The American Kafir

2012/07/17

Legal Project News

I am posting the below information for those who read or find my The American Kafir will add The Legal Project as their reading material. W

Legal Project News Clips: 07/07/12 – 07/13/12

The LP works to protect the right in the West to freely discuss Islam, radical Islam, terrorism, and terrorist funding. Our website is http://www.legal-project.org/

This past week, a former member of the LP staff produced the following blog that you might enjoy:

Free Speech Victory makes Germany’s Lawfare Score 1:1

The following four articles from the past week should be of great interest to you. These clips focus on attempts by Islamists (i.e., radical Muslims) and their allies to shut down the debate about Islam-related topics (e.g., Islam, radical Islam, Islamist terrorism, and Islamist terrorist funding).

 

Islamist Violence or Threats of Physical Violence Against Speech

Glazov, Jamie. ” Muslims Stone Christians in Dearborn, Michigan ,” The Glazov Gang: Frontpage Magazine, July 9, 2012.
Whitehead, Tom. “Terror suspects allegedly planned to attack EDL,” The Telegraph (UK), July 10, 2012.

Hate Speech Laws & Willful Blindness & PC Problems

Coyne, Andrew. “Hurt feelings aren’t reason enough to tread on freedom of speech,” The Montreal Gazette, July 10, 2012.

Willful Blindness & PC Problems

Ibrahim, Raymond. “Play Station and IKEA: Latest to Offend Muslims,” Jihad Watch Blog, July 11, 2012.

 

The following six articles from the past week should also be of interest to you. These clips focus on attempts by Islamists (i.e., radical Muslims) and their allies to shut down the debate about Islam-related topics (i.e., Islam, radical Islam, Islamist terrorism, and Islamist terrorist funding).

Blasphemy in the Muslim World

Kelly, Kim. “When Black Metal’s Anti-Religious Message Gets Turned on Islam,” The Atlantic, July 11, 2012.

Ostrovsky, Arsen. “Who Will Speak for the Ahmadi Muslims?,” Gatestone Institute, July 12, 2012.

Pressure Tactics Against Free Speech

Baron Bodissey. “Free Speech After Breivik,” Gates of Vienna Blog, July 11, 2012.

ICLA. “The Brussels Declaration,” Europe News, July 12, 2012. (at the end of the list is a PDF copy of The Brussels Declaration)

Sarah AB. “Silencing dissent: Hasan and Freedland,” Harry’s Place Blog, July 11, 2012.

Willful Blindness & PC Problems

Lilly, Brian. Why not confront Muslim extremism?,” SUN News Network, July 13, 2012.

 

More articles may be found at http://www.legal-project.org/news-external/

Advertisements

2012/06/27

The Evils of the Muslim Brotherhood: Evidence Keeps Mounting

Egypt’s longtime banned Muslim Brotherhood—the parent organization of nearly every subsequent Islamist movement, including al-Qaeda—has just won the nation’s presidency, in the name of its candidate, Muhammad Morsi. That apathy reigns in the international community, when once such news would have been deemed devastating, is due to the successful efforts of subversive Muslim apologists in the West who portray the Brotherhood as “moderate Islamists”—forgetting that such a formulation is oxymoronic, since to be “Islamist,” to be a supporter of draconian Sharia, is by definition to be immoderate. Obama administration officials naturally took it a step further, portraying the Brotherhood as “largely secular” and “pluralistic.”

Back in the real world, evidence that the Brotherhood is just another hostile Islamist group bent on achieving world domination through any means possible is overwhelming. Here are just three examples that recently surfaced, all missed by the Western media, and all exposing the Brotherhood as hostile to “infidels” (non-Muslims) in general, hostile to the Christians in their midst (the Copts) in particular, and on record calling on Muslims to lie and cheat during elections to empower Sharia:

Anti-Infidel:

At a major conference supporting Muhammad Morsi—standing on a platform with a big picture of Morsi smiling behind him and with any number of leading Brotherhood figures, including Khairat el-Shater, sitting alongside—a sheikh went on a harangue, quoting Koran 9:12, a favorite of all jihadis, and calling all those Egyptians who do not vote for Morsi—the other half of Egypt, the secularists and Copts who voted for Shafiq—”resisters of the Sharia of Allah,” and “infidel leaders” whom true Muslims must “fight” and subjugate.

The video of this sheikh was shown on the talk show of Egyptian commentator Hala Sarhan, who proceeded to exclaim “This is unbelievable! How is this talk related to the campaign of Morsi?!” A guest on her show correctly elaborated: “Note his [the sheikh’s] use of the word ‘fight’—’fight the infidel leaders’ [Koran 9:12]; this is open incitement to commit violence against anyone who disagrees with them…. how can such a radical sheikh speak such words, even as [Brotherhood leaders like] Khairat el-Shater just sits there?” Nor did the Brotherhood denounce or distance itself from this sheikh’s calls to jihad.

Anti-Christian:

It is precisely because of these sporadic outbursts of anti-infidel rhetoric that it is not farfetched to believe that Morsi himself, as some maintain, earlier boasted that he would “achieve the Islamic conquest (fath) of Egypt for the second time, and make all Christians convert to Islam, or else pay the jizya.”

Speaking of Christians, specifically the minority Copts of Egypt, in an article titled “The Muslim Brotherhood Asks Why Christians Fear Them?!” secularist writer Khaled Montasser, examining the Brotherhood’s own official documents and fatwas, shows exactly why. According to Montasser, in the Brotherhood publication “The Call [da’wa],” issue #56 published in December 1980, prominent Brotherhood figure Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah al-Khatib decreed several anti-Christian measures, including the destruction of churches and the prevention of burying unclean Christian “infidels” anywhere near Muslim graves. Once again, this view was never retracted by the Brotherhood. As Montasser concludes, “After such fatwas, Dr. Morsi and his Brotherhood colleagues ask and wonder—”Why are the Copts afraid?!”

Lying, Stealing, and Cheating to Victory:

Read it all at Investigative Project On Terrorism

Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum

American Muslims Stone Christians In America

Source Article Link: FrontPageMagazine

In the video below, we see a small number of Christians who gathered holding Christian signs at the 2012 Dearbor, Michigan Arab festival being assaulted by Muslims with bottles, stones, and other objects. The police do not protect the Christians or take action against the perpetrators; in the end, they reprimand the Christians and instruct them to leave. Ever since, there has been no coverage of this outrageous event in our media. Nor has CAIR or any other Muslim organization denounced the Muslims who abused the Christians.

One can’t help but wonder: If a small group of Muslims gathered in the U.S. somewhere with a few signs depicting Koranic verses, and a mass crowd of Christians or Jews began to assault them, verbally and physically, threatening violence and mayhem, would police tell the Muslims to leave, instead of acting against the perpetrators? And would the media be completely quiet about it? Would Muslim groups be silent about it after?

What if Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson gathered in a civil rights rally and they were surrounded and stoned by a mob of KKK supporters? Would the police show up and reprimand Sharpton and Jackson and instruct them to leave, all the while leaving the racist perpetrators untouched? And if this happened, would our media be completely silent about it? Would Anderson Cooper be completely silent every evening on CNN as he is at the moment about the stoning of the Christians in Dearborn?

We encourage our readers to watch the video and to ponder what is happening not only in the Middle East, but on the soil of the United States of America:

2012/04/06

Muslim Brotherhood seeks U.S. alliance as it ascends in Egypt

Source Washington Times

Muslim Brotherhood seeks U.S. alliance as it ascends in Egypt

Vows to honor treaty with Israel

By Ben Birnbaum

A lawmaker from Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood said Thursday that there would be “no referendum at all” on the country’s peace treaty with Israel, hours after the Islamist group’s presidential candidate made his unexpected bid official.

“We respect international obligations, period,” Abdul Mawgoud Dardery, a lawmaker from the Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party (FJP), told The Washington Times.

Mr. Dardery was on a good-will tour of Washington this week with three other Muslim Brotherhood representatives. Long shunned by Washington, the group has sought to soften its image in the West as it prepares to assume greater power in post-revolution Egypt.

On Thursday, the White House downplayed the significance of a meeting between administration officials and the Brotherhood’s envoys.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said the FJP representatives met with “midlevel” officials from the National Security Council and that it was a reflection of the new politics in Egypt and the “prominent role” the group now plays in Cairo.

“We have broadened our engagement to include new and emerging political parties and actors,” Mr. Carney said.

“Because of the fact that Egypt’s political landscape has changed, the actors have become more diverse and our engagement reflects that,” he said. “The point is that we will judge Egypt’s political actors by how they act, not by their religious affiliation.”

Presidential ambitions

The Muslim Brotherhood’s ascendancy to power in the aftermath of longtime President Hosni Mubarak’s ouster last year has raised concerns among secular Egyptians and Coptic Christians, as well as U.S. and Israeli officials, about how the fundamentalist group would rule Egypt’s 85 million people and conduct its foreign relations.

Asked whether a Brotherhood-led government would put the 1979 Camp David Accords to a referendum, as many of the group’s leaders have promised, Mr. Dardery said no.

“No referendum at all concerning international obligations,” he said. “All our international agreements are respected by the Freedom and Justice Party, including Camp David.”

Meanwhile, FJP presidential candidate Khairat al-Shater filed papers Thursday with Egypt’s High Presidential Elections Commission. Egyptians will vote in the presidential election’s first round May 23 and 24, with the top two vote-getters facing off in a June 16 runoff.

The Brotherhood had promised not to field a presidential candidate but changed course Saturday, citing threats to democracy from the military council that has ruled Egypt since Mr. Mubarak stepped down in February 2011.

In Washington, Mr. Dardery said the Brotherhood fielded a candidate “to make sure that [the] democracy road is protected by the people of Egypt,” arguing that the military council had refused to give the parliament sufficient authority.

Mr. Shater, a businessman with a reputation for cunning pragmatism, joins a crowded field that includes Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa, former Prime Minister Ahmed Shafik and moderate Islamist Abdel Moneim Abdoul Futouh. Salafist preacher Hazem Abu Ismail was disqualified Thursday, increasing Mr. Shater’s chances for victory.

Doubts about democracy

A poll taken by Egypt’s Al Ahram newspaper found that 58 percent prefer an Islamist candidate.

With Mr. Shater’s entry, some analysts now doubt that Mr. Moussa – once considered the overwhelming favorite – will make the runoff.

“Egypt is not moving toward a democracy,” said Eric Trager, an Egypt analyst at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “It is moving toward a competitive theocracy in which the Muslim Brotherhood is pitted against more fundamentalist Salafists.

“The question is only which interpretation of the Shariah will be legislated, not whether Egypt will be a theocratic state.”

The FJP and the hard-line Salafist Nour Party won two-thirds of the seats in recent parliamentary elections and now dominate the constituent assembly tasked with writing Egypt’s new constitution.

The prospect of unchecked Islamist control has frightened secular Egyptians as well as the country’s large Coptic Christian community, which has faced escalating violence over the past year.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said this week that U.S. officials “want to see Egypt move forward in a democratic transition, and what that means is you do not and cannot discriminate against religious minorities, women, political opponents.”

Egypt’s Islamist tide also has sparked concerns in Israel, which has maintained a cold but stable peace with its southern neighbor since 1979.

“The Muslim Brothers will not show mercy to us, they will not give way to us, but I hope they will keep the peace,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Tuesday. “It is important for us, but I think that it is also important for Egypt.”

Despite Mr. Dardery’s statements Thursday, many analysts remain skeptical about the Brotherhood’s true intentions.

Trouble in the Sinai

“Their discourse back at home about Israel being an enemy is consistent with where they have been all along, and I don’t think we should expect any change,” said Steven Cook, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and author of “The Struggle for Egypt.”

“I think their hope is that they can put [the peace treaty] to the side at least for the moment, but the fact that they called for this referendum, the fact that they’ve used this issue makes it hard to believe that they wouldn’t bow to any political pressure [on Israel].”

Israel has had tense relations with Egypt’s military council, which the Jewish state says has not done enough to prevent terrorists from operating in the Sinai Peninsula.

Early Thursday, Mr. Netanyahu warned that the Sinai is becoming a “terror zone” after a rocket fired from the territory struck the southern Israeli resort city of Eilat. No injuries were reported.

The prospect of a further deterioration in relations between the two countries would raise difficult questions for Washington, which has given Egypt roughly $2 billion in aid annually since 1979.

“If they no longer respect agreements reached under previous governments, then they’re not a country worthy of our support,” said Rep. Gary L. Ackerman of New York, the ranking Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s Middle East and South Asia subcommittee.

But Mr. Ackerman, echoing a now-common school of thought in Washington, told The Times that Mr. Shater’s candidacy might be a positive development given the alternative.

“If I was writing the morning line on who can beat the Salafists, it’s the Muslim Brotherhood,” he said. “And if I have to choose between horrible and not that great, I’ll take not that great.”

Susan Crabtree contributed to this report.

