JIHAD! Watch and learn....

[American Patriot]

FReep This Event: Group Tied to Pakistani Terrorist to Parade in Binghamton, NY
Weasel Zippers ^

The city of Binghamton, New York granted a group with ties to Islamic terrorist Sheikh Mubarek Ali Gilani a permit to publicly celebrate Milad-un-Nabi, or Muhammed’s birthday, in the streets of Binghamton this Saturday. The Muslims of the Americas (MOA), the name used by Jamaat ul Fuqra, or “Community of the Impoverished,” was issued a permit for a public celebration that includes a parade that will run through the downtown area and close one lane of the city’s main street. Previous celebrations by MOA members have been held at their 35 acre compound in Hancock, NY.

(Excerpt) Read more at weaselzippers.net ...

[American Patriot]

Sharia in the schools: Monitoring the American madrassa (Michelle Malkin)
MichelleMalkin.com ^ | April 11, 2008 | Michelle Malkin



Sharia in the schools: Monitoring the American madrassa

By Michelle Malkin • April 11, 2008 09:56 AM


Katharine Kersten’s excellent investigative work on the Minnesota taxpayer-funded Islamic school, TIZA, has led to a state probe of the institution. It has also shed light again on the spread of sharia in U.S. secondary public schools.

You’ll remember the heated battle in San Diego over Muslim prayers in a public charter school.


You may recall the jihadi crossword puzzle discovered by parents in Johnston County, NC.


In Contra Costa (CA) County, school officials allowed Islam indoctrination lessons that subjected public school students to prayer recitation sessions and Muslim re-naming. Remember?









And in Brooklyn , the fight continues over the Arabic-themed Khalil Gibran International Academy.

The grass-roots group, Stop the Madrassa, continues to press for transparency–and continues to get stonewalled by educrats:

After four separate Freedom of Information Law requests and four court hearings, the Department of Education has not responded to our demands for complete transparency. The reason for KGIA’s existence is to teach the Arabic language and Arabic Culture; however, the curricula and textbooks have not been revealed. As we pursue the truth, everyone continues to wonder exactly what is being taught in the Khalil Gibran International Academy. Are they learning that Muslims discovered America? If so, why? The answer is that if the Islamists can establish their presence as the original inhabitants of North America then the land becomes part of the Ummah, the Islamic lands. The caliphate now extends to the United States.

Ed Lasky at The American Thinker exposed this curricular sharia creep several years ago:

A Native American tribe has forced distributors of an Arab studies guide for American teachers to remove an inaccurate and absurd passage that Muslim explorers preceded Columbus to North America, and eventually became Algonquin chiefs named Abdul—Rahim and Abdallah Ibn Malik!


The Middle East Policy Council, a Washington advocacy group that promotes this curriculum to school districts in 155 U.S. cities have apparently been somewhat unresponsive and dismissive of complaints. Ridiculous as this example is, it is illustrative of a far more disturbing development: the placement of propaganda in our schools by Muslim extremist groups. As the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation pointed out in a report …titled, “The Stealth Curriculum:Manipulating America’s History Teachers” these efforts are intended “to use America’s public school classrooms to shape the minds of tomorrow’s citizens by manipulating what today’s teachers introducing into the lessons of today’s children”


The American Textbook Council has played a leading role in resisting Arab efforts to supply propaganda to our schools, and recently published a report, “Islam and the Textbooks”, by Gilbert T. Sewall, which reports this phenomenon. It can be found here.


These militants and their supporters have set their eyes on our children, and are attempting to brainwash them by supplying free textbooks which whitewash the truth regarding Muslim extremism, while promoting Arab and Palestinian political goals. These “teaching materials” also impugn and devalue America, Western nations, Israel. Judaism, and Christianity. The article, ‘Textbooks for Jihad,’ found here is a good analysis of these developments .


The Council on American—Islamic Relations, some of whose members have been “outed” as terror supporters, has an active program to supply these this type of propaganda to libraries across the nation. Naturally, like schools, the librarians are more than happy to accept inexpensive, or free, material to fill their shelves. Yet these same books and audio—visual material are filling our children’s minds with lies that are tantamount to propaganda that teach hate. Efforts should be made by local activists and PTA or PTO members to scrutinize the reading lists at our “educational” institutions.

The political and education establishments–see, for example, NYC mayor Michael Bloomberg and NYC chancellor Joel Klein–persist in labeling critics “bigots.”


They’re looking out for CAIR.


Who’s looking out for your children?


***


Ed Morrissey notes that the TIZA principal has suddenly learned how to operate a flagpole. Mirabile dictu!

[American Patriot]

The Many Forms of Radical Islam All Threaten America
Family Security Matters ^ | April 15, 2008 | Peter S. Probst

“Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Quran is our law.

Jihad is our way. Dying in the service of Allah is our highest hope”.

Credo of the Muslim Brotherhood

The Strategy

While we understandably worry about terrorist infiltration across our borders, the uncomfortable truth is they already live among us as quiet, affable, next door neighbors who keep an immaculate lawn, are members of the garden club, and babysit our kids. Border security is vital, but so is countering the internal threat which, too often, is treated in a dismissive and even contemptuous fashion. Often labeled by the foolish or malevolent as “Islamophobia” or “bigotry,” the American-based Islamists do their best to erode our confidence in government’s efforts to secure the homeland and, too often, such efforts are inadvertently aided by government incompetence and misdirected zeal.

And when the motivations of the Islamists are called into question and links between them and terrorist groups exposed, they turn to invective and law suit in an attempt to intimidate and silence their critics. Being blessed with deep pockets they were in the past, too often, successful. They had learned that the best defense is an aggressive “take-no-prisoners” offense. But their detractors also learned to meet their lawsuits head on using “discovery” and other tools of the American legal system to turn the tables. The War on Terrorism is being fought on a variety of fronts by some very unlikely people.

(Excerpt) Read more at familysecuritymatters.org ...

[American Patriot]

Why We Fight The Culture War
RedState.com ^ | 16 April 2008 | .cnI redruM An eight-year-old Yemeni girl had the following to say after her big day in court.
"I am happy that I am divorced now. I will be able to go back to school," Nojud Mohammed Ali said… - AFP(15 April 2008)

The divorced husband, 28-year-old Faez Ali Thameur, withstood it all like true champion of a man.…said he married the child "with her consent and that of her parents" but that he did not object to her divorce petition.

In response to a question from Judge Mohammed al-Qadhi, he acknowledged that the "marriage was consummated, but I did not beat her."

Faez Ali Thameur will encounter significant legal problems under codified versions of Yemeni Law. The minimum age of consent for Yemeni marriages is set by statute at 15. This is actually more conservative and protective of a female children than what you would find in Iran, but fairly primitive compared to the statute laws in most other Muslim Countries.

Thus, the Yemeni judge had far more on his mind than prurient curiosity when he asked the man about consummating a marriage with an eight-year-old child. So would an observer who wasn’t charged with ensuring the proper execution of Yemeni jurisprudence. UNICEF examined the disgusting phenomenon of early marriages in a March 2001 publication entitled Early Marriage; Child Spouses.

This study offers a perspective that is far more enlightening than it is pleasant. A sample of the gruesome conclusions follows below.


