tampa, Florida 33612 2011

Stand against Islamic supremacism, gender apartheid, and Islamic law in American law enforcement and courts. Call out the feminists and the Tampa Chief of Police, Jane Castor.

National NOW Conference June 24-26 in Tampa, Florida, at the Embassy Suites Tampa - USF/Near Busch Gardens. Jane Castor, Tampa Chief of Police, is scheduled to deliver the Welcome Speech from 1:45 - 2:00 pm

The irony is thicker than blood. Jane Castor, Tampa Chief of Police -- scene of the misogynistic Abdallah cover-up in submission to Islam -- is speaking to a feminist crowd on what? The upside of the dehumanizaton of women? The hypocrisy is crushing. NOW, instead of fighting for women, has taken up genocidal jihad flotillas.

Let's call out the feminist claptrap about women's rights when they stand silent as Muslim girls are murdered here in America, and stand silent in the face of gender apartheid, clitorectomies, forced marriage, child marriage under the sharia in Muslim countries.

What has the hypocrite group NOW done to alleviate the suffering of women living under the boot of Islam? Nothing. Their silence is sanction. What have they done to help Muslim girls here in the US living in terror in devout households?

This Friday we are going to protest the NOW conference taking place in Tampa, scene of the Fatima Abdallah cover-up. The honor killing was classified as an accidental suicide. Medical examiner Laura Harris ruled Fatima's honor killing an accidental suicide by banging her head on the coffee table (there was no blood on the coffee table). The Tampa police department went along with this horrible crime.

Fatima Abdallah's "mouth was bloodied by a blow, and at the left corner of her mouth is an angular cut/incision/indentation, which only could have been made by a blow." Also, "her left eye orbit was broken, and her left eye socket was blackened, suffering a blow causing hemorrhaging of blood about the eye." And "her right arm had contusions at the front inside of the elbow, and at the shoulder near the front armpit, consistent with being grasped forcibly by human hands."

Where are the feminist liars and imposters? Is a Muslim woman's life worthless? Is it politically expedient to allow enforcement of the sharia, so as not to offend Muslims? 

Jane Castor, Tampa Police Dept. Chief, will be speaking. PLEASE PROTEST WITH SIOA.

The 2011 National NOW Conference is being held June 24-26 in Tampa, Florida, at the Embassy Suites Tampa - USF/Near Busch Gardens.

Jane Castor, Tampa Chief of Police, is scheduled to deliver the Welcome Speech from 1:45 - 2:00 pm, so let's RALLY FOR JUSTICE FOR FATIMA from 1:00 - 2:00,  in front of the hotel. Look for the signs!

Pamela has much more here.

A pleasantly surprising update on this story. The next steps: enforcement and education. "Ban on female genital mutilation passed," by Hemn Hady and Patrick Smith for AKNews, June 23 (thanks to Nicholas):

Erbil, June 23 (AKnews) - For the first time in Iraqi Kurdistan women are protected by a new law against some of the traditions most harmful towards them.

Yesterday the regional parliament ratified a bill banning female genital mutilation and domestic violence. This is a landmark law in a region that is more steeped in such practices than surrounding countries.

As explained at the link above ("this story"), one factor Kurdistan holds in common with other countries removed from Africa where FGM is prevalent is the dominance of the Shafi'i school of Islamic jurisprudence, in which female "circumcision" is obligatory.

Female circumcision, where the clitoris and hood, and sometimes the labia, are cut away, is particularly commonly in rural areas. A German-Iraqi study conducted in 2007/08 showed more than 77 percent of female interviewees aged 14 and over in the Kurdish province of Sulaimaniyah had undergone the procedure.

The new law lays out the penalty for encouraging female genital mutilation as 3 to 6 years imprisonment or a IQD 1 million ($860) fine. Those who carry out the operation will be sentenced to 3 to 5 years or a fine equal to IQD 5 million ($4300). If they are medical practitioners they will be banned from working for three years.

The demanding of dowry payments, forced marriage, arranged marriages for young women to men many years their elder and forcing women into prostitution are also outlawed by the new law.

It is not clear how a law, seeking to stop a practice, such as genital mutilation, that is not carried out though official means, will be enforced.

Kurdistan's health minister, Taher Hawrami, said authorities are distributing posters to promote awareness, but he said religious leaders should do more to end the practice.

"The clerics should take on the main role. People need to have better understanding of religion in order to give up this phenomenon."

There are also many issues that are not covered by bill. Payman Abdul-Kareem, a member of the parliamentary committee for women and children’s affairs said: ‘When a woman is divorced, she does not have anywhere to go and is often mistreated.

“There ought to be social welfare safety nets to cope with this.”

The final two paragraphs, along with a few above, are carried over from the prior report.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) released a report last year that showed there are at least four factors driving the prevalence of genital mutilation: a link to Kurdish identity, a religious imperative, social pressure, and an attempt to control a woman's sexuality.

The practice is often carried out at home and by people without medical training. When not done properly the girls, who are often as young as ten, can have lasting damage and in extreme cases die from loss of blood or infection.

How could a Western author, as one of the writers named above apparently is, allow such a statement to go to press under his name? The practice has never been, is not now, and never can or will be done "properly." There is always "lasting damage." That is the whole purpose.

An occasion of justifiable schadenfreude, if there ever was any. The Saudi connection is less remarkable than the fact that an al-Qaeda member was doing business in the United States on such a scale as late as 2005 through 2007. "DOJ: Al-Qaida member loses $20M in investments," by Sophia Tareen for the Associated Press, June 22:

CHICAGO – Poor financial decisions with a Chicago futures brokerage firm lost an alleged al-Qaida operative with links to Osama bin Laden some $20 million dollars in just eight months, according to a lawsuit filed recently in Chicago by the U.S. Department of Justice.

Federal officials said Abu al Tayyeb, through an associate, deposited nearly $27 million — earned from a "Saudi Arabian-based investment scheme" — into an account with Chicago-based R.J. O'Brien & Associates in 2005. But because of a "poor trading position adopted" by the associate, the money dropped below $7 million less than a year later.

Those exact investment decisions weren't detailed in court documents. DOJ officials didn't immediately respond Wednesday to a request for comment and U.S. Attorney's office spokesman Randall Samborn in Chicago declined to be interviewed.

Still, experts say the loss for al-Qaida would have been considerable. They estimate at the time of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, its network took in up to $30 million each year, but that amount has significantly dropped since.

"The value of $20 million to a terrorist organization is pretty significant," said Scott Helfstein, director of research at the U.S. Military Academy's Combating Terrorism Center at West Point. "Like everybody else, they got their hands on some money and said `Let's see if we can invest it.' There weren't a whole lot of people who did well."

The lawsuit doesn't connect al Tayyeb's money to terrorist acts, but in the lawsuit federal officials claim he supported al Qaida's military operations, raised money for the group and plotted attacks against U.S. citizens and military personnel.

Al Tayyeb — also identified as Muhammad Abdallah Abdan Al Ghamdi — met with bin Laden in 2000 or 2001 and others involved in the 9-11 attacks, according to the lawsuit. Al Tayyeb, who also had been recruiting for al-Qaida in Saudi Arabia, allegedly gave his associate, about $35 million in Saudi riyals in 2005, of which $26.7 million was invested with R.J. O'Brien, according to the lawsuit.

"Al Tayyeb began raising significant amounts of money through . a Saudi Arabian-based investment scheme. Al Tayyeb then used the funds raised, in part, to finance jihadist-related activities," according to the civil lawsuit filed Sunday.

The federal government froze the assets in 2007 and just $6.2 million remains today. Now, federal officials want to take control of what remains through laws that allow seizure of assets connected to terrorism, a practice that is common in the fight against global terrorism.

Department of Justice officials said al Tayyeb and Ghamdi were arrested in Saudi Arabia in 2006. Bin Laden was killed last month during a U.S. Navy SEALS raid in an army town outside the Pakistani capital of Islamabad....

Westminster Institute Conference [May 25, 2011]: Fighting the Ideological War. Strategies for Defeating al-Qaeda.
by Ibn Warraq
Complete article

The overall philosophy or mission of the conference was to educate the public and the government about the ideology of our enemy which is, as the Westminster Institute announced, "well-organized, well-funded, and grounded in the authority of religious texts. The United States therefore has a particularly difficult battle to fight. It is engaged with an enemy who cares first and foremost about the ideological battle—rebuilding a distinct Muslim identity, strengthening the ummah, and defeating the West, both materially and spiritually. Without directly confronting the ideology driving such groups as Al Qaeda, the United States will never be able to defeat the threat of terrorism. Drawing on the expertise of those who were directly involved in the fight against past totalitarian ideologies and of those who are intimately familiar with the ideology and strategy of the current enemy, this conference will draw lessons from the past for today’s fight against Al Qaeda and associated movements.”

Patrick Sookhdeo, author of Global Jihad, and Adjunct Professor at George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies, inaugurated the conference with a lucid presentation of the underlying problems in fighting Islamic Terrorism, and offered some tentative solutions. In what follows, I have taken Sookhdeo’s talk as the basis of my analysis. I have added further examples that were not in the original talk, and have fleshed out some of his arguments. Thus the present article should be seen as my own take on the problem, though of course heavily derived from Sookhdeo, and certainly in the spirit of his presentation.

Sookhdeo’s talk was divided into three parts: Confusion, Understanding, and Prospects.

First, he pointed out that our policy makers were confused about what the terrorist ideology was, and thus were unable to take the necessary measures needed to defeat it.

Michael Hayden, who was the Director of the CIA until 2009, declared in 2008 that there had been “significant setbacks for al-Qaida globally - and here I'm going to use the word 'ideologically', as a lot of the Islamic world pushes back on their form of Islam.” However, as Sookhdeo insisted, “al-Qaeda and radical Islam remain significant and in some cases a growing threat. Al Qaeda has continued to strike in the West and even on US soil, has established new bases and is consolidating existing strongholds, is recruiting new generations of young Muslims and Muslims living in the West. Successes such as the death of Bin Laden will not have a fundamental impact on the underlying issues which continue to make Islamic radicalism a significant force.” In May 2010, the White House released the document “US National Security Strategy, 2010” [NSS, 2010], which declared that “We are at war with a specific network, al-Qa’ida, and its terrorist affiliates”. But nowhere in this document is there a mention of the whole Islamist culture and ideology which justifies terrorism; instead we have a vague enemy called “violence and hatred”: “For nearly a decade,” NSS 2010 tells us, “our Nation has been at war with a far-reaching network of violence and hatred”.

As Katherine Gorka of the Westminster Institute underlined in November 2009, “The 9/11 Commission Report, released in July 2004, clearly stated the nature of the perpetrators and the ideology that was driving them. As Stephen Coughlin, an expert on radical Islam, has recently pointed out, the 9/11 Report used the word Islam 322 times, Muslim 145 times, jihad 126 times, and jihadist 32 times. In sharp contrast, The National Intelligence Strategy of the United States, issued in August 2009, uses the term Muslim 0 times, Islam 0, and jihad 0. Similarly, The FBI Counterterrorism Analytical Lexicon, the purpose of which is ‘to standardize the terms used in FBI analytical products dealing with counterterrorism,’ uses the term Muslim 0 times, the term Islam 0 times, and the term jihad 0 times.”

On August 6, 2009, John O. Brennan, Barack Obama's assistant for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, said “Even as we condemn and oppose the illegitimate tactics used by terrorists, we need to acknowledge and address the legitimate needs and grievances of ordinary people those terrorists claim to represent….Using the legitimate term jihad, which means to purify oneself or to wage a holy struggle for a moral goal, risks giving these murderers the religious legitimacy they desperately seek but in no way deserve.”

This can only be characterized as appeasement; and what legitimate grievances do Al-Qaeda represent?

A ranking US Defense Department official, speaking at a recent conference: “We are not at war with jihad. Jihad is a legitimate component of Islam.” The muddled thinking behind such statements is clear: “We must not give the impression that we are at war with Islam, a great world religion of peace and tolerance….”.

President Obama in a similar vein indulges in fantasy when he declares, “...we reject the notion that al-Qa’ida represents any religious authority. They are not religious leaders, they are killers; and neither Islam nor any other religion condones the slaughter of innocents.” [NSS, 2010, p.22] British Ambassador to Lebanon, Frances Guy, speaking after the death of the Hezbollah leader Shiekh Muhammad Hussein Falallah, displays his own kind of wishful thinking, “The world needs more men like him willing to reach out across faiths, acknowledging the reality of the modern world and daring to confront old constraints.” President Obama’s ecumenical gush was replied to by Anjem Choudary, the British radical cleric, “There is a place for violence in Islam, there is a place for jihad in Islam...Jihad is the most talked about duty in the Koran after tawhid – belief.”

It is time Western policy makers woke up to the reality of the struggle we are facing: we are not faced with freedom fighters, or latter day Robin Hoods trying re-distribute wealth; we are dealing with ideologues who wish to impose their worldview on the entire globe, and who are willing to use every kind of violence at their disposal. All the violence is justified with references to the Koran, Hadith, and the example of the wars and tactics employed by Muhammad and his Companions.

The West is still consumed with post-colonial guilt, is hampered by political correctness, and wishful thinking. Adding to the confusion have been the geopolitics of oil, and the wars in the Islamic world which have influenced policy adversely -- seeing allies where there are none. President Obama in particular has tried to deny reality, and pursues his goal to win popularity in the Muslim world. There are no quick fixes; we are engaged, as in the Cold War, in a long ideological struggle that is likely to endure for decades. Since poverty is not the problem -- as Khomeini once said, we did not make the revolution to reduce the price of melons -- the solution is not to throw money -- billions of dollars of taxpayer money -- at various Islamic regimes.

Better hope for a soft landing. This report does not spell out whether regular passenger flights included dangerous cargo, or if there were charter flights under false pretenses. In either case, "war is deceit." The allegation is included in a sidebar by BBC reporter Kim Ghattas adjacent to the main report, and appears first below."US imposes economic sanctions on Iran Air," from BBC News, June 23:

Iran Air passenger planes have allegedly been used by the Revolutionary Guards to transport rockets and missiles - some of them to Syria.

Revolutionary Guard officers are said to occasionally take control of Iran Air flights with special cargo.

Wink-wink.

Iran Air doesn't fly to the US and is unlikely to have any assets here, but Washington will also encourage other countries to shun the blacklisted companies and get airports around the world to stop refuelling Iran Air planes.

The main report:

The US has imposed economic sanctions on Iran's national airline, saying Iran Air had supported the Iranian military.

In a statement, the treasury department also said the airline had provided "material support and services" to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.

It said the paramilitary group supported terrorism and committed human rights abuses against protesters.

The US accuses Iran of aiming to develop nuclear weapons. Tehran says its programme is wholly peaceful.

In addition, the US treasury department accused Iranian port company Tidewater Middle East Company of the Revolutionary Guard Corp of exporting arms and military equipment from the seven ports it operates in the country.

"Preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons is a top US government priority and we remain deeply concerned about Iran's nuclear intentions," US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner said in a joint statement.

"The United States is committed to a dual-track policy of applying pressure in pursuit of constructive engagement, and a negotiated solution."

To quote the good doctor from Airplane, "I just wanted to say good luck, and we're all counting on you."

Iran Air has faced US sanctions since 1995, preventing it from buying aircraft or spare parts from Boeing or Airbus.

Last year, the European Commission banned Iran Air jets from European air space, citing safety concerns....

They have all the more reason to do so now.

Well, there's a return on investment. More on this story. "Karzai surrounding himself with anti-US advisers," by Kathy Gannon for the Associated Press, June 23:

KABUL, Afghanistan – President Hamid Karzai is increasingly isolated and has surrounded himself with an inner circle of advisers who are urging him to move closer to Iran and Pakistan as the U.S. draws down its role in Afghanistan, several friends and aides tell The Associated Press.

We speak frequently of "Pakistan's double game," but Afghanistan's equivalent under Karzai is becoming ever more strident.

Their advice is echoed in Karzai's anti-West rhetoric, which has heightened both in his public speeches and in private. He met recently with Iran's defense minister, and constantly cautions against trusting the U.S. to have Afghanistan's best interests at heart.

Several of Karzai's close friends and advisers now speak of a president whose doors have closed to all but one narrow faction and who refuses to listen to dissenting opinions. They say people allowed to see the president are vetted by an inner circle of religious conservatives who belong to a nonviolent wing of Hizb-i-Islami, a radical Islamic group whose relentless attacks on American soldiers forced the U.S. to withdraw from bases in northeastern Kunar and Nuristan provinces.

The group's leader, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, was once an American ally but has since been declared a terrorist by the United States.

Although Hekmatyar shares the Taliban's goal of an Islamic regime, his men have also fought Taliban militants over the past year, and Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar is said to despise him. When the Taliban ruled Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001, Hekmatyar spent five years in exile in Iran.

Inside Afghanistan's presidential palace, Iran, Pakistan and China are most often referred to as reliable allies, according to Karzai's friends and advisers. Last year, Karzai openly acknowledged taking "bags" of money from Iran to finance his administration.

"A lot of Afghans are very concerned about the direction the country is taking, moving away from the international community ... toward a more conservative practice in which the religious people and warlords have more power," Human Rights of Afghanistan Commissioner Nader Nadery said.

"Consistently his aides are pushing him toward Iran and Pakistan," Nadery said. "All those who are managing and controlling his schedule, providing appointments, all see the advantages of breaking with the international community."

Karzai seemed to go out of his way to snub the United States in the days leading up to President Barack Obama's address Wednesday announcing an initial withdrawal of 30,000 U.S. soldiers by next summer.

He stood shoulder to shoulder this week with Ahmad Vahidi, the first Iranian defense minister to visit Afghanistan since Iran's 1979 Islamic revolution. He also announced he would attend an anti-terrorism conference in Tehran later this month, while at the same time questioning the sincerity of U.S. and NATO soldiers in Afghanistan....

Yonathan Melaku turns out to be yet another Misunderstander of Islam. How unfortunate for Hamas-linked CAIR that so many Misunderstanders are coming out of the woodwork on the day of their big "Islamophobia Report" coming-out party.

More on this story. "Man arrested in Pentagon scare charged in DC-area shootings at military sites," from NewsCore, June 23 (thanks to herr Oyal):

WASHINGTON -- A Marine Corps reservist arrested for suspicious activity near the Pentagon last week has been charged in connection with a spate of shootings at military sites in the Washington, D.C., area last fall, federal officials said Thursday.

Yonathan Melaku videotaped himself shouting "allahu Akbar" after firing shots at the US Marine Corps museum and documents concerning bomb-making were found in his home, FOX News reported....

The 22-year-old Marine Corps reservist, who is a Muslim believed to be a naturalized US citizen originally from Ethiopia, was arrested by US Park Police last week with a backpack full of suspicious items.

Melaku fled from law enforcement when he was approached at Arlington National cemetery early Friday. During the chase, he dropped a backpack, which contained spent 9mm shell casings, clear plastic bags containing a powdery substance, spray paint, and a spiral notebook containing references to the Taliban, al Qaeda and Usama bin Laden, among other references to terrorism.

An FBI chemist found that the powdery substance was mostly ammonium nitrate, FOX said.

A search of his home turned up a list of items used to make an improvised explosive device, or IED, as well as a laptop computer holding documents concerning bomb-making, FOX reported. Officials also found a videotape showing Melaku repeatedly firing a handgun while driving near the National Museum of the Marine Corps.

According to FOX, he says in the video: "That's what they get. That's my target. That's the military building. It's going to be attacked." He also yells, "allahu Akbar" repeatedly after firing.

Forensic evidence linked him to five shootings at four military buildings in October and November of 2010, FOX News reported Wednesday.

The D.C.-area shootings occurred at the National Museum of the Marine Corps, Coast Guard and Marine Corps recruiting centers, and at the Pentagon, where windows were shattered just before 5:00am on Oct. 19, 2010.

FOX reported that the cost to repair the windows and exterior of the Pentagon after the Oct. 19 shooting totaled $15,144. Damage resulting from two shootings at the National Museum of the Marine Corps was $83,985.

Meanwhile, the US Marine Corps announced Thursday that Melaku, who held the rank of Lance Corporal, will be processed for "administrative separation" from the Marine Forces Reserve due to an unrelated "grand larceny" charge....

The statement noted that Melaku had no record of misconduct when he was admitted into the Marine Corps....

And no one would have dreamed about questioning him about his beliefs and loyalties. That would have been "Islamophobic."

Misunderstanders of Islam abound -- and these guys' timing couldn't be worse, what with Hamas-linked CAIR issuing its big "Islamophobia" report today. Hamas-linked CAIR devotes its time and energy (and enormous financial resources) to defaming freedom fighters instead of to doing anything to ensure that Muslims in the U.S. stop misunderstanding Islam and thinking that it calls for jihad against unbelievers, instead of for the peace, love, and flowers that Hamas-linked CAIR would like us to believe it is all about.

"Two men arrested in terrorism plot aimed at Seattle military station," from MyNorthwest.com, June 23 (thanks to Peter):

The U.S. Justice Department says two men were arrested in a plot to attack a military recruiting station in Seattle.

Law enforcement began monitoring Abu Khalid Abdul-Latif, a.k.a. Joseph Anthony Davis and Walli Mujahidh a.k.a. Frederick Domingue in early June after someone notified them of being approached about participating in an attack and supplying firearms.

The person agreed to work with agents.

Abdul-Latif, of Seattle, and Mujahidh, of Los Angeles, were captured on video and on audio discussing the attack on the Military Entrance Processing Station on East Marginal Way, a building that houses many civilians, military employees, and a daycare. MEPS are where military branches screen and process enlistees.

According to the DOJ, the men intended to use grenades and machine guns in the attack. The weapons were rendered inoperable without the men knowing.

"Driven by a violent, extreme ideology, these two young Americans are charged with plotting to murder men and women who were enlisting in the Armed Forces to serve and protect our country. This is one of a number of recent plots targeting our military here at home," said Todd Hinnen, Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security, in a news release. "The threat was averted by the combined efforts of the federal, state and local law enforcement officers that make up the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force."...

Hamas-linked CAIR has teamed up with the aptly-named professor Hatem Bazian, who some years ago called for an "intifada" in the U.S., to produce a defamatory report on "Islamophobia" that attempts to ascribe -- much like the Wilders trial -- any criticism of Islamic supremacism and the global jihad to "hate."

Yes, of course. Anyone who is concerned about how Islamic jihadists use Islamic texts and teachings to justify violence against unbelievers must be motivated by "hate." Only "hate" could cause anyone to wonder why so many violent Muslims use the Qur'an to explain their violence and hatred -- people like bin Laden, and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and Feisal Shahzad, and Abdulhakim Muhammad, Khalid Aldawsari, Baitullah Mehsud, and Roshonara Choudhry, and so many more. But no, if you're concerned about them and others like them, it's only because you're motivated by "hate."

CAIR's press release:

New CAIR, UC Berkeley Report Documents Growing Islamophobia in U.S. By Council on American-Islamic Relations Published: Thursday, Jun. 23, 2011 - 10:34 am

WASHINGTON, June 23, 2011 -- Groundbreaking study offers recommendations to help challenge troubling phenomenon

WASHINGTON, June 23, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the University of California, Berkeley's Center for Race and Gender today released a report based on available data and interviews with experts that documents growing Islamophobia in the United States and offers recommendations about how to challenge the troubling phenomenon.

"Berkeley's Center for Race and Gender." What race is Islam? What gender is Islam?

You can get a pdf of the report here.

The groundbreaking report –- titled "Same Hate, New Target: Islamophobia and Its Impact in the United States 2009-2010" -- offers a definition of Islamophobia as a "close-minded prejudice against or hatred of Islam and Muslims" and an overview of its growing negative impact in the United States. After defining the term, the report states: "It is not appropriate to label all, or even the majority of those, who question Islam and Muslims as Islamophobes."

