Jihad Watch

The Wall Street Journal is very pleased that the U.S. military is using ex-jihadists to fight against those who are still jihadists in Afghanistan. It's all in "U.S. Teams Up With Ex-Mujahedeen" by Yochi J. Dreazen, October 10.

He said that there are key differences between the two generations of Islamic fighters. Capt. Suleimanjan says that while the mujahedeen tried to avoid harming civilians, the Taliban have killed Afghan engineers working on roads and burned down several schools. "They use the name of Islam, but it's fake," he said.

With Hamas trying to keep the peace -- in yet another attempt to show itself as a moderate group with whom the West should play ball.

"Palestinian gunmen clash in Gaza," by Ali Waked for Ynet, October 10 (thanks to James):

Exchanges of fire have been reported Saturday in a Gaza neighborhood between members of Army of Islam and gunmen belonging to an al-Qaeda-affiliated group....

The shootout reportedly included the firing of at least five mortar shells. Meanwhile, Hamas forces rushed to the scene and surrounded the site of the battle.

On August 14th, Hamas members clashed with loyalists of a Salafi organization associated with al-Qaeda in the Strip. Hamas forces surrounded a mosque in Rafah after the Salafi group's sheikh declared that the Gaza Strip is an Islamic Emirate and that his followers belong to al-Qaeda and are loyal to Osama Bin-Laden. The sheikh was killed in the subsequent firefights....

MOGADISHU, Oct. 10 (Xinhua) -- Somalia's Hezbul Islam rebel group on Saturday threatened to attack UN offices planned to be reopened in Mogadishu, and ordered local and international non-governmental organizations to register with it, officials of the Islamist group said.

The group, which controls parts of central and southern Somalia, said it would carry out attacks on UN offices once the plan to reopen them in Somalia's capital was carried out.

The Somali government and UN officials this week discussed ways of relocating the UN Somalia office, currently in Nairobi, Kenya, to Somalia's capital Mogadishu. They agreed that the offices will be reopened after expert advice on the issue was considered.

Spokesman for Hezbul Islam, Mohamed Osman Arus, said his faction would target the UN offices in Mogadishu and "escalate" the attacks against the Somali government forces and African Union(AU) peacekeepers in Mogadishu if the offices of the UN was relocated to the capital city.

The group accuses the UN of supporting the Somali government and the nearly 5,000 AU peacekeeping soldiers deployed in Mogadishu, which the rebel group considers as an invasion force.

The UN Political Office for Somalia (UNPOS) and other UN agencies that support the fragile Somali government have their offices and staff in neighboring Kenya because of the deteriorating security situation in Somalia....

More on the jihad-enabling Goldstone Report. "Islamic Jihad: UN probe into Gaza factions will not criminalize them," from the Ma'an News Agency, October 10 (thanks to James):

Bethlehem - Ma'an - The Goldstone report must be fully supported and every opportunity to realize its recommendations seized, Islamic Jihad's Secretary General Ramadan Shalah said Saturday.

Investigations of the Gaza resistance factions will not criminalize them, Shalah explained, "we are used to hearing that, but we cannot reject the report because it includes the condemnation of the resistance, it is more important that it includes the condemnation of the Israelis and the prosecution of its leaders in the international forums."...

"State Department Lauds Obama's Nobel Peace Prize by Making Jab at Bush," from
FOXNews, October 9 (thanks to Weasel Zippers):

In a clear dig at former President George W. Bush, a State Department spokesman compared President Obama's Nobel Peace Prize to the flying footwear his predecessor faced in Iraq.

"From our standpoint, you know, we think that this gives us a sense of momentum ... when the United States has accolades tossed its way, rather than shoes," State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley told reporters on Friday.

Crowley was referring to a 2008 incident in which an Iraqi reporter hurled his shoe at Bush during a news conference in Baghdad. The act of protest struck a chord with millions in the Arab and Muslim worlds who had been captivated and angered by daily images of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

Obama, who has publicly committed to improving America's image abroad, was named recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize for, the Nobel committee said, his initiatives to reduce nuclear arms, ease tensions with the Muslim world and stress diplomacy and cooperation rather than unilateralism.....

Whatever the case may be, there is no clear mission in Afghanistan, no clear idea of victory, and no understanding of the jihad doctrine that motivates not only the Taliban but others in Afghanistan -- and all that is a recipe for disaster. "U.S. troops abandon remote Afghan base where 8 were killed," by Laura King for the Los Angeles Times, October 10:

Kabul, Afghanistan - American troops have abandoned an isolated firebase where eight U.S. soldiers were killed in a fierce assault by insurgents last weekend, military officials said Friday.

The departure from the base in the Kamdesh district of Nuristan province, in northeastern Afghanistan, was part of a previously planned "repositioning" of troops, NATO's International Security Assistance Force said in a statement.

The Taliban, in its own statement, said it had driven the Americans out.

The daylong battle Oct. 3 in Kamdesh, in which at least four Afghan troops and 100 attackers also were reported killed, was reminiscent of a much-scrutinized engagement in the area in July 2008. In that battle, nine U.S. soldiers were killed and their remote firebase was nearly overrun.

In last week's attack, insurgents managed to penetrate the base's perimeters, military officials have acknowledged, a rare occurrence in clashes between Taliban fighters and the much better armed Western forces.

The pullout from the battered Kamdesh base was described as part of a larger strategy laid out by U.S. Army Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, commander of Western forces in Afghanistan. His counterinsurgency plan calls for troops to concentrate their attention on populated areas rather than continue to staff isolated outposts that are vulnerable to attack and have little effect on the insurgents' ability to move in a given area....