Yet many societies, primarily in Africa and South Asia, continue to support the idea that girls should marry at or soon after puberty. Their spouses are likely to be a few years older than they are, but may be more than twice their age. Parents and heads of families make marital choices for daughters and sons with little regard for the personal implications. Rather, they look upon marriage as a family-building strategy, an economic arrangement or a way to protect girls from unwelcome sexual advances. - UNICEF, Ob. Cit., March 2001.


This held partially true in the recent case in Yemen. Nojud Mohammed Ali was well prepubescent unless her onset of puberty occurred early by at least 5-sigma. Her spouse was not twice, but rather thrice her age. I can’t imagine the farce of a wedding ceremony this union would have entailed.


Nojud had her choice made for her by her father. He claims that he was penniless, and was afraid that another, even less amenable amorous partner would abscond with his precious daughter. Perhaps the presiding judge could also take a look at Dad’s assets and confiscate whatever he sold his child daughter’s virginity for on the auction block.
The Yemeni authorities deserve a measure of credit for actually putting a stop to this perversion of human justice. Many countries will subvert efforts to curb this practice and view it as an imperialistic surjection of foreign cultural morality into their lives. The UNICEF study sighted above describes the non-enforcement regimes adopted in many “emerging” nations.


In many countries, early marriage falls into what amounts to a sanctions limbo. It may be prohibited in the existing civil or common law, but be widely condoned by customary and religious laws and practice. This is common where marriages typically take place according to customary rites and remain unregistered.

It also bears examination that the proud and manful groom actually stooped to physically consummate the union. While churlish, putrid and reeking of emunctory moral turpitude, this detail actually serves notice of what happens in failed, primitive cultures. The daughter’s state of chastity impacts her bride price.


Mr. Thameur did not deflower the prepubescent Ms. Ali for the sake of base, despicable pleasure. He did it to imprint his brand. He marked her the way a rancher would trademark one of his cattle. This grotesque expedient rendered Ms. Ali a less attractive kidnapping target for other young men not fairing as well as him in the recessionary Yemeni singles market.


If there is a moral to this sordid descent into the modern abyss of “emerging world” social culture it would be this. What nations like the United States, Japan and those of Western Europe have achieved is a precious, fragile and easily extinguishable flame burning under a downpour. None of what we enjoy is automatically ours by birthright. It can be snuffed like an unwanted puppy.


Cultures are way easier to destroy than they are to build. Compare the time, cost and effort needed to build the Twin Towers with the investment costs required to execute 9-11. Even if the mighty US Army one day deploys FCS in its clenched, mailed fist; the barbarian will forever enjoy the same advantages of entropy that Gaiseric enjoyed against the Late Roman Empire.


Cultures exist in Darwinist, mortal competition. People always select among options. They can respect the fundamental dignity of their charming, seven-year-old daughter or they can turn her out into the street as a profit center. In our culture, this one usually doesn’t require much decision analysis to figure out. I’d personally prefer to have it stay that way.


People wonder why the US gets involved in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. So what if the Dali Lama gets boned in the ear by China over Tibet? These 3rd World pick-a-ninnies, consigned to reeking, primitive dung heaps probably just want to trade unfairly with us and steal all of our jobs anyway. At least that’s what Senator Barack Obama tells us we are supposed to believe in all of our bitter resentment.


We go where we go with our culture because we are forced to. We must continue to compete economically, diplomatically, socially and militarily with a world that wants to see Western Civilization burn in Hell.


This world resents me telling them not to auction off their eight-year-old daughters to 30-year-old men. After all, they don’t tell me how to go about making the monthly rent payment.


Those of us who are disgusted by child marriages, seven-year-old soldiers and female genital mutilation aren’t grossed out by nature. We are grossed out because our forefathers have built a society that taught us as children to find such practices execrable. We fight against child marriages in Yemen today so that we don’t have to fight against them in Alexandria, Virginia in some hideous, dystopia of a future.
Cross-Posted At: THE MINORITY REPORT

[Beetle]

Undercover detective finds jihadist activity in New York mosques

This will come as no surprise to anyone who is aware of the 1991 Muslim Brotherhood memorandum about that organization's "grand jihad" in the United States; Sheikh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani's 1999 testimony about 80% of mosques in America being under the leadership of extremists; and the 2005 Center for Religious Freedom report about the massive distribution of hateful jihadist and Islamic supremacist material in mosques in this country. It will come as no surprise to those of us who have noted the utter failure of the Muslim community in America to do anything to teach against the jihad ideology.
"Undercover city detective finds hints of danger among mosques," by Patrice O'Shaughnessy for the New York Daily News, July 5 (thanks to all who sent this in):

A young undercover city detective spent four years in the shadowy world of terrorist wanna-bes - taking part in jihadist discussions and training in parks in the dead of night - to get a handle on the homegrown threat. At great personal risk, he participated in everything from prayers at a mosque to martial arts training under cover of darkness to watching jihadist videos, with many of the activities laced with talk of killing, according to a source familiar with the undercover's investigations.
His experiences paint a vivid portrait of the potential for local terror. While the picture is in no way indicative of the city's Muslim population as a whole, it provides insight into its most radical element.
The detective spent his time interacting with informal groups of youths and men who shared extremist views - and his experiences illustrate what police say is the potential for radicalization of some elements in the community.
He reported that after prayers at a neighborhood mosque, there were often private classes that included discussions about bombing different areas.
The men discussed violent jihad in bookstores, private houses and on buses en route to paintball and shooting-range events.
He was invited to join in "bonding" activities like working out at a gym and martial arts training in parks at night, during which the group discussed ideological justifications for killing Westerners.
He also watched military movies and jihadist videos with groups of young men in private homes. During one such evening, one man got so excited he punched a wall.
The detective reported that some youths became extremists after they traveled to their home countries; others went on the hajj - the pilgrimage to Mecca - and came back fired up by imams who encouraged violence as a religious obligation.

This will come as a surprise to Dinesh D'Souza, who can always be relied on to come to the exactly wrong analysis of the jihad threat. But much more important than D'Souza are the multitudes who will continue to assume that this agent is exaggerating, or that he happened upon a jihadist cell while the overwhelming majority of Muslims reject the jihad ideology. That is false. The overwhelming majority of Muslims is not doing anything to further the jihad ideology. But that is not, unfortunately, the same thing as rejecting it.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/021644.php

[American Patriot]

The Stealth Jihad in Britain
Cross Action News ^ | 7-9-08 | Robert Spencer

In his address Lord Phillips praised the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, who famously said last February that it was “inevitable” that Sharia would come to Britain. “An approach to law which simply said – there’s one law for everybody – I think that’s a bit of a danger,” said the Archbishop. He had apparently forgotten, if he ever knew, that the idea of “one law for everybody” was one of the great achievements of Judeo-Christian civilization, and was rooted in the idea of the dignity of all human beings as created in the image of God.

(Excerpt) Read more at crossactionnews.com ...

[vector7]

---

---

GLOBAL JIHAD
'Beware, we are coming!'
Islamic rule 'from Alaska and Chile to South Africa'

---

Posted: January 11, 2009
8:24 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily


Radical Muslims in Somalia are promising Islamic rule from Alaska and Chile to South Africa and from Japan to Russia, issuing the warning "Beware, we are coming," according to a media monitor
The Middle East Media Research Institute, or MEMRI, cites excerpts from television reports on the Somali terror organization Shabab al-Mujahideen that aired on Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya in recent weeks.

