Somali Troops Close In on 3 Wanted for U.S. Embassy Bombings

Wanted in the 1998 Embassy bombings. From AP, with thanks to Twostellas:

KISMAYO, Somalia — Fighting erupted Sunday on the outskirts of the last remaining stronghold of Somalia's militant Islamic movement, as thousands of residents streamed from the area ahead of the feared battle with Ethiopian-backed government troops.

Prime Minister Ali Mohamed Gedi said the militants in the coastal city of Kismayo were sheltering three men wanted in the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania that killed more than 250 people.

"If we capture them alive we will hand them over to the United States," Gedi said.

Fitzgerald: The re-primitivization of the world

As Saddam was being hung, the voices of several of those present in the room were heard crying out. They didn't cry out "a bicameral legislature!" They didn't cry out "checks and balances, for god's sake let us have checks and balances." They didn't cry out "we want a government of limited powers." No, they cried out "Moqtada al-Sadr, Moqtada al-Sadr."

Amurath an Amurath succeeds.

And will, until it is realized that people suffused with the tenets and attitudes of Islam are not interested in Western parliamentary democracy. Nor are they interested in guarantees of the rights of minorities and especially of the individual, or in the Spirit of Liberty, which is defined by Learned Hand as the spirit that is "not quite sure that it is right." Try to imagine a Muslim Washington, a Muslim Jefferson, a Muslim Adams, a Muslim Madison, James Wilson, Clay or Webster or Calhoun or John Randolph of Roanoke, a Muslim Lincoln, or for that matter a Muslim John Marshall, a Muslim Louis Brandeis, a Muslim Oliver Wendell Holmes. You can't. And you know why.

And unless, and until, the Camp of Infidels understands that it must not only understand, but make its constant theme, the connection between those assorted amuraths and the politico-religio-legal system of Islam, that refuses to locate legitimacy in the will of mere mortals, all of them rightfully slaves of Allah, and that urges submission to the ruler, no matter how despotic, as long as he is declared to be a Muslim, you never will be able to imagine such creatures. They will continue to be chimerical as long as the connection between the inshallah-fatalism of Islam and the economic backwardness, despite the OPEC trillions, of Muslim lands (where the only real economies are found, in some form, in those countries where Islam has been constrained -- as in Turkey or Tunisia) continues to go unnoticed. And the connection between the social failures, the moral failures, the intellectual failures, of Muslim societies must be connected to the doctrines, the teachings, the attitudes, the atmospherics of Islam. The case for such a connection is overwhelming. It will not be easy to deny it, and at the very least, the world's Infidels will see that connection, and so will the most advanced people born into Islam. It will put Islam permanently on the defensive among its own adherents, who will indeed begin to wonder why their countries have a series of despots succeeded by other despots, why their countries are so naturally violent in their politics, why they are, despite such oil revenues, unable or unwilling to create advanced economies, why their societies, so hostile to non-Muslims and to women, will remain estranged from the rest of the world as that world passes them by, and why the habit of mental submission encouraged by Islam will always prevent them from the enterprise of science, or from all else that requires the encouragement, and not the punishment, of free and skeptical inquiry.

Mahdi this, and Mahdi that. "What do you want to do tonight, Mahdi?"

"I don't know, Angie, what do you want to do tonight?"

"Jeez, I don't know, Mahdi, what do you want to do tonight?”

God, it's going to be boring under the new dispensation.

The re-primitivization of the world proceeds, proceeds because the advanced peoples do not appreciate their own achieved advancement. The uncivilized are inheriting that civilization, because the civilized themselves are insufficiently grateful their own legacy, and indifferent or ignorant of the conditions that were necessary for its achievement over time. And the uncivilized, seizing control of that very civilization they had so little a hand in creating, will determinedly undo it. They already are.

En passant par la Lorraine... (old song)

En passant par l'Irak...and then leaving at long last, and while removing all the planes, all the helicopters, all the Humvees, all the Bradley fighting vehicles, all the trucks, all the tanks, all the everything -- now remember, boys, don't leave any war materiel behind, including computers, including absolutely everything, god knows American taxpayers have spent or committed nearly $500 billion to hideous Iraq and its largely hideous people, and nothing should be left behind.

Let Moqtada al-Sadr be forced to deal, without the Americans to do the fighting for the Shi'a, with those stout-hearted Sunni yeomen of Fallujah, Ramadi, and Tikrit.

That will be fun. That will make it pleasant, and not disturbing, to get up in the morning, and read the latest dispatches from "Iraq."

Iran website heralding 'Mahdi' by springtime

And then the fun will begin. From WorldNetDaily.com, with thanks to Davida:

An official state media website in Iran has posted a message heralding the coming of the Shiite messianic figure, Imam Mahdi, noting he could arrive by the spring equinox.

"Imam Mahdi (may God hasten his reappearance) will appear all of a sudden on the world scene with a voice from the skies announcing his reappearance at the holy Ka'ba in Mecca," the message says.

The Islamic Republic of Iran broadcasting website said in a program called "The World toward Illumination," that the Mahdi will form an army to defeat the enemies of Islam in a series of apocalyptic battles, in which the Mahdi will overcome his archvillain in Jerusalem.

The Mahdi's far sightedness and firmness in the face of mischievous elements will strike awe. After his uprising from Mecca all of Arabia will be submit to him and then other parts of the world as he marches upon Iraq and established his seat of global government in the city of Kufa.

Then the Imam will send 10 thousand of his forces to the east and west to uproot the oppressors. At this time God will facilitate things for him and lands will come under his control one after the other. ...

After his appearance the Imam would remain in Mecca for some time, and then go to Medina. ... a descendant of the Prophet's archenemy Abu Sofyan will seize Syria and attack Iraq and the Hejaz with the ferocity of a beast ... finally Imam Mahdi sends troops who kill the Sofyani in Beit ol-Moqaddas (Jerusalem), the Islamic holy city in Palestine that is currently under occupation of the Zionists.

The Iranian series also claims the Mahdi will reappear on Earth with Jesus: "We read in the book Tazkarat ol-Olia, 'the Mahdi will come with Jesus son of Mary accompanying him.' ... Imam Mahdi will be the leader while Prophet Jesus will act as his lieutenant in the struggle against oppression and establishment of justice in the world. Jesus had himself given the tidings of the coming of God's last messenger and will see Mohammad's ideals materialize in the time of the Mahdi."

Release of up to 80 jihadists puts Pakistan counterterror efforts 'back to square one'

"As many as 80 hard-core militants are on the loose after being cleared by the courts or released on bail." Friend and Ally Update. "Freed jihadis put Pakistan's war on terror 'back to square one', say senior officers," by Massoud Ansari and Gethin Chamberlain for the Telegraph:

Anti-terrorism forces in Pakistan have been told to brace themselves for a wave of atrocities. Intelligence officials warned that the security situation is now more precarious than it was before the September 11 attacks on New York and Washington.

Senior officers say they are "back to square one" in their fight against international terrorist groups after the release of dozens of militants by Pakistani courts. High-ranking police officials say that as many as 80 hard-core militants are on the loose after being cleared by the courts or released on bail.

They are believed to have been involved in crimes including the attempted assassination of President Pervez Musharraf and a suicide attack on the American consulate in Karachi.

A memo sent by Pakistan's interior ministry to law enforcement agencies around the country warns of a plot to use suicide bombers to target Britons and Americans, including diplomats, in a coordinated campaign involving some of the country's most notorious terrorist groups. The ministry warned that the bombers were also believed to be looking at high-profile individuals and military installations as potential targets.

Last month, Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller, the head of MI5, warned of the growing threat from within Pakistan. She said young British Muslims were being groomed to become suicide bombers and that most of the 1,600 suspects being tracked by her agents were British-born but linked to al-Qaeda in Pakistan.

MI5 is reported to have compiled detailed dossiers on British Muslims travelling to jihadist training camps in Waziristan, on the border with Afghanistan, the region where the United States believes Osama bin Laden is hiding. At least two of the British Muslims involved in the Tube and bus bombings in London on July 7 last year are known to have visited training camps in Pakistan.

Anti-terrorism officers in Pakistan say they are deeply alarmed by the security situation. "We are back to square one and the situation is more precarious than it was before 9/11," one senior officer told The Sunday Telegraph. "They are planning more attacks. They have got huge backup. There are so many youths who are joining them. The old ones who are released from the prison are guiding and training the new cadres."

The interior ministry memo warns: "We would like to direct all the concerned -security departments to tighten security around important personalities inside Pakistan, and to keep a constant eye on the movement of people who had previously provided shelter to militants linked to terror organisations."

Counter-terrorism officials are aghast at the decision by the courts to free so many people suspected of involvement in attacks. Police say many have since disappeared off the radar of intelligence agencies and are believed to be planning to strike.

Among those released recently are Sohail Akhtar (aka Mustafa), the operational commander of the outlawed Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami group. He has been blamed for a campaign that included a suicide attack in Karachi in which 11 French engineers died, the suicide attack on the US consulate, and the failed attempt on the president's life. Intelligence officers say Mustafa — who was initially sentenced to death before a court overturned the verdict — is also believed to have travelled to Iraq to establish contact between al-Qaeda and terrorists there. His interrogators described him as "a terrorist genius".

One official said: "He was the one who cobbled together all the jihadis, working under various organisations, by coining the slogan, 'The ways should be different but the goal should be one'."

Officials said they had intercepted jihadist manuals which Mustafa wrote while in the prison, in which he had set out precise instructions on how to carry out attacks and maintain security.

Other militants released by the courts include Fazal Karim, who is believed to have been present at the killing of the American journalist Daniel Pearl, and Qari Mohammed Anwar (also known as Abu Darada). Anwar was arrested at an al-Qaeda safe house in Karachi along with Khalid al-Atash — who is wanted by the FBI in connection with the USS Cole bombings off Yemen — and Ammar al-Balochi, who was allegedly involved earlier this year in a plot to attack Heathrow airport.

The government has called a meeting in Islamabad this week to discuss the release of militants. It may put forward a strategy to deter the courts from clearing suspects or releasing them on bail.

That would be nice.

But police admit that their own methods have contributed to the problem. A senior official said police had taken to producing false witnesses because members of the public were too scared to testify in court. In addition, officers did not have the modern forensic tools to gather evidence.

"The prayers of all Muslims when they cast their stones at the devil must be directed at Bush and his devilish allies in America and the Arab world"

"The number one Satan is America."

Tiny Minority of Extremists Update: this kind of thing seems to play very well at the Hajj. "Muslim haj pilgrims perform devil-stoning ritual," by Souhail Karam for Reuters, with thanks to LGF:

MENA, Saudi Arabia, Dec 31 (Reuters) - More than 2.5 million Muslim haj pilgrims performed devil-stoning rites on Sunday, amid tight security to prevent overcrowding and protests following the execution of Saddam Hussein.

The 5-day haj, marred by deadly stampedes in recent years, was overshadowed by the hanging on Saturday of the former Iraqi leader, a hero to some Sunni Arabs because of his anti-U.S. stance, but hated by many Shi'ites.

"The number one Satan is America," said Iraqi pilgrim Suleiman Awadallah, who described himself as "a resistance fighter", after performing the stoning ritual.

"The prayers of all Muslims when they cast their stones at the devil must be directed at (U.S. President George) Bush and his devilish allies in America and the Arab world."

Ahmed al-Dosary from Kuwait agreed. "I prayed for myself, my family and for the end of the main evil, the United States."

India: jihadists hide bombs in toys

Will the Islamophobia never end? "Bombs found hidden in toys - police," from Agence France-Presse, with thanks to Mao:

TWO suspected Islamic militants had been arrested with explosives hidden inside toys which they planned to blow up at a busy market in New Delhi, Indian police said today.

Samimullah and Ali Mohammad, both from Indian Kashmir, were arrested at a New Delhi railway station on suspicion of belonging to pro-Pakistan militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba, senior police official Karnal Singh said.

The arrests came amid tight security in the Indian capital ahead of New Year festivities.

"We received a tip-off that the two men would be coming by train from Jammu (the winter capital of Indian Kashmir)," Mr Singh said.

"We detained them and during interrogation they admitted to being members of the Lashkar, and their plan was to plant two explosive devices."

In their luggage, a bomb disposal squad found two boxes with the toys - a toy duck and a toy bus - filled with explosives, he said.

"It took the squad around three hours to deactivate the two bombs."

Lashkar-e-Taiba, one of several groups battling Indian rule in Kashmir, was blamed for the October 29, 2005 triple bomb attacks in New Delhi, just ahead of the main Hindu festival of Diwali.

Those attacks killed 66 and injured at least 200 others.

The group was also blamed for the July 11 commuter train attacks in Mumbai this year that killed 186 people and injured about 800.

Shi'ite-Sunni rift laid bare by hanging

As predicted here by Hugh Fitzgerald.

By Lauren Frayer for AP, with thanks to Jeffrey Imm:

BAGHDAD -- As Iraqis awoke yesterday to television images of Saddam Hussein's neck twisted by a hangman's noose, Shi'ites cheered, Sunnis vowed revenge and at least 80 persons died from bombings and death squads -- not far from the daily average.

In Baghdad's Shi'ite neighborhood of Sadr City, victims of Saddam's three decades of autocratic rule took to the streets celebrating, dancing, beating drums and hanging Saddam in effigy.

Celebratory gunfire erupted in other Shi'ite neighborhoods across the country.

Outside the Sunni insurgent stronghold of Ramadi, west of the capital, loyalists marched with Saddam pictures and waved Iraqi flags.

Defying curfews, hundreds took to the streets vowing revenge in Samarra, north of Baghdad, and gunmen paraded and fired into the air in support of Saddam in Tikrit, his hometown.

"He's gone, but our problems continue. We brought problems on ourselves after Saddam because we began fighting Shi'ite on Sunni and Sunni on Shi'ite," said Haider Hamed, 34, a candy store owner in east Baghdad whose uncle was killed in one of Saddam's many brutal purges....

There was no immediate sign of a feared Sunni uprising in retaliation for Saddam's execution.

But the London Sunday Telegraph reported that 400 to 500 Shi'ites had been kidnapped in the past two months and messages to relatives said they would be killed if Saddam died.

The responses within Iraq to Saddam's death echoed the larger reaction across the Middle East, with his enemies rejoicing and his defenders proclaiming him a martyr.

Iranians and Kuwaitis welcomed the death of the leader who led wars against each of their countries.

Some Arab governments denounced the timing of the 69-year-old former president's hanging just before the start of the most important holiday of the Islamic calendar, Eid al-Adha.

Libya announced a three-day official mourning period and canceled all celebrations for Eid.

1,500 in Minneapolis protest ouster of Sharia government in Somalia

What are 1,500 supporters of Islamic jihad and Sharia law doing in Minneapolis? What are the implications of this for our own national security? Why is no one with any power or influence even asking these questions?

"Area Somalis want peace for homeland: Many of the 1,500 protesters in Minneapolis were angered that the U.S. gave tacit support for ousting of Islamists," by Liz Fedor in the Star Tribune, with thanks to CGW:

More than a thousand Somalis gathered in Minneapolis on Saturday to call for Ethiopian troops to withdraw immediately from Somalia.

Their protest capped a week in which transitional government troops retook Mogadishu, Somalia's capital, with the backing of Ethiopian infantrymen.

The U.S. government "gave the green light" to Ethiopia to work in concert with the transitional federal government in Somalia, and that action was "totally wrong," said Hassan Mohamud.

He is the president of the Somali Institute for Peace and Justice in Minneapolis, which organized Saturday's rally.

"We ask the president of the United States, Mr. Bush, and his administration to stop supporting the terrorists. Ethiopian troops are terrorists," Mohamud said to a cheering crowd.

Somali men, women and children gathered Saturday morning in Peavey Park in Minneapolis, and they carried an array of signs. Some said "No more war" and "Islam is the solution."

Lt. Rick Thomas of the Minneapolis Police Department estimated the crowd at about 1,500 people for a rally that ran for more than two hours.

Mohamud said he and other Somalis want the United States to support talks that can yield "peace and reconciliation."

Somalia has not had a stable government in 15 years, but many attendees at the rally said that the Union of Islamic Courts (UIC) had brought some peace to the country during the past six months.

When that Islamic group took over the capital in June, many people were optimistic about the future, said Omar Jamal, executive director of the Somali Justice Advocacy Center in Minneapolis.

"They brought back security," Jamal said in a telephone interview. "We were all hoping that the moderates would be able to take the lead in the organization of the UIC. But unfortunately, the radicals hijacked the process."

Don't they always.

Jamal said the large Somali community in Minnesota "is divided," adding that many local Somalis supported the overthrow of the Islamists over the past few days.

Jamal said he attended the rally as an observer....

Sadia Egal, 23, said she had been planning to visit her parents in Somalia in January. But the recent military actions prompted her to postpone the trip. She is fearful that her teenage brothers in Somalia could be killed in revenge slayings. "My dad asked them to stop going to school," she said, so they could stay home and avoid being targets for violence.

Egal, who lives in north Minneapolis, has not returned to Somalia since she left the country with her aunt when she was 12 years old. She works as a parking attendant and interpreter and has been saving her money for six months to pay for her plane ticket.

Abdullahi Hassan, a small-business owner from Eden Prairie, said, "What brought me here [to the rally] is our country is under occupation by foreign forces." He said the United States should support a process that would allow highly educated Somalis to find solutions to stabilize the country and build hospitals and schools that will serve the people.

Tacit U.S. approval

A member of the Somali Institute for Peace and Justice, Abdul Mohamed of Minneapolis, said the military advances last week by Ethiopian troops created "one of the worst moments in Somali history."

Mohamed disagrees with U.S. policy in Somalia, which he said is driven by "Islamophobia."

If anyone in the American government had any courage, they would tackle this head-on, explaining that they opposed the Somali jihadists not only because they had ties to Al-Qaeda, but because Sharia government institutionalizes discrimination against women and religious minorities and denies freedom of conscience, and is in general an outrage to the dignity of the human person. In other words, they would engage the ideological challenge posed by the global jihad by asserting the superiority of the values of the modern West, and of the civilization built on Judeo-Christian values. But they don't dare.

U.S. agencies missing links between illegal immigration and jihad terrorism

Another story highlighting the howling need for immigration reform, and underscoring its status as a national security issue. As the embattled Congressman Goode said, illegal immigration must be stopped, and legal immigration drastically curtailed -- with an eye toward keeping jihadists from entering the country. "Of special interest: U.S. agencies missing links between illegal immigration and terrorism," by Sara A. Carter in the San Bernardino County Sun, with thanks to Doc Washburn:

COLUMBUS, N.M. - On Sept. 5, a man calling himself Miguel Alfonso Salinas was apprehended off a deserted highway near the U.S.-Mexico border.

The tinted windows on Alfonso Salinas' vehicle aroused the suspicion of Border Patrol agents patrolling a dark and desolate stretch of Highway 9, which runs parallel to the border and is the site of large numbers of illegal crossings.

The agents discovered three Mexican migrants in the vehicle with Alfonso Salinas.

But what they discovered several days later made a far greater impression.

Alfonso Salinas was not who he seemed, according to U.S. Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security documents. He lied to the agents about who he was, where he came from and what he was doing.

It would take nearly a week of interviews with federal agents before Alfonso Salinas would give his real name: Ayman Sulmane Kamal, a Muslim born in Egypt - a country designated as "special-interest" by the United States for sponsoring terrorism.

Kamal's case is not an isolated one.

Evidence of "special-interest aliens" using the Mexican border to gain entry to the United States has been kept secret from the American public, according to federal law-enforcement agents, terrorism experts and critics of U.S. foreign policy with Mexico.

In 2005, the Border Patrol apprehended approximately 1.2million people illegally in the U.S. Of those, 165,000 were from countries other than Mexico, and roughly 650 were, like Kamal, from special-interest countries, according to the Border Patrol.

Those interviewed by the Sun's sister newspaper, the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin of Ontario, say agencies including the FBI and CIA are not using information from Border Patrol and Drug Enforcement Administration agents to make connections between the drug trade, illegal immigration and terrorist organizations.

"For us to believe that Mexican smugglers will not assist, knowingly or unknowingly, foreign terrorists trying to enter the United States is incomprehensible," said Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, who, along with other representatives, has pushed for stricter border security policies.

Read it all.

Not a shot was fired yet the Somali jihad was suddenly over...

Yes. It was sweet -- although many among the Western elites would prefer a "stable" Sharia-ruled Somalia. By Xan Rice in The Guardian:

Their fortress fell without a shot. After just nine days of clashes in Somalia's hinterland, the Islamists who had vowed to fight to the death abandoned Mogadishu, the city they had governed since June. From having controlled most of southern and central Somalia, they were holed up yesterday in the southern port city of Kismaayo, facing annihilation by Ethiopian troops.

Ali Mohamed Ghedi, Prime Minister in Somalia's transitional government - an irrelevance until last week - rode triumphantly into Mogadishu on Friday, announcing the end of 'terrorism' in the country. Ethiopia, which together with the US has stoked fears about the rise of a terrorist state in the Horn of Africa, was basking in the success of a campaign that was swifter and more successful than anyone had predicted.

'Nobody expected the Islamists to show this little political resilience,' said Matt Bryden, a consultant to the conflict-monitoring body, International Crisis Group. 'They were the first movement to pacify southern Somalia for 16 years, yet they crumbled like a pack of cards.'

The Guardian also recently published an article entitled "International lawlessness: The US-backed invasion of Somalia to topple its Islamists is a dangerous, illegal act of aggression," by Salim Lone, UN spokesman in Iraq in 2003 and a columnist for the Daily Nation in Kenya (thanks to Douglas Murray).

Zawahri: "Those who had sold Palestine, the secular traitors, can not be your brothers"

Another religion-based appeal from Al-Qaeda's #2 man. "A-Zawahri: Abbas sold out Palestine: Al-Qaeda No. 2 lashes out at moderate Arab leaders for being traitors for cooperating with United States in audiotape posted on Islamic Web site," from Associated Press, with thanks to Kemaste:

...Ayman a-Zawahri's wished the Palestinian people a happy Eid al-Adha but lashed out at Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah movement.

"Those who had sold Palestine, the secular traitors, can not be your brothers. Do not recognize their legitimacy... and don't sit with them ... and do not sign with them the documents that will make you lose Palestine," said a-Zawahri in the 15-minute audiotape posted on a Web site commonly used by Islamic insurgents.

A-Zawahri did not mention Saddam Hussein's execution in the tape, suggesting it was made before the ousted leader's hanging on Saturday....

The No. 2 al-Qaeda leader denounced US ally Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in an apparent reference to recent arrests and detentions of several members of the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood.

"I greet my brothers inside the prisons of Mubarak, the traitor," he said.

A-Zawahri also extended his Eid greeting to Iraq, praising the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, and urged Muslims in Somalia, Chechnya, Indonesia, the Philippines and Algeria to keep on fighting the "infidels and crusaders."

"The jihad in Iraq will be intensified and attacks on invader forces will increase"

Reactions ranged from hailing Saddam as a hero to condemning him as another Hitler. "Jubilation and anger," from Reuters:

..."There is a feeling of surprise and disapproval that the verdict has been applied during the holy months and the first days of Eid al-Adha," a presenter on the official al-Ikhbariya TV said after programming was broken to read a statement.

"Leaders of Islamic countries should show respect for this blessed occasion ... not demean it," said the statement, which was attributed to official news agency SPA's political analyst.

[...]

"This is the worst Eid ever witnessed by Muslims. I had goosebumps when I saw the footage," said Jordanian woman Rana Abdullah, 30, who works in the private sector.

Hesham Kassem, an Egyptian newspaper publisher and human rights activist, said airing the images was controversial, but added: "This man was one of the most brutal mass murderers in the history of mankind. He stands alongside Hitler and Stalin."

But in the impoverished Iraqi village where Saddam was born, residents vowed revenge. "We will all become a bomb," said one young man in Awja, 150 kilometres north of Baghdad.

Libya, the only state to show solidarity with Saddam in his death, declared three days of mourning and cancelled public Eid celebrations. Flags on government buildings flew at half-mast.

While many Arab governments refrained from comment, a senior aide to Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa called the execution "a tragic end to a sad phase in Iraq's history".

"We hope that the Iraqi people would focus on the future to be able to pass this stage, stop the violence and achieve reconciliation," Hesham Youssef told Reuters in Cairo.

The Foreign Ministry in Egypt, the most populous country in the Arab world, expressed regret that authorities in Iraq went ahead with the execution, and for carrying it out on the first day of the Eid al-Adha feast.

"We hope that carrying out the execution ... would not lead to more deterioration in the situation," the official MENA news agency quoted the ministry's spokesman Alaa El-Hadidi as saying.

The government of Iraqi neighbour Jordan said it hoped the execution would not have "any negative repercussions".

Abdel-Bari Atwan, editor of the London-based Al-Quds al-Arabi newspaper, said Arabs wondered who most deserved to face trial: "Saddam Hussein, who preserved the unity of Iraq, ... or those who engulfed the country in this bloody civil war?"

No street unrest was reported in Arab capitals, where Muslims were preoccupied with the Eid holiday, but thousands of Indians, mostly Muslims, staged anti-US protests.

Tajeddine El Husseini, a Moroccan international economic law professor, said Saddam's "symbolic sacrifice" on a religious day when Muslims slaughter animals would make things worse.

In Afghanistan, a Taliban commander said Saddam's demise would galvanise Muslim opposition to the United States.

"His death will boost the morale of Muslims. The jihad in Iraq will be intensified and attacks on invader forces will increase," Mullah Obaidullah Akhund told Reuters by telephone.

News of Saddam's death shocked Palestinians, many of whom had seen him as an Arab hero for his missile attacks on Israel during the 1991 Gulf War that ended Iraq's occupation of Kuwait.

"The Americans wanted to tell all Arab leaders who are their servants that they are like Saddam, nothing but a sheep slaughtered on Eid," said Abu Mohammad Salama at a Gaza mosque.

Hamas lawmaker Mushir al-Masri said Saddam's execution was a "proof of the criminal and terrorist American policy and its war against all forces of resistance in the world".

In Kuwait, where Saddam is reviled for his 1990 invasion, parliament speaker Jasim Mohammad al-Kharafi hailed the execution, saying it had brought the country "two Eids".

Fitzgerald: Arab secularism

"Like Arafat, Nasser, and Assad, he [Saddam Hussein] was a secular Arab nationalist who lived and wielded power according to rules that were hardly uniformly Islamic." -- from the comment by Robert Spencer

The phrase "secular Arab nationalist" may lead to some misunderstanding. Nasser and Saddam Hussein had pretensions to become King of the Arabs, but they were Muslims. They were ready whenever necessary to appeal to and exploit Muslim history. Neither one was impelled by a genuine sense of the "secular."

In Nasser's case, it would have made no sense, in the years before OPEC trillions (which Egypt in any case did not share in), or the millions of Muslim immigrants settled deep behind the enemy lines of Western Europe, for him, an army colonel interested in modernizing Egypt and in enlarging his own power and greatness, to appeal to any pan-Islamic sentiment. After all, his main threat were those who were completely Muslim, the Ikhwan al-muslimin or Muslim Brotherhood, founded by Tariq Ramadan's grandfather Hasan al-Banna back in 1928, when thes dansants at Shepheard's Hotel were still in full swing, and the syce-runners waiting patiently outside, and Levantines were reading The Egyptian Gazette.

Nasser's only political rivals were the fanatically Muslim, and he represented not true "secularism" but rather, a less intense form of Islam. But, as he demonstrated again and again, he was prepared to use, and be used by, Islam -- and his seizing the property of, and throwing out of the country, Greeks, Jews, Armenians, Italians and others could be seen as an act of "nationalism," but could also be seen as an act against Infidels. Certainly his rhetoric before and during the Six-Day War was dripping with Islamic themes, and so was, for years, the Egyptian press. How could it be otherwise? Egypt was largely Muslim. And it is today.

As for Saddam Hussein, he realized that the Shi'a were more numerous than the Sunnis (though not quite to the extent that they have become today), and that the best way for a Sunni despotism to survive would be to disguise it as something else. Any Islam-based opposition to the rule of Saddam Hussein would have to be, among the Arabs, mosque-based. And that meant many of them would be Shi'a mosques, and that would be dangerous for the Sunni rulers of Iraq.

In Syria, Ba'athism helped to disguise the Alawite dictatorship, and since the Alawites are about 12% of the population, and with their cult of Mary are dangerously un-Islamic. In fact, one of their achievements was to receive, in recent years, a fatwa from Shi'a Muslims in Iran offering the opinion that Alawites were indeed orthodox Muslims -- but as the Sunnis might say, this may be a case of needing a second opinion. They needed such a disguise. The Alawites, a minority despised by the Sunni Arabs, came to power only as a result of their having served the French as part of the "Troupes Speciales," and then having formed a kind of military caste. Finally, the Air Force officer Hafez al-Assad put himself and other Alawites (the only people he could fully trust) in power. He could not possibly abandon "secular" Ba'athism, because he had to appeal not only to Christians (with Armenians forming one of the special household-guard units), who realized the Alawites were their only protectors against the real Muslims, but also to those Muslims who were more alarmed by the Ikhwan than they were offended by the syncretistic Alawites.

In Iraq, a similar disguise was needed by the Sunnis, which is why Iraq was the only country, other than Syria, where Ba'athism took hold. Ba'athism was the perfect disguise for Sunni despotism. It appeaed to be, on the surface, a party open to all, free from sectarian or ethnic bias, so that Shi'a Arabs, Kurds, and even the odd Christian (and Tariq Aziz was very odd) might join the Ba'ath Party and to some modest degree at least claim or pretend to have a share in the power. Behind Ba'athism, however, were always the Sunni Arabs, determined to treat both Kurds and Shi'a Arabs (the Arabic-speaking Christians hardly counted, and Jews, who had in 1920 constituted one-third of the population of Baghdad, had disappeared unlamented from Iraq, having left in a hurry, harried out, sent packing, and the pogrom of 1941, or the little pogroms of 1948-1950, or the public hanging of innocent Jews as "Zionist spies" in January 1969, before a Baghdad crowd of a half-million howling with hysteria and rapturous hate, made sure that any who remained would not remain for long).

Saddam Hussein appealed to Islamic history again and again whenever he felt the need. He naturally named his battles and campaigns against Iran after famous battles in that history. He named his war against the Kurds "Al-Anfal" after a sura in the Qur'an. He built mosques, and was building the largest mosque in the world when he was so rudely interrupted by three American divisions. He commissioned Qur'ans, including one calligraphed using an ink consisting mainly of his, Saddam Hussein's, own blood. He put a Qur'anic inscription on the Iraqi flag. He spoke more and more with Qur'anic phrases and allusions to Islam. It hardly mattered how deeply he felt it; he certainly was no true secularist, but merely someone more interested in the power of the Arabs, and that power meant the power of the Sunni Arabs, and of the Sunni Arabs, it had to mean their great champion, Saddam Hussein, and whatever it took for him to retain and enlarge his power, including being open, for example, to the education of women, not because he had been reading Mary Wollstonecraft but because those educated women could learn such useful things as weapons technology (and Dr. Germs and Dr. Anthrax did), or otherwise make his Iraq, and therefore make him, more formidable.

And had Nasser lived longer, instead of dying of a broken heart from his loss in a war that he alone brought on himself in June 1967, one would not have been surprised to find that he, too, as the occasion arose, would have embraced Islam more fervently, as Saddam Hussein found himself doing in his last decade of power. First, out of political necessity, to keep the allegiance of a Muslim population. Second, because in the end, these were not true "secularists" as this word is commonly used in the West. They were simply just a bit less fanatically Muslim than some other Muslims who were their political rivals. Pan-Arabism was merely the only game in town in the early days, when independence had just come to Morocco, Tunisia, and Algeria, when Pakistan was still arranging itself, and Indonesia was under the control of the still-secular Dutch-educated local nationalists, and there was no oil wealth to support global dreams. Pan-Arabism is best seen not as an alternative to, but merely as a subset of, pan-Islamism.

And in any case, pan-Arabism and pan-Islamism overlap so much that to set them in opposition is to mislead. For in Islam it is the Arabs who, though they now constitute about one-fourth or one-fifth of the world's Muslims, continue to dominate all non-Arab Muslims. Those non-Arabs must read the Qur'an in Arabic, pray toward Araabia, take as models seventh-century Arabs, claim if they can Arab lineages, even in many cases take Arab names. Fulfillment of a pan-Arab dream would merely be a logical stepping-stone to the next goal, a pan-Islamic state, a single Caliphate with a single, undoubtedly Arab Caliph, that would use the tens of trillions still to come, and the billion unswerving believers, and the tens of millions of Believers now multiplying behind what they themselves are taught to regard as enemy lines.

Arab "secularists" do exist. Bourguiba was one. But neither Saddam Hussein, nor Nasser, were "secular" in anything like the way as the Arab Bourguiba, or the non-Arab Ataturk. Both wished to curb their political rivals, but neither was intent on systematically constraining Islam; rather, each wished to exploit Islam for his own ends. They alluded to Islamic history, appealed to their adoring mobs with Qur'anic passages, gave speeches impregnated with, or rather reflecting, attitudes naturally emanating from Islam. OPEC money, Muslim migrants in the West, and technological advances in the dissemination of Islam's message, all contributed to replace the pan-Arabism of Nasser (first self-proclaimed King of the Arabs) and Saddam Hussein (second self-proclaimed King of the Arabs, by unpopular demand) with what had once seemed merely an impossible dream: pan-Islamism.

But real "secularists" in the Western sense? Never. Not possible.

Saddam: "I have spent my life in jihad and fighting aggression"

One man's jihad is not another's. "New Videos Show Graphic Saddam Images," by Qassim Abdul-Zahra for AP, with thanks to the Constantinopolitan Irredentist:

One of the most notorious dictators of the late 20th century, his hands bound behind him, was led up the stairs of the gallows by masked men in leather coats. A few seconds later, a trapdoor snapped open and _ with a crash _ Saddam was dead.

He may have been the first chief of state executed in the age of the Internet and the camera phone. Probably because of that, his death was graphically documented on video, and available worldwide, within hours.

By several accounts, Saddam was calm but scornful of his captors, exchanging taunts and accusations with the crowd gathered to watch him die _ insisting that he was Iraq's savior, not its tyrant and scourge.

[...]

After his captors brought Saddam into the execution chamber, his hands _ which were tied in front of him _ were untied, then tied in the back, Haddad told the BBC.

"He said we are going to heaven and our enemies will rot in hell and he also called for forgiveness and love among Iraqis but also stressed that the Iraqis should fight the Americans and the Persians," Haddad told the BBC.

The New York Times reported that Mowaffak al-Rubaie, the national security adviser for Iraq, stood next to Saddam before he mounted the scaffold, and asked him if he felt remorse and fear.

"No," the Times quoted Saddam saying. "I am a militant and I have no fear for myself. I have spent my life in jihad and fighting aggression. Anyone who takes this route should not be afraid."

Al-Rubaie told the Times that one of the guards grew angry. "You have destroyed us," he reportedly shouted. "You have killed us. You have made us live in destitution."

"I have saved you from destitution and misery and destroyed your enemies, the Persian and Americans," Saddam responded, al-Rubaie told the Times.

"God damn you," the guard said.

"God damn you," Saddam said, according to the Times.

[...]

In the video, one of those attending the execution called out praise for Dawa Party founder and Shiite cleric Mohammed Baqir al-Sadr, who was executed along with his sister by Saddam in 1980. The Islamic party has been locked in a fierce decades-old battle with Saddam's now outlawed secular Baath party. Muqtada al-Sadr, the powerful and radical Shiite cleric in Iraq, is a distant relative of the Dawa founder.

Saddam appeared to smile at those taunting him from below the gallows, and said they were not showing their manhood.

Then Saddam began reciting the "Shahada," a Muslim prayer that says there is no god but God and Muhammad is his messenger.

"Saddam did so but with sarcasm," Haddad said. But to others, Saddam's tone sounded calm and measured, neither sarcastic nor frightened.

Saddam made it to midway through his second recitation of the verse. His last word was Muhammad, according to a translation by the Associated Press.

The floor dropped out of the gallows, there was a crash and the chamber erupted in shouting.

Saddam's last words: "Muqtada al-Sadr"

In Saddam's last thoughts

UPDATE: The cellphone execution video that is making the rounds does not seem to bear this out. (Thanks to Jesse Petrilla.)

SECOND UPDATE: The incident does seem to have occurred. The shouts of "Muqtada" can clearly be heard on the video, as well as what is apparently the voice of Saddam responding derisively by saying "Muqtada" and possibly laughing. The New York Times has this:

The room was quiet as everyone began to pray, including Mr. Hussein. “Peace be upon Mohammed and his holy family.”

Two guards added, “Supporting his son Moktada, Moktada, Moktada.”

Mr. Hussein seemed a bit stunned, swinging his head in their direction.

They were talking about Moktada al-Sadr, the firebrand cleric whose militia is now committing some of the worst violence in the sectarian fighting; he is the son of a revered Shiite cleric, Muhammad Sadiq al-Sadr, whom many believe Mr. Hussein ordered murdered.

“Moktada?” he spat out, mixing sarcasm and disbelief.

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

Perhaps an unwitting nod to Iraq's new masters. From CNN, with thanks to Ray:

As the noose was tightened around Hussein's neck, one of the executioners yelled, "long live Muqtada al-Sadr," Haddad said.

Hussein mockingly uttered one last phrase before he died: "Muqtada al-Sadr," according to Haddad.

Western media, bent on discrediting Islam and jihad, plants bomb on Iraqi bus -- no, wait...

It was Sunni jihadists, taking time out from their inner spiritual struggle to set off a bomb on a minibus full of Shi'ites. "Bomb kills 31, wounds 58 in Iraqi town," by Lauren Frayer for Associated Press, with thanks to Jeffrey Imm:

BAGHDAD, Iraq - A bomb planted on a minibus killed 31 people in a fish market in a mostly Shiite town south of Baghdad on Saturday, and the man blamed for parking the vehicle was cornered and killed by a mob as he walked away from the explosion.

There was no indication that the explosion, in Kufa, a Shiite town 100 miles south of the Iraqi capital, was related to the execution of
Saddam Hussein. The attack came on the eve of when Iraq's Shiites begin celebrating Eid al-Adha, the most important holiday of the Islamic calendar. Shoppers had crowded the market to buy supplies for the four-day festival.

At least 58 people were wounded, said Issa Mohammed, director of the morgue in the neighboring town of Najaf.

A couple of book reviews

I just discovered that two book reviews I recently wrote for Middle East Quarterly are online.

Review of The Case for Islamo-Christian Civilization by Richard W. Bulliet

Review of Jihad: From Qur'an to Bin Laden by Richard Bonney

More on Bonney and his book here.

Many Somalis in Oslo support jihadists

Tiny Minority of Extremists Update. "Islamist support from Oslo," from Aftenposten:

"If the Ethiopians continue to occupy Somalia, we won't sit here. We will go back to Somalia and fight as one!" says Zakharia Ahmed, banging his fist on the table.

The scene is the Café Bolsho in Oslo's downtown immigrant district Grønland. Dozens of compatriots are gathered round in the noisy café, and Ahmed clearly has full support. "Yes, we will go back and fight," the others shout.

Aftenposten has chosen this Somali café at random. The conversation is animated, takes place in Somali, English and Norwegian, and here there is total agreement.

Strong opinions

"What this is about is that the regime in Ethiopia has not forgotten the war in 1977 when Somalia went into the Ogaden province in Ethiopia. Now the rulers in Addis Abeba are out for revenge. The so-called UN-recognized government in Somalia is nothing but marionettes for the Ethiopians. I have been in contact with my relatives in Mogadishu. Ethiopian soldiers are already raping women and cutting the throats of civilians in the city. It is all in return for their humiliating defeat in 1977," says Abdi Muhamed, who lived in Mogadishu before coming to Norway four years ago.

The café crowd, entirely made up of young men, emphasize strongly that the Islamist regime in Somalia brought law and order to a country marked by 16 years of fear and chaos. Muhamed is convinced, though he hasn't seen it first hand.

"I have not been in Somalia for a long time but my sister has been back to Mogadishu after the Islamists came to power. She said that everything was better. This is also the impression I get when I talk to relatives in Somalia. There is virtually no one in Somalia, or Somalians here in Norway, who do not support the Islamist regime," Muhamed says.

Other opinions

Some Somalian leaders in Norway do take an opposing stance. Shirdon M. Abdikarim, head of the Somalian Council in Norway, which includes 11 member organizations, said his group wholeheartedly backs the UN-approved government in Somalia.

"Somalia has never been a sharia (Islamic) state and will not be one in the future," Abdikarim told Aftenposten.

Abdikarim has heard that some Somalians with Norwegian citizenship support the sharia tribunals, as Prime Minister Mohamed Ali Gedi was quoted as saying in an interview with Norwegian web site Nettavisen on Thursday. Gedi also was cited as saying significant sums of money were being transferred to the Islamists via Norway.

"There are 8,000 Somalians with Norwegian citizenship. Quite a number of Somalian refugees have gone back to their homeland from Norway, but no one knows how many. Somalia's borders have been open in recent years, and there has been [sic] no checks of who has traveled in and out of the country," Abdikarim said.

Saddam, just before execution, shouts: "God is great. The nation will be victorious and Palestine is Arab"

Saddam Hussein is dead, executed by the Iraqi government for his part in the murder of 148 Shi'ites.

Saddam was one of the last of a dying breed. Like Arafat, Nasser, and Assad, he was a secular Arab nationalist who lived and wielded power according to rules that were hardly uniformly Islamic. Like Arafat and others also, he made use of jihadist rhetoric whenever it suited him to do so, and increasingly so in his latter years, as Sharia supremacists grew more powerful than they had been for some time. While the jihad was not his cause, he didn't hesitate to try to co-opt it for his own ends, even to the extent of sponsoring jihad terror activity. If he had remained in power, it would have been interesting to see who ultimately co-opted whom.

With Saddam out of power, there is no one with the will or the strength to keep Iraq united, except possibly Iran -- the chief beneficiary of the American democracy project. Here is yet another fruit of the wholesale ignorance of and wishful thinking about Islam that prevails in Washington.

The Boxer story

This morning a lot of people have been sending me this story from Newsweek about Senator Barbara Boxer rescinding an award to a CAIR operative.

We had that story a week ago.

Jihad Watch: first with the jihad news -- sometimes!

Wales: Muslims claim police bias -- for being detained 20 minutes at the airport

Apparently the effort to place out of bounds any scrutiny of Muslims at airports is international. "Muslims claim police bias," by Helen McCormack in The Independent, with thanks to Twostellas:

A Muslim couple who missed a flight out of Britain after being detained under terrorism laws said yesterday they plan to take legal action against the police.

Aisha Pritchard and her husband, Sadi Elhaloul, a Palestinian, were trying to board their flight from Cardiff International Airport to Dubai on 14 December. The couple claim officers from South Wales Police questioned them for around 20 minutes and then decided to remove their luggage and search it.

