Recently in Sharia Category

This is a result of Muhammad's exoneration of his favorite wife, Aisha, who was suspected of adultery. Allah gave him a revelation requiring four male witnesses to establish such a crime: "And those who accuse honourable women but bring not four witnesses, scourge them (with) eighty stripes and never (afterward) accept their testimony - They indeed are evil-doers" (Qur'an 24:4). The problem with this is that women who accuse men of rape but cannot produce four male witnesses are often accused themselves of zina -- unlawful sexual intercourse -- and jailed as a result.

"Sharp rise in jail terms for Afghan rape and abuse victims," by Dean Nelson in the Telegraph, May 21 (thanks to Pedro):

The number of Afghan women and girls jailed for fleeing sexual abuse, domestic, violence and forced marriage has increased dramatically, according to new official figures.

Statistics obtained from Afghanistan's Interior Ministry by the campaign group Human Rights Watch reveal the number of women and girls convicted of 'moral crimes,' which include running away from home has increased by 50 per cent in the last year from 400 to 600.

Many of the 600 women jailed in the last year are victims of sexual assault and domestic abuse whose only crime was to run away from their assailants, the group said.

It called on the Afghan government to enforce its own Elimination of Violence Against Women (EVAW), and to stop its judges punishing female victims.

Although it is not a crime in Afghanistan for women to run away, the group said the country's judges, including members of its Supreme Court, regard women who run away from their homes as criminals. Many of them who flee rapes and other assaults have been charged with seeking sex outside marriage, known as Zina in Afghanistan.

Those jailed for Zina include women and girls who have been raped or forced into prostitution, the group said.

Earlier this year Human Rights Watch released its report I had to Run Away, which revealed that half of all women and 95 per cent of girls in Afghan jails had been convicted of 'moral crimes' of running away or sex outside marriage.

A report by Oxfam found that 87 per cent of Afghan women had suffered sexual and physical abuse and been forced into unwanted marriages.

Earlier this year a 22 year old woman, Gulnaz, who was jailed for Zina after she was raped and impregnated by her cousin's husband decided to marry her attacker to spare her daughter the stigma of being born out of wedlock. She had been 'pardoned' for her crime by President Karzai and released following an international outcry....

Dangerous

The dangers of speaking one's mind in what is rapidly becoming a Sharia state. "Amina Tyler, Tunisia’s ‘topless jihad’ activist, caught and under arrest," from Al Arabiya, May 21:

After months of reportedly going into hiding, the outspoken Tunisian feminist who sparked a trend of “topless jihad” has been found and arrested by Tunisian authorities earlier this week and may be charged for conducting “provocative acts.”

Amina Tyler, 19, was found in the midst of police scuffles with hardline Salafist group Ansar al-Shariah in the central Tunisian city of Kairouan on Sunday.

Tyler previously described herself as a member of the Ukrainian feminist group Femen, which uses nudity in protests.

Witnesses said she allegedly scrawled “Femen” on the wall near the main mosque and may have intended to hang a banner on the building before an angry crowd gathered and started shouting at her to leave, according to The Associated Press.

Video posted by the Tunisian online Nawaat news site shows Tyler, with dyed blonde hair, clutching a banner and being hustled away by police and put into a van as residents chased her.

A local resident shouts at the camera: “She is dishonoring us. We will protect our town, but a dirty girl like her shouldn’t come among us.”

Mohammed Ali Aroui, the spokesman for the Tunisian interior ministry, described her acts as provocative and said she was under investigation and may be charged for her behavior on Sunday. He added that he understood the angry reaction of local residents to her appearance.

The ministry had banned Ansar al-Shariah’s annual conference, citing it as a threat to security and public order, and sent 11,000 soldiers and police to prevent hardline Muslims, known as salafis, from entering Kairouan.

In March, Tyler posted pictures of her topless body with the phrase “my body is my own” scrawled on it, and she went into hiding after receiving death threats. Her family took her to stay with relatives outside the capital before she escaped and hid with friends.

A month later, Tyler had been trying to leave Tunisia, her former lawyer said after a video surfaced in which the woman recounted being drugged and given virginity tests by relatives.

“Free Amina” rallies held by bare-breasted Femen activists hit Paris last month as Tyler’s supporters feared she would soon face criminal prosecution.

What fun the Sharia supremacists will have when they begin to turn on their Leftist patrons and helpers. "Couple jailed for sex outside marriage in Dubai," by Bassam Za’za’ for Gulf News, May 18 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

Dubai: A couple has been sentenced to a year in jail for sex outside of marriage, after the man’s wife reported them to police.

The man’s wife was in the couple’s marital home in Discovery Gardens on November 29 at the time of the incident. She was in the living room while the pair were in the bedroom.

The hotel manager and his partner pleaded not guilty when they appeared before the Dubai Misdemeanour Court. They said they got married in Ukraine on August 1, 2012 and provided the judge with a copy of their marriage contract.

“It is true that we were having consensual sex… but I was not on good terms with my wife and we had marital problems that were leading us to divorce,” the manager said in court.

Records said the manager provided the judge with Sharia court papers certifying that he divorced his wife in December 2012.

“My husband is a Hindu and he is not allowed to have two wives at the same time. We had agreed to divorce but he was supposed to provide me with housing, which he didn’t. I was staying in the house temporarily until we settled things. When he brought his lover with him, I asked him to kick her out. He didn’t,” the man’s ex-wife said.

The Ukrainian woman is believed to be seven months’ pregnant.

Records said the 35-year-old Indian manager started having sex outside of marriage with his 22-year-old Ukrainian girlfriend in March 2012 while still married to his 32-year-old countrywoman.

The manager said that he was not satisfied with his marriage and he asked for a divorce when his Ukrainian girlfriend got pregnant.

The couple claimed that they had consensual sex nearly 60 times since they first met. The defendants asked the court to acquit them because they were married and didn’t have sex outside of marriage.

According to Tuesday’s judgement, the court decided the pair had sex outside marriage as they confessed their relationship blossomed in April 2012, while the manager got divorced in December.

The pair will be deported following the completion of their jail terms, said presiding judge Mohammad Shawqi....

This AP story uses "conservative" to refer to the pro-Sharia Muslims who blocked this women's rights law. That's in accord with common journalistic practice, which refers to religious people of any religion as "conservative" and to more secular types as "liberal." The common journalistic practice runs into a contradiction, however, with the global alliance between Islamic supremacists and the forces of the Left. That leads the mainstream media to term opponents of Sharia "right-wing" and even "far-right," their all-purpose term to semaphore to readers that we are bad people and decent folks should stay away from us. But that means that in the U.S., opponents of Sharia are "conservatives," while in Afghanistan, proponents of Sharia are "conservatives." If ever (and this will never happen) a counter-jihad, anti-Sharia movement arose in Afghanistan, AP's collective head would explode.