MEMRI monitors, translates and interprets media reports from the Middle East on critical issues including religion, terror and war.

The report said Islamic leaders spoke of their world plans in a pre-Christmas broadcast on the Middle East satellite channel
Al-Jazeera.
See the incredible video on Islam that was banned in Detroit! "Obsession" shows you what they don't want you to see.

"We are defending ourselves against those who attacked us," Abu Mansour said in the report. "Once we succeed, we will fight to end oppression in other places in the world."

Added Ibrahim Al-Maqdasi, "We want to inform Bush and our rivals about our real intentions. We will establish Islamic rule from Alaska and Chile to South Africa, and from Japan to Russia. Beware, we are coming."
Somalia's move toward radical Islam has raised concern internationally.

Officials in the U.S. fear American youth are being recruiting into jihad in the African nation and believe at least one already has carried out at suicide attack.

Said Mansour, "We welcome any Muslim from anywhere in the world who wants to join us. We will allow him to marry our daughters and share our crops. Many have died fighting for our cause, and others are here with us."
A separate Al-Jazeera report had a reporter describing the work of the Shabab Al-Mujahideen in Somalia, implementing Islamic Shariah law by reducing a Catholic church to rubble.

"We are a people chosen by Allah to spread the Islamic Shariah throughout Somalia," Hassan Ya'Qoub said in the report.

It cited three drug dealers who were sentenced to 40 lashes.
A report on Al-Arabiya TV shortly said Somali Islamists resemble al-Qaida "in everything, except for swearing allegiance to al-Qaida's leader, Osama bin Laden."

An unidentified man said, "I'll tell you one thing. I'll put a bullet in the head of the infidels, and I'm ready to do it. Allah willing, the 'saved sect' will lie in wait for each and every dog the infidels bring. … We will put bullets in their heads."

On Al-Jazeera, Muqtar Robow, identified as a spokesman for Shabab al-Mujahideen, said his group intends "to implement Shariah completely – every single element of it."

"Our objectives, by the grace of God, are to see the return of the Islamic Caliphate, the last of which was the Ottoman empire that collapsed in the 1920s. We want to bring that system back and govern the world with God's law," he said.
Somalia has been in turmoil for decades, and the U.S. has contributed more than half a billion dollars in aid, mostly food, in recent years. The transitional government in recent months has begun to organize. [/color]
However, the report said Robow considers the new leaders as "war criminals."

"We urge them to just repent and seek forgiveness from the Lord, and then return to the people, take up their guns, and fight the enemy they brought into the country, because the enemy forces will not listen if we ask them to leave today," he said.

[vector7]

Jihad on US campuses

May 13, 2010, 4:51 AM

Comments (0)

|

|

Print

In the following clip, you see David Horowitz from the Freedom Center asking a Muslim student activist at UC San Diego if she supports Hizbullah's aim of eradicating Jewry from the face of the planet. And this smooth-talking human upholstery board - sporting a drapery and a tablecloth - said yes. So there you have it.

Add that to the Muslim student assault on Swedish cartoonist Lars Vilks at Uppsala University in Sweden - to the ringing calls of Allau Akhbar.

When I watched this video yesterday my concern was that given Sweden's leftist deathwish, the people who will end up getting punished for this assault are the policemen who tried to restrain the Muslim students from killing Vilks.

Posted on May 13, 2010 at 4:51 AM

[American Patriot]

I posted that in it's own thread, but this was trhe one I wanted it in. Thanks for catching that Vector.

[American Patriot]

Counterterror Adviser Defends Jihad as 'Legitimate Tenet of Islam'


Published May 27, 2010
| FOXNews.com


White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan speaks to reporters in the White House Jan. 7. (AP Photo)



The president's top counterterrorism adviser on Wednesday called jihad a "legitimate tenet of Islam," arguing that the term "jihadists" should not be used to describe America's enemies.



During a speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, John Brennan described violent extremists as victims of "political, economic and social forces," but said that those plotting attacks on the United States should not be described in "religious terms."



He repeated the administration argument that the enemy is not "terrorism," because terrorism is a "tactic," and not terror, because terror is a "state of mind" -- though Brennan's title, deputy national security adviser for counterterrorism and homeland security, includes the word "terrorism" in it.


But then Brennan said that the word "jihad" should not be applied either.



"Nor do we describe our enemy as 'jihadists' or 'Islamists' because jihad is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam, meaning to purify oneself or one's community, and there is nothing holy or legitimate or Islamic about murdering innocent men, women and children," Brennan said.



The technical, broadest definition of jihad is a "struggle" in the name of Islam and the term does not connote "holy war" for all Muslims. However, jihad frequently connotes images of military combat or warfare, and some of the world's most wanted terrorists including Usama bin Laden commonly use the word to call for war against the West.



Brennan defined the enemy as members of bin Laden's Al Qaeda network and "its terrorist affiliates."


But Brennan argued that it would be "counterproductive" for the United States to use the term, as it would "play into the false perception" that the "murderers" leading war against the West are doing so in the name of a "holy cause."



"Moreover, describing our enemy in religious terms would lend credence to the lie propagated by Al Qaeda and its affiliates to justify terrorism -- that the United States is somehow at war against Islam," he said.



The comment comes after Brennan, in a February speech in which he described his respect for the tolerance and devotion of Middle Eastern nations, referred to Jerusalem on first reference by its Arabic name, Al-Quds.



"In all my travels the city I have come to love most is al-Quds, Jerusalem, where three great faiths come together," Brennan said at an event co-sponsored by the White House Office of Public Engagement and the Islamic Center at New York University and the Islamic Law Students Association at NYU.

[BRVoice]

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/print/277266



The European Caliphate
A refugee from the Muslim world sees it taking shape.
September 15, 2011 12:00 A.M.

For more than 30 years, Bat Ye’or, a refugee from Egypt, has been writing about dhimmis — Christians and Jews living under oppression in Muslim lands. Now, she has a new book, Europe, Globalization, and the Coming Universal Caliphate, that looks at Muslims living in lands that once were Christian but today call themselves multicultural. She predicts Europe will not remain multicultural for long. She is convinced that Europe, sooner rather than later, will be dominated by Islamic extremists and transformed into “Eurabia” — a term first used in the mid-1970s by a French publication pressing for common European-Arab policies.

Immigrants can enrich a nation. But there is a difference between immigrants and colonists. The former are eager to learn the ways of their adopted home, to integrate and perhaps assimilate — which does not require relinquishing their heritage or forgetting their roots. Colonists, by contrast, bring their culture with them and live under their own laws. Their loyalties lie elsewhere.

Ye’or contends that a concerted effort is being made not only to ensure that Muslim immigrants in Europe remain squarely in the second category, but also that they become the means to transform Europe politically, culturally, and religiously. Leading this effort is the Organization of the Islamic Conference, established in 1969, which, a few months ago, no doubt on the advice of a highly compensated public-relations professional, renamed itself the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.

The OIC represents 56 countries plus the Palestinian Authority. It claims also to represent Muslim immigrants — the “Diaspora” — in Europe, the Americas, Africa, and Asia. It is pan-Islamic: It seeks to unify and lead the world’s 1.3 billion Muslims. In a manual first published in 2001, “Strategy of Islamic Cultural Action in the West,” the IOC asserts that “Muslim immigrant communities in Europe are part of the Islamic nation.” It goes on to recommend, Ye’or notes, “a series of steps to prevent the integration and assimilation of Muslims into European culture.”