As a Side Note:

A 1991 document written by U.S. MB leader Mohammed Akram (a.k.a. Mohammed Adlouni)explains the goal of the Brotherhood in America, which he identifies as “settlement:”

The general strategic goal of the Brotherhood in America which was approved bythe Shura [Leadership] Council and the Organizational Conference for 1987 is“enablement of Islam in North America, meaning: establishing an effective and sta-ble Islamic Movement led by the Muslim Brotherhood which adopts Muslims’causes domestically and globally, and which works to expand the observantMuslim base; aims at unifying and directing Muslims’ efforts; presents Islam as acivilization alternative; and supports the global Islamic state, wherever it is.” …Thepriority that is approved by the Shura Council for the work of the Brotherhood inits current and former session is “Settlement.”

The document goes on to explain that “settlement” is a form of jihad aimed at destroying Westerncivilization from within and allowing for the victory of Islam over other religions:The process of settlement is a “Civilization-Jihadist process” with all that the wordmeans. The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sab-otaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so thatit is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have notprepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim’s destiny to perform Jihad and workwherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is noescape from that destiny except for those who chose to slack. But, would the slack-ers and the Mujahidin be equal.

In another part of the document titled “The Process of Settlement,” the author explains that forthe Brotherhood’s goals to be accomplished, it is necessary to have a strong organizational base:In order for Islam and its Movement to become “a part of the homeland” in whichit lives, “stable” in its land, “rooted” in the spirits and minds of its people,“enabled” in the life of its society, [with] firmly established “organizations” onwhich the Islamic structure is built and with which the testimony of civilization isachieved, the Movement must plan and struggle to obtain “the keys” and the toolsof this process in carrying out this grand mission as a “Civilization-Jihadist”responsibility which lies on the shoulders of Muslims and—on top of them—theMuslim Brotherhood in this country….”

Read the entire PDF here Muslim Brotherhood of the United States

Related Material:

The Muslim Brotherhood’s Charm Offensive in Washington

United States of America (USA) vs Holy Land Foundations (HLF) Trial

The Muslim Brotherhood

Al Jazeera and Qatar: The Muslim Brothers’ Dark Empire?

CAIR and the HLF Connection

Egypt and The Muslim Brotherhood-STRATFOR

Extremism and CAIR

Gaza -Exporting Terrorism

Hamas

Muslim Students Association

MUSLIM STUDENTS ASSOCIATION — MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY (MSA MSU)

Our Savior Has Arrived

The Muslim Brotherhood and the Egyptian Crisis

Portrait of Sheikh Dr. Yusuf Abdallah Qaradawi Senior Sunni Muslim Cleric, Affiliated With the Muslim Brotherhood

The Investigative Project on Terrorism CAIR Statement Analysis

2012/03/27

Whitewashing Islamic Terror in Toulouse

View this document on Scribd

2012/01/12

All American Muslim’s Very Special Tribute to Sept 11

All American Muslim’s Very Special Tribute to Sept 11

View this document on Scribd

2011/12/06

All-American Muslim: The Perils of Propaganda

All-American Muslim: The Perils of Propaganda

by Daniel Greenfield

All-American Muslim is on its last legs. Not only was the last episode of the show the lowest rated show in its time slot, losing again to Homeland, but it was also the lowest rated show of the night among the top 100 cable shows aimed at adults. While Homeland has improved its ratings, All-American Muslim has dropped so low that it’s hovering above the abyss.

Just to bring out the vultures, Discovery Communications is being sued by Visionaire Media which accuses it of stealing its idea for an “American Muslim Show” without compensation. At this point Discovery Communications, which oversees the disaster areas that are TLC, The Discovery Channel​, Animal Planet​ and several other learning channels that have turned into minor variations of each other serving up the same Reality content, might consider letting Visionaire have the credit for All-American Muslim which a month later looks more like blame.

The media which enthusiastically embraced All-American Muslim has nothing more to say about it. There are hardly any more stories on it and those few that show up make it clear that the writer did not watch the show beyond the premiere episode. The deadly secret of All-American Muslim is that not even the liberals in the media want to watch it.

That is the problem with propaganda, it isn’t very interesting. Negative propaganda can be entertaining, positive propaganda is stifling. All-American Muslim promotes Islam with weak reality show theatrics that are inferior in drama and entertainment value to the competition. It is so determined to promote its agenda that it utterly fails to be interesting.

With All-American Muslim’s fourth episode, Friday Night Bites, the show continues its obsession with making its women dress in the Imam approved fashion and with promoting the Islamic makeovers to general audiences. The birth of a child to one of the couples leads to a spotlighting of the Muslim call to prayer and the adventures of Fordson High School’s religiously cleansed team continues with more Ramadan than ever.

It would be a stretch to call any of this interesting. Watching All-American Muslim is like watching an extended commercial in which smiling people use a product and talk up its virtues, discussing it at length, in order to convince you to start using it. It’s no wonder that audiences are fleeing the show faster than infidels from the Middle East.

The target audience for All-American Muslim is someone who is extremely interested in Islam, but completely disinterested in any dimension or depth, who wants to see women modeling Hijabs and discussing how they deal with fasting, but isn’t at all interested in how the religion reconciles its claim of being peaceful with the violent tendencies in its midst, or who doesn’t care about the larger context of such things as guilting women into wearing Hijabs or forcing non-Muslims to work around the Ramadan schedules of Muslims.

These things are quite explosive subjects in Europe, and they are developing into serious issues in the United States, but All-American Muslim presents them enthusiastically and without any context. To anyone who is at all familiar with terrorism, watching the show is a little like tuning in to a classic cigarette commercial and feeling a little discomfort with the enthusiasm with which the narrator pitches the virtues of smoking a Camel. No matter how you feel about smoking, there is the sense that a serious issue is being ignored. That nagging feeling haunts All-American Muslim which takes audiences on a promotional tour of Muslim life without explaining some of the more problematic side-effects which include the systematic repression of women, the religious persecution of minorities and the criminalization of dissent.

Read the rest of the article at FrontPageMag

Muslim Brotherhood Confessions

Source Article Link: FrontPageMag

Muslim Brotherhood Confessions

By Raymond Ibrahim

The online version of the long-running Arabic journal Ruz al-Yusif carries an exclusive interview with Sheikh Osama al-Qusi entitled, “Former Salafi: Salafis Have Distorted Islam.” In the interview, Qusi discusses the “true thoughts” of the various Islamic groups, which “they conceal under a political mask”; he insists they have “distorted and exploited” Islam.

What he says concerning the Muslim Brotherhood and its methods of indoctrination and subversion are particularly noteworthy—notwithstanding Obama’s Director of National Intelligence’s assurances that the Brotherhood is a “largely secular” organization.

First, about Sheikh al-Qusi. He spent the last 39 years in different Islamic organizations in Egypt—beginning with the Brotherhood in the 1970s and ending with the more extreme Salafis. He still claims to be, not just a Muslim, but a Salafi—a sincere follower of “pure” Islam, as dictated by its prophet Muhammad. But he maintains that all Islamic groups are “manipulating” Islam for their own political ambitions. Accordingly, he “announced his break and washed his hands of them all, refusing to be a merchant of religion.” If laudable, some of his positions are unorthodox, for instance, that it ispermissible to have a Christian or female for a leader.

When asked to discuss “how it all began” for him, Qusi reminisced:

In the beginning, one is a born Muslim; then you begin to be lured, from whence, you do not know.

I was a medical student in the 1970s and the Muslim Brotherhood lured me to them from within the university. Nor did I even realize they were the Brotherhood. Anwar Sadat was president during this time, when he committed his greatest mistake—a mistake he paid for with his life. Not that he released these groups from the prisons after [his predecessor] Abdul Nasser had incarcerated them; but rather for giving them the green light to work in all fields of Egyptian society, thinking he would use them to get rid of his Socialist and Communist opponents. So he permitted them to work in trade unions, school unions—giving them every opportunity to hold official positions [Emphasis added].

As a student I had noticed that some of my fellow classmates were considerably older, eventually realizing they were former prison inmates. They began to distribute hand-written copies of Sayyid Qutb’s books, which were banned at the time. And we thought that they were heroes, imprisoned for their commitment and intellectual rigor, persecuted by the regime for their patriotism. Unfortunately, they greatly influenced us, since, at the time, we did not know how to differentiate truth from falsehood in regards to the ideas, principles, and pronouncements they exposed us to—to the point that religion and politics became one and the same for us. This was the beginning of my deviation.

When asked how he would describe the Muslim Brotherhood, Qusi cautiously answered: “All these organizations—without exception—are not without radicalism.”

Here, then, is firsthand testimonial from someone closely affiliated with the Brotherhood on how born Muslims can be lured and indoctrinated from within—and all in a very legal, peaceful manner. Sadat’s fault was less that he freed the Brotherhood, more that he allowed them legitimacy.

Qusi went on to discuss how these groups learned that the assassination of Sadat and the strikes of 9/11 were nothing to celebrate, to the point that some of those involved renounced these acts, having learned that stealth and patience are more effective than open warfare, which only brings unwanted attention.

All this is a warning to the West, where Muslim organizations, such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Muslim Brotherhood front group, implement the strategy their parent organization has perfected over the course of decades—incrementally subverting free societies from within.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

2011/11/28

Illinois State Government’s Muslim Brotherhood Love Affair

Source Link: FrontPageMag

Illinois State Government’s Muslim Brotherhood Love Affair

By Ryan Mauro

The Muslim Brotherhood’s stated objective in the U.S. is to “wage a grand jihad in eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house.” This is done through thinly-disguised front organizations with credentials as “moderates” that can win the affection of the media and officials. These fronts’ relationship with the government of the state of Illinois is a perfect example of this strategy’s success.

On August 30, Illinois Governor Pat Quinn announced who would serve on his newly-created Muslim American Advisory Council.  Among those chosen were Ahmed Rehab and Safaa Zarzour. The former is the National Strategic Communications Director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Executive-Director of its Chicago chapter. The latter is the secretary-general of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and is the chairman of CAIR-Chicago’s board. ISNA is listed in the Brotherhood’s own documents as one of “our organizations and the organizations of our friends.”

Both CAIR and ISNA are Muslim Brotherhood fronts and are listed by the federal government as “unindicted co-conspirators” in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation, which was shut down for financing Hamas. CAIR’s founders belonged to the Islamic Association for Palestine, which was also shut down as a front for Hamas. The two organizations went to court to get their designations lifted, but a judge determined that the government provided “ample evidence” connecting them to Hamas to justify the labels.

In 2007, the federal government said that, “From its founding by Muslim Brotherhood leaders, CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists” and “the conspirators agreed to use deception to conceal from the American public their connections to terrorists.” In 2009, the FBI ended its outreach programs with CAIR because of the evidence of its involvement with Hamas.

The well-documented and well-publicized evidence of CAIR and ISNA’s involvement with Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood has not stopped Illinois Governor Quinn and other officials from courting them. After all, opponents of the Brotherhood fronts are subject to being called “Islamophobes. As Quinn said in his announcement of his Muslim American Advisory Council, Illinois has “more than 400,000 Muslims and 300 mosques” and that’s a lot of voters.

“I congratulate CAIR-Chicago on another successful year of serving the needs of the Muslim population in Illinois, and for working toward ensuring justice and civil rights for all the communities you serve,” Quinn said in an email in March. Circuit County Clerk Dorothy Brown and Attorney General Lisa Madigan also complimented the group.

The website of CAIR-Chicago lists endorsements from the Secretary of State, five Democratic members of Congress, four mayors including that of Chicago, and various other officials in the state. It even includes praise from the superintendent of the Chicago Police Department and the Springfield FBI office’s Special Agent in Charge. Another Democratic Congressman, Mike Quigley of the 5th district, apologized to Muslims “on behalf of this country for discrimination you have faced” in September, playing into the theme of anti-Muslim hysteria and victimization the Islamists constantly use.

This isn’t the first time that Illinois officials have embraced terror-tied Muslim Brotherhood members. In December 2009, Imam Kifah Mustapha was appointed as the state police’s first Muslim chaplain. He, like CAIR and ISNA, was labeled as an “unindicted co-conspirator” by the federal government in the Holy Land trial. Documents introduced into court show that he was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood’s secret “Palestine Committee” to support Hamas in the U.S.

As a registered agent of the Holy Land Foundation, he raised the Hamas front hundreds of thousands of dollars.  The HLF sponsored his band, al-Sakhra, which performed songs supporting Hamas, jihad and violence against Israel. He also sat on the board of directors of the Hamas front named the Islamic Association of Palestine. CAIR also enjoys his support as a major fundraiser.

The Illinois State Police fired him in June 2010 as their chaplain after it Mustapha’s extremism was reported on. CAIR-Chicago immediately responded with a lawsuit accusing the State Police of McCarthyism and “fear-mongering and anti-Muslim rhetoric that has senselessly engulfed our nation.”

He has been the imam at the Mosque Foundation of Bridgeview since 2002, which was taken over by the Muslim Brotherhood in the 1970s after it wrested control from moderate Muslims. It quickly began promoting extremism, including Hamas, suicide bombings and speaking out against assimilation.

Shockingly, despite all of the incriminating facts about Mustapha, he was given a six-week tour of FBI facilities including its main training center and the National Counterterrorism Center in September 2010 as part of its outreach campaign. A local news report said that “he pushed agents to fully explain everything from the bureau’s use of deadly force policy to radical and ethnic profiling.” The FBI responded to the outrage by saying his involvement posed no risk.