Anyway, note that the Sharia supremacists block a law banning child marriage. This is because Muhammad consummated his marriage with Aisha when he was 54 and she was 9, and he is the supreme example for conduct (cf. Qur'an 33:21), so his example is normative and cannot be questioned. And the law also would have prevented the prosecution of rape victims -- one of the most noxious manifestations of the fact that in Islamic law, men are not called upon to exercise any self-control at all. Their conduct is entirely the woman's responsibility. If she gets raped, it is her fault.

"Conservative Afghan lawmakers block legislation protecting women’s rights," from the Associated Press, May 18 (thanks to all who sent this in):

KABUL, Afghanistan — Conservative religious lawmakers in Afghanistan blocked legislation on Saturday aimed at strengthening provisions for women’s freedoms, arguing that parts of it violate Islamic principles and encourage disobedience.

The fierce opposition highlights how tenuous women’s rights remain a dozen years after the ouster of the hard-line Taliban regime, whose strict interpretation of Islam once kept Afghan women virtual prisoners in their homes.

Khalil Ahmad Shaheedzada, a conservative lawmaker for Herat province, said the legislation was withdrawn shortly after being introduced in parliament because of an uproar by religious parties who said parts of the law are un-Islamic.

“Whatever is against Islamic law, we don’t even need to speak about it,” Shaheedzada said.

The Law on Elimination of Violence Against Women has been in effect since 2009, but only by presidential decree. It is being brought before parliament now because lawmaker Fawzia Kofi, a women’s rights activist, wants to cement it with a parliamentary vote to prevent its potential reversal by any future president who might be tempted to repeal it to satisfy hard-line religious parties.

The law criminalizes, among other things, child marriage and forced marriage, and bans “baad,” the traditional practice of selling and buying women to settle disputes. It also makes domestic violence a crime punishable by up to three years in prison and specifies that rape victims should not face criminal charges for fornication or adultery.

Kofi, who plans to run for president in next year’s elections, said she was disappointed because among those who oppose upgrading the law from presidential decree to legislation passed by parliament are women.

Afghanistan’s parliament has more than 60 female lawmakers, mostly due to constitutional provisions reserving certain seats for women.

There has been spotty enforcement of the law as it stands. A United Nations analysis in late 2011 found only a small percentage of reported crimes against women were pursued by the Afghan government. Between March 2010 and March 2011 — the first full Afghan year the decree was in effect — prosecutors filed criminal charges in only 155 cases, or 7 percent of the total number of crimes reported.

The child marriage ban and the idea of protecting female rape victims from prosecution were particularly heated subjects in Saturday’s parliamentary debate, said Nasirullah Sadiqizada Neli, a conservative lawmaker from Daykundi province.

Neli suggested that removing the custom — common in Afghanistan — of prosecuting raped women for adultery would lead to social chaos, with women freely engaging in extramarital sex safe in the knowledge they could claim rape if caught.

Another lawmaker, Mandavi Abdul Rahmani of Barlkh province, also opposed the law’s rape provision.

“Adultery itself is a crime in Islam, whether it is by force or not,” Rahmani said.

He said the Quran also makes clear that a husband has a right to beat a disobedient wife as a last resort, as long as she is not permanently harmed. “But in this law,” he said, “It says if a man beats his wife at all, he should be jailed for three months to three years.”...

As Turkey's Islamization is now galloping forward, before too long Turkish secularism will be a thing of the past and Sharia will be fully implemented. "Islamist Turkish government prepared alcohol ban everywhere in Turkey with new laws," from National Turk, May 15 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

The Turkish AKP government has prepared a draft law that would ban advertising alcoholic drinks in what officials say is an effort to protect children but could further divide religious and secularist Turks.

the [sic] Islamic-rooted Justice and Development Party (AKP) sent a bill on Friday which includes a series of measures to restrict how alcohol is advertised and displayed.

The bill includes a ban on event sponsorship for alcohol producers, restrictions on where drinks are sold and consumed, as well as a requirement for all alcoholic products to carry health warnings.

It is believed the bill could become a law before parliament recesses in July.

Although the bill has a stated aim of protecting young people, Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is renowned for his dislike of drinking, and has systematically raised taxes on alcohol he came to power 10 years ago.

Speaking in April at the global alcohol policy symposium in Istanbul, Erdogan angered secular Turks by claiming the country’s national drink was Ayran a non-alcoholic yoghurt-based drink and not the anise-flavoured spirit Raki.

“Our national drink is ayran…Alcohol offers no benefits to a society,” he is reputed to have said at the symposium.

Furthermore, in February this year, Turkey’s national carrier THY announced that it would cease serving alcoholic drinks on all domestic flights for both economy and business class passengers, except for certain routes, such as journeys to Istanbul.

The ban was justified on non-religious grounds, but it is widely felt that such a move is part of a campaign by Erdogan, a devout MusliM, to severely restrict alcohol consumption in public.

Critics say the move is the latest in a campaign led by the AKP to Islamize Turkish society by stealth and constitutes an intrusion into private life.

It follows a ban on drinks service on several routes flown by state-run Turkish Airlines. Official statements cited lack of demand, but media accused the airline of following Ankara’s conservative footsteps.

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, a Muslim who does not drink or smoke, said recently that ayran, a non-alcoholic refresher made from yoghurt, was the “national drink” of the Turks.

According to figures provided by national statistics institute TurkStat, 85 percent of Turks do not consume alcohol.

Erdogan’s populist government, in power for over a decade, is often accused of creeping efforts to coerce the country to be more conservative and pious.

Turkey is a fiercely secular state, despite being a majority Muslim country. Under Erdogan’s rule headscarves – banned in public institutions – have become more visible in public places and alcohol bans are more widespread.

Good thing gay activist Chris Stedman came out so strongly against Pamela Geller and me for protesting against Sharia mistreatment of gays, eh? We wouldn't want anyone defending these 215 people arrested in Kuwait, now, would we? That would be "Islamophobic"!

Sharia Alert from modern, moderate Kuwait: "Over 200 homos, lesbians held in countrywide Net cafe raids," from Arab Times, May 14 (thanks to David):

KUWAIT CITY, May 13: Personnel from the Criminal Investigation Department during an extensive campaign at Internet cafes and suspicious places in the six governorates have arrested 215 young homosexuals and lesbians of various nationalities, reports Al-Anba daily.