The IOC, she argues, is nothing less than a “would-be, universal caliphate.”

It might look different from the caliphates of the Ottomans, Fatimids, and Abbasids. It might resemble, instead, a thoroughly modern trans-national bureaucracy. But, already, the OIC exercises significant power through the United Nations, and through the European Union, which has been eager to accommodate the OIC while simultaneously endowing the U.N. with increasing authority for global governance. Among the other organizations that Ye’or says are doing the OIC’s bidding are the U.N. Alliance of Civilizations, the U.N. Commission on Human Rights, and the European Parliamentary Association for Euro-Arab Cooperation (PAEAC).

In the eyes of OIC officials, no problem in the contemporary world is more urgent than “Islamophobia,” which it calls “a crime against humanity” that the U.N. and the EU must officially outlaw. Even discussing why so much terrorism is carried out in the name of Islam is to be forbidden. The OIC insists, too, that international bodies ban “defamation of religion,” by which it means criticism of anything Islamic. Defamation of Judaism, Christianity, Bahai, Hinduism, and even heterodox Muslim sects such as the Ahmadiyya is common within the borders of many OIC countries, a fact the OIC refuses to acknowledge.

Instead, the OIC has specifically “warned” the EU and the “international community” of the “dangers posed by the influence of Zionism, Neo-Conservatism, aggressive Christian evangelicalism, Jewish extremism, Hindu extremism and secular extremism in international affairs and the ‘War on Terrorism.’”

Though funding for terrorist groups flows generously from individuals in oil-rich OIC countries, the organization itself is not a supporter of terrorism.

Neither, however, is it an opponent. Violence directed against those it views as enemies of Islam is defined as “resistance” — even when civilians, including women and children, are the intended victims.

While the OIC expresses concern for the rights of Muslim immigrants in the West, the egregious mistreatment of foreign workers in the Gulf countries (and other Muslim countries as well) is not something OIC officials deign to discuss. Nor has the OIC ever condemned the genocide of the black Muslims of Darfur or the genocidal intentions toward Israelis openly expressed by Hamas, Hezbollah, and the rulers of Iran.

European diplomats might at least insist that the OIC accept the principle of reciprocity. If there is to be a “dialogue of civilizations,” shouldn’t both sides get to air their grievances? Shouldn’t Europeans work to end the persecution of religious and ethnic minorities in OIC countries and to grant foreign workers in Muslim countries basic rights and a path to citizenship? If the Saudis want to fund and control tens of thousands of mosques around the world, is it too much to ask that they permit people of other faiths to at least worship on their soil? Evidently it is, and Ye’or offers this explanation: Committed to a multicultural, multiethnic, multireligious, and multilateral ideology that rejects patriotism and even national identity and cultural pride, afflicted by guilt over their imperial and colonial past — and ignorant about more than a thousand years of Islamic imperialism and colonialism — Europeans have become dhimmis in their own lands; inferiors who accept their status and submit. TheOIC, by contrast, rejects multiculturalism, openly professing the superiority of the Islamic faith, civilization, and laws.

The caliphate,” Bat Ye’or concludes, is “alive and growing within Europe... It has advanced through the denial of dangers and the obfuscating of history.

It has moved forward on gilded carpets in the corridors of dialogue, the network of the Alliances and partnerships, in the corruption of its leaders, intellectuals and NGOs, particularly at the United Nations.”

If you think that’s alarmist, if you think the OIC sincerely seeks cooperation with the West or that Europeans know where lines must be drawn and have the courage to draw them, read her book. Or just wait a few years.



— Clifford D. May is president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a policy institute focusing on national security and foreign policy.

[vector7]

Top Muslim Declares All Christians ‘Infidels’

Posted By Raymond Ibrahim On November 1, 2011 @ 12:20 am In Daily Mailer,FrontPage | 32 Comments



To what extent was Egypt’s Maspero massacre, wherein the military literally mowed down Christian Copts protesting the ongoing destruction of their churches, a product of anti-Christian sentiment?

A video of Egypt’s grand mufti, Sheikh Ali Gomaa (or Gom’a), which began circulating weeks before the massacre, helps elucidate. While holding that Muslims may coexist with Christians (who, as dhimmis, have rights), Gomaa categorized Christians as kuffar — “infidels” — a word that connotes “enemies,” “evil-doers,” and every bad thing to Muslim ears.

After quoting Quran 5:17, “Infidels are those who declare God is the Christ, [Jesus] son of Mary,” he expounded by saying any association between a human and God (in Arabic, shirk) is the greatest sin: “Whoever thinks the Christ is God, or the Son of God, not symbolically — for we are all sons of God — but attributively, has rejected the faith which God requires for salvation,” thereby becoming an infidel.

Gomaa then offered a hypothetical dialogue between Christians and Muslims to illustrate Islam’s proper position:

Christians: You have the wrong idea about us; we don’t worship the Christ.

Muslims: Okay, fine; we were under the wrong impression — but, by the way: “Infidels are those who declare God is the Christ, son of Mary.”

Christians: But these are philosophical matters that we are unable to explain.

Muslims: Okay, fine; God is one—but, by the way: “Infidels are those who declare God is the Christ, son of Mary.”

As a graduate of and long-time professor at Al Azhar university and grand mufti of Egypt (a position second in authority only to Sheikh Al Azhar), Ali Gomaa​ represents mainstream Islam’s — not “radical Islam’s” or “Islamism’s” — position concerning the “other,” in this case, Christians.

Regardless, many in the West hail him as a “moderate” — such as this U.S. News article titled “Finding the Voices of Moderate Islam“; Lawrence Wright describes him as “a highly promoted champion of moderate Islam”:

He is the kind of cleric the West longs for, because of his assurances that there is no conflict with democratic rule and no need for theocracy. Gomaa has also become an advocate for Muslim women, who he says should have equal standing with men.

How does one reconcile such sunny characterizations with reality? The fact is, whenever top Muslim authorities like Gomaa say something that can be made to conform to Western ideals, Westerners jump on it (while of course ignoring their more “extreme” positions). It is the same with Gomaa’s alma mater, Al Azhar, the “chief center of Islamic and Arabic learning in the world.”

MEMRI, for instance, recently published a report titled “The Sheikh of Al Azhar in an Exceptionally Tolerant Article: Christianity, Judaism Share Basic Tenets of Islam.” Of course, the day after this report appeared, this same sheikh — Islam’s most authoritative voice — insisted that the American ambassador wear a hijab when meeting him: just as Muslim “radicals” compel Christian girls to wear the hijab, “moderate” Al Azhar compels U.S. diplomats.

In short, yes, many religions “share basic tenets,” but they are secondary to the differences, which are more final and define the relationship. Or, to put it in Ali Gomaa​’s paradigm: Fine, Christianity and Islam have commonalities — but, by the way: “Infidels are those who declare God is the Christ, son of Mary.”

The fact is, this Quranic verse is as much a cornerstone of Islam’s view of Christianity as the unity of God and Christ is a cornerstone of Christianity, articulated some 1700 years ago in the Nicene Creed​. The issue is clear cut for all involved.