Far too many of the Prairie State’s officials have been swindled by the Muslim Brotherhood and the voters of Illinois need to hold them accountable. Illinois Governor Pat Quinn and all of the officials whose public endorsements are proudly published on CAIR-Chicago’s website should be embarrassed and hopefully, replaced.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

2011/11/24

The Islamic Feminism of All-American Muslim

Filed under: Creeping Shari'a, Mainstream Media, Stealth Jihad, Taqiyya — - @ 7:01 pm

Source Link: FrontPageMag

The Islamic Feminism of All-American Muslim

By Daniel Greenfield

Once upon a time there used to be billboards for Virginia Slims cigarettes with the slogans, “You’ve come a long way, baby.” The billboards are gone now, but in their place are billboards for All-American Muslim which substitute the hijab for the cigarette. The same left which was outraged at a company marketing cigarettes as a form of female empowerment is completely supportive of marketing 7th century Islamic misogyny as female empowerment.

“The Fast and the Furious,” the second episode of TLC’s All-American Muslim, plays out like a hijab commercial, along with a pitch for the Ramadan fast. But what is missing is any acknowledgement of the violent means by which the hijab is imposed on Muslim and non-Muslim women around the world. For many women, even in North America, the consequences of not wearing the hijab can be fatal.

Sixteen-year-old Aqsa Parvaz was strangled to death by her father because she refused to wear a hijab… not somewhere in Pakistan, but in Ontario. In that same city, Mohammad Shafia killed his three daughters, ranging in age from 13 to 19, over their refusal to wear hijabs. There is no way to know if Virginia Slims or the hijab killed more women, but we do know that today it is unacceptable to show women smoking, but it is acceptable to promote treating them as chattel.

All-American Muslim had set out to show that Muslims weren’t terrorists, that they are just the neighbors next door. What a pity then that the second episode features a terrorist supporting cleric providing hijab counseling to one of the show’s stars.

Imam Abdul Latif Berry spoke at a 2009 commemoration ceremony for the Ayatollah Khomeini which took place at his own Islamic Institute of Knowledge. And he’s also quite a feminist. His website features an opinion that a husband can deny his wife a divorce if she does not return the dowry and in another appears to justify marital rape.

So, the wife must obey her husband by giving him his physical rights which he asks from her; she has to make herself available to him when he wants her; she has no right to abstain unless she has her period, a medical condition, or a difficulty that keeps her from responding favorably to him. If he demands his right and obliges her, this would not be rape in the Islamic Law, but something basic in the concept of marriage contract. Otherwise, what would marriage be without mating?

What about beating your wife? Imam Abdul Latif Berry has the answer for how to deal with a wife who won’t perform her “marital duties.”

When all peaceful methods have been exhausted and attempts to fix the problem have failed, and if this is the only means for reform, practice disciplinary confrontation with the rebellious wife. Again, Islam poses extreme conditions on this last step. The confrontation must not lead to injury or leave bruises. It must not be done in revenge or be based on hatred which trespasses the set limits, but instead be prescribed like the bitter medicine with calculated dosages to speed reform while still protect from harming the self and others.

What about marrying thirteen year olds?

The girl’s menstrual period is a natural sign that her body qualifies her for fertility, pregnancy, or reproduction. Islam does not contradict the natural aspect of life. Therefore, it does not oppose marriage at a younger age when the girl is naturally ready. However, American civil laws prohibit such marriage but could allow it in some states with parental consent and with the approval of a civil judge after verifying that the girl is qualified to wed.

This is the Islamic feminism that lurks behind the scenes of the placid life of All-American Muslim’s Dearborn, Michigan. When the cameras stop rolling, this is the religious authority that governs the lives of the “All-American Muslims” on the show. A man who praises the Butcher of Tehran and treats marital rape and wife beating as legitimate forms of behavior.

How does TLC feel about promoting a man who preaches such ugly doctrines? We’ll never know until they are actually challenged on it and until the show’s sponsors, which include Wal-Mart, Home Depot and Clinique are actually called upon to explain their relationship with the program.

The presence of Imam Abdul Latif Berry peels back the veil to reveal what is really underneath the smiling faces in their hijabs — a misogynistic religious authority that uses the Koran to demean and subjugate women. And Berry’s presence is a shadow on more than just the episode; it is a shadow on the entire premise of All-American Muslim.

All-American Muslim pretends that we can best learn about Islam, not by looking at a Koran, but at the ordinary lives of Muslims. But devout Muslims are not in charge of their own lives. It is men like Imam Berry who control their lives by controlling their religion.

Americans have grown used to taking decentralized religious authority for granted, but in Islam that is not the case; religious authority is not decentralized. Everything from deciding whether to beat your wife or to divorce her depends on the will and whim of men like Imam Berry.

We cannot understand what Islam in America means without also understanding the role played by Islamic religious authorities who are transforming their mosques into the nucleus of a theocracy. And so by the words of the Koran women are beaten, young girls are married off to older men and Sharia courts reduce women to the status of second-class citizens. All of this happens under the red, white and blue, and all of it is ignored or brushed aside in the name of tolerance.

There are two Islams in America. The ideal Islam and the real Islam. The ideal Islam is the religion of peace that so many Americans wish it could be. But the real Islam is the one that defines rules for beating your wife. And to look away from that Islam is to look away from the honor-killings and the subjugation of women.

2011/11/20

The Fraud of Islam

Source Article Link: FamilySecurityMatters

The Fraud of Islam

By Amil Imani

From the primitive land of the Arabian Peninsula of over 14 centuries ago rose Muhammad, an illiterate hired hand of a rich widow Khadija, claiming he was the bearer of a perfect life prescription from God—the Quran. He claimed humanity could do no better than to follow its precepts as well as to emulate Muhammad’s own life example for a guarantee of bliss and salvation. In exchange for this, people had to embrace Islam—surrender—by surrendering their liberty to Muhammad.

Islam is the most successful fraud in the history of humanity and it is a great success. Millions of mullahs and imams keep the fraud going and over a billion and a half of the faithful pay for it. They pay in funds, labor and even life, for the IOUs issued to them by the Islamic organizations that glide through life without breaking a sweat for earning their daily bread. Islam is a fraud and Muslims are the victims.

Muhammad, during his Mecca years, was ridiculed for his confused sayings by his own tribe of Quraish. He was called “shaeron majnoon”—crazed poet.

The death of his first wife and wealthy employer Khadija left Muhammad even more vulnerable to the ridicule and harassment of the Meccans. He fled from Mecca to Medina and in the relative safety of that city with a large tolerant Jewish community, Muhammad found more people willing to join his clique.

Once in Medina, Muhammad hit on a most powerful formula for success. He justified everything by claiming that Allah wanted it this way. And Allah was nothing to trifle with. He held the key to the most magnificent paradise as well as to a dreadful hell. The duty of every good Muslim became unquestioning obedience to everything that Muhammad said and wished. Muhammad became Allah’s gatekeeper to paradise and hell.

Muhammad’s formula worked magic with the Bedouins of Arabia who thrived on robbery and killing. His religion spread like a pandemic disease in no time at all.

As Muhammad gathered more and more followers, he turned on the Jewish community of Medina, killed the men, plundered their belongings, and captured their women and children as slaves. That was the birth of “Jihad.” Be meek and deceptive first, until you gather enough power then unsheathe the sword. It worked then and it is working today.

In no time at all, the savages of Arabia, allured by the win-win promise of Muhammad—you kill you get the booty from your victims in this world—you get killed and your abode will be the unimaginably glorious sensuous paradise of Allah—sword-in-hand, sallied forth to lands near and far.

Mind Control

As humans, our two legs move us along, but it is our minds that tell us which path to take in life and what to do. As the mind commands so goes the person. Yet, for humans, the mind does not arrive in this world with a set program of instructions. Contrary to many beliefs, we are born neither as demons nor as angels. Within each one of us is a potential for a demon or an angel. Many evolve into a mix of the two, a few fortunate mature into truly angelic and some become personifications of evil. It is the mind’s program that plays the critical role in making us what we are

Islam, from its inception, discovered the crucial secret of getting to the young mind early by adhering to the dictum: Instruction in early childhood is akin to carving in a rock. In the same vein goes the Jesuit saying, “Give me a child until he is seven, and I will give you the man,” derived from the philosophy and theology of Saint Augustine. The immense importance of getting early to the young mind is also emphasized by non-religious doctrines as diverse as the Freudian psychoanalytic theory and Watsonian Behaviorist psychology.

Islam Apologists

And here we are in the 21st century facing the onslaught of the Islamists, jihadist and Islam apologists in our culture and way of life. These are the fruits of the tree of fraud, planted by Muhammad some 1400 years ago.

Self-described doctors of Islamic religion universally practice sugarcoating the fraud of Islam. They keep ranting about the importance of accepting things on faith, denigrate reason, dangle carrots and sticks, and demand unconditional surrender in return for guaranteed bliss and salvation. The masses toe the line, support the clergy’s lavish parasitic lifestyle and the charade continues. It works like a charm. Use the Jihad of the sword when it can and use the “Soft Jihad” until the sword can be unsheathed to finish the job. And don’t forget, the end justifies any and all means, Islam apologists keep on preaching to the hordes.

Islam apologists never present the naked face of Islam. They never speak of the Islam that thrives on hate, throws acid in the face of women who fail to don the hijab or girls going to school; flogging people for sporting non-Islamic haircuts,  stoning to death, violators of sexual norms and other forms of Islamic brutalities such as honor killing. They never talk about institutionalized pedophilia in Islam.

The prophet Muhammad “married” a six-year old child and consummated the marriage when Ayesha was only nine, when he himself was pushing sixty. When apologists are confronted with this repulsive behavior of the founder of their “perfect religion,” a few exercise the defense mechanism of denial and say it did not happen, dismissing their own most trusted historical record. Some say that it wasn’t exactly marriage. It was a politically expedient act, an act of the perfect emissary of Allah. Then we have numerous instances of the same child molestation happening in the Islamic world ever since the example set by Muhammad. It is a kind of marriage of pre-pubescent girls to older men. It was not long ago, Dr. Salih bin Fawzan, a prominent cleric and member of Saudi Arabia’s highest religious council, issued a fatwa proclaiming that there is no minimum age for marriage, and that girls can be married “even if they are in the cradle.”

Adding insult to injury, Islam has powerful and unwitting allies in the masses of good-hearted gullible Americans who bend over backwards to protect the long cherished principle of religious freedom. And it is this magnificent provision of our society that made Hillary Clinton, for example, reissue a visa to the likes of Tariq Ramadan who come to exploit the benign provisions of a benevolent system for establishing Islamic enslavement.

Political Islam

Islam is political to the core. In Islam the mosque and State are one and the same—the mosque is the State. This arrangement goes back to the days of Muhammad himself. Islam is also radical in the extreme. Even the “moderate” Islam is radical in its beliefs as well as its deeds. Muslims believe that all non-Muslims, bar none, are hellfire bound and well deserve being maltreated compared to believers.

A true Muslim does not and cannot believe in liberty. Everything is up to Allah, so says Mohammad. Everything that a Muslim does is contingent upon the will and decree of Allah. It is for this reason that the phrase Enshallah (Allah willing) always accompanies any promise or commitment that a believer makes. By embracing Muhammad as the unerring and eternal emissary of Allah, a Muslim surrenders his liberty to decide for himself.

Muslims and Liberty

A Muslim’s surrender of liberty is not merely a matter of personal choice. Muslims abandon their most precious rights and are out to make all non-Muslims also do so, by hook or crook. It is said that misery loves company. And the type of misery that the fraud of Islam has visited on Muslims and the Islamic lands is a rapidly spreading plague that must be resisted by all who cherish their God-given liberty.

In spite of massive propaganda by Islamic organizations, more and more people are beginning to recognize Islam for what it is: A Fraud.

I challenge all cultural Muslims or any other kind of Muslim who is not a jihadist, to courageously do what is right, and take that fateful step; inhale the life-nurturing fragrance of freedom, abandon the fraud of Islam altogether and enlist in the ranks of the free where all members of the human tribe can live in peace and harmony.

FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Amil Imani is an Iranian-American writer, poet, satirist, novelist, essayist, literary translator, public speaker and political analyst who has been writing and speaking out about the danger of radical Islam both in America and internationally. He has become a formidable voice in the United States against the danger of global jihad and Islamization of America. He maintains a website at www.amilimani.com. Imani is the author of the riveting book Obama Meets Ahmadinejad and the thriller Operation Persian Gulf.

2011/10/29

Video-Sean Hannity-Muslim’s Trying To Force A Catholic School to Accomodate for Prayer

Islamism and Sadism

Source Link: Family Security Matters

Islamism and Sadism

Written By Amil Imani

It is not about God or love, it is about control and domination—just as sadism is not about human intercourse or love; it is about control, torture, punishment and domination.

Why else name a so-called religion “submission?” Islam’s provisions are intended to dominate every waking moment in the life of a believer. Islam seeks nothing less than a total global domination. There is no room for being a half-hearted Muslim and no toleration of watering down its invocations.