A security source said 30 low rank officers took part in the campaign and some of the arrested persons are believed to be residence law violators and others wanted by law for committing petty crimes or on civil charges and yet others for gambling.

The violators have been referred to the authorities.

Selling and drinking alcohol: haram. Shooting up alcohol shops and murdering people in the process: pleasing to Allah. "Baghdad alcohol shops caught in deadly attacks," from the BBC, May 14 (thanks to Mick):

Gunmen using silenced weapons have attacked a row of alcohol shops in Baghdad, leaving 12 people dead, officials say.

The attackers arrived in four vehicles and restrained policemen at a checkpoint in the eastern district of Zayouna, where the stores are located.

They reportedly struck when the shops were at their busiest, as commuters on their way home stopped to buy drinks.

There was no immediate claim of responsibility.

Police were quoted as saying the shops had been rebuilt after they were targeted in bomb attacks last year.

Since the fall of Saddam Hussein, activities perceived to be contrary to the moral code of Islam have come under repeated attack, with alcohol shops targeted in Baghdad and other cities....

In PJ Lifestyle yesterday I discuss the odd case of a female campaigner for the Islamic oppression of women in Saudi Arabia:

Some slaves prefer slavery: “A prominent Saudi female activist,” Emirates 24/7 reported last Thursday, has come out against Saudi Arabia’s lifting its ban on women driving cars.

Rawdah Al-Yousif complained that campaigns to give women the right to drive

“continue despite the clear response by the rulers of this country that any decision to allow women to drive cars is up to the community not to just 3000 people or to some articles in newspapers or online. I hope there will be no decision to allow women to drive at this stage because we have first to respect the wish of the people and the society…Women are also not ready yet to bear their responsibility and leave their homes at a time when news of blackmail against the women are widespread.”

Ah, yes. Women are not yet ready to bear their responsibility, just as we heard in the antebellum South that black Americans were not yet ready to bear the responsibilities of freedom, or in the Jim Crow South that they were not yet ready to bear the full responsibilities of citizenship. This is a common argument that oppressors make to justify oppression; it is unusual to hear it offered by one of the oppressed themselves.

Yet Rawdah Al-Yousuf is the prime mover behind a recent campaign in Saudi Arabia called “My Guardian Knows What’s Best For Me.” This involved, according to Emirates 24/7, “sending letters to King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia in which women confirmed their full support for an Islamic approach in administering the Kingdom.” Al Yousif expressed her “dismay at the efforts of some who have liberal demands that do not comply with Islamic law (Shariah) or with the Kingdom’s traditions and customs” and railed against what she characterized as “ignorant and vexatious demands” to abolish the guardianship system.

A manual of Islamic law certified by the foremost Islamic institution among Sunni Muslims, Cairo’s Al-Azhar University, as conforming to “the practice and faith of the orthodox Sunni community,” explains the guardianship system:

“A husband may permit his wife to leave the house for a lesson in Sacred Law, for invocation of Allah (dhikr), to see her female friends, or to go to any place in the town. A woman may not leave the city without her husband or a member of her unmarriageable kin accompanying her, unless the journey is obligatory, like the hajj. It is unlawful for her to travel otherwise, and unlawful for her husband to allow her to.” (‘Umdat al-Salik, m10.3).

This is based on a statement attributed to Muhammad, the prophet of Islam:

“It is not permissible for a woman who believes in Allah and the Last Day to allow someone into her husband’s house if he is opposed, or to go out if he is averse.”

In other words, a woman is her husband’s slave: he controls her movements, and if she dares to get out of line, another Sharia provision that is rooted in a Qur’an verse offers husbands a ready remedy:

“Men are the managers of the affairs of women for that God has preferred in bounty one of them over another, and for that they have expended of their property. Righteous women are therefore obedient, guarding the secret for God’s guarding. And those you fear may be rebellious admonish; banish them to their couches, and beat them.” (Qur’an 4:34)

Muhammad’s example is normative for Muslims, since he is an “excellent example of conduct” (Qur’an 33:21) – and according to a canonical hadith, Muhammad’s favorite wife, his child bride Aisha, reports that Muhammad struck her. Once he went out at night after he thought she was asleep, and she followed him surreptitiously. Muhammad saw her, and, as Aisha recounts: “He struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you?” (Sahih Muslim 2127) Aisha herself said it: “I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women.” (Sahih Bukhari 7.72.715)

The Qur’an commentary Ruhul Ma’ani reflects mainstream Muslim understandings of this verse when it gives four reasons that a man may beat his wife: “if she refuses to beautify herself for him,” if she refuses sex when he asks for it, if she refuses to pray or perform ritual ablutions, and “if she goes out of the house without a valid excuse.”

If these divinely sanctioned threats and terror don’t work on a woman so recalcitrant as to leave the house without a valid excuse, there is always the opprobrium of her peers like Rawdah Al-Yousuf, who love their slavery and want to make sure their Muslim sisters remain slaves. It is, after all, the will of Allah.

Once again, Islamic supremacist intimidation and thuggery works: the stores promised to stop selling alcohol. "7-Eleven, Indomaret Raided Over Alcoholic Beverages," from the Jakarta Globe, May 11 (thanks to Jerk Chicken):

Dozens of members of the Tangjungduren Islamic People’s Association raided two minimarts in Grogol Petamburan, West Jakarta, on Friday for selling alcoholic beverages.

The mob, who failed to meet the owners of the two establishments, a 7-Eleven and an Indomaret, decided to enter and confiscate all of the minimarts’ alcoholic beverages from their refrigerators.

“We have since March warned them not to sell alcoholic drinks. But these stores kept on selling the beverages freely,” Khalid, the coordinator of the mob, said as quoted by Beritajakarta.com.

Members of the Jakarta Public Order Agency (Satpol PP) were on location, but they remained on the sidelines during the incident, which caused a traffic jam along Jalan Tanjung Duren Raya.

Representatives from the stores promised the group that they would stop selling alcohol.

Khalid demanded that Satpol PP and the police take strict action against minimarts that openly offer alcoholic beverages.

Grogol Petamburan subdistrict head Denny Ramdhani said that out of the 12 minimarts operating in his area, only the 7-Eleven and the Indomaret continue to deal booze.

“If in the future they still sell alchol [sic], we will … revoke the permits of the two stores,” Denny said.