Accordingly, how can one fault Gomaa? As grand mufti, he is simply being true to Islam’s teachings. Indeed, his consistency is more commendable than the equivocations of Western ecumencalists who, by falling over themselves to assure Muslims that they all essentially believe in the same things, demonstrate, especially to Muslims, that they believe in nothing.

Incidentally, if Gomaa upholds the plain teachings of the Quran concerning who is an infidel, is it not fair to assume he also upholds the Quran’s teachings on how to confront them, as commanded in Quran 9: 29: “Fight … the People of the Book [Jews and Christians] until they pay the Jizya [tribute] with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” Of course, prudent Muslims, undoubtedly like Gomaa himself, know that now is not the time to talk openly about such things.

Either way, here is another reminder of how Quranic verses and terms that Western people brush aside as arcane or irrelevant have a tremendous impact on current events — such as Egypt’s Maspero massacre: For the same word Gomaa, the nation’s grand mufti, used to describe Christians is the same word Muslim soldiers used when they opened fire on and ran over Christian Copts; the same word twenty Muslim soldiers used as they tortured a protesting Christian; and the same word Muslims hurled at Christians during the funeral procession for their loved ones slain at Maspero: Infidel.

[American Patriot]

Well.... in America we are the Majority.

So go have sex with a camel.

[vector7]

Muslim chaplain at Northeastern University calls convicted al-Qaeda member who attempted to fire on U.S. soldiers "brave," condemns soldiers as "kafirs"

Abdullah Faaruuq also said "And I say they call this the land of the free and the home of the brave. And I call it the land of the coward and the home of the slave."

Oh, hey, here's a lost verse from the Sana'a Qur'an manuscripts: "Don't let the door hit you..." "Raising Money for 'Lady Al-Qaida'," by Steve Emerson for Family Security Matters, December 20 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

A Northeastern University Muslim chaplain, who also is a Roxbury, Mass. imam, hailed a terrorist convicted of attempting to murder Americans in Afghanistan as "brave," while painting the United States as an oppressive nation of infidels.

"They say that she took up a machine gun while they held her captive in the other room and was ready to attack her captives [sic]. What a brave woman she is," Abdullah Faaruuq said at a Dec. 8 fundraiser for Aafia Siddiqui.

Siddiqui, a Pakistani scientist also known as "Lady al-Qaida," is serving an 86-year prison sentence after being convicted of attempting to assault and murder American officers in Afghanistan. Prosecutors say she grabbed an Army officer's M-4 rifle and fired it at another officer and other members of a U.S. interview team at an Afghan police compound in July 2008. She was originally detained by Afghan officials who found in her possession notes about a "mass casualty attack" in the United States, along with a list of New York landmarks.

The fundraiser, "In Support of our Sister, Dr. Aafia Siddiqui," was held at the Islamic Center of Worcester. Speakers repeatedly cast her prosecution and conviction as unjust.

"What a brave woman she continues to be, and how much her bravery and her faith and her belief warrants our support at this time," said Faaruuq, an imam at Roxbury's Mosque for the Praising of Allah. "It is said that we're trying to raise $30,000 tonight. I would say it's better that we've raised your awareness and raised your ire, as your anger against a government who would level the charges that they have against this woman and they say she is guilty. I would say she's only guilty of defending herself."

In addition to lauding Siddiqui's "bravery," Faaruuq also condemned American soldiers, the very people who defend America, as "kafirs," meaning infidels.

"And if my mother was in the same place," he said, "she would have took (sic) her West Indian machete and cut her way through those kafirs."

He repeated an unsubstantiated claim that Siddiqui was abused while in custody. Muslims around the world are "cowering at the hand of the disbeliever," Faaruuq said, "and this one woman locked up deep down, possibly raped and abused, and they're saying that she was a terrorist, afraid of a 100-pound woman. And I say they call this the land of the free and the home of the brave. And I call it the land of the coward and the home of the slave."

The presiding judge who reviewed all the evidence saw things differently. U.S. District Judge Richard M. Berman said "significant incarceration" was called for because Siddiqui's acts were premeditated. In his sentencing, he also noted anti-American statements witnesses said were made by Siddiqui while firing on the soldiers, like "I want to kill Americans" and "Death to America."

It's not the first time Faaruuq has engaged in violent rhetoric while standing up for Siddiqui. Boston-based watchdog of radical Islamists Charles Jacobs wrote in October that Faaruuq sees cases like Siddiqui's as part of an effort to target Muslims in America. Muslims should "grab onto the gun and the sword, go out and do your job" in response, Faaruuq said. [...]

Also coming to Siddiqui's defense at the fundraiser was Imam Siraj Wahhaj of the Masjid Al-Taqwa mosque in Brooklyn, New York. Wahhaj has a history of defending convicted terrorists, listed as an unindicted co-conspirator and having served as a character witness for Omar Abdel-Rahman, the so-called "blind sheik," convicted of conspiring to bomb the World Trade Center in 1993....

Posted by Marisol on December 21, 2011 12:08 AM | 32 Comments

[vector7]

January 13, 2012

Three Jihadis

By Pamela Geller

It is almost every day now. Jihadi attacks in America. This past week there were three attempted jihad attacks. And what does the media consider the problem? Racistislamophobicantimuslimbigots, of course.

On Saturday, a Muslim named Sami Osmakac was arrested in Florida on charges of plotting to go jihad on nightclubs and the Tampa, Florida, sheriff's headquarters. "We all have to die," Osmakac said, "so why not die the Islamic way?"

Osmakac is from Kosovo, making his jihad another thank-you for U.S. involvement in Bosnia. And the U.S. still supports an independent Kosovo state, a militant Islamic state, in the heart of Europe. That is our policy. America refuses to own up to the terrible mistake we made in Europe -- worse still, we continue to prosecute the Christian Serbs.

Media reports said that Osmakac, a devout Muslim, was "self-radicalized." You have to wonder if Western dhimmis stay up nights thinking up new terms for jihad. Pathetic. Soon after his arrest, video emerged that showed how pious and violent Sami Osmakac really was, as he attacked and bloodied Christian street preachers. The pious Osmakac, who was completely the aggressor, then cried victim to the police, saying that he had been "insulted," the same fictitious narrative that we are bombarded with daily by Islamic groups and Muslim Brotherhood organizations like the Hamas-tied Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

The police, in what has become standard practice in dealing with Islamic supremacists, treated the perpetrator and the victim with equal contempt, actually charging the bloodied Christian with battery. This was in the same town, Tampa, that classified what was obviously an honor killing of a Muslim woman, Fatima Abdallah, as a "suicide."

Even worse, after the terrorism arrest, Hassan Shibly, director of the Florida chapter of CAIR, cried "entrapment." This is, of course, typical of jihadis, but what is really outrageous is thatthe FBI briefed Shibly prior to Osmakac's arrest. Hamas-CAIR was briefed? Was Qaradawi briefed, too?

"The weapons and explosives were provided by the government. Was he just a troubled individual, or did he pose a real threat?" Shibly asked. Hey, Shibly, he was a devout Muslim. Watch the videos: he is preaching the word of Allah in one and head-butting Christians in another.

Also on Sunday, a Muslim in Alabama named Luis Ibarra-Hernandez (the media did not release his Muslim name) shot out store windows and tried to get into a shootout with police officers.

Gadsden, Alabama Police spokesperson Capt. Regina May said: "After the man was taken into custody, he reported that he knew he must do something extreme to draw attention to Islam and himself, so he planned to shoot police officers."