This looks like another attempt by Hamas to portray itself as "moderate," and thereby gull the Infidels into fatal concessions. "Gaza militants say Hamas stops their rocket fire," by Nidal al-Mughrabi for Reuters, October 10:

GAZA (Reuters) - A Palestinian armed group accused the Gaza Strip's Hamas rulers on Saturday of preventing its men from firing rockets at Israel, a sensitive allegation for the Islamist faction as it pursues mediated deals with the Jewish state.

Hamas police intercepted Islamic Jihad rocket crews on three occasions over the past month, a group official said, foiling their bids to avenge Israeli fire on Gaza and to show solidarity with Palestinian protests over a contested Jerusalem shrine.

"We have been prevented from launching attacks," the Islamic Jihad official told Reuters, adding that Hamas had also scrapped a planned rally by the group and arrested two of its members in a dispute over control of a mosque in northern Gaza....

Maybe it was just a faulty gas jet. Maybe it was just a wiring problem. Could have been anything. But there have been some interesting stories over the years from Islamic schools in other countries:

July 2009: Bomb kills nine at imam's house used as Islamic school in Pakistan
April 2007: 22 arrested for bombmaking in Islamic religious school raid in Afghanistan
July 2006: Jihadist killed by his own grenade at religious school in Afghanistan
September 2004: Nine prosecuted for bomb-making at Qur'an recital class in Indonesia

Am I saying that that was what was happening in Syracuse? No, I am not. But I doubt that investigators are even looking into that possibility, because to do so would be "Islamophobic." And that's the problem. Because it could happen here, even if it didn't in Syracuse Thursday.

"Cause of explosion at Syracuse Islamic school still undetermined," by Robert A. Baker for The Post-Standard, October 9 (thanks to Steve):

Syracuse, NY -- Syracuse fire investigators have not yet determined the cause of an explosion Thursday at the Ihsan School of Excellence, a private Islamic school on West Onondaga Street....

A cause for the explosion in the school's basement will possibly be released on Monday, Galloway said.

Western countries have poured billions into initiatives like this in Afghanistan and elsewhere, and they still don't like us. The South African mufti Ebrahim Desai put paid to any good that hearts-and-minds efforts might do a few years ago when he said: "In simple the Kuffaar [unbelievers] can never be trusted for any possible good they do. They have their own interest at heart."

"Germany to send 1,200 police to Afghanistan," from The Local, October 10 (thanks to C. Cantoni):

Germany is set to send 1,200 police to Afghanistan to train local law enforcement in a major boost to its commitment to the war-torn country, news magazine Der Spiegel reported Saturday.

An official request for the officers would come in the next week from NATO, the magazine reported, citing sources within the transatlantic alliance.

The German officers would be needed for the "NATO Training Mission Afghanistan," which is due to start in April.

Under the program, some 10,000 foreign instructors would train the Afghan security forces as part of a major push by NATO to ready the strife-torn country to manage its own security affairs.

This is seen as vital if countries such as Germany, the United States and Great Britain are to begin withdrawing their military forces from the country....

Iran's ambassador to the UN, Mohammad Khazaee, sent a letter of protest to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in which he wrote that "there is no explanation for Israel's continuing threats against Tehran".

Of course, it couldn't have anything to do with the Thug-In-Chief Ahmadinejad saying things like this: "This regime (Israel) will not last long. Do not tie your fate to it ... This regime has no future. Its life has come to an end."

He was referring to an interview given by former Deputy Defense Minister Ephraim Sneh to the Sunday Times in which he said that if Iran were not further sanctioned by this Christmas Israel would attack the country.

Sneh told the paper that if Israel were forced to attack the Islamic Republic on its own it would do so, remarks the Iranian ambassador deemed "irresponsible".

He said he hoped the UN would take steps against such comments. "Remarks such as these, stated once in a while by Israeli leaders, are no more than sorry excuses aimed at avoiding supplying answers regarding Israel's nuclear arsenal and deflecting public awareness from the crimes and terror Israel commits in the region," he said....

Chutzpah!

$13,350 from the group that wants to destroy the West from within

As I noted last December, when it was first revealed that Ellison's Hajj was paid for by the Muslim American Society:

The Muslim Brotherhood "must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions." -- "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America," by Mohamed Akram, May 19, 1991.

What does that have to do with Congressman Ellison? Everything. The Muslim American Society paid for his Hajj. And what is the Muslim American Society? The Muslim Brotherhood.

"In recent years, the U.S. Brotherhood operated under the name Muslim American Society, according to documents and interviews. One of the nation's major Islamic groups, it was incorporated in Illinois in 1993 after a contentious debate among Brotherhood members." -- Chicago Tribune, 2004.

Imagine if a conservative Congressman had taken a trip that had been paid for by a Christian group that was, according to one of its own documents, dedicated to "eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house" so that Christian law would replace the U.S. Constitution. I expect we would hear more of an outcry than we are hearing about this.

But in this Star Tribune article, the controversy is all about the cost and Ellison's reporting. No one seems concerned about the nature of the Muslim American Society.

"Ellison reveals cost of trip to Mecca: $13.5K," by Kevin Diaz for the Star Tribune, October 8 (thanks to Paul):

WASHINGTON - After a months-long review by a U.S. House ethics panel, Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., has disclosed the amount of his privately-paid trip to Mecca in December.

The trip, paid for by the Muslim American Society of Minnesota, cost $13,350, Ellison said Thursday.

The two-week trip to Saudi Arabia, which Ellison described as a personal religious pilgrimage, or Hajj, prompted little discussion until June when Ellison filed financial travel reports that failed to disclose the amount the Muslim group had paid for his travel.

In releasing the amount on Thursday, Ellison held to his previous assertion that he was following the instructions of the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, commonly known as the ethics committee.

"I never had a moral objection to giving the number out," said Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress. "But the rules said I didn't have to, so I didn't. Now I am."...