Oh, really? The report lists some people who are supposedly fighting against "Islamophobia," and lists plenty of "Islamophobes," but doesn't give us even a single example of this apparently large group of people who question Islam and Muslims and yet aren't "Islamophobes." In reality, Hamas-linked CAIR brands anyone and everyone who dares to speak out against the jihad and Islamic supremacism as an "Islamophobe." There is in reality no one who "questions Islam and Muslims" who is acceptable to Hamas-linked CAIR. They are bent on marginalizing and discrediting every last individual who does not adopt a warmly positive stance toward the spread of Sharia in the West and all other manifestations of the advancing jihad.

Later on in the press release, Hamas-linked CAIR's Corey Saylor lets slip the report's real agenda -- to limit criticism of Islamic supremacism and jihad: "This report shows that Americans who embrace pluralism must act together to prevent Islamophobia from being accepted in mainstream society." They're going to issue another report which "will offer recommendations to the public and private sectors" -- no doubt including restrictions on the freedom of speech.

Suggestions are offered for all those "who wish to help rid our country of Islamophobia and other forms of intolerance," including passing legislation banning racial profiling, speaking out strongly against smearing entire faiths or peoples and refusing to offer a legitimizing platform to those who spout anti-Muslim bigotry or Islamophobia.

The anti-freedom agenda of this Hamas-linked gang of thugs and Professor Intifada must be exposed, such that no freedom-loving group in the public or private sector will allow itself to be intimidated into letting them dictate to whom it can give a platform and to whom it cannot.

The report itself, meanwhile, is full of howlers. Get this:

Some individuals, institutions and groups were at the center of pushing Islamophobia in America during the period covered by this report: Pamela Geller and Stop the Islamization of America (SIOA); Robert Spencer and Jihad Watch; Brigitte Gabriel and Act! for America; Frank Gaffney and the Center for Security Policy (CSP); Steven Emerson and the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT); Newt Gingrich; the four members of Congress who called for an investigation of Muslim Capitol Hill interns; Osama bin Laden, Al-Qaeda and other violent extremists; and Daniel Pipes.

I can't read this paragraph without laughing. First, let me thank Hamas-linked CAIR for naming my colleague Pamela Geller and me first among their opponents; I assure them they will continue to find ample justification for giving us this place of honor. (Pamela Geller comments here -- don't miss it.) But what makes me laugh is toward the end of the list: among the people "at the center of pushing Islamophobia in America" were "Osama bin Laden, Al-Qaeda and other violent extremists; and Daniel Pipes."

Osama, al-Qaeda, and Pipes! Of course, Hamas-linked CAIR wants us to believe that they reject Osama's version of Islam, and that he was thus purveying Islamophobia no less unmistakably than the mephistophelean Spencer or Pipes. But really this is rather like a Southern publication saying this in 1860: "Some individuals, institutions and groups were at the center of pushing Southernophobia in America during the period covered by this report: William Lloyd Garrison, Frederick Douglass, and Harriet Beecher Stowe; Simon Legree; and Harriet Tubman." (Garrison, Douglass, Stowe and Tubman were abolitionists; Legree a demonically brutal slave-owning character in Stowe's novel Uncle Tom's Cabin.)

So in Hamas-linked CAIR's world, jihad terrorism causes "Islamophobia," and resistance to jihad terror also causes "Islamophobia." Apparently we are all supposed to sit back and acquiesce to the stealth jihad to advance Sharia being pursued by Hamas-linked CAIR and other Islamic supremacist groups in the U.S.

No, thanks. I will instead be working hard to defend freedom and remain one of the foremost thorns in the side of Honest Ibe Hooper and the other Islamic supremacists at Hamas-linked CAIR.

Well, apologists do tell us Sharia is adaptable to the modern age.

The unnamed writer of this article notes how more serious cases take forever in Pakistan while authorities are swift and severe in prosecuting a "blasphemous" text message and similar, but lower-tech cases.

The reason for the discrepancy is simple: laws like this that allow authorities to mind citizens' business and pounce mercilessly on alleged violations of speech, wardrobe, and so forth are an easy way to look busy. There has been no loss of life or property to pursue, and the suspect is caught unaware and defenseless. It is a cheap display of state power and supposed piety at minimal effort with maximal damage to the "perpetrator" who has been marked as an example to intimidate others.

It is a win-win situation for lazy, unaccountable governance, and the waste and injustice such laws enable are another way in which Sharia is simply bad government. "Blasphemy sentence," from Dawn, June 23 (thanks to Zulu):

In a case that appears to be the first of its kind, a man has been sentenced to death for committing blasphemy via cellphone text messaging. On Tuesday, an additional district and sessions judge in Talagang handed down the sentence and imposed a fine on a man in a blasphemy case filed with the Talagang city police station in February last year. The circumstances of the case are murky to say the least. The complainant, a resident of Talagang, told the police that he had been receiving blasphemous text messages from an unfamiliar number. The police set up a special inquiry committee which used cellphone data to trace the apparent owner of the number, a resident of Larkana. It is worth questioning how credible the investigation was, particularly given that we live in an era where text messages are forwarded into endless circulation at unprecedented speed. All sorts of material is passed from person to person, sometimes without even being fully understood, and the authorship of messages is virtually impossible to establish.

It must also be pointed out that the police and court system showed uncharacteristic zeal in pursuing the case. Talagang in Punjab and Larkana in Sindh are hundreds of miles apart; in order to arrest the man, the police had to get special permission from the home department to conduct a raid in another province. The sentence, too, was handed down in far less time — a little more than a year — than is usual for Pakistan`s ordinarily ponderous court system. Most cases drag on for years and the backlog that exists in the lower courts in particular is well known. Meanwhile, police investigations are criticised for moving at a snail`s pace. If the justice system showed similar interest in pursuing other types of cases, the people`s cause would be better served.

In "Geert Wilders Verdict: West 1, Islam 0" at Big Government today, Pamela Geller makes some important observations about the Geert Wilders verdict:

The judges in the Court of Amsterdam delivered their verdict Thursday morning in the heresy trial of Dutch Freedom Party politician Geert Wilders. Wilders has been found not guilty of all charges of inciting hatred against Muslims. The judge, Marcel van Oosten, and the other Dutch authorities ended up doing the right thing, no matter how cowardly and compromised they may have been. They must have known how history would view them if Wilders had been found guilty: as troglodytes who ushered in the return of the Dark Ages.

When do the Islamic supremacists go on trial for inciting hatred against non-Muslims?

“I am delighted with this ruling,” Wilders said. “It is a victory, not only for me but for all the Dutch people. Today is a victory for freedom of speech. The Dutch are still allowed to speak critically about islam, and resistance against islamisation is not a crime. I have spoken, I speak and I shall continue to speak.”

The charges against Geert Wilders were that he had made statements that were intentionally offensive to Muslims; incited hatred against Muslims; incited discrimination against Muslims; and incited hatred of non-Western immigrants.

The Islamic supremacists who initiated the case told the Dutch dhimmi judges that the things Wilders said had led to a rise in discrimination and violence against Muslims. They had no proof, of course, of anyone committing any act of violence against any Muslim, or discriminating against any Muslim, because of anything Geert Wilders said. They just wanted to compel the Netherlands to enforce Islamic blasphemy laws.

This has been dragging on for a good while. The Wilders heresy trial began last October 4, but fell apart just a few weeks later after a special legal panel determined that the judges were biased against Wilders. No kidding. But they found more dhimmi judges and kept going.

The Islamic supremacist “plaintiffs” were seeking a one-euro fine. But it was of course never about a fine, symbolic or otherwise. The Wilders case has always been an attempt to win an Islamic supremacist triumph over the tenets of Western law and free speech. They said if they didn’t get their symbolic one-euro fine, they didn’t get it, but they said they were considering taking their case to the European Court of Human Rights.

Ah yes, take it to the anti-humans under the guise of human rights....

Read it all.

Pamela Geller has the details:

Does being a Muslim mean you can get away with murder?

RALLY FOR JUSTICE FOR FATIMA at the NOW Conference
Friday, June 24th, 1:00 - 2:00

Embassy Suites Tampa - USF/Near Busch Gardens
3705 Spectrum Blvd.
Tampa, Florida 33612 2011

Stand against Islamic supremacism, gender apartheid, and Islamic law in American law enforcement and courts. Call out the feminists and the Tampa Chief of Police, Jane Castor.

National NOW Conference June 24-26 in Tampa, Florida, at the Embassy Suites Tampa - USF/Near Busch Gardens. Jane Castor, Tampa Chief of Police, is scheduled to deliver the Welcome Speech from 1:45 - 2:00 pm

The irony is thicker than blood. Jane Castor, Tampa Chief of Police -- scene of the misogynistic Abdallah cover-up in submission to Islam -- is speaking to a feminist crowd on what? The upside of the dehumanizaton of women? The hypocrisy is crushing. NOW, instead of fighting for women, has taken up genocidal jihad flotillas.

Let's call out the feminist claptrap about women's rights when they stand silent as Muslim girls are murdered here in America, and stand silent in the face of gender apartheid, clitorectomies, forced marriage, child marriage under the sharia in Muslim countries.

What has the hypocrite group NOW done to alleviate the suffering of women living under the boot of Islam? Nothing. Their silence is sanction. What have they done to help Muslim girls here in the US living in terror in devout households?

This Friday we are going to protest the NOW conference taking place in Tampa, scene of the Fatima Abdallah cover-up. The honor killing was classified as an accidental suicide. Medical examiner Laura Harris ruled Fatima's honor killing an accidental suicide by banging her head on the coffee table (there was no blood on the coffee table). The Tampa police department went along with this horrible crime.

Fatima Abdallah's "mouth was bloodied by a blow, and at the left corner of her mouth is an angular cut/incision/indentation, which only could have been made by a blow." Also, "her left eye orbit was broken, and her left eye socket was blackened, suffering a blow causing hemorrhaging of blood about the eye." And "her right arm had contusions at the front inside of the elbow, and at the shoulder near the front armpit, consistent with being grasped forcibly by human hands."

Where are the feminist liars and imposters? Is a Muslim woman's life worthless? Is it politically expedient to allow enforcement of the sharia, so as not to offend Muslims? 

Jane Castor, Tampa Police Dept. Chief, will be speaking. PLEASE PROTEST WITH SIOA.

The 2011 National NOW Conference is being held June 24-26 in Tampa, Florida, at the Embassy Suites Tampa - USF/Near Busch Gardens.

Jane Castor, Tampa Chief of Police, is scheduled to deliver the Welcome Speech from 1:45 - 2:00 pm, so let's RALLY FOR JUSTICE FOR FATIMA from 1:00 - 2:00,  in front of the hotel. Look for the signs!

Pamela has much more here.

In a great victory for decency and sanity, the Court of Amsterdam has acquitted Geert Wilders of all charges.

Wilders remarked:

“I am delighted with this ruling. It is a victory, not only for me but for all the Dutch people. Today is a victory for freedom of speech. The Dutch are still allowed to speak critically about islam, and resistance against islamisation is not a crime. I have spoken, I speak and I shall continue to speak.”

Pamela Geller lists these as the charges against Wilders:

1. Intentionally offending Muslims
2. Inciting hatred against Muslims
3. Inciting discrimination against Muslims
4. Inciting hatred of non-western immigrants

On each, he was acquitted. It is a great victory for common sense, and a decisive defeat for the Islamic supremacist forces that have been trying to destroy the freedom of speech and compel dhimmi Western governments to label the truth about Islam and jihad as "hate speech." But we are not out of the woods yet. The forces that were responsible for the persecution and prosecution of Wilders will not give up, and will pursue similar charges against others. We may only hope that this verdict will set a strong precedent that will make it even less likely that they will succeed in the future. Nonetheless, we will not be completely clear of this kind of Stalinist show trial until "hate speech" laws are definitively rejected as the tools of tyranny that they manifestly are.

Westminster Institute Conference [May 25, 2011]: Fighting the Ideological War. Strategies for Defeating al-Qaeda.
by Ibn Warraq
Part I here.
Part II here.
Part III here.

Patrick Sookhdeo does put forward some positive proposals to combat this ideology, which threatens Western civilization immediately, and the rest of the world in the long-term. Some general strategies should begin with what the jihadists are saying, and then by taking their ideology seriously. Religion can no longer be excluded from international relations. We are engaged in a war of ideas and must not be afraid of criticising Islamic ideology. What can we learn from the success and failures in the battle against the Islamists in the United Kingdom? As Andy Hayman, the former Assistant Commissioner in charge of counter-terrorism in Great Britain, commented in The Times of London on 7th July, 2010, he never thought the threat of al-Qaeda would be home-grown, and soon realised that they needed greater intelligence coverage at home. Counter-terrorist police officers were increased from 500 to 2000. However, the money spent, some £53 million, on preventing radicalisation seemed to have been a total failure since there were more people who had turned to extremism than before the de-radicalization efforts.

Hayman concluded, “MI5 once published figures stating there are 2,000 people of interest and 200 networks. But they now appear reluctant to declare any figures, possibly because it would paint such a grim picture. We should stop dancing around the problem, which has been dogged by political correctness. The plan to reduce the number of Muslims being radicalised by giving those in the mainstream the confidence to challenge extremists is sensible, but overlooks a couple of important factors. First, the extremist threat is international, and the reasons for its existence are beyond the control of any one country. Second, sections of the Muslim community are so suspicious of police involvement that these projects cannot gain traction.” The solution is greater intelligence gathering, winning support from Muslim community, and international co-operation.

Dr Patrick Sookhdeo also wondered about the prospects in the Islamic world. There were some hopeful signs since some Muslim governments were engaging the terrorists at an ideological level, seeking to undermine some of their arguments. There were a number of pronouncements by individual former jihadists or former hardliners renouncing violence such as Dr Sayyid Imam Sharif. Mansour al-Nogaidan, a Saudi and former Salafist who has embraced Sufism wrote, “Muslims are too rigid in our adherence to old, literal interpretations of the Koran. It's time for many verses -- especially those having to do with relations between Islam and other religions -- to be reinterpreted in favor of a more modern Islam. It's time to accept that God loves the faithful of all religions. It's time for Muslims to question our leaders and their strict teachings, to reach our own understanding of the prophet's words and to call for a bold renewal of our faith as a faith of goodwill, of peace and of light.”

However, despite these positive developments, said Dr Sookhdeo, “the essential ideological problems still remained unsolved. Most counter-Islamist policies are carried out by conservatives who are not prepared to tackle the deeper theological legitimacy which terrorism derives from Classical Islam and the sources. Unwilling to argue that: [a] Aggressive texts in the sources should be contextualised, and [b] Sources and models are not applicable to the modern world”. In any case, the reformers and moderates in the Islamic world remain largely marginalized. What makes change in the beliefs of individuals from the Muslim world difficult is the fact that there is no culture of dissent or freethought, or a tradition of uninhibited exchange of ideas as in the West. Individuals remain firmly wedded to their ideologies- a abandonment of their beliefs is a far more traumatic affair in the Islamic world- apart from being dangerous. A self-confessed atheist would not last long in the streets of Cairo or Karachi. Then there is whole culture of honor and shame: a change in beliefs would bring shame on their family, tribe, and religion.

Dr Sookhdeo’s conclusions were bold. We must avoid wishful thinking, and acknowledge the role of Islam, and Islamic theology in inspiring the Islamists. I would go further. I believe, and I must emphasize that I, Ibn Warraq, alone am responsible for the following observations, that we cannot hope to reform Islam without attacking the fundamental tenets of Islam adhered to by Muslims of all colors and stripes, not just Islamists. We shall never make progress until we subject the Koran to the kind of analysis and criticism that was applied to the Bible by Spinoza in the 17th Century, and the great German scholars of the Nineteenth Century, such as Julius Wellhausen and Albert Schweitzer. We must embark on a series of translations into Arabic of works of Koranic criticism, of skepticism, of the great books of Western civilization. We must support the separation of religion and state, and secularists in the Islamic world. We must defend the religious minorities in the Muslim world: by according non-Muslims their human rights, Muslims would already be on their way to secularism.

More on this story. It is not entirely clear whether the "daggers" the inmates attacked guards with were conventional or improvised weapons. But as this report details, there was much more going on than that, and therefore an even higher level of coordination, some means of communication with the outside, and clearly a channel for contraband.

And one would assume this was purportedly a maximum- or high-security prison. "Dozens of Islamist militants tunnel out of Yemeni prison," by Mohammed al-Qadhi and Peter Finn for the Washington Post, June 22:

SANAA, Yemen — More than 60 Islamist militants tunneled out of a prison in Yemen on Wednesday in a well-executed escape that highlighted the security risks in a nation that is increasingly unstable and home to al-Qaeda’s most potent regional affiliate.

The prison break, which occurred in the eastern port city of Mukalla, was coordinated with militants attacking from the outside to divert the guards — a tactic that al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, also known as AQAP, used last summer to free prisoners in the southern city of Aden.

Among the escapees Wednesday were members of an al-Qaeda cell that has killed foreign tourists and tried to attack the U.S. Embassy in Yemen and other Western targets, according to Yemeni officials. AQAP was behind the attempted bombing of a Detroit-bound commercial flight on Christmas Day 2009 and the mailing of bombs on cargo planes destined for the United States.

The prison break could reinject committed fighters into the group’s ranks. Yemeni officials have not released a list of escapees, but one official told The Washington Post that 57 of the 62 men, many of whom fled into nearby mountains, had been convicted on terrorism charges and that some had been sentenced to death.

One is the loneliest number. 62 is a very worrying number:

“Even as we don’t know exactly who escaped yet, 62 is a very worrying number,” said Barbara Bodine, a former U.S. ambassador to Yemen and a diplomat in residence at Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. “The potential for destruction and disruption is high, although AQAP’s ability to be a political force, in whatever small area they control, is very limited.”

The prison in Mukalla, which is about 300 miles east of Aden, held up to 100 convicts who were associated with al-Qaeda or who had been imprisoned after returning from Iraq, where they had joined the insurgency against the U.S.-led coalition, according to Yemeni officials. They said two Syrians and two Saudis were among those who escaped.

The inmates dug the 50-yard tunnel themselves, said one jail official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to give details of the escape.

They attacked a guard with daggers, snatched his gun and fired it as they were making their escape, the official said. One guard was fatally shot, and another was wounded. At the same time, militants attacked from the outside, and a gun battle raged for 30 minutes while the prisoners fled....

The membership of Pakistani military personnel in any jihadist group is obviously not a trivial matter. Nonetheless, these cases do have the effect of deflecting attention in the short run from jihadist groups that are also clients of Pakistani intelligence, like Lashkar-e-Toiba, and from Pakistan's failed policies and shady dealings with groups like the Taliban and al-Qaeda.

An update on this story. "Pakistan: Majors quizzed over 'links with extremists'," from BBC News, June 22 (thanks to Glynn):

Four majors in the Pakistani army are being investigated for alleged links with banned extremist group Hizb ut-Tahrir, the army has said.

Army spokesman Gen Athar Abbas told the BBC the men were not under arrest but were being interrogated in connection with the case of Brig Ali Khan.

He was detained last month and is also accused of links to Hizb ut-Tahrir.

The army says it will not tolerate support for extremism within its ranks. Brig Khan's family say he is innocent.

The brigadier's lawyer and colleagues have told the BBC he is being victimised for criticising army top brass for their support for the US-led "war on terror". 'Incites hatred'

The brigadier is now being interrogated by military intelligence, the army says.

He is one of the most senior serving officers accused of links with extremists in Pakistan in recent years.

"He is under detention and an investigation is in progress for his contacts with a proscribed militant organisation," military spokesman Maj Gen Athar Abbas told BBC Urdu's Asif Farooqi on Tuesday....

A compromise with the prosecution, who wanted a whopping twelve years for Geele's axe-wielding home invasion. An update on this story. "Denmark stiffens sentence for cartoonist attacker," by Mette Fraende for Reuters, June 22:

COPENHAGEN (Reuters) - A Danish appeals court Wednesday lengthened the prison sentence of a Somali man to 10 years from nine for attempting to kill a cartoonist whose 2005 drawing of the Prophet Mohammad provoked Muslim outrage.

Whose prophet?

Muhudiin Mohamed Geele broke into the home of cartoonist Kurt Westergaard with an axe on New Year's Day last year.

The 29-year old was sentenced to nine years imprisonment in February after he was found guilty of attempted terrorism, manslaughter and violence against a police officer.

But prosecutors appealed and asked for a 12-year sentence.

The court called the attack an attempt to frighten the population and destabilize society, and thus an act of terror.

I sentence you to Somalia:

Geele was also sentenced to be expelled and banned from Denmark for life after serving his sentence.

He had pleaded not guilty to the terror and manslaughter charges, but guilty to unlawful possession of a weapon and breaking and entering. He said he had entered the cartoonist's home intending only to frighten him.

Westergaard's drawing of the Prophet with a turban resembling a bomb was one of a dozen cartoons lampooning Islam published in 2005 by the Danish daily Jyllands-Posten, which led to violent protests in 2006.

Most Muslims consider any depiction of the founder of Islam offensive....

So we've heard.

Whatever the suspicious object was that police detonated, this was an act of intimidation, intended to "strike terror" in the hearts of unbelievers (Qur'an 8:60) in a country where attacks against churches are a very real and immediate possibility. Just ask the people of Temanggung. West Borneo: bomb threats to a church, Catholics in the crosshairs of terrorists," by Mathias Hariyadi for Asia News, June 22:

Jakarta (AsiaNews) - The Catholic Church Stella Maris in Siantan Hulu, a village north of the city of Pontianak, the capital of western Borneo, is in the crosshairs of terrorists. On the evening of June 20 an anonymous phone call announced an imminent bomb attack. A woman's voice, in fact, warned of a crude bomb planted near the building. The pastor, warned by a faithful, called the bomb squad who blew up a hidden object in the trash. It has been a while since attacks against the Christian minority, although in the past there have been incidents of sectarian violence.

Interviewed by AsiaNews, Severianus Endy, a journalist in Pontianak, reports that the first phone call was addressed to a man named Beno, a Catholic pharmacist in the village. He immediately warned the pastor of Stella Maris, Fr. Sony Wengkang, who then contacted the police. "The threat came - said the priest - from an unidentified woman's voice, calling from a cell phone. The number was not hidden. "

A bomb squad immediately intervened to verify the seriousness of the threat. Rummaging in the garbage, experts found a suspicious object inside a garbage can and they detonated it. Addressing the crowd of worshipers, the pastor said that the community should be notified in case of concrete threats, at the same time he sought to soothe tensions, calling Catholics to calm and social harmony. Meanwhile, police launched an investigation to trace those responsible.

In the past, Pontianak, West Borneo, was the scene of sectarian violence. The area is inhabited mostly by Indonesians of Chinese descent and native local Dayak ethnic group, Catholics. In 1999 they were involved in violent clashes with maduranesi migrants, from the island of Madura in East Java, and mostly Muslim.

Previously, other incidents of sectarian conflicts had occurred in 1997 and 1996. Only the intervention of the Indonesian army guaranteed the return of calm and order.

The next question in any of these cases is always the matter of inside help or negligence. "Al-Qaeda militants escape Yemen prison," from the Telegraph, June 22:

In a carefully choreographed escape, the militants attacked their guards and seized their weapons just as bands of heavily armed attackers descended on the prison in Mukalla on the Arabian Sea.

The 62 escapees included militants convicted on terror charges or held in protective custody pending trial, according to officials. Two were reportedly rearrested.

The jail is believed to house more than 100 al-Qaeda militants.

The last major jail breakout by al-Qaeda militants in Yemen took place in 2006, when 23 escaped a Sana'a detention facility including Qassim al-Raimi, who has become the dominant figure in al-Qaeda's most active franchise.

The branch has been linked to several nearly successful attacks on US targets, including the plot to bomb a Detroit-bound airliner in December 2009. The group also put sophisticated bombs into US-addressed parcels that made it onto cargo flights....

Break out the hats and hooters.

"CAIR Loses IRS Status," from IPT News, June 22 (thanks to all who sent this in):

Donations to the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) no longer are tax deductible after the organization was among 275,000 tax-exempt organizations purged earlier this month by the Internal Revenue Service.