They agreed, but say that when they were released they were told their plane had departed and, as their tickets with the KLM airline were not transferable, they would have to pay £1,500 to take the next flight.

Ms Pritchard said they had passed through securitywithout issue and were only stopped as they neared the boarding gate. They have received no apology and Ms Pritchard said she believed her husband's nationality and race were the sole reason they were held.

South Wales Police would only confirm the couple were detained under the Terrorism Act 2000. The human rights group Liberty is representing the couple and is investigating the possibility of legal action against the police.

Two good articles about Keith Ellison

By Don Feder at FrontPage.

And by Alamgir Hussein at Islam Watch.

Fitzgerald: The execution of Saddam Hussein

No doubt when the Americans decided to put Saddam Hussein on trial, rather than simply kill him or let the government kill him, their minds were full of a blend of the Nuremberg Trials and those "Truth and Reconciliation" businesses that are all the rage these days. No doubt, too, they thought that "the Iraqis," suffused with eternal gratitude toward their "liberators" ("The liberation of Baghdad will make the liberation of Kabul seem like a funeral procession" -- also sprach Bernard Lewis, and so many others after him), would all be able to unite around their indignation and fury at mass-murdering Saddam Hussein.

But Saddam Hussein's mass murder of Kurds never did elicit a single syllable of protest from the Arab League, or any Arab government, or any significant Arab body – or, indeed, from any Arab at all, save for Kanan Makiya and one or two others. And Saddam Hussein's mass murder of Shi'a, similarly, was never a cause for indignation among Sunni Arabs inside or outside Iraq.

It should have been expected that once Saddam Hussein was permitted to live and stand trial, that he would become a symbol of a Sunni put on trial by a Shi'a-dominated government. And hence, for many Sunnis (even for those who suffered under him) Saddam Hussein became a symbol of their former status and supposed well-being, and of their new and unjustly humbled condition – unjust to them, in their refusal to recognize their real numbers or to acquiesce in the loss of power.

For they do not care what happened to them under Saddam Hussein. Their memories are fluid, picking out what they wish to remember, forgetting what they don't. Why would it be otherwise among people raised in societies suffused with a belief-system where what happened in the seventh century, or eighth, or ninth, or eleventh, the battles, the men, the deeds of valor and of treachery are kept fresh, and mean far more than what happened, say, a year or so ago when the Infidels sent aid to Pakistan or to Aceh, or a few years before that when they rescued Muslims in Kosovo and Bosnia.

Yes, Saddam Hussein, having been captured alive, and allowed to live and stand trial, did not become a rallying point, based on shared hatred of him, for "Iraqis," but rather a would-be martyr for almost all (except the most morally aware) Sunnis. And so now he is on the verge of no longer being a would-be martyr, but the very thing. The Shi'a and the Kurds remember him as murderer rather than as martyr. And so his trial, his sentence, and his execution will not serve, as dreamy and endlessly ignorant and obstinate policy-makers in Washington and their confused and besieged claque once thought, to unite and rally "Iraqis" to "Iraq."

How silly those Americans were, how uncomprehending, how little able to think or plan ahead.

So much nonsense. So much vzdor. So many stupidaggini. So much crap.

The execution of Saddam Hussein will exacerbate matters wonderfully. For he who has recently been adopting a magnanimous tone, addressing himself to all "Iraqis" and not only to his Sunni supporters. He has even repeatedly called on "Iraqis" not to "hate" the Infidels but only their governments. He may also, in his wild calculations, have thought that there was a chance that the Americans would see him as a possible savior-of-their-bacon in Iraq, and free him. Still, he will in death be a Sunni martyr, a figure of myth and poetry, the Sunni Arab put to death by those Rafidite dogs and Persians.

And as a bonus, Nouri al-Maliki has decided to have him executed forthwith, before he can be tried for the Anfal campaign against the Kurds, or for any of his attacks on fellow Sunnis. And in ignoring any of the non-Shi'a victims of Saddam Hussein, al-Maliki and the Shi'a supporting this hastened execution are ensuring that resentments among the Kurds will grow: they will now not get those months in court to state their case against him, and to let facts be presented to a not-very-candid world about the Arab persecution of the Kurds. The execution itself will further separate Sunni from Shi'a Arabs. But the timing of the execution, taking place after a single trial in which the victims were 148 Shi'a, and only Shi'a, at Dejail, and without any attempt to hold a trial about his killing of 182,000 Kurds in all of Kurdistan, or 300,000 Marsh Arabs in the south, will alienate the Kurds from the Shi'a. They are already angry at the Sunni Arabs, for it was the Sunni Arabs who eagerly supported the man who mass-murdered them, and it is Sunni Arabs who have moved in, or been moved in, to formerly Kurdish villages and even cities. In contested Kirkuk, it is largely Kurds against Sunni, not Shi'a, Arabs.

If one understands that the right goal is not to bring "democracy" to people who, because of the belief-system of Islam, cannot conceivably locate legitimacy in the expressed will of the people, but rather will always re-locate it in the will expressed by Allah in the canonical texts, and as glossed by the sayings and acts of his Prophet, Muhammad, then one will see the folly of Bush's enterprise. He doesn't. But never mind. The Muslim Arabs in Iraq are behaving as one would wish them to behave. Nouri al-Maliki, in putting Saddam Hussein to death tonight, will be ensuring the Sunni martyrdom of Saddam Hussein (even among Sunnis who suffered during his regime), and the Kurdish resentment at the (Shi'a) Arab indifference, as the Kurds will see it, to their own much greater (as the Kurds see it) suffering from Saddam Hussein.

If what one believes that the best way to defend the imperilled Camp of Infidels is by weakening the Camp of Islam, by exploiting its own natural divisions, the execution of Saddam Hussein tonight will be something to welcome. For leaving aside the matter of justice, it will help promote our ends, our goals. Not in the way Bush or many others assume it will, by "showing Iraqis that they can have justice through the judicial process." But in another way, a way visitors to JW by now understand perfectly.

And so, too, will Infidel interests be promoted by such things as the Saudi cleric's judgment expressed in this article. Here are his words:

"The rejectionists (Shi'ites) in their entirety are the worst of the Islamic nation's sects. They bear all the characteristics of infidels," Sheikh Abdel-Rahman al-Barrak said in the fatwa, or ruling, distributed on Islamist Web sites. “They are in truth polytheist infidels, though they hide this," it said, citing theological differences 14 centuries after the death of the Prophet Mohammad, such as reverence of shrines which followers of Saudi Arabia's Wahhabi school consider abhorrent."

Reading such words puts a bounce in my step and a smile on my face. Many Infidels no doubt have experienced something similar.

Islamic leader vows to stay in Somalia

The jihad will continue. By Les Neuhaus for Associated Press, with thanks to Jeffrey Imm:

AFGOYE, Somalia - The U.N.-backed Somali government on Friday moved swiftly to assert authority over the capital city Islamic fighters abandoned the day before, though the leader of the insurgents vowed they would continue to fight.

Somalia's prime minister was preparing to enter the capital, Mogadishu, which Islamic forces held for six months before a string of defeats in the last 10 days to government troops backed by Ethiopian soldiers and jets.

Sheik Sharif Sheik Ahmed, the executive leader of the Council of Islamic Courts, told The Associated Press Friday that his fighters would not be pushed out of Somalia.

"We will not run away from our enemies. We will never depart from Somalia. We will stay in our homeland," he said from the southern coastal port of Kismayo, where his forces retreated from Mogadishu.

Thailand: Western media, bent on defaming Islam, kills and burns Buddhist teachers -- no, wait...

The real perps were, believe it or not, Islamic jihadists, although the Bangkok Post doesn't deem that fact worthy of notice. "Insurgents kill, burn Buddhist teachers," from the Bangkok Post, with thanks to LS:

Southern violence continues, as two teachers were gunned down by insurgents in Yala while a village defense guard was killed in Narathiwat.

Extremists shot two male teachers in Muang district Friday morning as they were travelling to their school to teach. After shooting the two men, the insurgents dragged their bodies out of the pick-up and set them on fire. As the last act before fleeing, they set fire to the vehicle.

What’s the difference between Jihad and militancy?

Sheikha Sajida explains it all for you at Al-Jazeera. She begins her answer by saying that the concept of jihad has been -- you guessed it -- "misinterpreted by the Western media," and it just goes downhill from there. But this is a good example of how in appearing to put a good face on things, or at least attempting to, an Islamic apologist actually confirms the legitimacy of jihad violence in the service of Sharia supremacism.

Hi Sheikha,

What is Jihad? We keep hearing this word even in our media, however, regardless to the negative portrayal the main stream Western media provides, I’m sure many Europeans and Americans, as much as I, don’t know the exact meaning of the word.

Is it terrorism? Is it carrying weapons to attract more adherents to your religion?

Or is it carrying weapons to fight the infidels, like what the Muslims used to do some 1400 years ago?

Steve B. from the States

Dear Steve,

The concept of Jihad has been misinterpreted by the Western media as what some refer to as “religious militancy”, in ther words, using weapons to fight for the cause of one’s religion, regardless of whether fighting is against a true enemy or not, and regardless of weather it’s justified and being carried out against the right target or not.

Sure. The Western media made up the idea that jihad was religious militancy fought with weapons. Osama bin Laden works for the New York Times, after all, doesn't he? But as you'll see, the Sheikha herself doesn't object to jihad with weapons in every case. Read on.

But “religious militancy”, even if I’m opposed to it, doesn’t arise from vacuum. Human history has many examples of people becoming extremists and carrying weapons to fight dictator rule or bad social circumstances.

In other words, I may be opposed to it, but it may be justified.

“Religious militancy” in my view, is the outcome of extremism, which had been attributed to many factors including poverty, suppression, dictator rule, injustice, unemployment… etc.

In this the Sheikha sounds just like most Western analysts and government officials. Never mind the relative affluence of most jihadists, as has been amply documented by many studies we have noted here over the years. But the main object of her statement is to shift attention away from anything in Islam that might be giving rise to violence. And of course, nobody much is willing to consider the possibility that such elements of Islam might exist.

Despite continuous attempts to link Jihad to militancy, or so-called religious militancy, the concept of Jihad, carries a totally different meaning.

The word Jihad means to fight or struggle in the way of God, and the verb “fight” here is not limited to "fight" using weapons, it can be fighting to become a respectable and successful Muslim, fighting one’s greed, fighting one’s evil intentions by praying and fasting regularly. It means fighting for the cause of Islam, which still doesn’t mean aggressive warfare. Jihad can be by tongue, by words and by knowledge.

It "still doesn't mean aggressive warfare," except when it does -- again, read on.

It can be carried out by being a successful and an effective member in the society.

But Jihad using weapons, exemplified in the Palestinians’ fight against the Israeli occupiers (which is definitely justified) is the only meaning the West stress in their interpretation of Jihad, linking it to terrorism and militancy, and limiting its meaning to “killing the enemies of Islam” in an attempt to further shatter the image of Islam and its followers, whom they always portray as “evil souls”.

"Evil souls." I don't know who she is claiming to quote here, but in any case her position is completely ludicrous. The aggressive warfare carried out by the Palestinians against Israel, including evidently jihad martyrdom attacks on civilians, is "definitely justified," while it is "the West" that has "limited" the meaning of jihad to "killing the enemies of Islam," all in a dastardly attempt to ruin Islam's pristine image.

Well, I've got news for you, Sheikha. It isn't "the West" that has ruined Islam's image by focusing attention on jihad violence. It is Osama bin Laden, and the 7/7 bombers, and the 3/11 bombers, and the Bali bombers, and the perpetrators of the Beslan massacres, and jihadists from Nigeria to Thailand to Indonesia who have focused attention on the meaning of jihad that involves killing, and tarnished the enemies of Islam. "The West" doesn't give two hoots about the meaning of jihad as inner spiritual struggle, Sheikha, because your inner spiritual struggle doesn't explode all over a bus and kill innocent civilians.

Do you want to improve Islam's image, Sheikha? Then stop railing against "the West," and work to eradicate whatever you might consider as illegitimate "religious militancy" from the Islamic community -- if there is indeed any Islamic religious militancy that is not justified as far as you're concerned.

But it gets even worse:

Another point I need to stress here is that while Jihad is linked to Muslims and Islam- militancy, extremism and terrorism on the other hand are not limited to Muslims, we have Jewish and Christian militant groups, terror organisations and extremists.

Theodore Hertzl, a Jew, was the founder of terrorism in occupied Palestine. And we have the American Christian terrorist Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma bomber. But those who wish to ruin the image and the world’s respect for Islam focus only on Muslim terrorists, as if the world’s followers of Islam are all terrorists.

Unfortunately, while religion should be a weapon to mobilize and unite people, it had always been misused throughout human history.

But of course Herzl was not a terrorist at all, or an observant religious Jew. McVeigh, as useful as he continues to be to those who issue sly justifications for jihad violence (like this one), never attempted to justify the OKC bombing according to Christian religious principles, and his actions were of course never endorsed by any Christian sect -- in stark contrast to Osama bin Laden's Qur'an-filled communiques, and the wide acceptance of jihad violence in the Islamic world.

One might expect this sort of thing from Al-Jazeera. But Sheikha Sajida's reply could just as easily be talking points for the mainstream media and a good number of prominent conservative news outlets as well.

West: Will 2007 be "The Year of Shutting Up About Islam"?

If CAIR et al get their way, it will. Of course, for many liberal and conservative media outlets, we are already there. "A question for 2007," by the ever-perceptive Diana West:

...Our elites seem not to have the slightest clue how devastating such a change, which comes under the rubric of Islamization, would be to our Judeo-Christian-rooted civilization. Indeed, it is increasingly clear that they don't know the difference between "an Islamic order" and Judeo-Christian-rooted civilization — or even that there is a difference.

There are exceptions. In November, there was Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite, Florida Republican, who stood up for constituents' free speech under CAIR pressure. Now Rep. Virgil Goode, Virginia Republican, has become both the lone standard-bearer of free speech about Islam and the favorite whipping boy of the PC elites. In a letter to constituents about the decision of Rep.-elect Keith Ellison, Minnesota Democrat, to use a Koran at his swearing-in ceremony, Mr. Goode expressed what I take to be his recognition that the laws of Islam — which prohibit religious freedom, freedom of speech and conscience, equality before the law and women's rights — do not augment but rather contravene the founding principles of the United States.

He also wrote: "I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America." It's difficult to argue with Mr. Goode's logic. Indeed, the test case of the age — Europe — demonstrates that Islamic immigration brings Islamic law, which is demonstrably at odds with American values and beliefs. Forgoing debate, however, Mr. Goode's critics have resorted to name-calling and platitudes about "tolerance," failing utterly to notice the gross intolerance of the Islamic tradition. Worst of all, their tactics seem designed to shut up Mr. Goode, and anyone else who might follow his bold example. Will they?

It's the question of 2007.

Influential Saudi cleric denounces Shi'ites as infidels

The article accurately notes that this fatwa could have far-reaching implications on Sunni-Shi'ite conflicts everywhere, particularly in the growing Saudi-Iranian rivalry, and concerning the Shi'ite minority within Saudi Arabia. Sunni-Shi'ite Jihad Update. "Revered Saudi cleric denounces Shi'ites as infidels," from Reuters:

DUBAI, Dec 29 (Reuters) - An influential cleric of Saudi Arabia's hardline Sunni school of Islam has denounced Shi'ite Muslims as "infidels" in a new religious edict that comes amid rising sectarian tension in the region.

"The rejectionists (Shi'ites) in their entirety are the worst of the Islamic nation's sects. They bear all the characteristics of infidels," Sheikh Abdel-Rahman al-Barrak said in the fatwa, or ruling, distributed on Islamist Web sites.

"They are in truth polytheist infidels, though they hide this," it said, citing theological differences 14 centuries after the death of the Prophet Mohammad, such as reverence of shrines which followers of Saudi Arabia's Wahhabi school consider abhorrent.

Concern is growing in Saudi Arabia, birthplace of Islam, over Shi'ite-Sunni violence in Iraq which has taken the northern neighbour to the brink of civil war. Sunni-Shi'ite tensions are also high in Lebanon, where Shi'ites are leading efforts to bring down a Sunni-led cabinet.

"The Sunni and Shi'ites schools of Islam are opposites that can never agree, there can be no coming together unless Sunnis give up their principles," the fatwa said.

Barrak, an independent scholar, has come to be regarded by many as the highest authority for Wahhabi Muslims.

Clerics of the austere Wahhabi school of Sunni Islam have long dismissed Shi'ites as virtual heretics and Saudi Arabia's Shi'ite minority complains of second class treatment.But Barrak's fatwa was the strongest in recent years.

The fatwa, which was published on Barrak's Web site in response to a follower's question, also appeared to criticise efforts by some government-backed Saudi preachers at reconciliation between Sunnis and Shi'ites.

Saudi Arabia fears that violence between Sunnis and Shi'ites could lead to the break-up of Iraq and spill over its borders.

Barrak was among 38 clerics who issued a statement this month calling on world Sunnis to support their brethren in Iraq.

Somali troops enter Mogadishu to cheers

A victory for the free world, and for Somalia -- if they can make it stick. By Mohamed Olad Hassan for Associated Press:

MOGADISHU, Somalia - Jubilant Somalis cheered as troops of the U.N.-backed interim government rolled into Mogadishu unopposed Thursday, putting an end to six months of domination of the capital by a radical Islamic movement.

Ethiopian soldiers stopped on the outskirts of town, after providing much of the military might in the offensive that shattered what had seemed an unbeatable Islamic militia. Islamic fighters fled south vowing to continue the battle.

"We are in Mogadishu," Prime Minister Mohamed Ali Gedi declared after meeting with local clan leaders to discuss the peaceful hand-over of the city.

Despite the celebrations in the streets, worries about the future were widespread in a country that hasn't had an effective national government since clan warlords toppled a longtime dictator 15 years ago.

Many in overwhelmingly Muslim Somalia are suspicious of the transitional government's reliance on neighboring Ethiopia, a traditional rival with a large Christian population and one of East Africa's biggest armies. Witnesses said crowds threw rocks at Ethiopians troops on the city's northern edge.

Somalia's complex clan politics also are a big worry, having undone at least 14 attempts to install a central government in this violent, anarchic nation.

Gedi's government, set up in 2004 with U.N. backing, is riddled with clan rivalries, most notably between the young prime minister and elderly president.

"The future of Somalia is very bleak and Somalis will share the same fate with Iraq and Afghanistan," a Mogadishu resident, Abdullahi Mohamed Laki, told The Associated Press. "The transitional government has no broad support in the capital."

Muslim World League wants lawsuits for "abuse of Islam and the Prophet"

Another attempt to stifle all honest discussion of the roots within Islam of Islamic jihad violence and what can be done about them. "MWL Wants Lawsuits for Abuse of Islam and the Prophet," by P.K. Abdul Ghafour in Arab News, with thanks to all who sent this in:

JEDDAH, 28 December 2006 — A two-day conference organized by the Makkah-based Muslim World League yesterday called for a consultative commission in order to take legal action against those who abuse Islam and its Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and Islamic sanctities, at local and international courts of justice, the Saudi Press Agency said.

The conference titled “In Defense of the Prophet” called upon Islamic countries and governments to stand united to defend the Islamic faith and its Prophet. It denounced the smear campaigns to tarnish the image of the Prophet and urged Muslims to make all-out efforts to project the true picture of Islam and the great divine teachings of the Prophet.

Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdul Aziz Al-Asheikh, who presided over the conference, called upon Muslims to follow the Prophet’s teachings.

“Our enemies are exploiting Muslims’ weak adherence to the Prophet’s Sunnah,” said Al-Asheikh. “We should not be ashamed of implementing his Sunnah. On the other hand, all Muslims must observe his teachings in all walks of their life.”

MWL Secretary-General Abdullah Al-Turki said the attack on the Prophet was an expression of enmity toward Islam.

“The whole Muslim Ummah, including its leadership, scholars and ordinary people was outraged by such attacks and this again shows the lofty position the Prophet has in their hearts,” he said in reference to the Muslim response to cartoons depicting the Prophet.

MWL plans to launch an international program to introduce the Prophet and the conference called for setting up a fund to support the program. “The anti-Islam campaign also intends to trigger a cultural conflict between the Islamic world and the West and create a situation of clash and conflict in place of dialogue and peaceful coexistence,” the MWL chief said....

Jamal Badawi, a Canadian-Muslim expert on Islam, spoke about the Prophet’s outstanding influence on human history.

“There is no other personality who has made such a positive impact on history,” he told the conference.

Spencer nominated for Anti-Idiotarian of the Year 2006

I've been nominated for Little Green Footballs' Anti-Idiotarian of the Year 2006, along with Ayaan Hirsi Ali, John Bolton, Canadian PM Stephen Harper, Australian PM John Howard, Melanie Phillips, Pope Benedict XVI, Mark Steyn, Stuck Mojo, and Wafa Sultan.

I don't really belong on this list -- all the other candidates are worthier than I am, so go and vote for someone who deserves it, but I am honored to be included on it.

Report: Hizballah paying for Qassam rocket attacks

"Hizbullah paying for Kassam attacks," by Herb Keinon and Yaakov Katz for the Jerusalem Post:

Hizbullah is paying Palestinian splinter groups "thousands of dollars" for each Kassam rocket fired at the western Negev, The Jerusalem Post has learned.

According to Israeli intelligence information, Hizbullah is smuggling cash into the Gaza Strip and paying "a number of unknown local splinter groups" for each attack.

Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) sources said the Islamist organization paid several thousand dollars for each attack, with the amount dependent on the number of Israelis killed or wounded.

"We know that Hizbullah is involved in funding terrorist activity in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank," a security official said.

"Palestinian terrorists get thousands of dollars per attack. Sometimes they are paid before the attack and sometimes they submit a bill to Lebanon afterward and the money gets transferred a short while later."

According to the officials, while Islamic Jihad was behind most recent rocket attacks - including the one on Tuesday night that critically wounded 14-year-old Adir Basad in Sderot - several splinter terrorists groups are also involved and have received direct funding from Hizbullah.

According to security officials, Islamic Jihad gets the money via its headquarters in Damascus while Fatah's Tanzim terror group and the Popular Resistance Committees receive payment from Hizbullah in Lebanon.

That's the same Fatah Israel just allowed Egypt to arm.

All of the money originated in Iran, the officials said.

Government officials said Hamas was not currently involved in firing missiles, but was doing nothing to stop those who were.

Israel lets Egypt ship arms to Fatah -- with the blessing of the U.S.

There's no indicator of cluelessness quite like arming one's enemy. From the Jerusalem Post:

In response to continued violence between the Hamas and Fatah factions in the Palestinian Authority, Israel approved on Wednesday night the transfer of 2,000 automatic rifles, 20,000 ammunition clips and 2 million bullets, to the Fatah security forces in the Gaza Strip.

The decision, taken following Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's meeting last Saturday with PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, marked the first time Israel agreed to allow arms into Gaza in some six months.

With the approval of the United States, the weapons were transferred from Egypt via the Kerem Shalom crossing, after which a police escort guarded the guns as they were moved to the Karni crossing, where representatives of Abbas collected them.

Likud MK Yuval Steinitz called the move a "bad mistake."

"A lot of IDF soldiers and Israeli civilians will be killed with these weapons," Steinitz told Army Radio. "We haven't yet seen that Abbas is determined to contain terrorism, and there's a greater chance that these weapons will be used against [our] soldiers, and we'll have to combat terrorism."

National Infrastructures Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer rejected Steinitz's comments and insisted that the arms would be put to good use by Abbas.

"The weapons delivery is intended to give Abbas the ability to cope with those organizations which are trying to ruin everything. If it helps Abbas become stronger, I'm for it," said Ben-Eliezer in an interview with Army Radio.

Late Thursday afternoon, an Abbas spokesman denied that Egypt had given Fatah any weapons.

Israel's decision to allow the arms shipment to Fatah was a sign that the government was starting to think in more complex terms, Lt.-Gen. (res.) Yochanan Tzoref told Israel Radio.

Tzoref explained that while Fatah might be at a disadvantage as far as its arsenal in its struggle with Hamas, the real challenge facing the organization was that it had lost the faith of the Palestinian public.

"Fatah has to undergo an internal process that will strengthen it, and allow it to compete with Hamas in the public's eyes," Tzoref said.

Hamas had the [Palestinian] public's support almost "instinctively," Tzoref continued, whereas the Fatah "old guard" was holding up necessary reforms.

Meanwhile, a source in Abbas's Presidential Guards denied on Thursday that Fatah had received weapons and ammunition from Egypt. The unnamed source told Israel Radio that the Egyptian shipment had contained an X-ray machine, televisions, and computers to be used at the Gaza border crossings.

Saeb Erekat, a spokesman for Abbas, declined comment, as did Olmert's spokeswoman Miri Eisin and the Defense Ministry.

Jihad Watch at Hot Air on Goode and Ellison

In this week's Jihad Watch videoblog at Hot Air, I discuss the Keith Ellison/Virgil Goode Qur'an controversy.

Fitzgerald: A teaching moment

Voting for Keith Ellison was a way for Minnesotans in his district to demonstrate, to themselves and to others, that they were certifiably tolerant, impeccably broad-minded. All the better if it was done without even making a move to find out what might be in the texts, tenets, attitudes, and atmospherics of Islam to cause disquiet.

Such holier-than-thou voters were not really voting for Ellison. They were voting for themselves. And in voting for themselves, in giving themselves a pat on the back and a vote of moral self-confidence, they did not wish to have their minds violated by facts, by what they might have found out if they had actually looked into Islam. That would only have confused them. That would only have been an obstacle in the project of self-appreciation.

As he enters the voting booth and makes his little marks on the computer-legible piece of paper, this kind of voter hears the distant voice of someone reading from "Leaves of Grass":

"Do I celebrate myself? Very well then, I celebrate myself."

Vote for someone, so that when you cast that vote -- never mind the actual positions or possible dangers of that candidate winning -- you can feel good about yourself. Isn't that what life is supposed to be all about? Feeling Good? And isn't Feeling Good About Yourself part of Feeling Good? Of course it is. Vote for Ellison.

Voting as a branch of Self-Esteem Studies.

But now that he has been elected by these self-satisfied Minnesotans, everything should be done to clarify his positions. Interviewers should use the occasion of his swearing-in on the Qur’an to read aloud 9.29 and 9.5 and the rest of Sura 9, and then all the other Jihad verses, and then from the hadith, and then from the life of Muhammad. Others will scream, "a man's religion should not be an issue" and "that's un-American." Let them. A man's religion should be an issue -- if that "religion" is far more than a religion, if it is a complete politico-religio-socio-economico-whateveroyouwant, then it is legitimate, it is incumbent upon any incumbent or non-incumbent to raise the question. Simply reply that a belief-system as all-encompassing as Islam has become a political issue because Ellison has made it one. Ellison, after all, voluntarily subscribes to it and made an effort to belong to it (rather than simply being one of those people born into it). He has had years to discover what Islam teaches, what it is all about, so he cannot at this point claim, "I was unaware of those passages." His answers, therefore, about how these passages are to be taken will be instructive.

What are we to make of a Congressman who professes to believe in a holy book that includes 9.29 and 9.5 and so much else? What are we to believe of a Congressman who believes that Muhammad is the Perfect Man, uswa hasana, al-insan al-kamil? We want to know details. We have to know details. We have a right to know details. What about the attack on the Khaybar Oasis? What about all the rest, all of which is now no longer hidden, but is becoming every day the common talk of non-Muslims as they begin to find out more about this?

Where does the Congressman stand on the Danish cartoons? On "treaties" signed by Israel with Muslim states or polities and the Muslim model for all such treaties, the agreement of Al-Hudaibiyya? And there is so much more to discuss. Any journalist who refrains from asking about this would be doing the public a disservice. We need to know. And we need to know, finally, what Mr. Ellison makes of Taqiyya and Kitman, what he makes of Muhammad's statement "war is deception," and what he actually knows of the real Islam, and not, possibly, His Own Private Islam.

Once upon a time some of this might, in our innocence, have been overlooked. It might still be overlooked by some, who think it infra dig to ask such questions. Our safety, and our lives, depend on the asking, and re-asking, of such questions.

Make it an issue. Ask Ellison what he thinks of Muhammad's behavior with the Banu Qurayza, or with Asma bint Marwan. Do not forget to mention little Aisha. Ask what he thinks. He will either have to denounce all that, or he will not -- and if he does not, that will be telling.

Use his election as a Teaching Moment.

And resist all attempts to head off such questioning by saying that this is "beyond the scope of legitimate debate" and so on and so bloody forth. It isn't. It must not be.

Fitzgerald: Moral preening

Those who are criticizing Congressman Virgil Goode these days are engaging in moral preening, without any felt need of responsibility to study carefully both the actual contents of the belief-system too easily assumed to be a "religion" (and therefore, presumably, to be accorded the status of a Good Thing). It is assumed, furthermore, to be a "religion" just like, more or less, any other (because we are told or allow ourselves to believe that All Religions Stand for the Same Thing).

Nor is there any felt need to study the actual history of Jihad-conquest and of the subsequent treatment, according to well-elaborated rules that are to be found in the Shari'a (see Antoine Fattal, "Le status legal des non-musulmanes en pays d'Islam" for the best compendium), of non-Muslims. There is, after all, a complete doctrine set out for Muslims, and the division of the world between Believer and Infidel remains central to Islam, and does not differ between Sunni and Shi'a, or for that matter, in any important way, among the four schools of Sunni jurisprudence.

Moral preening: we know, say the editorial writers of the Washington Post and the Baltimore Sun. So sayeth Susan Estrich, still casting about for something else to say since her long-ago book on rape and flurry of brief fame for some world-conquering purchase on the universe: we know all about Islam. How do we know? Oh, we just know. And therefore we just know that Virgil Goode is a bigot, and we know that the people in France, Italy, England, Germany, and Holland who are worried to death about the colossal presence of Muslims have nothing to worry about. And we know that all those who do worry aloud about the islamization of the Western world -- such as Bassam Tibi, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Ibn Warraq, Ali Sina -- are bigots all, and so too is the scholar of the dhimmi condition Bat Ye'or, and Professor Bernard Lewis, and Professor Hans Jansen, and so many other of Europe's true scholars (as opposed to the apologists paid for by the Saudis and other Arabs). So too was the late Oriana Fallaci (wasn't she practically a Fascist? Wasn't her family part of Mussolini's crowd?), and Alain Finkielkraut, and Alain Besancon, and Pavel Kohout, and those crazed right-wing editors of Jyllands-Posten, and that crazed bigot Theo van Gogh, and all the others who have concluded that Jihad is something to be resisted. They are bigots all, although some have come to their conclusions about Jihad from their direct experience with large numbers of Muslim immigrants to the Lands of the Infidels (as Muslims call them). Others have come to these conclusions through their study of the canonical texts of Islam -- Qur'an, Hadith, Sira. Still others have come to them through their study of the history of Muslim conquest and subjugation of non-Muslims. Finally, some have realized that Jihad is a menace through taking in, and making sense of, observable Muslim behavior in the southern Sudan, in Nigeria during the Biafra War caused by the "Jihad" against the Christians (as Col. Ojukwu noted in the Ahiara Declaration), in Thailand, and in Bangladesh and Pakistan (where life has led to a steady outward flow of Hindus and other non-Muslims escaping Muslim persecution and murder, while the Muslim population of India itself steadily rises both relatively and absolutely). They have observed the treatment of non-Muslims everywhere in Dar al-Islam. The states -- such as Sudan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran -- that are most fanatically Muslim in their application of the Shari'a are the most dangerous for non-Muslims. Life is only better for non-Muslims in the handful of Muslim states that have mitigated the force of Shari’a, either through the benefits of Kemalism, as in Turkey, or because of the Soviet campaign against religious belief and the forced secularization of so many now-nominal Muslims, as in Kazakhstan (the other four "stans" are another matter).

No, none of this is studied, and a good deal more is ignored as well. Don't confuse us with facts. We are good Americans. Virgil Goode is a bad American. Only a Bad American -- the Washington Post and the Baltimore Sun suddenly have draped themselves in the mantle of, and are channeling the voices of, Martin Dies and the House Un-American Activities Committee -- can conceivably worry about Islam or about Muslim immigration.

Just look at France, England, Belgium, Spain, Italy, Denmark, Norway, Sweden. Look in particular at Malmo, and at Rotterdam. What's the problem? What's worrisome about any of that?

Jihadists abandon Mogadishu

"Islamic forces abandon Somalia's capital," by Salad Duhul for Associated Press:

MOGADISHU, Somalia - Clan militiamen poured into the streets of Somalia's capital Thursday after the Islamic movement that has controlled Mogadishu for months abandoned the city and government forces advanced to within striking distance.

Gunfire echoed through the streets and hundreds of gunmen who had backed the Muslim militants demonstrated they had broken allegiance by switching from uniforms to civilian clothes.

... or possibly shifting gears for guerrilla warfare.

Some began looting buildings deserted by the Islamists. One resident said three men and a woman had been killed in a scramble for ammunition and food.

"We will capture Mogadishu any time within the coming hours," government spokesman Abdirahman Dinari told The Associated Press, saying the country was in a state of emergency. "We are now at the entry points of the city."

President Abdullahi Yusuf was expected to offer the clans a truce later Thursday.

Residents south of the city said Islamist forces were streaming south toward the port city of Kismayo. Yusuf Ibrahim, a former Islamic fighter who quit Thursday, said about 3,000 fighters left for Kismayo.

Islamists acknowledged they had left Mogadishu but said they were not giving up their fight. Abdirahman Janaqow, a senior leader, told The Associated Press he ordered his forces out of the capital to avoid bloodshed.

"We decided to leave Mogadishu because of the safety of the civilians," Janaqow said in a telephone interview. "We want to face our enemy and their stooges in a separate area, away from civilians."

A well-known clan leader, Hussein Haji Bod, asked people to remain calm and said elders would meet Thursday to discuss the "future of the capital." The largest market in the capital was closed for fear it would be looted.

The Council of Islamic Courts seized Mogadishu in June and went on to take much of southern Somalia, often without fighting. They were later joined by foreign militants, including Pakistanis and Arabs, who supported their goal of making Somalia an Islamic state.

[...]

Ethiopian and Somali government troops advanced on the capital from the north and the west, capturing the country's most important airfield and driving Islamic fighters out of Jowhar, the last major town on the northern route. As troops entered Jowhar on Wednesday, an independent radio station began blasting Western music, which the militias had banned.

The commander of Ethiopian forces in Somalia, Gen. Salem Hagos, met Thursday with government commanders to discuss their next move. Col. Ahmed Omar, a Somali officer, said Ethiopian troops would stop advancing on the capital, but government forces would approach the capital.

[...]

The competition for control of Mogadishu since 1991 has involved the Abgal and Habr Gadir clans, who came together earlier this year to support the Islamic council. Most of the shooting and looting in Mogadishu on Thursday was coming from Abgal clan strongholds.

Spencer: A Bigot in Congress?

In FrontPage this morning I discuss the controversy over the letter written by Congressman Virgil Goode (news links in the original):

Congressman Virgil Goode (R-VA) is being censured by almost everyone for his remarks about incoming Congressman Keith Ellison (D-MN) and Muslim immigration. “I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States,” Goode wrote in a letter to a constituent, “if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America and to prevent our resources from being swamped.” He also noted Ellison’s intention to be sworn in on the Qur’an, declaring that “if American citizens don’t wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran.”

In an unsigned editorial entitled “A Bigot in Congress,” the Washington Post huffed that besides being a bigot, Goode was “colossally stupid” and suffering from “xenophobic delirium.” Goode, opined the Post, was “evidently napping in class the day they taught the traditional American values of tolerance, diversity and religious freedom. This country's history is rife with instances of uncivil, hateful and violent behavior toward newcomers, be they Jewish, Irish, Italian or plenty of others whose ethnicities did not jibe with some pinched view of what it means to be American. Mr. Goode’s dimwitted outburst of nativism is nothing new.” The “real worry” was that “the rest of the world might take Mr. Goode seriously, interpreting his biased remarks about Muslims as proof that America really has embarked on a civilizational war against Islam.”

The Post was not alone. The Baltimore Sun scored Goode for his “ignorance” and “mindless prejudice,” and editorialized that “Americans sincerely trying to put aside their biases are not well-served by elected officials who proudly espouse wrongheaded views fostering distrust and hatred.” And the New York Times, also in an unsigned editorial, “Fear and Bigotry in Congress,” scolded both Goode and radio host Dennis Prager (who also voiced objections to Ellison’s using the Qur’an in his swearing-in): “As for Mr. Prager and Mr. Goode, we appreciate their help in demonstrating how very fast things can get both nutty and unpleasant once the founding fathers’ wise decision to avoid institutionalizing any religious faith gets breached.”

Fox talking head Susan Estrich said that “the Virgil Goode position on immigration is, basically, to stop it, especially immigration by Muslims. God forbid the world, especially the Muslim world, should see us as a country where diversity is valued and respected, and freedom of religion guaranteed….Where in the Bible does Mr. Goode find his basis for such hatred? And how in the world does Mr. Goode think we will ever fight terrorism, especially terrorism by Muslims, if we do not have the support, cooperation and trust of leaders in the Muslim community? If we are viewed, at the highest levels, as damning all those who believe in the Koran, who will take our side? Don’t we want to encourage Muslims to believe in the political process and participate in it?”

All these criticisms share a common core assumption: that Goode has no reason to be concerned about Ellison, the Qur’an, or Muslims, and that any suspicion he does have is simply evidence of his bigotry and ignorance. In raising the specter of nativism, the Post was suggesting that America has been down this road before, and has nothing to show for it but shame. Suspicions about previous waves of immigrants amounted to nothing more than xenophobia, there was no Jewish conspiracy or Popish plot to subvert the United States Constitution, and concerns about Muslims and the Qur’an are just as hysterical and unfounded. Ellison, for his part, sounded a defiant note in an address in Dearborn, Michigan. To cries of “Allahu akbar” from a Muslim crowd, he declared: “On January 4, I will go swear an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States. I’ll place my hand on the Quran.”

Ellison said these words at a convention hosted by the Muslim American Society and the Islamic Circle of North America. According to a 2004 Chicago Tribune article, “A rare look at secretive Brotherhood in America,” the Muslim American Society was founded in 1993 as the United States arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, the Egyptian based terror group that has spawned both Hamas and Al-Qaeda. MAS members now maintain that the group has no ties to the Brotherhood, but there are indications that many in the group want to see the U.S. Constitution replaced by Islamic law. “We may all feel emotionally attached to the goal of an Islamic state” in America, said a speaker at a 2002 MAS conference, but “we mustn’t cross hurdles we can’t jump yet.” The Muslim American Society’s chapter for Ellison’s home state of Minnesota hosts a website that offers in an “Online Library” texts by the jihad theorists Syed Abul Ala Maududi and Sayyid Qutb. Qutb in his jihad manifesto Milestones asserts that “Islam is the way of life ordained by God for all mankind, and this way establishes the Lordship of God alone -- that is, the sovereignty of God – and orders practical life in all its daily details. Jihaad in Islam is simply a name for striving to make this system of life dominant in the world.” Likewise, according to terror expert Steven Emerson, the Islamic Circle of North America “is a Jamad Islamia group, which is on record as calling for jihad in the United States, to promote the notion of an Islamic world. ICNA also published something very recently saying that they are against suicide bombings, except when it comes to killing Israelis.”

Is it reasonable to ask Ellison if he shares such views? When he speaks at a conference sponsored by such organizations, is it simply bigotry to ask him if he holds views they are on record as having? When Muslim leaders around the globe have spoken about the necessity to impose Islamic law upon the world, is it sheer nativism to ask Ellison and American Muslims if they hold the same views? On June 29, 2005, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad declared that “the wave of the Islamic revolution will soon reach the entire world.” As late as November 2003, the website of the Islamic Affairs Department (IAD) of the Saudi Arabian embassy in Washington, D.C. stated that “the Muslims are required to raise the banner of Jihad in order to make the Word of Allah supreme in this world, to remove all forms of injustice and oppression, and to defend the Muslims.” This is a venerable idea within Islam: even the noted Islamic historian Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406), whose name adorns the pro-democracy Ibn Khaldun Center for Development Studies in Cairo, taught that “in the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force.” In Islam, the person in charge of religious affairs is concerned with “power politics,” because Islam is “under obligation to gain power over other nations.”[1]

On the basis of what evidence do Goode’s many detractors assume that neither Ellison nor any other Muslim in the United States subscribes to these views? Bigotry is an obstinate and irrational hatred of a particular group. Is it obstinate or irrational, or any kind of act of hatred at all, to ask Ellison to clarify where he stands on the MAS’s desire for the eventual imposition of Islamic law in the United States? He has chosen to be associated with MAS and ICNA. He ought to be willing to clarify matters accordingly. And the mainstream media ought to be willing to take time out from vilifying Virgil Goode long enough to entertain the possibility that this case doesn’t quite fit their preconceived notions.

[1] Ibn Khaldun, The Muqaddimah: An Introduction to History, translated by Franz Rosenthal; edited and abridged by N. J. Dawood, Princeton University Press, 1967, p. 183.

Another death threat

Most of this message from "mohammed_souljha@hotmail.co.uk" was unrepeatable, but it ended with these Christmas wishes (yes, I put in the asterisks):

i will f**kin chop you up and put chilli powder all over your wounds. ps bin laden

What never ceases to amaze me about this sort of thing is that some people in the West still tend to equate speaking honestly about the jihad ideology and jihad violence with "hate speech," while messages like this one from jihadists, and jihadists who commit actual violence in the name of that ideology, don't faze them at all.

U.S. says captured Iranians can be linked to attacks

An update on this story. By Sabrina Tavernise for the New York Times:

BAGHDAD, Dec. 26 — The American military said Tuesday that it had credible evidence linking Iranians and their Iraqi associates, detained here in raids last week, to criminal activities, including attacks against American forces. Evidence also emerged that some detainees had been involved in shipments of weapons to illegal armed groups in Iraq.

In its first official confirmation of last week’s raids, the military said it had confiscated maps, videos, photographs and documents in one of the raids on a site in Baghdad. The military confirmed the arrests of five Iranians, and said three of them had been released.

The Bush administration has described the two Iranians still being held Tuesday night as senior military officials. Maj. Gen. William Caldwell IV, the chief spokesman for the American command, said the military, in the raid, had “gathered specific intelligence from highly credible sources that linked individuals and locations with criminal activities against Iraqi civilians, security forces and coalition force personnel.”

General Caldwell made his remarks by e-mail in response to a query about the raids, first reported Monday in The New York Times. “Some of that specific intelligence,” he said via e-mail, “dealt explicitly with force-protection issues, including attacks on MNF-I forces.”

MNF-I stands for Multinational Force-Iraq, the official name of the American-led foreign forces there.

American officials have long said that the Iranian government interferes in Iraq, but the arrests, in the compound of one of Iraq’s most powerful Shiite political leaders, were the first since the American invasion in which officials were offering evidence of the link.

[...]