TEL AVIV - The Obama administration was instrumental in facilitating a partnership deal that will see billions of dollars in trade flow between the European Union and Syria that may revitalize Damascus' stagnant economy, Egyptian and other Palestinian diplomatic sources told WND.

U.S. opposition was a main factor in the deal being delayed since it was drawn up as a draft pact in 2004. The deal is worth an estimated $7 billion a year for the Syrian economy. The Bush administration was particularly opposed to Syria's interference in Lebanese affairs and Damascus' military alliance with Iran.

According to the Egyptian and Palestinian diplomatic sources, the Obama administration dropped American opposition to the deal without first extracting a concession from Syria to end its alliance with Iran.

The sources told WND the White House received pledges from Syria to collaborate with the West in Lebanon and Iraq and to play a more constructive role in the Middle East.

"Syria was clear there was no promise to end its ties to Iran," said a diplomatic source....

Individuals matter. Oriana Fallaci, and latterly Magdi Allam, have had a great and salutary influence on the understanding of Islam in Italy. Geert Wilders is a symbol, and more than a symbol, as Pim Fortuyn was before him, of a stance to be taken against the islamization of Europe. Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who along with another half-dozen apostates from Islam, deserves -- and is unlikely ever to get -- the Nobel Prize for Peace, has had an effect on those who, because she is from Somalia, can tell certain home truths about Islam without that all-purpose idiotic charge of "racism" being flung at her so as to silence her, or at least to make those who might stay to listen hesitate instead, and possibly walk on.

And if individuals matter, and they do, the individual who most intrigued me today was not the winner of the Nobel Prize for Peace but, rather, the Chairman (as of 2009) of the Norwegian Nobel Prize Committee. So I turned to Wikipedia, which sometimes is awful, and sometimes is most useful and informative. In this case, Wikipedia did not disappoint.

And I wanted to share what I found out. So you are free to go to Wikipedia yourself, or you may prefer to read what I have arranged, with some interpolated explanatory phrases, in an order, and with a filleting, designed to highlight the most relevant parts of the works and days of the Chairman of the Committee. His name is Thorbjørn Jagland.

The biographical information is below.

Everything below in italics is taken from the Wikipedia entry on Mr. Jagland:

This morning's winner from the Hate Mail Bag comes to us from Orléans in France, but it ain't the France of Maurice Chevalier anymore:

this a message for all kafiran who working on this site.What iare your purpose on writing on my religion? money? discrimination? clash of civilisation? you have invented nothing you just repeat the same bullshit,you think that you writte a new page of history but it just a repi for you ,Allah is the greatest and you are nothink.you are not muslim you want to make it in order to believe you you working for sionniste and illuminati people.America will loose control and his soul like jude!Stop the intox you know nothing stop to write about my religion muslim are all terrorist it's because you provok them,9111 has never being exist! when you kill and rape your children in your church are they any muslim to make you a war for that? so when you see some muslims who are not necessarly muslim making a battlefight between us why are you going like dogs to them in order to make a deal why it's your bullshit? do yopu belive that we rae all stupidd like you? continue to sell your soul the paradise is just for simple minds not a degenerate people like yankees like you! die to sioniste and israel and sure america north!

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Audacious. Brazen. Assertive. "Six soldiers dead in attack on Pakistan army HQ," by Khurram Shahzad for AFP, October 10:

RAWALPINDI, Pakistan -- Heavily-armed militants tried to storm Pakistan's army headquarters on Saturday, with six soldiers and four rebels killed in an audacious attack near the capital Islamabad, officials said.

Six insurgents armed with automatic weapons and grenades shot their way through one checkpost in the garrison town of Rawalpindi, before being stopped by security forces at a second post. Two militants have fled, officials said.

Pakistan has seen a surge in attacks blamed on Taliban rebels in the past week, as the insurgents vow to take bloody revenge for the death of their leader Baitullah Mehsud in a US drone missile attack in August.

"The terrorists were wearing army uniform and were armed with sophisticated weapons and grenades," army spokesman Major General Athar Abbas said on state-run television....

His deputy Colonel Attique ur Rehman told AFP: "Six soldiers were martyred in the attack."...

"Martyred." So in this case both sides claim to be fighting for Islam.

"Human Rights vs. Sharia: Violence Against Women," by Valentina Colombo for Hudson NY, October 5:

The great irony of the recent International Conference on Violence Against Women hosted by the Italian Ministry for Equal Opportunities, is that if the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Violence Against Women (CEDAW), ratified by 185 countries, or over 90% of the United Nations, were implemented, there would be no need for this conference.

One if the main problems is the distance between laws, international conventions and treaties - and their implementation.

In Islamic countries, for example, although 46 out of 57 members of the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) ratified it, they did so with "reservations." It seems there are Muslim intellectuals and human rights defenders who are still ambivalent about pursuing engagement with Islam and Islamic law, and gender equality and women's empowerment in Muslim societies.

Even though the 1990 Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, the 1994 Charter on Human Rights, and the 2005 OIC Covenant on the Rights of the Child in Islam indicate that the relationship between Islam and Human Rights is crucial - - due to the place of Islam and Islamic law in the social, cultural, political, and legal affairs of states' parties - CEDAW has more "reservations" placed on it than any other Human Rights treaty. States' parties identified as Islamic have placed "reservations" even broader in scope and ground, maintaining that they will not implement any article against the principles of sharia. The Convention ends up, therefore, as though they had never signed it.

In October 2000, even the Saudi Government signed the Convention, but now is Saudia Arabia, as someone said, women are not persons: they cannot drive - they cannot do anything - without their "guardian's" permission. Is this a contradiction? Not at all: Saudi Arabia signed CEDAW with the following "reservations":

· "1. In case of contradiction between any term of the Convention and the norms of Islamic law, the Kingdom is not under obligation to observe the contradictory terms of the Convention.

· "2. The Kingdom does not consider itself bound by paragraph 2 of article 9 of the Convention and paragraph 1 of article 29 of the Convention."...