The groups failed to file required annual reports, known as form 990s, detailing their revenues and expenses, for three consecutive years. CAIR had been a non-profit on its own, but in 2007, the IRS approved a separate tax-exempt CAIR Foundation. The foundation never filed any subsequent reports. Both the foundation and CAIR national are on the purge list.

CAIR has 30 state chapters throughout the country, many of which have their own non-profit designations which remain active.

While the IRS believes most of the organizations stripped of status have shut down, those still operating can apply for reinstatement. Meanwhile, CAIR's web site continues to solicit donations by touting them as tax deductible two weeks after the IRS issued the list and notifications were sent to all 275,000 purged groups.....

They want my head on a platter

Along with David Horowitz, Pamela Geller (who comments here), David Yerushalmi, Brigitte Gabriel, John Jay, and others, I've been named to "The Anti-Muslim Inner Circle" by the Leftist pro-hate and anti-freedom group Southern Poverty Law Center, whose officials make a tidy living running interference for Islamic supremacists.

ROBERT SPENCER

ORGANIZATION Runs the Jihad Watch website, a project of the David Horowitz Freedom Center. Co-founder with Pamela Geller (see above) of Stop Islamization of America and the American Freedom Defense Initiative.

CREDENTIALS Spencer has a master's degree in religious studies from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Co-produced with Geller the film "The Ground Zero Mosque: Second Wave of the 9/11 Attacks" (2011). Author of numerous books including The Truth About Muhammad: Founder of the World's Most Intolerant Religion (2007) and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) (2005).

SUMMARY Spencer is entirely self-taught in the study of modern Islam and the Koran.

It doesn't much matter, since "self-taught" does not equal "wrong," however much the SPLC and Islamic supremacists who make the same claim wish that it did. Still, this is an entirely false claim. I began studying Islam while in college, and took courses on it. In graduate school I studied with Gordon Newby, author of The Making of the Last Prophet and A Concise Encyclopedia of Islam -- which is not to say that he and I saw eye-to-eye on much of anything. While in grad school I wrote an extensive study of how the Qur'an's teaching on the crucifixion of Jesus Christ (see sura 4:157) was influenced by Gnostic Christian traditions. Certainly the bulk of my study of Islam I did after graduate school, but it is false to say I am "entirely self-taught."

Critics have accused him of doggedly taking the Koran literally — Spencer considers it innately extremist and violent — while ignoring its nonviolent passages and the vast interpretive tradition that has modified Koranic teachings over the centuries.

That's nonsense. Anyone can see an extensive discussion of the Qur'an's nonviolent passages, and of Islamic interpretative traditions regarding it, in my books Onward Muslim Soldiers and The Complete Infidel's Guide to the Koran. But also, that "vast interpretive tradition that has modified Koranic teachings over the centuries" seems to have eluded not only my grasp, but that of Islamic jihadists around the world -- and yet they, as we have seen again and again, pride themselves on their Islamic rigor and authenticity.

Spencer believes that moderate Muslims exist, but to prove it, they'd have to fully denounce the portions of the Koran he finds objectionable.

How terrible, to ask people to renounce faith-based violence (Qur'an 2:191; 4:89; 9:5, 9:29; 47:4; etc.), the oppression of women (Qur'an 2:282; 4:3; 4:34, etc.), sanctified plunder (Qur'an 8:1; 8:41), and all the rest of it.

Spencer has been known to fraternize with European racists and neo-fascists, though he says such contacts were merely incidental.

Not just incidental, but non-existent. I've never had anything to do with any racists or neo-fascists, and never would -- but this just shows how the Big Lie works: this false claim has been circulating for years, demonstrating yet again that if you repeat something often enough, then people will start believing it.

Benazir Bhutto, the late prime minister of Pakistan, accused Spencer of "falsely constructing a divide between Islam and West" in her 2008 book, Reconciliation: Islam, Democracy, and the West. Spencer, she wrote, presented a "skewed, one-sided, and inflammatory story that only helps to sow the seed of civilizational conflict."

Yes, there is no divide between Islam and the West. Pakistan's close alliance with the United States and heartfelt cooperation in getting bin Laden shows that. And remember that Benazir herself was so interested in heading off civilizational conflict that she funded and armed the Taliban in Afghanistan.

IN HIS OWN WORDS "Osama [bin Laden]'s use of these and other [Koranic] passages in his messages is consistent … with traditional understanding of the Quran. When modern-day Jews and Christians read their Bibles, they simply don't interpret the passages cited as exhorting them to violent actions against unbelievers. This is due to the influence of centuries of interpretative traditions that have moved them away from literalism regarding these passages. But in Islam, there is no comparable interpretative tradition."
— From The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades), 2005

Uh huh.

"Where is moderate Islam? How can moderate Muslims refute the radical exegesis of the Qur'an and Sunnah? If an exposition of moderate Islam does not address or answer radical exegeses, is it really of any value to quash Islamic extremism? If the answer lies in a simple rejection of Qur'anic literalism, how can non-literalists make that rejection stick, and keep their children from being recruited by jihadists by means of literalism? Of course, as I have pointed out many times, traditional Islam itself is not moderate or peaceful. It is the only major world religion with a developed doctrine and tradition of warfare against unbelievers."
— Jihad Watch, Jan. 14, 2006

Yep.

As I said last night, it's thin gruel, but here is the Leftist dhimmi pseudo-journalist's hit piece on my FrontPage interview regarding Anthony Weiner and Huma Abedin: "Anthony Weiner-converted-to-Islam meme spreads," by Justin Elliott at Salon, June 21:

This interview with Robert Spencer, the go-to Islam expert for the right wing, offers a taste of the worldview of the Shariah fear-mongering set...

The "go-to Islam expert for the right wing"! I like that, although I don't see what is or ought to be particularly "right wing" about acting in defense of the freedom of speech and equality of rights for all people. On the other hand, the left wing has always been inclined toward totalitarianism and elitism, so perhaps Elliott considers defending freedom and legal equality to be "right wing" indeed.

In any case, in this he is signaling to his hapless Leftist readers at Salon that I am evil and not to be trusted. After all, I engage in "Shariah fear-mongering." Of course. What's to be concerned about regarding a law that approves of female genital mutilation; the restriction of non-Muslim religious practice; the devaluing of a non-Muslim's life as compared to that of a Muslim; the brutalizing of women; the forbidding of music; and, of course, jihad and Islamic supremacism?

This is the second time we've heard the baseless claim that the very Jewish Weiner might have converted to Islam when he married Huma Abedin.

The important point here is that Spencer is no fringe figure; he's at the very center of the anti-Muslim movement in the United States. His bio describes the impressive access he has to both mainstream and right-leaning media sources:

His articles on Islam and other topics have appeared in the New York Post, the Washington Times, the Dallas Morning News, the UK's Guardian, Canada's National Post, Middle East Quarterly, WorldNet Daily, First Things, Insight in the News, National Review Online, and many other journals.

Spencer has discussed jihad, Islam, and terrorism at a workshop sponsored by the U.S. State Department and the German Foreign Ministry. He has also appeared on the BBC, ABC News, CNN, FoxNews's O'Reilly Factor, the Sean Hannity Show, the Glenn Beck Show, Fox and Friends, and many other Fox programs, PBS, MSNBC, CNBC, C-Span, France24 and Croatia National Televison (HTV), as well as on numerous radio programs including Bill O'Reilly's Radio Factor, The Laura Ingraham Show, Bill Bennett's Morning in America, Michael Savage's Savage Nation, The Sean Hannity Show, The Alan Colmes Show, The G. Gordon Liddy Show, The Neal Boortz Show, The Michael Medved Show, The Michael Reagan Show, The Rusty Humphries Show, The Larry Elder Show, The Barbara Simpson Show, Vatican Radio, and many others. He has been a featured speaker at Dartmouth College, Stanford University, New York University, Brown University, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the University of Virginia, the College of William and Mary, Washington University of St. Louis, the University of Wisconsin at Madison, the University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee, and many other colleges and universities.

Can you picture Elliott's static and impotent rage as he read all that? After all, the Left is pro-censorship and favors the silencing of dissenters rather than free and open discussion. Clearly the fact that I've appeared in all these places and more nettles him. But unfortunately for him, the truth is getting out in more places and among ever more people all the time.

I asked Spencer about his claim, and he emailed: "If [Weiner] converted, it was almost certainly for convenience, not out of conviction." Spencer also amended his statement that Weiner "most likely" converted to "most immediately obvious":

"'Most likely' is a bit overstated. That is the most immediately obvious scenario, given Abedin's background and self-identification as a Muslim. It is, as is obvious from the rest of what I said, not the only possible scenario," he wrote.

That's all there is. I warned you it was thin gruel. Anyway, apparently to speculate as to whether Anthony Weiner and Huma Abedin complied with the letter of Islamic law when they got married is deeply offensive and evidence of some kind of bigotry, even though Abedin identifies herself as a Muslim and thus it wouldn't have been unreasonable at all, or unusual for such situations, if he had asked Weiner to make a pro-forma conversion to Islam for the sake of the marriage. They're both likely to be post-modern secularists anyway, so would it really have mattered all that much to him, or necessarily interfered with his cultural Judaism? Elliott's link above to the "very Jewish" Weiner actually goes to a piece that says that Weiner "doesn’t belong to a synagogue or consider himself close to a single rabbi," and that as a child "we weren’t a very religious household, but we had a very strong sense of our Judaism." It also details his pro-Israel voting record. Would all this be jeopardized by a formalistic conversion to a religion about which Weiner almost certainly knows next to nothing, and which presents itself to prospective converts as tolerant and ecumenical? Not necessarily.

What's more, Weiner fasts during Ramadan and has given up alcohol, and Arab News describes his wife as a "pious" Muslim -- i.e., one who probably knows of and respects the Islamic law forbidding a Muslim woman from marrying a non-Muslim man. But speculate that Weiner has converted to Islam? You must be some kind of conspiracy theorist or greasy Islamophobe, or both!

In any case, in light of all this, the possibility that Weiner might have converted to Islam is anything but "baseless," although we may never know for sure one way or the other. What is demonstrably baseless right now is Justin Elliott's claim to journalistic fairness and integrity.

Arid Uka is a Kosovar Albanian Muslim. For some odd and unexplained reason he was neither moderate nor brimming with gratitude towards Americans, as every learned analyst knows that every single Kosovar Albanian is. "Charges filed in slayings of U.S. airmen in Germany," from CNN, June 22 (thanks to Harry):

(CNN) -- A man accused of killing two United States Air Force servicemen outside an airport in Germany was charged on Tuesday in a formal complaint filed by the U.S. Department of Justice.

The suspect, Arid Uka, also known as "Abu Reyyan," was arrested in March after he allegedly opened fire on an Air Force bus outside Frankfurt International Airport on March 2.

Uka, 21, is accused of shooting and killing Nicholas Alden and Zachary Ryan Cuddeback of the U.S. Air Force and injuring two other servicemen. He is in German custody and will be brought to New York for trial, according to U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara.

According to the complaint filed Tuesday, Uka shot Alden in the head before boarding the bus and shooting Cuddeback. He then continued to fire, injuring two other servicemen while shouting "God is great," the complaint said.

When his weapon jammed, Uka ran from the bus and was later arrested by German police, the complaint said.

According to German officials, Uka later confessed to the shooting and said he was motivated to carry out the attack after watching an Internet video he said showed U.S. soldiers raping Muslim women.

Uka is a Muslim from Kosovo who was influenced by radical Islamist websites, German authorities said....

Frontpage Interview’s guest today is The Anti-Jihadist, a counter-jihad writer, activist and critic of Islam who resides in a majority Muslim country. He writes under a pseudonym for reasons that do not need to be explained. His work can also be found at Jihad Watch, Infidel Bloggers Alliance and Pedestrian Infidel.

FP: Welcome The Anti-Jihadist to Frontpage Interview.

I would like to talk to you today about the Muslim persecution of Christians in Malaysia. But first, tell us a bit about your background and how you arrived to being who you are.

The Anti-Jihadist: In order to protect my identity, I’d rather not get into too many specifics about my background, for reasons I hope you and your readers understand. Suffice it to say that I grew up in a middle class, educated family where the discussion of politics and other ‘sensitive’ topics was encouraged. I grew to appreciate and then embrace this intellectual sort of freedom.

As I grew older, I began to notice differences between what I heard the government say or what was taught in school, and what was really happening in the world, but I learned to keep such thoughts to myself in order to get along. Then 9-11 happened and it turned the world upside down, my own perception of it in particular. I wanted to be surprised that Muslims had carried out mass murder explicitly in the name of Islam, but I wasn’t. Another shock for me was when I found out that the Muslims — jihadists, Al Qaeda members and others — who planned the attacks in New York and Washington had had a big planned meeting right here in Kuala Lumpur (the capital and biggest city in Malaysia) in early 2000. And the conspiracy theories about 9-11, the increased appearance of anti-Semitic diatribes in Malaysian bookshops (one tome by Henry Ford is popular here) were things that I simply could not turn a blind eye to anymore. Lastly, Malaysian terrorist Azahari Husin had his hero’s sendoff near Kuala Lumpur in 2005, and about the same time the Malaysian Christian convert Lina Joy was told by this nation’s highest court that she was not allowed to become a Christian, despite the fact that religious freedom is supposedly guaranteed by Malaysia’s constitution. By then, I could no longer hold back my pent-up disgust and outrage at what was happening.

FP: So you turned your back on Islam?

TAJ: I don’t want your readers to have the impression that I am now or ever was a Muslim. While I am not a Muslim, I have indeed been asked to become one, on more than one occasion and with varying degrees of seriousness. ‘Dawah’, or Islamic prosetylization, is never too far away in Malaysia.

Deciding that Islam as an ideology (and not Muslims per se) was my enemy was a personal Rubicon for me, a step that, once taken, could never be retracted. I understood how serious this was, from my own studies of Islam, from my knowledge of what’s happened to other critics of Islam, and from the repeated warnings here in Malaysia regarding ‘insults’ to Islam — i.e. being too truthful about it.  And the pointed Malaysian warnings about being ‘respectful’ of all religions (‘respect’ for Islam is all the government here really cares about) make it very clear that criticism of Islam is a big, big red line that should never be crossed.  Furthermore, in Malaysia it’s quite legal for anyone to be arrested and held indefinitely without charge, trial or access to legal council.  It’s a law called the ‘Internal Security Act’ or ‘ISA’ for short and it’s positively medieval. ISA is one of the reasons that you rarely hear criticism of Islam from anyone in this country, in public and even in private, no matter how outrageous things get.

So around late 2005, when I made my fateful personal decision to take up the cause of counter-jihad, to oppose Islam, I told very, very few people. Thankfully, my significant other, a former Muslima, who has known since the beginning, has fully supported me. I have a very small circle of close friends with whom I’ve shared my views, my articles, and so on.

Beyond that, I’ve told no one–not my family, my colleagues, acquaintances and most of my friends. My counter-jihad writing and work are secrets that I’ve been compelled to keep in order to ensure my continued survival.  And it is a wearisome burden, I can assure you. My writing and my political views has, in essence, forced me to live a double life. Beyond my trusted circle I cannot afford to tell anyone about what I know, or my writing, or about what others in the counter-jihad are saying. So there has been a personal toll–I’ve had to become paranoid, and always watchful about what I say around others. But I’ve never considered going back to what I was before. I can’t and I won’t.

FP: Share with us what is happening to Christians in your country.

This Asia News piece never specifically identifies what kind of "fundamentalists" were behind this attack. Militant Baptists? Hardcore Hindus? We only get the real picture from the name of one of the attackers: Thajuddin. And so it becomes clear that this is another story involving the peculiar Islamic "morality" that finds the prospect of a woman out bicycling at night to be immoral, but the brutal assault of that woman to be perfectly moral.

"Kerala: ‘morality police’ attacks women because she is out at night," by Nirmala Carvalho for Asia News, June 22 (thanks to Block Ness):

Mumbai (AsiaNews) – A 31-year-old woman working as an information technology technician at the Infopark in Kakkanad, Kochi, Kerala, was brutally assaulted by a group of people acting as ‘morality police’. The incident occurred last Sunday at 10.30 pm.

Tasni Banu was cycling with a friend when a group of men started shouting at them. “We won't allow you to make this place another Bangalore where girls go out in the night and party,” they said.

"Later four persons abused me using filthy language,” Tasni said. “When I questioned their behaviour, they assaulted me," she said.

The Chief Minister of Kerala asked police for a report on the incident.

It is a very serious concern that many girls have recently been attacked by anti-social elements in Kerala. In Tasni’s case, the attackers warned her to stay off the streets and not to go out at night. They also told her to avoid the Bangalore lifestyle. According to the victim, one of her attackers was probably drunk.

Police believe that fundamentalists are probably behind the incident. “We have collected certain information about the persons who attacked the girl. We will take them into custody soon,” said Thrikkakara Assistant Commissioner of Police T R Prakash.

The police on Tuesday recorded statements from Tasni, who is in hospital with severe bruises on her neck and hand. “Women are not safe in the streets of Kochi. The attack reflects the attitude of society towards women who have to go out during the night," Tasni added.

Police said they have identified Thajuddin, one of the attackers. He is said to be an auto-rickshaw driver.

According to Sajan K George, President, Global Council of Indian Christians (GCIC), “Such incidents are manifestations of the rising tide of fundamentalism which is taking roots in Kerala”. It shows “how a section of the Muslim community is persecuting its own.”

“A few years ago, Tasni Banu, was in the news years ago for defying the fundamentalists in Malappuram as she had opted to marry under the Special Marriage Act . At that time, she had to face the wrath of not only her parents but also a group of fundamentalists who imposed a house arrest on her and later ostracised her."

Move America Forward has compiled care packages that contain goods our troops need and cannot get -- as a way of saying "thank you" for their sacrifices and courage.

You can show your gratitude by sending one to the troops. Each care package will include a personal message written by you where you can express your gratitude to our military.

Move America Forward is a 501(C)3 so all care package donations are tax deductible.

Contribute here

Once again I am captaining a team of contributors: "The Anti-Jihadists"! If you're a blogger, please join our team! Let's take the big prize for largest contribution amount this year! Joining the competition is easy. Simply e-mail MAF Blogger Danny (danny@moveamericaforward.org) to get placed on a team and obtain the correct link to the care packages.

Right now the team consists of:

Jihad Watch
Atlas Shrugs
Creeping Sharia
Cao's Blog
D. C. Watson
Facing Islam
Islam Today Oregon
The Jawa Report
MidnightWatcher’s Blogspot
Newstime.NZ
Patriot's Corner
Zilla of the Resistance

In "Ban the Burqa" in the American Thinker today, Pamela Geller discusses the Carnita Matthews case -- a claim of victim status that backfired on the lying Muslim accuser, at least initially. Pamela also explains why the burqa should be banned entirely.

Back in November, I reported on a burqa'ed Muslima in Australia, Carnita Matthews, who was charged with making a false complaint that used the Muslim victimhood card in her defense. "All cops are racist," she charged -- what race? Covered from head to toe in a burqa, with just a slit through which to see, the Muslima claimed that a police officer had tried to tear off her burqa.

It didn't happen. Matthews was charged with making a false complaint to police. And the judge, Magistrate Robert Rabbidge, saw through her claim right away, describing her lie as "deliberate, malicious and ruthless." Rabbidge added: "There is not a shadow of doubt in my mind, beyond a reasonable doubt, that she knew that the complaint she was making was false."

Matthews, predictably, played the race card, saying: "You look at me and see me wearing this and you couldn't handle it. All cops are racist."

Her lawyer claimed that Matthews had been a victim of mistaken identity. Because who really knows who was under that burqa? Only Allah can say for sure. But Rabbidge would have none of it. Matthews is the one who lodged the complaint against an officer, and signed a statement to that effect. Police prosecutor sergeant Lisa McEvoy said: "Her signature on that affidavit coupled with the signature on her driver's licence is exactly the same."

Matthews was found guilty, and was sentenced to six months in prison. Yet despite the indisputable evidence against her, the burqa'ed civilizational jihadist appealed -- and this past week, she won, all the while remaining inside her cloth coffin. A new judge, Clive Jeffreys, bought her claim of mistaken identity, and said that because she was wearing a burqa, there was no certainty that Carnita Matthews was the same woman who falsely accused the police officer. Jeffreys contradicted Rabbidge, saying: "I am not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that she made the complaint. Even if I was satisfied that she made the complaint, I am not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that it was knowingly false."

The Muslims expressed their gratitude for this in their usual way: it was an ugly scene. Australia's News.com.au reported: "More than a dozen Muslim supporters linked arms and began chanting 'Allah Akbar' as they stormed out of Downing Centre Court with Mrs Matthews concealed behind them. Tempers rose and they began jostling with police after several members of the group attacked cameramen."  Matthews' dhimmi lawyer Stephen Hopper explained: "They are obviously happy with the result and are expressing it in a way that is culturally appropriate to them."

Attacking cameramen: "culturally appropriate" for Muslims.

Read it all.

Translating Jihad has now posted the complete subtitled video of the statement by the hijabbed Kuwaiti "activist" Salwa al-Mutairi, calling for the revival of the Islamic practice of using captive non-Muslim women as sex slaves, in accord with Qur'an 4:3.

"Video: Kuwaiti Activist: 'I Hope that Kuwait Will Enact a Law for...Sex Slaves,'" from Translating Jihad, June 22:

[...] I was given the opportunity to visit Mecca, and when I did so, I brought up (this man's) situation to the muftis in Mecca. I told them that I had a question, since they were men who specialized in what was halal, and what was good, and who loved women. I said, "What is the law of sex slaves?"

The mufti said, "With the law of sex slaves, there must be a Muslim nation at war with a Christian nation, or a nation which is not of the religion, not of the religion of Islam. And there must be prisoners of war."

"Is this forbidden by Islam?," I asked.

"Absolutely not. Sex slaves are not forbidden by Islam. On the contrary, sex slaves are under a different law than the free woman. The free woman must be completely covered except for her face and hands. But the sex slave can be naked from the waist up. She differs a lot from the free woman. While the free woman requires a marriage contract, the sex slave does not--she only needs to be purchased by her husband, and that's it. Therefore the sex slave is different than the free woman."

Of course, I also asked religious experts in Kuwait (about this issue), and they told me about the problem with the passionate man, or even the man who is committed to his religion. For every good man in our religion, the only solution for him--when forbidden women come around, if he's tempted to sin, then the solution to this issue is for him to purchase sex slaves. I hope that Kuwait will enact the law for this category, this category of people--the sex slaves. [...]

There is much more. Read it all.

Westminster Institute Conference [May 25, 2011]: Fighting the Ideological War. Strategies for Defeating al-Qaeda.
by Ibn Warraq
Part I here.
Part II here.

Dr Patrick Sookhdeo superbly summarizes the historical roots and the theological components of the Islamists’ ideology in this way:

• Historically Islam continually faces the same challenges which it is facing today
o Difficulty in coping with change
o Constant quest to return to what is pure and authentic
• These pressures have frequently led to violence and conflict
• Quest for authenticity has led to violent reactions
o Wars of apostasy
o Wars of succession
o Wars of takfir
o Wars against the infidel
• Set the parameters for contemporary violence

• All of the main Islamic sources can be used to justify violence:
o Qur’an – abrogation of peaceful Meccan by aggressive Medinan verses
o Hadith – traditions recording words and deeds of Muhammad related to violence
o Muhammad’s Model (Sira) – his normative example in dealing with opponents (raids, wars, assassinations, Jews) and his explicit command
o Shari‘a and classical scholars – codified laws of Jihad
o Violence in Islamic history
• Civil wars Sunni-Shi‘a, Kharijis, dynastic, tribal
• Conquests and expansion
o Model of recurring revivals: purifying Islam, return to Shari‘a, expansion by Jihad.
• The influential Islamist Abdallah ‘Azzam celebrates Muhammad’s role as a military leader:
o “Jihad was a way of life for the Pious Predecessors (Salaf-us-Salih), and the Prophet (SAWS) was a master of the Mujahideen and a model for fortunate inexperienced people.
o The total number of military excursions which he (SAWS) accompanied was 27.
o He himself fought in nine of these; namely Badr; Uhud, Al-Muraysi, The Trench, Qurayzah, Khaybar, The Conquest of Makkah, Hunayn and Taif . . . This means that the Messenger of Allah (SAWS) used to go out on military expeditions or send out an army at least every two months.”
• [Abdallah ‘Azzam, Join the Caravan, p. 30]

• Faisal Shahzad, the suspected perpetrator of the failed car bombing in Times Square, NYC, commenting on a Muslim opponent:
o "I bet when it comes to defending the lands, his opinion would be we should do dialogue, etc., which is not the proven way from history and has not worked in current time and will not work in the future because it simply wasn't the way of the Quran."