Iraq’s president, Jalal Talabani, had invited the two Iranians during his visit to Tehran, his spokesman said Sunday, but by Tuesday, some Iraqi officials began to question if Mr. Talabani had in fact made the invitation. His office was unavailable for comment Tuesday night.

“We know when they caught them they were doing something,” said one Iraqi official, who added that the Iranians did not appear to have formally registered with the government.

Some political leaders speculated that the arrests had been intended to derail efforts by Iraqis to deal with Iran on their own by making Iraqis look weak.

But the military seemed sure of what and whom it had found.

At about 7 p.m. on Wednesday, the military stopped a car in Baghdad and detained four people — three Iranians and an Iraqi. The military released two of them on Friday and the other two on Sunday night, General Caldwell said. The Iranian Embassy confirmed the releases.

But the more significant raid occurred before dawn the next morning, when American forces raided a second location, the general said. The military described it as “a site in Baghdad,” but declined to release further details about the location.

Iraqi leaders said last week that the site was the compound of Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, one of Iraq’s most powerful Shiite political leaders, who met with President Bush in Washington three weeks ago. A spokesman for Mr. Hakim said he had not heard of a raid on the compound.

A careful reading of General Caldwell’s statement makes it clear, however, that the location itself was of central importance. The military gathered “specific intelligence from highly credible sources that linked individuals and locations with criminal activities,” it said. The crimes were against Iraqi civilians, security forces and Americans.

In that raid, American forces detained 10 men, 2 of them Iranians. They seized documents, maps, photographs and videos at the location, the military said. The military declined to say precisely what the items showed, nor did it specify if the Iranians themselves were suspected of attacking Americans, or if the Iraqis arrested with them were suspected, or both.

[...]

One Iraqi politician suggested that the tip for the raid had come from a source within Mr. Hakim’s own party, known by the acronym Sciri, in an effort to weaken or unseat him.

However it had been led there, the military said it had found evidence of wrongdoing. By questioning the detainees and investigating the materials, the military found evidence that connected some of those detained “to weapons shipments to armed groups in Iraq,” General Caldwell said.

The military did not specify the types of weapons.

The allegation, if true, would make this the first incident since the American invasion in which Iranian military officials were discovered in the act of planning military action inside Iraq. American officials have long accused them of supplying arms and money from Iran, but never of traveling to Iraq and taking part in plotting violent acts here.

American officials accused Iran of designing and shipping new powerful, armor-piercing bombs to Iraq as early as summer 2005.

American officials have on occasion offered evidence of Iranian involvement: A weapons shipment bearing serial numbers believed to belong to an official Iranian manufacturer was intercepted last year. The most recent allegations, if true, would appear to draw a line back to Tehran more directly than ever.

Ethiopian, Somali troops near Mogadishu

The jihad there may be ending soon. By Mohamed Olad Hassan for Associated Press, with thanks to D. C. Watson:

MOGADISHU, Somalia - Somali and Ethiopian troops drove Islamic fighters out of the last major town before Mogadishu on Wednesday, and the government predicted that the capital and stronghold of the radical Islamists would fall without a fight.

Government spokesman Abdirahman Dinari said no assault was planned on Mogadishu because the forces of the Council of Islamic Courts were crumbling so fast.

"Islamic courts militias are already on the run and we hope that Mogadishu will fall to our hands without firing a shot," he said.

The Islamic Courts movement had grown steadily in power for six months, until the dramatic entry into the war by Ethiopian troops last week. Since then, fortunes have changed dramatically with the Islamists in full retreat.

"Rise up and march with Somalia to destroy Christianity and establish Khilafah"

Making clear what the war there is about. From the Islam First website, with thanks to DFS:

** Rise up and march with Somalia 2 crush Christianity

RISE UP AND MARCH WITH SOMALIA TO DESTROY CHRISTIANITY AND ESTABLISH KHILAFAH

DOORS OF JIHAD OPEN IN SOMALIA

A Somali Islamic Courts defence chief has for the first time called on foreign Muslim fighters to join his movement's war against Ethiopia.

"We're saying our country is open to Muslims worldwide. Let them fight in Somalia and wage jihad, and God willing, attack Addis Ababa," Yusuf Mohamed Siad, known as Inda'ade, said.

"Today the war is being fought by land and air," Sheikh Mahmud Ibrahim Suley, an SICS official, told reporters in Mogadishu.

"We want anyone who can help remove the enemy to come in," he told a news conference in the Mogadishu, the Somali capital and an Islamic Courts stronghold.

"Our Islamic fighters have taken control of Idale and are heading to other parts where Tigray (Ethiopian) invaders are now based, by the will of Allah, we will liberate our people and country from the Ethiopian invaders," Islamic Courts Information chief Abdurahim Ali Muddey said the AFP.

"We are at war with Ethiopia, but not with the government," Sheikh Hassan Dahir Aweys, the Islamic Courts leader said on Thursday.

Somalia's Islamic courts on Monday, June 5, claimed victory over a US-backed warlord alliance after four months of fierce fighting in the capital Mogadishu that claimed the lives of hundreds as the interim government invited the courts to take part in dialogue.

"The Joint Islamic Courts are not interested in a continuation of hostilities and will fully implement peace and security after the change has been made by the victory of the people with the support of Allah," its chairman Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmed said in a statement cited by Agence France-Presse (AFP).

Iranian parliament adopts bill to speed up nuclear activities

Perhaps they're anxious to get on with nuking Israel. From Al-Bawaba, with thanks to Sr. Soph:

The Islamic Consultative Assembly (Iranian parliament or Majlis) on Wednesday ratified a double-urgency bill urging the government to speed up Iran's nuclear activities and make a revision in the country's cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to meet interests of the nation.

The bill on "urging the government to revise cooperation with the IAEA" was approved by MPs during the open session of the Majlis.

Majlis started review of the double-urgency of the bill during its Tuesday session. According to IRNA, the decision was made following adoption by the UN Security Council Resolution 1737 on Saturday night under the US pressure against Iran's peaceful nuclear program.

Of the total 191 votes cast, the double-urgency bill was ratified as 161 MPs voted in favor, 15 against and 15 abstained.

Addressing the session in favor of the bill, Majlis Speaker Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel said, "Iran has always been ready to hold negotiations on nuclear issue rationally and based on international regulations. "The IAEA has repeatedly announced Iran had no diversion in its peaceful nuclear program but anti-Iran sanctions are raised while several countries in Asia have nuclear bombs."

Palestinian PM: US plan for state with temporary borders is 'unacceptable intervention'

A two-state solution is no good as far as Hamas is concerned. Hamas wants a one-state solution. "Hamas rejects US state offer: Palestinian PM: US plan for state with temporary borders is 'unacceptable intervention,'" by Yaakov Lappin for YnetNews, with thanks to Sr. Soph:

The PA Hamas government has turned down an American proposal to form a Palestinian state in two years with temporary borders, Hamas' English language website said Tuesday night.

"The PA government sitting under chairmanship of premier Ismail Haneyya on Tuesday declared rejection of an American proposal to establish a Palestinian state with temporary borders within two years," the website said.

It added that Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh "described such plans as an unacceptable intervention in Palestinian internal affairs."

Haniyeh was reported as saying "that Washington should recognize the Palestinian people's legitimate rights including establishment of a fully-sovereign Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital, release of all prisoners and return of refugees."

Iran Is Seeking More Influence in Afghanistan

As it is all over the Islamic world. By David Rohde in the New York Times, with thanks to Sr. Soph:

ISLAM QALA, Afghanistan — Two years ago, foreign engineers built a new highway through the desert of western Afghanistan, past this ancient trading post and on to the outside world. Nearby, they strung a high-voltage power line and laid a fiber-optic cable, marked with red posts, that provides telephone and Internet access to the region.

The modernization comes with a message. Every 5 to 10 miles, road signs offer quotations from the Koran. "Forgive us, God," declares one. "God is clear to everyone," says another. A graceful mosque rises roadside, with a green glass dome and Koranic inscriptions in blue tile. The style is unmistakably Iranian.

All of this is fruit of Iran's drive to become a bigger player in Afghanistan, as it exploits new opportunities to spread its influence and ideas farther across the Middle East.

The rise of Hezbollah, with Iran's support, has demonstrated the extent of Tehran's sway in Lebanon, and the American toppling of Saddam Hussein has allowed it to expand its influence in Iraq. Iran has been making inroads into Afghanistan, as well. During the tumultuous 1980s and '90s, Iran shipped money and arms to groups fighting first the Soviet occupation and later the Taliban government. But since the United States and its allies ousted the Taliban in 2001, Iran has taken advantage of the central government's weakness to pursue a more nuanced strategy: part reconstruction, part education and part propaganda.

Sending the Mullahs to Bed Without Supper

Andrew C. McCarthy explains what's wrong with the UN sanctions against Iran in National Review:

...In what, moreover, has to be one of the more embarrassing king-has-no-clothes moments, this testament to cravenness came only a day after federal judge Royce C. Lamberth’s painstaking 209-page opinion, describing the Islamic Republic’s orchestration of the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing which killed 19 members of the United States Air Force and wounded 372 others.

After many meandering months, the outcome on the sanctions resolution was still in doubt as late as Saturday morning because two of our “allies” in this exquisite diplomatic effort — China (itself a nuclear proliferator with extensive economic ties to Iran) and Russia (Vladimir Putin's thug-state which is actually helping Iran develop its nuclear capability) — were still busy watering down measures already so diluted even the Iraq Study Group would have found them fatuous.

The penalties against the regime that sees a world without America and Israel as “attainable” are laughable.

The New York Times reports that all countries would be required to ban “the import and export of materials and technology used in uranium enrichment, reprocessing and ballistic missiles.” Except, well … not so much. The Times and the Associated Press note that the Russians are continuing apace with the construction of Iran’s atomic power plant at Bushehr. They succeeded in having any mention of Bushehr removed from the resolution, while forcing other amendments to ensure that “legitimate” nuclear activities in Iran could continue.

The ballyhooed sanctions also include an asset freeze on twelve Iranian individuals and eleven companies involved in Iran’s nuclear and missile programs. But observe: This is not a freeze on Iran. It affects only a handful of persons and entities — and even with respect to them, it matters only if they happen to have assets that can be readily identified inside some country that is willing to pierce through a maze of nominees and seize them.

Feigning at some backbone, the U.S. and some of the more “hawkish” members of the coalition (comprised of the five permanent Security Council members plus Germany) also urged that the named Iranians be banned from traveling outside Iran. But even this gambit — better thought of as a nuisance than a sanction — was too much for the Russians. Due to their nyet, countries will instead be asked “to exercise vigilance” if the Iranian Dirty Dozen enter or transit through their territory. That’ll show ‘em.

It’s worth rehearsing the sorry history that has led us to this point. Abandoning a long-settled policy against direct negotiations with the Iranian regime, and making a mockery of the Bush Doctrine’s pledge that rogue states would be made to decide whether they were “with us or with the terrorists,” the State Department this spring offered to give the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism everything including the kitchen sink for what would have been the pretense of abandoning its nuclear weapons program.

In so doing, the Bush administration conceded the legitimacy of the Islamic Republic’s development of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes — notwithstanding that such efforts are generally indistinguishable from arms development. Not content with that, it agreed that Iran should be assisted in that development with light water reactors, spent fuel management instruction, and “a substantive package of research and development co-operation.”

Read it all.

Fitzgerald: What does Keith Ellison believe?

"On Jan. 4, I will go swear an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States. I'll place my hand on the Quran..." -- from a remark by Keith Ellison quoted in this article

Whether or not the Qur'an is actually used in the ceremony hardly matters. What matters is that Keith Ellison believes -- with the firm faith of the convert, a faith that is often much more firm and often much more fanatical than many a Muslim born into Islam -- that the Qur'an is the uncreated and immutable Word of God. And that Qur'an is full of things about the duty of Jihad, about the duty of behaving toward all non-Muslims with at least ("do not take Christians and Jews as friends" etc.) and at most sheer murderousness ("kill the Unbelievers" etc.).

How does someone who claims that he believes in a faith that is more than a faith, that is an entire way of life, a Total Regulation of Life, a Complete Explanation of the Universe, a way of life that tells its adherents that they must always and everywhere be submissive, and must acquire if they do not already possess the habit of mental submission to Allah, and never to use their own reason to question his will or for that matter his whim, claim to uphold the U.S. Constitution, which is based on a quite different series of premises?

How does a Muslim, who if he is a real Muslim must locate political legitimacy can never reside in the expressed will of mere mortals, but only in the will expressed by Allah in the Qur'an (and as glossed by the Hadith and the Sira) manage to support the political and legal institutions of this or any Infidel country? How can he give such support especially to a country that so noisily makes a fetish of democracy and that expressed will of the people, and enshrines individual rights, not one of which -- freedom of speech including that of mocking any and all belief-systems, legal equality of men and women, and of all religions ("Islam is to dominate, and not to be dominated") -- is protected by Islamic law?

Is Keith Ellison a real Muslim? That is, does he believe that "Islam is to dominate and is not to be dominated"? Does he take Muhammad as the Perfect Man, uswa hasana, al-insan al-kamil? And so does he therefore endorses the attack on the Khaybar Oasis, the murders of Abu Afak and Asma bint Marwan, the consummation of that "marriage" to little Aisha when she was aged nine, and the beheading of the bound prisoners of the Banu Qurayza, and so much more? Either he does, or he doesn't. Either he is loyal to the American Constitution, or he is loyal to Islam, which in every important particular flatly contradicts both the spirit and the letter of the American Constitution, as it does both the spirit and the letter of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Is there not a single reporter in all of the United States -- or especially in the state of Minnesota -- who will look into this? Is there no reporter who will study it? Is there no reporter who will find out what Islam teaches, find out why the Muslim states, instead of becoming signatories to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, concocted a Muslim version that leaves out all of the most important individual rights recognized in the full, real, Infidel version?

Put Ellison on the spot. Ask him about all that. Ask what he thinks is the source of political legitimacy for governments -- any government. Ask what he thinks of the specific rights in the Bill of Rights. Ask what he thinks, while you are at it, about the Arab Muslim treatment of black African Muslims in Darfur, or of other non-Arabs, such as the Kurds in Iraq, or the Berbers in Algeria. Ask him, and keep asking him, until an answer is received.

Even if Ellison is not sworn in with a Qur'an, his insistence on carrying it about is all the excuse one needs -- if one is needed at all -- to use this as the point of departure for discussion of what is in the Qur'an, and what Ellison makes of those passages in it about Infidels.

Let a hundred articles be written about what is in the Qur'an, using the Ellison story as the justification and reason. Anything to get those contents out. And don't stop there. Go into the Hadith, and what they tell us about Muhammad's attitudes toward Infidels.

The excuse exists. Take full advantage.

1st Muslim congressman thrills crowd in Dearborn

Some honest questions for Keith Ellison below.

In this article by Niraj Warikoo in the Detroit Free Press (thanks to Twostellas), Ellison is defiant:

Speaking in Dearborn late Sunday night, the first Muslim elected to Congress told a cheering crowd of Muslims they should remain steadfast in their faith and push for justice.

"You can't back down, you can't chicken out, you can't be afraid, you got to have faith in Allah, and you got to stand up and be a real Muslim," Detroit native Keith Ellison said to loud applause.

"Allahu akbar" — God is great — was the reply of many in the crowd.

Ellison, a Minnesota Democrat elected to the U.S. House, has been the center of a national debate in recent weeks over Islam and its role in politics. Ellison has said he would take his oath of office on the Quran, the Muslim holy book, igniting a storm of criticism from some commentators. And U.S. Rep. Virgil Goode, a Republican from Virginia, said in a letter to constituents this month that the election of Ellison and other Muslims poses a danger to the country.

But Ellison said in Dearborn that Muslims can help teach America about justice and equal protection, suggesting that Muslim activists may be part of God's plan. He spoke at the annual convention of two Muslim groups, the Muslim American Society and the Islamic Circle of North America. The convention ended Monday morning.

The Muslim American Society has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and does not deny a report published in the Chicago Tribune in 2004 that it hopes to replace the U.S. Constitution with the Qur'an. According to terror expert Steven Emerson, the Islamic Circle of North America "Another individual who was quoted in the New York Times was an official of the Islamic Circle of North America, again portrayed as a mainstream group. What they didn't reveal is the Islamic Circle of North America "is a Jamad Islamia group, which is on record as calling for jihad in the United States, to promote the notion of an Islamic world. ICNA also published something very recently saying that they are against suicide bombings, except when it comes to killing Israelis."

Does Ellison endorse these views? Would he kindly issue an unequivocal statement affirming that he does not?

"Muslims, you're up to bat right now..." he said. "How do you know that you were not brought right here to this place to learn how to make this world better? How do you know that Allah, subhanahu wa ta'ala,” (meaning praised and exalted is he) “did not bring you here so that you could understand how to teach people what tolerance was, what justice was?… How do you know that you're not here to teach this country?"

Fine. Teach us. Teach us how Sharia is compatible with the Constitution. Take head-on the questions about non-establishment of religion, freedom of conscience, and equality of rights for women and religious minorities that raise legitimate questions about the compatibility of Sharia and the Bill of Rights. Discuss these questions openly, rather than indignantly claiming that to ask them is to manifest "bigotry."

The convention, which ends today, drew more than 3,000 Muslims from across the country for an event aimed at revival and reform. It featured workshops and panels on a range of topics from civil rights to politics to how to spread Islam in the U.S.

Ellison, who converted to Islam during college, made his remarks at the Hyatt Regency, the site of the five-day convention. He spoke about the controversies he has faced in recent weeks.

"We had faith in Allah," Ellison said. "And we patiently endured this adversity. And facing adversity bravely and with patience in the faith in Allah is an Islamic value. … That's what it means to be a Muslim."

He cautioned though that there might be more anti-Muslim attacks in the future.

"We're going to continue to face them," Ellison said. "They're not going to stop right away. But if you, and me too, stick together, if we believe in Allah, subhanahu wa ta'ala, if we turn to the Quran for guidance, we'll find an answer to the questions we have. And we will find that we are an asset and a plus not only to our own community, but to this country, and to this whole world."

Ellison vowed to use the Quran during his swearing in ceremony next month.

"On Jan. 4, I will go swear an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States. I'll place my hand on the Quran," Ellison said while placing his hand on the lectern, to loud applause and cries of "Allahu akbar."

No he won't. No book is used in the swearing-in of Congressmen. Ellison is probably speaking of a photo-op with the House Speaker that takes place after the swearing-in. Still, the symbolic value of the photo will be significant.

He urged Muslims to thank God for testing them over the past several weeks. "Before you begin to think that some hardship has befallen you, you need to stop and thank Allah," Ellison said. "Because this controversy has...made people dust off their Constitution and actually read it ."

Good. That's a positive development.

Fitzgerald: Egypt and Sinai

The Egyptians who raise the matter of Eilat are skating on thin ice. For the Sinai, which Egypt has convinced the world is historically part of its domain, was always a corpus separatum. It was regarded as such, and was discussed openly as such by travellers and diplomats, right up until World War I. And if many do not realize this, it is only because they have accepted unquestioningly the notion that the Sinai is part of Egypt.

When Francis Frith published his famous photographs, they were of "Egypt, Sinai,and Palestine." When the Anglican divine Arthur Stanley wrote his book of Biblical observations, it was entitled Sinai and Palestine. No one at the Paris Peace Conference thought of the Sinai as belonging to Egypt. It was not until the 1920s that the entire Sinai was handed over to Egypt when, in fact, in large part it was connected to Jewish history (Sinai? Mount Sinai?) and to Christian history (St. Catherine's monastery, with so much of the world's intact Byzantine icons, and so much Christian history), but never to the Muslims. But Jewish history and Christian history did not matter, and Egypt was handed over the Sinai.

How many of you have ever seen the map, reproduced in the Diaries of Colonel Meinertzhagen, that show how much of the Sinai became Egyptian only in the 1920s? Egypt had no historic or legal title to the Sinai except that provided by Great Britain. Britain was perfectly willing to diminish unilaterally the territory intended for the Mandate for Palestine by lopping off all of historic Palestine east of the river Jordan. It was also perfectly willing to curry favor with Egypt, at the very moment when the British who had come under Lord Cromer to improve the civil service were leaving, by handing over the Sinai to an Egypt that had never before been thought entitled to it.

This was not an argument that was made by the Israelis at Camp David. They were beaten about by Jimmy Carter, who was the same Carter then as he his now. At the time, however, all kinds of Jewish leaders were falling all over themselves praising the antisemitic Carter as a veritable prince of peace. This was because they failed to know much about the treaty itself. They also failed to understand what treaties mean to Muslims. They likewise failed to see how poorly the Israelis had fared, especially since the Israelis themselves, with a few intelligent exceptions, did not and still do not understand what is happening, what is the nature of the menace they face They do not seem to know what are their own legitimate rights, and how those rights should be convincingly presented.

By all means, let us reopen the question of the entire Sinai, and to whom it belongs, or should belong. And perhaps those Egyptian members of Parliament will regret their demand for Eilat. However, the fact that this demand has been made against Israel, a country that scrupulously observed every commitment made under the disastrous Camp David Accords while Egypt failed to observe a single one of its solemn commitments to end all hostile propaganda and to encourage instead a new attitude of friendliness, should tell Israelis and supporters of Israel something. It should tell those Israelis who still think that "treaties" with the Arabs mean something, that they do not and cannot, as long as the model of Muhammad’s Treaty of Al-Hudaibiyyah stands. And it will stand as long as there is Islam, and as long as Muhammad remains the Perfect Man, uswa hasana, al-insan al-kamil.

No one, not even the Israelis, seems to comprehend that no negotiations leading to treaties mean anything other than a temporary "truce treaty" on the model of that made by Muhammad at Al-Hudaibiyya with the Meccans -- a treaty he broke as soon as his forces became more powerful. If the Islamic tenets that require Muslims to attack and destroy Israel -- by degrees if necessary, where outright assault cannot work -- were known, then a great many people would realize that these treaties -- Oslo, Camp David, and so on -- are simply a snare, a delusion, a waste.

What keeps the peace now between Egypt and Israel is not something called the Camp David Accords, but the military power of Israel. In other words, Egypt does not attack Israel for the same reason that Syria does not attack it.

Amazing how resistant the foolish Israeli leadership is to comprehending this, and to making clear that it now understands what is going on. When Israelis were distracted with nation-building, and were resettling huge numbers of Jewish refugees in the first two decades of the state's existence, such inattention was understandable. But when, after 1967, the Arabs began to methodically dress up their campaign in the camouflage of a "struggle for legitimate rights" and then invented, for the occasion, the "Palestinian people" (who are not mentioned once in the UN records between 1948 and 1967 -- not once, not by any Arab or non-Arab), the Israelis should have been vigilant. They were not. They have damaged themselves, terribly.

And what is more, they have damaged the West, which not understanding the Jihad against Israel, also failed to understand the elements of Jihad that are being used against the entire non-Muslim world, with Western Europe the first to suffer. Yet one sympathizes with Israel, for it simply did not have a policymaking elite that could permit itself the leisure to think and to comprehend; they were so busy countering this or that attack, putting out this diplomatic fire, and so on. And who, after all, wants to allow himself to believe that his country will forever be a target, will forever -- no matter what its size -- be for the Muslim Believer an outrage, a "humiliation" (for Islam "must dominate and not be dominated") that, sooner or later, in a decade or a hundred years, or a thousand years, be undone?

Iraq protests at US arrest of Iranian diplomat

Good thing we have a friendly government in Iraq now. Shi'ite Client State Update from Reuters, with thanks to Sr. Soph:

BAGHDAD - Iraq’s president protested on Monday against the arrest by US forces in Iraq of two Iranian diplomats who US officials said were seized in raids against Iranians suspected of planning attacks on Iraqi security forces.

Iran said the diplomats had been invited by the Iraqi government and warned their detention would “provoke unpleasant repercussions”, a local Iraqi news agency said.

“Two Iranian diplomats were detained by the Americans,” said Hiwa Othman, media adviser for Iraqi President Jalal Talabani.

“The president is unhappy. He is talking to the Americans about it as we speak. The diplomats came to Iraq at the invitation of the president,” Othman told Reuters. He said he was not aware if they had met Talabani.

"I lost brothers and sisters, yet I do not hate one single Muslim, I do not hate one single Indonesian"

The message of Jose Ramos-Horta encapsulates the superiority of a civilization, and a spiritual energy that can overcome that of the Islamic rage for revenge, if the West only has the courage to recapture and defend it.

This will be a considerable preoccupation of my next book, tentatively entitled Why Christianity Is A Religion of Peace -- And Islam Isn't (coming next summer from Regnery Publishing), which will confront and refute the multiculturalist assumption that all religions and cultures are equal, explore Judeo-Christian civilization as the focus of the global jihad attack, and explain why it is so eminently worth defending -- by Christians and non-Christians alike.

This doesn't mean that it is likely that Osama will heed this message and lay down his arms. Nor does he mean that non-Muslims shouldn't defend themselves against the jihadists. But it does bespeak a civilization of mercy and magnanimity, which is greater than that of the civilization of hatred and barbarism, and should be defended as such.

"Timor PM sends Xmas message to bin Laden," from AFP, with thanks to Sr. Soph:

DILI - East Timor Prime Minister Jose Ramos-Horta said Tuesday he hoped Osama bin Laden had tuned in from his mountain hideout to hear his Christmas message of peace directed at the feared terrorist leader.

Ramos-Horta’s message to the elusive September 11 mastermind was broadcast on the BBC.

“It occurred to me that a man who is one of the most feared and detested on earth by some and admired by others, might tune into the BBC and hear my message,” he said....

“I have no illusions that my message will achieve any change, but I thought that here I had a chance that Osama bin Laden would listen and maybe, just maybe, my message would touch his conscience,” he said in explanation of his choice of recipient....

“On this occasion when we are celebrating the birth of Jesus Christ, my words, words of peace, are sent to my brother somewhere in the mountains, in the caves, of Afghanistan and Pakistan, Osama bin Laden. Yes, I consider you to be a brother,” he said.

Ramos-Horta said he failed to understand why bin Laden directed his resentment over the harm done to Muslims against innocent civilians.

“I come from a small country, East Timor, that was invaded by the largest Muslim country in the world.

“I lost brothers and sisters, yet I do not hate one single Muslim, I do not hate one single Indonesian. That’s the only difference between you and me, my brother Osama bin Laden,” he said.

“I beg you to re-think and extend your love, your solidarity, your friendship, the same ones you feel about Palestinians, extend to the rest of the world, extend to Europeans, to Christians. You will then win them over that way, more than through hatred and violence. I thank you, may God Almighty and Merciful bless us all.”

The Nobel Peace laureate said he hoped his words got through.

“I can only hope and pray that Osama bin Laden heard my message and accepted it in a spirit of peace,” he said.

"There is no other way besides jihad. To stop the holy war means to humiliate ourselves and to become weak"

Al-Libi, who escaped from the Americans in 2005, calls Muslims to continue the jihad. "Reuters: Al Qaeda Summoned for Continuation of Jihad," from Reuters, with thanks to the Constantinopolitan Irredentist:

Kabul. An activist of the international terrorist network Al Qaeda who claims that he managed to escape from US air base in Afghanistan in 2005, summoned the Muslims to continue their “holly war against the West”, Reuters reports. The statement of the man who presented himself as Abu Ahia al Libi had been published in an Islamic website. He summoned the Muslims to remain vigilant and not to refuse from their fight”. “There is no other way besides jihad. To stop the holly war means to humiliate ourselves and to become weak. The war should continue”, al Libi stated.

Internet cafés in the front line of new Gaza violence

Because they're, horror of horrors, "trying to make a whole generation preoccupied with matters other than jihad and worship." "Internet cafés in the front line of new Gaza violence," by Stephen Farrell in the TimesOnline, with thanks to Sr. Soph:

Using political violence between Hamas and Fatah as cover, radical Islamists are bombing internet cafés, pool halls and chemists in Gaza to impose their own brand of fundamentalism.

Cybercafés have been singled out for allegedly allowing customers to download pornography. Chemists have been bombed for selling hallucinogens smuggled from Israel or through tunnels from Egypt, while pool halls are accused of encouraging immoral behaviour. A group calling itself the Swords of Islamic Righteousness is believed to have carried out more than a dozen attacks in recent weeks.

The previously unknown group issued a warning letter late last month threatening to “execute the laws of God”. It claimed responsibility for “shooting rocket-propelled grenades and planting bombs at internet cafés in Gaza, which are trying to make a whole generation preoccupied with matters other than jihad and worship”. The group also claimed unverifiable attacks on unveiled women, music shops and motorists playing loud music.

Many of Gaza’s backstreet internet cafés have closed after the attacks. Many of those still open told The Times that they were nervous about the Islamist threat. Security officials and human rights workers said that disintegrating law and order was also being exploited by gangsters and criminals. Women’s rights groups report an increase in “honour killings” of women suspected of adultery or immoral behaviour.

Read it all.

Pipes: How the West Could Lose

Daniel Pipes is taking a hiatus from his column to teach a course at Pepperdine University in Malibu. In his last piece before the break, published today in the New York Sun, he details some of the reasons why we're losing -- in a conflict many Americans haven't even yet noticed we're fighting. (Many links in the original.)

After defeating the fascists and the communists, can the West now defeat the Islamists?

On the face of it, the West's military predominance makes victory seem inevitable. Even if Tehran acquires a nuclear weapon, Islamists have nothing like the military machine the Axis deployed in World War II, nor the Soviet Union during the Cold War. What do the Islamists have to compare with the Wehrmacht or the Red Army? The SS or Spetznaz? The Gestapo or the KGB? Or, for that matter, to Auschwitz or the gulag?

Yet more than a few analysts, including myself, worry that it's not so simple. Islamists (defined as those who demand to live by the sacred law of Islam) might do better than the earlier totalitarians. They could even win. That's because, however strong the Western hardware, its software contains some potentially fatal bugs. Three of them — pacifism, self-hatred, complacency — deserve attention.

Pacifism: Among the educated, the conviction has taken hold that "there is no military solution" to current problems, a mantra applied to Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, the Kurds, terrorism, and the Arab-Israeli conflict. But this pragmatic pacifism overlooks the fact that modern history abounds with military solutions. What were the defeats of the Axis, America in Vietnam, or the Soviet Union in Afghanistan if not military solutions?

Self-hatred: Significant elements in several Western countries — especially America, Britain, and Israel — believe their own governments to be repositories of evil and see terrorism as just punishment for past sins. This "we have met the enemy and he is us" attitude replaces an effective response with appeasement, including a readiness to give up traditions and achievements.

This will be the focus of my next book, which is tentatively entitled, Why Christianity Is A Religion of Peace -- And Islam Isn't.

Osama bin Laden celebrates by name such leftists as Robert Fisk and William Blum. Self-hating Westerners have an outsize importance due to their prominent role as shapers of opinion in universities, the press, religious institutions, and the arts. They serve as the Islamists' auxiliary mujahedeen.

Read it all.

Jordan's King: Israel not as strong as we thought

And he promises that the two-state solution will solve everything. This was, of course, the original plan in 1948, and it didn't satisfy the Muslims then; I doubt it will now. "King Abdullah: Israel not as strong as we thought," from Ynet News, with thanks to Sr. Soph:

Jordan’s King Abdullah said during an interview with Tokyo-based newspaper The Daily Yomiuri that “The (Lebanon ) war last summer showed that Israel is not as strong as we had previously thought, and, justifiably or not, the perception in the Middle East is that Israel lost.”

Abdullah, who is currently visiting Japan, added that “More and more countries in the region will now believe that the only way to get
Israel to listen is through force and not negotiations. Israel will have to take a significant step in the right direction that will lead to calm in the region.”

The Jordanian king stressed that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains the main source of Mideast tension. “Until we deal with this issue, which can be easily resolved, the Middle East will be forever cursed, as will the entire Muslim world,” he said.

Abdallah said that in light of the current situation Israel must decide whether or not it wishes to remain isolated.

“The Arab countries are very interested in moving the peace process along, and this conveys a message to the Israelis: If we advance the peace process and implement a two-state solution, all the Arab and Muslim countries will agree to establish (diplomatic) relations with Israel,” he said.

Abdullah also asked a pointed question:

"The next step is to get to the streets, the schools, the homes. This is not a process that could take place over night. In certain places this process could take 15-20 years, but eventually the moderate majority must decide – does it want to sit quietly, or does it plan to act against the horrible crimes committed in the name of religion?"

"The Jihad will be going on until we kick them out of Afghanistan"

Democracy On The March Update from Afghanistan: "Taliban vows to continue jihad despite success of Operation Baaz Tsuka," by Bill Graveland for Canadian Press, with thanks to the Constantinopolitan Irredentist:

MAS'UM GHAR, Afghanistan (CP) - The jihad against NATO forces will continue despite the apparent success of Operation Baaz Tsuka a spokesman for the Taliban said Tuesday.

"The Jihad will be going on until we kick them out of Afghanistan," said Qari Yousaf Ahmadi in an interview with The Canadian Press by satellite phone.

"The non-Muslims came and occupied our country."

Yes, out of the blue, without any provocation whatsoever.

More signs Pakistan playing role in aiding Taliban

Friend and Ally Update: "On the trail of the Taliban's support: More signs suggest Pakistan plays a role in aiding the Afghan insurgency," by Paul Watson in the Los Angeles Times, with thanks to Arjun:

..."A hundred armed Taliban men passed through the Pakistani border with their equipment, and with their rocket-propelled grenade launchers," said Qasim Khail, commander of the Afghan border police's 2nd Brigade, which guards the post here. "And they retreated the same way. There are only two escape routes out of here, and both of them end at a Pakistani border post."

Confidential documents obtained by The Times show that for at least two years, U.S. military intelligence agencies have warned American commanders that Taliban militants were arming and training in Pakistan, then slipping into Afghanistan with the help of Pakistani border control officers.

Pact with Islamabad

On Sept. 5, Pashtun tribal leaders in Pakistan's North Waziristan border region signed a pact with the central government in Islamabad led by President Pervez Musharraf, an avowed ally of the U.S. in its declared war on terrorism.

Under the agreement, the Pakistani army, which had fought fierce battles with pro-Taliban militants, withdrew from the region, leaving a tribal force in charge of border posts. In return, the tribesmen foreswore giving support, training and sanctuary to Taliban and Al Qaeda-linked fighters, although some foreigners were allowed to remain.

But the violence has not abated. Instead, Afghan officials and the U.S. military say that since the pact was signed, cross-border attacks have escalated.

Like many Afghans, Khail believes that despite Musharraf's persistent denials, his country's Inter-Services Intelligence agency, or ISI, still supports the Taliban and at least some of its allies. The intelligence documents show that the U.S. military shared this suspicion as recently as the start of this year.

Read it all.

Jihadists on the retreat in Somalia

Things continue to go poorly for the Islamic Courts. "Islamic forces on the retreat in Somalia," by Salad Duhul for Associated Press:

MOGADISHU, Somalia - Islamic fighters were in a tactical retreat Tuesday, a senior Islamic leader said, as government and Ethiopian troops advanced on three fronts in a decisive turn around in the battle for control of Somalia.

Somalia's internationally backed government called on the Council of Islamic Courts to surrender and promised them amnesty if they lay down their weapons and stop opposing the government, spokesman Abdirahman Dinari said from Baidoa, the seat of the government.

Sheik Sharif Sheik Ahmed, leader of the Council of Islamic Courts' executive body, said the group had asked its troops to withdraw from some areas.

"The war is entering a new phase," he said. "We will fight Ethiopia for a long, long time and we expect the war to go everyplace."

Ahmed declined to explain [his] comments in greater detail, but some Islamic leaders have threatened a guerrilla war to include suicide bombings in Ethiopia's capital, Addis Ababa.

Patrick Mazimhaka, the deputy chairman of the African Union Commission, expressed support for Somalia's government and defended Ethiopia's military advances.

"If Ethiopia feels sufficiently threatened, then we recognize the right of Ethiopia to defend itself if it thinks its sovereignty and its security are under direct threat."

[...]

Some analysts also fear that the courts movement hopes to make Somalia a third front, after Afghanistan and Iraq, in militant Islam's war against the West.

[...]

But Ahmed rejected any suggestion of resuming peace talks and appeared unbowed by his group's losses.

Skirmishes were continuing on Tuesday, with a witness in Bur Haqaba reporting that he heard explosions nearby after two Ethiopian jets flew overhead.

"I saw two helicopters, I heard the sounds of bombs at Lego village," said Mohamed Abdulle Siidi by telephone. The account could not be immediately confirmed.

Islamic troops withdrew more than 50 miles to the southeast from Daynuney, a town just south of Baidoa. The retreat along the western front follows the bombing by Ethiopian jets of the country's two main international airports.

Advancing government and Ethiopian troops captured Bur Haqaba, one of the Islamists' main bases after it was abandoned early Tuesday.

"We woke up from our sleep this morning and the town was empty of troops, not a single Islamic fighter," Ibrahim Mohamed Aden, a resident of Bur Haqaba said.

Islamic fighters were also reportedly retreating on two other fronts. On the southern front, government troops captured Dinsor, Dinari said.

On the northern front, government and Ethiopian troops entered the town of Bulo Barde, where just two weeks ago an Islamic cleric said anyone who did not pray five times a day would be executed.

Government and Ethiopian troops were headed for Jowhar, 55 miles north of Mogadishu, after driving Islamic troops from Bandiradley, Adadow and Galinsor.

Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi announced on Saturday that he had sent troops into Somalia to fight international terrorists, defend Ethiopian interests and prop up the besieged U.N.-backed government, which only has a very small military force.

[...]

Many Somalis are enraged by the idea of Ethiopian involvement here because the countries have fought two wars over their disputed border in the past 45 years. Islamic leaders have repeatedly said they want to incorporate ethnic Somalis living in eastern Ethiopia, northeastern Kenya and Djibouti into a Greater Somalia.

Escaped al-Qaeda: Keep up jihad

Christmas musings from al-Qaeda, and they're not about an "inner spiritual struggle." "Al-Qaeda: Keep up jihad," from Reuters:

Dubai - A man believed to be a top al-Qaeda militant who escaped from a US airbase in Afghanistan last year, said in a statement that the tide had turned against the West, but urged Muslims to keep up their holy war.

A website often used by Islamists posted the statement from a man identified as Abu Yahya al-Libi in which he said Muslims should remain vigilant and not give up force in favour of dialogue.

"There is no way to reach what is required but through jihad (holy struggle).

"Leaving jihad causes humiliation, weakness and suffering, but carrying it out and excelling in it is the way," he said in the statement which appeared on Monday.

Abu Yahya al-Libi is believed to be the alias for Libyan Mohammad Hassan who along with three other al-Qaeda militants broke out of the Bagram Air base last year.

Complacent

Libi warned jihadists not to become complacent despite what he said were Western losses in Afghanistan and Iraq.

"By God's grace we are seeing a noticeable retreat and crumbling of the armies of the Crusaders, but we should differentiate between joy and optimism and believing that the enemy has put down its arms and surrendered," he wrote.

Libi warned militants against co-operating with "Western countries and trusting their promises".

[...]

Libi warned Sunni Muslim militants the road to defeating the West was long and arduous.

"The battle, in all its dimensions, is too great to be resolved in a day or two ... but is wide open," he said.

U.S. is holding Iranians seized in raids in Iraq

"Senior military officials." By James Glanz and Sabrina Tavernise for the New York Times:

BAGHDAD, Dec. 24 — The American military is holding at least four Iranians in Iraq, including men the Bush administration called senior military officials, who were seized in a pair of raids late last week aimed at people suspected of conducting attacks on Iraqi security forces, according to senior Iraqi and American officials in Baghdad and Washington.

The Bush administration made no public announcement of the politically delicate seizure of the Iranians, though in response to specific questions the White House confirmed Sunday that the Iranians were in custody.

Gordon D. Johndroe, the spokesman for the National Security Council, said two Iranian diplomats were among those initially detained in the raids. The two had papers showing that they were accredited to work in Iraq, and he said they were turned over to the Iraqi authorities and released. He confirmed that a group of other Iranians, including the military officials, remained in custody while an investigation continued, and he said, “We continue to work with the government of Iraq on the status of the detainees.”

It was unclear what kind of evidence American officials possessed that the Iranians were planning attacks, and the officials would not identify those being held. One official said that “a lot of material” was seized in the raid, but would not say if it included arms or documents that pointed to planning for attacks. Much of the material was still being examined, the official said.

Nonetheless, the two raids, in central Baghdad, have deeply upset Iraqi government officials, who have been making strenuous efforts to engage Iran on matters of security. At least two of the Iranians were in this country on an invitation extended by Iraq’s president, Jalal Talabani, during a visit to Tehran earlier this month. It was particularly awkward for the Iraqis that one of the raids took place in the Baghdad compound of Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, one of Iraq’s most powerful Shiite leaders, who traveled to Washington three weeks ago to meet President Bush.

Over the past four days, the Iraqis and Iranians have engaged in intense behind-the-scenes efforts to secure the release of the remaining detainees. One Iraqi government official said, “The Iranian ambassador has been running around from office to office.”

Iraqi leaders appealed to the American military, including to Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the senior American ground commander in Iraq, to release the Iranians, according to an Iraqi politician familiar with the efforts. The debate about what to do next has also engaged officials in the White House and the State Department. The national security adviser, Stephen J. Hadley, has been fully briefed, officials said, though they would not say what Mr. Bush has been told about the seizure or the identity of the detainees.

A senior Western official in Baghdad said the raids were conducted after American officials received information that the people detained had been involved in attacks on official security forces in Iraq. “We conduct operations against those who threaten Iraqi and coalition forces,” the official said. “This was based on information.”

A spokesman for Mr. Hakim, who heads a Shiite political party called Sciri, which began as an exile group in Iran that opposed Saddam Hussein, declined to comment. In Tehran, the Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman, Mohammad Ali Hosseini, had no comment about the case on Sunday other than to say it was under examination.

[...]

Much about the raids and the identities of the Iranians remained unclear on Sunday. American officials offered few details. They said that an investigation was under way and that they wanted to give the Iraqi government time to figure out its position. A Bush administration official said the Iranian military officials held in custody were suspected of being members of the Quds force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. It has been involved in training members of Hezbollah and other groups that the Americans regard as terrorist organizations.

American and Iraqi officials have long accused Iran of interfering in this country’s internal affairs, but have rarely produced evidence. The administration presented last week’s arrests as a potential confirmation of the link. Mr. Johndroe said, “We suspect this event validates our claims about Iranian meddling, but we want to finish our investigation of the detained Iranians before characterizing their activities.”

[...]

The raids and arrests were confirmed by at least seven officials and politicians in Baghdad and Washington. Still, the development was being viewed skeptically on Sunday by some Iraqis, who said that they suspected that the timing was intended to reinforce arguments by some in the administration that direct talks with Iran would be futile.

[...]

The United States is now holding, apparently for the first time, Iranians who it suspects of planning attacks. One senior administration official said, “This is going to be a tense but clarifying moment.”