M. Cherif Bassiouni, distinguished emeritus yada yada, was there too. Sharif Sheikh Ahmed is part of the Islamic Courts Union (ICU). In Fall 2007 I published an article in the Journal of International Security Affairs showing the ICU's bloodthirsty Islamic supremacism. Here is an excerpt:

[...] For its troubles, the regime received an endorsement from none other than Osama bin Laden. In a message circulated on the Internet in late June, bin Laden exhorted Somalis: "You have no other means for salvation unless you commit to Islam, put your hands in the hands of the Islamic Courts to build an Islamic state in Somalia." Meanwhile, foreign Islamists were hastening to aid the new regime in Somalia. The United Nations Security Council reported in November 2006 that the Islamic Republic of Iran was supplying weapons to the ICU in an attempt to obtain uranium in return.

Meanwhile, the ICU appeared to bear out Bashir Goth's fears. The Courts forbade music (which is prohibited according to strict Islamic law), dancing and soccer within days of taking power. Women began to don Saudi dress, which covered their faces, rather than traditional Somali garb, which did not. And ICU militiamen proved ready to enforce Islamic law with an iron fist: after banning all movies and television viewing, jihadists shot and killed two people who were watching a World Cup soccer match in early July.

That September, Mogadishu youth gave a hint that the new Islamic regime was not popular with all Somalis. They responded to an ICU attempt to break up their viewing of another soccer match by burning tires and throwing stones at ICU militiamen. But the implementation of the strictest sharia provisions remained high on the ICU's list of priorities both before and after this show of resistance. Raids in Mogadishu led to 60 arrests for the crime of movie-watching. Women were forbidden to swim at Mogadishu's Leedo beach.

The ICU also moved to muzzle the press, imposing "rules of conduct" on journalists. These included a prohibition on the publication or dissemination of "information contrary to the Muslim religion, the public interest or the interest of the nation," as well as "information likely to create conflicts between the population and the Council of Islamic Courts." Journalists were required to reveal their sources, "must not serve foreign interests," and "must not publish or disseminate elements of a foreign culture contrary to Islamic culture or promoting bad behavior, such as nudity on film." Finally, "the media must not employ the terms which infidels use to refer to Muslims such as 'terrorists,' 'extremists,' etc."

That last bit sounds like something that would very much appeal to Brave Ahmed. But the larger question is -- why would these putative moderates, Bassiouni and Rehab, go to a reception for the leader of a draconian Sharia regime that is waging bloody jihad?

Bassiouni and Brave Ahmed are welcome to contact me with explanations. But I won't be waiting by the phone.

"Executive Director Ahmed Rehab Attends Reception for Somalian President," from CAIR-Chicago, October 5:

CAIR-Chicago's Executive Director, Ahmed Rehab, today attended a private reception for Somali President Sharif Sheikh Ahmed at DePaul University. The event was hosted by the Univeristy in advance of the Somali President's speech at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs.

The Dean of DePaul University's Law School and Distinguished Professor of Law Cherif Bassiouni greeted the President's entourage. About 20 academics and civic leaders were in attendance.

President Ahmed thanked the University and expressed hope that it would help Somalia charter a brighter future in terms of educational and humanitarian opportunities.

[...] Jamal Khashoggi, who is the editor and publisher of the influential Saudi daily Al-Watan noted that he believes Mr. Obama won the Peace prize for his overtures to the Arab and Islamic world, and especially for his June address at Cairo University.

" It is a good sign and it is very quick for a president to receive the Nobel Prize even though he didn't finish a whole year in his term," said Khashoggi. "But, his speech in Cairo was a very good blueprint for peace. He did not only address Israeli's interests as American presidents usually do, he addressed also Palestinians concerns and rights. Not only Palestinians ... he even talked to Hamas. That was really good. I was there in Cairo and I was very much impressed. It is a very good step. I just hope that Hamas and others in the Palestinian camp will realize that."

The popular, Saudi-owned Al-Arabiya TV broke into its regular news programming to make the announcement that President Obama had won the prize, noting that the President had taken "many extraordinary steps in trying to achieve a rapprochement with the Arab and Islamic world."

Read it all.

But...but...it's a book of peace! "Picture of evil: Bloodthirsty German Al Qaeda fanatic poses with 2ft-long knife for beheading British soldiers in Afghanistan," from the Daily Mail, October 9 (thanks to all who sent this in):

An Al Qaeda fanatic who trains fellow Europeans to fight in Afghanistan has given a stark warning to our troops - by posing with a 2ft-long beheading knife.

The bearded terrorist, identified as 'Abu Askar the German', belongs to one of Osama Bin Laden's 'foreign legions' fighting alongside the Taliban.

In a new terror video posted online he vows to 'achieve a victory for Islam' using the huge blade, which is inscribed with an Arabic passage from the Quran....

Expect Honest Ibe Hooper and Brave Ahmed Rehab to explain to Abu Askar how he is getting the Koran's peaceful message all wrong, wrong, wrong. Ibe? Ahmed? Anyone? Anyone?

The intrepid Austrian freedom fighter E.S.W. reports on our tour of three mosques in Berlin last Sunday:

Last Sunday I entered the surreal world of cultural enrichment in Berlin. Being from Vienna, where the Socialist government has given the multiculturalists a free hand for the past century, I thought I was already used to the sight of hijabed women of all backgrounds, with countless children in tow. Well, I was in for an unpleasant surprise.

Robert Spencer and I safaried through heavily enriched areas of Berlin, with Berlin-BPE member Uwe Morowski kind enough to act as our guide. It was the day after Germany's Reunification Day, which has been turned into an Open House day for Muslims, a day on which they hope to open their hearts and ...., well, mosques to more or less unsuspecting visitors interested in joining the Religion of Peace. It must have been a hugely successful day, requiring rest for everybody, because Robert and I visited three very different mosques, two of which were deserted.