I think it is poetic that this Alabama Muslim wanted to call attention to Islam by shooting at police. He is right, of course. Such actions best illustrate the violent and true nature of jihad. He would have been richly rewarded in paradise, perhaps 73 virgins instead of 72. But as Islamic scholar Robert Spencer points out, "he did not, however, succeed in gaining the space that is guaranteed in Paradise for those who 'kill and are killed' for Allah (Qur'an 9:111)."

Meanwhile, the military jihad continues. Last Friday, a former U.S. Army soldier named Craig Baxam was arrested and charged with trying to join al-Shabaab, a jihad terror group in Somalia. Baxam converted to Islam while in the U.S. Military. He said he wanted to die defending Islam, and was "looking for dying with a gun in my hand."

So three jihads in one week, and an ongoing sharp increase in jihad activity in Obama's America. Yet this is never remarked upon. It is deliberately ignored. And it's astonishing. Is this what we can expect from our politicians and the media? We're under siege by the enemedia, and by craven politicians, and by the enforcers: CAIR, ISNA, ICNA, etc., that have these government agencies in their back pocket.

What's it's going to take?

America, where are you on this?

[samizdat]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...22917532871834

[Beetle]

The Muslim Brotherhood comes to America

By Lauren Bohn, Special to CNN
updated 12:14 PM EDT, Tue April 3, 2012


Sondos Asem, right, and her mother, Manal Abu Hassan, use social media in their Cairo living room

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• A 24-year-old Egyptian woman is the unofficial tweeter of the Muslim Brotherhood
• Sondos Asem has been promoting the Brotherhood in the United States
• Experts say it's part of a global charm offensive for a group that wants to revamp its image
• The Muslim Brotherhood is the oldest and largest Islamist movement in the world

Editor's note: Lauren Bohn is a 2010-2011 Fulbright fellow and multimedia journalist based in Egypt. She's a Pulitzer Center grantee and a 2012 Overseas Press Foundation fellow.

(CNN) -- Sondos Asem has butterflies, formulating answers to questions she expects to be asked and practicing her diction with the devotion of a high school debate champion. The gentle 24-year-old graduate student at the American University in Cairo is in a hotel room in downtown New York, figuring out what to wear on national television. ("This blazer would look good, right?" "Should I wear more color?")
Like many young Egyptians, she's been tweeting the fallout after the 2011 uprising that brought down former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. The stakes are higher than 140-character dispatches might suggest. Asem has emerged as an unlikely unofficial spokeswoman for the Muslim Brotherhood, helping to run its English-language Twitter feed, @Ikhwanweb, and in turn revamp the group's image in the West.

In no more than three lines, often using abbreviations and hyperlinks, she hashes out the views of the Brotherhood, the 83-year-old fountainhead of political Islam in the region and one of the most powerful organizations in Egypt. The Brotherhood's newly established political arm, the Freedom and Justice Party, has won just under half of the seats in the country's new parliament -- more than any other group -- and will have a major hand in rewriting the country's constitution.

This week, Asem and five members of the Brotherhood are in New York as part of the group's first delegation in the United States, the face the Brotherhood thinks perhaps would be well received in the West. Asem is part of a worldly, urban generation. She shops at Egypt's flashy mega-malls. She brushes her eyelids with a modest dash of sparkly eye shadow and wears designer head-scarves. She has an affinity for cosmopolitan cities and uses American teen parlance like "You rock" and "Yeaaah, girl." She seems very unlike the kind of person who has historically been loyal to the Brotherhood.

Founded in Egypt in 1928, the group is the oldest and largest Islamist movement in the world. It has affiliates and branches throughout the region and adherents in Europe and the United States. Mostly made up of middle-class doctors, lawyers, and other professionals, the Brotherhood has sought a more traditional Islamic society by building extensive networks and social services across the country, often filling in gaps left by the neglect of sclerotic, corrupt regimes.

Band of brothers

Until the Egyptian uprising in 2011, the Brotherhood was officially banned by Mubarak's government. Its members were routinely imprisoned. But it was given limited room to operate in the country and became one of the largest dissident organizations.

Many Western pundits and politicians have long denounced the group as a quasi-terrorist organization and the ancestor of al Qaeda. While some al Qaeda leaders -- notably Ayman al-Zawahiri, who is Egyptian -- have roots in the Brotherhood, al Qaeda largely dismisses it for renouncing violence and engaging politically.
When it comes to charming a largely Western audience, Asem is one of the Brotherhood's prized go-to people. She comes from a stalwart Brotherhood family. Her father is in charge of publishing all the organization's educational materials, like "How to be a good Muslim father" and "How to be a good Muslim wife." Her mother ran unsuccessfully for parliament and is the current chairman of the political party's committee on women.

Asem is persuasive and assertive, gesturing confidently as she talks, but she still looks down and shows the insecurities of a 20-something caught up in a national identity crisis.




Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt's election




Asem: Egyptians want security, stability




Asem: 'Historic responsibility' in Egypt
Just six months ago, Asem went by a pseudonym in the press for fear of suffering a backlash among her private-university classmates, who are mostly secular and perceive the Brotherhood as a bunch of religious ideologues, bent on imposing Islamic law and diminishing civil liberties.
But times have changed since the Arab Spring.

The Brotherhood's near-landslide victory in parliamentary elections has given Asem and fellow members the confidence to back the group publicly. She and some of her equally eloquent colleagues have shuttled across the world to attend conferences on the revolutionary uprisings, and their opinions are being heard and heeded on an unprecedented scale.

At the recent Daily Beast/Newsweek Women in the World summit, Asem brushed elbows with actresses Meryl Streep and Angelina Jolie and sat on a panel moderated by Andrew Sullivan, a renowned gay Catholic blogger. It was a far different scene from a few years ago, when she and other members gathered clandestinely in cramped living rooms, turning off their mobile phones because they were afraid state security forces could be tracking their whereabouts.

As Asem settled into her hotel room in New York and prepared to meet with a prominent news organization's editorial board, she got word that her boss had decided to run for the presidency of Egypt.

"Wow! I can't believe it," she exclaimed.

Not many can. The political arm of the Muslim Brotherhood has nominated its longtime strategist and financier Khairat al-Shater for president. The announcement ran counter to the Brotherhood's previous pledge to stay out of the race, a decision the group said was made to prevent flooding the fledgling political system and derailing a smooth transition of power in the country.

The delegation that Asem is part of is meeting with Pulitzer-prize-winning journalists and the editorial boards of prestigious papers. The Council on Foreign Relations is hosting them in New York for a talk and they're meeting with the Carnegie Endowment and the Brookings Institution in Washington, with a lot of coffee-talk in between. The goal: to alleviate the fears of a still-suspicious American establishment.

Global charm offensive

The delegation is really part of an international charm offensive, analysts and critics say, that is strategically unrepresentative of the deeply hierarchal Brotherhood. The image the group is trying to portray to the West belies its oppressive views of women and religious minorities, these experts say. And politically that could be a concern to the West, because the Brotherhood has historically been hostile to Israel.

On the other hand, it would be foolish to shun the delegation, and the least the West should do is continue to engage the group to understand its strategic influence in the new Egypt, say Marc Lynch, director of the Institute for Middle East Studies at George Washington University.

