Iraq’s human rights minister, Mohammed Shia al-Sudani, claims there is undeniable evidence that Islamic gangs have executed at least 500 Yazidis and 300 women were taken as sex-slaves
by, Jason Beattie | Mirror
Petrified women and children were buried alive in a mass slaughter by Islamic State extremists, it was claimed yesterday.
An estimated 500 Yazidis were murdered in the atrocity in Iraq, according to the country’s human rights minister. He also said around 300 girls and women have been kidnapped as slaves by the terror group.
The outrages have piled pressure on the West to step up its actions against the jihadists who have besieged around 150,000 Yazidis in the Sinjar region of the country.
Desperate families on foot continued to flee for their lives at the weekend. Children and stricken adults were carried during the exodus in the searing heat.
The human rights minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani said there was “striking evidence” – including photos – showing “indisputably that the gangs of the Islamic States have executed at least 500 Yazidis after seizing Sinjar”.
He added: “Some of the victims, including women and children, were buried alive in scattered mass graves in and around Sinjar.
Video courtesy of: WochitGeneralNews
“In some of the images we have obtained there are lines of dead Yazidis who have been shot in the head while the Islamic State fighters cheer and wave their weapons over the corpses. This is a vicious atrocity.”
He added: “We spoke to some of the Yazidis who fled from Sinjar. We have dozens of accounts and witness testimonies describing painful scenes of how Islamic State fighters arrived and took girls from their families by force to use them as slaves.
“The terrorist Islamic State has also taken at least 300 Yazidi women as slaves and locked some of them inside a police station in Sinjar and transferred others to the town of Tal Afar. We are afraid they will take them outside the country.”
US forces yesterday unleashed a fresh wave of airstrikes against the extremists – also known as ISIS – near Erbil, the capital of Iraq’s semi-autonomous Kurdish region.
The bombings, launched by drones and fighter jets, were aimed at protecting Kurdish Peshmerga soldiers trying to hold off the advance of the Islamist militants whose self-proclaimed caliphate stretches across a large swathe of Iraq.
US military commanders said the strikes destroyed armoured vehicles “indiscriminately” firing at Yazidis trapped on Mount Sinjar.
Britain has stepped up its humanitarian effort, dropping fresh supplies to the thousands in the mountains. UK officials believe up to 150,000 people could be stranded, with many of them facing starvation and dehydration.
But many have urged Britain to do much more. Lord Dannatt, the former head of the British Army, slammed David Cameron for going on holiday, adding that Parliament should be recalled so that further action could be authorised.
Lord Dannatt said: “From today the British should be joining the air strikes against Islamic State forces as they press towards Erbil.
Today’s Iraqi operation takes place under a very different set of circumstances to the one proposed last August to bomb Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad’s chemical weapons capability. In the face of a crisis of this scale, with the potential for so much human misery, this is not the moment for decision-makers to be on holiday.
“Parliament needs to be recalled and the West needs to face up to its responsibilities. We must make sure that we do not come out of this wringing our hands at another genocide and saying ‘next time, we must do better’. We are being put to the test, and history will be our judge.”
The demand to recall Parliament was echoed by Labour MP Mike Gapes. He said: “I hope we can then, with Opposition support, achieve a massive vote for UK military intervention alongside our US and NATO partners to defend and protect our democratic and secular Kurdish friends and to stop the genocide of Christians, Yazidis and other minorities by ISIS in Iraq and Syria.”
Downing Street has not ruled out supporting the US military offensive if there was a risk of genocide. But experts said Britain had little to offer beyond special forces and intelligence gathering.
A Whitehall insider said: “We have no aircraft carrier and no aircraft to put on a carrier.” Senior Government officials yesterday held a meeting of the emergency Cobra committee to discuss the situation at which it was agreed to send
humanitarian advisers to the Erbil region.
The first UK aid drop took place on Saturday night with the RAF sending in 1,200 water containers and 240 solar lanterns which can be used to recharge mobile phones.
A No10 spokesman said: “We are working to step up these deliveries in the coming days.
“Meanwhile, we continue to engage with the US, Kurds, Turks and other international partners on how to get those trapped on the mountain to safety.” He added: “The humanitarian situation remains deeply worrying and consequently this continues to be our priority.”
It has been reported that 30,000 of the Yazidis may have escaped to Syria and then been escorted back into Iraqi Kurdistan by the Kurdish forces.
Peshmerga fighters have retaken two villages from the militants, according to a Kurdish military official. These reported triumphs in Makhmour and al-Gweir would be the first victories by the Kurdish troops against the extremists.
The president of Kurdish Iraq, Massoud Barzani, has called on the international community to send weapons to fight the militants.
The Iraqi government in Baghdad warned that the atrocities could not be stopped unless the world confronted the Islamic State threat.
Barack Obama said at the weekend the US air strikes could continue for months.
Mr Obama added it would take more than bombs to restore stability, and criticised Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s Shia-led government for failing to share power with Iraq’s Sunni minority.
The US has removed some staff from its embassy in Baghdad and its consulate in Erbil, the State Department said yesterday.
The Yazidis are a sect of around 700,000 people in northern Iraq whose religion has taken elements from various faiths.
Leaders of the Islamic State have accused the Yazidis of being devil worshippers, and have ordered them to convert to Islam or face death.
Bill would sanction the Muslim Brotherhood and all of its affiliate organizations
by, Adam Kredo | The Washington Free Beacon
Congress is moving to officially designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) and impose sanctions on any person who provides the group and its affiliates with “material support,” according to a copy of the legislation obtained by theWashington Free Beacon.
The Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act of 2014—sponsored by Rep. Michele Bachmann (R., Minn.)—seeks to slap U.S. sanctions on the organization’s political center in Egypt as well as scores of affiliates operating across America and Europe, according to the bill.
The bill currently has seven cosponsors: Peter Roskam (R., Ill.), Trent Franks (R., Ariz.), Cynthia Lummis (R., Wyo.), Kevin Brady (R., Texas), Steve Southerland (R., Fla.), Louie Gohmert (R., Texas), and Doug LaMalfa (R., Calif.).
While the United States has designated individuals and certain affiliates of the Brotherhood in the past, this is the first time that Congress has moved to sanction the organization as a whole, including all of its member organizations.
The 19-page bill seeks to build a case against the group as one of the leading sponsors of terrorism and argues that the Brotherhood has long been a key player in orchestrating attacks across the globe via its proxies.
The legislation comes as Egyptian authorities continue to crack down on Muslim Brotherhood-backers that have wreaked havoc on Christians and other minorities since the downfall of former President Mohammed Morsi.
The bill would direct the U.S. government to level all “available sanctions” to any person in the United States “who knowingly provides material support or resources to the Muslim Brotherhood or its affiliates, associated groups, or agents.”
It also moves to block anyone affiliated with the Brotherhood from receiving a U.S. visa, which could complicate the White House’s diplomacy efforts on multiple fronts.
A senior member of the Brotherhood was hosted at the White House in February, and other representatives of the group have also gained entrance to the United States, though it remains unclear just how many due to limited documentation.
Additionally, the bill would force a complete shutdown of any Brotherhood affiliates located in the United States and permit the removal of “any alien who is a member or representative” of the group.
Much of the legislation focuses on building a case against the Brotherhood and detailing its many terrorist links.
While the organization remains headquartered in Egypt, where it has faced a violent crackdown from Egyptian authorities, the Brotherhood operates across the world.
“The Muslim Brotherhood’s motto remains to this day what it has been for decades: ‘’Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. The Koran is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope. Allahu-Akbar!’” the bill states, referring to primary documents from Brotherhood leaders.
Lawmakers argue that, at its core, Brotherhood continues to support and finance jihad and promote the spread of an extremist version of Islam across the globe.
Previous administrations have designated global elements of the Brotherhood as terrorists.
The terror group Hamas, for instance, which continues to fire rockets at Israeli civilians from its headquarters in the Gaza Strip, is a known wing of the Brotherhood and has operated with its support.