Tanjung Duren Police chief of prevention Adj. Comr. Purnomo said that the police would facilitate a dialogue between the owners of the minimarts and residents of the area at the subdistrict chief office.

"Why did they not produce four witnesses? Since they produce not witnesses, they verily are liars in the sight of Allah" (Qur'an 24:13).

"Abandoned," Yahoo News Sunday Night, May 12 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

With Dubai emerging as a major stopover point for long haul journeys, five hundred flights a month will deliver over one million of us to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) in the next year.

Dubai is being promoted as a luxury high-class paradise in the desert, but the reality is brutally different, as Australian Alicia Gali discovered. Gali took a job in the UAE with one of the world’s biggest hotel chains, Starwood. What happened next makes this story a must-watch for every Australian planning on travelling through the region.

Gali was using her laptop in the hotel’s staff bar when her drink was spiked. She awoke to a nightmare beyond belief: she had been savagely raped by three of her colleagues. Alone and frightened, she took herself to hospital. What Alicia didn’t know is that under the UAE’s strict sharia laws, if the perpetrator does not confess, a rape cannot be convicted without four adult Muslim male witnesses. She was charged with having illicit sex outside marriage, and thrown in a filthy jail cell for eight months....

Clueless and/or complicit Western writers such as Eric Posner, Sarah Chayes, and bottom feeder and stalker Nathan Lean (aka "Garibaldi") must be so pleased.

"As more people are arrested for blasphemy in Egypt, a young Christian teacher is jailed," from Asia News, May 11 (thanks to C. Cantoni):

Luxor (AsiaNews) - Under the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood, more and more people are being arrested in Egypt on allegations of insulting Islam. The latest case involves a Coptic teacher who was detained on the order of the Prosecutor's Office in the Governorate of Luxor, and is set to remain behind bars until the end of the investigations.

Until her arrest, Demyana Emad was a 23-year-old social studies teacher at the Sheik Sultan primary school in south Luxor. She became a case in April, when the head of the parents' association filed a complaint against the teacher for insulting the Prophet Muhammad in front of her pupils, a charge Ms Emad has rejected, calling for more evidence to be brought to the fore.

What is known is that recently, several Islamic "extremists" pushed their way into the school to press the pupils to testify against her.

Edam's case is not unique. With the rise to power of the Muslim Brotherhood, more and more people, especially minority Copts, have been detained on allegations of blasphemy and insulting Islam.

The most serious case occurred back in October in Bani Suef (Upper Egypt) when two Coptic children Nabil Nagy Rzik, 10, and Mina Nady Farag, 9, were arrested after local Islamic authorities accused them of urinating on some pages of the Koran.

Despite the resistance of their parents and the local priest, who pointed out that the two kids were illiterate, the imam of their village put pressure for their detention.

In another case in September 2012 in Sohag, Bishoy Kamel, a Coptic religion teacher, was sentenced to six years for posting blasphemous cartoons and insults against President Mohammed Morsi on Facebook. He has always maintained his innocence and said that he is the victim of a plot.

On 13 September 2012, police arrested Saber Albert, a 25-year-old Coptic man for posting an anti-Islam film that caused demonstrations all over the world.

Saber is still in custody awaiting trial.

"There's really no such thing as just Sharia, it's not one monolithic Continuum - Sharia is understood in thousands of different ways over the 1,500 years in which multiple and competing schools of law have tried to construct some kind of civic penal and family law code that would abide by Islamic values and principles, it's understood in many different ways..." -- Reza Aslan

Not really: "[As for] the thief, the male and the female, amputate their hands in recompense for what they committed as a deterrent [punishment] from Allah. And Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise." -- Qur'an 5:38

And the caliph Umar, one of Muhammad's closest companions, maintained that the punishment of stoning for adultery (this story doesn't specify the method of punishment, but the outcome of the punishment is the same in any case) was originally in the Qur'an:

'Umar said, "I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, "We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book," and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession." Sufyan added, "I have memorized this narration in this way." 'Umar added, "Surely Allah's Apostle carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him." (Bukhari, vol. 8, bk. 82, no. 816)

"Allah's Apostle" is, of course, Muhammad, who did indeed carry out stonings. Here is the hadith in which he challenges the rabbis about stoning, and in which there is amidst the barbarism and brutality a final act of love and compassion:

The Jews came to Allah's Apostle and told him that a man and a woman from amongst them had committed illegal sexual intercourse. Allah's Apostle said to them, "What do you find in the Torah (old Testament) about the legal punishment of Ar-Rajm (stoning)?" They replied, (But) we announce their crime and lash them." Abdullah bin Salam said, "You are telling a lie; Torah contains the order of Rajm." They brought and opened the Torah and one of them solaced his hand on the Verse of Rajm and read the verses preceding and following it. Abdullah bin Salam said to him, "Lift your hand." When he lifted his hand, the Verse of Rajm was written there. They said, "Muhammad has told the truth; the Torah has the Verse of Rajm. The Prophet then gave the order that both of them should be stoned to death. ('Abdullah bin 'Umar said, "I saw the man leaning over the woman to shelter her from the stones." (Bukhari, vol. 4, bk. 56, no. 829)

Even the monkeys practiced stoning, according to another hadith:

During the pre-lslamic period of ignorance I saw a she-monkey surrounded by a number of monkeys. They were all stoning it, because it had committed illegal sexual intercourse. I too, stoned it along with them. (Bukhari, vol. 5, bk. 58, no. 188)

Muhammad's example is, of course, normative for Islamic behavior, since "verily in the messenger of Allah ye have a good example for him who looketh unto Allah and the Last Day, and remembereth Allah much" (Qur'an 33:21).

"New PA Laws: Cutting Off Thieves' Hands, Lashes for Drinking," by David Lev for Israel National News, May 8 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

Hamas is lobbying for a stricter enforcement of Islamic law in Gaza – including provisions to cut off the hands of thieves, and execution of individuals who cheat on their spouses. A report in the Al-Hayat daily newspaper said that Hamas expects the new regulations to take effect in the coming months, after introduction of the legislation in the PA parliament.

Existing laws mete out the death penalty to individuals convicted of murder, spying, homosexuality, or selling land to Jews. The new legislation will expand the crimes for which individuals can be executed to include disloyalty to a spouse – having sexual relations outside the context of marriage. Other provisions of the law include chopping off the right hand of a thief (along with at least a seven year jail sentence), and lashes for a large number of “crimes,” including drinking alcoholic beverages and gambling. All the punishments are derived from sharia, Islamic law.