How do the Islamists prey upon their victims? For one, Islam is stamped on the impressionable mind of the child from birth. The parents and immediate members of the family are the ones who make the very first impressions on the tabula rasa of the young mind. These early impressions are the grid-work for further formation of the person’s mind and belief system. It is by far easier, as life goes on, to incorporate “items” that readily fit into the grid-work, than to modify it or dismantle it altogether and begin anew. It is in recognition of the importance of early training and education that people such as Saint Augustine and Freud considered the first few years of life as critical for molding the person.

It is some consolation; however, to realize that there are many practicing religions who are willing to stand up to the extremists, even at their own great peril. It is also quite human to fight against control and domination. However, marrying Islam with government is stoking fire with explosives. That is what the Islamic Republic of Iran currently represents.

The Mullahs and their lackeys have tortured, raped and executed hundreds of little girls and little boys out of their abject fear of losing control. They are to be ridiculed and despised among men as the wretched, miserable, and entirely loathsome creatures that they are.

In free democracies, governments are accountable to the people and serve at the people’s pleasure. In Islamic theocracy, governments are accountable only to Allah and the people must serve at the pleasure of the government. And one can see the result of Islamic total or partial rule in fifty-six or so countries which rank among the highest nations of the world on every index of misery.

Other problems arise. Liberty, deeply cherished by democracies, is replaced by submission—unquestioning obedience and adherence to the dictates and precepts of the all-knowing and all-wise Allah. The individual becomes little more than a passive obedient vessel of Allah and his perspective of himself and life drastically changes. Once he submits to the all-powerful, all-knowing, then he is absolved of the responsibility of having to chart his own way in life.

It is this total form of submission that, among other things, prompted the Muslims to systematically burn libraries of the lands they invaded. They justified their actions by contending that the Quran, the comprehensive unerring book of Allah, contained all perfect knowledge that humanity needs. To this day, in places where Islam rules, many books are banned, newspapers and magazines are systematically either censored or shut down, and other non-print media are methodically blocked.

There is considerable allure in submission to a power that is willing and able to take care of the person. It is not a bad arrangement. The problem is that all past claimants have invariably been proven as either fraud or failures in honoring their part of the bargain. Islam is no exception. A cursory glance is enough to show the condition of Muhammad’s flock. In spite of huge material wealth, Muslims in the oil-rich countries are imprisoned in the paralyzing mentality of submission and all the terrible ancillaries that go with it.

Islam certainly has taken on a predominant role in Europe. It has become so prominent there that the most senior judge in England has blessed the idea of making Sharia law equal with civil law in some cases. Many European countries are already on the verge of capitulation to the Islamists. The Supreme Guide of terror in the Islamic Republic of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, confidently proclaimed that Europe will be Islamic in a dozen years. He has good reason to say that. Muslims are forming states within states in many European towns and cities. In Britain, for instance, non-Muslims are in serious danger entering Muslim neighborhoods.

Comparatively, it is imperative to comprehend that a sadistic person is not after sex; he seeks a sick way of dominance and pain over his victims. He wants to be in control of the action. A person being raped, for example, really has no control over the situation, the subject literally being coerced.

Violence, weapons, injury, or torture fascinates a sadistic person just as it fascinates an Islamist. Both enjoy getting their subjects (be it humans or animals) to do what they want them to do by frightening them through a series of intimidation, fear and terror. Both take pleasure in the psychological or physical suffering of others (including animals).

This is exactly how the Islamists have been ruling over a peaceful and sophisticated country, Iran, for the past 33 years. They have completely restricted the activity and independence the people of Iran. In the cycle of prison horrors and terrors, the Islamic Republic of Iran uses many old Soviet techniques, ranging from harassment, intimidation and tortures, to mechanical devices designed to inflict gross tissue damage. They employ psychological and physiological techniques, such as solitary confinement and sleep deprivation. The Islamic Republic’s lackeys are commonly using these techniques on the Iranian youth while the Islamic Republic dreams of world Shi’a domination.

In short, the Islamists want to have control over their subjects during one’s entire life. This is exactly how the Prophet of Islam controlled his army of followers. The campaign of death waged by the jihadist, be a puppet or a puppeteer, is energized by the belief of delectable rewards that await the faithful implementer of Allah’s dictates.

Through a highly effective indoctrination, the Islamists have come to believe firmly in Islamic utopia. They believe that Allah is the one and only supreme creator of earth and heavens and it is his duty and privilege to abide by Allah’s will and carry out his plans at all costs. He believes firmly in a gloriously wonderful immortal afterlife in paradise, for which a martyr’s death is the surest quickest admission. Although the dominating theme of the delusion is quasi spiritual, the promised rewards of the afterlife awaiting the martyr are sensual and material. All the things and activities that the jihadist desires and cannot attain or practice, and rejects in his earthly life will be purified and proffered to him in the paradise of the next life. Thus goes the delusion.

Islam is violent, oppressive, racist, and irrational at its very core. It is treachery for people to present it as otherwise, either out of ignorance or because of their own personal reasons. To truly appreciate Islam, you must experience firsthand Islam in power. Take a quick trip to the lands of the Muslims and find out for yourself how horribly they treat the non-Muslims, even the, “People of the book,” Jews and Christians. Try to have a Bible study group or build a church in Saudi Arabia and discover the benevolence of Islamic rule.

Folks, this is a battle for survival that every one of us can help wage. Let us get on with it before, if not you, then your children and grandchildren end up under the barbaric rule of Sharia law. All the excuses, grievances and reasons given for savagery of the jihadists and Islamofascists are side issues. Islam is about terror, punishment, control and domination.

FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Amil Imani is an Iranian-American writer, poet, satirist, novelist, essayist, literary translator, public speaker and political analyst who has been writing and speaking out about the danger of radical Islam both in America and internationally. He has become a formidable voice in the United States against the danger of global jihad and Islamization of America. He maintains a website at www.amilimani.com. Imani is the author of the riveting book Obama Meets Ahmadinejad and the thriller Operation Persian Gulf.

2011/10/28

DHS Gave Secret Clearance to Islamist now Accused of Leaking Classified Data

Source Link: Creeping Sharia

We told you about the hiring a year ago – Napolitano Swears in Islamist to Homeland Security Advisory Council. In the video below, a Congressman grills Napolitano over the same Islamist’s possible abuses of the secret clearance. Watch it all or skip to the three minute mark. H/t @CausingFitna (also see CF’s vids on left nav bar now)

Patrick Poole at PJM: BREAKING: Homeland Security Adviser Allegedly Leaked Intel to Attack Rick Perry

Texas Department of Public Safety officials are asking questions following a report that Department of Homeland Security Advisory Council member Mohamed Elibiary may have been given access to a sensitive database of state and local intelligence reports, and then allegedly shopped some of those materials to a media outlet. He allegedly used the documents to claim the department was promoting “Islamophobia” — claims that the media outlet ultimately rejected. They declined to do the story.

Earlier today, I received confirmation from a left-leaning media outlet that Elibiary had recently approached them asking to do a story attacking Texas DPS:

Yes, he approached us and gave us some reports marked FOUO [For Official Use Only] that he said showed a pattern of Islamophobia at the department. He emphasized that some of the regional fusion centers were shut down a few years ago after the ACLU complained that they were targeting Muslim civil rights groups and said that this was being directed by [Texas Gov.] Rick Perry.

We looked at the reports and they weren’t as he had billed them to us. They seem to be pretty straightforward, nothing remotely resembling Islamophobia that we saw. I think he was hoping we would bite and not give it too much of a look in light of the other media outfits jumping on the Islamophobia bandwagon.

I asked if there was any sense of his possible motivation:

Oh, self-promotion definitely. It was clear up front that he wanted to be a quoted source in the story. We’ve used him as an unnamed source in previous stories. There’s nothing unusual or unseemly about that because officials do it all the time, but this was the first time he approached us with documents. Honestly, if they had been what he represented them as we would have probably run with the story. But we looked at them and saw this was a partisan hatchet job that could blow back on us so we passed on it.

In light of these allegations, I spoke today with Texas DPS Director Steve McCraw. He confirmed that Elibiary has access to the Homeland Security State and Local Intelligence Community of Interest (HS SLIC) database, which contains hundreds of thousands of intelligence reports and products that are intended for intelligence sharing between law enforcement agencies.

I asked Director McCraw if he knew whether Elibiary had access to TX DPS reports on the HS SLIC, to which he replied:

We know that he has accessed DPS documents and downloaded them.

Continue Reading it all at Creeping Sharia

2011/10/04

American Liberals and Iranian Mullahs Peddle Fear

* To buy the pamphlet, click here.

In late August, the Center for American Progress issued a 130-page pamphlet called Fear Inc.: The Roots of the Islamphobia Network in America.  It was filled with inaccuracy, misrepresentation and slander against American critics of Muslim extremism, especially those who have pointed out the efforts to make “Islamophobia,” a coinage of the Muslim Brotherhood, a “thought crime,” thereby silencing those who discuss Islamist violence against women, murder of homosexuals, etc. That this publication came from a George Soros-backed organization such as the CAP, deeply networked with leading figures in the Democratic Party establishment, rather than from the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) or one of its other front groups, was a tremendous victory for the Muslim Brotherhood and its effort to kill free speech on Islamic issues.  That the report was conceived of as a weapon in the attack on America was proven by the fact that its “findings” were immediately trumpeted by the Islamic Republic of Iran and reprinted by its state-run propaganda agency. The new section in our pamphlet, Islamophobia: Thought Crime of the Totalitarian Future, deals with this phenomenon. It is printed below:

American Liberals and Iranian Mullahs Peddle Fear

By David Horowitz and Robert Spencer

Continuing the train of attacks by American leftists on critics of Islamic misogyny and terror, the Center for American Progress issued a new Islamophobia report in August 2011, and received widespread publicity for its allegations on Internet sites like HuffingtonPost and cable news networks like MSNBC. The slickly produced 130-page document called Fear, Inc.: The Roots of the Islamophobia Network in America required a year to write, according to its authors, but followed the same basic lines of argument, repeated the same unsubstantiated accusations, and vilified the same “Islamophobes” as the “reports” by CAIR and FAIR.

A striking feature of the new report, on the other hand, was that it was not produced by a fringe leftist group like FAIR or a Muslim Brotherhood front like CAIR. The Center for American Progress is a Democratic Party brain trust headed by former White House chief of staff John Podesta, and funded by George Soros and others. Gaining the backing of the Democratic Party in its campaign to suppress its critics had to be ranked as one of the most significant victories to date for the Muslim Brotherhood, whose claims and concepts the new report rehashed.

One of the five authors of Fear, Inc. was Wajahat Ali, who had been featured on the Center for American Progress’s CAIR-inspired panel the year before. In college, Ali was a board member of the Muslim Students Association, which is, as previously noted, a Muslim Brotherhood front. Ali is a fanatic supporter of the Islamic jihad. When the U.S. prosecutors indicted the Holy Land Foundation for funding the terrorist organization Hamas, Ali denounced the prosecution as a pro-Israel policy and a notch on the Bush Administration’s “get a terrorist club.” He also rushed to the defense of Palestinian Islamic jihad leader Sami al-Arian when the latter was prosecuted (and eventually deported) for terrorist activities. Ali called him “one of the earliest victims of the ‘war on terror.” On his Internet blog, Ali also criticized certain elements of the left as Muslim-haters (i.e., Islamophobes) because they “have certain beliefs contradictory to radical feminist and gay ideologies.” Ali was thus a revealing choice as one of the authors of a report attacking critics of Islamic misogyny, gay-hatred and terror.

The glossy photograph on the cover of Fear, Inc. is a photograph of the building that houses the Islamic Center of North America (ICNA), with the words “Go Home” painted in red across its front. The photo encapsulates the report’s message that “Islamophobia” – or hatred directed against all Muslims — is a serious problem in America. But that is not what the photo shows. The Islamic Center of North America is not an unpolitical, inclusive Muslim group. Instead, ICNA is a well-known Muslim Brotherhood front, and a spearhead of the jihadist attack on America’s secular and inclusive civilization.

The theme of Fear, Inc. is that the movement to oppose attempts to institute Sharia law in the American legal system and to erect symbols of Islamic conquest like the Ground Zero Mosque are the work of a sinister cabal created by conservative foundations, largely Jewish, whose mission is to stir up hatred against all Muslims. The specifics of Fear, Inc.’s indictment imitate its CAIR and FAIR predecessors in distorting the positions of its victims, and twisting associated facts beyond recognition.

What distinguishes Fear, Inc., on the other hand, is its focus on the alleged financial “machine” behind the Islamophobia campaign. This is composed of seven foundations, many of which happen to be run by Jews – a point emphasized at several points by the authors. The recipients of the foundations’ largess are eight organizations, which according to the report have received $42 million for Islamophobia agendas over a nine-year period. But this figure represents the total funding received by organizations such as the Center for Security Policy and the David Horowitz Freedom Center, while in fact these institutions devote many of their program activities – and funds received – to causes unrelated to the threat from the Islamic jihad. Moreover, the alleged sums are far smaller than the funds available to the Islamic supremacist groups and their progressive allies that have produced and promoted the “Islamophobia” reports.