Iran to install 3,000 centrifuges in response to UN sanctions

Looks like the ball is back in the UN's court. How long will it take to hammer out the next resolution? "Iran to install 3,000 centrifuges from today after sanctions," from AFP:

TEHERAN - Iran will on Sunday start putting in place 3,000 uranium enriching centrifuges at a key nuclear plant in an immediate response to a UN sanctions resolution, top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani told the hardline Kayhan newspaper.

“Our immediate response to the UN Security Council is that, as of today, we will start the activities at the site of the 3,000 centrifuge machines in Natanz and we will go ahead with full speed,” Larijani told the paper.

Natanz is the plant where Iran carries out uranium enrichment, a process the West fears could be diverted to make a nuclear bomb, a charge vehemently denied by Iran.

“We will accelerate our programme to install the 3,000 centrifuges” in response to the resolution, Alaeddin Boroujerdi, the influential head of parliament’s security commission, told state radio.

Installing 3,000 centrifuges would be an important step for Iran towards enriching uranium on an industrial scale. So far it has two cascades of 164 centrifuges at its uranium enrichment plant in the central city of Natanz.

Iran has maintained that it wants to have the new centrifuges installed by March and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said the Islamic republic will be able to celebrate ts “nuclearisation” around that time.

“Previously we said repeatedly that if the Westerners wanted to exploit the UN Security Council it will not only have no influence but make us more determined to pursue our nuclear goals even faster,” said Larijani.

“This action only decreases the credibility of the UN Security Council and has no effect on the Iranian will to pursue peaceful nuclear technology,” he added.

After weeks of diplomatic wrangling, the UN Security Council on Saturday adopted a resolution, which imposes restrictions on Iran’s nuclear industry and ballistic missile programme, its first ever sanctions against Teheran.

Ahmadinejad: Backers of UN resolution "soon to regret"

"We will celebrate our atomic achievements in February." With fireworks, Mahmoud? From Al-Bawaba, with thanks to Sr. Soph:

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Sunday those who voted for a UN nuclear resolution against the country would soon regret it, the official IRNA news agency reported.

“This resolution will not harm Iran and those who backed it will soon regret their superficial act,” Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying. “Iranians are neither worried nor uncomfortable with the resolution ... we will celebrate our atomic achievements in February.”

On his part, Iran's top nuclear negotiator said the country will push forward immediately with efforts to enrich uranium, a newspaper reported Sunday. "From Sunday morning, we will begin activities at Natanz — site of 3,000-centrifuge machines - and we will drive it with full speed. It will be our immediate response to the resolution," Ali Larijani told the Kayhan newspaper.

Qassam hits strategic facility in Ashkelon

Christmas greetings from Gaza. From YnetNews, with thanks to Sr. Soph:

Palestinian gunmen launched a Qassam from northern Gaza, which landed in the industrial area in Ashkelon, hitting a strategic facility.

Ethiopian Forces Capture Somali Border Town After Bombing Islamic Positions

The Somali Jihad is not going well so far. Every country that is threatened by jihad activity should be supporting Ethiopia now. From AP, with thanks to Jamie Glazov:

MOGADISHU, Somalia — Ethiopian and Somali troops captured a key border town early Monday, a day after Ethiopia sent fighter jets into neighboring Somalia and bombed several towns in a dramatic attack on a powerful Islamic movement.

Ethiopia's prime minister announced Sunday night that his country was "forced to enter a war" with Somalia's Council of Islamic Courts after the group declared holy war on Ethiopia, a largely Christian nation.

Residents said Islamic fighters left the town of Belet Weyne on the Somali-Ethiopian border overnight after Ethiopian fighter jets bombed Islamic positions on Sunday.

Col. Abdi Yusuf Ahmed, a Somali government army commander, told The Associated Press that his forces entered Belet Weyne early Monday without a shot fired. He held up his telephone and a reporter could hear street celebrations.

Ahmed said his troops would pursue the Islamic fighters south on one of Somalia's key roads.

Merry Christmas, and (belated) Happy Chanukah

...to all Jihad Watchers and others who observe either.

May we do all we can in 2007 to defend the civilization built by those who through history have celebrated these holy days, and to show those who have forgotten and who never knew that it is indeed worth defending.

Indonesian police guard churches amid terror alert

Peace on earth, good will to men (just kidding)

Jihadists plan Christmas greetings for Christians in Indonesia. It has become "something of a tradition." Pass the egg nog, and the latest death threat! From AP, with thanks to Jeffrey Imm:

Police searched worshippers and swept for bombs at churches in Indonesia on Sunday amid warnings by Western nations that Islamic militants may be plotting Christmas attacks.

Indonesian officials downplayed the alerts, which have become something of a tradition themselves since Christmas Eve bombings at churches across the country in 2000 killed 19 people.

Islamic Jihad fires rockets into Israel despite cease-fire

I've got an idea! Let's conclude another treaty with these jihad groups! From Xinhua, with thanks to Twostellas:

GAZA, Dec. 24 (Xinhua) -- A military wing of the Islamic Jihad (Holy War) movement launched two homemade rockets into southern Israel on Sunday morning despite a mutual cease-fire.

Saraya al-Quds Brigades claimed responsibility for firing two rockets into southern Israel's town of Sderot in a statement sent to reporters.

The rockets, fired from the northern Gaza Strip, came in response to "the Israeli violations and crimes committed everyday against the Palestinian people," said the statement.

Israel and the Palestinians agreed to a limited cease-fire in the Gaza Strip in late November following large-scale Israeli offensive.

However, Israel said the Palestinians have fired 51 rockets since the fragile truce took effect.

Iraq's grand ayatollah declines to bless Shiite-Sunni-Kurd bloc

All systems go for Al-Sadr -- and civil war. "Iraq's grand ayatollah declines to bless Shiite-Sunni-Kurd bloc: Al-Sistani's refusal is a setback for politicians hoping to isolate al-Sadr, an anti-U.S. cleric," by Qassim Abdul-Zahra for The Associated Press, with thanks to Twostellas:

BAGHDAD, Iraq – Iraq's most revered Shiite cleric withheld support Saturday for a U.S.-backed plan to build a coalition across sectarian lines, Shiite lawmakers said, jeopardizing hopes that such a show of political unity could help stem the country's deadly violence.

Members of the United Iraqi Alliance, the Shiite coalition that dominates parliament, met with Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani in Najaf after traveling to the holy city over the past few days. Al-Sistani holds no political post and rarely emerges from his home and adjacent office, but he has strong influence over Shiite politics.

Some members of the Shiite alliance have sought a coalition that would include Kurds and Sunnis, and sideline Muqtada al-Sadr, the Shiite cleric whose militia is blamed for much of Iraq's sectarian violence. Lawmakers who attended the meeting with al-Sistani said the cleric opposed any move that would divide Shiites.

"There are obstacles in the face of forming this coalition, because al-Sistani does not support it. So we will work to strengthen the (Shiite) alliance," said Hassan al-Sunnaid, of the Dawa Party of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

Ali al-Adib, also a Dawa Party member, said al-Sistani "does not support such blocs because they will break Shiite unity."

An official close to al-Sistani, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media, said the cleric "will not bless nor support any new bloc or front. He only supports the unity of the Shiites."

Morocco: Weekly Banned for "Anti-Islamic" Jokes

How many indignant clerics does it take to change a light bulb? They can't tell you in Morocco. A press release from Reporters Without Borders:

Reporters Without Borders said it firmly and utterly condemns a ban that has been slapped on the Arabic-language weekly "Nichane" and legal action launched against it for "damaging Islam".

The paper carried a feature in its 9 to 15 December 2006 issue entitled, "Jokes: How Moroccans laugh at religion, sex and politics". The Moroccan government banned the paper on 20 December and the king's prosecutor at the Casablanca High Court ordered police to investigate the article.

The prosecutor's office decided to take legal proceedings against editor Driss Ksikes and journalist Sanaa Al Aji for "damaging the Islamic religion" and "publication and distribution of articles contrary to morality".

"In taking this double step, the Moroccan authorities remind anyone who might have forgotten that the judicial arsenal is always available to curb the free expression of Moroccan journalists," the worldwide press freedom organisation said.

Despite promises and commitments made by Rabat in recent months, the "red lines" are still clearly there to constrain all journalist work, it said. Forbidden issues include the sacred status of the king, Islam as the state religion, Western Sahara, the army or morals. These bans are found as often in the 2002 press code as in the anti-terror law or the draft law on opinion polls, and always in terms vague enough to allow the widest interpretation. The same bans also appear in an ethical charter recently adopted by the federation of press editors.

Reporters Without Borders said it believed the steps taken were based on an electoral calculation in the run-up to polling which could be marked by a strong showing by the Islamist movement. The organisation said it feared that, far from calming the extremists, these measures could dangerously expose journalists with "Nichane".

It urged the Moroccan authorities to reconsider the ban on the weekly and called on the Casablanca prosecutor's office to withdraw its complaint for "damage to the Islamic religion" and "publication and distribution of articles contrary to morality". It restates its solidarity with the newspaper and the journalists targeted by the ban and legal proceedings.

Ethiopian forces launch counterattack in Somalia

Somalia Jihad Update. "Ethiopia attacks Somalia Islamic council," by Mohamed Olad Hassan for Associated Press:

MOGADISHU, Somalia - Ethiopia launched an attack Sunday on Somalia's powerful Islamic movement, sending fighter jets across the border and bombarding several towns in a major escalation of the violence that threatens to engulf the Horn of Africa.

Ethiopia confirmed the attacks, the first time it has acknowledged that its troops were fighting in Somalia, though witnesses have reported their presence for weeks.

"After too much patience, the Ethiopian government has taken a self-defensive measure and has begun counterattacking the aggressive extremist forces of the (Islamic council) and foreign terrorist groups," said Ethiopia's foreign affairs spokesman, Solomon Abebe.

The Council of Islamic Courts has vowed to drive out troops from neighboring Ethiopia, a largely Christian nation that is providing military support to Somalia's U.N.-backed government.

"They are cowards," said Sheik Mohamoud Ibrahim Suley, an official with Somalia's Council of Islamic Courts. "They are afraid of the face-to-face war and resorted to airstrikes. I hope God will help us shoot down their planes."

But Somali President Abdullahi Yusuf said his forces have gained the upper hand.

"I think they have met a resistance they have never dreamt of before," Yusuf said in brief remarks from Baidoa — the only town the government controls — as the battles began to die down Sunday afternoon.

[...]

As Sunday's fighting wore on, the Islamic leadership in the capital, Mogadishu, began broadcasting patriotic songs about Somalia's 1977 war with Ethiopia. Abdi Mohamed Osman, who owns a shop in the capital, said businessman [sic] were closing their shops to go and fight.

"We are going to support our brothers on the front line," he said.

The Ethiopian airstrikes were the first against Somalia's Islamic movement. Ethiopia and Somalia have fought two wars over their disputed border in the past 45 years. Islamic court leaders have repeatedly said they want to incorporate ethnic Somalis living in eastern Ethiopia, northeastern Kenya and Djibouti into a Greater Somalia.

Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi has said his government has a legal and moral obligation to support and defend Somalia's internationally recognized government. He has repeatedly accused the Islamic courts of backing ethnic Somali rebels fighting for independence from Ethiopia and has called such support an act of war.

[...]

In Kismayo, a strategic seaport captured from the government by Islamic militia in September, residents saw several foreign Arab fighters disembarking from ships this week.

Channel tunnel is jihad target

Christmas greetings, Infidels! "Channel tunnel is terror target," by Jason Burke in The Guardian, with thanks to Jeffrey Imm:

The Channel tunnel has been targeted by a group of Islamic militant terrorists aiming to cause maximum carnage during the holiday season, according to French and American secret services.

The plan, which the French DGSE foreign intelligence service became aware of earlier this year, is revealed in a secret report to the French government on threat levels. The report, dated December 19, indicates that the tip-off came from the American CIA. British and French intelligence agencies have run a series of checks of the security system protecting the 31-mile tunnel but the threat level, the DGSE warns, remains high. British security services remain on high alert throughout the holiday period.

According to the French sources, the plan was put together in Pakistan and is being directed from there. The plotters are believed to be Western Europeans, possibly Britons of Pakistani descent. The DGSE say that levels of 'chatter', the constant communication that takes place between militants, has not been so high since 2001. Last week Sir Ian Blair, the head of the Metropolitan Police, described 'the threat of another terrorist attempt' as 'ever present' adding that 'Christmas is a period when that might happen'.

Cherry-picking

In the course of writing yesterday's post about "Islamophobia," I happened upon this: "Will the Extreme Right Succeed? Turning the War on Terror into a War on Islam" by Louay Safi, the Director of Research at the International Institute of Islamic Thought, Editor of the Journal of Islamic Social Sciences, and a Founding Member and Director of the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy.

Even though it is a year old, I thought it warranted an answer, as it makes arguments that have been parroted in cruder form elsewhere.

The anti-Islam campaign is carried by self-appointed experts who have little understanding of Islam and Muslims, yet are bent on depicting the faith of 1/5 of humanity as intolerant, violent, and anti-western. Having little insight into Muslim societies and Islamic faith and history, they often rely on the crude and faulty logic of generalization about Muslims from the experiences of fringe Muslim groups, and of reading Islamic texts out of context, both the socio-political and the discursive.

"...self-appointed experts": I haven't appointed myself to anything. Everything I assert in my books about Islam, Muhammad, jihad, Sharia, dhimmitude, whatever, is carefully documented from Islamic sources. (Of course, that doesn't stop the liars: yesterday someone sent me a link to a site asserting that my "Jesus vs. Muhammad" quotes in The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) were unsourced and probably made up, but this just shows the depth of the mendacity of some people: anyone with the book can see that it isn't true.) Some time ago I heard from a professor who got one of my books and determined to prove me wrong -- so he gathered my sources and started to check up on me, and lo and behold, he found out that I was right. Everyone is invited to do the same thing.

Nor am I "bent on depicting the faith of 1/5 of humanity as intolerant, violent, and anti-western." I am bent on showing what the jihadists use in Islamic texts and teachings to make recruits and justify their actions, and bent on asking self-proclaimed moderates like Louay Safi to deal with that material forthrightly. But he sure doesn't here:

Robert Spencer, a prolific anti-Islam writer and a leading Islamophobe who is bent on distorting Islam and demonizing Muslims, has persistently argued that violence and terrorism employed by Muslim extremists is rooted in the Quran and its message. Spencer calls the Quran, a book sacred to Muslim, “the jihadists’ Mein Kampf,” in reference to Hitler’s memoir. He openly blames the Quran for giving impetus to the terrorist open war against the West. “So is the Qur'an the Mein Kampf of the totalitarian, supremacist movement that is the global Islamic jihad? If we take seriously the words of the book itself and how they are used by jihadists, then it clearly is their inspiration and justification.”

A familiar tactic: Safi acts as if it is I who have originated the idea that the Qur'an is the jihadists' inspiration and justification. Yet all one has to do is read the writings of Osama bin Laden, Zarqawi, and all the rest of them to see their copious use of the Qur'an and Sunnah to justify what they do. They will do this no matter what I am doing, and it is not I who led them to do it.

Spencer insists that the Quran is the source of the violence perpetrated by Muslim extremists against civilians. “Nor are these jihadists misrepresenting, twisting, or hijacking what the Quran says,” Spencer contends. “There are over a hundred verses in the Qur’an that exhort believers to wage jihad against unbelievers. ‘O Prophet! Strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their abode is Hell, an evil refuge indeed’ (Sura 9:73). ‘Strive hard’ in Arabic is jahidi, a verbal form of the noun jihad. This striving was to be on the battlefield: “When you meet the unbelievers in the battlefield, strike off their heads and, when you have laid them low, bind your captives firmly” (Qur’an 47:4). This is emphasized repeatedly: ‘O ye who believe! Fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him.’ (Qur’an 9:123).”

Spencer cherry picks few out of the hundreds verses that deal with issues of peace and war, and misrepresents Islam by arguing that the Quran directs Muslims to fight non-Muslims on the account of having different faith. He does that by obscuring both the textual and historical contexts of the verses he cites. The Quran is unequivocal that fighting is a last resort and is permitted to repulse aggression and stop oppression and abuse: “A declaration of disavowal from God and His Messenger to those of the polytheists (Arab pagans) with whom you contracted a Mutual alliance.” (9:1) The reason for this war against the pagans was their continuous fight and conspiracy against the Muslims to turn them out of Medina as they had been turned out of Makkah, and their infidelity to and disregard for the covenant they had made with the Muslims: “Why you not fight people who violated their oaths, plotted to expel the Messenger, and attacked you first.”(9:13)

Out of the hundreds of the Quran’s verses left out of Spencer’s discussion are those that direct Muslims to initiate fighting only to repel aggression while urging them to seek peace when the other party seeks peace: “Fight in the way of God those who fight you, but do not commit aggression, for God loves not aggressors. And fight them wherever you meet them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out; for persecution is worse than slaughter. But if they cease, God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. And fight them on until there is no oppression and the religion is only for God, but if they cease, let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression.” (2:190-193)

Actually I have discussed that verse in several books and on many occasions. In the Zarqawi article linked above, which came out six months before this article by Safi, I discuss his use of it. But here again, if there is "cherry-picking" going on, it is being done by the jihadists about whose use of Islamic texts I report, not by me. As for context, in his sira, Muhammad's earliest biographer Ibn Ishaq explains the contexts of various verses of the Qur'an by saying that Muhammad received revelations about warfare in three stages: first, tolerance; then, defensive warfare; and finally, offensive warfare in order to convert the unbelievers to Islam or make them pay the jizya (see Qur'an 9:29, Sahih Muslim 4294, etc.). Qur'anic commentaries, tafasir, by Ibn Kathir, Ibn Juzayy, As-Suyuti and others also emphasize that Surat At-Tawba -- the Qur'an's ninth chapter -- abrogates every peace treaty in the Qur'an.

In the modern age, this idea of stages of development in the Qur'an's teaching on jihad, culminating in offensive warfare to establish the hegemony of Islamic law, has been affirmed by jihad theorists such as Sayyid Qutb, Syed Abul Ala Maududi, the Pakistani Brigadier S. K. Malik (author of "The Qur'anic Concept of War"), Saudi Chief Justice Sheikh Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Humaid (in his "Jihad in the Qur'an and Sunnah"), and others. It is, of course, an assertion of no little concern to non-Muslims, since it encapsulates a doctrine of warfare against non-Muslims and their ultimate subjugation under Sharia rules, with all that implies.

Thus, as an ostensible moderate Muslim and vociferous opponent of terrorism in all its forms, Louay Safi ought to be fighting against this interpretation of Islam among his fellow Muslims, instead of fighting against me for noting its existence, as if I originated it. If he is really concerned about "Islamophobia," he would be doing battle against this view within the American Muslim community, since this expansionist imperative forms the ideological underpinning of much of today's terrorism, and thereby fuels any "Islamophobia" that actually exists.

But in any case, his charges that I cherry-pick and rip passages out of context are entirely unfounded, for this jihadist interpretation of the Qur'an and Sunnah is based on a contextual analysis of the Qur'an, a relative weighing of Meccan and Medinan suras, and an examination of the asbab an-nazool -- the circumstances of revelation -- for a large number of verses. It would be refreshing if Louay Safi would deal with this material in an open and honest discussion, without ad hominem attacks, but I have no hope for that.

Congressman: Probe of Islamic ties to OKC bombing "obstructed by feds"

Anything to this? I don't know. I'd like to find out. Will we find out? Probably not. "Probe of Islamic ties 'obstructed' by feds: Congressman who chaired panel says public 'would be outraged if they knew the extent,'" by Art Moore for WorldNetDaily.com, with thanks to all who sent this in:

Federal officials were "outrageously obstructive" during a congressional probe examining possible Islamic terrorist and foreign ties to the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, according to a congressman who disclosed to WND some of the highlights of a subcommittee report scheduled for release next week.

"The public would be outraged if they knew the extent of obstruction, or lack of cooperation, that has been given to this investigation," said Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., who led the probe as chairman of the International Relations' Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.

One example was the Justice Department's handling of a lead Rohrabacher received from an independent investigator concerning a Muslim figure with suspected ties to the Oklahoma City bombing whose name curiously shows up on the list of unindicted co-conspirators in the 1993 World Trade Center attack. The New York City bombing was attributed to Muslim terrorists connected to al-Qaida.

The report will document a series of correspondence between the subcommittee team and Justice officials that concluded with a refusal to turn over information about the suspect – for no apparently legitimate reason, according to Rohrabacher.

"This may well reflect the way the Justice Department deals with legislative branch investigations in general, which is very disappointing," Rohrabacher told WND. "In this case, however, we're talking about the investigation of the mass murder of 168 Americans and how that relates to the threat we face today from al-Qaida, and we find that to be rather alarming."

Read it all.

Many Azeris see Iranian hand behind wave of unrest

Iran is working hard to become the leader of the global jihad. By Ilan Greenberg in the International Herald Tribune, with thanks to Twostellas:

BAKU, Azerbaijan: An article denigrating Islam published early last month in an obscure newspaper here in the capital has led to emotional demonstrations across Azerbaijan and in Iran. A prominent Iranian cleric demanded the death of the two writers of the article, who have been imprisoned in Azerbaijan.

The article blamed Islam for Azerbaijan's meager development and likened the Prophet Muhammad to a used handkerchief. The ensuing furor echoes the case of the Danish cartoons published in September 2005 that mocked Islam and that, months later, generated protests throughout the Muslim world.

Here, the thunderous rhetoric from village imams and other religious conservatives has sent tremors through the Azeri government and the secular elite of the nation.

"I am for freedom of speech but not the freedom to insult," said Haji Ilgar, an imam at the Jama Old City Mosque in Baku who is often critical of the government of the secular president, Ilham Aliyev. "The only solution is to take this to the courts."

Many Azeris see the roots of the trouble in what they consider Iran's shadowy influence here. The two countries have had an often prickly relationship since Azerbaijan's independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. Iran is the regional power, and Azerbaijan is an up- and-coming oil state, tucked between Iran and Russia on the Caspian Sea.

Both Iran and Azerbaijan are Shiite, but Azeris fear that Iran wants to destabilize the country by spreading its brand of militant Islam across the border. Iran is struggling to deal with a large minority — upwards of a third — of Iran's 66 million people who are ethnic Azeri, a beleaguered minority that frequently agitates for more rights and cultural autonomy. Iran does not want them to get any ideas from a secular and prospering Azerbaijan, in this view.

Egypt demands Israel vacate Port City

Camp David Accords? Pshaw. The Americans will stand anything. "Egypt Demands Israel To Vacate Port City," by David Bedein in The Bulletin, with thanks to all who sent this in:

It will be remembered that the 1967 Six-Day War broke out after Egypt closed the straits of Tiran and strangled the trade from Israel's southern port city of Eliat.

Yet few are aware that Egypt has staked a claim to the city of Eilat, ever since it lost Eilat to the nascent state of Israel in the wake of the Egyptian army's defeat in the 1948 war, followed by the expulsion of the Egyptians from this southern port city on the Red Sea.

Now, in the wake of recent reports about plans to dig a canal linking the Red Sea on the Israeli side and the Dead Sea on its Jordanian side, a fiery argument broke out in Egypts parliament, with the members of parliament (MPs) speaking out against the "Israeli plot to choke the Suez Canal to death."

In the course of the debate, which has been going on in parliament for the last two days, Abed el-Aziz Sayef a-Nasser, an aide to the Egyptian foreign minister, was called as an expert witness. A-Nasser is the director of the Egyptian Foreign Ministry's legal department.
"Eilat, or by its former name Umm Rashrash, belongs to the Palestinians," he said, representing the opinion of the Egyptian Foreign Ministry.

His predecessor, Dr. Nabil el-Arabi, was the head of the Foreign Ministry's legal department and headed the delegation for negotiations at Taba. He also emphatically declared: "Eilat belongs to the Palestinians."

A-Nasser's response was meant to calm tempers in the rowdy debate in the Egyptian parliament, after dozens of opposition representatives demanded holding negotiations to have Eilat returned to Egyptian sovereignty. Opposition MPs recruited several legal experts, international law lecturers and experts on geography and topography who showed documents and opinions that Eilat is territory that belongs to Egypt and was captured in 1949 by Israel. They contend that the Egyptian negotiating team to Taba conceded Eilat to Israel 20 years ago "in the framework of the wish to build confidence and to display Egyptian good will in the spirit of the peace agreement."

This was not the end of the matter. An Egyptian international law expert presented an intermediate position in parliament: "Eilat belongs formally to Egypt and administratively to the Palestinians."
In the debate in parliament two days ago, an opposition MP, Mohammed el-Aadali, whipped out a document from 1906 which states, in the name of the Ottoman sultan: Umm Rashrash belongs to Egypt. In this spot - said the Egyptian experts on topography and geography - Egyptian pilgrims would stop and rest on their way to the holy cities in Saudi Arabia.

Another document brings testimony relating to 350 Egyptian police who were in Umm Rashrash just before it was captured in March 1949 and who were killed in battles with IDF soldiers.

Significantly, in the debate among the Egyptian MPs, the experts and the Foreign Ministry officials, no mention is made of possible legitimate Israeli sovereignty of Eilat. The debate in Cairo is between two camps: the Egyptian Foreign Ministry which claims that Eilat belongs to the Palestinians, and the opposition MPs who claim that Eilat belongs to Egypt.

The opposition Egyptian MPs threatened on Thursday to relay their demand for an Israeli withdrawal from Eilat to the Arab League to handle. Despite Israel's 1979 peace treaty with Egypt, the Arab League's 1948 declaration of war to liquidate the state of Israel remains in force. While Egypt was the kingpin of the Arab League from 1948 until 1977, the current dominant power in the Arab League is Saudi Arabia, which remains in a consistent state of war with the Jewish State until the present day. To that end, Saudi Arabia finances all Islamic terror groups that fight Israel, and continues to forbid any Jew from stepping on the soil of the Saudi kingdom.

U.S. strike kills Afghan Taliban leader

Tom Collins has it right (I raise my glass to you, Colonel): this is not a personality-driven movement. While this is a victory, there will just be another one who will come along and take Osmani's place.

By Jason Straziuso for Associated Press, with thanks to all who sent this in:

KABUL, Afghanistan - A top Taliban military commander described as a close associate of Osama bin Laden and Taliban leader Mullah Omar was killed in an airstrike this week close to the border with Pakistan, the U.S. military said Saturday. A Taliban spokesman denied the claim.

Mullah Akhtar Mohammad Osmani was killed Tuesday by a U.S. airstrike while traveling by vehicle in a deserted area in the southern province of Helmand, the U.S. military said. Two associates also were killed, it said.

There was no immediate confirmation from Afghan officials or visual proof offered to support the claim. A U.S. spokesman said "various sources" were used to confirm Osmani's identity.

Osmani, regarded as one of three top associates of Omar, is the highest-ranking Taliban leader the coalition has claimed to have killed or captured since U.S. forces invaded Afghanistan to oust the Taliban regime in late 2001 for hosting bin Laden.

U.S. military spokesman Col. Tom Collins described Osmani's death as a "big loss" for the ultraconservative militia.

"There's no doubt that it will have an immediate impact on their ability to conduct attacks," Collins said. "But the Taliban is fairly adaptive. They'll put somebody else in that position and we'll go after that person, too."

Daniel Pipes to debate Red Ken Livingstone

On January 20 in London, Daniel Pipes will take on Sheikh Qaradawi's good friend, London Mayor Ken Livingstone (thanks to Teri for the heads-up). Here are some details from Livingstone's website.

Perhaps this will be an occasion for the British public to learn more about the man Livingstone has championed -- Qaradawi -- and what he represents.

UN lashes Iran with wet noodle

I'm sure they're quaking in their boots in Tehran. "Security Council Approves Iran Sanctions," by Edith M. Lederer for AP, with thanks to James:

UNITED NATIONS (AP) - The U.N. Security Council voted unanimously Saturday to impose sanctions on Iran for refusing to suspend uranium enrichment, increasing international pressure on the government to prove that it is not trying to make nuclear weapons. Iran immediately rejected the resolution.

The result of two months of tough negotiation, the resolution orders all countries to stop supplying Iran with materials and technology that could contribute to its nuclear and missile programs. It also freezes Iranian assets of 10 key companies and 12 individuals related to those programs.

If Iran refuses to comply, the council warned it would adopt further nonmilitary sanctions, but the resolution emphasized the importance of diplomacy in seeking guarantees "that Iran's nuclear program is exclusively for peaceful purposes."

Your tax dollars at work: US government meets with CAIR and other Muslim leaders to discuss "Islamophobia"

Why is the State Department participating in conferences like this? Why is the State Department participating in conferences with people like Nihad Awad and Mahdi Bray? And why is the State Department spending any time at all discussing "Islamophobia" in the U.S., when, if it exists at all, its cause is clear?

Just in case you're coming in late, Americans are an extraordinarily tolerant people. There are large numbers of immigrants in the U.S. right now, legal and illegal, and apart from some isolated incidents they are not being victimized. The age of "Dogs and Irish Not Allowed" is long gone. Muslims in America are not suffering from any large-scale discrimination or hatred, and much of CAIR's vaunted hate crimes report is trumped-up. "Islamophobia" is a political tool invented by people like the speakers at this conference, for the purposes of providing protected victim status for American Muslims. The primary cause of "Islamophobia," insofar as it exists at all, is precisely the disingenuousness of those same American Muslim leaders when confronted with acts of violence committed by their coreligionists, in the name of the religion. Americans aren't stupid. They can see through the shiftily-worded and inadequate condemnation of terrorism issued by the Fiqh Council of North America.

If anything fuels "Islamophobia," it is this constant jockeying for protected victim status, rather than an honest grappling with what in Islam gives rise to violence and fanaticism, and a rejection of those elements of the religion. But I'm sure that was one hypothesis that went undiscussed at this conference.

"US Govt and American Muslims Engage to Define Islamophobia," by M. A. Muqtedar Khan in Arab News, with thanks to Marshall:

On Dec. 4, 2006, the national leadership of American Muslims met with key senior US government officials to discuss the state of Islamophobia in America and US-Muslim relations. The conference was organized by the Bridging the Divide Initiative of the Saban Center at the Brookings Institution. It was co-sponsored by the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding and the Association of Muslim Social Scientists.

As the conference chair of the program, the most extraordinary challenge that I faced was to bring together two parties that did not see eye to eye on this issue. While American Muslim leaders and participants were arguing that Islamophobia was not only a reality but rapidly increasing phenomenon in America, the government’s position was that while there have been increased incidences of anti-Muslim episodes in the US, the word Islamophobia deepens the divide between the US and the Muslim world. Other representatives of the government also suggested that the fear that Muslims were referring to was not the fear of Islam but the fear of Muslim terrorism as manifest on Sept. 11, 2001.

Stephen Grand, the director of the US-Islamic World program welcomed the forty plus participants from the US government and the Muslim community and launched the conference. The government was represented by several participants from the Department of State, the Department of Homeland Security and associated agencies. The morning keynote address was delivered by Alina Romanowski, the deputy assistant secretary of state for professional and cultural affairs. She was introduced by Ambassador Martin Indyk, director of the Saban Center. He argued the importance of such dialogues at a time when the gap between America and the Muslim world appeared to be widening.

Romanowski reiterated the vision and objectives that Ambassador Karen Hughes seeks to advance at the State Department on public diplomacy. She talked about the three key public diplomacy objectives — offering a positive vision of hope and opportunity around the world that is rooted in America’s belief in freedom, justice, opportunity and respect for all; and fostering a sense of the common values and common interests between Americans and peoples of different countries, cultures and faiths around the world.

But of course, the people she was talking to are not making any significant effort at "isolating and marginalizing the violent extremists and confronting their ideology of hate and tyranny."

The question and answer session was remarkably open and candid. Romanowski agreed to relay the issues raised by the group during her session to others in the State Department. Listening and creating opportunities for people-to-people exchanges and dialogue, she said, was a key component of the work of the Education and Cultural Affairs Bureau at the Department of State.

Nihad Awad, the executive director of the Council on American Islamic Relations, argued that Islamophobia was a new word but not a new phenomenon. He presented data to indicate that hate crimes against Muslims had risen by 29 percent in the last one year, and in the ten years since 1995 that his organization had collected data on Islamophobic episodes, it has shown nothing but a steady increase. He concluded that being critical of Islam and Muslims is not Islamophobia, but to ridicule the faith and the faithful, certainly is.

Aside from the twaddle about hate crimes (see the link above), what Awad says about criticism versus ridicule is fair enough. But Awad does not behave this way in practice. Speaking personally, I have never ridiculed the faith or the faithful (with the possible exception of the murderous mujahid Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman and his Santa hat), and have asked numerous serious questions about Islam and Muslims. All I have received in response from Awad and his colleagues has been abuse. I'd like to know, in light of my own experience, what kind of material "critical of Islam and Muslims" Awad would deem acceptable.

Louay Safi, the executive director of the ISNA leadership Development Center, insisted that Islamophobia deepens the divide between the US and the Islamic world. He argued that increasingly Islam is being presented as a violent and intolerant religion and this message is spreading from the margins to the mainstream. A report entitled “Blaming Islam” authored by Dr. Safi and published by the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding was released at the event.

You can find that paper here. It ends with a series of recommendations for the U.S. government, and with none at all for any Muslim body. The implication, once again, is that Muslims have done nothing at all to cause anyone to dislike them; the fault lies entirely with U.S. government policy toward Muslims and Islamic countries.

This displacement of responsibility is pandemic among Muslim leaders worldwide. It never, ever occurs to them, at least publicly, that Islamic supremacism and violence might lead non-Muslims to regard them with suspicion and even distaste. It is always the non-Muslim's fault.

Imam Mahdi Bray, the executive director of MAS Freedom Foundation, expressed concern that in spite of the fact that most Muslims cherish American values, they are portrayed as seditious. He lamented the ignorance of Islam that underpins Islamophobia and suggested that occasionally some measures of the government, when in its overzealous endeavor to prosecute the war on terror it overplays its hand and undercuts Muslim civil rights, may also be contributing to the growing instances of Islamophobia.

Here again: if Mahdi Bray is worried that American Muslims are seen as seditious, instead of complaining about victimization he should be working within the American Muslim community to promote activities that are not seditious. Let American Muslims form their own brigade in Iraq, as Japanese Americans did during World War II. Let them engage in regular, public, and large-scale efforts to educate not non-Muslims (who are once again, as Bray reminds the State Department, "ignorant" of Islam), but Muslims -- about why they should reject the jihad ideology and Islamic supremacism. Let them adopt a policy of full transparency about what goes on in the mosques, and encourage cooperation with the police and FBI against jihadists.

Anyway, it sounds as if the keynote speaker tried to inject a bit of rationality into the proceedings:

The afternoon keynote address was delivered by Dan Sutherland, the officer for civil rights at the Department of Homeland Security. Sutherland started by observing that there is “a lot of heat but very little light” on the subject of Islamophobia. He addressed the issue of Islamophobia and the rising hate crimes and anti-Muslim discourse in America head-on. He argued, based on fifty years of statistical data, that America has progressively become less and less racist.

Sutherland then spoke at length about the stunning achievements of American Muslims in every sphere of American life asserting that the degree to which American Muslims are integrated and successful belies any claims of systematic Islamophobia in America. He did however concede that there have been several incidences of Islamophobic episodes, but he also claimed that there were many which were resolved in the favor of Muslims and discussed a few cases where the government has interfered effectively on the behalf of Muslims.

The government’s case was very clear; yes there are disturbingly large numbers of incidences that suggest that prejudice is at work, however the overall picture indicates that things are not as bad as some Muslim leaders were claiming them to be.

The final panel of the day included, Ahmed Younis, the national director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council, Imad-ad-Dean Ahmad of the Association of Muslim Social Scientists and myself. This panel sought to balance the debate by arguing that while there are disturbing indications of the growth of anti-Muslim prejudice in America, there are several surveys which speak to this reality and that American Muslims must be careful how they talk about Islamophobia.

The panelists also argued that American Muslims must work with the government to not only challenge the anti-Islamic discourse that is spreading in the US, but also work to correct some of the misunderstandings that the government itself maybe harboring about Islam and American Muslims. An additional theme that was explored was the need to challenge anti-Americanism that was spreading within the Muslim community. Recognizing that anti-Americanism and Islamophobia feed each other, the panelists called for simultaneously addressing both prejudices.

Expect CAIR to launch a full-scale nationwide program to combat anti-Americanism among Muslims in the United States. I won't be holding my breath, Ibrahim.

While this was the first US government and American Muslim conference on Islamophobia, there is need for several more such interactions in order to help define the term and come to a common understanding about the extent of anti-Muslim prejudice in America and how the government and the community can jointly address it.

Oh, I'm sure there will be many more, Dr. Khan.

Incidentally, I was recently on a Jamaican radio station with the author of this article, M. A. Muqtedar Khan, to discuss Islam and democracy. Khan and the host insisted that the stunted growth of democracy in the Islamic world was entirely the fault of Western colonialism. When I pointed out that there were no functioning democracies in the Islamic world even before the colonial period, both denied the fact, but offered no evidence for their point of view. It was an exchange that was in many ways typical: the displacement of responsibility for the failures of the Islamic world on the West, the substanceless insistence that Islam can become or already is what it never has been, and indignation at any suggestion that reform might be needed. It doesn't bode well for any genuine resolution of the problem of "Islamophobia," if such a problem really exists at all, in the United States.

Peshawar: Call for jihad against UN and human rights organizations

Mufti Khalid Shah demonstrates that he doesn't know who his best friends are. "Peshawar: Call for ‘jihad’ against NGOs," from Pakistan's Dawn, with thanks to Twostellas:

PESHAWAR, Dec 22: A ‘fatwa’ calling upon Muslims to wage a “jihad against non-governmental organisations”, including the UN and human rights organisations, has been distributed in Darra Adamkhel.

The ‘fatwa’ attributed to one Mufti Khalid Shah, who claims to have a master’s degree in Arabic, Islamiyat and political science, urged the people to attack workers, offices and vehicles of the NGOs “promoting the agenda of the Jews and Christians”.

Senator Boxer rescinds award to CAIR's Elkarra

An update on this story, from an Americans Against Hate press release: "Senator Boxer Rescinds Award to CAIR." (Thanks to RF.)

(Coral Springs, FL) Americans Against Hate (AAH), a civil rights organization and terrorism watchdog group, appreciates the decision made by United States Senator Barbara Boxer to rescind the award her office had presented to the Executive Director of CAIR-Sacramento Basim Elkarra.

Both CAIR and Elkarra have exhibited the type of extremist behavior that is not worthy of awards or accolades. Former officials from CAIR are currently in prison, serving time for terrorist-related crimes involving Hamas and Al-Qaeda. In fact, CAIR can thank Mousa Abu Marzook, the second in command of Hamas today, for its very existence.

Unfortunately, too many in America's government, media and religious institutions have made CAIR out to be a legitimate group, rarely mentioning its numerous ties to terrorism. AAH and its subdivision CAIR Watch were created to expose CAIR and others like it for having these ties.

Pipes: Goode a target of CAIR's "victimization game"

Daniel Pipes tells the truth, and CAIR's Ibrahim Hooper, true to form, slings ad hominems and misrepresentations of what Pipes said -- note how criticism of CAIR becomes "a hostile view towards the American Muslim community." Note also that Hooper said nothing to refute Pipes' remarks about the "victimization game"; all he did was play it again. "Islamic Group Has Mastered Victimization Game, Critic Says," by Randy Hall for CNSNews.com, with thanks to DFS:

(CNSNews.com) - The Republican lawmaker who sparked a storm with comments about Muslims and the need to tighten immigration laws is the latest target of an Islamic advocacy group's "victimization game," a political analyst said Thursday.

It's a game that the Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), has "mastered," Daniel Pipes, a critic of the group and director of the Middle East Forum, told Cybercast News Service.

CAIR is calling on Rep. Virgil Goode (R-Va.) to apologize for writing in a letter to constituents that says, "we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt" strict immigration policies.

Pipes said CAIR was "perpetually on the prowl for any incidence of anti-Muslim sentiment, real or imaginary, spontaneous or provoked, major or minor."

The organization's goal, he said, was "to make the United States like so many other countries - a place where Muslims, Islam and Islamism cannot be freely discussed."

"It is imperative for Americans to retain their freedom of speech about Islam -- as it exists in relation to other religions -- and resist these many demands for remorse."

CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper said Thursday the organization had "a long history of disagreement" with Pipes.

"He's free to have a hostile view towards the American Muslim community," Hooper told Cybercast News Service.

"He's free to say, as he did to the American Jewish Congress on Oct. 21, 2001, that the growth and enfranchisement of American Muslims is a threat to this country. He's free to do all these things, and we're free to defend against defamatory attacks on our faith and community."

In his Oct. 2001 address, Pipes said: "I worry very much, from the Jewish point of view, that the presence, and increased stature, and affluence, and enfranchisement of American Muslims, because they are so much led by an Islamist leadership, that this will present true dangers to American Jews."

Amplifying later, Pipes said: "You must note that this was spoken to a Jewish audience. I make the same point respectively to audiences of women, gays, civil libertarians, Hindus, Evangelical Christians, atheists, and scholars of Islam, among others, all of whom face 'true dangers' as the number of Muslims increases."

"Truce" offered for US withdrawal from Iraq

Get out, but leave your heavy weapons behind as war booty. "Insurgents offer U.S. 30-day truce for withdrawal," from Associated Press:

CAIRO, Egypt (AP) - The purported leader of an al-Qaida-linked militant group offered U.S. troops a one-month truce for withdrawing from Iraq without being attacked, according to a speech posted on an Islamic Web site Friday.

The leader of Islamic State of Iraq, Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, also called on former officers in Saddam Hussein's disbanded army to join his militia, promising to provide them with a salary and house so long as they could recite three "suras," or groups of verses, of the Quran.

The 20-minute audio tape appeared on an Islamic Web site known for displaying militant groups' statements. In Washington, a senior U.S. intelligence official said the CIA was reviewing the tape to determine its authenticity.

The "Islamic State of Iraq" declared itself in October. It is believed to be an umbrella group for militant organizations, including al-Qaida in Iraq.

Addressing the United States, al-Baghdadi said: "We order you to withdrew [sic] your troops immediately, using troop carriers and aircraft, and taking only your personal weapons. Don't withdraw any heavy weapons. Instead you should hand over those and your military bases to the holy warriors of the Islamic State."

For one month, he said, "we will allow your withdrawal to proceed without being attacked by explosives or any other form."

Al-Baghdadi claimed that Washington had tried to negotiate with his group through the Saudi government.

"The giant has started to fall. It is looking for an escape and seeking to negotiate with all the other groups and parties," al-Baghdadi said. He claimed he spurned the offer because "we are not ones to negotiate with those who killed our children."

Earlier this week, the No. 2 in the overall al-Qaida network, Ayman al-Zawahri, issued a video that congratulated the Islamic State of Iraq on its establishment and urged other Iraqi insurgents to join it. The tape was broadcast on the Qatari satellite channel Al-Jazeera.