• The well-known Egyptian scholar, Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd [died 2010], has noted:
o “If we follow the rules of interpretation developed from the classical “science of Koranic interpretation”, it is not possible to condemn terrorism in religious terms. It remains completely true to the classical rules in its evolution of sanctity for its own justification. This is where the secret of its theological strength lies.”

• Islamism
– Resurgent in first half of 20th century
– Accelerated spread since 1970s

• View of Islam as inherently political: Unity of religion (din) and state (dawlah) –
• no dichotomy
o Islam aims at political dominance everywhere.
o State is the best tool for implementing Shari‛a.
o Seek to gain power in state and then use its coercive power to enforce Shari‛a.
o Peace only possible under Islamic rule.
o Qu’ran and Shari`a contain recipe for complete social and political system (nizam)

• Theological Components

o Takfir – Judging jahiliyya (idolatry) wherever it is found. Legal, official declaration of heresy and apostasy
– Jahiliyya demands response of jihad
o Jihad against internal “apostates” (secular Muslim regimes) and external infidels (the West)
o Istishad – glorification of martyrdom
– Renewed the Khariji and Assassin principle of suicide missions
o Khilafa – restoring the Caliphate a shari‘a duty
o Tawhid – unitary and uniform vision of God, universe and society: One God, one people, one law
– God’s physical laws imposed on the universe
– God’s religious law (shari‘a) imposed on society
– God’s unity enforced on all in unitary shari‘a system
o Hakimiyya (rabbaniyya) - God’s sovereignty, implementing tawhid

• All legal and political systems must be based on shari‘a
• Islam as revolution – Protest of poor and oppressed, “wretched of the earth”, purifying violence, liberation theology, third-worldism.
• Utopian – Naïve and holistic view of man’s inherent goodness (fitra) flourishing under a totalitarian worldwide Islamic system that ensures God’s will on earth.
• Shari‘a centered – Shari‘a only criterion of legitimacy. Must implement Shari‘a in state to fulfil God’s will.
• Binary dichotomies – Good vs Evil, God vs Satan, everyone must choose - no neutral ground, no innocent civilians.
• Conspiracy theories – Scapegoating. Identify evil enemies who always, at all times and places, seek to destroy Islam.
• Permanent battle – Constant fight in God’s way.

As Dr. Sookhdeo reminds us, “the mainline Islamist movements are a seedbed out of which the terrorist groups originate, and with which they continue to exist in a symbiotic relationship:
– The Wahhabi-Salafi movement (Saudi Arabia, worldwide)
– The Muslim Brotherhood (Egypt, worldwide)
– The Jama‘at–i-Islami (Indian Subcontinent, worldwide)
– The Deobandi movement (Indian Subcontinent, worldwide)
– Ahl-i-Hadith (Indian Subcontinent)
– The Shi‘a revolutionary Islamist movement founded by Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr, Ayatollah Khomeini and Ali Shariati.”

The terrorist networks have become increasingly decentralized, as the focus shifts to self-reliant individuals and groups. Al-Qaeda does not necessarily have much direct influence over their “affiliates”, which use their association with al-Qaeda to gain credibility and funding, but remain essentially autonomous. There may well be further decentralization after Bin Laden’s death, and confusion over the succession.

In "Honor killing cover-up in Florida?" in WND today, Pamela Geller gives the details of this curious case:

A Muslim woman shunned by her devout Muslim family for her "shameful" divorce dies a sudden death after "throwing herself on the floor" in front of her family, and it's classified an accident. That's what Florida law enforcement determined. No one was charged in the death of 48-year-old Fatima Abdallah in Florida. But there is evidence that she may have been a victim of Islamic honor killing, and that Tampa authorities are complicit in a cover-up.

Honor killing is the all too common Islamic practice in which a woman who has brought "shame" to the family is murdered to preserve family "purity." It should be exposed, investigated and stopped in the U.S. – not covered up. This is Shariah in America. The idea that a woman would die after she "threw herself to the floor" is institutionalized devaluation of women and tacit sanctioning of honor killing – in accord with Islamic law.

Medical examiner Laura Hair ruled Fatima Abdallah's death accidental. Deputy Police Chief Marc Hamlin said, "The bottom line is, no matter how long you investigate and no matter how much you investigate, it's not going to overrule the competent medical evidence that it was an accident." How do they know that? How is it more likely that she threw herself to the floor than she was fatally thrown to the floor?

Even worse, the Tampa Police report claims that Abdallah committed suicide by repeatedly striking her head against a coffee table. The idea defies logic, belies reality. There is a great deal of evidence that the Tampa Police investigation was drastically flawed and that the Police Department and medical examiner ignored numerous indications that Fatima Abdallah did not commit suicide or die in an accident, but was brutally assaulted.

Read it all. And act: please write to Dr. Vernard Adams, the Chief Medical Examiner in the Hillsborough County Medical Examiners office (the office that called Fatima Abdallah's death an accidental suicide). His email address is Adamsv@hillsboroughcounty.org. Pamela Geller has a sample letter here, including extensive documentation of the problems with the official explanation of Fatima Abdallah's death. Please write Dr. Adams, and cc me at director@jihadwatch.org and Pamela Geller at PamelaGeller@gmail.com.

"Pakistan's army has long faced accusations that it harbours extremist sympathisers within its ranks, and some analysts say the detention could be an attempt to persuade critics that these concerns are being acted on."

Pakistan is indeed under pressure to produce, and offering up an alleged HuT member does take the focus off of the establishment's favored (Lashkar-e-Toiba) and/or more feared (Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan) jihadist groups. "Pakistan army officer held for 'links with extremists'," from BBC News, June 21:

A senior officer serving in Pakistan's army has been detained for alleged contacts with banned extremist group Hizb ut-Tahrir.

Brig Ali Khan is being interrogated by military intelligence, the army says.

"We follow a zero tolerance policy of any such activity within the army," a military spokesman said.

Brig Khan, serving at Pakistan's military headquarters in Rawalpindi, was detained last month. His family say he is innocent.

The brigadier is one of the most senior serving officers accused of links with extremists in Pakistan in recent years.

"He is under detention and an investigation is in progress for his contacts with a proscribed militant organisation," military spokesman Maj Gen Athar Abbas told BBC Urdu's Asif Farooqi.

Hizb ut-Tahrir is a global Islamist group that wants to revive the Islamic caliphate and unify Muslim countries under Islamic laws. It describes itself as a peaceful political organisation - but its critics say it incites hatred and violence.

The group is active in Western countries, but the Pakistan chapter of the organisation is not particularly prominent, correspondents say.

Pakistan's army has long faced accusations that it harbours extremist sympathisers within its ranks, and some analysts say the detention could be an attempt to persuade critics that these concerns are being acted on.

The brigadier's lawyer told the BBC his client was being victimised for criticising army top brass after US troops killed Osama Bin Laden on Pakistani soil....

The elephant in the room then hurried off to the airport. It had other important meetings to sit in on in Washington and London. "Motive for digger's murder 'may never be known'," from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, June 21 (thanks to Dumbledoresarmy):

Defence Minister Stephen Smith says the motive for the murder of an Australian soldier by a member of the Afghan National Army may never be known.

After a three week manhunt, Coalition forces shot dead Shafied Ullah, who was responsible for killing Australian Lance Corporal Andrew Jones at Combat Outpost Mashal in the Chora Valley.

Mr Smith says there was limited Australian involvement in the operation that led to Ullah's death, near his home village in the Khowst province of eastern Afghanistan.

Mr Smith has told ABC1's Lateline he does not believe Ullah was a member of the Taliban.

"My instinct has always been a rogue ANA soldier rather than a Taliban plant, but as I've said before instinct is not a good basis, conclusive evidence is, and we still have that investigation ongoing," he said.

Mr Smith says Ullah had been a member of the ANA for up to four months and had been undergoing training with Coalition forces for about one month.

"Suffice to say that we don't have anything which would indicate infiltration by the Taliban," he said.

"We had all of the usual checking and vetting, the biometrics and the like, which is why he's been able to be identified in the course of yesterday and today."

The Taliban has claimed responsibility for the death of Lance Corporal Jones, but Mr Smith says there is no evidence to support this.

"I put that very much in the category of: they would do that, wouldn't they? For propaganda purposes," he said.

"So, it may well be the rogue actions of an individual disgruntled soldier, but we continue to, in a sense, pursue the inquiry that the chief of the Defence Force formally started at the end of May on his tragic death."

Ullah's brother was captured in the operation and Mr Smith says he is being questioned.

But he says the Defence Force would have preferred to capture Ullah alive.

"Whilst this will bring some solace or some closure to the family that the person responsible for the death of Lance Corporal Jones has met his own demise, it does substantially make more difficult bringing to a conclusion the investigation that has been commenced. So, we may well never know," he said....

This report mentions that "Salafism is a strict adherence to the Koran and the earliest principles of Islam," perhaps inadvertently hitting the nail on the head in describing Salafism's appeal to former "moderates" and contradicting the claim that "extremism" must be rooted in a "misunderstanding" or later innovation. "Salafist threat growing, interior ministers say," from The Local, June 21 (thanks to Twostellas):

German state interior ministers are warning of a rise in radical Salafist Islam that poses a risk of home-grown terrorism, with one politician calling for changes to residency laws so “hate preachers” can be more easily deported.

Hesse Interior Minister Boris Rhein of the conservative Christian Democratic Union told daily Die Welt that Salafism was a “centre and pivot for those who want to participate in so-called holy war.”

“Salafism can in this way lay the path to Islamist terrorism,” he said, adding that the law needed to be changed so that “hate preachers” can be more easily thrown out of the country.

“In future, this should be possible when someone spreads material that goes against the liberal democratic basic order or that fosters radicalisation or, as the case may be, terrorism recruitment.

“We should also change the corresponding laws covering the right to assembly and paragraphs of the sedition law.”

Interior ministers from Germany's 16 federal states plan to discuss the issue when they hold a regular meeting on Tuesday. The Financial Times Deutschland reported Tuesday that the Verfassungsschutz domestic intelligence agencies would be intensifying their monitoring of the Salafist scene.

“Salafism is seen both in Germany and on the international level as the dynamic Islamist movement at the moment,” a Verfassungsschutz expert, who was not named, told the FTD.

Salafism is a strict adherence to the Koran and the earliest principles of Islam from between the 8th and 10th centuries. They aim to reorder society, the state and the law according to Salafist values regarded as God-given.

Rhein said that Salafists wanted “a return to a stone-age Islam and want to turn Germany into a theocracy.”

“They demonise anything western. The preach hate, intolerance and exclusion. They call for the stoning of adulterers and death sentences for homosexuals. They reject the equality of men and women. This ideology is at odds with our fundamental values. It is in every way unconstitutional and dangerous.”

Bavarian Interior Minister Joachim Herrmann of the conservative Christian Social Union also warned of the growing danger.

“I am warning against underestimating the danger arising from Salafism,” he told the FTD. “Almost all terrorism issues in the past have been somehow or other traced back to a tendency to radicalisation from Salafism. We have to be especially watchful here.”

One of the most prominent representatives of Salafism in Germany is the former boxer Pierre Vogel, who now goes by the name Abu Hamza, whose sermons and internet videos are popular with young followers.

The young Kosovar Arid Uka who underwent a rapid radicalisation and killed two US military servicemen at Frankfurt Airport at the start of March, followed Vogel as a Facebook friend....

An update on this story. "Yusuf O." was with the German Taliban Mujahedin; strange as that may sound, Yusuf has a lot of company in German jihadists, frequently affiliated with the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan and other "misunderstanders" of Islam. There is even reportedly an entire village of German jihadists and converts to Islam in Pakistan, reflecting a strong network of German-speaking jihad connections for new recruits.

"Terror suspect extradited from Austria," from The Local, June 20 (thanks to Twostellas):

A German man arrested on suspicion of recruiting for a terror group mounting attacks in Afghanistan and Pakistan was extradited from Austria Monday, federal prosecutors said.

The German federal prosecutor's office said in a statement that the suspect identified only as Yusuf O. was arrested in Austria on May 31 on a German warrant.

Prosecutors say the 26-year-old travelled to the border region between Afghanistan and Pakistan from Germany in May 2009 and joined the "foreign terrorist organisation" German Taliban Mujahideen (DTM) in September of that year.

He allegedly trained in using explosives and firearms "and took part in jihad for the DTM," which plots attacks against government troops in the region as well as the NATO-led force in Afghanistan, the statement said.

"In addition he is accused of appearing in propaganda videos for the terrorist organisation," it said.

From early 2011, Yusuf O. is believed to have begun seeking new recruits for the DTM in Europe.

Austrian police arrested four terror suspects last week including a 25-year-old Austrian convert to Islam suspected of recruiting for terror training camps in Afghanistan and Pakistan and financing the DTM.

He is believed to have been in contact with Yusuf O., according to Austrian authorities.

The three other suspects, who were arrested at Vienna airport apparently on their way to a terrorist training camp in Pakistan, were released but the alleged Austrian recruiter remains in custody.

The daily Kronen Zeitung reported Saturday that the Austrian suspect, identified as Thomas al-J., was plotting to crash a plane into the Bundestag parliament building in Berlin and had been training on a flight simulator.

Neither Austrian nor German authorities have confirmed the report.

Abu Tholut was charged with "helping set up a terrorist training camp for a group that plotted attacks on foreigners and assassinations of the country's moderate Muslim leaders." Not that those leaders have been particularly helpful if one is, say, a Christian or Ahmadi. This jihadist group targeted Muslims as well, however.

Fellow jihadist Abu Bakr Bashir got a 15-year sentence last week where prosecutors had asked for a life term. It will be interesting to see how quickly Tholut can return to jihad as usual. "Another top terror suspect on trial in Indonesia," by Niniek Karmini for the Associated Press, June 20:

JAKARTA, Indonesia (AP) — One of Indonesia's top terrorism suspects went on trial Monday on charges of helping set up a terrorist training camp for a group that plotted attacks on foreigners and assassinations of the country's moderate Muslim leaders.

The trial of Abu Tholut began days after a hard-line cleric was sentenced to 15 years in prison for supporting the same jihadist camp.

Tholut, 50, is accused of procuring M16 assault rifles and other weapons for the camp, which was raided early last year in westernmost Aceh province, prosecutor Bambang Suharyadi told the West Jakarta District Court. Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty.

Arrested in December, Tholut is one of more than 120 alleged members of the "Tanzim Al Qaeda in Aceh" group to have been captured or killed since the camp was uncovered. More than 50 of those men have been sentenced to prison.

Radical Indonesian cleric Abu Bakar Bashir, co-founder of the al-Qaida-linked Islamist movement Jemaah Islamiyah, was last week sentenced to 15 years for supporting the camp.

Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim nation, was thrust onto the front lines of the battle against terrorism in 2002, when Jemaah Islamiyah militants bombed two crowded nightclubs on the resort island of Bali, killing 202 people, many of them foreign tourists. There have been several attacks since then, but all have been far less deadly.

Police have said the Aceh group was plotting Mumbai-style gun attacks on foreigners at luxury hotels in the capital of Jakarta and assassinations, including of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, to punish the government for supporting the U.S.-led anti-terrorism fight.

Tholut, also known as Mustofa, became one of Indonesia's most wanted fugitives after master bomb-makers Noordin M. Top and Dulmatin were gunned down early last year in police raids.

He was convicted for involvement in a 2001 bomb blast at a shopping plaza in central Jakarta that wounded six, and he served five years of an eight-year sentence after getting remission for good behavior. Like dozens of other convicted Indonesian extremists, he returned to his terror network after he was released.

Nasir Abas — a former militant who has helped police track down and arrest several members of his network — said Tholut had been a combatant in Afghanistan and an "excellent instructor" who helped train Islamist militants in the southern Philippine region of Mindanao.

Judges adjourned the trial until next week, when Tholut's lawyers are due to respond to the charges.

I just heard from Justin Elliott of Salon magazine, who is evidently preparing a hit piece [UPDATE: Thin gruel, but here it is] involving my speculations concerning Anthony Weiner and Huma Abedin. It reminded me that in all the excitement I let slip the chance to make any timely comment on his June 16 piece, "Arabic for right-wingers." In it, Elliott condescends to explain to those racist right-wing yahoos how they're misusing various Islamic terms. His source? The Saudi-funded dhimmi pseudo-academic John Esposito!

The term: dhimmi

How it's used: As a pejorative for non-Muslims who fail to understand -- and unwittingly aid, or even appease -- the Islamic menace

Example: "These dhimmi effetes at the Times think their toe licking will save them. They will be the first ones with their heads on the chopping block." -- the blogger Pamela Geller

What it actually means: "Protected people." The dhimmi were non-Muslims living under Muslim rule who paid a special tax and in return were permitted to practice their own religion, be led by their religious leaders and be guided by their own religious laws and customs. This treatment was very advanced at the time. No such tolerance existed in Christendom where Jews, Muslims and Christians who did not accept the authority of the pope were persecuted, forced to convert or expelled.

However progressive this policy may have been in the past, it would amount to second-class citizenship for non-Muslims today. Therefore, some insist that non-Muslims must be given full citizenship rights because of the Quran’s emphasis on the equality of all humanity. This need for reinterpretation can be seen in the increased incidents of discrimination and violence against non-Muslims in countries like Egypt, Iraq, Nigeria, Pakistan, Malaysia and Indonesia.

So even though Elliott uses Geller as his foil here, what she wrote was an entirely reasonable and justifiable use of the word. Esposito does grant that dhimmitude amounts to "second-class citizenship for non-Muslims," but he fails to mention that if dhimmis complained about their inferior status, institutionalized humiliation, or poverty, their masters voided their contract and regarded them as enemies of Islam, fair game as objects of violence. Consequently, dhimmis were generally cowed into silence and worse -- many even affirmed the wonderful tolerance of their Muslim masters and of Islam in general, and became vociferous advocates for their own state of subjugation.

It is this kind of bootlicking that Pamela Geller was referring to in connection with the New York Times' whitewashing of jihad and Sharia. The analogy is entirely apt.

Elliott then goes on to "jihad," giving Esposito's explanation:

What it actually means: Literally, "struggle" or "exertion" in the path of God, following God's Will. It is a concept with multiple meanings, used and abused throughout Islamic history. The importance of jihad is rooted in the Quran’s command to struggle in the path of God and in the example of the Prophet Muhammad and his early Companions. The two broad meanings of jihad, nonviolent and violent, are contrasted in a well-known Prophetic tradition. "Greater" jihad is the struggle within oneself to live a righteous life and submit oneself to God’s will. "Lesser" jihad is the defense of Islam and the Muslim community.

Jihad as struggle pertains to the difficulty and complexity of living a good life: struggling against the evil in oneself -- to be virtuous and moral, making a serious effort to do good works and help to reform society. Depending on the circumstances in which one lives, it also can mean fighting injustice and oppression, spreading and defending Islam, and creating a just society through preaching, teaching and, if necessary, armed struggle or holy war. A radicalized violent minority combines militancy with messianic visions to inspire and mobilize an army of God whose jihad they believe will liberate Muslims at home and abroad.

Esposito does not mention the fact that was pointed out by the 14th-century Islamic scholar Ibn Taymiyya: that the concept of the "greater jihad" as interior spiritual struggle is based on a hadith that "has no source and nobody whomsoever in the field of Islamic knowledge has narrated it." Ibn Taymiyya insists that "jihad against the disbelievers is the most noble of actions and moreover it is the most important action for the sake of mankind.” Nor is this his view alone. Jihad understood as warfare against unbelievers in order to establish the hegemony of Islamic law has much greater support in Islamic scripture, tradition, and historical practice than does the spiritual jihad -- and leading jihad theorists including Hasan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, and Abdullah Azzam, Osama bin Laden’s friend and intellectual mentor and co-founder with him of Al-Qaeda, challenge the authenticity of the "greater jihad" saying in their writings.

Esposito also fails to mention that jihad is not only defensive, but offensive. A Shafi'i manual of Islamic law that in 1991 was certified by the highest authority in Sunni Islam, Cairo's Al-Azhar University, as conforming "to the practice and faith of the orthodox Sunni community." This manual, 'Umdat al-Salik (available in English as Reliance of the Traveller), spends a considerable amount of time explaining jihad as "war against non-Muslims." It spells out the nature of this warfare in quite specific terms, saying that the Muslims must wage "war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians . . . until they become Muslim or pay the non-Muslim poll tax."

The term: taqiyya

How it's used: As an explanation for why Muslims cannot be trusted -- because their religion allows them to ethically practice deception

Example: "Thus it is reasonable to conclude that Keith Ellison’s deceitful pronouncements at Thursday’s Homeland Security Hearings, this past Thursday, and one day later on 'Real Time With Bill Maher,' are consistent with the Koranic doctrine of taqiyya, Islamic religious dissimulation." -- writer on Andrew Breitbart's Big Peace site

What it actually means: Precautionary dissimulation of religious belief and practice in the face of persecution. Muslims recognize the personal duty of affirming right and forbidding wrong, but when confronted by an overwhelming injustice that threatens the well-being of an individual, this obligation can be fulfilled secretly in the heart rather than overtly. Among Shia Muslims, who from the death of the Prophet onward considered themselves subject to persistent religious persecution by the Sunni majority and the holders of political power, taqiyya permits not only passive or silent resistance, but also an active dissimulation of true beliefs when required to protect life, property and religion itself.

Esposito doesn't mention that this idea is based on the Qur'an, and thus has currency among Sunnis as well. The great Islamic scholar Ignaz Goldziher points out that while it was formulated by Shi'ites, "it is accepted as legitimate by other Muslims as well, on the authority of Qur'an 3:28." Qur'an 3:28 warns believers not to take unbelievers as "friends or helpers" (َأَوْلِيَا -- a word that means more than casual friendship, but something like alliance), "unless (it be) that ye but guard yourselves against them." This is a foundation of the idea that believers may legitimately deceive unbelievers when under pressure. The word used for "guard" in the Arabic is tuqātan (تُقَاةً), the verbal noun from taqiyyatan -- hence the increasingly familiar term taqiyya.

The Sunni Islamic scholar Ibn Kathir says that the phrase "unless (it be) that ye but guard yourselves against them" means that "believers who in some areas or times fear for their safety from the disbelievers" may "show friendship to the disbelievers outwardly, but never inwardly. For instance, Al-Bukhari recorded that Abu Ad-Darda' said, 'We smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.' Al-Bukhari said that Al-Hasan said, 'The Tuqyah [taqiyya] is allowed until the Day of Resurrection."

Then comes Sharia:

How it's used: To refer to a rigid set of Muslim laws that prescribe stoning for adulterous women, execution for homosexuals, etc.

Example: "We all know what shariah law does to women -- women must wear burqas, women are subject to humiliation and into controlled marriages under Sharia law. We want to prevent it from ever happening in Texas." -- Texas state Rep. Leo Berman

What it actually means: Historically, many Muslims and non-Muslims have come to confuse and use the terms "Shariah" and "Islamic law" interchangeably. Because the Quran is not a law book, early jurists used revelation as well as reason to create a body of laws to govern their societies. But, over time, these man-made laws came to be viewed as sacred and unchangeable. Muslims who want to see Shariah as a source of law in constitutions therefore have very different visions of how that would manifest. Though the definition of Shariah refers to the principles in the Quran and prophetic tradition, some expect full implementation of classical or medieval Islamic law; others want a more restricted approach, like prohibiting alcohol, requiring the head of state to be a Muslim, or creating Shariah courts to hear cases involving Muslim family law (marriage, divorce and inheritance). Still others simply want to ensure that no constitutional law violates the principles and values of Islam, as found in the Quran.