At the time that Fear, Inc was published, for example, Hamas-linked CAIR announced that it had almost reached its goal of raising $650,000 during Ramadan – well over twice the annual budget of JihadWatch.org, one of the groups the report singles out for attack. The Center for American Progress receives $38 million per year, or almost 100 times the budget of JihadWatch.org from George Soros and other left-wing sources. As one of the report’s targets observed, “It’s pretty rich that the Center for American Progress, whose 2009 budget was $38,187,695, focuses on 8 organizations receiving about that sum over a period of nine years.

Fear, Inc. focuses on the funding received by five individuals – anti-Sharia attorney David Yerushalmi, scholars Robert Spencer and Daniel Pipes, investigative reporter Steven Emerson, and Center for American Security head Frank Gaffney. As journalist Daniel Greenfield notes, “ The Muslim world often blames its problems on the Jews, and Fear, Inc, … does the same thing by claiming that five men, three of whom are Jews (a fourth is employed by a Jew – as the report notes — and receives underwriting from two more Jews), have turned Americans against Islam.”

Fear, Inc.’s distortions start with the description of these five individuals as “the anti-Muslim misinformation scholars we profile in this report.” None of the named individuals has ever attacked Muslims as such, and no credible evidence is provided in the report that they have. All five have been critical of Islamic policies, regimes and political parties that oppress Muslim women, Muslim gays, Jews, Christians and other minorities, suppress freedom of speech and religion, and conduct or endorse terrorist attacks on their religious and political enemies.

Like the New York Times before it, the Center for American Progress attempts to establish guilt by association of its targets with the ravings of Norwegian mass murderer Anders Breivik: “While these bloggers and pundits were not responsible for Breivik’s deadly attacks, their writings on Islam and multiculturalism appear to have helped create a world view held by this lone Norwegian gunman that sees Islam as at war with the West and the West needing to be defended.” But in fact it is Osama bin Laden, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the Muslim Brotherhood who see Islam as at war with the West, and there is no patriotic American who does not recognize that America and the West need to be defended. There is no comment in the report on this, since its agenda, like the Brotherhood’s, is to silence critics, not to answer them.

Fear, Inc. singles out the most prominent moderate Muslim in America, Zuhdi Jasser, and condemns him because he “dangerously and incorrectly labels mainstream Muslim-American organizations as subversive.” But the mainstream Muslim-American organizations Jasser has criticized – CAIR, the Muslim American Society, the Islamic Society of North America and the Islamic Center of North America,” are all Muslim Brotherhood fronts. The report also calls “inaccurate and perverse” Robert Spencer’s statement that Islam is “the only religion in the world that has a developed doctrine, theology and legal system that mandates violence against unbelievers and mandates that Muslims must wage war in order to establish the hegemony of the Islamic social order all over the world.” What the report does not do is offer evidence that this is not the case. This is particularly revealing since it is matter that can be objectively verified: all the mainstream Islamic sects and schools of Islamic jurisprudence do indeed teach that the Islamic umma must wage war against unbelievers and subjugate them under the rule of law. The report does not – and cannot – produce evidence of mainstream Islamic sects or schools that do not teach this.

Scholar Daniel Pipes is accused of defaming CAIR, an organization four of whose top executives have been convicted of terrorist activities. “Without corroborating evidence, Pipes smeared the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, in an article called ‘CAIR: Islamists Fooling the Establishment.’” No specifics are offered as to how Pipes smeared CAIR or how the 7700- word, heavily footnoted article failed to provide “corroborating evidence.”

Such false claims appear throughout the report with no attempt by the authors to substantiate them. “Numerous times,” as critic Mark Tapson observes, Fear, Inc. condemns the “Islamophobes” for claiming that the majority of American mosques are radicalized and preach violence.” The claim appears in David Yerulshami’s study “Shari’a and Violence in American Mosques,” which Fear, Inc. says “speciously claims that more than 80 percent of U.S. mosques feature texts that promote or support violence,” – a claim that is hardly unique to Yerulshami. “How is the claim specious?” Tapson asks. “As usual, the report does not specify.”

Spencer’s scholarly credentials are attacked in the report on the authority of “Islamic scholar Carl W. Ernst, Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies and Director of the Carolina Center for the Study of the Middle East and Muslim Civilizations at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill,” Ernst claims that Spencer has no academic training in Islamic studies whatsoever. The claim is false and the authority, Ernst, is a man who flew to Teheran in December 2008 to accept an award from Iran’s Jew-hating, genocidal Islamic supremacist, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

It should hardly come as a surprise then, that the Islamic Republic of Iran immediately picked up the Center’s report, and its official English language press agency trumpeted the “findings” of the Center’s attack on critics of Iranian terrorism, Jew-hatred and anti-American ravings under the telling title “U.S. Empire Foments Islamophobia.” Terror analysts Clare M. Lopez and W. Thomas Smith, Jr., noted that the Iranian agency PressTV was “funded almost almost exclusively by Iranian petrodollars (oil profits) from the same regime that funds and directs global terrorist organizations like the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (the IRGC which is also known as the Pasdaran), the IRGCs Quds Force, Lebananon’s Hizballah, and others; all of which are designated foreign terrorist organizations by the U.S. government and other countries.”

Commented Lopez and Smith, “The Press TV articles – to include those who funded and published it – should not be taken lightly. This was not simply an opinion piece. This was a list of names published in international media by a state-run news agency; a state designed by the U.S. State Department as a ‘state sponsor of terrorism.”

In other words, the Center for American Progress, a key component of the liberal establishment in America, published a “report” filled with inaccuracies, misrepresentations and false accusations, which the chief terrorist state in the Middle East has authenticated as a document identifying the enemies of Islam.  This could be counted a perfect score for the Muslim Brotherhood and its campaign in the West to silence the critics of the Islamic jihad.

Islamic Shari’ah Law Conquering The West

Source Article Link: RadicalIslam.org

Islamic Law Conquering The West

by Clare M. Lopez

Western liberal democratic civilization is under assault by the forces of shariah Islam. The so-called “Arab Spring” that swept across the Middle East in 2011, while encompassing the hopes and dreams of millions who seek freedom from tyranny, unfortunately has been commandeered for the violent phase of the Islamic Awakening that began in the 20th century. The jihadist drivers of that Islamic movement seek the re-establishment of the caliphate and global imposition of Islamic law. They are determined and sophisticated, deftly deploying information warfare to co-opt and neutralize what little remains of Western defenses.

There will be no democratic transformation of the Arab Middle East until and unless the United States and all who treasure the principles of equality, individual liberty, pluralism, and tolerance as understood through exercise of human reason begin to champion those ideals and confront those who are willing to fight and kill and die for Islam not just on the kinetic battlefield but in the far more important War of Ideas. The war we fight is far along at this point: shariah is advancing not only across North Africa and the Middle East, but throughout the Western world as well.

Jihadi terror and violence on the physical battlefields of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and the streets of Jerusalem, London, and New York are important to the enemy but secondary to the ideological confrontation taking place inside Europe and the U.S.  While jihadis with IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices) and Kalashnikovs sap our will to fight by draining us of blood and treasure, front groups posing as the “moderate” alternative and led by the Muslim Brotherhood, boast openly that they are working at “eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their [our] hands and thehands of the believers so that Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.” Both the terrorists who grab so much of the public attention and the stealth warriors of groups like the Brotherhood seek the same two objectives: shariah and the caliphate. Shariah is Islamic law derived from the Qur’an and hadiths; it’s the basis for constitutions in Muslim countries around the world and is utterly antithetical to Western law and the U.S. Constitution in myriad respects. The caliphate is an Islamic empire. It is obligatory for all Muslims everywhere for all time to engage in warfare (jihad) to spread Islam as a “complete way of life” and to subjugate the entire world to its dictates.

Our failure to understand these fundamental realities cripples our ability to mount an effective strategy to defeat this enemy. Distracted, as intended, by the bombings, kidnappings, and killings of the kinetic wars, and unwilling to acknowledge and name the enemy even as he describes himself, we are gradually succumbing to that subversion from within. In the end, the battlefield that matters, the one where we will lose our civilization if we don’t wake up is the Information Battle Space.

In Europe, where shariah has made extensive gains in recent decades, dozens of Islamic Courts disenfranchise Muslim immigrants and citizens alike from the local legal system. So-called “No Go Zones,” micro-states governed by Islamic law, are proliferating across Europe. Muslimresidents of these enclaves demand recognition of their shariah infrastructure and violently prevent local police from enforcing local laws. In hundreds of municipalities, the authorities simply give in, or worse yet, willingly collaborate to permit these parallel Islamic societies effectively to secede from secular national control. Mega-mosques, many built with Saudi money, are transforming the landscape while cathedrals and churches become tourist attractions (or rental space for Muslim prayer services).

Most troubling of all, though, is the proliferation of so-called “hate speech” laws. Unbeknownst by many, enforcement of such laws(intended primarily to criminalize criticism of Islam) is a top agenda item for the global Muslim head of state Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). Shutting down free speech is the necessary prelude to attacking other human rights with impunity. The laws of slander under shariah are broad and subjective: slander is anything deemed offensive by a Muslim—and may be punishable by death.

European elites, who have lost their appreciation of the Enlightenment that gave Westerners the highest standards of living in the world based on the freedom to speak without fear and challenge authority andestablished doctrine, are now enforcing shariah language codes even as unassimilated European Muslims increasingly take shariah law enforcement into their own hands. The Dutch filmmaker, Theo Van Gogh, was murdered by a Muslim who took offense at his views; the fearless Dutch parliamentary leader, Geert Wilders, was hauled into court to defend his right to speak freely about shariah’s encroachment in the Netherlands. In Austria, Elizabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff must defend herself against charges of offending Islam, Scandinavian champions of free speech like Lars Hedegaard and Kurt Westergaard battle courts and axe-wielding assassins, while Ayan Hirsi Ali had to flee the Continent altogether.

Islamic law obviously is about much more than amputations, floggings, stoning and execution of adulterers, apostates, and homosexuals. Its fundamental ideas about how society should be governed clearly are radically different than our Western ones. This is why the Information Battle Space is so crucial and education about shariah so critical to the defense of liberal democratic society. The more we know and understand about Islamic law, and how it differs from Western-style law, the better prepared we will be to defend the system that undergirds our way of life.

Western liberal democratic civilization is under assault by the forces of shariah Islam. The so-called “Arab Spring” that swept across the Middle East in 2011, while encompassing the hopes and dreams of millions who seek freedom from tyranny, unfortunately has been commandeered for the violent phase of the Islamic Awakening that began in the 20th century.

The jihadist drivers of that Islamic movement seek the re-establishment of the caliphate and global imposition of Islamic law. They are determined and sophisticated, deftly deploying information warfare to co-opt and neutralize what little remains of Western defenses.

There will be no democratic transformation of the Arab Middle East until and unless the United States (U.S.) and all who treasure the principles of equality, individual liberty, pluralism, and tolerance as understood through exercise of human reason begin to champion those ideals and confront those who are willing to fight and kill and die for Islam not just on the kinetic battlefield but in the far more important War of Ideas.

The war we fight is far along at this point: shariah is advancing not only across North Africa and the Middle East, but throughout the Western world as well.

Jihadi terror and violence on the physical battlefields of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and the streets of Jerusalem, London, and New York are important to the enemy but secondary to the ideological confrontation taking place inside Europe and the U.S.  While jihadis with IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices) and Kalashnikovs sap our will to fight by draining us of blood and treasure, front groups posing as the “moderate” alternative and led by the Muslim Brotherhood, boast openly that they are working at “eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their [our] hands and the hands of the believers so that Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”

Both the terrorists who grab so much of the public attention and the stealth warriors of groups like the Brotherhood seek the same two objectives: shariah and the caliphate. Shariah is Islamic law derived from the Qur’an and hadiths; it’s the basis for constitutions in Muslim countries around the world and is utterly antithetical to Western law and the U.S. Constitution in myriad respects. The caliphate is an Islamic empire. It is obligatory for all Muslims everywhere for all time to engage in warfare (jihad) to spread Islam as a “complete way of life” and to subjugate the entire world to its dictates.

Our failure to understand these fundamental realities cripples our ability to mount an effective strategy to defeat this enemy. Distracted, as intended, by the bombings, kidnappings, and killings of the kinetic wars, and unwilling to acknowledge and name the enemy even as he describes himself, we are gradually succumbing to that subversion from within. In the end, the battlefield that matters, the one where we will lose our civilization if we don’t wake up is the Information Battle Space.

In Europe, where shariah has made extensive gains in recent decades, dozens of Islamic Courts disenfranchise Muslim immigrants and citizens alike from the local legal system. So-called “No Go Zones,” micro-states governed by Islamic law, are proliferating across Europe. Muslim residents of these enclaves demand recognition of their shariah infrastructure and violently prevent local police from enforcing local laws. In hundreds of municipalities, the authorities simply give in, or worse yet, willingly collaborate to permit these parallel Islamic societies effectively to secede from secular national control. Mega-mosques, many built with Saudi money, are transforming the landscape while cathedrals and churches become tourist attractions (or rental space for Muslim prayer services).

Most troubling of all, though, is the proliferation of so-called “hate speech” laws. Unbeknownst by many, enforcement of such laws (intended primarily to criminalize criticism of Islam) is a top agenda item for the global Muslim head of state Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). Shutting down free speech is the necessary prelude to attacking other human rights with impunity. The laws of slander under shariah are broad and subjective: slander is anything deemed offensive by a Muslim—and may be punishable by death.