Al-Baghdadi said his "state" had received wide support. He named four other militant groups as adherents and added that insurgents in 15 cities had pledged allegiance. He claimed that 70 percent of Sunni Muslim tribes in Iraq were supporters.

Islamic law was already being [enforced] by courts in the "state," he said. He claimed its authorities had already executed a man and a woman who committed adultery. They were executed in a public square after Friday prayers, but he did not say where and when this took place.

Iran Held Liable In Khobar Attack

"The totality of the evidence at trial . . . firmly establishes that the Khobar Towers bombing was planned, funded, and sponsored by senior leadership in the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran." In other ages, that would have been considered an act of war. Now it is considered an occasion to offer various gifts to Iran to get them to stop.

By Carol D. Leonnig in the Washington Post, with thanks to Davida:

A federal judge ruled yesterday that Iran is responsible for the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing and ordered that the government pay $254 million to the families of 17 Americans who died in the attack in Saudi Arabia.

Whether the families of the dead U.S. servicemen and women will ever receive that money remains in question. Iran has refused to participate in the case and insists it has no connection to the bombing. The families' law firm plans to try to track down Iranian government assets in countries around the world and claim them to collect the damages.

Nineteen people died in June 1996 when a truck bomb blew up the tower-style dormitory for U.S. Air Force pilots and staff. U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth's ruling yesterday was the first time an American court found that Iranian government agencies and senior ministers financed and directed the bombing by a militant Saudi wing of the Islamist terrorist group Hezbollah.

"The totality of the evidence at trial . . . firmly establishes that the Khobar Towers bombing was planned, funded, and sponsored by senior leadership in the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran," Lamberth wrote. "The defendants' conduct in facilitating, financing, and providing material support to bring about this attack was intentional, extreme, and outrageous."

Lamberth's decision in the lawsuit, which was filed in 2002 by the families of 17 victims, reverses a lower magistrate judge who said evidence linking the Iranian government to the bombing was not convincing.

Lamberth said the leading experts on Hezbollah, a Shiite militant group based in Lebanon, presented "overwhelming" evidence that the Iranian military worked with Saudi Hezbollah members to execute the attack, and the Iranian Ministry of Intelligence and Security provided money, plans and maps to help carry out the bombing. Six Hezbollah members captured after the attacks implicated Iranian officials.

Somali jihadists urge Muslims worldwide to join jihad

Somali Jihad Update: one jihad leader is threatening Addis Ababa and warning that the conflict will "engulf the region."

"Somali Islamists urge Muslims worldwide to join jihad," by Guled Mohamed for Reuters, with thanks to the Constantinopolitan Irredentist:

MOGADISHU (Reuters) - Somali Islamists urged foreign Muslim fighters on Saturday to join their "holy war" against Ethiopia after days of heavy fighting between Islamist and pro-government troops.

The Islamists and pro-Somali government fighters have been firing artillery and rockets at each other across frontlines since Tuesday, killing dozens and wounding hundreds. Though residents reported a lull in fighting early on Saturday.

"Our country is open to Muslims worldwide. Let them fight in Somalia and wage jihad, and God willing, attack Addis Ababa," said Islamisti defense chief Yusuf Mohamed Siad "Inda'ade", a hard-liner known for his belligerent rhetoric.

"We told the world to stop this problem. We told them to do something before it becomes a blazing fire that would engulf the region," he told reporters in the Islamist stronghold of Mogadishu.

Zawahri to Dems: you didn't win, we did

Zawahri claims victory in the U.S. midterm elections. How much he will be setting policy remains unclear. "Al Qaeda Sends a Message to Democrats," by Brian Ross and Hoda Osman at the ABCNews blog, with thanks to Davida:

Al Qaeda has sent a message to leaders of the Democratic party that credit for the defeat of congressional Republicans belongs to the terrorists.

In a portion of the tape from al Qaeda No. 2 man, Ayman al Zawahri, made available only today, Zawahri says he has two messages for American Democrats.

"The first is that you aren't the ones who won the midterm elections, nor are the Republicans the ones who lost. Rather, the Mujahideen -- the Muslim Ummah's vanguard in Afghanistan and Iraq -- are the ones who won, and the American forces and their Crusader allies are the ones who lost," Zawahri said, according to a full transcript obtained by ABC News.

Saudi journo: "Iran has become more dangerous than Israel itself"

There are a few other memorable statements in this New Duranty Times (aka New York Times) article about Saudi nervousness over Iran, but that was the best one. There is also a great deal here about the Sunni-Shia rift that will continue despite our efforts to paper over it. "Bickering Saudis Struggle for an Answer to Iran’s Rising Influence in the Middle East," by Hassan M. Fattah in the Times, with thanks to all who sent this in:

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia, Dec. 21 — At a late-night reading this week, a self-styled poet raised his hand for silence and began a riff on neighboring Iraq, in the old style of Bedouin storytellers.

“Saddam Hussein was a real leader who deserved our support,” he began, making up the lines as he went. “He kept Iraq stable and peaceful,” he added, “and most of all he fought back the Iranians.” He continued, “His one mistake was invading Kuwait.”

This "self-styled poet" is apparently proceeding from the standpoint of Saudi security, not Islamic assumptions, for otherwise he would have denounced Saddam as a hypocrite. But Islam does end up being brought into the picture by others:

Across the kingdom, in both official and casual conversation, once-quiet concern over the chaos in Iraq and Iran’s growing regional influence has burst into the open.

Saudi newspapers now denounce Iran’s growing power. Religious leaders here, who view Shiism as heresy, have begun talking about a “Persian onslaught” that threatens Islam. In the salons and diwans of Riyadh, the “Iranian threat” is raised almost as frequently as the stock market.

Shiism threatens "Islam." A loaded choice of words.

“Iran has become more dangerous than Israel itself,” said Sheik Musa bin Abdulaziz, editor of the magazine Al Salafi, who describes himself as a moderate Salafi, a fundamentalist Muslim movement. “The Iranian revolution has come to renew the Persian presence in the region. This is the real clash of civilizations.”

Sheik Musa bin Abdulaziz has been inhaling too much of his own propaganda if he really believes Israel is a threat to Saudi Arabia. And "this is the real clash of civilizations"? Between Sunni and Shi'ite? This is an example of the depth of this division, and how it could be exploited, as Hugh Fitzgerald has tirelessly pointed out here, to keep the heat off the infidels.

Many here say a showdown with Iran is inevitable. After several years of a thaw in relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia, Saudis are growing concerned that Iran may build a nuclear bomb and become the de facto superpower in the region.

In recent weeks, the Saudis, with other Persian Gulf countries, have announced plans to develop peaceful nuclear power.

Oh, peaceful nuclear power! Why, that's just what the Iranians are developing! It's interesting that the Times would juxtapose this to a paragraph about the Iranian nuclear threat, as if to signal that no one in the entire world takes these protestations of peacefulness seriously.

Saudi officials publicly welcomed the Iraqi Harith al-Dhari, whose Muslim Scholars Association has links to the insurgency, during a visit in October, and they have indicated that they may support Iraq’s Sunnis over the majority Shiites with links to Iran. All were meant to send a message to Iran.

“You need to create a strategic challenge to Iran,” said Steve Clemons, senior fellow and director of the American Strategy Program at the New America Foundation. “To some degree, what the Saudis are doing is puffing up because they see nobody else in the region doing so.”

Yes, and neither is the United States. So far.

Hamas threatens attacks on U.S. targets in Middle East

The Hamas/Fatah split is, surprise of surprises, all the fault of the U.S. "Hamas threatens attacks on U.S.: Terrorist warns 'Middle East is full of American targets,'" by Aaron Klein for WorldNetDaily.com:

TEL AVIV – Members of Hamas are debating whether to carry out attacks against the United States and may hit American targets if the U.S. continues to support Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' call for new elections, Hamas leaders told WND in a series of interviews.

"There is no doubt that Abu Mazen (Abbas) was encouraged to decide early elections after receiving American promises to support him politically and military," Abu Abdullah, a leader of Hamas' Izzedine al-Qassam Martyrs Brigades, the group's declared "resistance" department, told WND.

The terror leader accused the U.S. of instigating a Palestinian civil war.

"Here the Americans did not support the elections, they actually gave their support and their encouragement to a Palestinian civil war. It is our duty to prove to the Americans that they chose the wrong policy exactly like it is the case in Iraq," said Abu Abdullah, considered one of the most important operational members of Hamas' so-called military wing.

Abu Abdullah told WND Hamas has not yet decided to attack the U.S., "but one cannot guarantee that this will be the situation if the conspiracy of chasing our government succeeds."

Asked which U.S. targets Hamas would hit, Abu Abdullah replied, "Do you think that I can give you an answer to this question? I can say that the Middle East is full of American targets and the world has had the occasion to learn what are the weapons of the anti-American forces in the region."

In a move widely seen as an attempt to dismantle the Hamas-led government, Abbas' this past weekend called for new Palestinian elections, prompting violent clashes in the Gaza Strip between Hamas and Abbas' Fatah party.

Hamas, which won parliamentary elections in January, has threatened to boycott the proposed new elections, calling them "illegitimate."

Hamas-Fatah clashes in Gaza have killed at least 16 Palestinians the past five days.

According to multiple reports, the U.S. has been arming and training Fatah militants to bolster them in clashes against Hamas.

A number of Hamas members, including Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, have claimed in recent days Abbas' call for new elections was orchestrated with the U.S.

Syria building 'death trap' villages for Hizballah-inspired conflict with Israel

And when Israel responds to attacks, it will be assailed in the media for attacking "civilian" villages. "Syria building 'death trap' villages," by Yaakov Katz for the Jerusalem Post:

Warning that Israel may face a "Syrian intifada," a high-ranking officer in Northern Command has told The Jerusalem Post that villages recently built by Syria along the border are planned to be used as "death traps" for IDF troops in Hizbullah-inspired attacks.

Since this summer's war in Lebanon, Syria, the officer revealed, has invested large amounts of money in replicating Hizbullah military tactics, particularly in establishing additional commando units and fortifying its short- and long-range missile array.

The idea is to draw Israel into an asymmetric war, the officer said, like the warfare the IDF encounters in combat against the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip as well as against Hizbullah in Lebanon.

Over the past two years, Syria has built a number of villages along the border with Israel, some inhabited and some not. At first, the IDF was not sure of their purpose. But now, following the war, the officer said, it was understood.

"Syria drew motivation from Hizbullah's surprise success this summer," the high-ranking officer said. "They now want to copy that type of guerrilla warfare."

While for years it was assumed that Israel had a major edge against Syria's military with regard to a conventional war - tank versus tank, jet versus jet - in an urban setting, the Syrian military would be able, the officer said, to wreak havoc against IDF infantry and armored units like Hizbullah did.

According to the officer, Syria has drawn three major lessons from the war and has begun to implement them. The first is that rockets - 4,000 struck northern Israel during the 33-days of fighting - can paralyze the home front. The second is that antitank missiles can penetrate the Merkava tank and force infantry units to abandon armored personnel carriers and trek into enemy territory by foot. And the third is that in villages and cities the Israeli Air Force's abilities are limited and IDF ground forces can be defeated.

During the war, the IDF fell into several deadly ambushes in southern Lebanese villages; one in Bint Jbail killed eight soldiers from Battalion 51 of the Golani Brigade.

The Syrian military, the officer said, was conducting urban warfare exercises in preparation for the possibility of a war with Israel. The IDF has also dramatically increased its training regiments and has, at all times, between two-to-three brigades training in the Golan Heights.

Lacking clear intelligence regarding Syrian intelligence, the officer said that the Northern Command's "working assumption" was that there was a possibility of war and there was a need to prepare accordingly.

While defense officials have crisscrossed in recent weeks concerning the sincerity of Syrian President Bashar Assad's offer of peace, the top officer said that, according to "all the signs," Syria was preparing for war with Israel. The Syrian military has beefed-up forces along the Golan Heights and Israel has done the same. In the Hermon, for instance, the IDF has doubled the number of troops.

"The feeling is unfortunately that another round is needed before we will be able to engage in a dialogue or peace talks with Syria," the officer said. "It is like with the Egyptians. The war in 1973 was what made it partially possible for [Egyptian president Anwar] Sadat to come to Israel."

Syria, the officer said, has since the war ended, transferred truckloads of weapons and missiles to Hizbullah. Due to the convoys, Hizbullah, he said, was almost back at its full strength where it was before the war with Israel.

The Jihadist Dream to Liberate Spain

Because all land that once belonged to the House of Islam belongs by right forever to the House of Islam. Aaron Hanscom reports in FrontPage (thanks to Mackie; news links in the original):

Earlier this year a jihadist document calling for the liberation of so-called occupied territories and issued by the al-Qaeda-linked group Nadim al-Magrebi was posted on the Islamic extremist website Alansar. In most European capitals, where the cult of Palestinianism reins supreme, such demands are often met with approval since the occupied land in question is usually Israeli. But this time the statement addressed Spain—not Israel. It warned of a “holy war against the infidel Spanish state which has occupied the two cities.”

The two cities in question are Ceuta and Melilla, Spanish enclaves on the North African coast which Spain gained control of nearly 500 years ago. Melilla, with a population of 64,400, is home to 26,400 Muslims; Ceuta’s Muslims number 27,000 out of a population of 71,500. The Spanish newspaper El Pais reports that Muslims will become the majority in the next decade.

Demographics, however, don’t pose the only threat to Spain’s future. This month 11 Islamist radicals, ten Spaniards and a Moroccan, were arrested in Ceuta for planning to stage terrorist attacks in the country. (Two of the brothers of Hamed Abderrahaman Ahmed, the one-time Guantanamo prisoner who was eventually exonerated by a Spanish court, were among those arrested.) The seven suspects later detained by Judge Baltasar Garzon were charged with belonging to the Salafia Yihadia terrorist group which forms part of the al-Qaeda network in North Africa. In a statement Garzon said that the group had considered stealing weapons and explosives from a military base and carrying out an attack during Ceuta's annual fiesta. Sources claim that at least one member had already written a suicide note. The investigation of the group which began in March of 2005 also revealed that the individuals detained were in contact with two Spanish soldiers of Moroccan origin from whom they hoped to obtain explosives and strategic information.

While the revelation of the terrorists’ plans was shocking, the fact that such planning took place in the border town of Principe Alfonso was not surprising in the least. The fact is that Principe has become a veritable caldron of Islamic extremism over the years. In their paper titled “Favorable situations for the jihadist recruitment: The neighborhood of Principe Alfonso (Ceuta, Spain),” Drs. Javier Jordan and Humberto Trujillo of the University of Granada detail the full extent of jihadist activity in the town.

Resembling the combustible suburbs of Paris, Principe is basically off-limits to the National Police and Guardia Civil except in emergency situations or raids because of the risk officers face when entering the town. Recently the local police office and its lone police car were burned. Not only are ambushes of police cars common in Principe, but emergency calls are frequently made in order to trap police officers. The resulting chaos has led to a situation where even the city buses can’t run safely.

The only authority in Principe comes from Islamic extremists who are intent on imposing their Salafist interpretation of Islamic law. For example, boys are routinely castigated for playing games with girls on the street. Jordan and Trujillo suspect that ‘moral squads’ which intimidate or attack girls who don’t wear the veil or men who drink alcohol in public may already exist.

Many Muslims in Principe blame its poverty on the Catholic dominion of the city. Such rhetoric incites hatred for Spain and its Catholic traditions and helps explain why shouts referring to the ‘Intifada of Ceuta’ are often heard during the ambushes of police cars.

It might be easier to conclude that this disturbing scenario is inevitable in a ghetto close to Morocco’s border—but unlikely in the rest of Spain—if the quest to reconquer all of historic Al-Ándalus were not continuing full-speed ahead. Not willing to accept the bargain that the Spanish electorate thought they were making by electing the appeasing Socialists to power in the aftermath of the Madrid bombings, Islamists remain determined to attack the entire country. Since 2004 at least eight terrorist attacks have been thwarted, while in 2006 alone there have been more than 50 terrorism related arrests. And now Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, who assured voters that the withdrawal of Spanish troops from Iraq would make their country safer, must explain to his countrymen why another group of fighters from Iraq are back in Spain.

A story appearing this month in the Spanish newspaper El Pais reported that jihadists who gained combat experience in Iraq are returning to Spain to prepare attacks in Europe. In Iraq these holy warriors worked with the late Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the one-time al Qaeda leader in Iraq and a central figure in the Madrid bombings. Mariano Simancas, deputy director of Europol, issued this warning: “They are the new Trojan horse of Al Qaeda and its satellites on our territory and they are already preparing themselves.”

The question is whether Spaniards are preparing themselves for the inevitable struggle against Islamic extremism that faces them. Years of looking the other way while terrorists attacked Israel definitely haven’t helped prepare them for the fight ahead. Spaniards could do worse than heed the words of former German foreign minister Joschka Fischer, who warned that if by any chance Israel were to fall and be defeated, the next in line would definitely be Spain.

Fitzgerald: A fantastic war

"In the future,” many have predicted, “the Iraqis will blame their civil war on the US."

Well, of course they will. They already do. They do in Man-on-the-street interviews, in which those men on the street explain how “everyone got along” until the bad old Americans came. In a poof, the persecution and mass-murder of the Kurds is forgotten by all the Arabs. In a poof, the persecution and mass-murder of the Shi'a by the Sunnis (the regime of Saddam Hussein being merely a disguised Sunni despotism) is forgotten -- certainly by almost all the Sunnis, but also by some Shi'a when they want to blame, as they do want to blame, the Infidels for everything. Everything was wonderful.

In Pakistan Sipaha-e-Sahaba never attacked the Shi'a. In Afghanistan the Taliban never tried to wipe out every last Shi'a Hazara. In Lebanon, the Shi'a have never suffered or ever wanted to get back at the Sunnis. In Bahrain, the Shi'a who constitute 75% of the population are ruled benignly by a Sunni Arab about whom they have nothing to complain. And as for the past 1300 years of Sunni-Shi'a relations, let's just say it has been roses, roses, roses all the way.

Of course the Americans are to blame, in Muslim eyes. Always will be.

But here's the amusing part. The Bush Administration cannot admit to itself that the Sunni-Shi'a divide pre-dated the invasion of Iraq by some 1300 years, and that the fissures between them would inevitably widen once the iron grip of Saddam Hussein had been removed. Because to admit that this was all inevitable, would be to raise the question: if it was all inevitable, why did we not see it? For it if was inevitable, and we hadn't -- and still refuse to have -- the slightest idea of its inevitability, then there must be something wrong with us. But we can't admit that. Nor can all the commentators, for and against the war, who failed to immediately identify this inevitable outcome, and who either remained Bush loyalists, or opposed the war for all the wrong, appeasing reasons. Or they advocated some halfway measure, such as that "put in a strongman" -- without, of course, asking themselves whether that "strongman" would be Sunni, in which case the Shi'a would never accept him, or Shi'a, in which case the Sunnis would never accept him.

No, those who were wrong, being unable to admit it, will persist in their obstinacy. And that obstinacy requires them to deny the depth and duration of the Sunni-Shi'a split, and thus to support the view that the "Americans caused it."

A fantastic war, this Iraq war. Undertaken for one stated reason, continued long after for quite another, crazily messianic and polypragmonic reason. Supported by those who simply mechanically rallied around the Bush-Republican-conservative wagons, without considering what was actually going on. And even today most are still unable to see the folly of the Bush and now Gates definition of "victory," which is the very opposite of what should be desired.

When Gates says failure to obtain "victory" -- by which he means ending the Sunni-Shi'a violence and forcing the Kurds to permanently acquiesce in remaining within Arab-ruled Iraq, he has it all backwards. He speaks of "catastrophe." But the real "catastrophe" would be if the Americans, after having squandered 3,000 lives and 22,000 wounded and a half-trillion dollars in sunk or committed future expenses, and after having done great damage to both the materiel and the morale of the armed services (not cheap to repair in one case and not easily recovered in the other), were to continue to squander men, money, and materiel in order to achieve the opposite of what would constitute a kind of victory, which would come through dividing and demoralizing and thereby weakening the Camp of Islam. Well, this would be the greatest self-inflicted defeat in American history. And it would have been entirely avoidable if Bush and Co. had had the right understanding of the instruments and full scope of the menace of Jihad.

But Jihad is not understood. Not by Bush. Not by Cheney. Not by Rice. Not by Gates. Not by the idiotic Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group. Not by The New Duranty Times. Not by The Bandar Beacon. Not by the bright-eyed "insurgency experts" who keep making plans to win hearts and minds in Iraq, and who speak confidently and irrelevantly about how insurgencies "last on average ten years." They do not consider that this "insurgency" is Islam-based. As long as Islam is there, the Infidels will always be fought, and as long as Islam is there, the ethnic and sectarian divisions within Islam will never be overcome, because the spirit of compromise, especially peaceful compromise, is contradicted by the tenets and attitudes of the belief-system of Islam.

How long will it take this learning-curve to begin to take off, as it still strains and strains and strains for lift-off?

Tony Blair, warrior for Islam

Tony Blair continues to call for his "alliance of moderation" in the Islamic world, confident that Muslims will turn away from Iran's "warped and wrongheaded misinterpretation of Islam" and join Britain in a war against the global jihad. And of course, he may get some positive response from some quarters who see common cause with Britain as something to their advantage; but it will be very interesting to see what kind of response his appeal on the basis of pure and true Islam will get -- for that is exactly the same kind of appeal that the jihadists use. Both Blair and the mujahedin claim to be representing and fighting for true Islam -- Blair, of course, as a non-Muslim -- and calling for support on that basis. It will be interesting to see which appeal proves more effective.

"Tony Blair: 'Wake Up' to Iran's Extremism," from AP, with thanks to Tommy:

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates -- British Prime Minister Tony Blair wrapped up a Middle East tour Wednesday with a blunt speech warning that the world faces a monumental struggle between moderates and extremists - and labeling Iran the main obstacle to hopes for peace.

In an address to business leaders and journalists in Dubai, Blair said combating extremism and the violence it foments was the greatest challenge of the 21st century. He said the lesson he had drawn from his five-day Mideast trip was "startlingly real, clear and menacing."

"There is a monumental struggle going on worldwide between those who believe in democracy and moderation, and forces of reaction and extremism," Blair said.

"We have to wake up. These forces of extremism - based on a warped and wrongheaded misinterpretation of Islam - aren't fighting a conventional war. But they are fighting one, against us - and us is not just the West, still less simply America and its allies," Blair said.

"We must therefore mobilize our alliance of moderation in the region and outside of it to defeat the extremists."

Blair has repeated that message throughout his trip - in Turkey, Egypt, Iraq, Israel, the Palestinian territories and the United Arab Emirates.

Indonesian Supreme Court overturns Bashir's conviction

"Likely to anger the United States and its regional ally Australia." Oh, hopefully more countries than that. "Indonesia overturns Bashir's conviction," by Niniek Karmini for Associated Press:

The Supreme Court ruling is likely to anger the United States and its regional ally Australia, both of which publicly accused the aging cleric of being a top leader of Jemaah Islamiyah, an al-Qaida-linked Southeast Asian terror group.

Bashir, 69, who was released from prison in June, has long claimed that the government in the world's most populous Muslim nation succumbed to pressure from the West when it arrested him soon after the Bali attacks.

Bashir's son, Abdurrahmin, said his father had received word of the verdict.

"Thank God the Supreme Court has finally revealed the final truth," he said by telephone from Bashir's hometown on Java island. "He is praying now to say thanks to God that his prayers have been accepted."

Thursday's ruling was in response to an appeal filed during Bashir's imprisonment.

Supreme Court Chief Judge German Hoediarto told reporters he had decided to quash the conspiracy conviction following testimony from 30 witnesses, but gave no more details. A written verdict will likely be made public soon.

The 2002 Bali bombings that killed 202 people, mostly foreign tourists, were the first in a string of attacks in Indonesia targeting Western interests, with 2003 and 2004 blasts at the Australian Embassy and the J.W. Marriott Hotel and triple suicide bombings on Bali last year.

Bashir has always denied any wrongdoing, but admits having known several Southeast Asian militants in the 1980s and 1990s who went to Afghanistan and trained there at al-Qaida-run camps.

Since his release, he has preached in towns across the country, espousing fiercely anti-American and anti-Jewish views and promoting his campaign to transform Indonesia's secular state into an Islamic one.

Christmas jihad

In this week's Jihad Watch videoblog at Hot Air, I discuss the mujahedin's latest holiday jihad threats.

Somali jihadist chief: "All Somalis should join the war against Ethiopia"

The Somalia jihad enters a new phase. "Fierce fighting convulses southern Somalia despite truce pledge," by Mustafa Haji Abdinur for AFP:

A day after European Commission humanitarian chief Louis Michel said he had secured both sides' commitment to observe a truce and resume peace talks, the Islamic movement chief called on Somalis to join the war against Ethiopian forces.

Not surprising.

The government said Wednesday it had killed "hundreds" of rival fighters and wounded hundreds while the Islamists said they had killed at least 70 enemy combatants in the deadly assaults. None of the figures could be independently confirmed.

"Our mujahedeens have killed 70 soldiers today ... the Islamic courts are winning the war against Ethiopian invasion," Sheikh Mohamoud Ibrahim Sulley, the secretary of the Islamists, told a press conference in Mogadishu.

At the same time, residents said an Ethiopian helicopter landed in Baidoa, the seat of government, about 250 kilometres (155 miles) northwest of the capital Mogadishu.

"I saw an Ethiopian-flagged military chopper, it collected some wounded soldiers from the airport," said Abdullahi Mohamed, who lives nearby.

"Mortar fire was still going on at night ... nothing has stopped," said Information Minister Ali Jama, adding that the Islamists were mobilising more fighters to widen a conflict that compounds the misery of nearly a million people affected by recent flooding.

"The fighting is still continuing and we dont know how things can be changed," said Hussein Ali, a Baidoa resident said.

Islamists chief Sheikh Hassan Dahir Aweys rallied Somalis to join the war against Ethiopian forces deployed to protect the government.

"All Somalis should join the war against Ethiopia," Aweys told HornAfrik radio, a day after he said the conflict was "a small incident."

[...]

"The government will not attack anybody, but we are prepared to defend ourselves," [Somali Information Minister] Jama said of the clashes threatening to embroil the entire region, possible drawing in Addis Ababa's arch-foe Eritrea.

Fighting erupted early Wednesday, hours after the expiry of an Islamist ultimatum for Ethiopian forces to pull out or face major attacks.

Deputy Defence Minister Salad Ali Jelle said the army was winning the fight, which erupted when Islamists raided the two garrisons.

[...]

The government officials said fugitive terror suspects and foreign fighters were bolstering the Islamists.

Congressman won't kowtow to CAIR, stands by "Islamophobic" letter

In my 2003 book Onward Muslim Soldiers, I observed that "September 11 was largely a problem of faulty immigration controls" and called, accordingly, for tighter immigration controls -- while noting the chief obstacle to such measures: "immigration controls on Muslim countries are supposedly racist, even though Muslims are not members of any single race or ethnic group." I also wrote that "the greatest amount of damage control...must be done with the Muslim immigrants who are already in the United States. Multiculturalism has relegated the idea of assimilation to the dustbin of history. But that is precisely what is needed. American Muslims need to become assimilated to the American ideals enumerated in the Constitution." (Pp. 297-298)

I've written about this problem, and what realistically can be done about it, beginning with measures that can reasonably be instituted given the current political situation, elsewhere as well. And in numerous addresses to audiences all over the United States I have called for a restoration of sanity in our immigration policies toward admission of Muslims -- starting at very least, but not ending, with the institution of mechanisms to screen for jihadist sentiments, with appropriate enforcement. I have met with several congressmen (not including Virgil Goode) about specific means by which this can begin to be done.

I note all this not to take credit for what Virgil Goode has said and written -- I have never met or spoken with him -- but because another writer of some prominence is continuing to allege that I do not really believe what I have told him I believe about this issue, and that I am not doing anything or saying anything about it, when in fact I am. He has on several occasions asserted that I hold positions that I do not hold, and refused my request for retraction. He has posted numerous personal slurs, while claiming that I have made the discussion personal, and has even represented my courtesy to him as discourtesy -- proving once again that the Miranda rights should enjoy the status of an adage: anything you say can and will be used against you (as this post will be also). For that reason I am not going to discuss these matters with him further, or name him here, but I post this for the record so that my own positions, as well as the fact that I have held them for years, are clear.

Anyway, I am very glad to see a congressman speaking out about this problem, and happy to see him sticking to his guns in the face of CAIR's bullying.

"Lawmaker won't apologize for 'Islamophobic' letter," from CNN, with thanks to all who sent this in:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A Virginia congressman will not apologize for writing that without immigration reform "there will be many more Muslims elected to office demanding the use of the Quran," his spokesman said.

Republican Rep. Virgil Goode's letter to constituents also warns that without immigration reform "we will have many more Muslims in the United States."

Spokesman Linwood Duncan said Goode's letter was written in response to complaints his office received about Minnesota Rep.-elect Keith Ellison's request to be sworn in using the Quran.

Ellison is the first Muslim to be elected to Congress.

Goode's office released the letter to CNN Wednesday.

In it, Goode wrote, "When I raise my hand to take the oath on Swearing In Day, I will have the Bible in my other hand. I do not subscribe to using the Quran in any way.

"The Muslim representative from Minnesota was elected by the voters of that district and if American citizens don't wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Quran.

Goode is right, of course, and it has already happened, long before Ellison was elected -- as we noted here and here. What neither Dennis Prager nor anyone else has addressed is the fact that the Qur'an is unsuitable for oath-taking in the United States because it allows Muslims to lie to unbelievers (3:28, 16:106). Whenever I have brought this up, people start talking about the Bible -- but the difference is that the Bible doesn't enjoin believers to lie to unbelievers, and problematic passages within it are not being acted upon around the world today in the way that problematic passages in the Qur'an are. I hope someday someone -- perhaps Virgil Goode -- will explain that in the public forum.

"We need to stop illegal immigration totally and reduce legal immigration and end the diversity visas policy pushed hard by President Clinton and allowing many persons from the Middle East to come to this country.

"I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America and to prevent our resources from being swamped."

Excellent. Goode is not opposed to having "many more Muslims in the United States" out of "bigotry," as CAIR has predictably alleged, but because he is aware that Islam presents a challenge, as we have explained here so many times, to "the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America." He also seems to be aware, when he warns that "our resources" could be "swamped," that Muslim immigrants, including mujahedin, cheerfully live on the dole in Europe -- a situation that is nothing less than suicidal.

He added, "The Ten Commandments and 'In God We Trust' are on the wall in my office. A Muslim student came by the office and asked why I did not have anything on my wall about the Quran.

"My response was clear, 'As long as I have the honor of representing the citizens of the 5th District of Virginia in the United States House of Representatives, the Quran is not going to be on the wall of my office.' "

The Council on American-Islamic Relations asked Goode to apologize.

"Rep. Goode's Islamophobic remarks send a message of intolerance that is unworthy of anyone elected to public office," the council's Corey Saylor said in a statement. "There can be no reasonable defense for such bigotry."

It isn't bigotry, Corey, and I just provided a reasonable defense in brief. I'd be happy to expand on these matters in a debate with you. You can contact me here.

Duncan told CNN that Goode stands by his comments.

Bravo.

UPDATE: Some people have asked me about my statement above that Qur'an 3:28 and 16:106 allow Muslims to lie to unbelievers. Here is the relevant section on 3:28 from the Qur'anic commentary of Ibn Kathir:

..."unless you indeed fear a danger from them" meaning, except those believers who in some areas or times fear for their safety from the disbelievers. In this case, such believers are allowed to 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 is allowed until the Day of Resurrection.''

Top British Army aide accused of spying for Iran

"James is of Iranian descent..."

"Top British Army aide accused of spying," by Duncan Gardham, Philip Johnston and Thomas Harding for the Telegraph, with thanks to DFS:

A military aide to the commander of British forces in Afghanistan appeared in court yesterday accused of spying. Cpl Daniel James, 44, is charged under the 1911 Official Secrets Act with "prejudicing the safety of the state" by passing information "calculated to be directly or indirectly useful to the enemy".

It was said he had communicated with a "foreign power" in the incident on Nov 2, believed to be Iran....

James is of Iranian descent and speaks fluent Pashtun, the main language in Afghanistan, making him invaluable to the Army which is very short of translators.

Neighbours at his £800,000 house in Brighton, said his mother speaks only Farsi, the main language of Iran.

"Allahu akbar! We are the masters, not the slaves"

For "Islam must dominate, not be dominated." "Jordan tourist attacker to hang," from the BBC:

A Jordanian court has sentenced a man to death by hanging for a gun attack that killed a British tourist visiting Amman and injured six other people.

Nabil Ahmad Jaoura, a Jordanian of Palestinian origin, is said to have been motivated by anger at Western policies towards Arabs in the region.

He is said to have acted alone and had no links to violent organisations.

British accountant Christopher Stokes was killed in September's shooting outside Amman's Roman amphitheatre.

Five other tourists and a Jordanian policeman were hurt by bullets fired from Jaoura's pistol. Jaoura was arrested at the scene of the shooting.

As the sentence was read out in Jordan's state security court, Jaoura shouted in Arabic: "God is great!" and "We are the masters, not the slaves."

"I am a holy warrior and I thank God for this verdict," he said.

BBC video report here.

Santa's on his way

Banned books roasting on an open fire,
Houris nipping on your nose...

Pakistani Embassy comments on Spencer book ban

A Pakistani Embassy official in Washington defends Pakistan's ban of my book The Truth About Muhammad by...making false claims about its sourcing. "Pakistan Bans Regnery Book," by Ivy J. Sellers for Human Events:

Robert Spencer's latest book, "The Truth About Muhammad," has been banned in Pakistan.

"The Truth About Muhammad: Founder of the World’s Most Intolerant Religion," published by Regnery (a HUMAN EVENTS sister company), was pulled off shelves after it was found to contain "objectionable material" about Islam's founder, according to a notification obtained by the Kuwait National News Agency.

The Pakistani government has confiscated all copies and translations of the book.

"It is interesting that they would say the book contains 'objectionable materials,' since it is all scrupulously sourced from texts that Muslims themselves consider reliable," Spencer told HUMAN EVENTS. "It manifests a certain cultural insecurity that, instead of having a fruitful dialogue or debate about what's in the book, the Pakistani government just bans and confiscates it."

In response to questions about the ban, Shahid Ahmed, counselor of community affairs of the Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan in Washington, D.C., said he had not yet read the latest reports but that "the book is very, very damaging—let me tell you." He also said the book was ill-sourced.

Spencer said his primary sources for the book were the Koran, the Hadith collections of Bukhari and Muslim, and the two earliest biographies of Muhammad, which, he said, were "both written by pious Muslims: Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Sa'd."

"Obviously, this official hasn't looked at the book," Spencer said.

PA official: Hamas "not even good liars anymore"

In an interview on Al-Arabiya TV yesterday, Mohammad Dahlan, chairman of the Palestinian Legislative Council's Security Committee, made an interesting admission: "It seems that some of the Hamas spokesmen are not even good liars anymore."

So they used to be, eh, Dahlan? I agree. I think they were among the best. Of course, their audience was so willing and eager to be fooled.

Dahlan also mocks the Hamas contention that they are the pure ones, the executors of the will of Allah.

From a translation from the Arabic circulated kindly sent to me by Nissan Retlev-Katz:

...When we were at university, there was a slogan that told us that our work is bad and we will burn in hell. Ever since we met with the Islamic camp, the political tension started. I was never part of the side that turned the political disagreements into personal ones. Hamas makes everything personal and you would be seen - depending on how lucky you are - as a non- believer, blasphemist, spy. They are always the good and the pure ones.

[...]

I saw the speeches made by them, and I was happy as a Fatah member, to listen to the madness coming out of the mouths of some magicians. But I was also sad about what Hamas has ended up being. It used to be a resistance movement, and now it is a movement that is chasing people with accusations and acting as if it is God Almighty's deliverer on earth.

This witchcraft should stop, because it does not frighten anyone and does not change anything.

[...]

Concerning the claims that there is an attempt to assassinate Ismail Haniyeh, I think that there are tapes documenting everything. He expressed this with two big mistakes - the cameras were filming the ones that were above - of course they were! The cameras have been there since the (Rafah) crossing was opened.

Because the scandal was documented on these cameras, Hamas wants to find an excuse for this. Also neither the Palestinian people, nor Fatah nor Israel want Mr. Ismail Haniyeh.

Mr. Ismail Haniyeh is respected, even by Fatah. Therefore, things should not be portrayed as if there was an attempted assassination. This is part of a series of lies. It seems that some of the Hamas spokesmen are not even good liars anymore.

[...]

We gave the Authority to Hamas and they destroyed it. Therefore, I think if elections are held according to plan that will be set by the Central Elections committee, Fatah will surprise the Palestinians with its performance and will surprise the Arabs with the results that it will receive.

[...]

Finally, I want to ask the Hamas people to carefully consider their actions. They are not God's representatives on earth. They were not chosen to carry out the will of God on earth, as they want to believe.

Ahmadinejad: Britain, Israel, US to 'vanish like the pharaohs'

"Oh, and by the way, we're a nuclear power." From AFP, with thanks to James:

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has predicted that Britian, Israel and the United States would eventually disappear from the world like the Egyptian pharaonic kings.

"The oppressive powers will disappear while the Iranian people will stay. Any power that is close to God will survive while the powers who are far from God will disappear like the pharaohs," he said Wednesday, according to Iranian news agencies.

"Today, it is the United States, Britain and the Zionist regime which are doomed to disappear as they have moved far away from the teachings of God," he said in a speech in the western town of Javanroud.

"It is a divine promise."

We'll see.

Ahmadinejad: Iran now nuclear power

He has said this before.

From YnetNews:

Iran is now a "nuclear power," its President, Mahmoud Ahamdinejad, declared Wednesday, according to the Islamic Republic News Agency. During a speech delivered in the Western Iranian province of Javanroud, Ahmadinejad said: " The Islamic Republic of Iran is now a nuclear power, thanks to the hard work of the Iranian people and authorities."

The announcement of Iran as a "nuclear power" is bound to significantly escalate tensions between the West and Iran, and marks a dramatic stage in the Islamic Republic's nuclear campaign.

In recent days, the US military has begun to build up forces around the Gulf, in what is being seen as as a warning to Iran.

Spencer's Truth About Muhammad banned in Pakistan!

Funny how they're on a first name basis with me in the headline. But anyway, don't take The Truth About Muhammad with you on vacation to Karachi. "Pakistan bans Robert''s book about Prophet Muhammad," from the Kuwait National News Agency, with thanks to the Constantinopolitan Irredentist:

ISLAMABAD, Dec 20 (KUNA) -- The government has confiscated all copies of a book about the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and translations of the book because it contains "objectionable material" about the founder of Islam, said a notification.

The book, titled 'The Truth About Muhammad: Founder of the World's Most Intolerant Religion', is written by Robert Spencer and published and printed by Regnery Publishing Inc, Washington DC, it added.

"Objectionable material"? Interesting, as it is all from Qur'an, Hadith, and early Islamic biographies of Muhammad.

Tariq Ramadan sheds some clarifications

Tariq Ramadan...Tariq Ramadan...Tariq Ramadan, prospero año y felicidad...Tariq Ramadan...Tariq Ramadan...from the bottom of my heart...

"I hope that these answers shed some clarifications," says putative "Muslim Martin Luther" Tariq Ramadan at the end of this Q&A with readers at the Globe and Mail. It's an interesting elision of "shed some light" and "provide some clarifications," making the whole statement ambiguous: did he mean to make things clear, or to shed -- i.e., get rid of -- clarity? And certainly his answers often display the artful ambiguity for which he has become renowned.

Alexander Baillie from Munster, Canada writes: Citizens in the West generally take a live-and-let-live approach to other religions and cultures, including Islam. Westerners also discriminate between ordinary Muslims and their extremist co-religionists. But too many Muslim acts -- such as fatwas against authors, riots and murders in response to cartoons and other intimidating behaviors that threaten freedom of expression -- reinforce the impression that Islam cannot and will not accept criticism. Is Islam compatible with Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms? Does Islam accept a division between mosque and state? (Or is Turkey fighting a losing battle?) Does Islam attach negative attributes to "infidels" or require any negative response to them -- as opposed to tolerating others' religious freedom?

Tariq Ramadan: Many questions in one. You are right on your first assessment -- it is as if the Muslims are always overreacting. Nevertheless, I think that the images from abroad should not mislead us. In Canada, as well as in the US or in Europe, Muslims were reacting very often in a reasonable way and this is a good sign. Millions of Muslims are already showing you that they accept life in secular societies, that they respect the laws and are loyal to their Western countries: Do not be misled by the few who are making noise and shouting.

The first thing Muslism should do is to translate the Arabic words in the right way: kafir does not mean "infidel" or "disbeliever" but "someone who does not recognise the last message as the truth." It is a statement, not an insult. Lots of work to do in the field of education….

No answer at all, you'll notice, to the key questions: "Is Islam compatible with Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms? Does Islam accept a division between mosque and state?" Ramadan says, "Millions of Muslims are already showing you that they accept life in secular societies, that they respect the laws and are loyal to their Western countries." But the behavior of individual Muslims, who may or may not be strictly adhering to the tenets of Islam, and who may or may not be hoping eventually to establish Islamic law in their new countries, and working to that end, doesn't actually tell us anything about whether or not Islam is compatible with Western constititional government.

And the redefinition of "kafir" just makes a distinction without a difference.

R. Carriere from Canada writes: Good day. One simple (and complex) question: Can you please explain the term "Jihad?"

Tariq Ramadan: It is a complex question indeed for it is at the heart of the Islamic teaching. First, jihad is neither "holy war" nor "crusade." Jihad means effort and resistance. Our first natural inner state, as human beings, is not peace but tension. Tensions between our bad temptations and our positive aspirations. We need to get inner peace by controlling our self: This resistance is an inner jihad. While facing oppression, our resistance is in the same way a jihad. In fact the very meaning of jihad is to go from natural or potential tensions, conflicts or war towards inner serenity and collective peace. Jihad is the way toward peace … exactly the opposite of what is sometime understood by non Muslims … as well as some Muslims.

"Jihad means effort and resistance." Might that mean military effort and violent resistance against non-Muslim states and individuals? Ramadan doesn't rule it out. What constitutes "oppression"? Is oppression the very fact of rule by any law other than Sharia, as many Islamic spokesman have asserted? Ramadan doesn't say.

Jeff Kelly from Kitchener writes: I have read that the tenets of Islam call for the creation of an Islamic state; that a "secular government" as seperate from Islam is a Western idea that is incompatible with true Islam. Is this true? Does true Islam require its followers to work towards a state following the ideals/beliefs of Islam?

Tariq Ramadan: This is the problem we have with some Islamic trends and groups. They are confusing the historical models with the eternal principals. For them to remain faithful to the Islamic principles you have to duplicate what the Prophet (PBUH) and the Companions did in a specific time. They want to imitate the model and think that there is something like an "Islamic model" to be distinguished from the "Western model." This is a clear reduction based on a deep misunderstanding. The Islamic principles (such as rule of law, equality, accountability, majority decision process, etc.) are universal, and the Muslims should find new models according to their new environment and the new era. I tried to show that in my last book by trying to draw spiritual and contemporary lessons for our time from the prophetic experience in the 7th Century. It is important to repeat that principles are universal, and models historical -- they must evolve and change.