Lynch says the recent meeting of former Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain with al-Shater in Cairo was perhaps the most eye-catching moment in this new engagement. Sen. Lindsey Graham, who was traveling with McCain, reportedly said of the trip: "I was very apprehensive when I heard the election results. But after visiting and talking with the Muslim Brotherhood, I am hopeful that ... we can have a relationship with Egypt where the Muslim Brotherhood is a strong political voice."
But at same time, there is going to be mutual suspicion on both the U.S. and Brotherhood sides, Lynch predicts. The Brotherhood will likely realize that whatever sympathy it got from America for being oppressed by Mubarak won't continue unless the Brotherhood brings democracy to Egypt.

"I don't discourage these road shows," says Michael Hanna, a Middle East analyst at the Century Foundation, a progressive nonpartisan think tank. "But there's always that question that hangs over the interactions: just how representative are these people of a very parochial, more conservative organization?"

It's not just abroad that the Brotherhood finds itself on the defensive, but also on its home turf.

The Tahrirists

An increasing rift between liberal and leftist political groups and the Muslim Brotherhood has shaken Egypt since the Tahrir Square uprising. Over the past year, many "Tahrirists" have complained that the Brotherhood has hijacked their revolution.

They fear Egypt will become a near-theocracy, an instant replay of Iran's 1979 revolution.

With the Muslim Brotherhood winning most of the seats in the recent parliamentary elections, and the even more conservative Salafist Party coming in a close second, opponents fear a backsliding on minority rights, especially those of women.

Nathan J. Brown, a professor of international affairs at George Washington University, says Egypt's secular parties and young revolutionaries have lost the first major political battles of post-Mubarak Egypt. In the recent parliamentary elections, they only managed to secure a quarter of the seats in the People's Assembly and about 40 seats in the 100-member Constituent Assembly, elected by the parliament to draft the constitution. Many have withdrawn from the assembly in protest.

"We majorly failed," concedes Mahmoud Salem, a popular pro-democracy activist and blogger who tweets as "Sandmonkey." "The secular revolutionaries and leftists didn't focus on moving beyond Tahrir and engaging the streets, listening to the demands of the people. So right now, we have to reassess and plan before we move forward."
Leadership within the Brotherhood seems to have that process down pat, even while it's simultaneously trying to soften its fundamentalist image in the West.

"They have multiple discourses and they're playing to different audiences," says Shadi Hamid, research director at the Doha Brookings Center in Qatar. "Is that not politics? There are different personalities and currents within the vast group of 300,000 members. They represent a broad spectrum of society."
This is what democracy looks like in Egypt, says Hamid.

"People should stop assuming democracy is good for the liberalization of society, women, and minorities. Democracy doesn't necessarily translate to more rights," says Hamid. "In fact, it could mean the opposite."

Backdoor deal?

Many Egyptians believe, even fear, that the Muslim Brotherhood and the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, senior members of Egypt's military, have been brokering a behind-the-scenes deal to share power after the formal handover to civilian rule happens at the end of June. But if any deal was in the works, it seems to have hit major difficulties in recent days.

The military refused the Brotherhood's demands that SCAF fire the military-appointed cabinet and allow the parliamentary majority to form a government. Nominating al-Shater as a presidential candidate is seen as the group's boldest move in a recently escalating battle for power. The Brotherhood's critics now compare the group to the Mubarak regime, citing a lack of democracy within the organization. Breaking its pledge that it wouldn't field a presidential candidate is just more evidence that the Brotherhood wants power at all costs, critics say.

They also cite an internal crackdown on younger members who wanted change. Mohammed Abbas, a leading member of the Revolution Youth alliance, left the organization soon after the Tahrir Square uprising. "You don't have a say in the Brotherhood," he says, noting that many young Brotherhood members have since been forced to leave the organization for supporting the presidential bid of Abdel Moneim Fotouh, another former Brotherhood leader. "It's not a democracy."

Promises for Egypt's poor

Under a mantra of "Islam is the solution," the Brotherhood has maintained influence by providing social services like education and health care to the 40% of Egyptians who live under the poverty line.

In one of the many slum neighborhoods of Cairo, where the Brotherhood has provided social services for decades, a pregnant Alia Ali, 22, steps out of a maze of dilapidated apartment buildings. "It's a mess in this country. I don't even know what's happening anymore. We were going to support Hazem Salah Abou Ismail (a Salafist candidate), but then we hear the Brotherhood now wants us to vote for Khairat. When will this all be over?"

Her father, Ahmed, an unemployed mechanic and now cab driver, isn't a Brotherhood member, but voted for its candidate in parliamentary elections. "The Egyptian people are tools again in politics," he said, about to start his second shift of the day. "Nothing has changed."

While some Salafists have discussed their desire to push for Islamic banking, restrict the sale of alcohol, and censor art, the Brotherhood has pledged to respect basic individual liberties while guiding society in a more conservative direction.

"It will be tough to figure out ways, like with tourism, to welcome other cultures, but to also make sure they respect our identity as an Islamic state," admits Dina Zakaria, one of the Freedom and Justice Party's female advocates. "And while we don't impose the head-scarf, we believe, at the end of the day, it's crucial for women in Islam."

The Brotherhood for women?

Though the Brotherhood says women will share equal rights, often holding up spokeswomen like Asem and Zakaria as examples, critics point to an organization they say reflects Egypt's patriarchal history.

No women are represented in any of the movement's two main power structures -- the Shura Council and the Guidance Bureau.

In the past, members have defended separating men and women because, they say, that causes fewer problems. The Freedom and Justice Party offers more opportunities for women, argues Essam El-Erian, a senior leader. During the recent parliamentary elections, the party fielded about 75 female candidates -- more than any other party. Nine of the 498 newly elected parliamentarians are women, four of them from the party.

One of the group's well-known female foot soldiers, Zahraa al-Shater, is Khairat al-Shater's wife and the mother of their four children. When 22 senior Brotherhood figures were arrested in 2006 (including her father and husband), she launched a campaign of mothers and daughters against the court bodies trying the men. This, to her, is a step forward for women. "Women saved this organization," she resolutely proclaims. "It might not look like Western feminism based on secular notions, but we are empowered."

But even women in the group have given ammunition to critics' claims that the Brotherhood's policies are retrograde.

One of the group's parliamentarians, Azza El Garf, has been hit with bad press after a few colorful comments that she says were taken out of context. She said that all women should take cooking classes and that no sexual harassment exists in Egypt. (She stands by the latter remark, saying she's often walked home at 2 a.m., and has never once been assaulted.) And while the Brotherhood supports Egypt's ban on female genital mutilation, she recently came out against it, saying that a woman has a choice in deciding to undergo the practice.

The granddaughter of Hassan al-Banna, the late founder of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, feels differently. Sanaa al-Banna, 25, at work on her doctorate at Cairo University, left the Brotherhood a few years ago and has cut almost all communication with members. She is working with a separate activist group now.
"If I were a man, I still would have left. There's no freedom for either sex," she says. "The Brotherhood is becoming more and more like the NDP (the National Democratic Party of Hosni Mubarak, which was quickly disbanded after his ouster). There's no transparency, no permission for the divergence of thoughts or critical thinking. It's their way or you're out."

"They wanted me to stay on the front desk, you know, the people the media talk to -- Khairat al-Shater's 'friendly to the West' public relations wing. But these people really have no say. I was the old Sondos," she says. "But I got out."