European elites, who have lost their appreciation of the Enlightenment that gave Westerners the highest standards of living in the world based on the freedom to speak without fear and challenge authority and established doctrine, are now enforcing shariah language codes even as unassimilated European Muslims increasingly take shariah law enforcement into their own hands.

The Dutch filmmaker, Theo Van Gogh, was murdered by a Muslim who took offense at his views; the fearless Dutch parliamentary leader, Geert Wilders, was hauled into court to defend his right to speak freely about shariah’s encroachment in the Netherlands. In Austria, Elizabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff must defend herself against charges of offending Islam, Scandinavian champions of free speech like Lars Hedegaard and Kurt Westergaard battle courts and axe-wielding assassins, while Ayan Hirsi Ali had to flee the Continent altogether.

Islamic law obviously is about much more than amputations, floggings, stoning and execution of adulterers, apostates, and homosexuals. Its fundamental ideas about how society should be governed clearly are radically different than our Western ones. This is why the Information Battle Space is so crucial and education about shariah so critical to the defense of liberal democratic society. The more we know and understand about Islamic law, and how it differs from Western-style law, the better prepared we will be to defend the system that undergirds our way of life.

Clare M. Lopez, a senior fellow at the Clarion Fund, is a strategic policy and intelligence expert with a focus on Middle East, national defense, and counterterrorism issues.

2011/09/30

Hizb ut-Tahrir Emerges in America

Hizb ut-Tahrir Emerges in America

Source Link: ADL

Introduction

Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT), an international organization that seeks to establish a worldwide Islamic theocracy, is increasing its efforts to spread its message and recruit members in the U.S.

The American branch of HT convened its 2011 Khilafah Conference, titled, “Revolution in the Muslim World: From Tyranny to Triumph,” on June 26, 2011, in the Chicago suburb of Oak Brook, Illinois.

Messages at the conference primarily centered on promoting the organization’s vision of establishing worldwide Caliphate and how the revolutions in the Middle East affect the movement’s goals.

HT held its first major event in the U.S., a conference entitled “Fall of Capitalism and Rise of Islam,” at the Hilton in Oak Lawn, Illinois, on July 19, 2009. Although HT America’s Web site states that the group “does not work in the West to change the system of government,” speakers at the conference focused on HT’s larger agenda of establishing a global Islamic caliphate, which entails ousting existing governments.

While HT has operated as a predominately clandestine organization in the U.S., the Oak Lawn conference marked the group’s emergence onto the public stage in America.

HT is increasingly using the Internet to organize meetings in the U.S. and distribute materials, and has become active on social networking sites like YouTube and Facebook, which it used to advertise both of its conferences.

A closer look at the group’s ideology and international activity reveals that HT not only promotes Islam as a way of life, but is also fundamentally opposed to capitalism and democracy and is explicitly hostile toward Israel and Jews. These basic tenets, along with its record of advocating violence, contradict the group’s attempt to portray itself as a political party seeking change through nonviolent means.

Khilafah Conference 2011

Hizb ut-Tahrir’s American branch convened its second Khilafah conference in the Chicago suburb of Oak Brook, Illinois, on June 26, 2011. The conference, which was not advertised as broadly as it first conference in 2009, was attended by approximately 250 people.

Messages at the 2011 conference, titled “Revolution in the Muslim World: From Tyranny to Triumph,” primarily centered on promoting the organization’s vision of establishing worldwide Caliphate and how the revolutions in the Middle East affect the movement’s goals.

One session at the conference, titled “Breaking the Shackles,” gave voice to the organization’s idea that capitalist and nationalist systems of the West are “enemies to Islam,” and the only solution is for a unified Islamic state to replace such systems with “the rule of Allah,” Sharia, and the Sunnah. The speaker at this session, indentified as Brother Abu Saib, offered the February 2011 ousting of the Mubarak regime in Egypt as evidence of the Islamic nation awakening and starting on a path toward establishing a Caliphate.

Another session, “The Meaning of Real Change,” was accompanied by a follow-up question and answer with a panel of HT representatives in the U.S. The session addressed practical steps the Muslim community can take to bring forth the Caliphate and to prevent another dictator from seizing power in newly liberated Arab countries, like Egypt . Panelists in the Q&A session emphasized that HT was “working with the Ummah [Muslim community] in Egypt ,” and that a Muslim’s duty is to “get the West out of our lands.”

The last two sessions, “Shaking the Thrones” and “Life Under the Khilafah,” examined the state of suffering the Ummah and Islam have fallen into since the abolition of the Ottoman Caliphate, and how everyday life will be governed once Islamic law is implemented worldwide with the rise of a new Caliphate. One of the speakers, identified as Abu Atallah, emphasized that the rise of the Caliphate would mean that borders become obsolete, nationalist ideology would be abandoned and Muslims would control the military.

The meeting ended with organizers stressing the importance of pushing forward for a unified Islamic state, and that the “Qur’an is a message for all mankind and a solution to all of man’s problems.” This was detailed in a pamphlet, “Khilafah State Structure: Introduction to the Constitution,” that was handed out during the conference.

The constitution provides a detailed look at the structure, laws, and methods of governance the global Caliphate is expected to embody once it is established. The source of the Caliphate’s authority and sovereignty will be derived from the Qur’an and the Sunnah, which will help the Caliph “adopt certain rules […] and obliges the people to act according to them.” This pamphlet was designed to be “studied by Muslims while they are working to establish the Islamic State that will carry the Islamic daw’ah to the world.”

Some key points mentioned in the draft constitution:

  • Article 1 states that ‘aqeedah (Islamic creed) will be the sole basis of the State’s foundation. The government’s structure in its entirety can only exist if it is from the Islamic ‘aqeeda.
  • Article 7 describes that the State will be charged with implementing “divine law”, therefore those “guilty of apostasy (murtad) from Islam are to be executed according to the rule of apostasy…”
  • Article 23 details the eight institutions of the Caliphate system, which includes an Amir of Jihad (war). The Amir of Jihad will oversee all war-related activities in the government.
  • In the “Army” section, Article 56 states, “Jihad is a compulsory duty (fard) on all Muslims. Military training is therefore compulsory. Thus, every male Muslim, fifteen years and over, is obliged to undergo military training in readiness for jihad.
  • The social system of the Caliphate would strictly enforce gender segregation between the two sexes, and while women will have the same rights and obligations as men, a woman’s primary role “is that of a mother and wife,” and she may not hold any positions of power within the structure of governance. (Articles 108-118)
  • In reference to trade with foreign nations, Article 157 states that “Any country we have real war between us and its citizens (such as Israel) is excluded” from trading with the Caliphate and its citizens.
  • Article 194, Section 3, describes “imperialist states” like the UK, U.S., France, and Russia as potentially belligerent states that do not have a treaty with the Caliphate.*

*With regards to Israel and the Caliphate’s policy toward the Jewish state, Section 4 states that there can be no peace, and that “a state of war must be taken as the basis for all dispositions with them. They must be dealt with as if a rear war existed between us – whether an armistice exists or not.”

Khilafah Conference 2009

Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT) held its first ever Khilafah (Arabic for “caliphate”) conference in the U.S. on July 19, 2009, at the Hilton in Oak Lawn, Illinois. The conference, entitled the “Fall of Capitalism and Rise of Islam,” advocated for the implementation of an Islamic financial system and promoted the organization’s larger agenda of establishing a global Islamic caliphate, or Islamic rule worldwide, which entails ousting existing governments.

Speakers addressed a crowd of approximately 400 men and women on a range of issues, including the “Islamic economic system,” “suffering under capitalism” and the rise of Islam in the United States.

Mohammad Malkawi, an HT spokesperson and computer engineer from Chicago, argued that capitalism is responsible for the world’s poverty, hunger and war. “It is time to deliver the world to Islam, an idea whose time has come,” he said.

Another speaker from Chicago, Jaleel Abdul-Adil, a professor of clinical psychology at the University of Illinois – Chicago, spoke about the role of Muslims in the U.S., arguing that every Muslim should utilize his skills in the struggle for an Islamic caliphate. Abdul-Adil, who has reportedly appeared at past HT conventions in Britain, declared that “Every home and every community and every masjid [mosque] must contribute to the struggle.”

Abdul-Adil also urged the audience to never “stop calling for Islam as a complete way of life…unless and until Islam becomes victorious or we die in the attempt.”  During a question and answer session following his presentation, Abdul-Adil was asked if shari’a, or Islamic law, would trump the U.S. Constitution. “Yes, it would be gone,” Abdul-Adil replied.

Another speaker, identified only as Abuatallah, outlined how capitalism has failed America, and African-Americans in particular. “Making a black man president will not stop this systemic oppression, will not stop what we see in the urban ghettos,” he said. “Making Obama president is only a scheme, a plot, designed to quiet us.”

In a session on “The Global Rise of Islam,” Burhan Hanif, a member of HT in Britain, criticized Western governments and values and called for Muslims to “work for khilafah,” or the establishment of Islamic rule worldwide.  “Freedom and democracy has become an opium of the masses,” Hanif claimed. “We see how the call of Islam resonates in the increased desperate measures in governments around the world… they are destined to fail.”

HT presented several videos at the conference, including a recruitment video showing HT conferences and demonstrations around the world. “Now it is your turn,” the video says, “Join Hizb ut-Tahrir America.”

A pamphlet entitled “Islamic Reformation: Exposing the Battle for Hearts and Minds,” was reportedly distributed at the conference.  The pamphlet, written by Adnan Khan, an HT member in Britain, calls for the death penalty for those “in the khilafah [who] openly leave Islam.” The pamphlet is also critical of the West, where “crime, sexual promiscuity, individualism and civil disorder is rife.”

The Aqsa School in Bridgeview, Illinois, which was originally scheduled to host the event, cancelled two weeks before the conference, claiming that the group did not disclose the true nature of HT or the conference.

Hizb ut-Tahrir Background

Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT), Arabic for “Party of Liberation,” is an international organization that seeks to establish a global Islamic caliphate.  Established in Jerusalem in 1953, HT claims to be a political organization “whose ideology is Islam.”

HT maintains an extensive international following; it is currently active in more than 45 countries, and its August 2007 convention in Indonesia drew approximately 100,000 delegates.

HT’s strategy to establish a global Islamic caliphate consists of three stages. In the first, the group seeks to recruit “people who believe in the idea and the method of the Party.”  This stage mimics that of the prophet Muhammad, who “gathered together secretly those who believed in him on the basis of this ideology,” according to HT’s Web site.

In the second stage, HT seeks to educate the larger Muslim community about its interpretation of Islam so that the community can work “to establish it in the affairs of life.”  This stage consists of approaching the masses through “lessons, lectures, and talks in the mosques, centers, and common gathering places, and through the press, books and leaflets.”

The third and final stage entails replacing all governments and implementing a global Islamic caliphate.

HT conferences around the world suggest that the group is currently in the second stage of its goal of establishing a global Islamic government. In commemoration of the anniversary of the abolishment of the Islamic caliphate 85 years ago, HT held worldwide events throughout the summer of 2009, calling “on Muslims around the world to mobilize to re-establish the Islamic Khilafah.”  In addition to the July 19 conference in Oak Lawn, Illinois, events took place in Ukraine, Mauritius, Lebanon, Tanzania, Bangladesh, Britain, Indonesia, Sudan and Turkey, among other places.

HT claims that it does not engage in violent activities and generally espouses a policy of nonviolence.  However, in a January 2010 press release, HT called for violence against U.S. troops stationed in Afghanistan.  The group accused “US crusaders” of killing nine school children and injuring 85 others in Afghanistan.  “Such incidents,” HT said in the press release “has to be answered by sharp swords of Muslim united armies under a true Muslim leader (Imam/K), not by few words of condemnations, rallies and demonstrations or submissions of list of demands to the UN’s or Human Rights, which are the protector of these crusaders, not us.”

Its position on nonviolence is complicated by its admission that “jihad” is compulsory for Muslims in an Islamic country to fight their perceived enemies. According to the group’s Web site, “the members of Hizb ut-Tahrir in that country are a part of the Muslims and it is obligatory upon them as it is upon other Muslims, in their capacity as Muslims, to fight the enemy and repel them.” HT’s statements in response to the Israeli naval operation to stop a flotilla of ships en route to Gaza, which called on Muslim armies to “fight the Jews” and “blow ‘Israel’ off the map,” further demonstrate the group’s acceptance of violence.

The radicalization of HT members who adhere to the group’s extremist ideology can also lead to violent acts.  In 2007, German police arrested three men on suspicion of plotting to bomb military and civilian airports, restaurants and nightclubs. Two of the men were allegedly Uzbek members of the HT splinter cell Islamic Jihad Union (IJU), which carried out a terrorist attack against the American and Israeli embassies in Uzbekistan in July 2004.

Two British HT members were also allegedly involved in terrorist activities. One of the men was among those responsible for the 2003 suicide bombing at Mike’s Place, a bar in Tel Aviv.  Another HT member was suspected of joining Al Qaeda and plotting to attack several New York-Based financial targets.  He was arrested in 2004 by British authorities.