Former President George W. Bush designated in 2001 the Brotherhood Lajnat al-Daawa al-Islamiya (the Islamic Call Committee) in Kuwait as a terrorist organization.
The Brotherhood’s Lajnat al-Daawa al-Islamiya served as a financial conduit for terror mastermind Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda. It also has funded terror groups in Chechnya and Libya.
The U.S. government also has designated Muslim Brotherhood leaders from Yemen and other countries.
The Brotherhood’s financial networks have been implicated in the funding of Chechen rebels and there is evidence that the group has established some fundraising channels in the United States.
Former FBI Director Robert Mueller told lawmakers in 2011 that classified intelligence indicates the Brotherhood has been operating in America.
‘‘I can say at the outset that elements of the Muslim Brotherhood both here and overseas have supported terrorism,” he said at the time.
Some have pointed to the case of the Holy Land Foundation, a Muslim charity shut down by the federal government for funneling money to Hamas, as firm evidence of the Brotherhood’s efforts to raise money in the United States for terrorists
Experts note that while the Brotherhood supports an extremist ideology it would be very difficult for the government to designate the group and then determine who exactly is a member.
“American terrorist designations should be applied narrowly, or else they will lose their credibility. While the bill correctly highlights the Brotherhood’s deep hostility towards the United States and its violent ideological underpinnings, the evidence suggesting that it’s currently engaged in organized terrorism is flimsy,” said Eric Trager, an Egypt expert and fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP).
“Moreover, given the significant blow that the Brotherhood has experienced in the past thirteen months since [former President] Morsi’s fall, the Brotherhood is no longer a strategic threat, and focusing on it will distract policymakers attention from the far more significant threats that have emerged in Syria and Iraq, where actual jihadis now control territory,” Trager explained.
- – -
Egypt, Russia and Saudi Arabia have already designated the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization long ago.
Why do “you” think the US has not?
Coptic Christian teacher, Demiana Emad. Photo courtesy of: Ahram Online
The conviction stems from parents’ complaints, but a human rights NGO says that the social studies teacher only compared religions from a historical perspective
by, Ahram Online | h/t David Wood @ Answering Muslims
A Coptic Christian school teacher has been sentenced to six months in prison on charges of insulting Islam.
Demiana Emad, a 23-year-old social studies teacher, was arrested on 9 May 2013 after the head of the parents’ association of Sheikh Sultan Primary School in Luxor filed a complaint accusing her of insulting Islam.
In June 2013, Emad was sentenced to pay a LE100,000 fine. Sunday’s jail sentence was ordered by the court in response to an appeal filed by the defendant on last year’s fine.
According to a year-old report by the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights (EIPR), Emad didn’t insult Islam, only “presented a comparison between religions in ancient, middle and modern ages as mentioned in the curriculum.”
The report, which warned of similar cases becoming “a tool to oppress minorities,” added that during investigations the majority of Emad’s students denied that she had insulted Islam in her class.
Charges of insulting religion go back to the regime of ousted president Hosni Mubarak, widely used then as a pretext to crack down on political activists. However, occurrences of the charge significantly rose under the rule of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) and Islamist president Mohamed Morsi, who was removed from power last July.
A report issued by the EIPR last September revealed that since the 25 January 2011 revolution until the end of 2012, a total of 63 citizens, both Muslims and Christians, were charged with insulting religion.
Article 98 of Egypt’s penal code says anyone convicted of offending religion in any form can face up to six years in prison.
by, Rand | h/t David Wood @ Answering Muslims
There is a growing terrorist threat to the United States from a rising number of Salafi-jihadist groups overseas, according to a RAND Corporation study.
Since 2010, there has been a 58 percent increase in the number of jihadist groups, a doubling of jihadist fighters and a tripling of attacks by al Qaeda affiliates. The most significant threat to the United States, the report concludes, comes from terrorist groups operating in Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
“Based on these threats, the United States cannot afford to withdraw or remain disengaged from key parts of North Africa, the Middle East and South Asia,” said Seth Jones, author of the study and associate director of the International Security and Defense Policy Center at RAND, a nonprofit research organization. “After more than a decade of war in Afghanistan and Iraq, it may be tempting for the U.S. to turn its attention elsewhere and scale back on counterterrorism efforts. But this research indicates that the struggle is far from over.”
For the RAND study, Jones examined thousands of unclassified and declassified primary source documents, including public statements and internal memorandums of al Qaeda and other Salafi-jihadist leaders. The study also includes a database of information such as the number of Salafi-jihadist groups, their approximate size and their activity — attacks, fatalities and other casualties.
The RAND study focuses on Salafi-jihadist groups, a particular strand of militant Sunni Islamism. These groups, which include al Qaeda and its affiliates, emphasize the importance of returning to a “pure” Islam, that of the Salaf, the pious ancestors. They also believe that violent jihad is a personal religious duty for every devout Muslim, Jones said.
One reason for the increase in groups, fighters and attacks is the weakness of governments across North Africa and the Middle East. Weak governments have difficulty establishing law and order, which allows militant groups and other sub-state actors to fill the vacuum.
These trends suggest that the United States needs to remain focused on countering the proliferation of Salafi-jihadist groups, despite the temptation to shift attention and resources to the Asia-Pacific or other regions and to significantly decrease counterterrorism budgets in an era of fiscal constraint, Jones said
The report documents how the broader Salafi-jihadist movement has become more decentralized among four tiers: core al Qaeda in Pakistan; formal affiliates that have sworn allegiance to al Qaeda; Salafi-jihadist groups that have not sworn allegiance to al Qaeda, but are committed to establishing an extremist Islamic emirate; and inspired individuals and networks.
Jones says the threat posed by these diverse groups varies widely. Some are locally focused and have shown little interest in attacking Western targets. Others, like al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, present an immediate threat to the U.S. homeland, along with inspired individuals like the Tsarnaev brothers who perpetrated the April 2013 Boston bombings. Others threaten U.S. interests overseas, but not the homeland.
In addition to high-level threats from Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan and Pakistan, the RAND study concludes that there is a medium-level threat from terrorist groups operating in Somalia, Iraq, Libya, Lebanon, Nigeria and Algeria. And there is a low-level threat from Salafi-jihadist groups operating in such countries as Tunisia, Mali and Morocco.
In response to these threats, Jones says the U.S. should establish a more-adaptive counterterrorism strategy, pursuing engagement — the use of special operations, intelligence, diplomatic and other capacities to conduct precision targeting of these groups and their financial, logistical and political support networks — where there is a high threat to the U.S. and a low local government capacity.
In other cases, the U.S. may adopt a “forward-partnering” strategy, Jones said. Forward partnering involves deploying small numbers of U.S. military forces, intelligence operatives, diplomats and other governmental personnel to train local security forces, collect intelligence and undermine terrorist financing. Unlike an engagement strategy, however, U.S. forces would not directly become involved in the war by conducting raids or drone strikes.
A third strategy, “offshore balancing,” should be used in cases where there is little or no direct threat to the United States. Offshore balancing involves relying on allies and local governments to counter terrorist groups, while avoiding direct engagement or forward partnering.
Research for the study was funded by and conducted within theInternational Security and Defense Policy Center of the RAND National Defense Research Institute, a federally-funded research and development center sponsored by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, the Unified Combatant Commands, the Navy, the Marine Corps, the defense agencies and the defense intelligence community.
by, Valentina Colombo | The Gatestone Institute
“[T]he organization of the Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist organization, and anyone who asks either to reconcile with them, to join them or to ally with them is himself a terrorist.” — Refaat Saïd, leader of Egypt’s Socialist party, al-Tagammu’, and previously close friend of former Muslim Brotherhood Supreme Guide, Mahdi Akef.
It should come as no surprise, then, that the motto of Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis is also the verse singled out by Hassan al Banna: “Fight them until there is no fitnah [discord], and [until] the religion, all of it, is for Allah.” [Qur'an, Sura VIII, verse 39]
The link between the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas is clear, and confirmed by Article 2 of the Charter of Hamas, which reads: “The Islamic Resistance movement is one of the wings of the Muslim Brothers in Palestine”.