You'll notice that in all this verbiage Esposito doesn't ever deny that Sharia prescribes the subjugation of women, the stoning of adulteresses, the execution of homosexuals, etc. He just says that some Muslims mitigate it or don't want to apply all of it. Great. But it is what it is.

"Madrassa" (just a school, not a jihad factory!) and "Allah" (the Arabic word for God! Christian Arabs use it, too!) round out Elliott's lesson, but they're just lagniappes in a piece that in its totality amounts to less than meets the eye. Elliott purports to expose the ignorance of the various evil "right-wingers" he quotes, but he allowed himself to be played by Esposito, who left out of his explanations the aspects of the words that showed the "right-wingers" to be a lot closer to correct about Islam than Justin Elliott will ever be.

CYBERJAYA: African nations have expressed interest and responded positively to the global movement of moderates.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said he had taken the opportunity to explain the concept to the heads of governments during the Leaders Retreat at the Langkawi International Dialogue.

“The leaders are interested in the idea and there is positive response in support of the [moderation] concept,” he told reporters after chairing the retreat yesterday.

Najib had in his address to the United Nations General Assembly last year called for the global movement of moderates that would see governments, intellectuals, religious scholars and business leaders across the world take a united stand against extremism.

The Prime Minister said that during the discussion, Tanzanian president Jakaya Kikwete had shared his country's experience in which the government was in the midst of identifying moderates to solve the conflict between the Hutu and Tutsi tribes in Burundi.

Exactly what this swell 'moderation concept' is supposed to all about is not disclosed in the article. And don't bother looking, either. Remember that articles in the Malaysian media are generally uncritical of and rather faithful to their government masters (and Islam is naturally blameless and beyond reproach). Which means that they're quite good at passing along their government's lies and taqiyya with a more-or-less straight face.

Neither does Najib bother to explain what 'extremism' is either. Naturally, it goes without saying that Islam is never to be considered as 'extremist' or to be associated in any way with 'extremism'. Of course; this would be Islamophobic and probably racist as well.

Prime Minister Najib, would supporting a bunch of homical-minded Jew-hating terrorists in the Middle East be considered 'extreme'?  Would throwing Malaysians who stop believing in Islam -- a.k.a. 'apostates' -- into Government built and funded prisons where they are assaulted and tortured by police be 'extreme'? Would those Malaysians who carry out and enforce a legal system -- a.k.a. Shariah -- that denotes women and non Muslims as inferior be deemed 'extremists'?

Malaysia's Najib may be able to fool a bunch of African leaders that he can 'identify moderates and extremists' with his (at best) questionable 'moderation concept'.  But if Najib wants to see a real extremist, all he really has to do is look in the mirror.

In Human Events this morning I take apart one of the many whitewashes of Sharia that are being published these days:

Now that 20 states are considering legislation to outlaw Islamic law (Sharia), Islamic supremacist advocacy groups in the U.S—particularly the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)—have launched an energetic media campaign to whitewash Sharia and gull Americans into believing that it is as benign as a game of dominoes.

To that end, Nezar Hamze, executive director of the South Florida chapter of CAIR, published a piece in the Miami Herald assuring us that Sharia was as American as baseball and fishing—and conveniently leaving out everything about Sharia that makes people believe it is a threat in the first place.

Hamze attributed concern about Islamic law to those who “claim that 'Moozlims' are trying to replace the U.S. Constitution with the Sharia” and are ready to “run out with pitchforks and protest signs.”

“Moozlims.”  “Pitchforks.”  Hamze was semaphoring that the only people who could possibly be concerned about Sharia are ignorant racist yahoos.  This is just a smear tactic, but it works insofar as it warns unreflective and uninformed leftists (i.e., virtually all leftists) not to dare to oppose Sharia:  We wouldn’t want to align with rednecks, now, would we?

Hamze quoted Florida politician Adam Hasner as saying that “today there is an enemy, and that enemy is Sharia-compliant Islam.”  Then Hamze commented:  “This statement is ridiculous.  When I wash before praying, this is Sharia-compliant Islam.  When I offer a greeting to someone, this is Sharia-compliant Islam.  What in the world is Hasner talking about?”

Hamze left out a few details.  When I cut out a woman’s clitoris, this is Sharia-compliant Islam.  When I forbid non-Muslims to practice their faith openly, this is Sharia-compliant Islam.  When I count a non-Muslim’s life as less valuable than a Muslim’s, that is Sharia-compliant Islam.  When I brutally lash a woman, this is Sharia-compliant Islam.  When I smash musicians’ instruments and threaten them, saying they better not play music again or else, this is Sharia-compliant Islam.  When I wage war against and subjugate unbelievers, this is Sharia-compliant Islam.

And so the same question Hamze asks should be asked of him: What in the world is Hamze talking about? Does he really expect us to believe that Hasner is upset about washing before prayers and greeting people?

Hamze insists that while his opponents “claim that the ‘Moozlims’ are trying to infiltrate our court systems and replace our Constitution,” in reality “not one Muslim has introduced anything to any legislative body calling for Sharia to replace the Constitution or for the Sharia to replace the law of the land.”

In fact, Sharia has been involved in court cases in 23 states. And while “not one Muslim has introduced anything to any legislative body calling for Sharia to replace the Constitution or for the Sharia to replace the law of the land,” that is only because they are not fools: To do such a thing would be very close to open sedition, and would draw upon the Muslims involved a torrent of popular disapproval and law enforcement scrutiny. Better to work behind the scenes. Remember Imam Musa al-Sadr, the Washington, D.C., imam who wants to establish an “Islamic State of North America no later than 2050.” Remember the Muslim Brotherhood’s program in the U.S. of “eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”

Hamze criticized Rep. Allen West (R.-Fla.), charging him with saying during his campaign that “we are at war with Islam” and “Islam is not a religion.” West even had the audacity to claim, according to Hamze, “that the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 were doing exactly what the Koran told them.”

Yet the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 stated explicitly that they were doing exactly what the Koran told them. And many Muslims say that Islam is at war with us. I believe Islam is a religion, but also more than a religion: a political system, and one that is repressive and authoritarian. We ignore or deny this at our own peril.

Hamze concluded by telling Americans: “Educate yourself on Islam.” I strongly recommend that. Americans who do so will see through Hamze’s deceptive rhetoric, and see the usefulness of anti-Sharia legislation.

Westminster Institute Conference [May 25, 2011]: Fighting the Ideological War. Strategies for Defeating al-Qaeda.
by Ibn Warraq
Part I here.

A ranking US Defense Department official, speaking at a recent conference: “We are not at war with jihad. Jihad is a legitimate component of Islam.” The muddled thinking behind such statements is clear: “We must not give the impression that we are at war with Islam, a great world religion of peace and tolerance….”.

President Obama in a similar vein indulges in fantasy when he declares, “...we reject the notion that al-Qa’ida represents any religious authority. They are not religious leaders, they are killers; and neither Islam nor any other religion condones the slaughter of innocents.” [NSS, 2010, p.22] British Ambassador to Lebanon, Frances Guy, speaking after the death of the Hezbollah leader Shiekh Muhammad Hussein Falallah, displays his own kind of wishful thinking, “The world needs more men like him willing to reach out across faiths, acknowledging the reality of the modern world and daring to confront old constraints.” President Obama’s ecumenical gush was replied to by Anjem Choudary, the British radical cleric, “There is a place for violence in Islam, there is a place for jihad in Islam...Jihad is the most talked about duty in the Koran after tawhid – belief.”

It is time Western policy makers woke up to the reality of the struggle we are facing: we are not faced with freedom fighters, or latter day Robin Hoods trying re-distribute wealth; we are dealing with ideologues who wish to impose their worldview on the entire globe, and who are willing to use every kind of violence at their disposal. All the violence is justified with references to the Koran, Hadith, and the example of the wars and tactics employed by Muhammad and his Companions.

The West is still consumed with post-colonial guilt, is hampered by political correctness, and wishful thinking. Adding to the confusion have been the geopolitics of oil, and the wars in the Islamic world which have influenced policy adversely -- seeing allies where there are none. President Obama in particular has tried to deny reality, and pursues his goal to win popularity in the Muslim world. There are no quick fixes; we are engaged, as in the Cold War, in a long ideological struggle that is likely to endure for decades. Since poverty is not the problem -- as Khomeini once said, we did not make the revolution to reduce the price of melons -- the solution is not to throw money -- billions of dollars of taxpayer money -- at various Islamic regimes.

Various dictators in countries where Muslims form the majority have themselves been engaged in struggles against the jihadists, and are perfectly aware of Islamic history, the theological and Koranic underpinnings of their ideology. Leaders in Muslim countries have tried to control mosques and the sermons preached there, and even the Islamic media and discourse. And yet these same leaders, living in cultures of honor and shame, refuse to admit that there is a problem, and even less that it is Islam that is the chief obstacle to peace. Others who are more conservative refuse to let in the cold blasts of sobering modernity knowing that they themselves might be blown away, and that Islam itself would be undermined.

The Islamists, with considerable justification from Islamic history and Islamic theology, view Islam as inherently political- there is no separation of state [dawlah] and religion [din], and thus they aim at political dominance worldwide. For them the state is the best way to implement Islamic Law, Sharia, and hence their primary goal is gain power in the state. The Koran and the Sharia are enough to construct a complete social and political system.

First Transatlantic Anti-Islamization Conference Coming to France July 2

The human rights organizations Stop Islamization of America (SIOA) and Stop Islamisation of Europe (SIOE) will hold their first-ever transatlantic summit in Strasbourg, France, on July 2.

SIOA and SIOE are the foremost organizations in America and Europe that are dedicated to defending human rights, religious liberty, and the freedom of speech against Islamic supremacist intimidation and attempts to bring elements of Sharia to the West.

It will mark the European premiere of the acclaimed SIOA documentary on the Ground Zero mosque controversy, The Ground Zero Mosque: Second Wave of the 9/11 Attacks. The documentary features speakers such as Dutch freedom fighter Geert Wilders, former Ambassador John Bolton, Sudanese ex-slave Simon Deng, and many 9/11 family members and first responders. It also features brand-new interviews with Geller and SIOA associate director Robert Spencer. As many similar mosque initiatives are being pursued in Europe, this film has a particular urgency for Europe as well as America.

The confirmed list of speakers at the summit includes Pamela Geller, the popular blogger and columnist who publishes the acclaimed AtlasShrugs.com blog and is the author of The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America and the soon-to-be-released Stop the Islamization of America, A Practical Guide to the Resistance; Robert Spencer, a bestselling author and internationally renowned Islamic expert; the noted activist SIOE Director Anders Gravers; Roberta Moore of the Jewish Division -- EDL; Conny Meier of the German human rights group Pax Europa; frontrunning Bulgarian presidential candidate Pavel Chernev; and others to be announced soon.

The SIOA/SIOE summit will establish a common American/European coalition of free people who are determined to stand for freedom and oppose the advance of Islamic law, Sharia, which is not simply a religious system, but a political system that encompasses every aspect of life; is authoritarian, discriminatory, and repressive; and contradicts Western laws and principles in numerous particulars.

The SIOA/SIOE Strasbourg summit will begin at 1PM with a demonstration at Place de la République, followed by a conference at FEC 17 rue Saint Etienne at 3PM.

We are a coalition of free people who are determined to stand for the Constitutional principles upon which the United States is based. We recognize that Islamic law, Sharia, is not simply a religious system, but a political system that encompasses every aspect of life; is authoritarian, discriminatory, and repressive; and contradicts U.S. law in numerous particulars.

In defense of freedom, therefore, we oppose the advancement of Sharia in all its manifestations in this country, including:

• The use of Sharia to decide cases in American courts, which use generally victimizes the women involved in such cases;


• The adoption of the provisions Sharia finance by American financial institutions, which involves the restriction of entire sectors of the U.S. economy, and allows Islamic supremacists dangerous access to our financial apparatus;


• The accommodation of Sharia provisions in American workplaces, schools, and government institutions, which is generally intended to establish Muslims as a special class with special rights and privileges that non-Muslims do not enjoy (exactly as Sharia envisions);


• The construction of mega-mosques designed to assert Islamic supremacy, and that will be devoted to the teaching of Sharia principles in American neighborhoods;


• The relaxation of proper and justifiable scrutiny of the American Muslim community for terrorist and seditious activity out of fear of offending Muslims;


• The brutalization and murder of women in the U.S. in Islamic honor killings that are subsequently covered up or lightly punished by authorities anxious not to offend the Muslim community;


• The media bias that focuses on a non-existent anti-Muslim “backlash” after every jihad plot in the U.S., instead of on the reality of jihad activity in U.S. mosques, and that ignores or minimizes the jihadist ties of putatively “moderate” U.S. Muslim organizations;


• The continuing media demonization of anti-jihad activists, in accord with Sharia provisions forbidding criticism of Islam;


• Any and all other manifestations of the Islamization of America.

We stand for:

• The freedom of speech – as opposed to Islamic prohibitions of “blasphemy” and “slander,” which are used effectively to quash honest discussion of jihad and Islamic supremacism;


• The freedom of conscience – as opposed to the Islamic death penalty for apostasy;


• The equality of rights of all people before the law – as opposed to Sharia’s institutionalized discrimination against women and non-Muslims.

We call upon all elected officials and law enforcement authorities to take all necessary actions to defend the Constitutional freedoms they have been entrusted with preserving and protecting.

We insist that they apply existing sedition laws to any and all individuals and groups that are advocating adoption in the U.S. of any Sharia provision contradicting U.S. law.

We call upon the mainstream media to report on Islamic supremacist activity, and the resistance to that activity, fairly, fully, and accurately.

We call upon all free people of all races and creeds to stand with us to defend our freedoms against this radically intolerant ideology.

In this effort, we pledge our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.

"Human Rights Watch (HRW) released a report last year that showed that there are at least four factors driving this: a link to Kurdish identity, a religious imperative, social pressure, and an attempt to control a woman's sexuality."

Regarding the religious imperative for female genital mutilation, particularly for Islamic countries outside of Africa such as Yemen, Kurdish areas, and Indonesia, there is a noteworthy correlation with the prevalence of the Shafi'i school of Islamic jurisprudence. In that Islamic legal tradition, female "circumcision" is obligatory. Thus, for both apologists and prospective reformers, it is that much more difficult to brush the practice aside as merely "cultural," or "tribal," and for sincere reformers, it will be that much harder to abolish.

"Bill to ban female genital mutilation before parliament," from AKNews, June 19 (thanks to Nicholas):

Erbil, June 19 (AKnews) – The Kurdistan parliament will discuss a bill on domestic violence tomorrow, which proposes the criminalization of female circumcision.

The trend, is more widespread in Kurdistan than the surrounding countries, despite awareness raising campaigns carried out by civil society organizations and the media.

It is practiced particularly commonly in rural areas. A German-Iraqi study conducted in 2007/08 showed more than 77 percent of female interviewees aged 14 and over in the Kurdish province of Sulaimaniya had undergone the procedure.

The practice is often carried out at home and by people without medical training. When not done properly the girls, who are often as young as ten, can have lasting damage and in extreme cases die from loss of blood or infection.

It has never, is not now, and will never be done "properly." The deeply disturbing photo that accompanies this story at the link above should make that abundantly clear.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) released a report last year that showed that there are at least four factors driving this: a link to Kurdish identity, a religious imperative, social pressure, and an attempt to control a woman's sexuality.

"It's time for the regional government to step up to the plate and take concrete actions to eliminate this harmful practice because it simply won't go away on its own," said Nadya Khalife, HRW Middle East women's rights researcher.

It is estimated that more than 130 million women worldwide have undergone female genital mutilation (FGM), mainly in sub-Saharan Africa, western and southern Asia and parts of the Middle East.

It is not clear how a law, seeking to stop a practice that is not carried out though official means, would be enforced.

Kurdistan's health minister, Taher Hawrami, said authorities are distributing posters to promote awareness, but he said religious leaders should do more to end the practice.

"The clerics should take on the main role. People need to have better understanding of religion in order to give up this phenomenon."

The bill also seeks to curb fathers beating their children and forced marriages.

Last year, there was also a measure that attempted to cut aid to Lebanon's army over concerns about collusion with Hizballah. As Hizballah's tentacles lengthen their reach, the response from the Washington must evolve as well to ensure, in Rep. Berman's words, that "no US taxpayer funds benefit the terrorist organization Hezbollah or any party that allies itself with Hezbollah." "US congressman introduces bill to cut off Lebanon aid," from the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, June 19 (thanks to Weasel Zippers):

LOS ANGELES - A Jewish congressman has joined with three Lebanese-American colleagues to sponsor a bill to cut off American aid to Lebanon, as long as Hezbollah remains part of the ruling coalition government.

The unusual alliance, cutting across ethnic and political lines, was initiated by Democratic Rep. Howard Berman of Los Angeles and includes Reps. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), Charles Boustany (R-La.) and Nick Rahall (D-W. Va.).

Designated as the Hezbollah Anti-Terrorism Act, or HATA, the bill seeks legislation “to make certain that no US taxpayer funds benefit the terrorist organization Hezbollah or any party that allies itself with Hezbollah,” Berman said in a phone interview Friday from his Washington office.

Berman drafted and introduced HATA a few days after the formation of a new Lebanese government “forged by Hezbollah and led by a Hezbollah-designated prime minister [Najib Mikati],” Berman said.

The California legislator, formerly the chairman and now the ranking democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, termed his alliance with the three Lebanese-American congressmen as “very unusual.”

He attributed the support by his three colleagues to their deep concern over Hezbollah’s threat to freedom and democracy in their ancestral homeland, overriding any differences with Berman on Israeli-Palestinian issues.

Issa commented that “Hezbollah is a terrorist group and a cancer on Lebanon. This bill surgically targets this cancer.”

Currently, Lebanon annually receives $200 million in aid from the United States, of which $105 million goes for security assistance. The new bill specifically provides for continued support for humanitarian, educational and democratic institutions in Lebanon.

Berman said that the White House and State Department “knew generally” about the contents of HATA, before he introduced the bill.

For obvious reasons, the Muslim Brotherhood is miffed, as hurrying the elections along would stack the deck in their favor. That was also the case with the hasty referendum on constitutional amendments held in March, which was promoted in part by Islamic groups including Ikhwan members as a way to keep Egypt's Christians in line.

At every step, they are using the democratic process as a means to their ends. Right now, it is the path of least resistance. "Calls grow in Egypt to delay elections," by Hamza Hendawi and Maggie Michael for the Associated Press, June 19:

CAIRO (AP) — Calls are growing in Egypt for a delay of September's parliamentary elections to give parties formed in the aftermath of Hosni Mubarak's ouster more time to organize.

The push, which now has the prime minister's backing, is aimed at keeping the well-organized Muslim Brotherhood from dominating the next legislature and exerting disproportionate Islamist influence over the drafting of a new constitution.

The debate over the timing of the elections and the new constitution is a political novelty in a country where elections under the 29-year rule of former President Mubarak were routinely marred by widespread fraud and their results known before the first ballot was cast. [...]

Interim Prime Minister Essam Sharaf, in an interview posted Sunday on Egyptian news website Masrawy.com, said he preferred a delay in the vote to allow the nation's "political landscape" to take shape. He also hinted that drafting a new constitution before the elections would not be a bad idea either.

Sharaf, however, made clear that a delay is his personal preference, and that his Cabinet would do everything it can to ensure a fair and secure vote if the election went ahead as scheduled.

The Islamic fundamentalist Brotherhood, Egypt's largest and best organized political group, reacted angrily to Sharaf's comments, with a top figure in the group saying the prime minister should resign before expressing personal views.

"The people want to transfer power to a civilian administration. This is in the interest of the country," said Sobhi Saleh, a Brotherhood leader who helped draft amendments to Egypt's current constitution that were voted on in March. "The Muslim Brotherhood are against postponement and against drafting the constitution before elections."

Some fear that elections will leave the doors wide open for Islamist ministers to govern, a council of clerics to decide which laws to pass or drop depending on how they fit according to Islamic Sharia law and where liberal and secular voices will be labeled "infidels."

Those worries have been prompted by the fact that the 90-year-old Brotherhood has revved up the social services campaign that has long helped it build its following. Just after the collapse of Mubarak's rule, it formed for the first time a political party and launched a strong nationwide campaign....

Once again, while we're told there is "no compulsion in religion" (Qur'an 2:256), there are in reality numerous means of coercion, many of which are enshrined in Islamic law. Qur'an 9:29 itself offers unbelievers the options of conversion, subjugation, or war -- but hey, no compulsion or anything.

And so it is easy for the lines between persuasion and compulsion to become blurred; those in power could care less about splitting hairs on where one ends and the other begins, and subjugated unbelievers would put themselves in danger by calling them out on it. For that matter, we have often seen stories of abducted non-Muslim girls' being forced to sign documents stating they converted willingly: compulsion in signing a document to prove there was "no compulsion."

"Pakistan, forced conversions of Hindu girls to Islam. Often unreported out of fear," from AsiaNews, June 14:

Lahore (AsiaNews / Agencies) - Young Hindu girls forced to become Muslim and forced to marry their captors, denounce Pakistani Hindus members of the Rights Movement for "scheduled castes" recently formed in Pakistan. They also call for greater respect for their rights. Hindus belonging to "scheduled castes", ie the protected Hindu minorities, form 6% of the total population of Pakistan, and 10% in the region of Sindh, but are under-represented in both public service and in the elected assemblies. In addition, the movement calls for the creation of a law for the registration of marriages of "scheduled castes" that used the term "Hindu" rather than "scheduled castes" in the column that specifies the religion in the registrar, and that the National Parliament promote a law against religious hatred against them.

The movement brings together various ethnic Hindu groups such as the Kolhi, Bhel, Bagri, Meghwar and Rawar. They have no permanent homes, living in temporary camps at the mercy of local land lords. Since the creation of Pakistan the number of seats in Parliament reserved for minorities has never gone beyond 10. This is why the Movement for Rights calls for granted lands, where they can establish their residence, that they be allowed to celebrate religious festivals and the application of the 6% quota reserved for them in public services. The leaders of the movement point out that the situation is such that the groups are kept in a state prison by landowners, and that instances of forced conversions of Hindu girls are extremely common, and not reported. They ask that measures are taken against those responsible.

The Christian minority suffers for similar reasons. A positive development should, however, be noted: a court in Rawalpindi has acquitted three Christians of blasphemy, even though fears that the three may become the target of an act of violence by Islamic radicals. On June 12 court judge Akhter Sarfraz ordered the release of Hector Haleem, Basharat Masih and Robin Masih because the prosecution was not able to provide evidence supporting the charges presented against them last year by a Muslim, Ghufran Sialvi. The accusation was that they had sent blasphemous messages. The court has opened an investigation to prosecute both the Police Commissioner for failure to provide evidence of the charges for the prosecution. Haleem, 55, runs an Pakistani NGO called "Peace Worldwide”.

These are becoming a daily occurrence, as Boko Haram continues to focus its attacks on institutions and practices that are contrary to government by Sharia alone. "Nigerian Islamists kill 7 in police station, bank raid," by Pius Utomi Ekpei for Agence France Presse, June 20:

Suspected members of the radical Boko Haram Islamist sect on Monday staged simultaneous bomb and gun attacks on a police station and a bank killing seven people, witnesses and local journalists said.

The dead included five policemen, witnesses said, in an attack coming just four days after the sect bombed the country's police headquarters in the capital Abuja killing at least two.

A gang of 10 gunmen launched the two attacks on a police station and a bank in Kankara town, 13O [sic] kilometres (80 miles) south of the northern city of Katsina.