Some observers have suggested that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the admitted mastermind of the September 11 terrorist attacks, and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, Al Qaeda in Iraq’s former leader, were also members of HT.

In 2003, Germany banned HT for allegedly spreading anti-Semitic propaganda.  Russia declared the group a terrorist organization that same year after reportedly detecting links between HT and Chechen terrorists.  The group had previously been banned in Russia in 1999 for being a criminal organization.  HT has similarly been banned in several Arab and Central Asian countries as well.

Several other European countries, including the United Kingdom, have considered banning HT.  The British government sought to ban the group after allegations that it was linked to the London bombings in July 2005.

HT also has a growing presence in the West Bank, which stands in opposition to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and rejects the legitimacy of both the Palestinian Authority and Hamas.  In 2007, the group held a conference in Ramallah that reportedly drew approximately 20,000 supporters.  That same year, HT marched through Ramallah in opposition to the “Zionist provocation” against the Al Aqsa mosque.  Palestinian officials banned HT from holding a July 2009 rally opposing both Fatah and Hamas and the concept of a modern nation-state.

On Israel and Jews

Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT) claims that Islam is in conflict with the existence of Israel, which it says harms both Islam and Muslims, and has a history of encouraging followers to eliminate Israel and the Jews as a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.  This long record of hostility toward Israel and the Jews belies HT’s claim that it does not espouse or condone violence, and, according to the U.S. State Department, can yield violent acts against the U.S. and its allies and generate support for terrorism.

A press release dated May 31, 2010, was posted on HT America’s Web site in response to the Israeli naval operation to stop a flotilla of ships en route to Gaza on the same day. “O people: indeed Hizb ut-Tahrir strengthens your determination… there is no solution except to mobilize armies, gathering the capable soldiers and fight the Jews,” the statement declared.  The release also calls on Pakistan and Iran to attack Israel, saying “O you possessors of the missiles that you boast can blow ‘Israel’ off the map, so where are you now, O Pakistan and Iran’s rulers?!”

In another press release in response to the flotilla incident, the Pakistani branch of HT issued a statement calling on the Pakistani army to “prepare nuclear bombs and other weapons for Jihad… fight under this command to annihilate Israel.” The Bangladeshi branch of HT also condoned violence in a press release that called upon Muslim armies to “eradicate Israel and purify the earth of Jewish filth.”

In March 2008, HT posted a press release on its Web site in response to Israel’s retaliatory military action in Gaza, which was employed to stop Hamas from firing rockets into Israeli towns.  “There is only one and uniquely one solution,” the statement declared, “and that is to exterminate the entity of the Jews from existence.”  In another press release that month, HT called on Pakistan and Iran to attack Israel as “the only option that the state of Jews deserves.”  The statement also urged Muslims to “direct your anger at the armed forces so that they stir up fighting the Jews.”

In addition to the inflammatory pronouncements on its Web site, HT America has also condoned violence and jihad during their monthly online discussions. In April 2010, an HT America leader asserted, “When the Muslim land is occupied, jihad is the obligation to those who are attacked by the kufar [non-Muslims].”

Leaders of HT America also produce a monthly newsletter, titled “The Shield,” which has condemned Israel.  In the May 2010 newsletter, an editorial claimed, “Israel was created by the West in order to ensure the Ummah remains divided and continually occupied in an endless struggle with a Western proxy.”

HT has also distributed virulently anti-Israel leaflets. In 2007, HT Australia reportedly promoted a conference in Sydney with a leaflet that depicted a dagger plunged into a map of the Middle East with the words “‘Israel’ is an illegal state” written in blood.

HT Denmark’s spokesman Fadi Abdelatif was convicted in Copenhagen in 2002, and again in 2005, for inciting young Muslims to kill Jews, first in an Internet posting and later in a leaflet.  The leaflet, which called Jews “a people of slander…a treacherous people,” made threats against Jews and called on Muslims to “kill them all, wherever you find them.” The leaflet, which was available on HT’s Web site, encouraged suicide bombings in Israel as “legitimate” acts of “martyrdom.”

HT has also been prosecuted elsewhere in Europe for distributing anti-Semitic publications.  Germany banned the group in 2003 for “spreading hate and violence” in leaflets that called for the killing of Jews, according to German officials. In 2005, the National Union of Students barred HT from universities in the UK after accusations of anti-Semitism.  The group does, however, still operate legally in the UK.

HT’s leadership has also publicly expressed opposition to Jews and Israel.  In an April 2002 response to Israel’s military operations at the Jenin refugee camp, HT in Sudan released a press statement on its Web site condemning the “miserable brethren of pigs and monkeys” of carrying out “brutal massacres.”  “Recognition and negotiation with the Jews,” the press release continued, “is a betrayal of Allah.”

In a 2000 interview with the Central Asia Caucasus Institute at John Hopkins University, an unidentified HT Central Asian leader openly stated, “We are very much opposed to the Jews and Israel… The United States is the enemy of Islam with the Jews.”

HT’s former global leader, Sheikh Abdul Qadeem Zalloom, reportedly declared an injunction in 1988, saying, “If the plane belongs to a country at war with Muslims, like Israel, it is allowed to hijack it, for there is no sanctity for Israel nor for the Jews in it.”

The Anti-Defamation League, founded in 1913, is the world’s leading organization fighting anti-Semitism through programs and services that counteract hatred, prejudice and bigotry.

2011/08/30

Muslims denounce bill to ban ‘foreign laws’- “Don’t Let The Door Hit Ya, Where The Good Lord Split Ya!!!”

If you will not adapt to the American way of life then all I can say is:

Don’t Let The Door Hit Ya, Where The Good Lord Split Ya!!!

Researched and Written By Walt Long

If individuals want to immigrate to the United States of America to escape from a country that is applying brutal Islamic Shari’a Law, why do they come to the United States? If the Muslim’s in this article choose Shari’ah Law then stay in your originated country you immigrated from. Many of us would buy you a one way ticket back to the very same Islamic Shari’ah Law Country you escaped from.

For centuries people have come to America, left their homeland property and their origin countries laws behind them. They have adapted and live with the precious freedom allowed under the Process of American Law.

After the article I am going to point out some Shari’a Laws which the Muslim’s in this article want to apply here in the United States.

Article Source: Detroit News

Muslims denounce bill to ban ‘foreign laws’

Community leaders call state rep’s plan divisive, unnecessary

Oralandar Brand-Williams/ The Detroit News

Detroit —Opposition is mounting among Muslims against pending legislation that would ban Michigan courts from considering “foreign laws” — including Sharia, or Islamic law.

Muslim and community leaders gathered Tuesday in Midtown to denounce legislation from state Rep. Dave Agema, R-Grandville, as divisive, unnecessary and mean-spirited.

“This plan goes against our country’s core values of accepting people from all races and walks of life,” said state Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Detroit, who is Muslim. “We simply cannot move forward with this plan.

“It’s racism at its core.”

Similar measures are under consideration in 25 other state legislatures, and supporters say the protections are needed. The Michigan bill doesn’t mention Sharia, but watchdog groups say they’ve identified 50 cases nationwide that could be influenced by the religious rules. Most involved divorce or child custody.

Another sponsor of the Michigan bill, Rep. Martin Knollenberg, R-Troy, said the legislation is necessary because “we shouldn’t allow other laws to usurp the state constitution.”

He scoffed at critics who called the bill racist: “Where does it say (in the bill) it’s anti-Muslim?”

Agema last week called the accusations of bigotry “hogwash.”

A House committee has yet to take up discussion of the bill. The Council of American-Islamic Relations’ Michigan chapter announced Tuesday it would sue if it becomes law. Gov. Rick Snyder’s office hasn’t done an analysis of the measure, said his spokeswoman, Geralyn Lasher.

“We don’t know if this is an issue taking place or whether there is a need” for a law, she said.

The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee also encouraged members Tuesday to contact their state representatives and urge them to oppose the bill.

bwilliams@detnews.com

(313) 222-2027

Jizya

Qur’an (9:29)“Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”

Articles:

Modern jizya table

Apostasy

Bukhari (83:37)“Allah’s Apostle never killed anyone except in one of the following three situations: (1) A person who killed somebody unjustly, was killed (in Qisas,) (2) a married person who committed illegal sexual intercourse and (3) a man who fought against Allah and His Apostle and deserted Islam and became an apostate.”

News Articles:

Christianity, Religious Freedom Violated By Blasphemy Laws

Christian woman sentenced to death in Pakistan ‘for blasphemy

Islamic Countries Are Top Persecutors of Christians

Adultery, Homosexuality and Non-Marital Sex

Punishment For Non-Marital Sex

Malaysia begins caning women for adultery

Video Shows Taliban Stoning Woman to Death

Woman stoned to death in north Afghanistan

Iran: Pregnant woman to be stoned to death

The Hadith and homosexuality:

The Hadith are collections of sayings attributed to Muhammad.

IslamOnline.net records a fatwa (religious ruling) concerning an Iranian man who had been convicted of raping and then killing his 16-year-old nephew. The fatwa does not appear to differentiate between consensual homosexuality and homosexual rape; both are linked to adultery. Their ruling stated:

“Homosexuality, moreover, is an abomination and a grave sin. In Hadith, the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, clarifies the gravity of this abomination by saying: “Allah curses the one who does the actions (homosexual practices) of the people of Lut.” repeating it three times; and he said in another Hadith: “If a man comes upon a man then they are both adulterers.” Here, he considered homosexuality tantamount to adultery in relation to the Shari’ah punishments because it is an abomination on the one hand and the definition of adultery applies to it on the other hand…..As for lesbians, the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said about them: ‘If a woman comes upon a woman, they are both Adulteresses‘.”

Articles on Homosexuality under Shari’ah Law:

Iran: Two More Executions for Homosexual Conduct

Iraq: Stop Killings for Homosexual Conduct

Saudi Arabia-The Kingdom in the Closet

Stealing

Bukhari (81:780)The Prophet said, “The hand should be cut off for stealing something that is worth a quarter of a Dinar or more.”

Bukhari (81:792) – Narrated Aisha: “The Prophet cut off the hand of a lady, and that lady used to come to me, and I used to convey her message to the Prophet and she repented, and her repentance was sincere.”

Abu Dawud (38:4373) – The Prophet (peace be upon him) had a mans hand cut off who had stolen a shield.

Articles about stealing:

Islamic Militants in Somalia Cut Off Convicted Thief’s Hand

Iranian Man gets hand cut off for stealing…Candy!!!

Saudi man’s hand cut off for stealing at Mecca – AP Online

2011/06/13

The Choice Is Ours: What will it be?

Source Link: Family Security Matters

A timeless paean for peace, written millennia ago by the biblical Jewish prophet Isaiah, appears ironically on the entrance wall of the building in New York City housing that most unholy, immoral and unjust organization: the United Nations. The delegates from every part of the world walk by it but see and understand it not. The words include:

And they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore. Isaiah 2:4.

On the other hand, Thomas Jefferson wrote:

“Those who hammer their guns into plows, will plow for those who do not.”

In a perfect world, Isaiah’s words should be paramount. But this is not a perfect world; it never has been. Jefferson knew it, and it may be millennia before it becomes such a world as envisioned by Isaiah. All we can do is strive mightily to bring the world to a better place than it is now. But the first years of the 21st century do not augur well for the human race. It is, therefore, only wise and prudent to maintain personal and national defense against all who harbor ill will and genocidal ambitions against us.

There is suffocating hypocrisy in the United Nations where up is down, day is night and a veritable Kafkaesque worldview exists. There is towering deceit and mendacity in the international corridors of power. Few nations can be trusted. Most act in their own best interests, despite agreements between them. Atrocities in Syria, Libya, the Congo, the Sudan, Iraq, Egypt, Nigeria, Iran, Pakistan and Somalia, to name a very few of the world’s benighted lands, make the very angels in heaven weep.

Liberals and the all-pervasive and pernicious Left would ban guns for personal and legitimate self-defense if they could; and they try mightily to do so. Similarly, the Left eviscerates national defense whenever it comes into power. In the 1930s, Britain let down its guard by slashing its military, despite all the clear and present warnings of German rearmament and the strident war cry spewing from the mouth of Adolf Hitler and his adoring German Nazi sycophants.

Winston Churchill, forced into the political wilderness, saw clearly what was coming and he, almost alone, pleaded in the House of Commons for the British nation to wake up before it was too late. For his efforts he was demonized as a war monger for far too long. And we all know how things turned out: That is those of us who still think.

So do we all have to go forward into the past? Do we all have to decry and vilify those who today warn us against the coming new war; a war that will transcend in human depravity even the horrors unleashed by fascism, Nazism and communism. It is coming, and it is the same ultimate horrific combination of a religion wrapped in an ideology that the same Winston Churchill warned about many years before the rise of the National Socialists (Nazism) and Communism.

Churchill called it, Mohammedanism, and he wrote the following in his book, The River War:

How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.

A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyzes the social development of those who follow it.

No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.

— Sir Winston Spencer Churchill (The River War, first edition, Vol. II, pages 248-50 (London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1899).