A new terror group, Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis [ABM], just officially entered the scene. Both the U.S. State Department and the British government included it, at the beginning of April, in their list of proscribed terrorist organizations.
The United Kingdom justified its decision as follows: “ABM is an Al Qa’ida inspired militant Islamist group based in the northern Sinai region of Egypt. The group is said to recruit within Egypt and abroad and aims to create an Egyptian state ruled by Sharia law. ABM is assessed to be responsible for a number of attacks on security forces in Egypt since 2011. The attacks appear to have increased since the overthrow of the Morsi government in July 2013. The group’s reach goes beyond the Sinai, with the group claiming responsibility for a number of attacks in Cairo and cross-border attacks against Israel. ABM has undertaken attacks using vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices and surface-to-air missiles. Examples of attacks for which the group has claimed responsibility include: an attack on the Egyptian Interior Minister in which a UK national was seriously injured (September, 2013); an attack on a police compound in Mansoura, killing at least 16 people, including 14 police officers (December 24, 2013), and an attack on a tourist bus in which three South Koreans and their Egyptian driver died (January 16, 2014).”
The decision taken by the British government against Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis came almost at the same time as the decision to start investigations on the activities of Muslim Brotherhood [MB] and its possible links with terrorism.
There is however a link between ABM and the Muslim Brotherhood: the justification of jihad, based on the Koranic text.
Although in January 2014, after the December 24 attack — linked by the British government statement to ABM — the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood issued a declaration in which it denied any connection with ABM, Refaat Saïd, the leader of the Socialist Party, Tagammu’, said otherwise.
Saïd pointed out, during the visit of Catherine Ashton to Egypt on the eve of its presidential elections, that Ashton “wants to open channels for a reconciliation with the Muslim Brotherhood despite knowing perfectly well that Dr. Mohammed Morsi himself imported the organization of Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis and placed it in the Sinai. Morsi released many of its members from prison so they could carry out terror attacks in the Sinai region to take him back to power.”
Saïd bluntly added that “the organization of the Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist organization, and anyone who asks either to reconcile with them, to join them or to ally with them is himself a terrorist.”
Saïd, previously a close friend of Mahdi Akef, the former MB Supreme Guide, knows the Brotherhood closely.
In September 2013, after an attack on the Egyptian Minister of the Interior, Major General Ahmad ‘Abd al-Halim explained that “Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis is an organization including 15 organizations acting and working in Gaza and belonging to the sphere of al-Qaeda and Hamas.”
Colonel Farouq Hamdan — an aide to former Egyptian Interior Minister — also commented that “the attack was carried out with the blessing of, and consultation between the organizations of the Muslim Brotherhood and Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis, which was funded by the Brotherhood.”
The connection between Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis, al-Qaeda and Hamas — already on the official lists of proscribed terrorist organizations in the West — and the Muslim Brotherhood — which is already presently on the proscribed terror organizations of Russia (February 2003), Syria (21 October 2013), Egypt (25 December 2013), Saudi Arabia (7 March 2013) and the United Arab Emirates (9 March 2014) — is sometimes a direct one, and sometimes an ideological link.
The link between the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas is clear and straight, and confirmed by Article 2 of the Charter of Hamas, which reads: “The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the wings of the Muslim Brothers in Palestine. The Muslim Brotherhood Movement is a world organization, the largest Islamic Movement in the modern era. It is characterized by a profound understanding, by precise notions and by a complete comprehensiveness of all concepts of Islam in all domains of life: views and beliefs, politics and economics, education and society, jurisprudence and rule, indoctrination and teaching, the arts and publications, the hidden and the evident, and all the other domains of life.”
It would appear rather more difficult to demonstrate the link between the Muslim Brotherhood and some markedly jihadist movements such as Al Qaeda, Gamaat al-Islamiyya — also internationally recognized as a terrorist organization — and Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis.
In 2005, Sylvain Besson published, for the first time in a Western language, a document in his book, The Conquest of the West: The Secret Project of Islamists, often referred to as “The Secret Project.”
The document, “Towards a global strategy of Islamic politics (starting points, elements, essential conditions and missions),” was found in 2001 by Swiss authorities in the house of Youssef Nada, one of the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood in the West
A similar version of the “Secret Project” was also aired in 2012 in a documentary film about the MB in the West by American journalist Glenn Beck. What is strange is that no one has given due importance to the contents of both documents.
“The Secret Project” explains the twelve starting points of the strategy of the Brotherhood in the West. For example:
“Step 5: Work to establish the Islamic state, in parallel make progressive efforts aiming at controlling the local centres of power through institutional work.
“Step 6: Work with loyalty alongside Islamic groups and institutions in various fields by agreeing on a common ground in order to cooperate on points of convergence while putting aside the points of divergence.
“Step 7: Accept the principle of temporary cooperation between Islamic movements and nationalist movements [...]“
In Step 9, jihad is finally mentioned: “Build a permanent force of the Islamic preaching and support movements engaged in jihad in the Islamic world, in different ways and within the limits of the possible….Get in touch with any new movement engaged in jihad wherever in the planet, with Islamic minorities, and create walkways, according to requirements, to support and establish a partnership. Keep the jihad on alert in the umma [Muslim community] […].”
“The Secret Project” calls for a bond, a better collaboration with jihadi movements and it would seem that strategically, leaders and members of the MB consider both jihad and jihadi movements fundamental to achieve their goals.
Hasan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood in 1936, issued a call to “kings and princes, members of legal organizations and Islamic societies, to those who own judgment and sense of honour in the Muslim world,” to the so-called “Fifty requests” to return to a true Islamic society.
The third request reads: “Reinforce the army, multiply sections of young people and inflame them on the grounds of Islamic jihad.”
Jihad appears always to have been part of MB ideology. Sayyid Qutb, possibly the most important MB ideologue, in his commentary of Koran, In the Shade of Qur’an, defines jihad: “Islam gives the name jihad to such cumulative efforts. This includes efforts to change people through verbal advocacy. It also includes the possible armed struggle to end an oppressive system and establish justice. [...] among the radical concepts of the revolutionary party named “Muslim” the most foundational is to engage every rebellious force that comes in Islam’s way: fight them, muster everything possible to replace them.”
Sayyid Qutb’s books and his theory of jihad have been fundamental in building the foundation of Al-Qaeda ideology as Ayman al-Zawahiri clearly states in his book Knights under the Prophet’s Banner.
In 1978, a Sudanese reformist and political leader, Mahmud Muhammad Taha, who was sentenced to death for apostasy in 1985, wrote, in the first part of his reflection, These are the Muslim Brothers: “In this age when humanity was predisposed to spread Islam at the scientific level based on persuasion, on reconciliation and peace, when the world opinion was inclined to renounce violence and not to resort to war to solve problems, here came the organization of the Muslim Brotherhood calling Muslims to jihad! Here is the shaykh Hasan al- Banna, the founder of their preaching, consecrating a letter of his to jihad, ‘The Letter of jihad.’ He quotes many Koranic verses calling for jihad [...] He concludes the document with the following invitation: ‘Brothers, the umma is a factory of death [...] and Allah reserved you the precious life on earth and eternal bliss in the afterlife, what a fragility leads us to love this life and hate death, be ready for an important action and long for death since it will give you life.'”
In a letter about “teachings” (Risalat al-ta’alim), in “Point 7,” the paragraph dedicated to action, Hasan al- Bannawrote: “We must be the masters in spreading the Islamic preaching in every place, ‘And fight them until there is nofitnah [upheaval] and [until] the religion, all of it, is for Allah’ (Surat al-Anfal, VIII:39) [...] and I want jihad as an obligation of the past that will continues until the Day of Judgment and that has as its main purpose the hadith of the Messenger of Allah — upon him the greetings and blessing of Allah: whoever dies without having fought and without having any intention of fighting is as if he had died in the era of ignorance.'”
The importance of jihad in the history of MB is further underlined by the title of an essay that Yusuf al-Qaradawi, one of its main theologians: “The Muslim Brotherhood. Seventy years of preaching, education and jihad” (Beirut 2001).