The first mosque was owned by DITIB (http://www.ditib.de/, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish-Islamic_Union_for_Religious_Affairs), a religious organization which is part of the Turkish embassy in Germany and as such enjoys diplomatic immunity. DITIB is in charge of all imams preaching in Germany, with the Turkish ministry of religious affairs, the Diyanet, in charge of the content of all Friday sermons.

We entered the mosque itself, which was empty except a mumbling old man crouching on the floor, all but ignoring three infidels, one without the usually prerequisite head covering. We walked about, pretending admiration, and were out soon. Nothing really to see. The courtyard, however, was a lot more information-friendly. The wall sported some interesting posters. One showed a girl covering her face with her hands and the text: "Domestic violence and what to do about it". DITIB will help you in case of: family conflicts and problems; problems with education, school and puberty; (drug) addiction; crisis situations; domestic violence; sexual abuse; marriage, separation and divorce; debt; family reunification; questions regarding residence permits; questions regarding public institutions; and last, but not least: DISCRIMINATION!

One photograph shows us in front of an office with a sign saying: "Consul/Attaché for consular and religious affairs".

We happened upon the next mosque by chance as we peered through a dark window and saw a young boy cowering on the floor. A young man waved us to the entrance and politely asked us to enter. Since I pretended not to speak any German, and Uwe was not part of the mosque, a man who appeared to be Syrian was quickly summoned, shaking Robert's and Uwe's hand, but ignoring me completely. Having lived in Muslim-Arab countries for a number of years, I did not expect anything else. However, the feeling is one of utter humiliation every time. The man proudly showed us the mosque which was still under construction, and with its elaborate arabesques and ornate dome, clearly showed signs that enormous expenditures had been made. There were children running around everywhere as well as young girls, some no older than nine or ten years, in full hijab mode.

Robert and Uwe were then invited to a glass of tea, while I was "allowed" to venture to the basement. As I walked down the stairs I saw only women with headscarves milling around. I was the only one sporting blond hair. It was interesting to note, though, that no one felt bothered by my presence. I unpacked my camera and took some photographs, fully aware that I might be asked to remove the camera and perhaps even myself. But no one cared or even looked at me.

The basement room was filled with racks of clothes; pants, dresses, shirts as well as hijabs were sold at very cheap prices (about a euro a piece!). In the back of the room I witnessed four veiled girls performing their prayers oblivious to the noise level.

At one table I was approached by a young lady who asked if she could help me. I shrugged, pretending not to understand her. She unpacked her rudimentary German skills and proceeded to tell me she was a kindergarten teacher, originally from Morocco, married to a Turk. Their two-year-old daughter does not speak any other language besides German. She was very friendly, pretty, and not out to dawa-ize me. I asked her where all the clothes came from. She tried to explain that it was shopkeepers who donated the clothes. My question - "Why so cheap?" - was met with a simple answer: "Because they [the shopowners] are Muslim." She declined to have her photo taken with me - "My brother doesn't approve" - and I took my leave. After a while I found all the hijabs stifling and returned back to the men, Uwe and Robert.

The last mosque we entered was literally a dump. Garbage strewn all over the courtyard. No one to be seen. Only some Turkish TV blasting from somewhere. There was a faint smell of dead or decayed meat. Back outside we took a closer look at the signs: The mosque had a butchery on its premises. That explained it.

Soon it was time for me to head back south to Vienna. I left Uwe and Robert, who headed off to have a beer or two, while I took the underground to the airport. The underground ride was an enriching experience in itself: A group of young Turkish boys, all dressed in expensive shirts and jeans, entered the train and proceeded to annoy riders by talking very loudly, almost shouting at each other, speaking a mixture of poor German and Turkish. One of the boys started hitting the handles and was reprimanded by a lady sitting across from me. "Why are you doing that? Can you stop right now." He didn't listen and continued banging for no apparent reason. The entire scene was a simple bullying match. He was bored and wanted to annoy people. I thought to myself, "These boys will one day enter the workforce? God help us." Before anyone accuses me of racism, I will add that yes, indigenous German and Austrian boys who belong to a group can get on older people's nerves. What shocked me was the air of superiority and arrogance these German-Turkish boys exhibited, an arrogance they have no reason to have. They were too young to be arrogant.

There was a collective sigh of relief when they got off the train.

And I was relieved to reach the airport and my final destination safe and sound.

When the EORN hired him, it is virtually certain that no one asked him any questions about what he thought about jihad, Sharia, Israel, republican government, freedom of speech, etc. Honest answers probably would not have been forthcoming, but it is extremely naive and stupid of authorities such as these simply to assume that Islam is a Religion of Peace and that it would accordingly be in bad taste to try to determine whether or not one is employing a jihadist. "'Al-Qaeda-link' Cern worker held," from the BBC, October 9 (thanks to John):

France has arrested a researcher at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (Cern) for suspected links with al-Qaeda, officials have said.

The 32-year-old man of Algerian descent was one of two brothers detained in the south-east town of Vienne on Thursday.

Police believe they had been in contact over the internet with people linked to al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, and had been planning attacks in France....

The organisation told the Associated Press that the researcher, whom it did not identify, was working for an outside institute and had no contact with anything that could have been used for terrorism.

Computers, hard drives and USB storage devices were removed from the brothers' home after their arrest....

The formidable Paris-based writer Nidra Poller explains why the President is a perfect recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize -- notably for his betrayal of Israel and aid to the global jihad:

Surprised? Shocked? Outraged? Not me. I'm delighted to see that the Nobel-Peace-Prize has been awarded to the person who most richly deserves it. Not only has he made gigantic efforts to promote Nobel-Peace in his nine short months in office but as president of the residually powerful United States of America he has the superforce to impose Nobel-style peace.