Not only Winston Churchill saw this fundamental danger to Judeo-Christian civilization but so did other luminaries. Here is what John Quincy Adams wrote about the same 7th century force, and its relentless war against non-Muslims:

“In the seventh century of the Christian era, a wandering Arab of the lineage of Hagar [i.e., Muhammad], the Egyptian, […..] Adopting from the new Revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion. He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST- TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE…. Between these two religions, thus contrasted in their characters, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. The war is yet flagrant … While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men.”

The twelve hundred year war that Adams wrote of continues today with greater ferocity, fuelled as it is by vast inflows of capital derived from oil. Atrocities committed in the name of Islam go hand in hand with a stealthy infiltration of Sharia law into every facet of life in the West.

Vast sums of money befoul European and American universities, enslaving their ability to attain and maintain the moral high ground. Instead, insidious examples of moral equivalence abounds in what Michael Savage describes as the “colleges of lower learning.” Anti-Semitism corrodes the very fabric of the halls of academia as one beguiled and besmirched student body after another falls victim to the malignant lies and poison of the immensely well-funded Arab and Muslim student organizations whose limitless coffers are enriched by each of us every time we fill our cars at the gas pump.

The students are the leaders of tomorrow. With few exceptions they are now infected, perhaps terminally, with an aberrant hatred of Jews and of Israel. Remember, the Jews are the canaries in the coal mine and whatever befalls them, eventually befalls all. Everything points to a new dark age with the stench of Arab and Muslim oil suffocating all clarity of thought and, perhaps, finally ushering in the victory that the followers of Islam have sought over those they have impudently called “infidels” since the 7th century. Remember also, even for those who yet mock the Bible, Genesis 12:3 remains an everlasting reproach to those who would curse embattled Israel and its people.

Churchill, Adams, Jefferson all understood the ever present and mortal Islamic threat. They spoke with conviction and knowledge in an age where the debilitating and impoverishing insanity of political correctness had not yet arrived to stifle free speech. There are those today who also warn us. But must we be fated yet again to ignore them and walk blindly into the darkest night of all?

© Victor Sharpe

FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Victor Sharpe is a freelance writer, contributing editor, and author of Volumes One and Two of “Politicide: The attempted murder of the Jewish state.”

2011/03/31

America: Beware Giving in to the False Concept of Islamophobia

Source INN
Written By Dr. Phyllis Chesler

We are drowning in anti-Israel propaganda, and still it never stops coming.

Simultaneously, the “Palestinian narrative” appears to us as if in a dream, over and over again, always slightly surreal and yet overly familiar. By now the “Palestinian narrative” is a brand and we have all been hypnotized.  This is not surprising.

For more than 40 years, the Soviet, Arab, and Saudi Lobbies, eventually joined by the Iranian Lobby, have funded the demonization of Israel and the popularization of Palestine. The condemnation of Israel for crimes it has never committed (“ethnic cleansing,” “genocide,” “apartheid”) and the call for a Palestinian one-state solution is echoed, similarly, in films, books, poems, academic papers and lectures; we see and hear this on television, at conferences, at campus demonstrations, in the halls of the United Nations, the European Union, in Parliaments, and, of course, in the Arab and Islamic worlds.

By now, the “Palestinian narrative” has effectively rendered Jews unsafe and unwelcome in Europe. Jews who look “Jewish” or “religious” are not safe on the streets of certain European countries such as England, France, Holland, Belgium, and Scandinavia. European pagan, Christian, and Nazi-era Judeophobia has found a new outlet in the obsessive demonization of Israel, the only Jewish state. This is also the way Europeans hope to appease Muslim immigrants who live in Europe but in parallel universes, who are hostile to the Western enterprise, and who demand the right to be brutally intolerant as a Western civil right.

This same false Palestinian narrative has morphed into a belief that all Muslims—who are, themselves, the largest practitioners of religious apartheid in the world, and who persecute all non-Muslims—are, as Muslims, being persecuted in the West. This may be because Islam is not (yet) dominant in the West.

In my opinion, the success of the “Palestinian” narrative is what has led to the unquestioning acceptance of the false concept of “Islamophobia.”

Those Europeans who have challenged the idea of “Islamophobia” and who have told the truth about Islam in Europe—or who have chosen to leave the Religion of Peace—have put themselves in harm’s way. Either they are sued for blasphemy or defamation—or they must live in exile and with bodyguards. Some have been murdered, even butchered.

What about America? Surely that is not true here.

In 2008, America’s FBI found that 66.1% of religious hate crimes targeted Jews, but only 7.5% of religious hate crimes targeted Muslims. On March 29, 2011, The Center for Security Policy released a revised edition of their groundbreaking longitudinal study, Religious Bias Crimes 2000-2009: Muslim, Jewish and Christian Victims — Debunking the Myth of a Growing Trend in Muslim Victimization. (I have provided a PDF Copy of this study at the bottom of this article) It is based on annual FBI statistics and contradicts the assertions that religious bias crimes against Muslims have increased in America and that the alleged cause is widespread “Islamophobia.” In fact, the study shows that religious bias crimes — also known as hate crimes — against Muslim Americans, have remained relatively low with a downward trend since 2001, and are significantly less than the numbers of bias crimes against Jewish victims.

According to the Center’s analysis, in 2009, Jewish victims of hate crimes outnumbered Muslim victims by more than 8 to 1 (1,132 Jewish victims to 132 Muslim victims). From 2000 through 2009, for every one hate crime incident against a Muslim, there were six hate crime incidents against Jewish victims (1,580 Muslim incidents versus 9,692 Jewish incidents). Even in 2001 when religious bias crimes against Muslims increased briefly for a nine-week period, total anti-Muslim incidents, offenses and victims remained approximately half of the corresponding anti-Jewish totals.”

Nevertheless, American Muslims have alleged rampant “Islamophobia” in America. Countless number of Talking Heads have taken this allegation seriously.

Thus, it is not surprising that CNN just aired a documentary which was titled Not Welcome: The Muslims Next Door.

On camera, the Muslims are all so very…peaceful. There is not one angry or hate-filled Muslim man on camera. Not one. Despite the fact that we have seen hundreds, possibly thousands of angry, frightening, violent Muslim demonstrations, including prayer services, all across America and across the Islamic world, and many hate-filled captured Islamic and Palestinian terrorists on camera, CNN’s chosen Muslim-American men of Murfreesboro, Tennessee, including the Sheikh of the planned Islamic Center, are all soft-spoken, emotional, tearful, non-violent. Except for the Sheikh’s American wifewho converted to Islam, the Muslims on camera are all innocent, good, non-white people.

Soledad O’Brien, CNN’s special anchor, likes them, and, as someone with Afro-Cuban as well as Caucasian Australian parents, perhaps she even identifies with them. In any event, O’Brien questions them very politely, sympathetically.

However, the white, Christian-Americans on camera—all of them, without exception—are portrayed as hateful, cruel, insidious, dislikable, selfish, phobic, and no doubt racist. O’Brien interviews them with barely disguised hostility and contempt.

At issue, according to CNN’s website are America’s post-9/11 fears about radical Islam, terrorism, and “Sharia Law.”  As CNN sees it:

“Murfreesboro, Tennessee has just over 100,000 people, 140+ churches, and one mosque. For decades, Muslims have lived and prayed in Murfreesboro without incident, but last May, when the Muslim community gained county approval to build a new 52,000 square foot Islamic center in town, hundreds of Murfreesboro residents took to the streets in protest…. O’Brien chronicles the dramatic fight to block the mosque project in Murfreesboro and the fight over religious freedom; a fight that would ultimately include protests, vandalism, arson and an explosive lawsuit that would involve the U.S. Department of Justice.”

What’s wrong with Murfreesboro is that it is too damn Christian and too damn white. It is not diverse enough.It is not Middle Eastern enough.

O’Brien, herself a Harvard graduate, dresses as a modern American woman. She has absolutely no comment to make about the fact that most of the adult Muslim women on camera are all wearing long, shapeless dresses and severe hijab—while the Muslim men are all dressed in modern, American style. The Sheikh’s wife insists that women are not “oppressed” under Sharia Law, that she is not oppressed, that no Muslim woman she knows has ever been oppressed, etc.

Interestingly enough, the Sheikh has a foreign accent. One wonders why so many Sheiks have been imported from the Middle East to America. Asra Nomani is a religious Muslim feministwho was born in India and raised in America. Her father founded the mosque of Morgantown, West Virginia. Nomani tried to persuade her mosque to become more woman-friendly. She failed. In a PBSdocumentary about this story, Nomani claimed that when Arab Muslims joined her mosque, her battle to bring it into the 21st century failed. On camera, she says:

“Extremists — mainly Arabs — led by one rather physically and verbally violent Egyptian, Hany Ammar, took over. At that point, I began hearing really scary sermons. An unchaste woman is worthless. The West is on a bad path. We must hate those who hate us. Women should be silent in a mosque. Jews are descendants of apes and pigs.”

Incredibly, on camera, Ammar says: “I pray to Allah that you be punished. May Allah get revenge for Ammar.” Ammar is also heard, but not seen, physically attacking a young moderate Muslim man. Ammar’s wife Mona is even more conservative, more aggressive than he is. She minces no words in expressing her contempt, even hatred for Nomani. Like certain kinds of religious women, she is even more zealous in upholding the patriarchal status quo, more aggressively empowered to strike down any other woman who dares challenge male supremacy or Islamic gender apartheid.

Ultimately, Ammar tries to ban Nomani from the mosque. Eventually, both she and her family leave.

Why do I even bring this in? Because Murfreesboro’s Sheikh Ossama Mohamed Bahloul is also a foreign-born Arab Muslim. All this means is that he may (or may not) be a religious Muslim supremacist or an Islamist. Bahloul is an Egyptian-born graduate of Al-Azhar University in Cairo. He was the Imam of the Islamic Society of Southern Texas, in Corpus Christi, and then the visiting Imam for the Islamic Center of Irving, Texas.

Sheikh Bahloul is not a terrorist, nor did he have anything to do with the trial of the Holy Land Foundation, an organization which raised money for Hamas and was based in a suburb of Dallas, Texas. However, he was summoned from Egypt to work in Texas, and left for Murfreesboro a year after the Holy Land trial began. Texas is known as a hotbed of increasingly fundamentalist Islam. Perhaps Bahloul was chosen for his radical beliefs and for his ability to mask them as something else. After all, his wife is dressed as if they live in Cairo, not in America.

To me, this is a sign and signal of a desire to live in a parallel universe, one in which Muslims are taught that they are superior to non-Muslims; one in which Muslims are taught to hate Jews and other infidels;one in which Muslims are taught that Sharia Law is, indeed, superior to American law. That is why CNN invites Harvard Professor Noah Feldman on. He assures people that “Our constitution prohibits any religion from becoming the law of the land.”

It does. But look at how Sharia law and/or Islamic custom has usurped the law of the land both in Europe and in America, where female genital mutilation, child arranged marriage, polygamy, the burqa and honor killings are pandemic.

An Egyptian father killed his two American daughters in Irving, Texas. Yaser Said came from Egypt, married his American-born wife when she was fifteen years old, honor murdered their daughters in 2008, and then fled. He has yet to be found.

A series of attacks were perpetrated against the building of the mosque. “Not Welcome” was spray painted on the sign which announced the mosque opening, arson was perpetrated, a lawsuit was brought. The graffiti and the arson are unacceptable. But no one who opposes the mosque is given a fair hearing or the slightest respect on camera. And, Sheikh Bahloul may be as clever as he is soft-spoken. In a very emotional but determined voice, pitched precisely to gain sympathy for his causehe says:  “This is America. This is too much.”

Ah, so the Egyptian-born Sheikh understands America and fully knows what his rights are here. Funny, he only arrived here post 9/11. Actually, for all I know, he could have arrived here sooneror more recently. None of his many biographies and interviews share this information with us.

Is he, perhaps, asecret lover of Zion, an admirer of the American way of life, a Sufi-style peaceful Sunni Muslim? He graduated from the most prominent school of Islamic learning in the Sunni world. If he is really a man for the 21st century, he will have to take some very prominent and public stands which prove that this is so.



Phyllis Chesler, Ph.D is an Emerita Professor of Psychology and Women’s Studies at City University of New York. She is an author, psychotherapist and an expert courtroom witness. She has lectured and organized political, legal, religious and human rights campaigns in the United States and in Canada, Europe, the Middle East and the Far East.

Dr. Chesler’s thirteen books and thousands of articles and speeches have inspired people on many diverse issues. Her books include: Women and Madness; Women, Money and Power; About Men; With Child: A Diary of Motherhood; Mothers on Trial: The Battle for Children and Custody; Sacred Bond: The Legacy of Baby M; Patriarchy: Notes of an Expert Witness; Feminist Foremothers in Women’s Studies, Psychology, and Mental Health; Letters to a Young Feminist; Woman’s Inhumanity to Woman; Women of the Wall: Claiming Sacred Ground at Judaism’s Holy Site; The New Anti-Semitism. The Current Crisis and What We Must Do About It; and The Death of Feminism. What’s Next in the Struggle for Women’s Freedom.

To subscribe to the Phyllis Chesler mailing list, go to http://www.phyllis-chesler.com/list_subscribe.php


View this document on Scribd
Older Posts »