Al-Qaradawi states that, “the movement engaged in real jihadi battles against the Zionists in Palestine and the British in Egypt and the movement sent the best of its sons to sacrifice.” (page 235)
It should come as no surprise, then, that the motto of Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis is also the verse singled out by Hassan al Banna: “Fight them until there is no fitnah [discord], and [until] the religion, all of it, is for Allah.” [Qur'an, Sura VIII, verse 39].
As stated in “The Secret Project” of the Muslim Brotherhood, the MB and Islamist movements are merely different but complementary ways to implement the goals of jihad.
Whereas the Muslim Brotherhood preaches jihad with pragmatism and “moderation,” the ABM, Hamas and al-Qaeda preach and practice it bluntly and with no delay. But whenever the Brotherhood enters what could be perceived as resistance, then open violence becomes permissible, as now in Egypt.
Recent statements to the Sunday Times by Ibrahim al-Mounir, whom many regard as the leader of the Brotherhood in Europe, sound as if they are a veiled threat: “If this [ban] happened, this would make a lot of people in Muslim communities think that [peaceful] Muslim Brotherhood values … didn’t work and now they are designated a terrorist group, which would make the doors open for all options.” When asked if he meant that the group was open to violence, he replied: “Any possibility.”
There can be no doubt about the ideological link between ABM and MB: both believe in jihad, in the conquest of power by Islam. The most important thing the West has to understand is the blunt pragmatism of MB, that is what Mohammed Charfi, former Tunisian minister of education, wrote in his essay, Islam et liberté: “Today the observers call a “moderate” Islamist the person who, with Westerners, uses reasonable language and who does not choose an openly violent action. However even though his style is calm and the rejection of violence seems sincere, since the movement is always linked to sharia and the sacralisation of history, his moderation remains provisional and indicates a strategy of waiting, because the ingredients of radicalization have not disappeared.”
by, Suzanne Hamner | D.C. Clothesline
Has everyone heard about Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine backing Hillary Clinton for a 2016 presidential bid? According to a CBS news article, Kaine, addressing a Democratic women’s breakfast on May 3, 2014, in South Carolina, said that former Secretary of State Clintonhad shown grace in handling an array of problems and attacks in her 30 years of public life. The Democratic Senator from Virginia said it was never too early to start backing Hellary (yes, this spelling is intentional) and that she had “what it takes” to be president.
According to a statement by Kaine, “She’s got the accumulated backbone and scar tissue and wisdom and judgment – all of those things you need in a leader.”
Other Democratic supporters of a “Hellary for President” run in 2016 includes Sen. Chuck Schumer (NY), former Governor Jennifer Granholm (MI), and Sen. Claire McCaskill (MO).
While Hellary decides on a run for the White House again later this year, a document dump by the Clinton Presidential Library released a handwritten note by Bill Clinton in March 2000 to Bassam Erstwani, chairman of the Dar Al-Hijrah Mosque in Falls Church, Virginia. The tone of the note suggests that then President Bill Clinton and First Lady Hillary Clinton “enjoyed a friendly relationship with the chairman of a mosque that counted 9/11 hijackers as worshippers and invited controversial Muslim Brotherhood-linked television preacher Yusuf al-Qaradawi in for a meeting.” It appears that in the note signed “BC,” former president Bill Clinton indicated that having Muslim support would be good.
It seems Erstwani visited the White House multiple times during the Clinton presidency. Photographic documentation has Erstwani in the Oval Office shaking hands with President Clinton and, on another separate occasion, at a White House event smiling while next to Hillary. Erstwani has also been linked with Anwar Al-Awlaki – imam of the Dar Al-Hijrah mosque from January 2001 to April 2002, a senior Al-Qaeda recruiter linked to several terrorists, preacher to three of the 9/11 hijackers, linked to the Fort Hood shooter by US officials and killed in a drone strike in September 2011 commanded by the CIA.
Yes, her stellar examples of wisdom and judgment are presidential quality as is her accumulated backbone. Her scar tissue of presidential quality ranks right up there with a case of the shingles. These are the things needed in a leader, according to Sen. Kaine, but Hillary’s example of these qualities is sorely lacking. In addition to her magnanimous qualities, her criminal, treasonous acts should be a prohibition for a presidential bid. However, Hellary’s lies, treason, and inaction resulting in the murder of four Americansmeans nothing to liberal progressive Democrats.
Instead of looking at the information that links another potential presidential candidate with known terrorists and the enemies of America, the liberal progressives take pot shots at those who speak in conservative tones. They deflect from the real issue to attack, malign and smear those who link the current corrupt government with American’s enemies and the heralding of the end of our nation. The current administration’s favoring of a special group means nothing to them even when that group seeks to subjugate the population and eradicate freedom. While they may believe in their mind they are supporting freedom, their continued support of individuals in government who do not support freedom suggests otherwise.
It has become an uphill battle to focus the attention of liberal progressives on true issues as they are more interested in promoting their agenda, defending criminals and those who seek to take freedom away and to use every tactic available to avoid facing facts.
Hellary’s friendly association with Erstwani, through Bill, has profound implications with regard to her actions in Benghazi, not to mention, her clear participation in a cover-up to conceal treasonous activities on the part of this administration and Obama. It also shows a clear intent to protect terrorists who commit atrocities, murder Americans and subjugate, rape, torture or murder Christians and other non-Muslims for sport – if that doesn’t satisfy this blood-thirsty group, they engage in cannibalism by eating the heart of their victims then play soccer and kickball with the heads of the murdered. This is whom the liberal progressives and Sen. Kaine, Sen. Schumer, Sen. McCaskill and former Gov. Granholm would support and back for a presidential bid – terrorist supporting, criminal,treasonous, corrupt Hillary Clinton?!
This is beyond ludicrous. And they call us insane.
6-Year-old boy that was sodomized by a Muslim Brotherhood member cries as he recounts his attack. Photo courtesy of: Islam Translated
by, Raymond Ibrahim | Islam Translated
A young boy in Egypt, apparently no more than six-years-old, was recently raped by a Muslim Brotherhood member “angered” at the child for singing praises to Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, widely seen in Egypt as the hero of the revolution that saw the ousting of Muhammad Morsi and the Brotherhood in July 2013, and likely Egypt’s next president.
The details, including video interviews with the boy (whose face appears alternatively blotted out or hidden by his hands to protect his identity and dignity) and his father and mother, recently appeared on Egyptian journalist Wael Ibrashi’s television program (the same program that exposed Egypt’s “first sex-slave marriage” and how women were drinking camel urine in connection with Islamic teachings).
The story goes as follows: One day when the boy was singing praises to Sisi near his home, a neighbor, Ahmed Abu Sa ‘id (the Brotherhood member), called him over and took him to a nearby shed, saying he needed help with something. Once inside, Sa‘id locked the door, began tearing the boy’s pants off and raped him, saying, “You’re always holding pictures of this Sisi and singing his praises. Come, I’ll humiliate and break you—and your Sisi.”
The boy started screaming aloud, until the man was finished and released him. According to his mother, “I heard him crying and left my work [in the field] and ran up to meet him. He was holding his pants up. I thought some kids had beaten him!”… (She bursts into inarticulate tears when describing what actually did happen to him.)
When the mother tried to confront her son’s rapist, he and his crew beat her on the head with iron rods.
According to the boy’s father, Ahmed Abu Sa‘id is a well-known Brotherhood member, living in the neighborhood, who often appeared with leading MB members back when Morsi was in power. Sa‘id often tried to enlist the support of the boy’s father but he refused.
Similarly, the raped boy’s mother said that Sa‘id’s wife also tried to buy her support, and once offered her a considerable amount of money—much more than she was earning working in the field—to go and support the Brotherhood “sit ins” in Rabia (where rape, torture, and mass murderwere taking place).
In other words, constant refusals from the boy’s family to join and/or support the Brotherhood earned the Sa‘id family’s wrath—culminating with the boy’s rape and degradation, for daring to sing songs in praise of Sisi and the anti-Brotherhood revolution. And now Sa‘id and his Brotherhood allies are threatening the boy’s family to keep silent about the rape, or else.