In addition, girls age 15 will be able to decide to marry on their own, without requiring permission from their parents. Individuals age ten and over are considered adults under the new legislation, and are subject to the full force of the law for offenses.

Hamas has a large majority in the PA parliament, with 74 of the 134 parliamentarians belonging to the Islamist party. Many of them belong to the fundamentalist Salafist movement, and they are behind the push for the new laws. While there is opposition in Hamas to the passage of the legislation at this point, it is expected to easily pass. Once it does, the laws will be extant in both Gaza and Palestinian Authority-controlled areas of Judea and Samaria, but it is not clear if they will be enforced there.

WARNING: Video is not very easy to make out, but disturbing nonetheless. Note that these murderers are adherents to the same Sharia that their coreligionists in the U.S. insist is benign and "Islamophobic" to resist.

"Bangladeshi Islamic mob beating people to death to enact sharia law," from LiveLeak, May 6 (thanks to Golem):

from yesterday, Sunday May 5- 200,000 Islamists marched in large rallies in Bangladesh to press the govt to enact hardline sharia law which critics have described as on par with the Taliban and their legal system. They also demand that the govt kill various bloggers and media figures for "insulting" Islam. Violence spread from Dhaka, the capital to other parts of the country including Chittagong, where this video was recorded and 5 people were murdered in large riots. I have no idea why these people were murdered by the mob, either they wore govt uniforms or they were Hindus, who have been targeted in large scale attacks recently by the majority muslim population. In total 20 people have so far been reported killed from yesterday with the figure likely to climb.

Selling alcohol: haram. Murdering someone who sells alcohol: pleasing to Allah.

Sharia Alert from the Sinai: "‘Islamist’ gunmen kill alcohol seller in Egypt’s Sinai," from Reuters, May 6:

Gunmen shot a man dead who was selling alcohol in Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula on Sunday in an attack security officials said was likely carried out by Islamist militants.

The four gunmen killed Rami Ahmed, 28, at a bar on a main road near El-Arish, a town in the northern Sinai Peninsula. It is an area where Islamist militant influence has expanded since the uprising that toppled President Hosni Mubarak more than two years ago.

"We are still in the early stages of the investigation but it is likely that Islamic hardliners were behind the incident," one of the security officials said. He said the victim came from the Nile Delta, north of Cairo, suggesting the shooting was unlikely to be related to local tribal rivalries.

Egypt’s government has been trying re-establish state authority that collapsed in Sinai following the 2011 uprising against Mubarak. Hardline Islamist groups based mostly in North Sinai have exploited the vacuum to launch attacks both across the border into Israel and on Egyptian targets....

Yet another indication of the fear and suspicion directed toward women in the culture established by Sharia. A few salient ahadith establishing Muhammad's view of women as essentially evil and contemptible:

It was narrated from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) that women will form the majority of the people of Hell. It was narrated from ‘Imraan ibn Husayn that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I looked into Paradise and I saw that the majority of its people were the poor. And I looked into Hell and I saw that the majority of its people are women.”

(Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 3241; Muslim, 2737)

With regard to the reason for that, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was asked about it and he explained the reason.

It was narrated that ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Abbaas said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I was shown Hell and I have never seen anything more terrifying than it. And I saw that the majority of its people are women.” They said, “Why, O Messenger of Allaah?” He said, “Because of their ingratitude (kufr).” It was said, “Are they ungrateful to Allaah?” He said, “They are ungrateful to their companions (husbands) and ungrateful for good treatment. If you are kind to one of them for a lifetime then she sees one (undesirable) thing in you, she will say, ‘I have never had anything good from you.’” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 1052)

It was narrated that Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri said:

“The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) went out to the Musalla on the day of Eid al-Adha or Eid al-Fitr. He passed by the women and said, ‘O women! Give charity, for I have seen that you form the majority of the people of Hell.’ They asked, ‘Why is that, O Messenger of Allaah?’ He replied, ‘You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religious commitment than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you.’ The women asked, ‘O Messenger of Allaah, what is deficient in our intelligence and religious commitment?’ He said, ‘Is not the testimony of two women equal to the testimony of one man?’ They said, ‘Yes.’ He said, ‘This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Is it not true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?’ The women said, ‘Yes.’ He said, ‘This is the deficiency in her religious commitment.’”

(Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 304)

It was narrated that Jaabir ibn ‘Abd-Allaah said: “I attended Eid prayers with the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). He started with the prayer before the khutbah, with no adhaan or iqaamah. Then he stood up, leaning on Bilaal, speaking of fear of Allaah (taqwa) and urging us to obey Him. He preached to the people and reminded them. Then he went over to the women and preached to them and reminded them. Then he said, ‘Give in charity, for you are the majority of the fuel of Hell. A woman with dark cheeks stood up in the midst of the women and said, ‘Why is that, O Messenger of Allaah?’ He said, ‘Because you complain too much and are ungrateful to your husbands.’ Then they started to give their jewellery in charity, throwing their earrings and rings into Bilaal’s cloak.”

(Narrated by Muslim, 885)

"Iran Cleric: Women to Blame for Earthquakes," by Elizabeth Sheld for Breitbart, May 4 (thanks to CGW):

A senior cleric in Iran says that the immodesty and whorish dress of women is responsible for Earthquakes. 

“Many women who do not dress modestly ... lead young men astray, corrupt their chastity and spread adultery in society, which increases earthquakes,” Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi told Iranian media.

Sedighi claims Iranian women are "owning and using a giant earthquake machine."

Apparently Iran is an earthquake prone country. (California is an earthquake prone state so..maybe he is on to something?)

Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad agrees: 

“As I have said before, the woes of Iran, and the earthquakes that threaten us in particular, can all be blamed on immodest women,” said Ahmadinejad.

The Iranian leader recently predicted that Tehran was in imminent danger of an earthquake from "a giant earthquake machine to hold our populace hostage"  

Oddly enough, Western feminists are completely silent about this.

Actually, it isn't odd at all. I have taken feminists to task more than once not only for their failure to stand up for Muslim women, but for their active excuse-making for the oppression of those women. See, for example, my article in FrontPage, "Feminists Betray Muslim Women," on how the feminist writer Laura Briggs justifies the oppression of Muslim women.

See also "Two Women Stoned: Feminists Mum," by David Horowitz, Janet Levy and me; "A Response to Feminists on the Violent Oppression of Women in Islam," by David Horowitz and me; and my article "The Conservative Vanguard of the Feminist Movement" in National Review.