President and Nobel Prince of Peace Obama is not naïve, inept, inexperienced, or wet behind the ears. He is practicing what he preached. He has already fulfilled more promises than most voters ever suspected were being made. And the way things are going, only a miracle will keep him from delivering on the rest.

Bat Ye'or teaches us the meaning of peace in our times, the peace of dhimmitude, the peace that Nobel Norwegians have dutifully honored. It is the peace of convert or die...or hang in by the skin of your teeth. When the heads have been severed from the stiff necks that refuse Islam, when the converted have been folded into the prostrate masses of the ummah, the dhimmis hand over the keys to their granges, their wives and children, their hearts and minds, their lands and dwellings in exchange for a fragile peace requiring endless sacrifice and constant restraint.

This is the peace of dhimmitude, this is the peace Nobelly rewarded in...uhhh...Oslo, right? And B Hussein O is the most deserving laureate. On the very day the prize was announced, forty people were killed in a jihad attack in Peshawar Pakistan. Do you remember, way back when, during the campaign, he narrowed his eyes and said Iraq's a distraction, let me get my hands on the trigger and I'll take care of Pakistan. There you have it. A promise keeper of the first order. Iraq was also a distraction from Afghanistan. So mister Taliban tally your bananas, we've got other fish to fry, do your jihad thing and we'll lower our eyes, peace be upon you.

President Obama's Cairo speech alone earned him enough points to get this prize hands down. His bow to the king of Saudi Arabia. His consistent snubbing of European leaders. His betrayal of Poland and the Czech Republic. His outstretched hand that reaches all the way to Iran's nuclear sites and protects them from rain, hail, and Israel. His betrayal of Persians yearning for democracy. His reluctance to look into McChrystal's ball and find some kind of half way plausible strategy for the overseas contingency whatchamegig in Afghanistan.

Am I being coy? Why haven't I mentioned his master plan for the nuclear disarmament of...

Israel!

Leaving the best for last. Even if he had not done all of the above, dayenu, he would be worthy of being hoisted on high in the Nobel firmament because he has declared war on Jewish construction in choice neighborhoods of al Quds and wannabe Palestine. Donche know, if you want peace be prepared to make war. And if you want the peace of jihad, make war on the Jews. Point your finger at them like a smoking gun. Sock it to 'em like a latter day koranic saint. Grab them by the scruff of the neck and scold them for all the world to see. Sic 'em with Goldstone, saddle them with Abbas, and send them to bed without dinner and ammunition. They wanted planes to fight to win? Stop the program, cancel the contracts, and if they holler strangle them with peace. Play footsy with Hamas, set up a mahjong date with Ahmadinejad, make cuddly eyes at Assad, and secretly decorate the private quarters of the White House with shahid posters, who would dare to protest?

Did you hear the latest? Anonymous sources have leaked to the press a flood of indignation from the peaceful Obama to you know who in the holy land. Aha! You thought he was fed up because his moderate ally Abu Mazen has reverted to PLO same o same o? Stirring up trouble on the Temple Mount because a bunch of French tourists got in the way of some irate Palestinian rocks? Which naturally led the Palestinians to go on a rampage in the narrow lanes of the Old City. How can President Obama call for the creation of a Palestinian state the day after tomorrow when his protégés are rousing a billion and a half Muslims to protect al Aqsa...from French tourists?

No. That's not why the Nobelly anointed young man is indignant. He is pissed off because Israelis are badmouthing him. Big shots and little guys in the street and on the beach, officials and cab drivers and housewives and left wing columnists are criticizing him.

Watch out. Even a Nobel-Peace-Prizer can lose his temper and explode. But then, who would blame him? What's more dangerous for world peace, a flock of Taliban or a gaggle of chuzpadike Israelis?

Hail to the Chief for reaching out to the Taliban and forgiving them for he knows not what they do, reaching out to the Muslim Brotherhood in all its forms and machinations, reaching out to the democratically elected Ahmadinejad and drawing a veil over the rape of the innocents, reaching out to Putin over the half dead body of Georgia...and trying to close Gitmo if only the jack-in-the-box would sit down and shut up.

And if he manages to push his health care revolution bill down US throats, they'll give him the Nobel Prize for Medicine next year. On the other hand, if he can maintain double digit unemployment and bring the dollar down to parity with the yuan he could outdistance Mugabe for the Nobel Prize for Economics.

A Nobel Prize to the wise is sufficient: when you hear the word "peace" praise the lord and pass the ammunition.

"Freedom of thought, opinion and expression should not be curtailed at the United Nations by auto-censorship, as a result of doctrinal accusations of 'blasphemy' ..." (19 May 1998 warning from AWE)

Comments by David G. Littman, NGO Representative to the United Nations in Geneva for the Association for World Education and the World Union for Progressive Judaism:

On April 7, 2009, Jihad Watch published my article on "OIC Stealth Jihad at UN Human Rights Bodies," in which I referred to Robert Spencer's FrontPage piece on "The UN's Jihad Against Free Speech". In a recent update [HERE], "U.S. co-sponsors anti-free speech resolution at the UN: Free speech death watch", he blasts the Human Rights Council resolution on freedom of expression (links to AP and Eugène Voloque in the Huffington Post).

Yet 11 years ago, on 19 May 1998, the Association for World Education wrote a detailed letter to the Chairman of the UN Special Rapporteurs and others with a clear warning as to what was on the horizon. At that time, everyone seemed to understand that the OIC was attempting to limit freedom of expression with allegations of blasphemy. We have come a long way since, but it seems our 1998 letter is relevant, which is why we are making it available to Jihad Watch readers.