Asem on American TV

Back in New York, Asem finally decides what she'll wear for her debut on CNN (a fitted off-white blazer). She says she's nervous about what an American audience will think of her.

"We have the Egyptian streets and we're just trying to show secular Egyptians and the world that they shouldn't be afraid," she says, sure of her mission. "That's all, honestly."

She goes on "Starting Point," a talk-driven morning show hosted by Soledad O'Brien.
Will Cain, a conservative pundit, interrupts her as she's speaking. "One of the charges often made ... is you come, say stuff to us in English here ... and then go back to Egypt, speak in Arabic, and say just the opposite," he says.
She knew this question was coming. Her voice shakes and she's visibly nervous. She looks like a 24-year-old with a lot of responsibility.

Cain is wrong, she tries to say -- the Brotherhood's message is consistent. It stands for human dignity and freedom. It has expressed full commitment to the peace treaty with Israel. It wants a civil, democratic state.

Back at her hotel room, she reassesses her performance and checks in on Twitter.
"Some 'tweeps,' of course, didn't like what I said," she notes. "But one thing is for sure -- I do need to smile more. Next time."

[vector7]

An Al Queda Terrorism Manual for American Consumption

by John Galt
May 16, 2012 21:40 ET

In what I can only call as a shocking document, I’ll leave this to the reader’s imagination as to how this will be perceived by the more radical and tempted members of America’s young Islamist nutcases. This is a direct shot at those who wish to do harm to our families, friends, and neighbors and should be taken for what it is:

A recruitment tool for Islamic youth dissatisfied with our nation and ideals.

Many thanks to Public Intelligence.com for providing this document to share with all concerned citizens.


(Click on the link above to see the entire document)

[vector7]

Graphic Video: Muslims Slaughter Convert to Christianity in Tunisia

by Raymond Ibrahim
Gatestone Institute
June 4, 201

GRAPHIC VIDEO!!!!!

Liberal talk show host Tawfiq Okasha recently appeared on "Egypt Today" airing a video of Muslims slicing a young man's head off for the crime of apostasy, in this case, the crime of converting to Christianity and refusing to renounce it. The video—be warned, it is immensely graphic—is embedded here (the actual execution appears from minute 1:13-4:00). For those who prefer not to view it, a summary follows:

A young man appears held down by masked men. His head is pulled back, with a knife to his throat. He does not struggle and appears resigned to his fate. Speaking in Arabic, the background speaker, or "narrator," chants a number of Muslim prayers and supplications, mostly condemning Christianity, which, because of the Trinity, is referred to as a polytheistic faith: "Let Allah be avenged on the polytheist apostate"; "Allah empower your religion, make it victorious against the polytheists"; "Allah, defeat the infidels at the hands of the Muslims"; "There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his messenger."

Then, to cries of "Allahu Akbar!"—or, "God is great!"—the man holding the knife to the apostate's throat begins to slice away, even as the victim appears calmly mouthing a prayer. It takes nearly two minutes of graphic knife-carving to sever the Christian's head, which is then held aloft to more Islamic cries and slogans of victory.

Visibly distraught, Tawfiq Okasha, the host, asked: "Is this Islam? Does Islam call for this? How is Islam related to this matter?...These are the images that are disseminated throughout the electronic media in Europe and America…. Can you imagine?" Then, in reference to Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood and Salafis, whose political influence has grown tremendously, he asked, "How are such people supposed to govern?"

In fact, only the other day a top Egyptian Salafi leader openly stated that no Muslim has the right to apostatize, or leave Islam, based on the canonical hadiths, including Muhammad's command, "Whoever leaves his religion, kill him." Islam's most authoritative legal manuals make crystal clear that apostasy is a capital crime, punishable by death.

The first "righteous caliph," a paragon of Muslim piety and virtue, had tens of thousands of people slaughtered—including by burning, beheading, and crucifixion—simply because they tried to break away from Islam. According to the Encyclopaedia of Islam, the most authoritative reference work on Islam in the English language, "there is unanimity that the male apostate must be put to death."

Finally, a word on the "prayers" or supplications to Allah made by the Muslim executioners in the video: these are standard and formulaic. It is not just masked, anonymous butchers who supplicate Allah as they engage in acts of evil; rather, top-ranking Muslim leaders openly invoke such hate-filled prayers.

See here for examples of prominent Muslims supplicating Allah to strike infidels with cancer and disease "till they pray for death and do not receive it," and even formalized prayers in Mecca, blasted on megaphones as Muslims pilgrimage and circumambulate the Ka'ba, supplicating Allah to make the lives of Christians and Jews "hostage to misery; drape them with endless despair, unrelenting pain and unremitting ailment; fill their lives with sorrow and pain and end their lives in humiliation and oppression."

"Is this Islam?" You decide.

[vector7]

Muslim preacher charged with conspiring to set up a jihad terror training camp in Oregon

And the defense attorneys want Osama bin Laden's name excluded from the proceedings, even though Mustafa Kamel Mustafa was an al-Qaeda operative. How did a preacher of Islam get the crazy idea that Islam mandated killing unbelievers? Doesn't he know it's a peaceful religion, and that only greasy Islamophobes think otherwise?

"US defends arrest of Egyptian Islamic preacher, says bin Laden’s name belongs in NY trial," from the Associated Press, April 28:NEW YORK — Osama bin Laden’s name should not be banned from the terrorism trial of an Egyptian Islamic preacher despite claims by defense lawyers that it would be prejudicial toward their client, the government has told a federal judge. Federal prosecutors said in court papers filed Friday in U.S. District Court that references to the deceased founder of al-Qaida will not be prejudicial or inflammatory and are important to explaining the case against Mustafa Kamel Mustafa to the jury.

They noted that Mustafa is charged with conspiring to provide or providing material support to al-Qaida and said the fact that bin Laden was the leader of the group at the time “is plainly relevant.”

Mustafa was extradited to the U.S. from Great Britain in October to face charges that he conspired with Seattle men to set up a terrorist training camp at a ranch in Bly, Ore.

The government plans to prove the camp, which never opened, was to be used for training in military tactics, weapons, assassinations, hand-to-hand combat and explosives.

Mustafa also is charged with helping to abduct two American tourists and 14 other people in Yemen in 1998. He has pleaded not guilty. The trial is scheduled for March.
In papers filed earlier this month, defense lawyers asked the trial judge to exclude bin Laden’s name, saying it would be “irrelevant and inflammatory” to Mustafa.

“Bin Laden’s leadership of al-Qaida is irrelevant to the charges, and its inclusion in the indictment is highly prejudicial to Mr. Mustafa,” the lawyers said. “The danger of unfair prejudice is overwhelming in this case, because of the toxic impact the mere mention of Osama bin Laden would likely have on a jury.”

But prosecutors offered multiple reasons why the mention of bin Laden was important. They noted that one of two men Mustafa is accused of sending from London to the United States to help establish the Oregon training camp had sent a letter to bin Laden saying in part: “We love you here” and “I ask God to help you here, and support you to fulfill His desire.”

The government said the letter would support its argument that the efforts to create the training camp were carried out in support of al-Qaida.

“Even though the letter does not make mention of al-Qaida by name, because bin Laden was the leader of al-Qaida, such expressions of loyalty to bin Laden are indistinguishable from expressions of loyalty to al-Qaida,” it said