Other articles I've written in FrontPage on issues revolving around women's rights in Islam include "Covering Up the Plight of Muslim Women"; "There Must Be Violence Against Women"; "Muhammad Mended His Own Clothes!"; Open Season on Muslim Women"; "Women Are Treated Better in Islam?."

Also there are my articles in Human Events, "Unveiled Women and 'Uncovered Meat'"; "Media Ignore Abuses of Women in Islam."

I also coauthored the monograph "The Violent Oppression of Women in Islam," which was published by the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

"Pakistan's women face battle for the right to vote," by Tracy McVeigh for The Observer, May 4 (thanks to Richard Dawkins):

Fears over the safety of women voting in next week's elections in Pakistan are rising after letters have been circulated in regions of the country warning men not to allow their wives, sisters and daughters out to the polling stations.

In an increasingly fraught and violent runup to the 11 May vote, leaflets are appearing stating that it is "un-Islamic" for women to participate in democracy.

Now a group of young female activists are planning to challenge what they call the government's inability to protect women's right to vote by organising their own protection teams at individual polling stations in tense and volatile Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, one of the four provinces of Pakistan, formerly known as the North West Frontier Province.

In what is being called Pakistan's youth election – almost a third of the electorate is between 18 and 29 – a growing tide of young women are determined to overcome cultural and political obstacles to make their voices heard.

Saba Ismail, 23-year-old founder and director of Aware Girls, a peace group for and led by young women to train girls in leadership skills, said they already planned to monitor 30 polling stations with volunteers who would support women who came out to vote and hoped to reach many more.

Malala Yousafzai, the 15-year-old activist for girl's educational rights who became an international figure after being shot and badly injured in a Taliban assassination attempt last October, was one of those trained by Ismail's group.

"Malala is not the only one who has been so brave, but she is a hero to all of us now," Ismail said. "Such a strong young woman and a true role model, I was very impressed by her. Many women and girls will feel empowered by Malala to come out and vote. It has been made very clear that women in Pakistan should not vote and those in rural areas are the most vulnerable, so we will be putting volunteers out to try and help women feel they can come out on this important day.

"For the 2008 elections, many polling stations were torched and women were told it was vulgar for them to cast a vote. This time we want Pakistan to have a free and fair election and for women to be able to vote in secret, not be told who to vote for by her family.

"Even those few women who are inside the political system are ordered about by their family. They are wives or daughters of men who want them to do their bidding, they are there just to make up quota numbers and have to do what they are told. It would be better to have quality not quantity.

"Recently on Pakistan TV we had three female politicians in the studio for a debate. They were asked questions like 'Should women really be allowed to work because they take more time to come to the office because they put make-up on?'"

"There's really no such thing as just Sharia, it's not one monolithic Continuum - Sharia is understood in thousands of different ways over the 1,500 years in which multiple and competing schools of law have tried to construct some kind of civic penal and family law code that would abide by Islamic values and principles, it's understood in many different ways..." -- Reza Aslan

Not really. Tiny Minority of Extremists Update: in "Sharia Über Alles" at the American Thinker, May 4, Andrew Bostom summarizes a new international survey's findings about the broad support in Muslim countries for the harshest Sharia punishments.

Despite a number of (deliberately?) mitigating biases, both methodological and interpretative, the latest Pew Research Forum report, "The World's Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society," released April 30, 2013, confirms the broad appeal of the totalitarian Sharia, Islam's religio-political "law," across Islamdom.

The data were pooled from surveys conducted between 2008 and 2012, representing, as touted by Pew, "a total of 39 countries and territories on three continents: Africa, Asia and Europe." Collectively, the surveys included "more than 38,000 face-to-face interviews in 80-plus languages and dialects, covering every country that has more than 10 million Muslims." Pew did acknowledge this important caveat about Muslim populations not surveyed because, "political sensitivities or security concerns prevented opinion research among Muslims." Notably excluded countries were Saudi Arabia, the Sudan, and Iran -- all Islamic states, governed by the Sharia, Saudi Arabia and the Sudan under Sunni Islam, the third, Iran, being the world's largest Shiite Muslim state.

Responses to four related questions on the Sharia, comprise the surveys' salient -- and pathognomonic -- findings. The questions were, "Do you favor or oppose making sharia law, or Islamic law, the official law of the land in our country?", and these three internally validating (and equally edifying) queries, "Do you favor or oppose the following: punishments like whippings and cutting off of hands for crimes like theft and robbery?", "Do you favor or oppose the following: punishments like whippings and cutting off of hands for crimes like theft and robbery?", "Do you favor or oppose the following: the death penalty for people who leave the Muslim religion?" Summary data from the nations with the five largest Muslim populations (as per 2010) surveyed, Indonesia (204 million), Pakistan (178 million), Bengladesh (149 million), Egypt (80 million), and Nigeria (76 million), revealed:

• 72% of Indonesian Muslims, 84% of Pakistani Muslims, 82% of Bengladeshi Muslims, 74% of Egyptian Muslims, and 71% of Nigerian Muslims supported making Sharia the official state law of their respective societies. The population-weighted average from these 5 countries was 77% supportive. (Composite regional data confirmed these individual country trends -- 84% of South Asian Muslims, 77% of Southeast Asian Muslims, 74% of Middle Eastern/North African Muslims, and 64% of Sub-Saharan African Muslims favored application of the Sharia as official state law.)

• 37% of Indonesian Muslims, 85% of Pakistani Muslims, 50% of Bengladeshi Muslims, 70% of Egyptian Muslims, and 45% of Nigerian Muslims favored Sharia-based mandatory ("hadd") punishments "like whippings and cutting off of hands for crimes like theft and robbery"

• 42% of Indonesian Muslims, 86% of Pakistani Muslims, 54% of Bengladeshi Muslims, 80% of Egyptian Muslims, and 37% of Nigerian Muslims favored the Sharia-based hadd punishment of stoning for adultery

• 16% of Indonesian Muslims, 75% of Pakistani Muslims, 43% of Bengladeshi Muslims, 88% of Egyptian Muslims, and 29% of Nigerian Muslims favored the Sharia-based hadd punishment of execution for "apostasy"

Furthermore, the Pew survey results confirm the abject failure of the U.S. midwifed Iraqi and Afghan "democracies" to fulfill the utopian aspirations of the much ballyhooed "(Bernard Lewis doctrine." Instead, the negative prognostications, epitomized by my colleague Diana West's evocative description "Making the world safe for Sharia," have been realized. Specifically, the Pew data indicated:

• 91% of Iraqi Muslims and 99% of Afghan Muslims supported making Sharia the official state law of their respective societies

• 55% of Iraqi Muslims and 81% of Afghan Muslims favored Sharia-based hadd punishments "like whippings and cutting off of hands for crimes like theft and robbery"

• 57% of Iraqi Muslims and 84% of Afghan Muslims favored the Sharia-based hadd punishment of stoning for adultery

• 42% of Iraqi Muslims and 79% of Afghan Muslims favored the Sharia-based hadd punishment of execution for "apostasy"

There is much more. Read it all.