"The attackers were 10 in all, divided themselves in two groups and attacked the bank and the police station at the same time with guns and bombs," Kankara resident Salmanu Jabir said.

"One group attacked the divisional police station, killing three policemen ... and setting free suspects from cells before bombing the police station," another Kankara resident Danjuma Nakande told AFP on the phone from the town.

He said the attackers fled carrying guns and ammunition, suspected to have been seized from the police station.

"While the attack on the police station was on, another group was robbing the bank," Nakande said.

The group threw a bomb at an electronic door of a bank along the same road as the police station and made off with cash. They shot dead two policemen and a bank security guard in the process, said another resident Salmanu Male....

Engaging in riba, or the charging of interest? Haram! Blowing up the bank and making off with the cash? Halal!

In "A Marriage Made by Hillary Clinton and the Muslim Brotherhood?" in FrontPage tonight Jamie Glazov interviews me about the strange case of Huma Abedin, Anthony Weiner and Hillary Clinton:

Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Robert Spencer, the director of Jihad Watch and the author of the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad.

Frontpage: Robert Spencer, welcome to Frontpage Interview.

I would like to talk to you today about Anthony Weiner’s marriage to his Muslim Brotherhood wife, Huma Abedin.

How is it exactly that a Muslim woman who is connected to the Muslim Brotherhood is married to a Jewish man? Something is not fitting here is it?

Spencer: Jamie, Islamic law prohibits a Muslim woman from marrying a non-Muslim man. A Muslim man may marry a non-Muslim woman, but not the other way around. This is yet another manifestation of Islamic supremacism: the idea is that a wife will become a member of her husband’s household, and the children will follow the religion of the father. Thus, Muslim men marrying non-Muslim women ultimately enriches the Islamic community, while the non-Muslim community must forever be made to diminish.

Consequently, when a non-Muslim man begins a relationship with an observant Muslim woman, he is usually pressured to convert to Islam, and such conversion is made a condition of the marriage. Of course, laws are often honored in the breach, and this is not always true. So while we know that Huma Abedin’s parents were devout and observant Muslims — indeed, her father was an imam — we don’t know what exactly is going on with her marriage to Anthony Weiner.

Certainly the most likely scenario is that Weiner did convert to Islam, as Abedin’s mother, a professor in Saudi Arabia, would almost certainly have insisted that he do so. Weiner has made no public statement of this conversion, but since it would almost certainly have cost him politically if he had announced it, this silence is not any indication that he didn’t actually convert.

However, it is also possible, given the recent scandal involving Weiner’s apparently frequent and sexually charged contact with other women, that the rumors that the Abedin/Weiner union is a political marriage of convenience are true. After all, in 2008, Hillary Clinton was running for president. There were widespread insinuations that she was involved in a romantic and/or sexual relationship with Abedin, her ever-present personal assistant. Those whisperings persisted into Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State. Abedin’s 2010 marriage to Weiner, at which Bill Clinton presided, put those rumors to rest.

In Islamic law, a Muslim must officiate a marriage ceremony; hence if Bill Clinton was the only one officiating, the marriage was not valid according to Islamic law. Huma Abedin would undoubtedly have known that. Thus, if no Muslim was officiating along with Clinton, Weiner would not have had to convert to Islam, as the whole thing was a charade from the outset, apparently entered into with the full awareness of all parties concerned.

FP: This all seems very strange. What do you personally think is going on?

Spencer: Either Weiner converted to Islam to marry Abedin, and a Muslim was officiating at the ceremony along with Clinton, or the marriage is a sham and Abedin, at very least, is fully aware of that — and probably the others are also. I don’t see any other possibilities.

FP: Sorry, I am a bit confused about the Bill Clinton angle. Isn’t this a bit of a bizarre person to ask to officiate your wedding? One would think that in getting married, you have things like faithfulness and loyalty on your mind, no?

Spencer: Yes, Bill Clinton is a strange choice, indeed — unless the whole point of the union had to do more with the Clinton connection than with faithfulness and loyalty.

FP: According to Islamic Law, Huma Abedin could be killed, right? If the whole thing is not a charade and a trick, it is a bit bizarre that her family, who are Muslim Brotherhood and Muslim Sisterhood operatives, have allowed this and not punished her, no?

Spencer: Yes, Jamie. If the marriage is not a sham, it is exceedingly strange that Huma Abedin’s mother and other Muslim Brotherhood connections would have no problem with it. She is, of course, a high profile individual in the United States, and thus is in a very different situation from that of a woman in Saudi Arabia who might enter into a relationship with a non-Muslim man. In Saudi Arabia, such a woman would almost certainly be murdered; would Brotherhood operatives murder the aide to the Secretary of State for committing the same sin? That is not so clear.

FP: Last year, Walid Shoebat translated the Arabic declarations relative to the validity of the Weiner-Abedin marriage. One publication Shoebat translated was the Al-Marsid newspaper, which reported on the marriage specifically:

“Dr. Anwar Shoeb of the faculty of Islamic law in Kuwait declared that the marriage between Anthony Weiner and Huma Abedin is null and void, considering it adultery as confirmed in the Sharia position, prohibiting the marriage of a Muslim woman to a non-Muslim, regardless of whether he is a Jew or a Christian. In this case, he assured the invalidity of the marriage certificate between them.”

Your thoughts on this?

Spencer: Dr. Shoeb is completely correct, of course, from the standpoint of Islamic law. In light of that, it is striking that there is no record anywhere of any Islamic anger about Abedin’s marriage or Hillary Clinton’s connection with her. This lends credence to the possibility that the marriage is a sham, and is known to be a sham among those in the Islamic world who have been responsible for stirring up and manipulating popular anger about other matters, such as the cartoons of Muhammad.

FP: So, just to crystallize the matter then, there is a remote possibility that Abedin is actually being deceptive in her marriage to Weiner to follow Muslim Brotherhood instructions and to infiltrate the U.S. government, correct?

Spencer: Certainly. That is a very real possibility, and it should be investigated. But the only ones who have the means to do so are mainstream media journalists who are either clueless or complicit....

There is more.

Hallmark doesn't make a "Sorry we accidentally murdered the wrong person in an act of jihad" card, though Boko Haram is unlikely to be particularly remorseful anyway. It is not entirely clear, but seems probable that this ambush on a card game is the same as the one reported here. "Nigerian Boko Haram Islamists 'kill nurse' in Maiduguri," from BBC News, June 20:

Gunmen from Nigeria's radical Islamist sect Boko Haram have killed a nurse who was playing cards in the north-eastern city of Maiduguri, according to police.

Police said four people were also wounded in the shooting at a bus stop in the city.

The gunmen killed another person in a separate attack in Maiduguri, police added.

Boko Haram, which is fighting for Islamic rule, bombed the police headquarters in Abuja last week.

A least eight people were killed in the bombing, local media reported.

The BBC's Bilkisu Babangida in Maiduguri says the nurse was killed in a drive-by shooting.

Police meeting

It seems the gunmen were targeting a policeman who usually played cards at the bus stop, but he was not there at the time, our reporter says. Gunmen from Nigeria's radical Islamist sect Boko Haram have killed a nurse who was playing cards in the north-eastern city of Maiduguri, according to police.

Police said four people were also wounded in the shooting at a bus stop in the city.

The gunmen killed another person in a separate attack in Maiduguri, police added.

Boko Haram, which is fighting for Islamic rule, bombed the police headquarters in Abuja last week.

A least eight people were killed in the bombing, local media reported.

The BBC's Bilkisu Babangida in Maiduguri says the nurse was killed in a drive-by shooting.

Police meeting

It seems the gunmen were targeting a policeman who usually played cards at the bus stop, but he was not there at the time, our reporter says....

When the promise of the virgins of Paradise is not enough, these scoundrels resort to kidnapping and booby-trapping children. "Girl, nine, used as human bomb," from the Independent, June 20 (thanks to S. J.):

A girl of nine has told how she escaped Pakistani terrorists who tried to use her as a human bomb.

Sohana Jawed said she was kidnapped on her way to school in Peshawar, and forced to wear a remotely-controlled suicide jacket. But she escaped her captors as they prepared to send her towards a paramilitary checkpoint.

Sohana, wearing her a blue and white school uniform, recounted her ordeal during a news conference with police in Lower Dir district. Militants in Pakistan have often used young boys to carry out attacks, but the use of young girls is rare....

I have in the past tangled with deceptive Islamic supremacists such as Khaleel Mohammed and Sheikh Abdul Hadi Palazzi, who have made a comfortable living speaking to Jewish groups and telling them that the Qur'an promises the Holy Land to the Jews. This is not the case, as I demonstrated here -- and today an Islamic spokesman confirms the accuracy of what I wrote there.

"A Holy Land for Whom?," from OnIslam, June 20:

A Holy Land for Whom?

Question and answer details
Name of Questioner: Begum Shofiq
Reply date: 2011/06/20
Question: Salam. There is a verse in the Qur'an that says that Allah has forbidden the Holy Land for the Jews for 40 years. Does this mean that now the Jews have religious right over it? Why cannot the Jews live in Saudi Arabia? Is it prohibited in the Qur'an?
consultant: Ahmad Saad

Answer

Salam, Begum.

Thank you for your interesting question that touches on one of the most important and critical issues of the present day: Jews and the Holy Land.

Let's first agree that Allah is Just and He does not treat people according to their color, language, tribal loyalty, race, or geographical locations. Allah treats people based on the main criteria of piety and righteousness. Allah says in the Qur'an what means,

(And indeed, after having exhorted (humankind), We laid it down in all the books of divine wisdom that My righteous servants shall inherit the earth.) (Al-Anbiyaa' 21:105)

That said, we can start the story by saying that the children of Israel were living in ignominy and oppression under the rule of a pharaoh in Egypt. With them suffering so much and enduring so many tribulations, Almighty Allah sent them a leader who defied the Pharaoh and led them through the sea miraculously until they were delivered to the land of Madyan (most probably what is known as Sinai today).

This leader, Prophet Moses (peace be upon him), led the children of Israel to a new land and told them that it is Allah Who sent him to save them because at that time, they were the true worshippers of Allah — the monotheists among a surrounding of idolaters and polytheist peoples whether in Egypt or elsewhere. Allah graced them by showing them the destruction of their enemy: Pharaoh was drowned in the sea and his life was ended in disgrace.

As they reached the land of Madyan, they discovered that they are in a barren desert, with neither food nor drink. Therefore, Almighty Allah the Ever-Merciful showered them with manna and quails so that they can eat and miraculously He gave Moses some water springs, still seen today in Sinai, and they could drink.

On this, Almighty Allah says in the Qur'an what means,

(O children of Israel! We saved you from your enemy, and We made a covenant with you on the right-hand slope of Mount Sinai and repeatedly sent down manna and quails unto you.) (Ta-Ha 20:80)

However, when Moses was invited to take the Covenant and went on a short journey to receive revelation, they started their deviation by creating a golden calf and worshipping it, forgetting the core of the message that came with Moses. They gave up on believing in the oneness of Allah and were ungrateful to the One Who saved them.

Even after Moses came back, reminding them of Allah's grace and some of them repented, they were required to go through a quick test. Allah wanted them to do some effort to prove their love to their Lord. Therefore, He revealed to Moses that they should go and fight the idolaters who own the Holy Land and establish justice there. Declining to the command of their leader and Prophet, they told Moses, these are huge people and we won't go there.

According to the Qur'an, when Moses asked them to go and fight and get the land to fulfill of Allah's command, they replied simply with, "Go with your Lord and fight, we will not move from here."

With this attitude and with complete denial of Allah's gifts, Almighty Allah gave His judgment that they will never enjoy a shelter for 40 years.

Allah made them wander in the desert for 40 years without a homeland. After the 40 years when this whole generation died and the time of Moses himself on earth ended, a new generation of righteous Jews appeared; and under the leadership of Talut (the strong knowledgeable man chosen by Allah to lead the Jews in a battle against their enemies), they were able to get into the Holy Land; and Prophet David (peace be upon him) was able to establish his kingdom there and rule the Jews.

As time passed, Jews started deviation again and therefore Allah plagued them with tribulations and afflictions: They were taken in chains by Nebuchadnezzar to the land of Babylon where they suffered ignominy again until a new generation, born in chains, was able to start a liberation movement and go back to the Holy Land.

The series of deviation and corresponding affliction continued as they used to kill prophets sent to them by Allah; and later on, some of them dispersed over vast areas of land, some of them went to Arabia and lived there over generations until they became Arabs.

Bearing all this in mind, it is clear that Jews have had no special merit that entitles them to any right over the Holy Land. They were, at a time, a fulfillment of Allah's will that the best group at that time (i.e. the one that believes in the oneness of Allah and worships Him) should inherit the Holy Land. As soon as they deviated, the Holy Land was not theirs anymore because they are no longer fulfilling Allah's law.

Later, people who accepted the way of Allah and followed His Path (i.e. the followers of the Prophet Muhammad) were given access to the Holy Land on the condition that they hold fast to the religion of Allah and fulfill His command.

At a time when Muslims forgot about their mission, the Holy Land was taken from them by those who falsely claim that they have right over it.

The issue now is not an issue of religious right over something. It is an issue of falsifying truths since today people are misusing religion in order to take the belongings and properties of others.

To realize this, we should understand that the Zionist state of Israel is a secular Jewish state, although it includes extremist Jewish groups. Many other Jewish voices already speak out against this occupation and call for the termination of the state of Israel. Even claiming that these are the real Jews (i.e. the descendants of Isaac and Jacob) is not a historically ascertained claim.

What is in Palestine now is simply a Zionist entity that tries to take the land of a people who already own it, under the false pretext of religion and historical fallacies. Such fallacies cannot create a right or entitle them to anything.

The issue takes ages to give full explanations, but this can give hints on what I wanted to say.

As for your other questions on why Jews cannot live in Saudi Arabia (although I don't know where you got this piece of information), I can simply tell you that there is no Qur'anic prohibition on that.

But the same kind of question will come again, yet from another angle: why should they occupy a place that does not belong to them? Why do Polish, Russian, and Ethiopian Jews take over and start living in a country that already is inhabited by its original people? Isn't it the same idea of the Europeans going to the US and settling there after massively killing native Indians?

In the case of the Zionists, it is even worse because religious excuses are added to it; and this misuse of religion is both dangerous and alarming.

One final word, we should always bear in mind that those who support or stand in favor of Israel are Zionists, whether Jews or Christians. Therefore, we should draw a line between Zionists and Jews because not all Jews are Zionists and not all Zionists are Jews.

Many Jews are nice people who decry the violent acts of other extremist Jews and are very friendly; personally, I have had a good experience with them whether in the US or in the UK.

I hope this answers your question. Please keep in touch.

Salam.

At noon today, the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) is planning to hold a forum on the anti-Sharia bills currently being considered by 20 states. I wonder if Edina Lekovic will be there. Lekovic is the MPAC flack whom Steve Emerson caught lying on national television, denying she was editor of a Muslim student publication that praised Osama bin Laden as a great mujahid. Emerson produced copies of the rag showing Lekovic's name on the masthead as editor on the very same page on which the praise for Osama appeared.

In any case, Islamic supremacists and their useful idiots in the mainstream media are mounting a full-court press against anti-Sharia legislation. Yesterday the New York Times had this: "Defend Muslims, Defend America," by Aziz Huq, an assistant professor of law at the University of Chicago.

When will the Times give equal time to someone who will make the case for the anti-Sharia legislation? Around the time hell freezes over, of course. That case is not fit to print.

WITH an eye toward the 2012 elections, legislators in six states have been debating laws explicitly prohibiting courts from considering or using Sharia law, with 14 more looking at wider bans on “foreign law.” They’re taking a clear cue from Oklahoma’s wildly popular Sharia ban, which voters approved as a state constitutional amendment last year by more than 70 percent.

Such laws are discriminatory and pointless. Civil liberties groups are fighting them in court and calling on state legislators to abandon such bills. But there is an additional reason everyone, including would-be proponents of the laws and the federal government, should oppose them: they pose a significant threat to national security.

Note the threat. The bills "pose a significant threat to national security." What on earth could that mean, except that Muslims will mount jihad attacks if they are passed?

To begin with, the bans’ justifications are thin. Despite the worries voiced by candidates in the recent Republican candidates’ debate in New Hampshire, no state, county or municipality is about to realign its laws with religious doctrine, Islamic or otherwise.

In reality, Sharia has been involved in court cases in 23 states.

Nor does any state or federal court today in Oklahoma, or anywhere else, need to enforce a foreign rule repugnant to public policy.

Sure. No one needs to enforce foreign law. The question is not whether or not courts need to, but whether or not they will.

Under the legal system’s well-established “choice of law” doctrines, the courts are already unlikely to help out someone who claims their religion allows, say, the subordination or mistreatment of women.

And yet they already have. In a case in New Jersey, a Muslim husband raped his wife, and the non-Muslim judge in an American courtroom did not charge him with sexual assault because Islam forbids wives to refuse sex to their husbands under any circumstances.

Instead, the bans would deprive Muslims of equal access to the law. A butcher would no longer be able to enforce his contract for halal meat — contracts that, like deals for kosher or other faith-sanctioned foods, are regularly enforced around the country. Nor could a Muslim banker seek damages for violations of a financial instrument certified as “Sharia compliant” since it pays no interest.

This is all ridiculous. The anti-Sharia laws are designed to prohibit the political and supremacist aspects of Islam -- the ones that contradict American Constitutional principles. That is all. If Islam did not contain those elements, no one would bother with anti-Sharia laws at all. They are not designed to prohibit individual Islamic religious practice, and would not do so.

The practices that anti-Sharia laws would prohibit include such aspects of Sharia as female genital mutilation; the restriction of non-Muslim religious practice; the devaluing of a non-Muslim's life as compared to that of a Muslim; the brutalizing of women; the forbidding of music; and, of course, jihad and Islamic supremacism.

Moreover, these bans increase bias among the public by endorsing the idea that Muslims are second-class citizens. They encourage and accelerate both the acceptability of negative views of Muslims and the expression of those negative views by the public and government agencies like the police.

Note the projection: it is Islamic law that mandates second-class status for non-Muslims. The prohibition of aspects of Sharia that contradict U.S. law would no more render Muslims second-class citizens than the prohibition of polygamy in the late nineteenth century made Mormons second-class citizens.

Such indignities arise amid a pattern of growing animus toward American Muslims. Reports of employment discrimination against Muslims to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which declined after a post-9/11 peak, have recently surged. Gallup, Pew and ABC polls confirm a new spike in anti-Muslim views. Most troubling, tallies of hate crimes collected by nongovernmental organizations show the same trend.

In reality, Muslims are manipulating the EEOC to make demands on companies to change their policies to bring them into line with Sharia. See, for example, the cases of Disney and Abercrombie & Fitch.

Meanwhile, hate crimes against Muslims are not spiking. They are, in fact, so rare (see here, here and here) that Hamas-linked CAIR has to trump them up to maintain the media myth of Muslims as victims.

In this context, bans like the one in Oklahoma will serve to chill cooperation by the Muslim-American community with counterterrorism efforts. This makes sense: in such an environment, it would be fair for Muslims to pause before, say, passing on a lead to the police, worrying about whether the police would then look at them with suspicion as well.

As if they're helping now.

But the likelihood of such a chill is also supported by four large, random-sample surveys that I conducted with two colleagues, Tom Tyler and Stephen Schulhofer. Our data, collected from Muslims and non-Muslims in New York and London, suggest that the experience and perception of private discrimination have a significant negative effect on cooperation.

This not only affects everyday public safety, but also the interaction necessary to gather information about self-radicalization and domestic efforts to recruit terrorists. After all, it’s simply impossible for the government to gather all that information. For that it must rely on the public, both as a filter and as an aid in interpreting it. If the government lacks strong ties to the Muslim-American community, that kind of filter falls apart.

It doesn't exist now. The "Muslim-American community" is famously not helping with counterterror efforts.

To prevent the erosion of such support, the Justice Department should better publicize its support for a pending challenge to the Oklahoma amendment. It should also announce that it will challenge similar measures as violations of the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of religion. Doing so would not only protect the rights of Muslim-Americans, but also send a signal that they can rely on the federal government’s support.

Hop to it, dhimmis!

To be sure, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. has taken steps against anti-Muslim bias, for example by supporting a California schoolteacher’s suit challenging her dismissal for taking time off to make a pilgrimage to Mecca. But these steps are inadequate compared to the scope of public and private discrimination facing Muslim-Americans.

That suit is ridiculous, and it is scandalous that Holder is supporting it.

America has been here before. In 1952, Attorney General James P. McGranery filed a legal brief for the plaintiffs in Brown v. Board of Education, in part, he said, out of national security concerns. “Racial discrimination furnishes grist for Communist propaganda mills,” he said, and “raises doubts even among friendly nations as to the intensity of our devotion to the democratic faith.”

McGranery’s insight remains true today. The federal government needs to do more to defend equal access to the law regardless of faith. To do so is not simply to uphold our core values — it is also to work to improve our nation’s security.

Threat noted.

Westminster Institute Conference [May 25, 2011]: Fighting the Ideological War. Strategies for Defeating al-Qaeda.
by Ibn Warraq

The overall philosophy or mission of the conference was to educate the public and the government about the ideology of our enemy which is, as the Westminster Institute announced, "well-organized, well-funded, and grounded in the authority of religious texts. The United States therefore has a particularly difficult battle to fight. It is engaged with an enemy who cares first and foremost about the ideological battle—rebuilding a distinct Muslim identity, strengthening the ummah, and defeating the West, both materially and spiritually. Without directly confronting the ideology driving such groups as Al Qaeda, the United States will never be able to defeat the threat of terrorism. Drawing on the expertise of those who were directly involved in the fight against past totalitarian ideologies and of those who are intimately familiar with the ideology and strategy of the current enemy, this conference will draw lessons from the past for today’s fight against Al Qaeda and associated movements.”

Patrick Sookhdeo, author of Global Jihad, and Adjunct Professor at George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies, inaugurated the conference with a lucid presentation of the underlying problems in fighting Islamic Terrorism, and offered some tentative solutions. In what follows, I have taken Sookhdeo’s talk as the basis of my analysis. I have added further examples that were not in the original talk, and have fleshed out some of his arguments. Thus the present article should be seen as my own take on the problem, though of course heavily derived from Sookhdeo, and certainly in the spirit of his presentation.

Sookhdeo’s talk was divided into three parts: Confusion, Understanding, and Prospects.

First, he pointed out that our policy makers were confused about what the terrorist ideology was, and thus were unable to take the necessary measures needed to defeat it.

Michael Hayden, who was the Director of the CIA until 2009, declared in 2008 that there had been “significant setbacks for al-Qaida globally -- and here I'm going to use the word 'ideologically', as a lot of the Islamic world pushes back on their form of Islam.” However, as Sookhdeo insisted, “al-Qaeda and radical Islam remain significant and in some cases a growing threat. Al Qaeda has continued to strike in the West and even on US soil, has established new bases and is consolidating existing strongholds, is recruiting new generations of young Muslims and Muslims living in the West. Successes such as the death of Bin Laden will not have a fundamental impact on the underlying issues which continue to make Islamic radicalism a significant force.” In May 2010, the White House released the document “US National Security Strategy, 2010” [NSS, 2010], which declared that “We are at war with a specific network, al-Qa’ida, and its terrorist affiliates”. But nowhere in this document is there a mention of the whole Islamist culture and ideology which justifies terrorism; instead we have a vague enemy called “violence and hatred”: “For nearly a decade,” NSS 2010 tells us, “our Nation has been at war with a far-reaching network of violence and hatred”.

As Katherine Gorka of the Westminster Institute underlined in November 2009, “The 9/11 Commission Report, released in July 2004, clearly stated the nature of the perpetrators and the ideology that was driving them. As Stephen Coughlin, an expert on radical Islam, has recently pointed out, the 9/11 Report used the word Islam 322 times, Muslim 145 times, jihad 126 times, and jihadist 32 times. In sharp contrast, The National Intelligence Strategy of the United States, issued in August 2009, uses the term Muslim 0 times, Islam 0, and jihad 0. Similarly, The FBI Counterterrorism Analytical Lexicon, the purpose of which is ‘to standardize the terms used in FBI analytical products dealing with counterterrorism,’ uses the term Muslim 0 times, the term Islam 0 times, and the term jihad 0 times.”