Again, no clear answer. Does seeking "new models" mean that there should be no Islamic state? Ramadan, surprise surprise, does not make this clear.

Al Qaeda Deputy Al-Zawahiri Condemns Palestinian Elections, Urges "Jihad"

Zawahiri votes -- with reservations -- for Hamas, calling Abbas "America's man in Palestine," which he certainly is. Our friend Jeffrey Imm, who has sent us countless important links over the years, has an excellent summary report of the new Zawahiri message over at the Counterterrorism Blog:

Al-Jazeera television released an excerpt of Al Qaeda deputy Al-Zawahiri's latest message in a Wednesday morning news bulletin, stating that it will air a longer segment later.

In this morning's excerpt of the latest Al-Zawahiri message, the Al Qaeda deputy stated: "Those who are trying to liberate the Islamic territories through elections based on secular constitutions, or on decisions to hand over Palestine to the Jews, will not liberate one grain of sand of Palestine, but will choke jihad." This is in apparent response to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas's proposal for early elections to resolve the conflict between the Fatah and Hamas parties.

Zawahiri called Abbas "America's man in Palestine," warning that if Palestinians accepted Abbas as their president, it would be "the end of holy war".

Zawahiri also criticized Hamas (although not mentioning the group by name), accusing the group of meeting concessions that would lead to "the recognition of Israel", accusing Hamas of concessions starting with signing "the truce" with Israel last year, and taking part in January elections "based on a secular constitution". Zawahiri asked: "Aren't they an Islamic movement? Aren't they campaigning for the word of God to be supreme?" he said, adding the party should have insisted on the drafting of "an Islamic constitution for Palestine."

The Al Qaeda deputy also stated: "Every way which is not Jihad will only result in defeat. He who tries to liberate the lands of Islam through elections is relying on secular principles and must realize that he is surrendering to the Jews." "The decision to surrender to the Jews will not free the Palestinian territories. To retreat before the West will not achieve anything. The Qur'an in fact tells us not to choose the Christians and Jews as allies so as not to follow their religion"....

UK: Police killer escapes in veil

Of course I'm my sister. Don't I look like her?

Are they listening in Grand Rapids? "Police killer escapes in veil," by Paul Jeeves in the Daily Mail, with thanks to Jeffrey Imm:

A SUSPECTED police killer escaped capture by fleeing Britain disguised as a Muslim woman.

Asylum seeker Mustaf Jama hid beneath a full-face niqab veil to sneak through Heathrow posing as his sister.

Jama, who is wanted for the murder of policewoman Sharon Beshenivsky, also wore a flowing head-to-toe jilbab as he fled to Somalia.

The Muslim gangster had been freed from jail six months earlier when Home Office officials ruled it would be unfair to deport him to his war-torn homeland because it was too dangerous.

The scandal emerged yesterday as Jama’s brother Yusuf was convicted of the murder of 38-year-old WPC Beshenivsky in a bungled robbery. Muzzaker Shah, 25, was also convicted of murder and two accomplices were convicted of manslaughter.

Jama was Britain’s most wanted man when, during last year’s Christmas holidays, he sneaked through Heathrow – even though air, rail and sea ports were on red alert following the murder in Bradford the month before.

Blair to urge Middle East states to rein in Iran

Tony Blair speaks from Dreamland. By Katherine Baldwin for Reuters, with thanks to James:

DUBAI (Reuters) - British Prime Minister Tony Blair will call on Wednesday for Middle East states to rein in what he calls the threat from Iran and to help advance peacemaking between Israelis and Palestinians.

Speaking in the United Arab Emirates, he will underline what has been the theme of his Middle East tour: moderate leaders must be empowered against extremists.

"We must recognize the strategic threat the government of Iran poses, not its people, not possibly all of its ruling elements, but those presently in charge of its policy," he will say, according to extracts of his speech released by his office.

Iran seeks "to pin us back in Lebanon, in Iraq and in Palestine," he will tell business leaders in Dubai.

"Our response should be to expose what they are doing, build the alliances to prevent it and pin them back across the whole of the region."

He says to do this "we need the open and clear backing of the countries in this region that know better than me what is happening and why."

Blair's spokesman dismissed suggestions his comments on Iran were designed to pit the region's Sunni Muslims against Shi'ite Iran, saying the prime minister worked with all faiths.

Afghanistan holds Pakistani intel agent with al Qaeda links

Friend and Ally Update. "Afghanistan 'holds Pakistani spy'," from the BBC:

Afghanistan says it has arrested a Pakistani intelligence agent who acted as a key link with al-Qaeda leaders.

Presidential spokesman Karim Rahimi said the agent had been detained in eastern Kunar province carrying documents which proved his guilt.

The news came a day after intelligence officials said an Afghan general had been arrested for spying for Pakistan.

Afghanistan has long blamed Pakistan for cross-border attacks by the Taleban. Islamabad denies the charges.

'Bin Laden escort'

Mr Karimi named the man arrested as Sayed Akbar, who he said worked for Pakistan's controversial Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency.

"Some evidence and documents have been seized with him proving his destructive activities in Afghanistan," Mr Karimi told a news conference in the capital, Kabul.

Sayed Akbar comes from the Chitral region of northern Pakistan bordering the Afghan province of Nuristan, the spokesman said.

The BBC's Payenda Sargand in Kabul says, according to the Afghan authorities, Mr Akbar was in charge of relations between the ISI and al-Qaeda leaders.

Officials say he has confessed to his "illegal activities" in Afghanistan. These are said to include escorting Osama Bin Laden last year from Nuristan to Chitral.

On Monday, intelligence officials in Kabul said they had arrested an Afghan army general, Khair Mohammed, on charges of selling secrets to the ISI.

Mr Rahimi told the news conference: "National security officials arrested a defence ministry general committing national treason, spying for foreigners, and he is under investigation."

Correspondents say it is not clear if the two arrests are linked. The defence ministry issued a statement saying that Khair Mohammed had not worked for it for almost four years.

There has so far been no response from Pakistan to news of either arrest.

Worsening row

Relations between Afghanistan and Pakistan have been tense for years, but have worsened during 2006 as violence in Afghanistan has soared.

Last week, President Hamid Karzai publicly accused the Pakistani government of backing the Taleban and said it wanted to turn Afghans into "slaves".

Thug-in-Chief asks: What would Jesus do?

"Ahmadinejad: What would Jesus do today?" by Yaakov Lappin for YNet News:

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has sent a greeting to the world's Christians for the coming New Year, in which he has linked Christianity's deity, Jesus, with the Shiite messianic figure, Imam Mahdi, saying he expected both to return and "wipe away oppression."

That's not Ahmadinejad's invention. Islamic tradition-- both Sunni and Shi'ite -- calls for Jesus and the Mahdi to appear together, with Jesus taking a subordinate role to the Mahdi and praying behind him:

Jabir b. 'Abdullah reported: I heard the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) say: A section of my people will not cease fighting for the Truth and will prevail till the Day of Resurrection. He said: Jesus son of Mary would then descend and their (Muslims') commander would invite him to come and lead them in prayer, but he would say: No, some amongst you are commanders over some (amongst you). This is the honour from Allah for this Ummah. (Sahih Muslim 001.293)

"I wish all the Christians a very happy new year and I wish to ask them a question as well," the Iranian leader said, according to the Iranian Student News Agency.

"My one question from the Christians is: What would Jesus do if he were present in the world today? What would he do before some of the oppressive powers of the world who are in fact residing in Christian countries? Which powers would he revive and which of them would he destroy?" the Iranian president asked.

"If Jesus were present today, who would be facing him and who would be following him?" He added.

This is an attempt to manufacture a sense of common cause by exploiting general ignorance: In playing the "Jesus" card, Ahmadinejad relies on the lack of awareness of the difference in the Christian and Muslim accounts of Jesus, with the expectation that Christian readers will project their understanding of Jesus onto a much different figure portrayed in Islam:

Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until the son of Mary (i.e. Jesus) descends amongst you as a just ruler, he will break the cross, kill the pigs, and abolish the Jizya tax. (Bukhari 003.043.656)

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: There is no prophet between me and him, that is, Jesus (peace_be_upon_him). He will descent (to the earth). When you see him, recognise him: a man of medium height, reddish fair, wearing two light yellow garments, looking as if drops were falling down from his head though it will not be wet. He will fight the people for the cause of Islam. He will break the cross, kill swine, and abolish jizyah. Allah will perish all religions except Islam. He will destroy the Antichrist and will live on the earth for forty years and then he will die. The Muslims will pray over him. (Abu Dawud 037.4310)

This view is corroborated in Shi'ite narrations about Jesus (see 11, 12).

'Occupiers warned to evacuate Iraq'

Ahmadinejad then linked Jesus with Imam Mahdi, a Shiite leader believed by the Iranian president to have gone into hiding centuries ago, and who is expected by Shiite Muslims to return and usher in a period of messianic dominance for Islam.

To clarify, the coming of the Mahdi is foretold in both Shi'ite and Sunni Islam, but the Shi'ites identify him with the hidden 12th imam.

"All I want to say is that the age of hardship, threat and spite will come to an end someday and God willing Jesus would return to the world along with the emergence of the descendant of the Islam's Holy Prophet, Imam Mahdi and wipe away every tinge of oppression, pain and agony from the face of the world," Ahmadinejad said.

Pentagon: Shi'ite Sadr Army bigger threat than Al-Qaeda in Iraq

But who cares? As far as the incoming chairman of the House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence is concerned, it's all the same thing anyway.

"Sadr Army is called top threat in Iraq: A Pentagon report cites the danger of the Shiite cleric's militia," by Julian E. Barnes in the Los Angeles Times, with thanks to Jeffrey Imm:

WASHINGTON — Armed militiamen affiliated with radical Shiite Muslim cleric Muqtada Sadr pose the gravest danger to the security and stability of Iraq, surpassing Sunni Arab insurgents and Al Qaeda terrorists, a new Defense Department report to Congress says.

The finding represents the military's strongest characterization of the danger posed by Sadr and is among the conclusions of a quarterly report to Congress that chronicles the instability in Iraq and record level of sectarian violence.

In the last three months, the number of attacks on U.S. and Iraqi troops and Iraqi civilians rose 22%, and the number of U.S. casualties grew 32%, the Pentagon assessment says.

As attacks have risen, the confidence of the Iraqi people has fallen, with fewer saying in surveys that they thought their government could protect them and more agreeing that civil war was likely.

The conclusion that Sadr-related militiamen posed the chief threat to the country's security came after the U.S. military had complained for months that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki, a Shiite, had been unable to address armed Shiite groups and had obstructed American efforts to confront Sadr.

Meanwhile, everyone has gotten used to the idea that there is nothing unusual in a cleric having a militia in the first place. In any case, from reading Sam Harris, Andrew Sullivan, and the like, you'll learn that the militia commanded by Jerry Falwell is far more lethal than As-Sadr's anyway. What's that? Falwell commands no militia? What are you, some kind of Islamophobe?

Sudan: Sunni jihadists accuse Iran of promoting Shi'ite Islam

This comes to us from our Exploiting the Natural Fissures Department. "Sudan: Islamists Accuse Iran of Promoting Shiitism," from AKI, with thanks to Jeffrey Imm:

Khartoum, 19 Dec. (AKI) - Sunni Islamists in Sudan have accused Iran of trying to spread its brand of Shiite Islam in the East African country through a propaganda campaign. The Sudanese chapter of the Muslim Brotherhood organisation in a meeting with authorities in Khartoum on Monday said it had presented evidence of Teheran's attempts to convert locals to Shiitism. "It's a large scale plan conceived by Shiite groups and local organisations with the objective of spreading Shiitism in Sudan," a spokesman for the group told the Arab daily al-Hayat.

Sunni groups have denounced what they say is a "Shiite peril" and the opening of several Shiite mosques in Khartoum.

They have asked authorities to close down the Iranian embassy's cultural centre and to prevent it from holding conferences which they say are being used for propaganda purposes.

"Shiite penetration in Sudan has become possible because of a lack of control on the part of the authorities," the Muslim Brotherhood's Sudan country representative, Sadiq Abdullah Abdel Majid, said.

The number of conversions from Sunni to Shiite Islam has been on the rise in recent years both in Muslim nations, particularly in North and East Africa where many have been impressed by the success of the Teheran-backed Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah's military successes against Israel.

As Osama said, everyone prefers the strong horse.

Spencer: Merry Christmas, Infidel

Merry Christmas, kuffar

In the featured article at FrontPage this morning I explain why jihad threats ratchet up around the holiday season (news links in the original):

Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman is gravely ill, and authorities are jittery. The mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, whose red-and-white knit cap and white beard give him an eerily Santa-esque appearance, Sheikh Omar has told his Al-Qaeda followers: “My Brothers...If they [the Americans] kill me, which they will certainly do – hold my funeral and send my corpse to my family, but do not let my blood be shed in vain. Rather, extract the most violent revenge, and remember your brother who spoke the truth and died for the will of God...The Mujahid Sheikh Omar Abdel al Rahman. In the name of God the kind and merciful.”

Adding to nervousness among Western officials during this holiday season are indications that jihadists are planning to strike around Christmastime. British Home Secretary John Reid said last Sunday that the possibility of an attack in the next few weeks was “very high indeed,” and British authorities were aware of as many as thirty planned jihad attacks. “The terrorists,” Reid noted, “only have to get through once, as they did on July 7, for us to see the terrible carnage that it causes.”

A French official concurred: “All of the warning lights are red…The threat is at its highest level. All [security] services are on tenterhooks, and it’s not just us [in France]. Work is under way everywhere, but nothing concrete is emerging.”

The threat is not confined to Europe. Indonesian officials fear that Noordin Muhammad Top, one of the masterminds of the Bali bombing of 2002, may be planning Christmas attacks in Indonesia.

This is not the first year jihadists have chosen the Christmas season to ratchet up their threats – which, even if they never materialize, are useful in themselves to “to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies” of Allah (Qur’an 8:60). Jihadists would want to sow this terror during one of the holiest seasons of the Christian year not just to maximize the potential for terror, but to emphasize that theirs is, as they see it, a holy struggle. The suitability of Christmastime for a jihad attack is an outgrowth of the idea that, in the words of Islamic preacher Husayn Mahfooth Shu’ayb, one of “the most critical manifestations of loyalty towards the infidels” is “celebrating their religious festivals.” Some Islamic clerics have even exhorted Muslims not to extend Christmas greetings to Christians, for that would be seen as an endorsement of their holiday, which they consider has no legitimacy; however, other clerics have rejected this view.

Nevertheless, the idea that Christian belief and observance is illegitimate is deeply rooted within Islam. The Islamic prophet Muhammad composed for the Muslims a brief prayer, known as the Fatiha (Opening), that became the cornerstone of Muslim prayer (it is recited seventeen times a day by the Muslim who performs the five daily prayers) and the first sura of the Qur’an:

In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful.

Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds,
The Beneficent, the Merciful.
Master of the Day of Judgment,
Thee (alone) we worship; Thee (alone) we ask for help.
Show us the straight path,
The path of those whom Thou hast favoured;
Not the (path) of those who earn Thine anger nor of those who go astray. (Qur’an 1:1-7)

Even this, which has a status among Muslims analogous to the centrality of the Lord’s Prayer for Christians, has a polemical edge. Traditionally Muslim divines have identified those who have earned Allah’s anger with Jews and those who have gone astray with Christians. The Qur’anic commentator Ibn Kathir (1301-1372) explains that “these two paths are the paths of the Christians and Jews, a fact that the believer should be aware of so that he avoids them. The path of the believers is the knowledge of truth and abiding by it. In comparison, Jews abandoned practicing the religion, while the Christians lost the true knowledge. This is why ‘anger’ descended upon the Jews, while being described as ‘led astray’ is more appropriate of the Christians” (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, vol. 1, 87). Late in his life Muhammad received revelations that were among the harshest toward Jews and Christians than any that he had ever received before, including one that asserted that Jews called Ezra a son of God, just as Christians called Christ the Son of God, and declared that both groups had thereby incurred Allah’s curse (Qur’an 9:30).

If the Christians’ having gone astray is epitomized by their calling Christ the Son of God, and Christmas celebrates Christ’s birth, then what better time to strike terror into the hearts of infidels? Here again, jihadist behavior becomes clear with reference to Islamic beliefs and assumptions. It is good that authorities in Britain and elsewhere are closely monitoring holiday terror threats. It will be even better when they begin to realize the importance of being thoroughly versed in the Islamic theology which motivates and guides jihadists – for only by knowing the enemy thoroughly can he ultimately be defeated.

Dhimmi and Anti-Dhimmi Award winners

Just in case you missed it, I thought I'd post a link to the Jihad Watch 2006 Awards Banquet post. Cox and Forkum were there to preserve the moment in pictures, as you can see above.

Senator Boxer gives award to CAIR extremist

No doubt she didn't look into his background. And why should she? Everyone knows CAIR is a moderate organization that enjoys approval and wields influence at the highest levels. And everyone knows that Islam is a religion of peace.

"U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer Gives Award to CAIR Extremist," a press release from from Americans Against Hate:

(Coral Springs, FL) Americans Against Hate (AAH), a civil rights organization and terrorism watchdog group, is calling on United States Senator Barbara Boxer to rescind the award she has presented to the Executive Director of CAIR-Sacramento, Basim Elkarra. The award, a certificate of achievement for "outstanding service," was given to Elkarra earlier this month.

As Executive Director, Basim Elkarra has defended someone who trained for jihad in a Pakistani terrorist camp; he has defended an imam who urged a Pakistani crowd to wage attacks on America; and he has defended an imam who was attempting to build an Islamic school for the purpose of teaching children how to commit violent acts against Americans. Also, Elkarra has described Israel as a "racist" and "apartheid" state, and he has moderated an event that featured a Hamas operative who spent five years in an Israeli prison and who is currently on trial in the U.S.

The organization Elkarra is affiliated with, CAIR, has a number of ties to Islamic extremism. Four officials from CAIR have been charged with terrorist activity, two convicted and two deported. CAIR is currently the defendant in a lawsuit put forward by the family of FBI Agent John O'Neill for the group's role in the 9/11 attacks. CAIR solicited funds for two "charities" whose accounts were frozen by the Department of Treasury for financing Hamas and Al-Qaeda. And CAIR's parent organization, the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), was shut down, shortly after it was found liable for the murder of an American boy during a Hamas attack.

AAH Chairman and founder of CAIR Watch, Joe Kaufman, stated, "Both Elkarra and the organization he represents exhibit behavior that is unworthy of such an honor as Senator Boxer has bestowed. We therefore demand that Senator Boxer withdraw the award immediately."

"On the surface, there is a cease-fire..., but underground they keep building tunnels."

Cease-fire Update, or in Gaza, a Reloading Update. "Gaza weapons smuggling flourishes," by Sarah El Deeb for Associated Press:

RAFAH, Gaza Strip - In houses along the steel wall separating Gaza and Egypt, the lights are flickering — a sign that smugglers are digging tunnels below, their powerful drills weakening the flow of electricity.

Tunneling is the fastest-growing business in this impoverished border town, and one of the biggest obstacles to any lasting Israeli-Palestinian truce.

Since Israel pulled out of the Gaza Strip a year ago, the number of tunnels for smuggling weapons, drugs and other contraband has more than doubled, evolving into an underground maze clawed out of Gaza's soft soil.

The largely unhindered weapons influx also heightens the threat of civil war between the rival Hamas and Fatah movements in Gaza and is souring Israel's ties with neighboring Egypt.

Israel says anti-tank missiles, tons of explosives and thousands of rifles have reached Gaza in the past year. Palestinian militants say they have already imported longer-range Katyusha rockets — they fired one earlier this year — plus the means to upgrade their homemade rockets to reach deeper into Israel.

A Palestinian security official says cordite, a highly explosive propellant for anti-aircraft weapons, has come through the tunnels, in one case blowing up on the buyer and killing two people in October.

The Palestinians have done nothing, despite a promise by President Mahmoud Abbas to shut down the weapons pipeline as part of a Gaza cease-fire reached last month, said Israeli government spokeswoman Miri Eisin. The smuggling, Eisin added, could easily bring down the truce.

"We don't build a cease-fire on luck," she said.

Palestinian analyst Ghassan Khatib said the arms buildup has fueled anarchy in the coastal strip. He noted that expired medicines and illegal drugs are also flooding Gaza.

After Israel's pullout, Egyptian and Palestinian security forces were to have deployed to stop the smuggling, but enforcement has been spotty.

As always.

Israel wants Egypt to do more. Egypt says it's trying, but needs more equipment and personnel.

Palestinian security is also reluctant to move against the powerful clans and militant groups that operate the tunnels. Many of its members have ties to these groups.

[...]

Israel raided Gaza after Hamas-allied militants tunneled into Israel in June, killed two soldiers and captured one. The military said it uncovered about 30 tunnels during

the raid.

Uri Dromi, a former Israeli government spokesman, said the smuggling is fueling Israeli fears that the militants are using the cease-fire to continue arming.

"On the surface, there is a cease-fire," he said, "but underground they keep building tunnels."

Fitzgerald: Naughty or nice?

He's making a list...checking it twice...

Have you been naughty or nice? Santa wants to know. Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi's Al Halal wal Haram fil Islam -- The Lawful and the Prohibited in Islam -- can be a useful guide, fitting for holiday revellers wondering what Santa will bring them. Qaradawi's version of "Dating Do's and Don'ts," for example, is endlessly amusing. In Al Halal wal Haram fil Islam (it is in English, and can be obtained in the U.S. -- I bought a copy at a library sale, with someone's Arabic marginalia), for example, I discovered that a woman was forbidden from wearing her hair in the "shape of a camel's hump." I suppose that puts paid to those 1950s-style bouffant hairdos -- well, they were not flattering, were they?

It could be a party game: Halal and Haram. That is, nice (halal) or naughty (haram) -- permitted or forbidden according to Islamic law. One person reads out something, and everybody else has to guess whether it is Halal or Haram. Keep it simple at first, then progress to more difficult items. Great fun for the whole family, and very educational.

Okay, ready?

Drinking wine -- halal or haram? That was easy.

Wearing your hair in the shape of a camel's hump?
--halal or haram? (Hint: look elsewhere in this article).

Mutilating the body of an Infidel corpse -- halal or haram? (Hint: see elsewhere on this site).

Wishing Infidels Merry Christmas in a Muslim land -- halal or haram?

Wishing Infidels Merry Christmas in an Infidel land where, for the moment, you need some Infidel goodwill -- halal or haram?

Taking seriously the oath of citizenship to an Infidel nation-state, even if it means fighting against fellow Muslims -- halal or haram?

Beating your wife on the face so it shows -- halal or haram?

Entering into a "temporary marriage" with an Infidel woman for the purposes of sex while you are studying in the dar al-Harb, and jettisoning her after your studies are complete -- halal or haram?

Denying that Aisha really was six when Muhammad married her, and nine when he had intercourse with her, in order to protect Islam from Infidel critics -- halal or haram?

Insisting to Infidels that Islam does not condone violence and that the behavior of Muslims is simply a reaction to the aggressive attacks on them by non-Muslims -- halal or haram?

Wearing green and a leprechaun button on St. Patrick's Day, and smiling back if somone says "Top o' the mornin' to you" -- halal or haram?

Allowing your children to pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands..." -- halal or haram?

Allowing Hindus to be treated as full equals of Muslims in Bangladesh -- halal or haram?

In Pakistan -- halal or haram?

In Kashmir -- halal or haram?

In India -- halal or haram?

Allowing nurses renting a room in a Muslim house to sing, behind closed doors, Christmas carols --halal or haram?

And if the house is in Saudi Arabia -- halal or haram?

Having sexual intercourse with a goat, or a sheep, or a camel, killing it afterwards, and then serving the meat at your son's graduation party -- halal or haram?

At an office Christmas party?

To a next-door neighbor?

To people in the next town?

Christmas is coming up. Families will be together. Supply your own questions, and of course, on the back of the card, give the answer and the authority: whether it's Qaradawi himself or one of the accepted collections of hadith (Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim will do fine), or the Qur'an.

It's wholesome fun for the whole family (well, maybe not the whole family -- you might want to keep questions concerning Aisha, or the rape and subseequent roasting of goats, to the special "Adult Version" of the game, the one you keep in your bedroom for those special guests). Fun -- and educational too. Why, I can say without any fear of contradiction that if you have enough questions with answers, you can teach your loved ones, your party guests, even that special someone, more about Islam in an evening or two than they can possibly learn by reading all the books of John Esposito, Karen Armstrong, Michael Sells, or by taking any of the current courses on Islam offered at Harvard or Yale or many other famous universities.

This will not, I'm afraid, be coming out from Parker Bros. anytime soon. So you have a choice. You can do it yourself, with scissors and a nice Qur'an, and Internet access to the collections of hadith. If you do, I would recommend the kind of cardboard that comes with your gently-starched shirts. But use your own Yankee ingenuity.

If you don't wish to go to the bother, I will consult with Mr. Spencer and see if he would like to go into the business with me. By the way, I hereby trademark, copyright, trade-secret, patent, and every other damn thing under the sun claim eternal and exclusive rights to this brilliant idea, and if enough orders come in, well -- we'll manufacture them.

Perhaps Ayaan Hirsi Ali can be persuaded to do some commercials for us. We'll figure out a price -- but first we need to do some market research here.

Any interest?

Just in case you haven't finished your Christmas shopping yet

Get it on t-shirts, sweatshirts and other stuff here. (Thanks to Pamela.)

Jihadists returning to Spain from Iraq

"Mujahedin fighters return to Spain from Iraq: report," from AFP:

MADRID - Mujahedin fighters have returned to bases in Spain after gaining combat experience in Iraq and are now a potential threat to European security, Spanish newspaper El Pais reported on Sunday.

Potential? Nah, they must be back to reconstitute La Convivencia.

According to El Pais the fighters worked alongside cells controlled by late Al Qaeda senior leader and Jordanian extremist Abu Musab Al Zarqawi, killed in June.

‘They are the new Trojan horse of Al Qaeda and its satellites on our territory and they are already preparing themselves,’ deputy director of the European police network Europol, Mariano Simancas, told El Pais.

‘They represent a serious threat for the countries of the European Union,’ Simancas added.

El Pais quoted anti-terrorist sources as saying that an unspecified number of formerly Spanish-based Algerians and Moroccans who had gained experience in handling arms and explosives in Iraq had now returned.

‘But they are doing nothing for the moment. They are biding their time, which complicates things when it comes to making arrests,’ one unnamed expert told El Pais.

Two years ago, Simancas told a parliamentary investigation into the March 11, 2004 Madrid bombings that Islamic terrorism was an ongoing major security threat and that it was not possible to know ‘100 percent’ where radical groups might strike.

In midweek Spain arrested 11 suspected Islamist militants in Spain’s north African enclave of Ceuta on suspicion they were planning attacks ‘of a terrorist nature.’

Newsweek: 12-man team of Westerners being trained by al Qaeda in Pakistan

Just a Tiny Minority of Extremists traversing what has become known as the "Al Qaeda Pipeline" between Pakistan and Britain. "The Regathering Storm," by Sami Yousafzai, Ron Moreau And Mark Hosenball for Newsweek:

Dec. 25, 2006 - Jan. 1, 2007 issue - For the past year, a secret has been slowly spreading among Taliban commanders in Afghanistan: a 12-man team of Westerners was being trained by Al Qaeda in Pakistan for a special mission. Most of the Afghan fighters could rely only on hearsay, but some told of seeing the "English brothers" (as the foreign recruits were nicknamed for their shared language) in person. One eyewitness, a former Guantánamo detainee with close Taliban and Qaeda ties, spoke to NEWSWEEK recently in southern Afghanistan, demanding anonymity because he doesn't want the Americans looking for him. He says he met the 12 recruits in November 2005, at a mud-brick compound near the North Waziristan town of Mir Ali. That was as much as the tight-lipped former detainee would divulge, except to mention that Adam Yahiye Gadahn, the notorious fugitive "American Al Qaeda," was with the brothers, presumably as an interpreter.

Another Afghan had more to say on the subject. Omar Farooqi is the nom de guerre of a former provincial intelligence chief for the Taliban; he now serves as the Taliban's chief Qaeda liaison for Ghazni province, in eastern Afghanistan. He says he spent roughly five weeks this past year helping to indoctrinate and train a class of foreign recruits near the Afghan border in tribal Waziristan, and among his students were the English brothers. The 12 included two Norwegian Muslims and an Australian, along with nine British subjects, says Farooqi. Their mission, Farooqi told NEWSWEEK, will be to act as underground organizers and operatives for Al Qaeda in their home countries—and their yearlong training course is just about finished.

U.S. and British security agencies have known this threat would come sooner or later. While saying he could not confirm the English brothers' case specifically, a spokesman for Britain's Foreign Office (unnamed as a matter of standard policy) calls it "common knowledge" that jihadist recruits have been traveling from Britain to Pakistan for indoctrination and training. The existence of a Qaeda pipeline between those two countries has grown harder to deny with every new terrorism story that has broken since the suicide bombings in London that killed 52 subway and bus passengers on July 7, 2005. Each new case that emerges features at least one or two suspects with ties to Pakistan—such as an alleged plot that began before 9/11 to bomb financial buildings in New York, Newark, N.J., and Washington, and this past summer's alleged plot to blow up airline flights from Britain to the United States.

[...]

American intelligence officials tell NEWSWEEK that their people are definitely concerned about terror suspects and operatives shuttling back and forth between Britain and Pakistan. One particular worry is that under current practice, British visitors to the States are not required to apply in advance for temporary visas, which are routinely granted to any British passport holder who is not on a watch list. In other words, the door is wide open for Britain's growing ranks of young jihadists, even those who have attended Qaeda training camps, if they are unknown to intelligence agencies. U.S. officials are discussing how the visa system could be tightened. "For the most effective background checks on passengers, the United States needs information and assistance from the country where the traveler resides," says Homeland Security Department spokesman Russ Knocke, adding that such help should be "routine."

While the Americans talk, Al Qaeda is pressing on with its training plans, Farooqi says. He confidently described those plans to a NEWSWEEK correspondent at a mud-brick house in Paktia province, not far from the Pakistan border, mentioning the English brothers almost in passing as an example of the jihad's recent successes. The specifics of his story could not be independently corroborated. But one gunman among the dozen or so guarding the house, with most of his face hidden by a black-and-white kaffiyeh, appeared to be a European with light -colored eyes; Farooqi later confirmed that the guard was one of the brothers. An open notebook lay on the carpet where Farooqi sat, and the NEWSWEEK correspondent caught a fleeting glimpse of scrawled names and phone numbers, including several that were preceded by the United Kingdom's country code: 44.

Farooqi says he first met the brothers, all of them in their 20s, soon after they reached Waziristan in October 2005. He recalls one of them, known as Musa, telling him that the 7/7 bombings in London "were just a rehearsal of bigger acts to come." A few, he couldn't say how many, had arrived in Pakistan by air, but most had taken a clandestine overland route across Turkey, Iran and Afghanistan, escorted by a network of professional smugglers. As NEWSWEEK has reported previously, Al Qaeda uses the same underground railroad to transport Iraqi bombmakers and insurgent trainers to share their skills with Taliban fighters in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

According to Farooqi, the brothers' travel arrangements were made by Abdul Hadi al-Iraqi, one of Al Qaeda's top operations men and a liaison with insurgents in Iraq. (His name has also cropped up in an ongoing British criminal trial in which seven London-area defendants of Pakistani descent are accused of conspiring to bomb British targets with homemade explosives. Prosecutors have alleged that Abdul Hadi's deputy even visited Britain and prayed at a mosque near London with one of the suspects.) The transcontinental journey took a month to complete, but Farooqi claims the brothers left no official traces of their passage, slipping past every border-control post without showing any travel documents. Once they get home, there may be no record that they ever visited Pakistan.

[...]

Farooqi says the recruits were taught a wide variety of subjects, from religious and ideological doctrine to the art of molding, assembling and detonating state-of-the-art Iraqi-style shaped-charge IEDs. They learned how to make and use suicide-bomb vests, how to rig car bombs, how to motivate other men to sacrifice their lives for the jihad and how to maintain communications with Al Qaeda on the Afghan-Pakistani frontier. They're not meant to be suicide bombers themselves, Farooqi says; they are far too valuable to waste. The recruits that M.I.5 was tracking also seemed bound for bigger things than cannon fodder.

The English brothers completed their Waziristan stay in October, Farooqi says, but before going home, they had one final assignment. Their Arab handlers separated them into several smaller groups and sent them into Afghanistan to see the jihad firsthand, embedded with Taliban units in Khowst and Paktia provinces. The unit commanders were warned to avoid putting them in any danger. After that, the brothers were supposed to return to Britain the same way they got to Pakistan. That means most of them could be getting home any day now—if they aren't there already.

Dialogue with the devil

The pro-jihad website Jihad Unspun is running a "never before published" interview with the late Zarqawi, in which the jihadist explains his activity as imitation of Muhammad, the prophet of Islam. In the excerpt below he stresses one hadith in which Muhammad says: "I have been sent with the sword, between the hands of the hour, until Allah is worshipped alone."

It would be refreshing to see a moderate Muslim (Ibrahim? Stephen? Ali?) formulate an Islamic response to this, showing how Zarqawi is misusing the Islamic texts. Only by engaging in such exercises will moderates ever begin making headway against jihadist recruitment in the Islamic community. But instead, what we mostly get is denial: the indignant and unsupported assertion that the Islamic texts, properly understood, teach peace. Zarqawi, unfortunately, was not convinced, and there are many, many other Muslims like him in the world today.

"PART TWO: Al-Furqan Foundation’s Interview 'Dialogue With Sheikh Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi," by Umm Saeed at Jihad Unspun:

An interview titled “Dialogue With Sheikh Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi, a never before published document, has been released by Al-Furqan Foundation for Media Production, the official publisher of media for the Islamic State of Iraq.

This in-depth interview with Sheikh Zarqawi, some 33 pages in Arabic, was conducted over a year ago by Abu Al-Baghdadi on behalf of the media committee for Al-Qaeda in Iraq and covers Zarqawi’s journey to Tawheed, his experience in Afghanistan at the time of the Soviet withdrawal and the situation at the time in Iraq.

[...]

Baghdadi:As a counter to the debaters, how do you answer the questions they are asking about what your belief (manhaj) is? And what is your political agenda? And what do you aim to achieve?

Zarqawi:As for our political agenda as some people call it, so we find it summarized richly in the saying of the Prophet (peace be upon him), “I have been sent with the sword, between the hands of the hour, until Allah is worshipped alone”. It is necessary to point out that we do not believe in politics in the way familiar with some groups that are directed by their sect, who raise Islam as a slogan. You find them in the parliaments, participating with the disobeyers in engaging the seats that rule against the law of Allah. Some of these groups have political agenda’s containing a lot of confusion and many wrong things. They also carry out some practices that are very deviant from the manhaj of the religion; we ask Allah refuge from them.

Our political agenda, like I said before is that of the saying of the Prophet peace be upon him, “I have been sent with the sword, between the hands of the hour, until Allah is worshipped alone”, and like the Prophet (peace be upon him) words that he had been sent with the sword until Allah is worshipped alone, this is what determines our political goal.

We fight in the way of Allah, until the law of Allah is implemented, and the first step is to expel the enemy, then establish the Islamic state, then we set forth to conquer the lands of Muslims to return them back to us, then after that, we fight the kuffar (disbelievers) until they accept one of the three.

“I have been sent with the sword, between the hands of the hour”; this is our political agenda.

And by Allah if it wasn’t that the Americans were fighting us, and they did not attack our homes, they and the Jews, it is better for Muslims not to sit back from jihad in the way of Allah until the law of Allah is implemented on this basis and Islam would spread everywhere. This is what the Prophet (peace be upon him) did when he traveled from Makkah to Madinah.

For after the establishment of an Islamic nation, he started moving to spread Islam in the east and the west and the north and the south. Our political agenda now is to expel the imposing enemy, this is the beginning, and our agenda after it is to establish the Shariah of Allah on earth.

This is our political agenda, “I have been sent with the sword, between the hands of the hour, until Allah is worshipped alone”

And in the sentence, this Hadith from its beginning to its end determines the basis to our path. For those who mean by political agenda in the modern way (mustalah al haadith), that is against the Shariah of Allah.

Fitzgerald: Recess is over

Surely the southern Sudanese, and at least some group in Darfur, can now beg the Americans to come in, and then the Americans should promptly accede. This should be done right now, without the Americans waiting to leave Iraq. Of course, the Americans should leave Iraq, and that prompt withdrawal should be accompanied by similar measures that will make it clear that the Americans are not leaving Iraq because they were defeated, but because they intend to more effectively counter the varied weapons of Jihad.

Other moves might include, for example, discussion of necessary changes in immigration policy all over the West, loud noises made about security threats to NATO and the danger from Muslims "in Europe seizing control of weapons and armories including nuclear weapons" -- a subject that should be discussed, written about, worried about, and made the subject of great interest right now, all over the nation-states that constitute the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

In other words, American (and other Western troops) in the Sudan, as well as Western military aid to Ethiopia or rather to its Christians, can do much to demoralize and dishearten jihadist Muslims throughout black Africa. Those troops and that military aid should be accompanied by a large and well-financed propaganda campaign devoted to the subject of the long and continuing Arab slave trade, and the Arab use of Islam as a vehicle for Arab imperialism, and the mocking of those blacks in the West who have been fooled into becoming pseudo-Arabs, with Arab names and subservience to the Arab National Religion (hence my request for someone to come up with the version of the epithet "Uncle Tom" that could apply to an islamized, arabized black man -- a term that needs to be created, for it could be an effective weapon of ridicule, one making the mahdi-brays of this world the butt of jokes, rather than what they think they are). And anything that can be done to split black Africa from the dominating Arabs and Muslims might also help, if properly exploited, to limit the effectiveness of those well-financed campaigns of dangerous Da'wa in our prisons, especially in the United States and Great Britain. Those Da’wa efforts are directed particularly at black prisoners -- ones who are disaffected and Searching for an Answer. But they must be made to understand that that Answer is Not the Arab National Religion.

For god's sake, is there nowhere in the Pentagon an office devoted solely to figuring out how best to demonstrate resolve while, at the same time, leaving Iraq so that we can take advantage of fissures within the Camp of Islam, just as Muslims in Europe have been exploiting for years the fissures within the Camp of the Infidels, playing especially on the coarse anti-Americanism and the inextinguishable though at times containable antisemitism of too many in Europe?

And there should also be, right next to that office, one labelled "Black Africa" and dedicated to figuring out how to support the Christians in the Sudan, in Nigeria, and in Ethiopia (all of whom have been the victims or targets of violent Jihad -- i.e., Jihad pursued through the instrument of qital or combat). That support should extend, indeed, up and down both sides of the Continent, even in places where the Muslim pressure is hardly noticed in the West but is very clear to the black Christians themselves, as in the Ivory Coast, Senegal, Liberia, Togo, Uganda (when Idi Amin was in power), Kenya, Tanzania, and in many other places.

But one suspects that there is not the Big Office devoted to coming up with a To-Do List of things that must be done before (that is, right now) and during and after the American withdrawal from Iraq, which must be pursued whatever our president, that Captain Queeg, that Man Without A Country, keeps insisting on. This is a democracy, and it is time for the village elders (not the Bakerites of course, not the collaborators of the Raymond-Close variety, but whoever can be rounded up to represent the untainted and the intelligent) to tell this Man Without A Country that the Iraq-the-Modelling Play-Dough just has to be put away. Recess is over.

Iranian students hide in fear for lives

Remember those Iranian students who dared protest against the Thug-In-Chief in front of Ahmadinejad himself? Well, so does Ahmadinejad. What was that again about it being "possible to govern based on an approach that is distinctly different from one of coercion, force and injustice," Mahmoud?

From the Mail & Guardian, with thanks to DFS:

Iranian student activists who staged an angry protest against President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad last week have gone into hiding in fear for their lives after his supporters threatened them with revenge.

One student fled after being photographed holding a banner reading, "Fascist president, the polytechnic is not for you", during Ahmadinejad's visit to Tehran's Amir Kabir university. At least three others have gone underground after being seen burning his picture. Vigilantes from the militant Ansar-e Hezbollah group have been searching for them.

In a startling contrast to the acclaim Ahmadinejad has received in numerous recent appearances around Iran, he faced chants of "Death to the dictator" as he addressed a gathering in the university's sports hall last week. Several hundred students forced their way in to voice anger over a clampdown on universities since he became president last year....

Last Monday's university demonstration triggered violent clashes between student activists and crowds of Basij militia, who were there to support the president. A shoe was thrown at Ahmadinejad while a student had his nose broken by an aide to a Cabinet minister.

Protesters later surrounded the president's car, prompting a security guard to fire a stun grenade to warn them off. Four cars in the presidential convoy collided in their haste to leave. Ahmadinejad's staff later insisted he had remained calm and ordered that the students should go unpunished. But some of those present say he accused them of being paid United States agents who would be confronted.

"He threatened us directly, saying that what we were doing was against the wishes of the nation," said Babak Zamanian, a spokesperson for Amir Kabir university's Islamic students' committee. "After that, the students protested even more sharply, calling him a lying religious dictator and shouting, 'Forget America and start thinking about us!'

"We were chanting, 'Get lost Ahmadinejad!' and 'Ahmadinejad -- element of discrimination and corruption.' You could see from his face that he was really shocked. He wasn't flashing his usual smile, and at one stage I thought he was going to cry. He told his supporters to respond with a religious chant hailing Ahmadinejad, but he was so shaken he was actually chanting it himself."

Another student said: "He was trying to keep control of himself, but you could see he was angry and upset."

Witnesses say Ahmadinejad also tried to ridicule the students by referring to the university disciplinary code, under which those with three penalty points are suspended from studies. "He joked that he was going to issue a presidential order for those with three stars to be enlisted as sergeants in the army. That made the students really angry," said Zamanian.

The university authorities' contentious use of the disciplinary code was said to be a trigger for last week's protest. About 70 students have been suspended and threatened with expulsion for various political activities, including writing articles critical of the government.

Last month, the authorities demolished two building belonging to the Islamic students' committee -- a moderate grouping representing diverse opinions. An elected student body was also disbanded. Women students have been told to wear conservative dress and remove any makeup.

In this atmosphere, activists at Amir Kabir university -- a traditional hotbed of political activism -- regarded Ahmadinejad's visit as a deliberate provocation and decided to protest. While many chanted, a hard core waved banners and burned his portrait, some ignoring instructions to cover their faces.

The 21-year-old student holding the "fascist president" banner was among those threatened with expulsion. He is said to be in grave danger after foreign news outlets, including the Guardian, published a picture of his gesture. Friends say he went into hiding after being confronted by two vigilantes.