* * * * *

ASSOCIATION FOR WORLD EDUCATION
Case Postale 161 - 1211 Geneva 16

Mr. Paulo Pinheiro. Chairman
5th Meeting: Special Rapporteurs, Representatives, Experts & Chairpersons of Working Groups of the Commission on Human Rights and Advisory Services Programme (26-29 May 1998). Centre for Human Rights. Palais des Nations - Genève
19 May 1998
Dear Sir,

At last year's meeting, members addressed the incident that took place on the last day of the 53rd session of the Commission on Human Rights, since called the "U.N. Blasphemy Affair." The High Commissioner's Note (E/CN.4/1998/45), under paragraphs 23, 71 (b), provides details and a unanimous decision that "special rapporteurs should not be requested to amend their reports merely because certain passages were deemed offensive by a particular member State or group of member States."

As you are aware, the Special Rapporteur had no alternative but to follow the Decision 1997/125 of the Commission that: (3) "Requested the Chairman to ask the Special Rapporteur to take corrective action in response to the present decision." This he did (E/CN.4/1997/71/Corr.1), but collective demands for further censure were made at the substantive session of ECOSOC on 22 July 1997, again at the Sub-Commission on 27 August 1997 and on other occasions, including the 54th session of the Commission on Human Rights under item 12.

Our association has stressed this matter because, as we wrote: "freedom of thought, opinion and expression should not be curtailed at the United Nations by auto-censorship, as a result of doctrinal accusations of 'blasphemy' whose demands are legion."

In this spirit, we decided that all the facts and arguments should be brought to the attention of the widest possible audience. Therefore, we submitted a written Statement to the Sub-Commission (E/CN.4/Sub.2/1997/NGO/3); and sent a more detailed article to an international journal of jurists, Justice, September 1997), a shorter version to an academic journal (Middle East Quarterly, December 1997), and a updated piece to Midstream (New York, February-March 1998).

We also spoke on this issue at the Commission (54th) under item 12 and again under item 14 (24 March 1998), reading a Joint Statement - signed by 37 NGOs working within the framework of the Special Committee of International NGOs on Human Rights (Geneva) - that quoted in full the above-mentioned unanimous consensus decision.

Please find enclosed 35 copies of the above documents for distribution to all members,
in agreement with the secretary.

We trust that this documentation will be useful and, in view of the ongoing nature of
the UN Blasphemy Affair', we call on your committee to reiterate and reinforce its 23
May 1997 decision.

Yours sincerely
David G. Littman René Wadlow
NGO Representatives of the AWE to the United Nation Office in Geneva

* * * *

OUR LATER ORAL STATEMENT SUMMARIZES THE FACTS

To recapitulate: the Special Rapporteur on Racism (Maurice Glélé-Ahanhanzo) had been criticised on 18 April 1997, the last day of the 53rd session, for quoting a factually accurate sentence in his annual Report [E/CN.4/1997/71], under the subheading: 'Islamist and Arab anti-Semitism' [E.3, Ch. II]. Faced with a diktat to resign or recant, he took the necessary 'corrective action' [E/CN.4/1997/71/Corr.1]. No State Member backed him. The Indonesian representative, chairman of the 56 OIC States, explained four months later to the Sub-Commission: this "excision of a blasphemous reference to the Holy Quran (...) was carried out in consultation with the parties concerned." [Verbatim statement, §6; and E/CN.4/Sub.2/1997/SR 35]

This 'blasphemous reference' was quoted from an annual report in, Dina Porat (ed.) Anti-Semitism Worldwide (Tel Aviv University, 1996).

The use of Christian and secular European anti-Semitism motifs in Muslim publications is
son the rise, yet at the same time Muslim extremists are turning increasingly to their own
religious sources, first and foremost the Qur'an, as a primary anti-Jewish source. (1)

In his subsequent Reports to UN bodies (1998-2002), all references to antisemitism in the Arab/Muslim world were omitted, although it is currently nourished - under the guise of anti-Zionism - by a crude and genocidal 'Culture of Hate.' Our warning - in UN oral and written statements, and in published articles - that the Special Rapporteur would succumb to auto-censorship has been proved correct.

* * * * *
In a Jihad Watch article of September 4, 2008: "In the name of Islamophobia, will the OIC soon 'Rule the Waves' at the UN General Assembly", we declared:

The OIC is attempting to limit both freedom of expression and freedom of religion, and to extend human rights to religion, per se, by its repeated promotion of the resolution "Combating Defamation of Religions" in the Commission on Human Rights [1999-2005], the Human Rights Council and in the General Assembly

This is quoted from a joint written statement A/HRC/7/NGO/96 (March 4, 2008) to the 7th HRC session by the Association for World Education, International Humanist and Ethical Union, and Association of World Citizens. For the full, documented text: 'The Cairo Declaration and the Universality of Human Rights,' see the IHEU site.

For an analysis of the principles at stake at the 12 session of the Human Rights Council, see the analysis by the IHEU Main Representative Roy Brown, "Freedom of Expression on trial again at the UN". [HERE] http://www.iheu.org/freedom-expression-trial-again-un.

Over 2000 years ago, Archimedes explained that it was not only the width of the walls he had built in 212 BCE that would save the City of Syracuse from the Romans. It was necessary for the citizens to have the will and determination to protect their freedom and their rights. This wise saying applies to all democratic member States and members of Civil Society at the Human Rights Council, and free peoples worldwide.
-----------------
(1) See articles mentioned above, in Justice, MEQ, and Midstream; republished in "Dangerous Censorship of a UN Special Rapporteur," by René Wadlow and David G. Littman, Part 5: Human Rights and Human Wrongs at the UN, ch. 29, p. 340, in Robert Spencer (ed.) The Myth of Islamic Tolerance: How Islamic Law Treats Non-Muslims, 2005.
* * * * *
P.S. A subsequent article will follow with our oral statements delivered at the Council.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Our old friend and former Jihad Watch writer Raymond Ibrahim, the most astute analyst of Al-Qaeda's belief-system and ideology on the scene today, here elucidates a theme we have touched on many times here: why no redressing of Islamic grievances against the West (as Obama is relentlessly pursuing) will blunt the force of the global jihad: the grievances are just counters and recruiting tools for a jihad imperative that is based simply on the fact that we are Infidels, not Infidels with an objectionable foreign policy or pop culture.