Of course, none of this should be surprising, as it conforms to earlier Brotherhood patterns. For example, back in December 2012, when Egyptians in mass first rose against Muhammad Morsi, Fox News reported that “Egypt’s embattled Muslim Brotherhood regime is paying gangs of thugs to rape women and beat men who gather in Tahrir Square to protest the power grab of President Mohamed Morsi, say activists.”
This is to say nothing of the fact that, under Brotherhood leadership, rape in Egypt skyrocketed.
More broadly speaking and beyond the issue of rape, during Egypt’s presidential elections back in June 2012 (and as I reported here), Islamist parties in general and the Muslim Brotherhood in particular made perfectly clear that they would do anything—lie, cheat, steal, threaten, beat, and kill—to get what they want, for example:
One man “beat his pregnant wife to death upon learning that she had not voted for the Muslim Brotherhood candidate Muhammad Morsi.” According to police reports, “despite her pleas,” the husband “battered and bruised” her after discovering she had voted for Ahmed Shafiq, the other candidate. She died later in the hospital “from injuries sustained.”
Another 52-year-old man and “supporter of Morsi” slapped his mother for voting for Shafiq. The man took his elderly mother to the voting booth, informing her that she must vote for Morsi; after she voted, he pressed her to confirm that she did in fact vote for him—only to be told that she did not. The man “lost his temper” and slapped her in front of the other voters and electoral supervisors.
Based on the Brotherhood’s own directives, whole segments of Coptic Christians were prevented from voting. According to Al Ahram, in Upper Egypt, where millions of Copts live, “the Muslim Brotherhood blockaded entire streets, prevented Copts from voting at gunpoint, and threatened Christian families not to let their children go out and vote.”
A peasant farmer was “stabbed” by a “supporter of Morsi,” simply for putting up a picture of the secular Shafiq on his motorcycle—reminiscent of the recent rape of the boy singing praises to Sisi.
In or out of power, then, the Muslim Brotherhood continues exposing its true colors—at least to those not colorblind.
U N I T E D W E S T A N D W I T H A Y A A N
by, Reuters | The Canberra Times
Boston, Massachusetts: A private university outside Boston has decided not to award an honorary degree to a Somali-born women’s rights activist who has branded Islam violent and “a nihilistic cult of death.”
Brandeis University said it had decided not to award an honorary degree to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a former Dutch parliamentarian who has been a prominent critic of the treatment of women in Islamic society.
Ms Hirsi Ali in a 2003 interview with a Dutch newspaper said that by modern standards, the prophet Mohammed could be considered a paedophile, and in a 2007 interview with the London Evening Standard called Islam “a destructive, nihilistic cult of death.”
“We cannot overlook certain of her past statements that are inconsistent with Brandeis University’s core values,” the university said in a statement late on Tuesday. “We regret that we were not aware of these statements earlier.”
The move followed an open letter from the Council on American-Islamic Relations to the university’s president, Frederick Lawrence, saying that to do so was “unworthy of the American tradition of civil liberty and religious freedom.”
Nihad Awad, the group’s national executive director, said, “offering such an award to a promoter of religious prejudice such as Ali is equivalent to promoting the work of white supremacists and anti-Semites.”
Ms Hirsi Ali could not be reached for immediate comment.
Ms Hirsi Ali, a supporter of atheism, has been a prominent critic of the practice of female genital mutilation, the partial or total removal of external female genitalia. The practice, which causes health problems, is for cultural and religious reasons and is prevalent in 28 African nations, as well as parts of the Middle East and Asia.
Located in the Waltham suburb of Boston, Brandeis was founded in 1948 with a Jewish tradition and has about 3600 undergraduate students, according to its web site.
The school came under fire in 2009, when the school’s then-president proposed selling the $US350 million art collection at its Rose Art Museum to raise money in the midst of declining enrolment during the global financial crisis. In the face of criticism from alumni and donors who had provided much of the art, the university backtracked in 2011 opened a renovated facility to show of its collection.
- – – – – – – – – – -
Editorial Footnote: Ibrahim Hooper from the CAIR Terrorist Organization of America is a racist, Islamic supremacist and a genderphobe. He has absolutely ZERO respect for women. Watch the video above and see how he continuously disrespects Megan Kelly by interupting her and talking over her. He is simply a typical Muslim male. No respect for women at all. Simply put, he is a disrespectful piece of sh*t. Women that work for CAIR are “token” women. They are placed in low positions of power, authority and decision making, for purposes of appearance and political correctness. But they do not fool us. We see everyday what Muslim men really think of women. We see it in their actions, not their empty words.
Tariq Ramadan, Religious adviser to David Cameron. Photo source: Abidjan.net
- PM facing embarrassment over links between adviser and Islamist group
- Adviser Tariq Ramadan is grandson of Muslim Brotherhood’s founder
by, Martin Beckford | The Daily Mail | h/t Trop
David Cameron is facing embarrassment over the close links between a Government adviser on religion and an Islamist group placed under urgent investigation.
The Prime Minister last week ordered the security services to look into the Muslim Brotherhood amid fears its leaders, exiled from Egypt, are plotting terrorist attacks from London.
He said the inquiry would establish ‘the complete picture’ of the Brotherhood including its possible involvement with ‘violent extremism’ and its ‘presence here in the UK’.
But the investigation is likely to lead to red faces in Whitehall, as a scion of the Muslim Brotherhood’s founding family is a senior ministerial adviser.
Tariq Ramadan is one of 14 members of the Foreign Office’s Advisory Group on Freedom of Religion or Belief, chaired by Tory peer Baroness Warsi. He is Professor of Contemporary Islamic Studies at Oxford University, and was a member of a taskforce set up by Tony Blair after 7/7.
But Prof Ramadan, 51, is grandson of the Muslim Brotherhood’s founder Hassan al-Banna and his father Said Ramadan was a leading light.
The Swiss citizen was for several years banned from the US for ‘providing material support to a terrorist organisation’ and only let in after a long legal battle in which he argued that no link with terrorism existed.
He was kept out of France in the 1990s over supposed links to Algerian terrorists.
He lost two posts at Dutch universities for hosting a chat show on a TV channel backed by the Iranian regime and became notorious for refusing to say stoning to death should be banned outright, although calling for a moratorium.
Prime Minister David Cameron last week ordered the security services to look into the Muslim Brotherhood amid fears its leaders, exiled from Egypt, are plotting terrorist attacks from London. Photo courtesy of: The Daily Mail
Critics repeatedly accuse the smartly dressed, well-spoken scholar of seeming to be moderate when speaking to Western audiences but giving more extreme speeches in Arabic.
Douglas Murray, associate director of the Henry Jackson Society think-tank, said: ‘David Cameron should be deeply embarrassed by this. Tariq Ramadan is extremely loyal to his father and grandfather and he does not, by any means, speak out against the Muslim Brotherhood.’
A Foreign Office spokesman said: ‘Prof Ramadan has written and taught extensively on issues relating to Islam, and therefore has plenty of relevant experience to bring to the group.’
Prof Ramadan’s office in France declined to comment.
Wake up! David Cameron is a Muslim Infiltrator:
by, Mariam Rizk | AP | The Globe and Mail | h/t Trop
CAIRO, Egypt: A court in Egypt’s second-largest city sentenced two supporters of ousted President Mohammed Morsi to death on Saturday for throwing two people off the roof of a building during violent protests after the Islamist president was ousted, according to Egypt’s state news agency.
The agency said the court in Alexandria found the men guilty of murdering a child and a young man in the coastal city during mass protests that demanded Morsi’s reinstatement after he was removed from power by the military.
Video courtesy of: MEMRI.TV
The roof incident happened July 5 of last year, two days after Morsi’s ouster. It was one of the most dramatic acts of violence on a day in which 16 other people were killed in Alexandria.
Judge Sayed Abdel-Latif said he would issue the verdict against another 60 defendants charged with violence that day in another two months. It was not clear why the ruling was split into two.