"They said they would pull his father out of the grave [an ancient Persian threat]," said one student. "He is in real danger. Vigilantes have been standing at the dormitory doors asking for him."

Students now fear an even fiercer crackdown. "We believe [the authorities] will react much worse than before," said Armin Salmasi (26) a leading activist. "We are already under constant surveillance. The student movement in Iran is going to be driven underground -- just like it was before the revolution."

Vote for Hero and Idiot of the Year at Faith Freedom International

The superlative Ali Sina at the must-read site Faith Freedom International is holding voting for Hero of the Year and Idiot of the Year. Exercise your civic duty and vote!

Ignorance May Be Bliss, but It Makes for Bad Policy: Analysis of the Iraq Study Group Report

And the article is even better than the title. Here is an analysis of the Baker/Hamilton Report by Timothy R. Furnish, Assistant Professor of History at Georgia Perimeter College, author of Holiest Wars: Islamic Mahdis, their Jihads and Osama bin Laden, and proprieter of the informative website mahdiwatch.org.

In perhaps no region of the world is history more important than in the Middle East; to note just a few of the most striking examples: Jewish claims to Jerusalem and environs are at least partially predicated on the Hebrew Scriptures’ 3,000 year-old assertions of divinely-assigned real estate rights; a significant slice of Muslim Arab public opinion resonates to every attempt by Usama bin Ladin and his ilk to link millennium-old Crusader belligerence with the Americans; and millions of Shi`is in Iran, Iraq and Lebanon are waiting for a man who disappeared over a thousand years ago to re-emerge onto the historical stage as the Mahdi.

So it is particularly disappointing when America’s best and brightest bipartisan foreign policy minds, when tasked by the President to devise ways to drain the bog of war in Iraq, come up with a document steeped in historical misunderstandings and downright inaccuracies about Islam, Iraq and the Middle East.

One jarring misapprehension is the ignorance of (or perhaps simple refusal to acknowledge) the eschatological element of two of the major Shi`i players in the region: Moqtada al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army in Iraq, and—more ominously—Mahmud Ahmadinezhad and the ayatollahs of Iran. These are men who clearly hold, and frequently publicly express, a strong belief in the imminent re-arrival of the long-Hidden Twelfth Imam (a descendant of Ali, Muhammad’s son-in-law and cousin, who died in 680 CE): al-Sadr is said to believe that the U.S. invaded Iraq in order to stymie the Mahdi’s coming-out party, and Ahmadinezhad—when not holding Holocaust denial conferences and musing about a world without Jews or Americans—is publicly praying at the U.N. for Allah to send the Mahdi. Yet Messrs. Baker and Hamilton suggest that we “try to talk directly to Moqtada al-Sadr” (p. 67) and “should actively engage Iran and Syria in…diplomatic dialogue, without preconditions” (p. 50).

Is the eschatological fervor, bordering on irrationality, of al-Sadr and Ahmadinezhad not worthy of some consideration? One might think it would somewhat complicate the “can’t we all just get along?” approach that Baker and Hamilton seem to be promoting. The flip side of the coming of the Mahdi is the emergence of al-Dajjal, “the Deceiver” of the Islamic traditions—an anti-christ figure who will lead many believers astray and into apocalyptic battle against the forces of the Mahdi and the returned Muslim prophet Jesus. And the Dajjal, by the way, will be Jewish. How, pray tell, does the U.S. negotiate with folks who not only hold but configure their politics around beliefs like that? Yes, of course, George Bush believes Jesus will return—but has he prayed publicly for that to happen in the well of the U.N. General Assembly, as Iran’s president has done regarding the Mahdi? WWJD—“What Would Jesus Do?”—is not a question bandied about at Bush Administration Cabinet meetings; I am not sure that the same can be said of “WWMD?”—“What Would (the) Mahdi Do?”—in Ahmadinezhad’s strategy meetings.

Read it all.

Neighboring Thai villages at center of violence between Muslims, Buddhists

It's All About Israel Update. By Kim Barker in the Chicago Tribune, with thanks to Twostellas:

OUTSIDE NARATHIWAT, Thailand - Once they were friends, the chiefs of neighboring Buddhist and Muslim villages, separated by less than a mile of rice paddies and rubber-tree plantations.

Violence drove them apart. And when Muhammad Dunai Tanyeeno, the chief of the Muslim village of Jaroh, was gunned down Oct. 20, the chief of the Buddhist village of Saikaew was not even sad. None of the Buddhists of Saikaew went to Dunai's funeral.

"He was a good friend," said Yoon Yencheun, 51, the chief of Saikaew, who carries two guns with him whenever he leaves his village. "But when any Muslim dies, I'm happy. So many Buddhists have been killed by the Muslims."

Oh, will the Islamophobia never end? It is chilling to hear any human being rejoice in the death of another. It is all the more chilling when one reflects that over the months we have published here at Jihad Watch story after story of Muslims killing Buddhists: monks, old men, schoolteachers. In light of all that, Yoon Yencheun's boiling anger is understandable. And this is what never enters into discussions of the trumped-up notion of "Islamophobia": the fact that jihadists are Islam's worst public relations agents. Efforts by Muslim spokesmen to blame the "Islamophobia" that results from Muslim violence (which the perpetrators justify by reference to the Qur'an and Muhammad) on "bigotry" or "hatred" on the part of non-Muslims only increases the sense that many people have that those Muslim spokesmen are being disingenuous, and not only not confronting but trying to deflect attention away from the real roots of the problem within their own theological traditions.

The history of violence in Thailand's Muslim-majority South, where a low-level Islamic insurgency has claimed nearly 1,700 lives since 2004, can be traced through these two villages, just southeast of the provincial capital of Narathiwat. In these villages, it's clear just how murky this insurgency is. It's also clear that violence is growing worse since the Sept. 19 coup, despite the new prime minister's apology to Muslims for past harsh treatment.

Most government schools were shut down recently in the three southern provinces of Yala, Narathiwat and Pattani, a reaction to an insurgent campaign of school burnings and attacks on teachers. A mysterious group recently put up fliers announcing an Islamic state and warning Muslims not to work, open their shops or go to the bank or hospital for 10 days. "Otherwise we can't guarantee your safety," the fliers said.

People listened. Shops were closed. People stayed away from restaurants, from karaoke bars. The local hospital in Rangae district had one-third fewer patients than usual. The streets at 7 p.m. in Narathiwat felt as empty as they do at 1 a.m.

You want to go out past 7 and not feel as if you're taking your life into your hands? What are you, some kind of Islamophobe?

Fitzgerald: The Awful Truth

A poster at this website recently asked: "There is an excellent PhD just waiting to be written re. the peculiar mental pathologies that Islam inculcates in its adherents....Has that PhD been written?"

Yes. Here and there. Look at Andre Servier's book, now on line (put online by a JW poster alerted to its merits). Look at "The Arab Mind" by Patai; figure out where he avoids the word "Islam" and supply it yourself. Other books -- such as that by John Laffin -- limn the same, sometimes better. Studies of the Qur'an have been completed that show how replete with aggression the text is, and which draw the obvious conclusions -- the conclusions that so few in Washington or other Western capitals will draw, or even dare to think much less talk about -- but at the moment the names of the Danes and the Dutch authors involved escape me.

It's all there. How Islam discourages free inquiry at every step. How Islam encourages submission to the blind and irrational (or at least not necessarily rational, but rather whimsical) will of Allah. How Islam encourages intolerance of others and an inability to compromise, but rather inculcates a zero-sum view of the world as divided between the victor and the vanquished. It starts with Believer (victor) and Infidel (vanquished), but can also be seen in the way that various groups of Muslims naturally treat each other.

Look at the Fast Jihad (Hamas) and the Slow Jihad (Fatah or PLO) in Gaza. Look at Sunnis and Shi'a in Iraq (not to mention Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Pakistan, and even Yemen). All of it clearly related -- and yet somehow never related -- to not merely the tenets, but what has been carefully described here about two thousand times as the "attitudes" and "atmospherics" of Islam, which arise naturally out of the canonical texts -- Qur'an and Hadith and Sira -- and the most authoritative commentators on those texts.

Tenets, attitudes, atmospherics of Islam -- they are all part of the same thing, and they can all be seen at work in societies suffused with Islam. There are those most suffused, with legal systems closest to the Shari'a: Saudi Arabia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Sudan, Pakistan. And now Somalia may be added to the list. There are those only slightly less complete and fanatical in their adherence to Islam: Egypt, Jordan, the U.A.E., the so-called "Palestinians" in those territories some call "Palestinian"; areas of Iraq under local control of local Shi'a (as in Basra) or Sunnis (as in Ramadi). Then Islam is observed less still in Morocco and Algeria and Libya (where the colonel has his own ideas, some of them hardly Islamic at all). Then there is still another group, with Tunisia and Oman being even milder in their Islam. In Tunisia this is the result of secularizing Bourguiba and the Destour Party and now Ben Ali, who runs a police-state designed to keep Islam down. Oman is a special case because of the influence both of Ibadiya Islam and Sultan Qaboos's wisdom. Then there is Syria, with its Alawites needing to preserve the role of the local Christians who are no threat to Alawites and who can help withstand the Sunni Ikhwan; Turkey, with its Kemalism tattered but not completely torn; and assorted non-Arab Muslim states, such as the "five stans" of Central Asia, in which so much stamping out of Islam (as of all religion) was accomplished by the Soviets during the basmachi uprisings, and where a non-Muslim population in Kazakhstan, for example, as well as the intelligently secular Kazakhs, have helped to keep Islam down as a political and social force. Indonesia, meanwhile, until recently managed, partly under Dutch rule, and then under the secular Sukarno, to constrain Islam because there was another, non-Arab identity and history to appeal to, whereas Arab Muslims have an ethnic identity that overlaps almost completely with, and reinforces and is reinforced by, Islam.

And so on.

But start with those books. Then go on from there.

Do you think anyone in the Pentagon or the State Department has managed to produce a list such as that above, with a sliding scale that measures the suffusion of a particular Muslim society or state with Islam? It would take a minute. But they don't do it. They don't even think in those terms. And if you think they could produce such a list, and what's more, offer a coherent explanation with reference to local histories as to why one country is this way and another that way, you are far too hopeful. Whatever your worst fears about the level of understanding in our government may be, they do not come close to the awful truth.

"The Awful Truth." A wonderful movie in which Irene Dunne sings a funny song to a bunch of stuffed-shirt swells before Cary Grant again carries her off in his automobile. Funny for the movie.

Not so funny when it applies to that State Department, that Pentagon, that Congress, that Washington press corps.

Gingrich: Imams should have been arrested

Newt Gingrich speaks truth to power about the Flying Imams rage incident. From UPI, with thanks to Doc Washburn:

MANCHESTER, N.H., Dec. 16 (UPI) -- Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich told an audience in New Hampshire Muslim clerics pulled off a plane for praying should have been charged criminally.

Gingrich made the remark Friday night, as he delivered the keynote speech at the Manchester Republican City Committee Christmas dinner, the Manchester (N.H.) Union Leader reported.

"Those six people should have been arrested and prosecuted for pretending to be terrorists," Gingrich said. "And the crew of the U.S. airplane should have been invited to the White House and congratulated for being correct in the protection of citizens."...

Robert Spencer chosen Time Magazine's Person of the Year!

Uh, along with a few billion other people, including Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Leon Spinks, Anna Nicole Smith, Magdi Allam, Britney Spears, Anjem Choudhury, Margaret Thatcher, Horace Clarke, Jeffrey Imm, Tammy Bruce, Twostellas, Omar Bakri, Anthony Braxton, Brigitte Gabriel, Evan Parker, Ban Ki-moon, Yanni, Bernard Lewis, that friendly Pakistani guy who runs the grocery store around the corner from here, and, of course, you.

This monumental bit of silliness on Time's part is just another illustration of the West's failure of will. We have no longer any standards, any distinctions, any excellence, because we are pathologically afraid of branding anyone a failure.

Along with this wholesale levelling comes an unwillingness or inability to declare any model of society or any belief-system superior to another, which saps all our will to fight against the encroachments of the Islamic jihad ideology. This will be the preoccupation of a book for which I have recently signed a contract with Regnery Publishing. The tentative title is Why Christianity Is A Religion of Peace -- And Islam Isn't, although if you can think of something catchier, please let me know. It is set to be out next summer; all I have to do now is write it.

"We believe that the American government cannot do anything against us"

The Thug-In-Chief of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, tells Time Magazine (thanks to Anon) that if the American government does Iran's bidding in Iraq and Israel, peace will come. Peace in our time. All we have to do is surrender. See how easy it is?

"At present we are paying 8 millions a year for the privilege of living on an ungrateful volcano"

"At present we are paying 8 millions a year for the privilege of living on an ungrateful volcano out of which we are in no circumstances to get anything worth having" -- Winston Churchill on Iraq, in a September 1922 letter to David Lloyd George (thanks to Andrew Bostom).

A holly jihadi Christmas

Have a holly jihadi Christmas;
It's the best time of the year
I don't know if something'll blow,
but keep on living in fear.

British Muslim leader: Only Muslims are innocent

I am a bit late with this, and you have probably already seen it, but I thought it was worth commenting on anyway. Anjem Choudhury of the Omar Bakri group of jihadists in Britain here appears on the BBC's Hard Talk (thanks to Hana). He is entirely ready to condemn attacks on innocent civilians, but he notes that because non-Muslims have rejected Islam, none of them are innocent. Therefore attacks like 9/11 and 7/7 are perfectly justified.

Choudhury can and no doubt does easily support his view from the Qur'an, in which Jews and Christians are under Allah's curse (9:30) and unbelievers are the "vilest of creatures" (98:6). In the face of this kind of thinking, we have seen British Muslim leaders condemn the killing of "innocent civilians." And in the U.S., we have received the much-publicized fatwa against terrorism issued by the Fiqh Council of North America, which declares: "Islam strictly condemns religious extremism and the use of violence against innocent lives."

Why isn't any law enforcement official asking Muslim leaders (in both the U.S. and Britain) to denounce in clear terms the statement by Anjem Choudhury, that no non-Muslim is innocent? And to follow up that denunciation with nationwide programs in mosques, teaching against the ideology enunciated here by Anjem Choudhury in unambiguous terms?

UPDATE: Daniel Pipes has an illuminating discussion of this concept here.

Russia defies West and goes ahead with nuclear fuel sale to Iran

John VI Cantacuzenes Alert. By Mark Franchetti in the TimesOnline, with thanks to Pamela:

RUSSIA is to begin supplying Iran with nuclear fuel early next year despite mounting concern in the West that this could accelerate Tehran’s plans to build a nuclear bomb.

Sergei Shmatko, head of Atomstroyexport, Russia’s state nuclear fuel exporter, said last week that preparations to send fuel to Iran would start next month and the first consignment was expected to reach the Islamic republic in early spring.

The announcement, at a time when Russia is asserting itself as an energy power, has caused anxiety in western countries which are trying to convince the Kremlin to end its nuclear co-operation with Tehran.

The concerns were strengthened yesterday when President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was reported to have told a Kuwaiti envoy that Iran was ready to transfer its nuclear technology to neighbouring countries.

The nuclear fuel will be sent to Bushehr, Iran’s first nuclear power station, which has been built by Russia over the past decade as part of a £450m contract. Iran says the plant will be used to produce energy and that its nuclear programme is solely for civilian purposes.

Officially at least Moscow accepts the claim. The West has little doubt that Tehran’s real aim is to build a nuclear bomb and is afraid that as a nuclear power Iran would threaten Israel and destabilise the region.

Islamic Jihad: Kassems at Israel Will Solve PA Crisis

Islamic Jihad says to Hamas and Fatah: Now now, boys. Let's get back to killing Jews. From Israel National News, with thanks to the Constantinopolitan Irredentist:

A lead article on the website of the Islamic Jihad terror group tonight said that the best way to reduce the tension between Hamas and Fatah over new elections was – to fire Kassem rockets at Israel.

The tension between the two terror groups over the difficulty in forming a unity government “proves that the Hudna does not serve Palestinian interests. Now more than ever, our rockets should be aimed at the Zionist entity in order to show that there will be no Hudna. Thus there will be no disagreement over who should rule” the PA, the website said.

“No Substitute for Victory”: The Defeat of Islamic Totalitarianism

Last October 21 I spoke at the Ayn Rand Institute’s conference “The Jihad Against the West” in Boston. There I had the privilege of hearing a tremendous address by John Lewis, an assistant professor of history at Ashland University and contributing editor of The Objective Standard, where you can read that address now. A very small sampling:

Our military capacities are not in doubt today. It is our moral self-confidence that is in question. What was it that stopped us from confronting Iran in 1979, except a lack of confidence in our own rightness, and an unwillingness to defend ourselves for our own sakes? Had we removed the Iranian regime in 1979, thousands of Americans would have been saved, and children across the world would not have grown up with sword verses rising in their minds as they give their lives to jihad. Consider the Japanese—and ask whether it would have been in our interest to have left the regime of 1945 in power, to continue preaching religious militarism and training kamikaze. The best thing Americans did for themselves (and, incidentally, the kindest thing for the Japanese) was to burn that regime to the ground. So it is today. The Islamic State—Totalitarian Islam—must go. And it is the moral responsibility of every American to demand it.

Don't fail to read it all.

Pakistani jihadist: Musharraf is out to enslave the nation to appease America, and cannot ensure legislation in conformity with Islam

This report is only marginally in English, but its point is clear: Syed Munawar Hasan is protesting against the Musharraf regime on Islamic grounds, once again illustrating how the jihadist appeal is always based on a call to loyalty to the Qur'an and Sunnah.

"ISG report a cover up of American war crimes: JI," from Online News, with thanks to the Constantinopolitan Irredentist:

LAHORE: Secretary General Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan Syed Munawar Hasan has said the Baker-Lee [sic] bipartisan report on the situation of Iraq is nothing but an abortive bid to cover up the shameful war crimes committed by American and allied forces in Iraq.

The steadfastness and commitment of Islamic resurgence in Iraq and Afghanistan has obliged the evil forces to wrap up their secular and so called liberal agenda. This fact has also been endorsed in the Iraq Study Group report.

Delivering Jumma sermon here at Jamia mosque Mansoorah on Friday Syed Munawar Hasan said the commitment of resistance forces and loyalty to their faith proved that the disproportionate equation in terms of logistics does not decide fate of war.

He regretted that the military rulers are out to enslave the nation just for seeking appeasement of America. They have forgotten the history and even the number of Siparas in holy Quran that is why education minister of Musharraf regime had counted them 40 in one of TV programs. Such rulers, he said, can not ensure legislation in conformity with the teachings of Islam.

Meanwhile, delivering Jumma sermon at Syed Maududi Institute’s Jamia mosque after his release from Gujrat jail Jamaat-e-Islami naib ameer Hafiz Mohammad Idrees said nervousness of the rulers could be judged from the fact they have registered terrorism cases against the peaceful political workers under the draconian laws.

Reading Lists

The New York Times today recommends six books that "provide more information about Islam and its history."

The list includes books by, predictably enough, John Esposito, Karen Armstrong, and Vali Nasr.

Here is a better booklist (scroll down past mine to see many worthy books by a variety of authors). And it's just for starters. Once you're done with those, contact me for more.

Try my grandmother's stuffed grape leaves

She was born in the Ottoman Empire, and was responsible for some of its finest cuisine. You can find the recipe in this book.

Hamas confirms meeting with group of Democrats

If this turns out to be true, it doesn't come solely out of a willingness to put partisanship before national security. It comes from a lack of awareness that Hamas poses any national security threat at all. And that in turn is a result of believing one's own PC line. "Hamas confirms meeting with group of Democrats: Leader claims U.S. party willing to hold dialogue with terrorists," by Aaron Klein for WorldNetDaily.com, with thanks to R.E.:

TEL AVIV – A key Hamas official has confirmed reports from last week the terror group held meetings with "important Democrats."

Ahmed Yousuf, chief political advisor to Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, told the Maannews Palestinian news website that Hamas officials met recently with high-ranking American figures, "especially members of the Democratic party."

He said Hamas also met with European leaders, including members of the British parliament.

Yousuf did not say when the meetings took place or which members of the Democratic party the terror group allegedly held dialogue with, but he stated the meetings were fruitful in introducing the Hamas political vision.

Last week, Maannews quoted a Hamas source claiming the terror group met with a delegation of "important Democrats" who expressed interest in relations with Hamas even if it doesn't recognize the right of Israel to exist.

Stacie Paxton, a spokeswoman for the Democratic National Committee, told WND the party was not aware of any meeting.

According to the report, the alleged meeting with the Democrats took place in a European country following a series of preliminary meetings with representatives from the British and French governments.

You can't fool me!

Otis B. Driftwood: It's all right, that's in every contract. That's what they call a sanity clause.

Fiorello: You can't fool me! There ain't no Sanity Claus!

Haniyeh: We're Shahids, not ministers

This is the government with which everyone wants to enter into negotiations.

By Ali Waked in Ynet News, with thanks to Kemaste:

Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh said Friday that he and his followers chose to be in the Hamas movement to be shahids (martyrs) and sacrifice their lives for Allah and not to be ministers. Haniyeh made the comments at a ceremony in the Gaza Strip, attended by some 100,000 people, marking 19 years since the founding of Hamas.

The Palestinian leader called for unity among the Palestinian factions, after days of continually escalating violence in the Strip and the West Bank.

“Palestinian blood must be safeguarded; we must unite for the fight to free our lands and holy sites,” he said. With that, Haniyeh said no amount of pressures on his government would lead Hamas to modify its stances.

Iraqi PM invites Saddam officers to return to army

Not only does this call into question the whole U.S. enterprise in Iraq, but it will no doubt be conducted with no effort whatsoever made to determine whether or not these officers hold to the ideology of the "insurgency." After all, why should such an inquiry be made, when the Iraqi Constitution stipulates that no law can be passed in Iraq that contradicts Sharia? The goal of the "insurgency" is within their grasp, if they can stop killing each other. From Reuters, with thanks to Mackie:

BAGHDAD, Dec 16 (Reuters) - Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki said on Saturday Iraqi army officers of all ranks sacked after the U.S. invasion in 2003 would be allowed to reapply for their posts in the new army.

The Shi'ite premier issued the invitation, a gesture towards disgruntled minority Sunnis, at a national reconciliation conference in Baghdad aimed at easing sectarian violence that U.N. officials estimate causes more than 100 deaths a day.

Shortly after the U.S. invasion to topple Saddam Hussein, U.S. administrator Paul Bremer quickly dissolved the Iraqi army, a decision experts consider a miscalculation. Many of its members then joined the ranks of the Sunni insurgency.

The Defence Ministry has recruited former officers of Saddam's army in the past but limited the invitation to junior ranks. Maliki's invitation was the first extended to all ranks.

"The new Iraqi army is opening the door to former Iraqi army officers. Those who do not come back will be given pensions," he told a conference of Kurdish, Sunni Arab, Shi'ite and secular politicians....

Saddam had used the military to reinforce his hold on power, but some experts argue that former members of the disbanded army, suddenly jobless, went on to help form the insurgency.

Was the Flying Imam incident staged in order to get anti-profiling legislation passed?

I have been saying for some time now that the Flying Imam rage incident was staged to help garner support for anti-profiling legislation. Just before the Flying Imams incident happened I noted that Nancy Pelosi had come out in favor of such legislation, and suggested here and here in late November that a push for such legislation was what was behind the incident. I also spoke about this on the Hannity radio show, where it was hotly denied by the truth-challenged Edina Lekovic, on December 4.

And then two days ago Katherine Kersten posited the same hypothesis in the Star Tribune, leading Allahpundit to post some pointed questions at Hot Air:

Piece this out for me: CAIR allegedly wants to engineer an incident it can sell to the public as evidence of discrimination and get the End Racial Profiling Act pushed through — and for the task it chooses a guy who admits that his mosque used to help out Osama Bin Laden, who’s been accused of raising money for Hamas, and who doubts that 9/11 was carried out by Muslims? And instead of just praying, he and the other five imams resort to hijack-type behavior that’s suspicious enough to spook multiple air marshals and pilots?

Doesn’t that actually make things more difficult for their Democratic allies in Congress? I can buy that CAIR would do this to raise their own profile; they probably are that stupid and it’s not like they have anything to lose in terms of reputation at this point. But they’ve got to know that this makes things considerably harder for Pelosi, Conyers, and Feingold in getting the bill passed. Not to mention the fact that grassroots pressure on Bush to veto the bill if it ever comes before him will be tremendous now, thanks in great part to this very incident.

Good questions. However, these facts about Omar Shahin and the other imams have not penetrated the mainstream media -- witness this Washington Post article from a few days ago that quotes indignant Muslims complaining that nobody minds when Christians pray in public, dismisses the questions about the imams' seat assignments and seatbelt extenders, and says nothing at all about the unsavory connections of Omar Shahin. CAIR probably calculated that the media reaction would mostly run along the lines' of MSNBC's Contessa Brewer's comparing the imams to Rosa Parks. Some rightwing bloggers make a fuss? Well, what do you expect from hatemongering Islamophobes?

No one in the mainstream media, after all, has ever -- ever -- asked CAIR about its derivation from the Islamic Association for Palestine, a Hamas group, or about the CAIR officials who have been arrested and convicted on various terror charges. (Why were they hired, if their Islam differed so markedly from that of "moderate" CAIR?) No one in the mainstream media has ever asked Ibrahim Hooper hard questions about his statements about wanting to see the U.S. become an Islamic state sometime in the future. CAIR enjoys a free pass from media, government, and law enforcement. Why would Hooper and Co. think the Flying Imams incident would be any different?

And so far, for the most part it hasn't been. Watch for anti-profiling legislation to pass. Then we can all count how many airplanes will have to come down before it will be repealed.

Advisor to Ahmadinejad: "The Resolution of the Holocaust Issue Will End in the Destruction of Israel"

Hitler had big plans for Berlin too. "Iran Holocaust Denial Conference Announces Plan to Establish World Foundation for Holocaust Studies – To Be Eventually Based in Berlin and Headed by Iranian Presidential Advisor Mohammad-Ali Ramin Who Has Said: 'The Resolution of the Holocaust Issue Will End in the Destruction of Israel,'" from MEMRI, with thanks to BG:

On December 14, 2006 the Iranian news agency IRNA reported, in English, that participants in the Iranian Holocaust Denial conference, dubbed "Holocaust: A Global Vision," had announced the establishment of a "world foundation for Holocaust studies" and unanimously appointed Presidential Advisor Mohammad-Ali Ramin as its secretary-general.

According to IRNA, Ramin said that "one of the plans of the foundation is to assign a committee to find out the truth about the holocaust [sic], and noted that its main office will be in Tehran, and that it "will eventually be transferred to Berlin, once proper grounds are prepared."

Ali Ramin was the subject of a June 15, 2006 Special Dispatch by MEMRI based on a June 9, 2006 article in the reformist online daily Rooz. It reported that during a visit with students at GilanUniversity in Rasht, Iran, Mohammad-Ali Ramin had discussed historical accusations against the Jews and questioned the Holocaust.

The following are excerpts from the Rooz article: [1]

"Throughout History, This Religious Group [i.e. the Jews] has Inflicted the Most Damage on the Human Race"

"On a visit to Gilan University, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s advisor Mohammad Ali Ramin said to a group of students in the town of Rasht: 'We Iranians are definitely not, and never have been, nationalistic, and we are not against any ethnic [group]. We certainly do not worship race, nor [are we] against any race, and we nave never perpetrated genocide. This is why Islam, which appeared and advanced [the notion of] equality among nations and among peoples, greatly appealed to us Iranians. We have accepted the [principle] of equality among nations since the days of the Achaemenids. [2] Antisemitism, therefore, has no place in our Iranian [culture]. I myself honestly fight for just treatment of Judaism. Ten years ago, [when] I first brought up the issue of the Holocaust in this country, my intention was to defend the Jews…

"'But among the Jews there have always been those who killed God’s prophets and who opposed justice and righteousness. Throughout history, this religious group has inflicted the most damage on the human race, while some groups within it engaged in plotting against other nations and ethnic groups to cause cruelty, malice and wickedness.

In these allegations, Ramin is working straight from the Qur'an. Then he adds in some ancient blood libel:

"'Historically, there are many accusations against the Jews. For example, it was said that they were the source for such deadly diseases as the plague and typhus. This is because the Jews are very filthy people. For a time people also said that they poisoned water wells belonging to Christians and thus killed them,' Ramin said.

[...]

"Ramin claimed that the Holocaust was the main reason why Palestine was occupied, while Israel was the main cause of crises and catastrophe in the Middle East. 'So long as Israel exists in the region,' he said, 'there will never be peace and security in the Middle East. So the resolution of the Holocaust issue will end in the destruction of Israel.'

Jihad Watch Dhimmi and Anti-Dhimmi Awards 2006

It's that time again, my friends: time for the most hotly anticipated social event of the year: the Jihad Watch Awards Banquet! The red carpet is out, the flashbulbs are popping ("Over here, please, Paris. Just one more, please"). The glamorous guests are arriving now in their limousines: Hal Smith! Daniel Gélin! Kaaren Verne! This is the night so many of us have all been waiting for!

And now the winners are arriving: John Bolton and John Howard walk boldly down the red carpet, with Geert Wilders matching Howard stride for stride. Jacques Chirac and Jimmy Carter arrive together, hunched over, conferring in whispers. Our preliminary ceremony, unveiling the new portrait of Jihad Watch Board Vice President Hugh Fitzgerald that hangs over the dais, goes by quickly, and with regrets all around Hugh departs on a fact-finding mission to Mogadishu. And now the great moment has come.

The American Dhimmi of the Year 2006...JIMMY CARTER!!

In his acceptance speech, Carter demonstrates how richly he deserves his cringing dhimmi statuette when he says that "apartheid in Palestine is not based on racism but the desire of a minority of Israelis for Palestinian land and the resulting suppression of protests that involve violence."

Dhimmi Internationale 2006...JACQUES CHIRAC!!

And now comes the best part: the heroes of our age, those who are standing in the breach, the catchers in the rye.

Anti-Dhimmi Internationale 2006...JOHN HOWARD and GEERT WILDERS!!

And finally...

The American Anti-Dhimmi of the Year 2006...JOHN BOLTON!!

Congratulations to all! Enjoy the champagne and the band!

"It is most disturbing to see how writers who try to warn about the totalitarian character of Islamism are defamed as racists. This wrong-headed political correctness prevents any honest discussion about the subject"

Tibi says "When you study religion, you do not study texts, you study social facts. A Muslim boy is torching cars and he is thinking he is waging jihad." That is true. But the texts also support the permissibility, and indeed the active good, of waging war against unbelievers. "Germans may regret ignoring 'prophet' in their midst," by Margaret Wente in the Globe and Mail, with thanks to Paul:

BERLIN -- Bassam Tibi is an unabashed alarmist. He is among Germany's foremost political scientists, and an expert on political Islam. And he says that even now -- after 9/11, after Madrid, after 7/7, and all the rest of it -- the European elites don't have a clue what they are up against.

"Europeans don't know what Islamism is," he argues. "We are talking about a new totalitarianism. And Islamists are establishing themselves in Europe with great success." They thrive, thanks to Europe's tolerance of the intolerable.

Dr. Tibi, a Muslim born in Syria, is persona non grata there.

He's not too popular in Germany either, where he has been accused of inciting Islamophobia. "It is most disturbing to see how writers who try to warn about the totalitarian character of Islamism are defamed as racists," he says. "This wrong-headed political correctness prevents any honest discussion about the subject."

This is not the message you will hear from any Muslim leader. The standard line is that extremism has been exaggerated, the media are to blame, and that the real problem is that Muslims have been unfairly targeted. But long before 9/11, Dr. Tibi began warning Europe had become dangerously vulnerable to radical Islamists. Today, many of these movements have their logistics, as well as their support systems, in Western Europe. In the name of multiculturalism, Muslims were encouraged to build parallel societies. Now, many have no intention of integrating into the mainstream.

It's true, he says, that the radicals are no more than a tiny minority -- between 3 per cent and 5 per cent of the Muslim population, he guesses -- but they are gaining ground. "They control most of the mosques and the welfare institutions, and they are the official speakers for Islam." (Among the most revered is Sheik Yusuf al-Qaradawi, now preaching from Qatar on Al Jazeera, who says Islam justifies suicide bombing.)

In spite of the new lip service being paid to integration, he says, Europe shows little interest in acting to promote it. Part of the problem is that there's no consensus on what it means to be European.

"Some people think there is no such thing as a common identity binding us together," he says....

Dr. Tibi is impatient with the endlessly repeated nostrum that Islam is "a religion of peace." "When you study religion, you do not study texts, you study social facts. A Muslim boy is torching cars and he is thinking he is waging jihad. Religion has nothing to do with terrorism. But you can use it to legitimate terrorism. There is a conflict -- it is social and economic, but it is articulated in religious language." And the quest of converting the entire world to Islam, he insists, is an immutable fixture of the Muslim worldview.

Tiny Minority of Extremists Update:

I asked Dr. Tibi how many of Germany's 3.2 million Muslims share his progressive, secular views. "Maybe a few thousand," he said.

Europe worries about holiday attacks

He knows when you've been bad or good, so be good, for goodness' sake

Jihadists are getting into the spirit of the season. And according to AP, they're still upset over the Danish cartoons and the Pope's remarks. You see, for Santa Omar Adel Rahman, we in the West have been very, very bad. By Paul Haven for Associated Press:

MADRID, Spain - Western intelligence and security officials say the threat of a terror attack by Islamic militants over the Christmas and New Year's holiday travel season is extremely high, with the greatest concern focusing on a possible plot targeting Europe.

While the year-end period is always a time of concern because of the vast number of travelers, authorities' anxiety is palpable this year.

European fears that terrorists might be planning something come in the waning days of a convulsive year of foiled plots and inflammatory moments. Terror schemes were thwarted in Britain, Germany, the Czech Republic and Italy.

Islamic anger over the publication of cartoons depicting images of the Prophet Muhammad caused riots throughout the world in January and February, with some Muslim protesters in London holding up banners urging "Behead those that insult Islam." Pope Benedict XVI's Sept. 12 comments that seemed to equate Islam with violence also caused outrage and mass protests.

And of course, there were the daily images of carnage in Iraq, Israel's bloody war with Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon, and continued controversy over the U.S. holding facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

A senior French counterterrorism official told The Associated Press that intelligence agencies throughout the continent are on "tenterhooks" and that "all of the warning lights are red," though they have yet to uncover any specific plan for attack.

"The threat is at its highest level," said the French official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the secretive nature of his job. "All (security) services are on tenterhooks. And it's not just us (in France). Work is under way everywhere but nothing concrete is emerging. Ends of the year are often bad. This year we haven't managed to distinguish a precise plot."

Those fears were echoed in Britain, already on edge after the failed August plot to bring down commercial jetliners over the Atlantic.

John Reid, Britain's top law enforcement official, said Sunday that it was "highly likely" that terrorists would attempt to mount an attack over the holiday period, when the number of travelers swells. He gave no other details....

This year, concerns have been heightened because of the deteriorating health of terrorist cleric Omar Abdel-Rahman, known as the blind sheik, who is serving a life sentence in the United States for his advisory role in a plot to blow up New York City landmarks, including the United Nations.

Abdel-Rahman has called for retaliation by terror sympathizers if he dies in prison.

Somali president: Peace talks no longer an option

A wider war on the Horn of Africa appears to be imminent. It seems apparent to Somali President Abdullahi Yusuf that "peace talks" would, at this point, amount to negotiations with al Qaeda and its foreign fighters rather than fellow Somalis. Also, while those talks would provide a public-relations outlet for the jihadists to feign an interest in peace and mutual respect, the substance of the meetings would ultimately involve their dictating terms of surrender to the Baidoa government.

"Somali leader: Door to peace talks shut," by Anthony Mitchell for Associated Press:

BAIDOA, Somalia - Somalia's president said Friday that peace talks with the country's Islamic movement are no longer an option because the group's leaders have declared war on his government.

"They are the ones who effectively closed the door to peace talks and they are the ones who are waging the war," Somali President Abdullahi Yusuf told The Associated Press from his office in Baidoa.

Tension has been mounting in recent weeks between Somalia's government, which has Western and U.N. recognition but little authority on the ground, and the Council of Islamic Courts, which controls most of southern Somalia. The Islamists have vowed to launch a holy war starting Tuesday unless Ethiopian troops supporting the government leave Somalia.

"The fighting can happen at any time now," Yusuf said, adding that his administration will not be the first to attack.

The Islamic courts have been steadily gaining power since June, raising concerns about an emerging Taliban-style regime. The United States accuses the group of having ties to al-Qaida, which it denies.

"Al-Qaida is opening up shop in Somalia," Yusuf warned. "This is a new chapter and part of the terror group's plan to wage war against the West."

Earlier Friday, Islamic leaders in the capital, Mogadishu, distributed sermons about holy war to be read at the city's mosques during prayers — the latest attempt to galvanize the nation as it slides toward war.

"The sermon concerns the holy war on Ethiopian troops inside Somalia," Islamic official Sheik Hussein Abdullahi Barre told the AP. He added, "What we want is that Friday's sermon should be concerned about jihad."

Iranian cleric: "Regarding Blair's devilish remarks, I am telling him that if he means Iran is a threat to Britain, yes we are. If he means we are a threat to America's arrogance, yes we are and we are proud of it"

Wild and Brainless Animal Alert: "Cleric says Iran a threat to U.S., Britain," from Reuters, with thanks to Mackie:

TEHRAN, Dec 15 (Reuters) - Iran is not a threat to Middle East stability but it is a threat to the United States and its European ally Britain, a hardline cleric said on Friday.

The mid-ranking cleric's remarks came in reaction to British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who on Tuesday called Iran a "major threat" to the region's stability.

"Regarding Blair's devilish remarks, I am telling him that if he means Iran is a threat to Britain, yes we are," Ahmad Khatami told Friday prayers worshippers in Tehran University.

"If he means we are a threat to America's arrogance, yes we are and we are proud of it."

Khatami, who is not related to the reformist former President Mohammad Khatami and does not hold any positions directly related to policy-making, said the United States, Britain and Israel caused instability in the Middle East....

"They (the international community) will face consequences for not stopping this wild and brainless animal," he added, referring to the Israeli premier.

I don't think Ehud Olmert is the wild and brainless animal anyone needs to be concerned about.

Ahmadinejad's Western Allies

Daniel Johnson in the New York Sun (thanks to DFS) comments on the rapid advance of Ahmadinejadization at the BBC.

"It began with Israel and it will only end with Israel!" It was the authentic voice of the British Broadcasting Corporation, or at least one of its most renowned and respected presenters, at a cocktail party last week. The Iraq Study Group, he declared, had finally sounded the death knell of the Bush doctrine. A chastened president would now have to kick out the neocon kids and listen to the "grownups." And the top priority would now be the unfinished business not just of 2001, but of 1967 and even of 1948. Had not James Baker himself — the most grown-up of all the grownups — endorsed both the return of the Golan Heights and the Palestinian right of return in his celebrated report?

The BBC now has a huge audience in America as well as in the rest of the world for its endless reiteration of the implied thesis that the Jewish state is the root of all evil — not only of war in the East but of terrorism in the West too — and that the " Israel lobby" rules in Washington. Gloating over the supposed triumph of Realpolitik since the midterm elections, the BBC can hardly contain its Schadenfreude at the departure not merely of Donald Rumsfeld but also of John Bolton.

Interviewing Mr. Bolton shortly before he announced his resignation, the same BBC presenter was taken aback by the acerbic ambassador's refusal to apologize for the invasion of Iraq, or indeed to agree with any of his assumptions about American policy: past, present, or future. The habitual hostility with which Bush administration officials are treated by the BBC was, unusually, turned back on the interviewer. "How do you know what my expectations were in 2003?" Mr. Bolton wanted to know.

Read it all.

The Special Cases: The Ahmadiyya

"Hello from writer Wolfgang Bruno. I will do a series of essays about the 'special cases,' groups at the fringes of or outside of the Islamic mainstream, such as the Ismailis, the Sufis and the Baha'i Faith, to see whether or not any of them can represent a viable alternative as a reformed and more peaceful Islam. I will start today with a short essay about the Ahmadiyya community."

There are movements within Islam, or groups of people who at least identify themselves as Muslims, that are indeed somewhat more tolerant and less violent that mainstream Muslims. One such movement is the Ahmadiyya community.

The Ahmadiyya movement was founded by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in 1889. He taught that jihad "by the sword" had been replaced by jihad "of the pen," and wanted to synthesize all religions under the banner of Islam. He claimed to be the "Reformer of the age" but did not bring any new revelation. After a schism in 1914, his followers split into two groups: The Ahmadiyya Muslim Community and the Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement, with its center in Lahore in what is today Pakistan. The main body, the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community (sometimes called the Qadiani after the village where the founder was born) claimed that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a prophet, although he didn't bring any new laws. The Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement, on the other hand, presented themselves as an Islamic reform movement and maintained the normal Muslim view that Muhammad was "the seal of the prophets" and that there would be no new prophet after him. Both branches, however, agree that Ghulam Ahmad was the Mahdi and the Messiah. They also believe that the Koran contains no abrogations.

Ahmadis still follow traditional Muslim rituals such as prayer and fasting, but among mainstream Muslims there is deep suspicion towards them, chiefly because the main body of Ahmadiyyas have affirmed that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a prophet, a claim that is considered heretical by most Muslims. The largest concentration of Ahmadiyyas is found in the Indian subcontinent, in Pakistan and Bangladesh. Both groups are viewed as heretical by Saudi authorities, and are thus not allowed to go on pilgrimage to Mecca and Medina.

At alislam.org, their official website, the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community says about themselves:

"The Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam is a religious organization, international in its scope, with branches in over 178 countries in Africa, North America, South America, Asia, Australasia, and Europe. At present, its total membership exceeds 200 million worldwide [note: it is impossible to verify this number, which is almost certainly inflated], and the numbers are increasing day by day. This is the most dynamic denomination of Islam in modern history. The Ahmadiyya Movement was established in 1889 by Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1835-1908) in a small and remote village, Qadian, in the Punjab, India. He claimed to be the expected reformer of the latter days, the Awaited One of the world community of religions (The Mahdi and Messiah). It [the movement] advocates peace, tolerance, love and understanding among followers of different faiths. It firmly believes in and acts upon the Qur'anic teaching: "There is no compulsion in religion." (2:257) It strongly rejects violence and terrorism [emphasis in the original] in any form and for any reason. After the demise of its founder, the Ahmadiyya Movement has been headed by his elected successors - Khalifas."

Precisely because they champion an unorthodox and somewhat more peaceful version of Islam, Ahmadis are frequently persecuted by traditional Muslims in both Pakistan and Bangladesh. Under Pakistan's strict blasphemy laws the Ahmadiyya are not allowed to preach, nor even to call themselves Muslims.