Everyone knows that the Islamic Republic of Iran is "extremist," but in fact, in Islamic terms stoning is not "extremist"; it is Islamic law for adulterous women. The caliph Umar, one of Muhammad's closest companions, even maintained that it was originally in the Qur'an:

'Umar said, "I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, "We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book," and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession." Sufyan added, "I have memorized this narration in this way." 'Umar added, "Surely Allah's Apostle carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him." (Bukhari, vol. 8, bk. 82, no. 816)

"Allah's Apostle" is, of course, Muhammad, who did indeed carry out stonings. Here is the hadith in which he challenges the rabbis about stoning, and in which there is amidst the barbarism and brutality a final act of love and compassion:

The Jews came to Allah's Apostle and told him that a man and a woman from amongst them had committed illegal sexual intercourse. Allah's Apostle said to them, "What do you find in the Torah (old Testament) about the legal punishment of Ar-Rajm (stoning)?" They replied, (But) we announce their crime and lash them." Abdullah bin Salam said, "You are telling a lie; Torah contains the order of Rajm." They brought and opened the Torah and one of them solaced his hand on the Verse of Rajm and read the verses preceding and following it. Abdullah bin Salam said to him, "Lift your hand." When he lifted his hand, the Verse of Rajm was written there. They said, "Muhammad has told the truth; the Torah has the Verse of Rajm. The Prophet then gave the order that both of them should be stoned to death. ('Abdullah bin 'Umar said, "I saw the man leaning over the woman to shelter her from the stones." (Bukhari, vol. 4, bk. 56, no. 829)

Even the monkeys practiced stoning, according to another hadith:

During the pre-lslamic period of ignorance I saw a she-monkey surrounded by a number of monkeys. They were all stoning it, because it had committed illegal sexual intercourse. I too, stoned it along with them. (Bukhari, vol. 5, bk. 58, no. 188)

Muhammad's example is, of course, normative for Islamic behavior, since "verily in the messenger of Allah ye have a good example for him who looketh unto Allah and the Last Day, and remembereth Allah much" (Qur'an 33:21).

Sharia Alert from the Islamic Republic of Iran: "Stoning Returns as Punishment," by Firoozeh Matin for Rooz, April 30 (thanks to Blazing Cat Fur):

The controversial “Islamic Punishment” law that was rejected by the Guardians Council returned and eventually was passed last week. To the disappointment of human rights activists and the promises of some Majlis representatives, not only stoning is not negated in the law, it is in fact emphasized.

Hamid-Reza Tabatabai, the vice-chairman of Majlis’s judiciary committee told the press, “Stoning is not negated in the new “Islamic Punishment” law. Its execution has been modified. This was requested by the Guardians Council. According to the law stones do not have to be used to implement the law and hanging, or other innovative methods by the judiciary, can be used to accomplish the same goal.”

He did not provide details about what those “innovative methods” of the judiciary could be. But recently, an extremist Muslim group in neighboring Iraq used an innovative method of the act by throwing blocks of cement on the head of the victim.

Recently the judiciary of the Islamic republic of Iran in the city of Shiraz unveiled an apparatus that had been built to dismember a person’s body organ. As reported by ISNA the tool is nothing but an electric saw made to cut off a person’s fingers. French news AFP compared the tool to the medieval torture tools.

With the new law in place, the judiciary is expected to come up with new “innovative methods” killing people.

The newly passed law had originally been drafted during ayatollah Hashemi Shahrudi’s term as the head of Iran’s judiciary and sent to the executive branch. It was subsequently rejected by the Guardians Council and sent back to the Majlis for changes, which were ultimately made, paving the way for its implementation.

In an interview during his term, Shahrudi had said at one point that the punishment of stoning had been removed from the law and that stoning had stopped being used as judges ruled on other methods of punishment. Just a few months ago on February 17, Shahrudi told Fars news agency that stoning had been removed from the new Islamic punishment law because of its negative international impact and that the final decision lay with the Guardians Council. He also restricted its legal basis to be only used against the most severe offences of adultery and applied only to women.

The spokesperson of Iran’s judiciary also acknowledged the negative domestic and international reaction to the practice. “The eight Majlis removed stoning as a judicial practice and this form of punishment was removed from the new Islamic Punishment law,” he is reported to have said. He did however qualify his remarks by saying that this was a divine concept that existed in the Sharia law.

But...but...Hamas-linked CAIR and Imam Rauf and Reza Aslan told us that Sharia was benign and perfectly compatible with Western legal systems! Are the Iranians yet again misunderstanding Islam?

Why is it that secular Turks can be legitimately concerned about Islamization but if Americans show the same concern, it's "racist," "bigoted," "hateful" and "Islamophobic"?

Sharia Alert from modern, moderate, secular Turkey: "Turks fear airline lipstick ban sign of Islamization," from Reuters, May 3:

ISTANBUL- Turkey's national airline has barred female flight attendants from wearing red lipstick and nail polish, striking a nerve among secular Turks worried the country is becoming more Islamic.

Turkish Airlines, Europe's fourth-biggest carrier, said the ban was aimed at keeping crews "artless and well-groomed with makeup in pastel tones", as a natural look improved communication with passengers.

"As a consequence of our current cabin uniforms not including red, dark pink, et cetera, the use of lipstick and nail polish in these colors by our cabin crew impairs visual integrity," the statement said.

Turkish Airlines declined a request for further comment.

The guideline follows other restrictions on employees' appearance and on serving alcohol. Critics say they reflect the influence of the government's conservative religious values at the fast-growing state-run airline, one of Turkey's most recognised brands.

"This new guideline is totally down to Turkish Airlines management's desire to shape the company to fit its own political and ideological stance," Atilay Aycin, president of the airline's Hava-Is labour union, told Reuters.

"No one can deny that Turkey has become a more conservative, religious country."

Turkey is 99 percent Muslim but the NATO state and European Union candidate has a secular constitution.

Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan's ruling AK Party, which traces its roots to a banned Islamic party, has relaxed the state's control over the expression of religion, such as once-strict limits imposed on wearing the Islamic-style headscarf.