One of those killed was nine-year-old Hamada Badr, who witnesses including an Associated Press journalist said was stabbed and then thrown off the roof. Another man in his twenties was hurled to his death and Morsi supporters were seen beating his lifeless body.
The father of the nine-year old said the verdict was partial vindication.
“But I want all the Brotherhood leadership tried and sentenced to death,” said Badr Hassouna.
Video footage of the incidents was repeatedly aired on national TV. It also showed one of the defendants roaming the roof raising a black flag often used by Islamic militants.
Another 12 people were killed elsewhere in Egypt that day in clashes sparked when tens of thousands of enraged Morsi supporters took to the street after a Muslim Brotherhood leader called on “defending” the ousted Islamist president who was then in military custody.
The violence set the tone for months to come. Authorities have since intensified a crackdown on Morsi supporters and dispersed protests in which over 1,000 were killed and thousands others were detained.
Last week, a court sentenced 529 Islamists to death for killing a policeman in the province of Minya, south of Cairo. Morsi and most of the Muslim Brotherhood leadership are detained, facing trials on charges ranging from murder to incitement of violence to conspiring with foreign groups to destabilize Egypt.
Almost no official has been held accountable for the killing of protesters. The government has declared the Brotherhood a terrorist group and blames it for waging a campaign of violence in Egypt.
Meanwhile, attacks on troops and police have increased, leaving hundreds dead. The Brotherhood denies it is behind the campaign of violence.
Also Saturday, airport officials said a Brotherhood leader arrested in Kuwait at Cairo’s behest was extradited to Egypt for prosecution.
Mohammed el-Qabouti is wanted for trial on suspicion he incited violence against authorities last summer. The handover of el-Qabouti is the first reported case of Cairo’s Gulf allies arresting and extraditing members of the Brotherhood to Egypt. Authorities reported his arrest in Kuwait earlier this month.
Following Saturday’s verdict, defendants in a cage in court raised the four-finger sign, a symbol of defiance associated with Morsi supporters. Families were not allowed into the court, and had to wait outside amid tight security.
Eight months after Morsi’s ouster, his supporters still protest, often sparking clashes on the streets with security forces or political opponents.
In the latest bout of violence Friday, five people were killed including a young female journalist who was shot in the head.
Four others were shot in the head and the chest, Hisham Abdel Hamid, spokesman of the forensic authority told CBC-TV Saturday. Protesters on the scene said they were attacked without warning by police with live ammunition. But the ministry of Interior said the slain were killed by protesters who carried weapons.
One of those killed was a Christian woman. Security officials said protesters pulled her out of her car when they spotted a cross inside. She was then shot, the officials said quoting witnesses. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media.
Elsewhere on Saturday, at least eight people were killed in explosion in a house where fuel was being stored for sale on the black market, the head of security in the southern province of Sohag, Maj. Gen. Ibrahim Saber said. It was not immediately clear what caused the blast, which wounded 64 people, including 25 who were in critical condition, Saber said.
Egypt is reeling from a shortage of fuel products, increasing hoarding and illegal sales.
by, Kris Zane | Western Journalism
Al-Qaeda spy and convicted felon Weiss Russell is currently working as a financial management analyst under the IRS Deputy Chief Financial Officer. As reported by Patrick Poole of PJ Media, Russell was convicted of spying for al-Qaeda operatives in 2008 for secretly accessing the FBI’s database to tip off al-Qaeda operatives who were under surveillance.
And this is rumored to be just the tip of the iceberg!
What is our Commander-in-Chief, Barack Hussein Obama, doing about al-Qaeda operatives infiltrating the IRS? Launching an investigation? Raiding IRS offices? Rounding up all the Islamists and Muslim Brotherhood operatives in his administration? None of the above. Obama has in fact welcomed Islamists into his administration with open arms.
Time to impeach Obama.
by, Mahitab Assran | Daily News Egypt
Egypt has been ranked the worst country in the Arab League states for women’s rights, according to a recent poll conducted by Thomson Reuters conduct a poll on women’s rights, with Comoros rated as the best.
The study was based on a 36 question survey, nine of which asked about the respondents’ name, age, sex, profession, employer and country of employment.
The poll tackled the 22 countries based on six different categories. First, “Women in politics” calculates women’s civil representation and presence in high public positions. “Women in society” measures tradition and cultural expectations of women and their limitations when participating in society. “Women in the economy” also evaluates their participation in the workforce and if they earn as much as a man. “Women in the family” assesses women’s right to refuse or accept marriage, at what age and their rights when separated. “Reproductive rights” generally calculates their rights in accessing healthcare and in childbearing. Finally, “Violence against women” assesses the levels of sexual assault and physical violence women suffer from in each country and whether the offender is punished.
The majority of the countries surveyed had signed or ratified the UN Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), which Egypt ratified in 1981.
Poll results show that Egypt suffers from the highest rate of sexual harassment of women in the Arab League states and the world in general, with 99.3% of women said to suffer from sexual harassment. Further, less than one percent of women who ran for elections in 2012 were actually elected. In Egypt, Muslim women are not allowed to marry non-Muslim men or they risk being criminally convicted of apostasy or turning their back on their faith.
Meanwhile, women in Lebanon, ranked 16 of 22, are not allowed to transfer their Lebanese citizenship to their foreign born children. In Mauritania, ranked 11 of 22 69% of women had to undergo female genital mutilation around the average age of one month old. Since only 2009 in Tunisia, ranked 6 of 22, non-Muslim women were allowed to inherit from their Muslim husbands. Even in Comoros, ranked first in the survey, 50% of all convicts are held for crimes related to sexual assault.
According to the poll’s methodology report, the survey only targeted workers at local, national, regional and international humanitarian, development and human rights organisations, academics, media professionals, health care providers, refugee shelters, women’s shelters, legal advisers and activists; politicians were generally avoided. None of the field research covered public opinion.
Abeer Aboul -Ella, the media advisor for the National Council for Women in Egypt expressed her “deep sorrow” for the state of Egyptian women in politics and in society, as shown in the poll.
“They refuse to give us a quota in parliament, which is the only way that will ensure our representation,” Aboul-Ella said, also lamenting the lack of women’s rights in the constitution that is currently being drafted. “Women are the one who pay the price of revolutions. When their fathers, husbands or sons die, they carry the burden of the family.”
The problem with sexual harassment in Egypt, according to Aboul-Ella, is that the law condemning the offender “is not strong enough, so the Ministry of Interior cannot take serious action.” Another law is currently being drafted but “we have to wait until it is approved by the parliament and there is currently no parliament, and so our hands are tied.”
Mozna Hassan, head of the women’s rights organisation Nazra for Feminists Studies, said that people should not be so “shocked” that the results of a poll done by an international media agency such as Reuters showed that women’s rights in Egypt are so dismal, given the increasing violence against women and growing marginalisation. “It is as if people want to only to maintain Egypt’s image on an international level,” she said, but added that ranking Egypt after countries like Saudi Arabia, where there is absolutely no participation of women on the political sphere, and Yemen, where girls marry at the ages of eight and nine is “madness”.
Hassan also criticised the fact that the poll used CEDAW values as a guide given that not all countries ratified it and those who did added reservations. Given the political circumstances of Egypt and the Arab world in general, she said, issuing such a poll at this time is “peculiar”.
Osama Abu Irshaid of American Muslims for Palestine speaks during the launch of the U.S. Council of Muslim Organizations in Washington on Wednesday, March 12, 2014. Behind and to his right is Council on American-Islamic Relations Executive Director Nihad Awad. Photo courtesy of: CNS News
by, Patrick Goodenough | CNS News | Family Security Matters
Ten U.S. Islamic organizations have come together to form a new umbrella group to serve as a “representative voice” for American Muslims, and one of their first tasks will be to carry out a census of the community.
Other focus areas for the new U.S. Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO), according to speakers at the body’s launch in Washington on Wednesday, include enhancing Muslim political engagement and participation in forthcoming elections, civil rights issues, combating “Islamophobia” and having an impact on U.S. foreign and domestic policy.