Under the Bangladesh National Party (BNP) -led government, discrimination and violence against the Ahmadis has intensified. "It's a dangerous moment in Bangladesh when the government becomes complicit in religious violence," said Brad Adams, executive director of Human Rights Watch's Asia Division. "The authorities have emboldened extremists by failing to prosecute those engaged in anti-Ahmadi violence and by banning Ahmadiyya publications."

In October 2004 Muslim fanatics razed an Ahmadiyya mosque. The mob vandalized and robbed Ahmadiyya houses, injuring at least 11. One of the injured, Shabju Mia, 52, imam of the mosque, ended up in hospital. Witnesses said local BNP leader led the raiders.

In July 2006, the Bangladeshi newspaper the Daily Star carried a story on Ahmadis who had been victimized, but the article was later removed, probably following pressures from powerful anti-Ahmadiyya forces. The police had accused four Ahmadis of preaching publicly in a village in the Punjab. The villagers protested against "unabated preaching" of the Ahmadiyya faith in their village, and urged the police to ensure the arrest of those accused. The minority sect condemned law enforcers for being reluctant to act in two assault incidents on Ahmadis that same summer. The movement believed this encouraged the bigots to be more aggressive. The Ahmadiyyas had become confined to their houses and refrained from going to work after fanatics threatened to attack them.

The irony is that although Ahmadis are hardly even considered Muslims by other Muslims, the first and so far only Muslim to be awarded a Nobel Prize for science was an Ahmadi. According to Hugh Fitzgerald:

"Among the nearly 1000 recipients of Nobel Prizes in science (Physics, Chemistry, Medicine), only one appears to have gone to a 'Muslim' - Abdus Salam. Trained partly at the Cavendish Laboratory in Cambridge, and dying in Oxford (to which he had retired), Abdus Salam shared the prize with Sheldon Glashow and Steven Weinberg. One presumes that Abdus Salam deserved his 1/3 of the 1979 prize. But his entire career depended upon access to Western education. And while he wrote on the 'Wisdom of Islam' (just the kind of thing to win a Templeton Prize) he was both claimed, in Pakistan, as a 'Muslim' and yet belonged, as an Ahmadiyya, to a sect regarded by many Muslims in Pakistan, Bangladesh, and elsewhere as not a real Muslim at all. It was a case of claiming not him, but rather his Nobel, for Islam, and then not discussing if just possibly, the reason he was the only Muslim Nobel-winner in science might have something to do with, precisely, the relatively greater mental freedom that Adhamiddya Islam may offer its adherents, compared to that available to those in orthodox Islam."

The Ahmadis do in some ways represent an interesting case of a "reformed" Islam, but it is in my view unlikely whether their version of Islam could ever form a viable alternative to the majority of the world's Muslims. They are simply too far removed from Islamic orthodoxy, especially the largest branch which considers their founder a prophet.

Bolton wants Iranian leader charged with inciting genocide

John Bolton shows himself deserving of this year's Anti-Dhimmi Award. "Bolton wants Iranian leader charged: U.N. ambassador says Ahmadinejad’s Holocaust remarks incite genocide," from Reuters, with thanks to Kemaste:

NEW YORK - Outgoing U.S. U.N. Ambassador John Bolton and former diplomats from Israel and Canada called on the United Nations on Thursday to charge Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with inciting genocide.

The U.N. International Court of Criminal Justice should charge Ahmadinejad for his threats against the United States, for calling for the destruction of Israel and for instigating discrimination against Christians and Jews, the group said.

“It’s important that if we are in this stage where we’re being given early warning, unambiguously, on what his intentions are, then it’s time to take action,” Bolton told a Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations symposium.

Ahmadinejad caused outrage in the West last year by calling for Israel to be “wiped off the map,” echoing comments by the Islamic Republic’s late founder, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

Speaking at a Tehran conference on Tuesday that questioned the Holocaust, in which 6 million Jews were killed by the Nazis, Ahmadinejad said Israel’s days were numbered.

Iran is accused by the West of seeking to develop nuclear weapons, but it insists it wants nuclear power only to generate electricity. Ahmadinejad said in August Iran was not a threat to any country, “not even to the Zionist regime.”

“Iran and the government that President Ahmadinejad leads is not simply a regime that engages in hateful rhetoric,” said Bolton, whose temporary appointment as U.N. ambassador ends with the current U.S. Congressional term.

“It is seeking to acquire capabilities, which when married with the intentions that they talk of, has to be of very grave concern to the United States and all its friends and allies, in particular Israel.”

'Ahmadinejad wants Israeli genocide'

Obviously. By Etgar Lefkovits in the Jerusalem Post, with thanks to Doug:

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wants to carry out another genocide aimed at destroying the State of Israel, head of Israel's Holocaust center said Thursday.

The remarks by Yad Vashem Chairman Avner Shalev were the most severe public comments to date on the Iranian nuclear threat by the head of Israel's Holocaust Martyrs' and Heroes' Remembrance Authority.

"Iranian President Ahmadinejad has made Holocaust denial part of a strategic agenda; not an academic or intellectual issue. Ahmadinejad wants to lead an Islamic Jihad and to orchestrate another genocide aimed at destroying the State of Israel," Shalev said at a symposium on Holocaust denial held at Yad Vashem for foreign diplomats stationed in Israel.

The conference, 'Holocaust Denial: Paving the Way to Genocide' which was held just days after a meeting of Holocaust deniers in Teheran, was attended by ambassadors and representatives from 40 countries.

"If Europe missed the opportunity to understand what Hitler was promising, then Europe should believe what the Iranian President is saying now. He means business," said Yosef (Tommy) Lapid, a Holocaust survivor and former Justice Minister who serves as the Chairman of the Yad Vashem Council.

"The entire Judeo-Christian tradition is in a battle for survival against Radical Islam," he added.

Atlanta: Accused violent jihadists fail to get charges thrown out

Courtroom Jihad Update: Syed Ahmed and Ehsanul Sadequee are tying up personnel, money, and time that could be devoted to more important and effective anti-terror efforts. "Setback for pair accused of terror aid," from The Associated Press, with thanks to Jeffrey Imm:

ATLANTA — A request by two young men accused of aiding terrorists to throw out certain charges against them should be denied, a judge recommended.

In a report made public Thursday, a U.S. magistrate rejected claims by two men accused of conspiracy and attempting to aid a terrorist organization that the charges against them are unconstitutionally vague and too broad.

Syed Ahmed, 21, and Ehsanul Sadequee, 20, are accused of discussing terror targets with Islamic extremists and undergoing training to carry out a "violent jihad" against civilian and government targets, including an air base in suburban Atlanta.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Gerrilyn Brill said the defendants' alleged conduct fits within the law they are charged with violating and is "sufficiently specific that a person of ordinary intelligence could reasonably understand" that such conduct is prohibited.

Brill's recommendation goes now to a federal district court judge for a final ruling.

The men have pleaded not guilty to a July 19 indictment charging them with providing material support to terrorists and related conspiracy counts. No trial date has been set.

Jihadist group claims Algeria bus attack

The oil weapon. "Al-Qaeda group claims Algeria bus attack," from Reuters, with thanks to Jeffrey Imm:

A militant Islamist group linked to al-Qaeda has claimed responsibility for the weekend bombing of a bus carrying foreign oil workers near Algiers, and warned of further attacks.

The Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC) claim came after the United States urged its citizens in Algeria to review their personal safety following the attack.

It was the first attack on Westerners in the North African country in many years.

"We reiterate our call to all Muslims in Algeria to keep away from the interests of the infidels to avoid harm ... once (these interests or individuals) are targeted," GSPC said in statement posted on the internet.

U.S. says al Qaeda behind Somali Islamists

The Tiny Minority of Extremists controls Mogadishu. "They are killing nuns, they have killed children and they are calling for a jihad (holy war)."

By Andrew Cawthorne for Reuters, with thanks to Jeffrey Imm:

NAIROBI (Reuters) - Somali Islamists are under the growing control of an al Qaeda cell in East Africa, a U.S. diplomat said on Thursday, as Washington condemned their threat to attack Ethiopian troops backing Somalia's interim government.

"The Council of Islamic Courts is now controlled by al Qaeda cell individuals, East Africa al Qaeda cell individuals. The top layer of the court are extremists. They are terrorists," U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Jendayi Frazer told reporters.

"They are killing nuns, they have killed children and they are calling for a jihad (holy war)," she added.

Arab attitudes toward U.S. grow more negative: poll

Amazing that Zogby would say this with a straight face. Amazing that anyone would take him seriously. Amazing that Reuters would print this bit of propaganda as a news story.

Well, that last point is not so amazing, I suppose. But in any case, since when was popularity the index of success in foreign policy? Do you think America was very popular among the Germans or Japanese in 1942? The fact that America is unpopular today among Arabs doesn't -- or shouldn't -- tell us a thing about what we should or should not be doing. What we are doing should be guided solely by considerations of the national interest and how best to defend the U.S. against the global jihad.

What this poll does tell us, yet again, that sympathy for the global jihad is not restricted to a tiny minority of extremists. Zogby asks us to assume that dislike for the U.S. is solely to be attributed to a sober and even-handed evaluation of U.S. foreign policy by "the Arab street." He doesn't say anything about the venomous propaganda about America that appears regularly in the Arabic media. Go to MEMRI and MEMRITV and look around, and you'll see what I mean. And much of that hatred proceeds from America's character as a non-Muslim state, as the chief obstacle to the imposition of Sharia around the world. That attitude won't change one whit with any adjustment in American foreign policy.

By David Alexander for Reuters, with thanks to Teri:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A new survey shows Arab attitudes toward American people, products and culture grew increasingly negative last year, a finding that underscores the need for a change in U.S. Mideast policy, a leading expert on the region said on Thursday.

James Zogby, the head of the Arab American Institute, said the annual survey of opinion in five Arab countries found that U.S. policy toward
Iraq and the Palestinian conflict were the main issues driving deteriorating Arab opinion.

"Our policies have not only had a worsening impact in terms of attitudes toward us but also in dampening confidence in the prospects for development and political stability and are therefore, I think, a real concern to countries in the region," Zogby said.

In previous years, Americans themselves had been viewed positively in most Arab countries, his group said.

President George W. Bush is preparing a change of course for the Iraq war after a bipartisan panel said U.S. strategy was not working and warned that Washington was losing its influence in the region.

The panel, led by former Secretary of State James Baker and former Democratic Rep. Lee Hamilton, also called for a renewed U.S. effort to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a way to defuse regional tensions.

"What the poll says to me is Baker-Hamilton are right," Zogby said.

"If America wants to salvage itself and improve its standing and get the credibility and legitimacy it needs to lead in Iraq, it needs to do something to earn the trust of allies in the broader region," he said.

The real purpose behind the Flying Imam publicity blitz

As I have pointed out many times now, the main purpose of the USAirways Imam Rage incident is to help push through legislation to outlaw religious profiling in airports, so that no matter how suspiciously a Muslim is behaving, officials will be able to do nothing. Now Katherine Kersten, who is doing marvelous work on this case for the Star-Tribune, has more on this as the goal of the whole incident. None other than the slick Mahdi Bray tells the Iranian Qur'an News Agency that Muslims want "new, broad-sweeping legislation that will extract even larger financial and civil penalties for any airline that participates in racial and religious profiling."

"Katherine Kersten: The real purpose behind the imam publicity blitz," by Katherine Kersten in the Star Tribune:

On Dec. 1, a curious report on the grounded-imams incident at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport appeared on the website of the Iranian Quran News Agency. The report quoted extensively from Madhi Bray, executive director of the Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation. The foundation is the American arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, "the world's most influential Islamic fundamentalist group," according to the Chicago Tribune.

Bray's initial statement about the incident had an all-American, see-you-in-court ring. He demanded "large financial compensation for the imams," adding, "We want US Airways and any other airline displaying this type of behavior against Muslims to be hit where it hurts, the pocketbook."

The report echoed statements made by the imams themselves. Omar Shahin, their spokesman, has portrayed the incident in a way that's consistent with a lawsuit and a public relations offensive. He's called for a Jesse Jackson-style boycott of US Airways, and applied classic civil-rights rhetoric to the incident: "This is prejudice; this is obvious discrimination," the Star Tribune quoted him as saying. "I cannot change the color of my skin," he told Newsweek.

But the report on the Iranian website, which has appeared on a variety of Muslim websites worldwide, had a larger primary focus. After the imams incident, it quoted Bray as saying Muslims want "new, broad-sweeping legislation that will extract even larger financial and civil penalties for any airline that participates in racial and religious profiling."

The report is optimistic that Rep. Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress, will lend his support to new legislation. Ellison, it says, has expressed his opposition to "such racial and religious profiling." Ellison, through a spokesman, declined to comment.

One piece of legislation in the works is the End Racial Profiling Act. It is an important priority of Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, whose district includes one of the largest Muslim populations in the country. Conyers introduced the bill in 2004 and 2005, but it went nowhere. Now the alignment of forces may be changing. Conyers will probably be chairman of the House Judiciary Committee when the new Democratic-controlled Congress convenes next month.

Nancy Pelosi, who called herself a "proud" cosponsor of the Profiling Act in 2004, is the incoming House speaker. And in January, Ellison, who represents the district where the imams incident occurred, will take his seat in Congress.

The act, although it doesn't as yet impose large penalties, would bar any federal, state or local law enforcement agency from "relying, to any degree, on race, ethnicity, national origin, or religion in selecting which individuals to subject to routine or spontaneous investigatory activities." That would include questioning, searches and seizures.

One of the act's central features is its definition of illegal profiling. Under it, if airport security personnel question passengers who are disproportionately Muslim or of Middle Eastern descent, this alone would constitute a presumptive violation of the law. Law enforcement agencies would bear the burden of proving that discrimination was not the cause.

What would the effect of such a law be?

"A law that would compel security professionals to focus on keeping their statistics within certain norms rather than on their mission keeping airline travel safe would have a devastating effect on our ability to ensure airline safety," said Daniel Horan of the Los Angeles Police Department in an interview. He worked at the Los Angeles airport on profiling-related issues for 6 years.

Read it all.

FBI: Jailed cleric's illness triggers al Qaeda attack fears

One can't put it past al Qaeda to find a way to blame America for Abdel-Rahman's tumor. From CNN:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The imprisoned blind cleric who inspired the 1993 World Trade Center bombing has been hospitalized, raising fears of new attacks if he dies in U.S. custody, the FBI said in a bulletin.

Radical Egyptian cleric Omar Abdel-Rahman, 68, spat up blood on December 6 and was rushed to a hospital, the FBI notice said.

The trip to the hospital came about after a small tear in his esophagus, and he was treated with a "needed transfusion to replace lost blood," said the FBI bulletin to staffers.

Medical personnel then discovered the cleric had a tumor on his liver, the FBI said.

Al Quintero, a public information officer for the U.S. Medical Center for Federal Prisoners in Springfield, Missouri, said Abdel-Rahman remained at the hospital for five days.

"His condition improved, and he was returned back to prison on December 11, where he remains in stable condition," Quintero said.

Abdel-Rahman has strong ties to al Qaeda and is seen as a key theological force behind the terror group. He is an influential figure for Egyptian Islamic Jihad, most of whose members joined al Qaeda. He has been mentioned often by Osama bin Laden and his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

Abdel-Rahman, who is serving life in a U.S. prison, has called for attacks if he dies in jail. Law enforcement sources said there is no intelligence to suggest there are any attacks being planned.

The cleric has been imprisoned since 1995 for inspiring the 1993 World Trade Center attack and a thwarted plot to attack bridges and tunnels, an FBI building and U.N. headquarters in New York.

The FBI bulletin includes what it said was Abdel-Rahman's last will and testament distributed at an al Qaeda news conference in 1998: "My brothers, if they kill me -- which they will certainly do -- hold my funeral and send my corpse to my family but do not let my blood be shed in vain. Rather extract the most violent revenge."

The memo also recounts a fatwa or religious message believed to have been issued from prison by Abdel-Rahman in the 1990s in which he blames the U.S. government for trying to eliminate him and other clergy "who are speaking the truth."

In the past, Abdel-Rahman has tried to make himself sick, according to prosecutors, so that his followers would retaliate against the United States.

It also notes during the recent Muslim holiday of Ramadan, al Qaeda in Iraq released a videotape encouraging all Muslims there to capture Westerners so they could be exchanged for the release of Abdel-Rahman.

FBI analysts said the tape is evidence that Abdel-Rahman remains a "significant source of inspiration" for al Qaeda and its sympathizers.

[...]

The bulletin is intended to alert all those in law enforcement of the possibility of a threat.

The End of British Multiculturalism?

In this week's Jihad Watch videoblog at Hot Air, I discuss Tony Blair's speech from last Friday, which has been trumpeted, unfortunately somewhat inaccurately, as a discarding of multiculturalism.

Islamic caliphate a dream, not reality -- experts

This article seems to be devoted to establishing that this "vision that seems to have unsettled Washington" is really nothing to be concerned about: the jihadists can't establish a caliphate anyway, so why are we bothering to oppose them? And it is indeed unlikely in the extreme that a caliphate will be established that would be accepted by the majority of Muslims today. Reuters even consigns this story to its "Oddly Enough" feature series, which usually contains stories about man-eating chickens and Jell-O wrestling.

But what no one quoted in this story ever discusses is the fact that however unlikely the prospect of success, the jihadists will soldier on, attempting to advance their cause by both violent and non-violent means.

Also, to dismiss the caliphate as "just part of (al Qaeda's) war of slogans" fails to recognize how potent slogans can be in formulating public opinion -- witness the success of the Palestinian cause in winning global support through canny use of terms like "occupation" and "apartheid" (and "Palestinian" itself). However unlikely its realization, the quest for the caliphate is increasingly popular -- at least by the evidence of election results in the P.A., Egypt, Algeria, and elsewhere, and that fact could have extraordinarily serious consequences.

By Andrew Hammond for Reuters, with thanks to Jeffrey Imm:

RIYADH (Reuters) - The creation of an Islamic caliphate, or empire, has long formed part of al Qaeda's world view, and it is a vision that seems to have unsettled Washington.

But experts say it will remain just a militants' dream.

Before he went into hiding in 2001, Osama bin Laden often talked of deposing Muslim rulers, seen as beholden to Western powers, and abolishing modern state borders to unite all Muslims under a caliphate -- an Islamic state where God's word was law ruled over by a caliph, or "successor" to Prophet Mohammad.

Now al Qaeda militants are talking about setting up a caliphate in west Iraq, and militants calling themselves al Qaeda in Yemen also said recently a caliphate is their goal.

Since September, President Bush has warned several times that al Qaeda wants to set up a violent, radical Islamic empire based in Iraq, to unite Muslims under one aegis.

Baghdad was once the center of an Islamic empire that lasted for four centuries -- but experts say the chances of a revival of the ancient Islamic institution are remote.

"Al Qaeda could set up an Islamic state in the west of Iraq, if there is no American army there. But it would be difficult for them to penetrate any other state where there is an army and state apparatus," said Saudi analyst Faris bin Houzam.

"Their big dream is to set up an Islamic state, but there's nothing to suggest it could happen," he added.

[...]

"I can see the whole Arab world falling into sectarian violence, so I can't see this caliphate happening," said London-based anthropologist Madawi al-Rasheed, referring to Sunni-Shi'ite tensions in Iraq and Lebanon.

"This is just part of (al Qaeda's) war of slogans."

[...]

Lebanese historian Kamal Salibi said the region had already failed to unite under the banner of Arab nationalism after World War Two.

"It didn't work with Arab nationalism, and with pan-Islamism it is working less," he said. "The likelihood that states would give up their sovereignty is now more remote than ever before."

[...]

Al-Rasheed said the word is being used more and more in a variety of contexts to signify a morally correct order. It is used by mainstream political parties, Muslim communities and politically interested activists on the Internet.

"With new communications there is a revival of the idea of a caliphate but as a virtual community with no territorial boundaries," she said, pointing to "diaspora" Muslims in Europe.

"Today, in the 21st century, it's a dream of Muslim activists."

Political groups who have indicated a desire to set up a caliphate in their own patch include the Islamist movement in Somalia, Morocco's main opposition group Al Adl Wal Ihssane (Justice and Charity) and Islamist militants in Central Asia.

The spiritual head of Nigeria's 70 million Muslims is referred to by followers as "caliph" and the Muslim region of the country is referred to as the Sokoto Caliphate.

Jemaah Islamiah, the biggest militant organization in southeast Asia, also dreams of setting up an Islamic state across the region, perhaps using the title "caliphate."

But in the Arab world, Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood has chosen not to focus its efforts on the goal of a caliphate, though scholars have often noted that the seminal Arab Islamist group arose -- perhaps filling a certain psychological need -- only four years after the caliphate was abolished in Istanbul.

The Ottoman empire fashioned itself as the inheritor of the first caliphates centered in Damascus, Baghdad and Cairo until Turkey's secular founder Mustafa Kemal Ataturk formally ended the office in 1924, in what Muslims have often viewed as a British imperial plot.

"For most of the mainstream and less mainstream political parties of political Islam, the borders of the contemporary state have been accepted," said As'ad AbuKhalil from Lebanon, who teaches politics at the U.S. California State University.

"There is absolutely no credence to the notion that the quest for the caliphate is the overriding goal of the Islamist movement in the region."

White House denies Saudi plan to aid Iraqi Sunnis

An update on this story. "WHouse denies Saudi plan to aid Iraqi Sunnis," from AFP, with thanks to Jeffrey Imm:

WASHINGTON - The White House denied Wednesday that Saudi Arabia had warned it would support Iraq’s Sunni minority against its Shia majority if the United States withdrew its forces from the war-torn country.

“That’s not Saudi government policy,” said the spokesman, who acknowledged that he had not discussed the matter with Riyadh’s embassy in Washington or to officials in Saudi Arabia.

The New York Times, citing US and Arab diplomats, reported Tuesday that King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia delivered the warning to Vice President Dick Cheney in Riyadh two weeks ago.

“It’s a hypothetical situation, and we’d work hard to avoid such a structure,” one Arab diplomat in Washington told the Times.

“If things become so bad in Iraq, like an ethnic cleansing, we will feel we are pulled into the war,” the diplomat was quoted as saying.

Authorities Probe Foreign Student Seeking Commercial Truck-Driving HAZMAT License

But he only wanted to learn how to drive forward -- reminiscent of those stories about the 9/11 hijackers telling flight instructors that they didn't need to learn how to take off or land, but only to fly.

By Liza Porteus for FoxNews, with thanks to TJ:

NEW YORK — Mohammed Yusef Mullawala wanted a license to transport hazardous materials and to learn how to drive commercial tractor trailers. There was nothing unusual about that, until he told his teacher that he only wanted to learn how to drive forward, and he wanted to learn fast.

That was enough to raise a red flag with Darleen Crawford, president of the Nationwide Tractor Trailer Driving School in Smithfield, R.I., where Mullawala took driving classes.

Federal and state authorities are investigating why Mullawala was seeking a commercial trucking license after his behavior raised flags at the Rhode Island driving school. Crawford said he was also insistent on taking the test necessary to earn a license to transport hazardous materials.

Mullawala, a 28-year-old citizen of India who is of Pakistani descent, is now in federal custody in Massachusetts on immigration violation charges....

Crawford started documenting suspicious activity: Mullawala lived in New York City but traveled to Rhode Island for the driving classes; he missed his first day of classes; and he was very insistent on getting his hazardous material transport license.

But the fact that he only seemed interested in driving forward was the most concerning.

"We tell them from Day One, 'you will be backing up,' 'you'll be backing up every single day,'" Crawford said, adding that it normally takes two to three weeks of practice backing up before drivers get road permits and learn how to drive forward, among other things.

The situation was reminiscent of when some of the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers told their flight-school instructor they were only interested in how to fly planes at certain altitudes, not so much how to land or take off.

"He was just really pushing to get out of here," Crawford said. "I've been doing this for 30 years so you just sort of know when something doesn't feel right."...

Investigators learned that when Mullawala obtained his driver's license from the Rhode Island Registry of Motor Vehicles, he gave a false statement indicating he was a Rhode Island resident. ICE then determined he was a citizen of India and in the United States on an expired temporary student visa.

On Tuesday, Mullawala went to state police headquarters thinking he was responding to another matter. He was then apprehended and turned over to ICE....

Saudi King Abdullah to Cheney: Saudis might back Sunnis if US leaves Iraq

If the Iraqi Shi'ites weren't happy when this idea was originally floated by the private security and energy advisor to the Saudi ambassador to the US, Prince Turki al-Faisal (who has very recently announced his resignation), they're certainly none too pleased about this.

"Saudis Say They Might Back Sunnis if U.S. Leaves Iraq," by Helene Cooper for the New York Times:

WASHINGTON, Dec. 12 — Saudi Arabia has told the Bush administration that it might provide financial backing to Iraqi Sunnis in any war against Iraq’s Shiites if the United States pulls its troops out of Iraq, according to American and Arab diplomats.

King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia conveyed that message to Vice President Dick Cheney two weeks ago during Mr. Cheney’s whirlwind visit to Riyadh, the officials said. During the visit, King Abdullah also expressed strong opposition to diplomatic talks between the United States and Iran, and pushed for Washington to encourage the resumption of peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians, senior Bush administration officials said.

The Saudi warning reflects fears among America’s Sunni Arab allies about Iran’s rising influence in Iraq, coupled with Tehran’s nuclear ambitions. King Abdullah II of Jordan has also expressed concern about rising Shiite influence, and about the prospect that the Shiite-dominated government would use Iraqi troops against the Sunni population.

A senior Bush administration official said Tuesday that part of the administration’s review of Iraq policy involved the question of how to harness a coalition of moderate Iraqi Sunnis with centrist Shiites to back the Iraqi government led by Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki.

The Saudis have argued strenuously against an American pullout from Iraq, citing fears that Iraq’s minority Sunni Arab population would be massacred. Those fears, United States officials said, have become more pronounced as a growing chorus in Washington has advocated a draw-down of American troops in Iraq, coupled with diplomatic outreach to Iran, which is largely Shiite.

“It’s a hypothetical situation, and we’d work hard to avoid such a structure,” one Arab diplomat in Washington said. But, he added, “If things become so bad in Iraq, like an ethnic cleansing, we will feel we are pulled into the war.”

The Bush administration is also working on a way to form a coalition of Sunni Arab nations and a moderate Shiite government in Iraq, along with the United States and Europe, to stand against “Iran, Syria and the terrorists,” another senior administration official said Tuesday.

Until now Saudi officials have promised their counterparts in the United States that they would refrain from aiding Iraq’s Sunni insurgency. But that pledge holds only as long as the United States remains in Iraq.

The Saudis have been wary of supporting Sunnis in Iraq because their insurgency there has been led by extremists of Al Qaeda, who are opposed to the kingdom’s monarchy. But if Iraq’s sectarian war worsened, the Saudis would line up with Sunni tribal leaders.

Well, officially wary. Private citizens in that country are reportedly funneling millions into Iraq to support the Sunnis.

The Saudi ambassador to the United States, Prince Turki al-Faisal, who told his staff on Monday that he was resigning his post, recently fired Nawaf Obaid, a consultant who wrote an opinion piece in The Washington Post two weeks ago contending that “one of the first consequences” of an American pullout of Iraq would “be massive Saudi intervention to stop Iranian-backed Shiite militias from butchering Iraqi Sunnis.”

Mr. Obaid also suggested that Saudi Arabia could cut world oil prices in half by raising its production, a move that he said “would be devastating to Iran, which is facing economic difficulties even with today’s high oil prices.” The Saudi government disavowed Mr. Obaid’s column, and Prince Turki canceled his contract.

But Arab diplomats said Tuesday that Mr. Obaid’s column reflected the view of the Saudi government, which has made clear its opposition to an American pullout from Iraq.

In a speech in Philadelphia last week, Prince Turki reiterated the Saudi position against an American withdrawal from Iraq. “Just picking up and leaving is going to create a huge vacuum,” he told the World Affairs Council. “The U.S. must underline its support for the Maliki government because there is no other game in town.”

Prince Turki said Saudi Arabia did not want Iraq to fracture along ethnic or religious lines. On Monday a group of prominent Saudi clerics called on Sunni Muslims around the world to mobilize against Shiites in Iraq. The statement called the “murder, torture and displacement of Sunnis” an “outrage.”

The resignation of Prince Turki, a former Saudi intelligence chief and a son of the late King Faisal, was supposed to be formally announced Monday, officials said, but that had not happened by late Tuesday.

“They’re keeping us very puzzled,” a Saudi official said. Prince Turki’s resignation was first reported Monday in The Washington Post.

Spencer: Tony Blair Renounces Multiculturalism - Sort Of

In FrontPage today I discuss the recent controversial remarks by Tony Blair, which turn out to be less than meets the eye (news links in the original):

British Prime Minister Tony Blair declared last Friday that “no distinctive culture or religion supercedes our duty to be part of an integrated United Kingdom.” He listed “respect for this country and its shared heritage,” along with “belief in democracy, the rule of law, tolerance, equal treatment for all,” as the things that “we hold in common” and give “us the right to call ourselves British.”

Philip Johnston, Home Affairs Editor of the Telegraph, termed this a “volte face” and noted that “just eight years ago” Blair “was a multiculturalist champion.” The prime minister’s speech, wrote Johnston, “was the culmination of a long Labour retreat from a cause it once enthusiastically embraced.” It was a retreat, he suggested, made necessary by the force of events: “In recent weeks, Jack Straw, Ruth Kelly, John Reid, and Gordon Brown have all played their part in a concerted revision of the Cabinet’s stand which began in earnest after the July 7 bombs in London last year.”

Blair himself, however, doesn’t seem to have intended his speech to be taken as a rejection of or retreat from multiculturalism. He explained: “It is not that we need to dispense with multicultural Britain. On the contrary we should continue celebrating it. But we need – in the face of the challenge to our values – to re-assert also the duty to integrate, to stress what we hold in common and to say: these are the shared boundaries within which we all are obliged to live, precisely in order to preserve our right to our own different faiths, races and creeds.” In line with this, he called for an adjustment in how multiculturalism was to be understood: “it is necessary to go back to what a multicultural Britain is all about. The whole point is that multicultural Britain was never supposed to be a celebration of division; but of diversity.” He rejected the separatism and relativism that would make for the Balkanization and atomization of British society and rule and law: “The purpose was to allow people to live harmoniously together, despite their difference; not to make their difference an encouragement to discord.”

Consequently, he called for grants “to promote integration”; an end to forced marriage (which the British failed to outlaw last summer); adherence by all groups to the rule of law (in other words, no Shari’a in Britain: Blair said, “Nobody can legitimately ask to stand outside the law of the nation. There is thus no question of the UK allowing the introduction of religious law in the UK”); restrictions on preachers coming from outside of Britain (which will do nothing, of course, about home-grown British jihadists such as the July 7 bombers); citizenship as part of the national curriculum (with “religious education in all community schools” that “should be broadly Christian in character but that it should include study of the other major religions”); “vigorous” enforcement of “legal requirements” for madrassas; an English requirement for permanent residency; and more.

As positive as all this is, it is rather astounding to realize that these measures, as mild as they are, have not been undertaken long ago, or that anyone would think them controversial. It is disappointing that Blair defines, at least in this speech, Britain’s national character almost exclusively in terms of the “tolerance” that “is part of what makes Britain, Britain.” He speaks in a somewhat confused manner about a placard that a Turkish protestor held aloft at a demonstration against the Pope’s recent visit there: “Jesus was a prophet but not the Son of God.” This placard, says Blair with evident admiration, occupied “an altogether higher plane of theology.” He added: “Most Christians are hugely surprised to be told that the Koran reveres Jesus as a prophet.” In this he demonstrated a complete lack of awareness of the fact that Islam’s reverence for Jesus as a prophet is a manifestation not of Islamic openness to Christianity, but of just the opposite: it is a manifestation of a supremacist theology that strips Christianity of all legitimacy and presents itself as the replacement and corrective of Christianity’s deification of Christ. In light of that, Blair would do better to speak not of “the rich Abrahamic heritage we share in common,” but of the necessity for Muslims in Britain to reject this supremacist doctrine, which because of the political character of Islam leads ineluctably to what Blair calls the “warped distortion of the faith of Islam” – that is, the Islam that believes it has a right and duty to impose Shari’a in Britain.

Blair, breaking new ground as the first non-Muslim Grand Mufti of Britain, affirmed that “of course the extremists that threaten violence are not true Muslims in the sense of being true to the proper teaching of Islam.” He did not, however, inform his audience where this “proper teaching of Islam” could be found, or call upon any of the mainstream Sunni schools of jurisprudence to repudiate the doctrine, which they all hold, that the Islamic community has the responsibility to wage war against the non-Muslim world in order to impose the rule of Islamic law. But Blair could not be expected to speak about this, even if he knew about it: discussion in Britain of the elements of Islam that give rise to violence and fanaticism have thus far been dismissed as “racism,” despite the patent fact that Islamic jihad supremacism is a religious and political ideology, and not a race at all. That’s why the end of Blair’s speech had an ominous tinge: “The right to be different. The duty to integrate. That is what being British means. And neither racists nor extremists should be allowed to destroy it.” Clearly by “extremists” he meant jihadists, but by “racists” it is likely that he meant the most vocal opponents of the creeping Islamization of Britain. After all, the Blair government attempted to pass an “incitement to religious hatred” bill that would have criminalized “abusive or insulting” behavior toward a particular religion. Certainly Islamic jihadists and their allies have characterized honest discussion of the violent elements of Islamic theology and tradition as abusive and insulting, truth notwithstanding; Blair’s bill would make deviations from his polite fictions about “the proper teaching of Islam,” no matter how careful, scholarly, and respectful, into criminal offenses.

As Johnston notes, however, the force of events has already compelled the Labour leadership to qualify its hitherto no-holds-barred support for multiculturalism, and has led Mr. Blair to affirm British values to the extent that he did on Friday. It is likely that this process is not over, and that reality will force new concessions from these leaders. As events rush on, they will increasingly see that Blair’s watery vision of mutual tolerance is not enough to ensure national self-preservation, and that multiculturalism must be discarded altogether in favor of a forthright and unapologetic assertion of British and Western civilization as something worth defending, and as something superior in numerous particulars to the alternative offered with increasing stridency by the Muslim immigrants in Britain. At that point, if it is not too late, it will be impossible to criminalize discussion of the violent elements of Islamic theology and tradition, for discussion of them will be an obvious national necessity, inextricable from the defense of the nation. If it is not too late, we may hope that Britain may then reemerge not just as a geographic location for anything at all and nothing in particular, but as a dynamic exponent of the Judeo-Christian civilization that has always been the focus of Islamic jihad efforts. And at that point it will be finally understood that the new defense against the jihad will be what truly gives British subjects the right of which Blair speaks: “the right to call ourselves British.”

Afghanistan's Karzai accuses Pakistani government of supporting the Taliban

Friend and Ally Update: "Pakistan accused of supporting Taliban," by Alisa Tang for Associated Press, with thanks to Jeffrey Imm:

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan - President Hamid Karzai directly accused Pakistan's government Tuesday of supporting the Taliban insurgency in his country, hours after a suicide attacker exploded himself in an Afghan governor's compound, killing eight.

Taliban militants have increasingly targeted government officials. Since September, they have killed one provincial governor, narrowly missed another, and killed several district-level police, intelligence and administrative chiefs.

The attacks are aimed at undermining the government of Karzai, who on Tuesday employed some of his toughest rhetoric yet against Pakistan,
Afghanistan's eastern neighbor and a U.S. ally.

"The problem is not Taliban. We don't see it that way. The problem is with Pakistan," Karzai told foreign journalists during a trip to Kandahar, the Taliban's former stronghold."

He said the Taliban took power with support from Pakistan, calling it "more than a boss."

"The state of Pakistan was supporting the Taliban, so we presume if there is still any Taliban, that they are being supported by a state element."

Michelle Malkin interviews Robert Spencer, part 2

At Hot Air today is the second half of my interview with Michelle Malkin, discussing my book The Truth About Muhammad and related matters. Part One is here.

You'll have to watch the whole thing to see whether or not the plant gets me in the end.

I'd like to express my profound gratitude to Michelle Malkin for allowing me an opportunity to explain these key points in greater depth than I usually have the chance to do.

Trolling for victim status

Yesterday Jihad Watch reader JS brought to my attention an "anti-hate" website that listed Jihad Watch among "Islamophobes" who hate all Muslims and want them all killed. Since, of course, this is a false and slanderous charge, I asked the site author for a retraction. In a series of virulently hostile emails, he refused to give it, and said:

I understand that you have said for some time that unmoderated comments on your site don't represent your official position, however, allowing such comments to remain on your site clearly implies endorsement.

Is that so? Here are some recent comments that "remain" on this site:

Islam is a perfect, beautiful way of life. If you knew the truth you would WANT to be governed by sharia law because you'd be more free and happier than you are now. It is so far from the warped perception you have of it that you must have been actively and purposefully mislead.

Islam is still the best way forward for all humanity....global Islam IS the way forward....

I am glad that Iran is willing to defend the Ummah against possible attack from the kuffur nations. The Ummah has been dominated and humiliated by the kuffur. The kuffur also dominate and humiliate women....

So let's see. I guess if allowing comments to remain on this site "clearly implies endorsement," by the looks of those comments I'm a supporter of the imposition of Sharia law on the West, as well as of Iranian belligerence.

But of course, any such notions can easily be dispelled by reference to my own writings, in which I have been critical of Sharia's denial of rights to women and religious minorities, as well as of Ahmadinejad's genocidal aspirations. And that's just the point: as I have said many times, if you think I endorse a comment here, please establish that from my own writings. But this writer did not do that for the positions he ascribes to Jihad Watch, and he cannot do that, because they are not my positions.

Open comments on this site exist in order to foster mature discussion, strategizing, exchanging of background information, and the like. We have many times asked commenters not to engage in venting that plays into the hands of the jihadists and their useful idiots. Comments are unmoderated, and there are thousands upon thousands of them at this point, most of which I never see. If I see a comment advocating hatred of all Muslims and calling for them to be killed, I remove it (and I ask you to kindly alert me to such when you see them, so that I can do so). But there is a more important point here, illustrated by further remarks to me from this blogger:

I'm sorry, but I cannot retract what is true. I understand that, if you follow your usual practice, you will now post attacks on me, and some of your more rabid followers will send death threats. I have fought online hate speech for quite some time, and am used to effectively dealing with all the consequences and dangers of such. I would hope that you would be a gentleman and not try to incite such, and I will closely monitor the situation.

When I read that, I understood what this man wanted: he was hoping that I would take his bait and post a link to his site (which I will not do, and I have refrained from quoting it also) so that he would be able to claim victim status on the basis of negative emails he would receive as a result of my posting. (It is ironic, also, that I am apparently supposed to accept being slandered without responding, but that's another matter.) It is plain slander for him to suggest that I incite anyone to issue death threats, but the point is this: I have received numerous genuine death threats, but that doesn't faze him one bit. He is hoping to use the response he thinks he would get from this site to help shift attention away from the genuine death threats issued by the Islamic jihadists, and the violence they commit daily in the name of Islam, to the alleged "hate" generated here.

This is a common tactic, and a widely-used one. The Holocaust conference going on in Tehran is a large example of the same phenomenon represented in a tiny way by this man who is slandering me. The message in Tehran is essentially that the Holocaust didn't happen, but that it should have, and will soon. Ahmadinejad and his stooges are trying to shift attention away from the manifest reality of genocide against the Jews to the trumped-up victim status of Iran and its allied belligerent states. They don't want you to see Israel as a victim, but as a perpetrator.

Likewise, in a small way, so often here at Jihad Watch critics attempt to shift the focus away from the jihad violence we report here, and onto how evil I am simply for the act of reporting it. In doing this, they manifest a moral corruption and hypocrisy comparable, on a vastly smaller scale of course, to that of Ahmadinejad himself.

CAIR urges Muslims making pilgrimage to Mecca to file civil rights complaints against airlines

The Council on American Islamic Relations, apparently oblivious to the public relations disaster that their trumped up Flying Imams controversy is becoming for them, is pressing on, asking Muslims flying on their way to Mecca to lodge complaints against airlines if their complimentary pretzels are stale.

Memo to Ibrahim Hooper: I hereby volunteer to fly to Mecca. I promise you I'll keep close tabs on the airline service, Ibrahim, and will give you a full report as soon as I get back. What's that? As a non-Muslim, I am forbidden to enter Mecca? Any practice of faith by a non-Muslim in Saudi Arabia could land me in a Saudi Arabian prison? What are you, some kind of a kafirophobe?

I mention the fact that non-Muslims cannot enter Mecca to put CAIR's civil rights mau-mauing into perspective. In no majority Muslim country in the world today do non-Muslims enjoy full equality of rights with Muslims; at very least they are forbidden to proselytize, while Muslims are not so forbidden. But CAIR, although it has not hesitated to speak out about affairs in other countries, has never spoken out against that fact. It is in this light that its persistent attempts to gain victim status for Muslims in the U.S., with all the privileges that come with that status in this politically correct and silly age, should be evaluated.

"Muslim pilgrims urged to complain," by Audrey Hudson in the Washington Times, with thanks to Twostellas:

American Muslims making a religious pilgrimage to Mecca are being encouraged to file civil rights complaints if they feel discriminated against by airlines.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), citing what it called the "airport profiling" of six imams removed from a recent flight, yesterday said Muslims traveling this month to the holy site in Saudi Arabia need to be aware of their rights.

"Given the increase in the number of complaints CAIR has received alleging airport profiling of American Muslims, we believe it is important that all those taking part in this year's hajj be aware of their legal and civil rights," said Ibrahim Hooper, CAIR spokesman.

The group has established a toll-free hot line (800/784-7526) for victims of "flying while Muslim," as Muslims have begun departing for the weeklong hajj, a once-in-a-lifetime obligation to visit the holy city of Mecca, which this year begins Dec. 29.

But M. Zuhdi Jasser, a Phoenix physician and chairman of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD), said the announcement by CAIR "continues the tired stoking of the flames of victimization."

"They are unfortunately exploiting, for purely political reasons, what should be a sacred and purely spiritual story of our faith's annual holy pilgrimage to Mecca," Dr. Jasser said.

"We need new leadership and organizations which use their passions and the bandwidth of the media to lead the ideological fight against radical and political Islam rather than this tired pre-emption of supposed discrimination."

CAIR is representing the six imams removed from a US Airways flight last month and has asked for a meeting with the airline to seek an out-of-court settlement. It maintains that police and witness reports detailing the imams unusual behavior before their removal last month were ethnically and/or religiously motivated.

The imams say they were praying and did not, as the reports say, change seats and make remarks critical of President Bush and the Iraq war.

Pilots and air marshals called the incident a "PC probe" to intimidate passengers and crew from reporting suspicious behavior by Muslim passengers and are fearful the incident will set off a domino effect of lawsuits.

Debra Burlingame, whose brother was the pilot of American Airlines Flight 77 that crashed into the Pentagon on September 11, thinks this is a ploy to extort money from the airlines.

"I think CAIR is soliciting complaints, and if they don't get it, they will make it up," said Miss Burlingame, who is also a dire