On August 6, 2009, John O. Brennan, Barack Obama's assistant for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, said “Even as we condemn and oppose the illegitimate tactics used by terrorists, we need to acknowledge and address the legitimate needs and grievances of ordinary people those terrorists claim to represent….Using the legitimate term jihad, which means to purify oneself or to wage a holy struggle for a moral goal, risks giving these murderers the religious legitimacy they desperately seek but in no way deserve.”

This can only be characterized as appeasement; and what legitimate grievances do Al-Qaeda represent?

In Scotland, the dirty kuffar must pay for the Muslims' schools. In Australia, they must pay for their halal training center. It is the lot of the Infidel to pay for the Muslims' enterprises, as specified in the Qur'an (9:29).

"Australian Muslim community demands 'taxpayer-funded halal training centre,'" from ANI, June 20 (thanks to Twostellas):

Canberra, June 20 : Australia’s top Muslim body has demanded a new taxpayer-funded halal training centre that would prepare refugees for jobs slaughtering animals in rural areas.

The Australian Federation of Islamic Councils (AFIC) said the centre would help solve the live-animal export dilemma while boosting jobs and maintaining the meat and livestock industry.

According to the Herald Sun, AFIC President Ikebal Patel will write to Agriculture Minister Joe Ludwig within days to seek financial backing.

Patel insisted that for a “couple of million dollars” taxpayers would get more country jobs, more refugees out of big-city "enclaves" and into work, and a stronger home-grown meat and livestock industry.

“We think the Australian Muslim community can help both the Government and the meat and livestock industry,” said Patel....

The schools proposed here would seek state funding; issues that should be raised immediately in response are those of curriculum and oversight. The design of an "Islamic" curriculum promises a minefield of problems including advocacy for a state governed by Sharia (now part of the measure of "extremism" in Britain), and the issues of women's rights, the rights of unbelievers, and Islamic supremacism in general. There is also the question of how well the standard British curriculum would be upheld: literature, art, and social studies included.

High-profile horror stories about the lack of meaningful oversight of private Islamic schools in Britain are cause for serious concern regarding these schools as well, as educational watchdogs have been accused of whitewashing reports about what goes on in Islamic schools, where inspectors linked with "radical" groups rubber-stamped their approval. The appearance of oversight has been no guarantee that all is well.

More on this story. "Muslims to break away from Scottish education system," by Ben Borland for the Express, June 19 (thanks to JG):

Muslim leaders are planning to break away from the Scottish education system and create their own schools because the current curriculum does not include enough about Islam.

The Sunday Express has learned parents are angry their children are not being given schooling according to their religious beliefs and claim teachers are even promoting “unIslamic principles and behaviours”.

Some have even threatened legal action to force councils to open state-funded faith schools at taxpayers’ expense.

Others want the “relatively affluent” Muslim community to take matters into its own hands, starting with Scotland’s first Islamic high school.

Parents and supporters are being rallied on an Internet chat room called glasgowmuslims.com. One father explains the plan is to “form a steering group of individuals who wish to contribute towards the creation of an Islamic Secondary School for Girls in Glasgow”.

The anonymous man – TariqM – adds: “I have spoken to a number of Imams representing the primary Masjids (mosques) in Glasgow and in principle everybody agrees the ideal solution to education for Muslims would be within an environment that has at its core an Islamic ethos.”

Another member proposes legal action over the city council’s refusal to fund an Islamic state school, stating: “There is a case to be made by the Muslim community against Glasgow Council claiming religious bigotry and discrimination.”

Sajid Quayum, president of the Glasgow branch of the Islamic Society of Britain (ISB), said he was aware of the group and its plans.

“Education is something close to the heart of all parents,” he said. “They are venting their frustration over not being able to ‘play the system’ as other religious groups have in the past.

“There is a lot of disagreement in the wider community whether having an Islamic state school is what we want. Some say it would be a good thing but others say there is enough separation from the main community as there is.”

Mr Quayum, a TV producer, also claimed children of all religions and backgrounds are not learning enough about Islam in school.

He said: “A lot of teachers are a little bit worried about trying to cover Islam because it has so many social and political issues.

“We have set up a teacher training programme called Islam Information Scotland. When we have approached RE teachers, they say they will often focus on a particular religion for a year, such as Hinduism, but it will rarely be Islam because they are worried about offending Muslims....

Damned if they do, damned if they don't. Just ask Gary Smith, the religion teacher who lay unconscious in a hospital for two days after being savagely beaten for teaching about Islam "incorrectly."

An update on this story. Eikenberry still chooses his words carefully, and does not mention Karzai by name. Someone might do well to remind Karzai why he is in power in the first place, as he acts as though he had no U.S. help -- and funding, funding, and more funding, so much of which has been lost to corruption -- to get there and stay there. "US envoy reproaches Afghan president on criticism," by Heidi Vogt for the Associated Press, June 19:

KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) — The U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan publicly reproached Afghanistan's president Sunday for painting American forces here as occupiers and enemies — one of the strongest signs yet that Afghanistan's international allies are no longer willing to excuse President Hamid Karzai's harangues as harmless domestic politicking.

U.S. Ambassador Karl Eikenberry told university students and faculty in the western city of Herat that he felt the need to speak from his heart as he reaches the end of his two-year tour as ambassador. The words that came next were strongly critical of the Afghan president, without naming Karzai.

"I find occasional comments from some of your leaders hurtful and inappropriate," Eikenberry told the crowd according to a transcript of the speech.

In recent speeches, Karzai has said the U.S. is in danger of becoming an occupying force, threatened to take unspecified "unilateral action" against international forces that conduct air strikes and accused international allies of undermining and corrupting his government.

The U.S. envoy hit back hard.

"When Americans, who are serving in your country at great cost in terms of lives and treasure, hear themselves compared with occupiers, told that they are only here to advance their own interest, and likened to the brutal enemies of the Afghan people ... they are filled with confusion and grow weary of our effort here," Eikenberry said. "Mothers and fathers of fallen soldiers, spouses of soldiers who have lost arms and legs, children of those who lost their lives in your country — they ask themselves about the meaning of their loved one's sacrifice."

Eikenberry's tour as ambassador has been strained by his tense relationship with Karzai. In a classified memo in 2009, Eikenberry said that Karzai was not a reliable partner with whom to rebuild Afghanistan. The memo were leaked to the press, and Eikenberry has spent the time since trying to repair the fractured relationship. He has repeatedly insisted that he and Karzai work well and comfortably together.

Now, as he prepares to hand over the post to Ryan Crocker, Eikenberry appears to have decided to speak more candidly.

"When we hear ourselves being called occupiers and worse, our pride is offended, and we begin to lose our inspiration to carry on," Eikenberry said....

You have to hand it to the Global Islamophobic Zionist-Crusader Conspiracy: they certainly don't lack attention to detail, even scheming about the floor tiles in an Islamabad bank! The complaint registered two years ago is illustrative once again of the conspiracy paranoia that is rampant in Pakistan.

More on this story. "Bombed Islamabad bank denies sacrilege," by Shakeel Anjum for the News International, June 18:

ISLAMABAD: A terrorist outfit targeted a bank in Islamabad on June 13 because its floor tiles and their design were strikingly analogous to the sacred name, Allah, and the bank did not change them despite complaints to its management.

A bank guard was killed and four others were injured in last Monday’s suicide attack on an Islamabad branch of a bank. The bank administration was cautioned by a section of the outfit that had even lodged a written complaint with Islamabad’s Industrial Area Police Station two years back following the direct warning to bank officials, it is reliably learnt.

Bank officials confirmed to The News on condition of anonymity that the administration received complaints about the design of the floor tiles, and that some individuals had also met the management official in this regard but neither the area police nor the bank administration took any action on the objections raised by the grdoup. [sic]

The bank’s president, when contacted for his comment, said: “It cannot even be imagined to disgrace the holy name of Allah Almighty.” He said the allegation was baseless and concocted. “We are Muslims and can never think of the disrespect to the name of Creator”, he added.

Head of the bank administration said that the plaza was four-storey building and the owner of the building constructed the structure but the design of the tiles was not objectionable. He said anyone could visit the building and the bank anytime.

Acting Inspector General of Police (IGP) Islamabad Binyameen when contacted by this correspondent for comments confirmed the lodging of the complaint with the Industrial Area police and said that although the complaint was filed two years back, the police were investigating that aspect. He said that the investigators have got some concrete evidence leading to the terrorist outfit involved in the suicide attack.

Priorities: someone committed suicide in order to commit murder over floor tiles.

Quoting evidence, Binyameen said that the attacker was not wearing suicide jacket but was carrying explosive material packed in a bag. He said that police were working on the aspect whether the suicide attacker blew the explosive material himself or some one other had exploded it by remote control.

The officials investigating the case disclosed that in June 2009 an application, a copy of which is available with The News, was lodged with the Industrial Area police by the district president (name withheld) of a youth organisation (name withheld), resident of Golra, Islamabad, saying he had asked the bank administration to change the sacrilege design of tiles but they didn’t bother to listen to him. He requested the police to register the FIR against the bank administration.

FIR = "First Information Report": the first step in lodging a criminal complaint in Pakistan.

Sources said that the police also didn’t take any action on the complaint despite the lapse of two years. The area police officials said that the complainant stated in the complaint addressed to the station house officer (SHO) Industrial Area Police Station, “I . . . son of ... am the president of . . ., district Islamabad. It has come to my knowledge that the design of the tiles used for the floors of the bank have resemblance with the holy name of Allah. This is a matter of my creed and conviction. I myself visited the bank, observed the design of the tiles thoroughly and took their photographs, which are attached with the application. The bank administration, despite repeated complaints, didn’t listen to me.”

It's all about the fitna:

“Sir, the holy name of Allah (we seek refuge in God) is being deliberately humiliated to create chaos in the country in pursuit of the agenda of anti-Muslims. I request you to register the FIR against the responsible officials of the bank for disgracing the holy name of Allah and arrest them.”

However, officers engaged in the investigation of the the bank suicide bombing case, believed the banned militant group Tehrik-e-Islami was involved in the attack. The investigators say they have got concrete evidence by using communication technology regarding the involvement of Tehrik-e-Islami in the suicide attack.

An update on this story, which discussed some of the potential problems with the "reforms" of the new law. In particular, the plan to move to a decentralized system to permit or deny building according to local approval echoes the system that has been so disastrous for Christians in Indonesia. There are additional issues, described below. "Copts Calls for Withdrawal of Draft Law on Places of Worship," from Al Masry Al Youm, June 19:

The Egyptian Organization for Human Rights (EOHR) called on the government on Sunday to withdraw a draft law on unified places of worship, which has been strongly criticized by various Christian denominations in Egypt. The churches said the draft law was a continuation of the old, discriminatory approach.

It would just decentralize it. To say all places of worship would be subject to local permission stacks the deck against the Christian minority.

Earlier this month, the Egyptian government approved the draft law for public debate.

For decades, Egyptian Copts have been calling for a law to unify the standards and conditions of construction for both Muslim and non-Muslim places of worship. The law would replace the "Hamayouni Decree", which is a clause in Egyptian law that regulates church construction and maintenance, and which dates from Ottoman rule. The decree stipulates the need to obtain prior approval from the chief executive -- the president in modern times -- to build a new church or to expand or restore an existing one.

A joint statement issued last week by the Egyptian Coptic, Anglican and Catholic Churches rejected the draft law on places of worship. They requested amendments to certain articles, especially those stipulating that places of worship should be 1000 square meters in size, which they say would be hard to implement, and that there must be at least 1km between places of worship.

That would be too easy. Every time someone wants to build a church, Muslims who didn't want a church in the area could find a place to claim to start a mosque project within 1km.

The permit system is also a non-starter:

They rejected the stipulation that local councils be given authority to grant permits, and requested that conditions for licenses be standardized.

In a statement on Sunday, the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies said the draft law was "put forward hastily and without adequate consideration to the reduction of growing sectarian tensions."

The EOHR called for non-legislative measures to overcome the various legal, procedural, administrative and security problems that continue to pose obstacles.

As noted below, Boko Haram's choice of targets focuses primarily on practices or institutions that go against Sharia law. Here, there is no mention of whether there was any actual gambling at any card game, which would be haram, or if the games themselves were considered close enough. In any case, to attack what is described as a common form of recreation in the area only echoes the Ayatollah Khomeini, as Robert pointed out below. He is traveling this morning but asked me to repost Khomeini's full statement:

"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."

So... no card games. More on this story. "Nigerian 'Islamists' fire at card players, kill two: source," by Pius Utomi Ekpei for Agence France-Presse, June 19:

Suspected members of a radical Islamist sect which bombed Nigerian police headquarters on Sunday opened fire on a crowd of card players killing two in a northern city, a senior military officer said.

Two motorcycle-riding gunmen suspected of being members of Boko Haram pumped shots into a crowd of people playing cards outside a house in the city of Maiduguri and disappeared into alleyways, said the officer who did not want to be named.

"The group of men were playing cards under a tree outside a house when two men on a motorcycle believed to be Boko Haram members opened fire on them, killing two people and seriously injuring five others," the officer told AFP....

The sect has staged attacks targeting government institutions, politicians, churches and beer drinking spots in what has become a low-level insurgency since last year. Dozens of people have been killed.

It's becoming less and less "low-level" here of late.

He said it. Ibrahim Saddiq Conlan must be a greasy Islamophobe. "‘Democracy is evil, Parliament is evil’ says radical Muslim cleric in billboard debate," by Clayton Hinds for Christian Today Australia, June 19 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

Democracy and parliaments are evil declared a radical Australian Muslim cleric in Sydney on Friday night during a debate with two Christian politicians.

Ibrahim Saddiq Conlan also called for the overthrow of the Australian legal system in favour of the controversial sharia law, the Islamic legal system.

“[the Australian legal system is] the primary cause of the spiritual, economic and environmental crisis in Australia,” he said.

“Democracy is evil, the parliament is evil and legislation is evil,” said Mr Conlon....

Unfortunately for him, however, it looks as if the global jihad has already opted to replace his regime. "Gadhafi calls for 'global jihad' as NATO bombs Libyan civilians," from the International Business Times, June 19:

The news first broke from the Libyan government itself, early Sunday, with NATO confirming the mistaken strike one hour later.

The incident made for propaganda fodder for Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, who tried used the event as a new rallying point against the international intervention in Libya's civil war.

A government spokesman called the strike "cold-blooded murder" and challenged NATO's stance it had intervened in Libya's revolt in order to protect civilian lives.

"Is this the protection of civilians?" spokesman Musa Ibrahim asked reporters at the scene. "Is this really the search for peace and democracy in the Libya, to attack peaceful neighborhoods of Tripoli?"

The foreign minister called for a "global jihad" on the West in response.

Libyan officials said nine people were killed, including two children, and 18 people were wounded.

"It appears that one weapon did not strike the intended target and that there may have been a weapons system failure which may have caused a number of civilian casualties," NATO said in a statement issued late Sunday at Brussels headquarters.

"NATO regrets the loss of innocent civilian lives and takes great care in conducting strikes against a regime determined to use violence against its own citizens," said commander Lt. Gen. Charles Bouchard....

If they want to form their own schools at their own expense, that's one thing -- but true to form, they are going farther than that, and want the kuffar to pay for their Islamic schools. "Muslims To Break Away From Scottish Education System," by Ben Borland in the Express, June 19 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

MUSLIM leaders are planning to break away from the Scottish education system and create their own schools because the current curriculum does not include enough about Islam.

The Sunday Express has learned parents are angry their children are not being given schooling according to their religious beliefs and claim teachers are even promoting “unIslamic principles and behaviours”.

Some have even threatened legal action to force councils to open state-funded faith schools at taxpayers’ expense....

There Is No Fun In Islam* Update from Nigeria: "Nigerian 'Islamists' fire at card players, kill two: source," from AFP, June 19 (thanks to Ken):

KANO, Nigeria — Suspected members of a radical Islamist sect which bombed Nigerian police headquarters on Sunday opened fire on a crowd of card players killing two in a northern city, a senior military officer said.

Two motorcycle-riding gunmen suspected of being members of Boko Haram pumped shots into a crowd of people playing cards outside a house in the city of Maiduguri and disappeared into alleyways, said the officer who did not want to be named.

"The group of men were playing cards under a tree outside a house when two men on a motorcycle believed to be Boko Haram members opened fire on them, killing two people and seriously injuring five others," the officer told AFP.

"The attack is a typical Boko Haram (shoot-and-run) style," the military officer said....

* The Ayatollah Khomeini said that.

It's all right. For their service to the umma, they'll be stoned to death last. "Hijab-Wearing ‘Flash Mob’ Invades RightOnline," by Evan McMorris-Santoro for TPM, June 18 (thanks to Weasel Zippers):

MINNEAPOLIS -- A group of around ten women in Muslim headscarves crashed the RightOnline conference for about ten minutes Saturday, protesting what they said was an incident targeting Muslim women Thursday night.

The event was the latest spark kicked up by the proximity of Netroots Nation and RightOnline. The two conferences are blocks apart -- RightOnline is being held in a hotel many Netrootsers are staying in -- and interaction between the progressives at Netroots and the conservatives at RightOnline has been inevitable.

A spokesperson for the group of women told TPM they weren't sure of the identity of the man responsible for the Thursday incident -- when two hijab-wearing women were followed by a man with a cell phone camera who reportedly asked them why they were dressed the way they were "in America" -- but rumors that the incident involved an employee of conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart were rampant at Netroots.

It was partially a confrontation over those rumors that caused the Breitbart kerfuffle at Netroots Friday.

The women who arrived at RightOnline were Netroots attendees, and were accompanied by blogger Joe Aravosis and gay rights advocate/provocateur Dan Choi.

The spokesperson for the "flash mob," Allison Nevitt, told TPM that there was a larger message to their protest beyond the Thursday incident, which Nevitt said had been reported to Minneapolis police.

"The point was mostly that Muslim women are an equal part of this nation, and that we have an equal right to exist here," Nevitt said....

Misunderstanders of Islam running amok, trying to terrorize the Christian South into staying under the Islamic government of the North, and no Correct Understanders of the Religion of Peace seem to be around to rein them in. "Sudanese Military, Militias Kill Christians in South Kordofan," from Compass Direct, June 17:

KHARTOUM, Sudan, June 17 (CDN) — Military intelligence agents killed one Christian, and Islamic militants sympathetic to the government slaughtered another last week after attacking churches in Sudan’s embattled South Kordofan state.

Christian sources said a Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) Intelligence unit detained Nimeri Philip Kalo, a student at St. Paul Major Seminary, on June 8 near the gate of the United Nations Mission in Sudan (UNMIS) in Kadugli’s al Shaeer area and shot him in front of bystanders. Kalo and other Christians were fleeing the town after Muslim militias loyal to the SAF attacked and looted at least three church buildings in Kadugli, they said.

UNMIS’s mandate is to support the Comprehensive Peace Agreement between the Government of Sudan and the country’s Christian and animist south, scheduled to secede on July 9, by helping in the disarmament process, among other means. Armed conflict in Kadugli broke out between southern and northern militaries on June 6 after northern forces seized Abyei last month.

SAF military intelligence agents accused Kalo of being a Christian and suspected he was therefore opposed to the Islamic government, the sources said.

“They shot him in front of our eyes and forced us not to cry, or else we would face the same fate,” a Christian source told Compass on condition of anonymity. Likewise, another Christian survivor said while breaking into tears, “They killed him in front of my eyes.”

On the same day, Islamic militants loyal to the SAF slaughtered a young Christian man by sword in Kadugli Market, the sources said. Adeeb Gismalla Aksam, 33, a bus driver whose father is an elder with the Evangelical Church in Kadugli, was murdered by Muslim extremists shouting, “Allahu-akbar [God is greater]!”

The Islamic militias were heard shouting “Allahu-akbar!” as they began shooting at a Roman Catholic Church building at 3:30 p.m. on June 8, during a mass in which the congregants were asking God to protect them.

“As we were praying, they started to pour bullets at us to the point that we were terribly scared,” a Christian who escaped the attack told Compass.

No one was hit by the bullets shot at the building from the outside, but SAF agents on June 8 arrested the Rev. Abraham James Lual in front of his congregation, a priest of a Kadugli parish told Compass. Accusing Lual of preaching that people should oppose the Islamic government, authorities took him to an unknown location and tortured him two days, releasing him the following morning, the priest said.

The Rev. Paul Okeny, another Catholic priest, told Compass that Islamic militias loyal to the SAF looted other churches in Kadugli as well, besides attacking Lual’s church and depriving him of his belongings....

Another Christian who requested anonymity said he was arrested at gunpoint by SAF military Intelligence agents at 8:30 a.m. on June 8. Accusing him of being anti-Islam and therefore opposed to the Islamic government, the security officers took him to a military jail, where he was severely beaten and “kicked like a ball,” he said.

According to the Christian, one high-ranking official told another, “Why shouldn’t you shoot him in his house so that his body gets rotten in his own house?” After taking him to his house, they started to torture him with sticks, guns and knives, saying, “We will kill you,” he said....

The SAF and Islamic militias on June 8 also set fire to buildings of the Episcopal Church of Sudan and the Sudanese Church of Christ in Kadugli, sources said.

“I saw a building of the Episcopal Church of Sudan in flames,” said one eyewitness....

On Sunday (June 12), North Kordofan Gov. Mutasim Mirghani Zaki El-deen declared jihad (holy war) on the Nuba people, most of whom are Christians....

Somehow I doubt that North Kordofan Gov. Mutasim Mirghani Zaki El-deen was referring to an interior spiritual struggle.

Yet another convert to Islam misunderstands his peaceful new religion. "Austrian National Arrested For Planning Bundestag Attack," from AGI, June 18 (thanks to all who sent this in):

(AGI) Vienna- An Austrian national was arrested in Vienna and charged with terrorism. Detectives believe he was planning to crash a plane into the Bundestag, German parliament headquarters in Berlin. The suspect, 25-year-old Thomas al-J., is a young man who has converted to Islam. He was arrested Wednesday in his apartment in the Austrian capital and has also been accused of recruiting terrorists in order to send them to jihad training camps in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and of funding terrorist organizations.....

The jihadists, some of whom "call themselves Ansar al Sharia, or Supporters of Islamic Law," have declared their intention of forming an Islamic state. That, after all, is the fundamental purpose of jihad in all its forms, other "underlying causes" notwithstanding. "Source: Yemeni troops fight Islamists for control of province," from CNN, June 19:

(CNN) -- At least a dozen Islamic militants and two Yemeni troops died overnight as Yemen fights to wrest control of Abyan province from militants, a senior security official in the southern province told CNN Sunday.

Qasim Bin Hadi, the head of security in Zinjibar in Abyan, said that the city has turned into a ghost town and that clashes between government forces and al Qaeda militants have been nonstop the past two days.

"Bodies of dead people are everywhere in the streets," said Bin Hadi.

Separately, more than 100 influential religious and tribal leaders said President Ali Abdullah Saleh was not able to lead the country and should step down.

"Saleh was injured seriously during the assassination attempt on his life. We call on Saleh to hand over powers to his vice president Abdu Rabu Mansoor Hadi, to save the country from further clashes and bloodshed," said the statement, which was circulated to the media.

Saleh and other senior officials were injured June 3 in an attack on the mosque at the presidential palace. Saleh is being treated in Saudi Arabia. Officials loyal to him have said he will return when he has recovered. [...]

In recent weeks, government troops have battled both anti-government tribal forces and Islamic militants, including al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. [...]

According to residents in Zinjibar, militants have succeeded in seizing a large number of heavy artillery from the government during the clashes the past two days.