Participating organizations include high-profile groups that have been dogged by controversy, such as the Muslim American Society (MAS), founded by Muslim Brotherhood members, and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which was named by the Justice Department in 2007 as “unindicted co-conspirators” in its case against the Holy Land Foundation in Texas, subsequently found guilty of raising money for Hamas.
“The new national council’s first priority will be to build on Muslim citizenship rights by conducting a census of American Muslims to create a database that will be used to enhance civic and political participation in upcoming elections,” USCMO said in a statement.
CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad, a participant at the launch, said that Muslim organizations in 2011 had come up with a “guesstimate” of seven to eight million Muslims in the United States.
“Opponents of the Muslim community shot down the number for political reasons, to two-and-a-half, two million, and sometimes people even said half a million,” he said.
The aim of the census project would be to determine a clear idea of the number and distribution of American Muslims, by 2016.
“Muslim voters can be swing voters in key elections, especially in 2016, and we are aiming at that election to bring a more visible participation from the Muslim community,” Awad said.
Video courtesy of: CAIRtv
Another participant, Osama Abu Irshaid of American Muslims for Palestine (AMP), said Muslims “are a growing demographic, numbering in the millions, and it is time to organize ourselves so that we can fully participate productively and efficiently in the political process.”
Abu Irshaid said American Muslims’ purchasing power exceeds $170 billion, “but we want to be more than consumers in this country.”
“We want to fully participate and engage in the civic process. We also want to ward off the evils of bigotry and Islamophobia and begin to define ourselves instead of allowing others – who don’t understand us, who fear us and even hate us – tell us how we should live and worship in this country.”
Abu Irshaid said bringing American Muslims into the political process “can only enrich American foreign policy and enrich our domestic policy as well.”
One prominent anti-Islamist Muslim described the move as “a circling of the wagons” by the nation’s top Islamist organizations.
“If they were going to start an American Islamist political party those would be the founders,” the president of the non-profit American Islamic Forum for Democracy, M. Zuhdi Jasser, said early Thursday.
The USCMO launch was a sign that Islamists were “feeling the heat,” Jasser said.
“America is both getting tuned in to their anti-American agenda as well as also realizing that far more diverse anti-Islamist American Muslim groups – like our American Islamic Leadership Coalition – can provide alternative and authentic Muslim voices beyond the Islamists.”
Although a woman emceed the event, no women were visible among the leaders of the organizations at the launch. USCMO Secretary-General Oussama Jammal said the new body’s stated priorities include “empowering women by developing and supporting their leadership skills, seeking appointment of Muslim women to leadership positions, and also involving women at all levels of our community organizations and expressions.”
The founding members of the new umbrella group are The Mosque Cares, Muslim American Society, American Muslims for Palestine, Council on American-Islamic Relations, Islamic Circle of North America, Muslim Legal Fund of America, Muslim Alliance in North America, Muslim Ummah of North America, American Muslim Alliance and the Mosque Foundation of Chicago.
How many Muslims?
The size of the Muslim American community has been a point of contention. The U.S. Census Bureau does not collect religious data, but the 2008 American Religious Identification Survey, conducted by scholars at Trinity College, found the number of American adults self-identifying as Muslims to be 1.35 million, up from 1.1 million in 2001.
In 2010, the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life put the number of Muslims in the U.S. at 2.77 million.
In his “address to the Muslim world” in Cairo the previous year, however, President Obama made reference to “nearly seven million American Muslims in our country” – drawing applause for doing so from an American Muslim leader at the time.
The seven million figure has been attributed to a CAIR-sponsored 2001 survey of leaders from a representative sample of mosques, which concluded that two million Muslims were associated with a mosque (with “association” defined as at least attending Eid, the major Islamic holiday at the end of Ramadan).
Based on that number, the survey authors concluded that “estimates of a total Muslim population of 6-7 million in America seem reasonable.”
The Islamic Society of North America states that there are “close to seven million Muslims” in the U.S.
CAIR Director Nihad Awad on Capitol Hill:
Video courtesy of: CAIRtv
by, Rami Rustom | Islam Watch
Most people think terrorism is a new phenomenon since the term terrorism was only recently used a lot in the media. But actually it’s much older than that. The term was first used in 1795 during the French Revolution, but that’s not a good way to figure out how old the phenomenon is. I mean, just because a word is 200 years old doesn’t mean that the idea the word refers to is 200 years old.
What is terrorism?
To figure out how old terrorism is, we need to know what it is, in other words, how to recognize it. According to a few dictionaries I checked, terrorism is the systematic use of violence in order to bring about political change.
So there are three parts to this. The act is violence, the goal is political change, and there is a coordinated effort among a lot of people to commit the acts of violence. One thing that is missing here is why these people would think that political change would occur. Well, it’s because they know that with fear comes capitulation. In other words, if I fear that my actions will bring about punishment, then I may change my actions in order to avoid the pain of the punishment. So really the goal is two fold – there is a means, and an end. The end is political change. The means is fear.
So terrorism is a systematic effort of a population to commit violence against another population with the goal of instilling fear so that they change their political actions.
How old is terrorism?
Now back to the question of how old terrorism is, let’s go back in history to look for cases that meet this definition. One case that comes to mind, and I’m sure this isn’t the oldest case, is Islam during Muhammad’s life. Most Muslims who don’t know the history think that Islam spread by voluntary conversion but actually it spread by the sword. Kingdoms were given a choice, convert to Islam and come under the rule of Muhammad, or die by the swords of Muslims. And most kings did not capitulate to Muhammad’s demands, so what resulted was Islamic invasions of those kingdoms. So Muhammad instituted a systematic approach of using violence in order to make these kingdoms into provinces of his own kingdom, which is political change. So Muhammad was a terrorist. Not the first terrorist, but definitely one of the worst in history — if we’re counting most deaths as the worst.
To be clear, had those kingdoms provoked the Islamic nation, then we could say that Muhammad retaliated in self-defense. But that’s not what happened. Muhammad sent envoys with his letters to these kingdoms unprovoked.
So terrorism is at least 1,400 years old, but really the fundamental idea underlying terrorism is much much older than that, and it pervades our societies a lot more than most people realize. Terrorism, at its most fundamental level, is an involuntary act with the goal of changing the mind of the victim (involuntarily). To help clarify this issue, let’s consider the alternative way of “helping” someone to change their mind. The only other way is voluntarily. Which raises the question: How do people change their minds voluntarily? The answer is simple, by discussion.
Why do people resort to terrorism?
In any given disagreement between two or more people, in order for agreement to be reached, all parties involved must find an idea that everybody involved agrees to. Otherwise, they are still in disagreement. Now, in a society where dissent is considered ok, if a disagreement does not end with agreement, then nobody involved retaliates against another with violence, and so they “agree to disagree”. That means that they still disagree about the issue they were discussing, but they agree on the narrow matter of leaving that disagreement alone. But, in a society where dissent is not ok, if a disagreement does not end with agreement, then one or more of the individuals involved may commit violence in order to force the dissenters to “change” their minds. Note that I put “change” in quotes because they don’t actually change their minds, and instead what they do is change their behavior in an effort to prevent retaliation from the terrorist.
Now that we’ve established the fundamental difference between terrorism and non-terrorism, let’s consider how pervasive this idea is in our societies. Who do you know that tries to “change” other people’s minds involuntarily? Parents. Parents often will punish their kids for disagreeing with them, as a means of causing them to “change” their minds. But as I said earlier, they don’t actually change their minds, and what actually happens is that they change their behavior in an effort to avoid the pain of punishment. Parents will also raise their voices, as a means of reminding the child of the punishment that will be delivered if the child doesn’t “change” his mind. Now, whether or not the parent intends to raise his voice as a means of instilling fear doesn’t matter. The act of raising one’s voice when somebody disagrees with you was designed to cause someone to involuntarily “change” their mind. So just because the parent doesn’t see it that way, doesn’t mean that the child is not fearful of his parent. My point is that what matters is whether or not the child is scared from the parent’s voice being raised, rather than whether or not the parent intends to instill fear.
I suspect that terrorism, defined as the act of instilling fear in order to “change” someone’s mind, is older than human civilization.