Such restrictions were aimed at reining in Islamism and improving women's rights, but effectively prevented many devout women from studying at university or taking government jobs.

Turkish Airlines scrapped its own ban on the headscarf more than a year ago, and covered women now work at check-in counters and at other positions in the company, Aycin said.

Other Turkish carriers also have guidelines on the appearance of cabin personnel.

HIDDEN AGENDA?

The flag carrier caused a stir earlier this year when newspapers published mockups of a new Ottoman-style uniform for stewardesses with ankle-length dresses, a proposal the airline's management appears to have since abandoned.

That was followed by a ban on alcohol on planes flying to most domestic destinations and some Islamic countries.

"They are objecting to the lipstick and nail polish that we have been using for years," said Asli Gokmen, 30, a flight attendant who lost her job with more than 300 others last year during a union protest and is petitioning for her position back.

No current employees were available for comment.

Turks worried the government is undermining the country's secular order see a hidden agenda.

On Twitter, women posted pictures after applying red lipstick. One wrote: "Why not just ban stewardesses altogether so we can all breathe a sigh of relief?"

Some male Twitter users were indignant over the insinuation that red lipstick would induce a sexual frenzy.

Turkish Airlines passenger Ahmet Yerli, 33, said he did not think the new guideline was a sign of creeping Islamisation but that the ban was still "absurd."

"I've never heard of a plane crashing because of a women's lipstick," he said before his flight.

Not yet, anyway. But you can't be too careful, eh wot?

The Salafists are even more strongly committed to imposing Sharia than is the Muslim Brotherhood. And now Salafist leaders have been invited to the U.S. by two mosques led by Salafists in the U.S. And there is talk in Egypt that Obama may back these hardline Islamic supremacists. "Finally, Salafists to visit the US: On their first visit to Washington, how will Egypt's Salafists present themselves, especially on issues like democracy, women and Copts?," by Mohamed El-Menshawy for Ahram Online, April 27 (thanks to David):

In a few days, several Salafist leaders will go to the US on their first trip to Washington, led by preacher Yasser Borhami of the Salafist Call. It was only a matter of time before they would visit the US capital after the creation of several Salafist political parties that declared their respect for the rules of the democratic political process and rejected violence as a means to achieve political goals. Also, after Salafists won nearly 25 per cent of People's Assembly seats before that body was dissolved by the courts.

Although the visit is an ordinary one, many are compelled to blow it out of proportion. Borhami denied his itinerary in the US would include meeting a number of US politicians and officials, saying that once the trip takes place it will be a missionary not political trip.

He added in statements to Al-Shurouq, however, that it is very likely the trip will be cancelled because entry visas are taking nearly an entire month to acquire. He explained the trip is based on an invitation by two Islamic centres in the US, Al-Manhal and Al-Tawheed, who are led by Salafists.

Borhami added that El-Nour Party will visit the US in the coming phase as well, as part of its campaign to connect with Egyptian expatriates there, and that there wasn’t too much coordination between the two trips since they have different itineraries.

I spoke to an Egyptian official, who believes Washington played a major role in everything taking place in Egypt, who said the trip will pave the way for Washington to switch its alliance with the Muslim Brotherhood for one with Salafist groups, especially because the Brotherhood has performed so poorly since President Mohamed Morsi came to power in the middle of last year.

I then spoke with a leader in the liberal current in Egypt who frequently visits Washington, who said US President Barack Obama and US Ambassador to Cairo Anne Patterson “are die-hard defenders of the Brotherhood-Salafist Islamist project.”

I then spoke to a former US official about the trip, who was not surprised at all. “It is normal for Salafists to visit the US,” he said. “Just like the Muslim Brotherhood and liberals do.”

Many in Washington believe a successful link with representatives of Egypt’s Salafist current is likely, although only a few months ago it was unimaginable that there would be direct dialogue between the two sides. An indicator of this was the fact that no talks or meetings were held between senior US officials who visited Egypt over the past few months and any Salafist leaders, unlike with senior Brotherhood and liberal leaders.

Meanwhile, Salafists will face a serious problem during their visit to Washington. They have already been preceded by the Muslim Brotherhood that presented itself as the legitimate representative of moderate Islam, and was generally accepted in US and Western circles. As for the Salafists, no one knows how they will present themselves in the West. Will they pose as an alternative to violent political groups? Will they promote themselves as an alternative to Al-Qaeda? Or will they present themselves as representatives of conservative fundamentalist Islam?

Salafists can easily remind US officials and citizens of what Obama said at Cairo University, in terms of his respect for the desires and choices of the people. He had declared: “The US welcomes all governments that are elected democratically and peacefully.” Salafists in Egypt are on the far right of religious politics, and the political right for the rest of the world. They are a key component of Egypt’s reality that cannot be ignored.

If they do end up travelling to Washington, Salafists will be assailed by an onslaught on their positions — positions are difficult to understand from an American perspective or to justify as part of “Egypt’s cultural individuality.” It is no longer a secret that some Salafist leaders have altogether rejected the entire “democratic process” and some of their senior sheikhs discourage political participation, such as balloting or nominating themselves in elections, or even participating in protests. Some of them believe democracy is merely a vessel and tool to be used to apply Sharia law.

Washington will also ask Salafists about their position on women’s issues and how some sheikhs said women’s attention should focus on the home and family, rejecting the notion of women going out to work. They will also be asked how some Salafists demanded the imposition of Islamic dress on all Egyptian women.

As for the issue of the Coptic minority, I do not believe Salafists have any convincing answers for the people of Egypt or the rest of the world that could justify their extreme and sectarian positions against a Christian becoming president, or even taking a senior position in the state.

The biggest hurdle will be Salafist rejection of political pluralism in its broader sense. Salafists have not yet found a clear, let alone convincing, answer to the issue of the “Other”, which includes definitions of citizenship, and the political and non-political rights and duties of citizens irrespective of faith, devoutness or gender. Continuous Salafist demands for the release of the blind Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman will fall on deaf ears in Washington. Abdel-Rahman is convicted of crimes related to terrorism, being implicated in the bombing of the World Trade Centre in 1993 that killed American citizens. It is impossible for Salafists to expect him to be released as part of any kind of political arrangement or deal.

Direct contact between Washington and Salafsts serves US interests and will be a great asset for Washington. The US will be able to boldly declare it is open to all political forces in Egypt, especially those who do not share its ideology or outlook. Such a declaration would also support the leverage of US negotiators when they sit with Egyptians to discuss pending bilateral issues that are sometimes fraught.