This report confirms what Karzai said yesterday while he was also channeling Woodsy Owl and accusing NATO of not giving a hoot.

In recent months, Secretary of State Clinton and others have expressed hope that parts of the Taliban who are open to "dialogue" might be split off from their more outwardly "extreme" brethren. But as always, "war is deceit," and the Taliban can be expected to exploit the opportunity to gain legitimacy, perhaps even emerging at some point as a Hizballah-like "political party" that also happens to function as a state-within-a-state with its own armed forces. (The move toward Taliban "political" offices in Turkey are another step in that direction.) In the short term, they will also use the pretense of dialogue to buy time for their military operations.

"Robert Gates confirms US-Taliban talks in Afghanistan," from BBC News, June 19:

Outgoing US Defence Secretary Robert Gates has confirmed that the US is holding "outreach" talks with members of the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Mr Gates said talks were "preliminary" but that a political solution was the way "most of these wars end".

It is the first time the US has acknowledged such contact and comes a day after Afghan President Hamid Karzai said peace talks had started.

The US is due to start withdrawing its 97,000 troops from Afghanistan in July.

It aims to gradually hand over all security operations to Afghan security forces by 2014.

"There's been outreach on the part of a number of countries, including the United States," Mr Gates told CNN., without naming other countries involved.

"I would say that these contacts are very preliminary.

"My own view is that real reconciliation talks are not likely to be able to make any substantive headway until at least this winter."

'Time to engage'

Mr Gates, who will leave office at the end of the month, said the first step had been to ensure the contacts were genuine and influential Taliban members.

"We don't want to end up having a conversation at some point with somebody who is basically a freelancer."

Mr Karzai said on Saturday that peace talks involving Afghan officials, the US and other "foreign militaries" were taking place and were "going well"....

The floor tile design was too similar to the Arabic script for the name of Allah. In a situation reminiscent of how rampages protesting the Florida Qur'an burning actually wound up burning untold numbers of Qur'ans as collateral damage, apparently blowing up what was taken to be Allah's name made up for the sacrilege of Allah's name appearing on the floor.

"Pakistan bank attacked by terrorists over 'sacrilegious' floor tiles," from Asian News International, June 18 (thanks to Weasel Zippers):

Islamabad, June 18(ANI): A terrorist outfit targeted a bank in Pakistan on June 13 because its floor tiles and their design were strikingly analogous to the sacred name, Allah.

This isn't the first case of its kind: soft-serve ice cream has also committed this atrocity. One might call it, in the parlance of Homer Simpson, "sacri-licious." Unfortunately, this time, the human cost was higher:

A bank guard was killed and four others were injured in last Monday's suicide attack on an Islamabad branch of a bank.

Murdered for floor tiles. You can't build a stable, prosperous society where priorities are so incredibly disordered and anger management is so self-righteously non-existent.

Bank officials confirmed that the administration had received complaints about the design of the floor tiles, and that some individuals had also met the management official in this regard, but neither the area police nor the bank administration took any action on the objections raised by the group.

When contacted, the bank's president said that the allegation was baseless and concocted.

"It cannot even be imagined to disgrace the holy name of Allah Almighty. We are Muslims and can never think of the disrespect to the name of the Creator," The News quoted him, as saying.

The officials investigating the case disclosed that in June 2009, an application was lodged with the Industrial Area police by the district president of a youth organisation in Islamabad, saying that he had asked the bank administration to change the sacrilege design of tiles, but they did not bother to listen to him.

He requested the police to register the FIR against the bank administration, but the police also did not take any action on the complaint despite the lapse of two years, according to sources.

Meanwhile, officers probing the bank suicide bombing case said they have got concrete evidence by using communication technology that the banned militant group Tehrik-e-Islami was involved in the suicide attack. (ANI)

What makes Phillips' claim that much more risible is that one of the main points of contention here is religious teachings on homosexuality. Generally speaking, it is a dangerous slippery slope we're on if the government wishes to treat a religion's disapproval of any act, inside the bedroom or elsewhere, as hate speech. The equality commission certainly seems to be flirting with that concept.

Phillips talks out of both sides of his mouth below, speaking in favor of religions' independence on matters of conscience, all while he is using his government position to bully religions over what has become a state-determined "heresy." In the current climate, such behavior plays directly into the hands of Islamic supremacists, who benefit from an obvious double standard.

Alongside politically correct dogmas foisted on society in the name of "tolerance," it is almost like a secular "Sharia" is taking hold attached to the new civil religion of multiculturalism (and like Sharia, you can convert to Islam for better treatment). Marginalizing Christianity in Britain in the name of an Orwellian "equality" while downplaying the problems of Muslim communities will set the stage for the real Sharia to gain an ever greater foothold.

Meanwhile, there is no Christian analogue to the situation in Tower Hamlets, where the persecution of gay people is rampant, and police are already looking the other way for fear of being called Islamophobic as Muslims indulge openly in violent hate speech and call for Sharia's often creative punishments against homosexuals.

It certainly appears one religion is "more equal than others" at the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

"Christians are more militant than Muslims, says Government's equalities boss," by Jonathan Wynne-Jones for the Telegraph, June 18:

Trevor Phillips warned that "an old time religion incompatible with modern society" is driving the revival in the Anglican and Catholic Churches and clashing with mainstream views, especially on homosexuality.

Utterly absent is any comparative discussion of religious teachings on homosexuality, which are reflected by the differences in behavior: Muhammad himself called for the execution of homosexuals. Jesus did not. Paul called homosexual acts sinful, but did not prescribe punishments for Christian communities to carry out.

He accused Christians, particularly evangelicals, of being more militant than Muslims in complaining about discrimination, arguing that many of the claims are motivated by a desire for greater political influence.

However the chairman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission expressed concern that people of faith are "under siege" from atheists whom he accused of attempting to "drive religion underground".

In an interview with the Sunday Telegraph ahead of a landmark report on religious discrimination in Britain, he said the Commission wants to protect Christians and Muslims from discrimination, admitting his body had not been seen to stand up for the people discriminated against because of their faith in the past.

In a wide-ranging intervention into the debate over the role of religion in modern Britain, Mr Phillips:

- warned it had become "fashionable" to attack and mock religion, singling out atheist polemicist Richard Dawkins for his views;

- said faith groups should be free from interference in their own affairs, meaning churches should be allowed to block women and homosexuals from being priests and bishops;

- attacked hardline Christian groups which he said were picking fights - particularly on the issue of homosexuality - for their own political ends;

- told churches and religious institutions they had to comply with equality legislation when they delivered services to the public as a whole.

It will be interesting to see if the imbalance in coverage reflected above where Islam is concerned is indeed the case in the full report.

The report, published by the Commission tomorrow, says that some religious groups have been the victims of rising discrimination over the last decade.

It shows that in the course of the last decade, the number of employment tribunal cases on religion or belief brought each year has risen from 70 to 1000 - although only a fraction of cases were upheld.

Mr Phillips spoke after a series of high-profile cases which have featured Christians claiming they have been discriminated against because of their beliefs, with a doctor currently fighting a reprimand from the General Medical Council for sharing his faith with a patient.

While the equalities boss promised to fight for the rights of Christians, he expressed concern that many cases were driven by fundamentalist Christians who are holding increasing sway over the mainstream churches because of the influence of African and Caribbean immigrants with "intolerant" views.

Stop right there. What would happen to Phillips if he said anything of the sort there about Muslims? There would be a firestorm. He would be called a racist, a colonialist, and so forth.

In contrast, Muslims are less vociferous because they are trying to integrate into British "liberal democracy", he said.

"I think there's an awful lot of noise about the Church being persecuted but there is a more real issue that the conventional churches face that the people who are really driving their revival and success believe in an old time religion which in my view is incompatible with a modern, multi-ethnic, multicultural society," Phillips said.

"Muslim communities in this country are doing their damnedest to try to come to terms with their neighbours to try to integrate and they're doing their best to try to develop an idea of Islam that is compatible with living in a modern liberal democracy.

"The most likely victim of actual religious discrimination in British society is a Muslim but the person who is most likely to feel slighted because of their religion is an evangelical Christian."

Senior clergy, including Lord Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, have attacked equality laws for eroding Christianity and stifling free speech, but Phillips said many of the legal cases brought by Christians on issues surrounding homosexuality were motivated by an attempt to gain political influence.

Pooh-poohing beliefs as petty politics:

"I think for a lot of Christian activists, they want to have a fight and they choose sexual orientation as the ground to fight it on," he said.

"I think the whole argument isn't about the rights of Christians. It's about politics. It's about a group of people who really want to have weight and influence."

He added: "There are a lot of Christian activist voices who appear bent on stressing the kind of persecution that I don't think really exists in this country."....

This round was Pakistan's chance to prove it could be trusted. That's not what Pakistan proved. "AP sources: Pakistanis tip off militants again," by Kimberly Dozier for the Associated Press, June 18:

WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. officials say Pakistan has apparently tipped off militants at two more bomb-building factories in its tribal areas, giving the terror suspects time to flee, after U.S. intelligence shared the locations with the Pakistani government.

Their excuse amounts to claiming they are not sovereign over their own territory:

Those officials believe Pakistan's insistence on seeking local tribal elders' permission before raiding the areas may have most directly contributed to the militants' flight. U.S. officials have pushed for Pakistan to keep the location of such targets secret prior to the operations, but the Pakistanis say their troops cannot enter the lawless regions without giving the locals notice.

All officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss matters of intelligence.

The latest incidents bring to a total of four bomb-making sites that the U.S. has shared with Pakistan only to have the terrorist suspects flee before the Pakistani military arrived much later. The report does not bode well for attempts by both sides to mend relations and rebuild trust after the U.S. raid on May 2 that killed Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad, a Pakistani army town only 35 miles (56.32 kilometers) from the capital Islamabad.

The Pakistanis believe the Americans violated their sovereignty by keeping them in the dark about the raid. American officials believe bin Laden's location proves some elements of the Pakistani army or intelligence service helped hide the al-Qaida mastermind, bolstering their argument that the raid had to be done solo.

The U.S. officials explained Saturday how they first offered the location of the third, and then the fourth site, in order to give Pakistan another chance to prove it could be trusted to go after the militants.

In the tradition of 'trust but verify,' the Americans carefully monitored the area with satellite and unmanned drones, to see what would happen, after sharing the information a third and fourth time, the officials said.

In each case, they watched the militants depart within 24 hours, taking any weapons or bomb-making materials with them, just as militants had done the first two times. Only then, did they watch the Pakistani military visit each site, when the terror suspects and their wares were long gone, the officials said.

Pakistan's army on Friday disputed reports that its security forces had tipped off insurgents at bomb-making factories after getting intelligence about the sites from the United States. The army called the assertions of collusion with militants "totally false and malicious."

Army officials further claimed they had successfully raided two more sites, after finding nothing at the first two, but a Pakistani official reached Friday offered no details of what they found there.

The official admitted that in each raid, however, the Pakistani security services notified the local elders who hold sway in the tribal regions. The official said they would investigate U.S. charges that the militants had been tipped off.

Two U.S. officials said they were asking the Pakistanis to withhold such sensitive information from the elders, and even their lower ranks, to prove they could be trusted to keep a secret, and go after U.S. enemies....

Apparently the TSA in Newark airport is devoting its energies to looking for drug traffickers. That's all well and good, but does anyone care to devote any attention to looking for Islamic jihadists? "U.S. Homeland Security Committee demands TSA explain reports of racial profiling at Newark airport," by Steve Strunsky for The Star-Ledger, June 17:

WASHINGTON — The Republican chairman and ranking Democrat on the House Homeland Security Committee said they want the head of the Transportation Security Administration to explain how racial profiling became a common practice among TSA screeners at Newark Liberty International Airport.

Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) and Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss) are both seeking answers from TSA Administrator John Pistole, after a federal report found several behavior detection officers, or BDOs, had singled out Mexican and Dominican passengers for special scrutiny, bag searches, questioning and document reviews in 2008 and 2009.

"We have been in contact with TSA. We are looking forward to hearing Administrator Pistole’s analysis," King, who is from Long Island, said in a statement[.] "After that, we will determine our course of action."...

The group of managers and BDOs who engaged in racial profiling were dubbed "the Great Mexican Hunters" by other TSA employees at the airport....

What worked for Neville Chamberlain works for Barack Obama. More on this story. "Karzai: Afghanistan, U.S. Negotiating With Taliban," from the Associated Press, June 18:

Kabul – President Hamid Karzai said Saturday that Afghanistan and the United States are engaged in peace talks with the Taliban, even as insurgents stormed a police station near the presidential palace, killing nine people....

Three men dressed in Afghan army uniforms stormed the police station near the presidential palace and opened fire on officers, said Mohammed Honayon, a witness. The Interior Ministry said in a statement that one of the attackers detonated a suicide bomb vest outside the gates while the others rushed in and began shooting....

Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid claimed responsibility for the attack in a text message to The Associated Press, saying the group dispatched three suicide bombers.

The assault occurred shortly after Karzai announced during a speech at the presidential palace that his government and the U.S. have begun preliminary negotiations with the Taliban aimed at ending the conflict.

"In the course of this year, there have been peace talks with the Taliban and our own countrymen," Karzai said. "Peace talks have started with them already and it is going well. Foreign militaries, especially the United States of America, are going ahead with these negotiations."...

The violent intimidation of anti-jihadists that I just saw in Stuttgart is coming to America. Authorities should act quickly and decisively to defend the freedom of speech, or it will most assuredly soon be gone. As Pamela Geller notes, these stories involve "two Christian groups, both under attack in a no-go zone zone in Dearborn, Michigan, in an increasingly sharia compliant America. Dearborn, the same city that refused to run my bus ads offering help to apostates (despite our win in the courts). On Friday, two separate groups were threatened and attacked because they came to Dearborn to stand for their beliefs. Whether you like their presentation or not is irrelevant. It's free speech. Period."

"Pastor Terry Jones Rallies in Dearborn, Skips Arab Festival," by Amy Lange for WJBK/myFOXDetroit.com, June 17 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

There was a hostile welcome Friday afternoon in Dearborn for controversial Florida Pastor Terry Jones. You could say he was pushed to his brink.

Jones led a rally against radical Islam at city hall before trying to continue his protest at the nearby Arab International Festival, but he never made it there.

Protesters got physical with Jones as he tried to head for the festival. He barely made it off the corner of Michigan and Schaefer.

Dearborn police made several arrests after urging the pastor to take a car instead of trying to walk the two miles to the festival.

People in the crowd yelled back and then they pushed back, prompting police to put Jones in a police car for his own safety. The pastor decided not to go to the festival after all.

Tensions were high after a highly inflammatory rally during which Jones and fellow speakers sometimes insulted the crowd and Islam, at times holding up the Koran for emphasis.

"I actually expected them to let us walk along the sidewalk and just continue to yell. I did not expect for them to actually get physical," Jones told reporters....

"Tensions high as protestors arrive at Dearborn Arab International Festival," by Julie Banovic for WXYC, June 17 (thanks again to Pamela Geller):

DEARBORN, Mich. (WXYZ) - The Arab International Festival attracts more than 300,000 people to Dearborn every year. This is the 16th year for the event that turned rowdy and at times dangerous when religious beliefs and protesters clashed.

The protesters waved signs plastered with sayings like ‘Islam is a religion of blood and murder’, many at the Arab International Festival saw hate.

“Talking dirty about the Koran. Dirty about Muslims,” said Mustafa Kahwaji.

Geller addresses this deftly: "Indeed. But bus ads and billboards that myriad Muslim groups ran claiming that Abraham, Issac, Jacob and Moses were Muslims were deeply offensive and 'dirty' to non-Muslims. Nobody was attacked."

They call themselves the bible believers—men and women assembled from all over the country.

Their posters and shouting caused the 16th annual festival to come to a standstill around 5:30 Friday night. Their organizer Ruben Israel comes from California.

“We’re here in Dearborn because they have issues with free speech,” said Ruben Israel.

You can say that again.

He says the group was enraged about the four missionaries arrested last July at the Arab American Festival, for their shouting their own religious message. It was a protest that officials deemed disorderly.

“When you arrest men for passing out literature, you’re going to get guys like us,” said Israel.

Tensions mounted and people in the crowd of 40-50 thousand started throwing things.

I myself was hit during my live shot when a full water bottle whipped from the crowd. It was an angry message meant for a protester.

No one was arrested, but police removed disorderly people from the crowd and asked them to leave the festival.

“Why are you going to come to our city and disrespect us like that,” said on [sic] angry onlooker.

Barricades were provided in an effort to separate protesters from furious festival goers. But after three hours, organizers were ready to take them down.

“If this is how they are going to behave, then his has gone beyond free speech at this point,” said Ahmad Chebbani, Chairman of the American Arab Chamber of Commerce.

“Things are going to get real pushy on the sidewalk. And whatever happens, blood is on his shoulder,” said Israel....

Indeed.

Some time ago I had an interesting exchange with the self-described "liberal Muslim" Mustafa Akyol, after he declared his support for the jihad flotilla that Turkey sent against Israel. The Turkish columnist Burak Bekdil has characterized the "liberal" Akyol as a pro-Sharia, pro-Erdogan Islamic supremacist. But undoubtedly a sly one. Bekdil says that Akyol is working to further "Islamists' global ambition to play the modern day, Muslim Trojan Horse at the gates of western civilization."

Consistent with that, Akyol here says that an Islamic Turkey is coming and that Turkish secularism cannot be salvaged, but that Israelis shouldn't be concerned: as long as they stop defending themselves against the Gaza jihadists and jihad flotillas, all will be well.

It would be refreshing if the many, many Americans who were taken in a few years back by Akyol's "moderate" act would reconsider now. But I am not holding my breath.

"Which Turks hate Israel most," by Mustafa Akyol in Hürriyet Daily News, June 17 (thanks to Joshua):

[...] The Turkish picture about Israel, in other words, is not black-and-white. We are not divided between Israel-hating Islamics and Israel-loving seculars.

Erdoğan’s party, for that matter, is somewhere between the Saadet and the Gülen Movement, if we put these in a spectrum and closer to the latter rather than the former. Most Israelis, who really are not in a love affair with Erdoğan, might find that hard to believe, but they should recall that the AKP leader had pretty good relations with the Jewish State until the end of 2008, when “Operation Cast Lead” began killing hundreds of innocents in Gaza. Erdoğan and his team passionately care for their Muslim brethren in Palestine, just like many American Jews care for theirs in Israel. Besides, they can not just sleep over the killing of nine Turks in international waters by Israeli soldiers, which has become a matter of national pride. But they ultimately support a two-state solution, and can be quite helpful in building it.

So, here is a friendly advice to Israeli policy makers and their advisors: Stop dreaming about the days when Turkey will become hyper-secular again. Those days are gone and Turkey’s Muslim identity is here to stay. But it might not be as bad as you fear, especially if you try to build bridges and reconsider some of your hawkish and intimidating policies.

Shouldn't the Palestinian jihadists try to build bridges and reconsider some of their hawkish and intimidating policies? For some reason, Akyol doesn't get around to calling for that.

In Houston, June 16

I'm back in La La Land now, but I have been on the road almost continuously this month: from Stuttgart, Germany to Cleveland, and then to Nashville, Tampa, Memphis, and Houston.

Here is a thorough and generally accurate report on my talk in Memphis from ACT of Jonesboro, Arkansas. I don't use the word "Islamists," and could quibble a bit about other matters, but this is in the main a reliable and detailed account, and I thank him for it: "Robert Spencer Speaks At ACT! for America In Memphis," from actjonesboroar, June 18:

Fellow Infidels,

Burkasrugly recently had the pleasure of hearing Jihad Watch director Robert Spencer speak to the Memphis chapter of ACT! for America, and was granted a personal interview with him. Here is Part 1 of several installments. Enjoy.

There are a few brave souls who are on the front lines of the war against the
encroachment of the smothering totalitarian political system called Islam. One of those heroes, Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch, spoke to a group ACT! for America members in Memphis last Wednesday.

Robert Spencer talks to ACT! for America members in Memphis

Spencer is like a walking encyclopedia of knowledge about anything Islamic. He explained to the group that Islam is the only religion in the world that is also a political system. It is a total way of life that covers all behavior including politics. Spencer pointed out that this is problematic for free people – especially Americans -because Islam teaches something totally different than American law.

The so-called Religion of Peace is very deceitful. They may have a few verses about peace, love, and lollipops, but itmeans [sic] they are only sweet and nice to OTHER MUSLIMS. While they are merciful to each other, they are ruthless to infidels (that’s us folks). Spencer said that in Saudi Arabia and Iran if someone kills a Muslim the punishment is much harsher than if they kill a non-Muslim. The customary practice of paying blood money to the victim’s family even reflects the disparity as blood money is less for non-Muslims.

Spencer said that according to Islamists, the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights is flawed. Islamic countries have formulated their own rules on human rights. They say the right to life has to be qualified. They have particular problems with Article 18 of the Declaration of Human Rights. That article guarantees freedom of conscience and basically says that people should be able to change their religion or have no religion at all. In the U.S. we take this for granted. However, in Islam, changing religion is grounds for the death penalty.

Spencer also said that sex slaves are guaranteed in the Koran. He pointed to a verse (Koran 4:3) that says that a man can have four wives plus “captives his right hands posses.” In the last couple of weeks a Kuwait woman proposed that Russian and Chechnyan Muslims should capture non-Muslim women and make slaves of them. Spencer emphasized that there is no American version of Islam – this is the same Islam that we have in the U.S. Women are essentially relegated to the status of commodities.

He acknowledged that these things are unpleasant, but must be made known to the public. He said that Mohammed was 54 years-old when he consummated his marriage with a 9 year-old girl. Muslims consider Mohammed to be an excellent example of conduct, and the supreme guide for their lives. This is why there are so many marriages (a pedophile’s dream) to little girls in the Islamic world....

Read it all. And part 2 is here.

On June 7 I was interviewed publicly before a live audience in Cleveland, Ohio, by David Zanotti of The Public Square. Then on June 9 in Nashville, Tennessee, we did it again, this time along with Dr. George Grant. Here is the first 60-minute radio program distilled from those two live interviews, featuring my appearance in Cleveland:

From The Public Square:

The Public Square 60 Minute Program Hosts: David Zanotti and Wayne Shepherd Producer: Alan C. Duncan

www.thepublicsquare.com

This week on The Public Square 60 Minute Program:
The American Policy Roundtable recently held two policy briefings in Cleveland, Ohio and Nashville, Tennessee about the topic of Islam and the West. Two special guests joined the forum: Mr. Robert Spencer, Director of Jihad Watch and author of ten books on Islam, along with Dr. George Grant, author of "The Blood and the Moon: Understanding the Historic Struggle between Islam and Western Civilization" and founder of Franklin Classical School.

These two experts in the field will share with you an in-depth conversation on Islam along with answering excellent questions submitted from the audience. You won't want to miss this program! (This is program one of a two part series.)

Mohamed Azahaf has been playing the "moderate" game for years, as you can see from this 2006 Jihad Watch post.

War Is Deceit Update: "Holland: Professional 'Moderate Muslim' Turns Out to be Radical, Pro-Terrorist Jihadist," by Barry Rubin in Pajamas Media, June 17:

Mohamed Azahaf, a 28-year-old immigrant from Morocco, was hired by the east Amsterdam district to build trust between Muslims and non-Muslims there. But a journalist did some careful research to discover he’s a supporter of Usama bin Ladin, said Muslim women who didn’t wear “proper” clothing weren’t real Muslims, and even issued death threats against those criticizing Islamic doctrine.

His response? Only after this was exposed publicly did he claim his remarks–never changed by him until that moment–didn’t represent his current views. The district council’s response? To defend him, though it’s starting to get worried.

But here’s the best part: After the murder of Theo Van Gogh, the filmmaker, by a radical Islamist, Holland’s queen met with several Muslims who supposedly represented the “real” views of the community opposing such violence. Azahaf was one of them. However, apparently she and everyone else didn’t know that Azahaf had already written that he supported the murder!...

Typical cluelessness from Western authorities.