What’s the solution to terrorism?
So what’s the solution to terrorism? Well, as I said before, some societies embrace dissent, while other’s don’t. So what’s the critical difference between them? The difference is the tradition of criticism. If the people in a disagreement have a good attitude towards criticism, then they will enjoy their discussion. And if they don’t, then they won’t. More importantly, having a good attitude towards criticism means understanding that disagreement between people is common and ok. Dissent is good. Criticism is good. But to understand this, one must understand what criticism is, and what is its purpose.
A criticism is an explanation of a flaw in an idea. If the criticism is true, then the idea it targets is rendered false. Now I’ve made this sound pretty simple, but it’s a lot more complicated than this. For one thing, people are fallible, which means that we can be wrong about any of our ideas. So this means that we can be wrong about our criticisms too, since criticisms are themselves ideas. For this reason, it’s important to keep even our criticisms open to criticism.
So how does criticism work? In other words, what does criticism do to ideas? Well, when we have an idea, and if we find a flaw in it, then that idea is rendered false. But that doesn’t mean that everything about that idea is wrong. As far as we know, some parts of the idea are right, everything except the flaw. So one way to move forward is to create a variation of the original idea, by changing the flawed part such that the new variation doesn’t have the known flaw. So in this way, the criticism, together with the brainstormed variation, acts as a means of evolving the idea from flawed to less flawed.
So criticism is necessary for our ideas to evolve. Criticism is necessary for the evolution of our knowledge. With each criticism and the correction that follows it, we are evolving our knowledge. This is an important and fundamental feature of how evolution works. And it’s the same feature that genetic evolution has.
Genetic evolution works by variation and selection. Genes are created by mutation, which results in variations of the precursor genes, and then the fit genes are selected for when the hosts of the unfit genes die due to having unfit genes. Analogously, ideas are created by variation, and then the good ideas are selected for when the bad ideas are criticized.
Human knowledge is created by guesses and criticism, analogous to how genetic knowledge is created by variation and selection. So criticism is a good thing. It is required in order for our knowledge to improve. Without criticism, our knowledge stays static. Without criticism, our knowledge can’t evolve.
Now the tradition of criticism is not a new thing. The ancient Greeks had it, though they lost it later. The tradition of criticism sprang up again in the 1500’s or so, resulting in what we now call The Enlightenment. The Enlightenment was many things, and science was one of them. Science has a strong tradition of criticism. Scientists expect to have their ideas criticized by other scientists, and they try their best to make their theories more criticizable, so that flaws can be more easily found.
The Enlightenment resulted in a boom of knowledge growth, one that we are still experiencing today. It started in Italy, but many other cultures have adopted this tradition of criticism since then, and so they too have joined The Enlightenment era.
For terrorism to stop, people must adopt the tradition of criticism. For a society to stop forcing it’s will on other societies, that society must adopt the tradition of criticism. Analogously, for a parent to stop terrorizing his children, he must adopt the tradition of criticism.
by, Rana Tanveer | The Express Tribune
LAHORE, Pakistan: Residents of Okara district allegedly vandalised an under-construction church and desecrated a cross, The Express Tribune has learnt on Tuesday.
The Christian residents in the district started construction of the church on a two-kanal piece of land owned by one of their community members.
Only a day after they had installed a cross on the partially constructed building, a group of local Muslims — allegedly over political differences – damaged the building and the land by ploughing the ground with the help of a tractor.
Javed Iqbal Masih — one of the Christian residents — told The Express Tribune that despite repeated requests, the group of 10 people damaged the building first with their hands and later with a tractor in the presence of local Christians.
Investigation officer Muhammad Javed said that police have registered an FIR under section 295-A and 506-B of Pakistan Penal Code against ten people for damaging the church and defaming the cross. He said police were raiding different areas to arrest the accused.
While speaking to The Express Tribune, Human Liberation Commission Pakistan chairperson Aslam Parvaiz Sahotra said the Christian community was not protected in Pakistan and that they face discrimination at every level.
by, Ryan Mauro | The Clarion Project | h/t Creeping Sharia
How can the government use chaplains from a group that they know is extremist and involved in terror funding? U.S. Military Hiring Muslim Brotherhood Chaplains – Again!
The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity, is proudly announcing that the U.S. military is again using their chaplains for active-duty service after a 15-year lull.
ISNA has a well-documented extremist history. In 1991, the Muslim Brotherhood listed ISNA as one of its main fronts. Declassified FBI memos said ISNA is a component of the Muslim Brotherhood, who sees its “work in America as a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within.”
In 2007, the U.S. government labeled ISNA a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity and an unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorism-financing trial involving the Holy Land Foundation funneling money to Hamas. The label was upheld in 2009 because of “ample” evidence linking ISNA to Hamas. Last year, ISNA’s Canadian affiliate lost its status as a charity because of its accounting discrepancies and links to Pakistani terrorists.
The two chaplains endorsed by ISNA are Sgt. Mustapha Rahouchen, who will be used by the U.S. Army, and Captain Rafael Lantiqua, who was chosen by the U.S. Air Force.
In April 2013, the Clarion Project broke the story that the U.S. Air Force Chaplain Corps had paid ISNA almost $5,000 for two advertisements in its magazine. When we contacted the Air Force about ISNA’s ties to the Brotherhood, we received the following response:
“The Islamic Society of North America is one of many religious organizations recognized by the Department of Defense that satisfy the ecclesiastical requirements to endorse qualified religious ministry professionals to serve as chaplains within the Military Departments.”
This story speaks to the broader threat posed by Islamist involvement in Muslim chaplain programs.
The Muslim chaplaincy services for the military and prisons were started by Abdurrahman Alamoudi, who was convicted in 2003 on terrorism-related charges. He later admitted that he was a secret member of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.
ISNA is one of the groups that the U.S. military trusts to certify Muslim chaplains. The military’s former endorsing agent was Dr. Louay Safi, an unindicted co-conspirator in the trial of Palestinian Islamic Jihad leader Sami al-Arian. Safi, like Alamoudi, later admitted to having been a Brotherhood operative.
Safi wrote in 2003, “The war against the apostates [non-believers of Islam] is carried out not to force them to accept Islam, but to enforce the Islamic law and maintain order.”
He continued: “It is up to the Muslim leadership to assess the situation and weigh the circumstances as well as the capacity of the Muslim community before deciding the appropriate type of jihad. At one stage, Muslims may find that jihad through persuasion or peaceful resistance is the best and most effective method to achieve just peace.”
In 2004, he said that the “assertion by ‘world leaders’ that the war on terrorism is not a war on Islam is nothing but a piece of propaganda and disinformation that was meant to appease Western Muslims and to maintain the coalition against terrorism.”
He was later suspended from working on U.S. military bases because of a criminal investigation. Safi is now working with the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood.
Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, a Muslim activist opposed to Islamism who served in the U.S. Navy, wrote in 2010 that a friend of his in the U.S. Army recently told him of his troubling interaction with an active-duty Muslim chaplain.
His friend asked the imam what his response would be if a Muslim soldier asked him if Islam prevented him from participating in combat against fellow Muslims. The answer should have been easy: Serve your country as you swore to do. Instead, the imam said he’d tell the soldier that he’s not qualified to answer the question and to ask ISNA.
Former Defense Department Inspector-General Joseph Schmitz was alarmed enough by loopholes in the system of vetting chaplains that allowed extremist organizations like ISNA’s involvement that hewrote a letter in 2010 describing his efforts to close them. He revealed in 2004 that he urged the Pentagon to adopt a policy that would prevent extremist groups, Muslim or otherwise, from involvement in the chaplaincy program.
He said that a policy should disqualify groups that support violent sedition, have an endorsing agent with a criminal history, are on a terrorism watch-list or have leaders convicted on terrorism-related charges. The Armed Forces Chaplains Board rejected his advice because it was “legally problematic.”
Here’s what’s really “problematic”: The U.S. government says ISNA is a Muslim Brotherhood entity and labeled it an unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorism trial. That same government is using ISNA to pick military chaplains and is a top outreach partner of the U.S. government.