"An Open Question to Osama Bin Laden -- or Any Other Islamist," by Raymond Ibrahim for Pajamas Media, October 7:

Ever since 9/11, when Osama bin Laden was thrust into the spotlight, he has made it a point to occasionally submit questions to Americans -- questions which he apparently thinks are unanswerable.

In his last message "commemorating" 9/11, for instance, after rehashing the storyline that the jihad on America wholly revolves around U.S. support for Israel -- former grievances cited throughout the years include America's "exploitation" of women and failure to sign the environmental Kyoto Protocol -- bin Laden concluded with the following musing: "You should ask yourselves whether your security, your blood, your sons, your money, your jobs, your homes, your economy, and your reputation are more dear to you than the security and economy of the Israelis."

In fact, bin Laden et al. have made it perfectly clear that should U.S. support for Israel cease, so too would Islamic terrorism cease. Hence, in this last communiqué: "Let me say that we have declared many times, over more than two and a half decades, that the reason for our conflict with you is your support for your Israeli allies, who are occupying our land of Palestine [emphasis added]."

Fair enough. Yet before responding to Osama, it must be noted that, in and of themselves, his communiqués beg a simple, logical question -- one that, as shall be seen, renders all his observations and questions moot.

Before articulating this question, let us first establish much-needed context: As clearly demonstrated by Islam's doctrines and history -- the former regularly manifesting themselves in the course of the latter -- it is a historic fact that Islamic hostility for and aggression against non-Muslims transcends any and all temporal "grievances." In short, Islam, according to the classical -- not "radical" -- schools of jurisprudence, is obligated to subjugate the world.

Read it all.

The misplaced faith in Pakistan exhibited by many in Washington is not new; it has been going on for fifty years, ever since the first early infatuation, by various Dulles brothers and American generals, with fly-whisking ramrod-straight terry-thomas-moustachioed generals who kept assuring the Americans that "Islam is a barrier to Communism" and allowed themselves to be compared -- favorably -- with bandung-conferencing, new-left-book-club-subscribing, Krishna Menon (India's foreign minister) and supercilious Jawaharlal Nehru.

It started with Pakistan as part of that farcical military alliance, CENTO, with Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Pakistan as the stout defenders of the West against atheistic Communism. That West, represented by Great Britain and the United States, supplied all the arms and all the money. The thing collapsed in 1958, having hardly existed, with Qassem's coup in Iraq, and "strongman" Nuri es-Said's body being dragged through the streets of Baghdad for further mutilation.

But the love affair, entirely unrequited, with Pakistan continued. The Americans sold weapons and even advanced planes. But Pakistan took those weapons and used them to threaten, or even to make war on India in repeated campaigns, and Pakistan military's support for terrorism in Kashmir did not begin yesterday, or the day before.

The misuse of American aid, and the dawning understanding, among some in the Senate, led to the Pressler Amendment. But unfortunately, those who had over slow time begun to really understand Pakistan's treachery, such as Senator Glenn, did not have a way to pass on that understanding to their successors. The Senate had no institutional memory, and lessons learned by some in Congress were forgotten when they left the scene.

But remember: they sincerely want peace! A stable, secure Palestinian state with contiguous borders will solve the problem forthwith!

"Hizbullah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah on Al-Quds Day: 'Israel Must Be Wiped Out Of Existence,'" from MEMRI, October 8 (thanks to all who sent this in):

In a televised address screened at the Sayyed Al-Shuhada complex in Dhahiya on International Al-Quds (Jerusalem) Day, September 18, 2009, Hizbullah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah laid down the main tenets of his organization. He stated: 1) that the historical Palestine - from the Mediterranean Sea to the River Jordan - belongs to the Palestinian people and to the entire Muslim nation; 2) that no one has the right to relinquish even a grain of Palestine's soil or a drop of its waters; 3) that the Israeli entity is an occupying, aggressive, cancerous body that contravenes religious law, and is therefore illegal; 4) that it is forbidden to recognize the Israeli entity or to acknowledge its legitimacy or existence; and 5) that it is forbidden to establish ties or to normalize relations with Israel. Nasrallah went on to state that Israel must cease to exist, that the next war would change the regional map, and that Hizbullah can destroy half of the Israeli army. [...]

"We say clearly and honestly and declare that the entire Palestinian territory is a possession of the Palestinian people. It belongs to them and to the entire Ummah. The Zionists own nothing and have no rights in this land. We are ready to discuss issues upon religious, historical, logical, reasonable, and legal basis and in reference to holy books - including the Old Testament which is well known to be adopted by the Jews of this age and earlier ages as to what we know from history.

"We assure that Palestine is the right of this nation and this Ummah and it is not a right for the Zionists at all. During the Holy Month of Ramadhan, Muslims read in the Holy Koran, trying to finish reciting it once and twice and maybe more. They try to study the meanings and lessons the Koran holds within its folds.

"The Holy Koran talks a lot about the people of 'Israel' and the prophets of these people - not only the Koran talks about them but so do the other holy books, especially the Torah. Based on the Koran and Islam, we accept that Allah, may He be praised and extolled, promised to Abraham that the Holy Land would be populated with his descendents. We do not deny this: it appears in our Koranic texts...

"However, Abraham's seed are not Jews nor Zionists - either as a political or religious stream, or as a tribe or a race. It is not only the children of Israel [who are Abraham's seed]... A great part of the Arabs are [also] Abraham's descendents. Abraham fathered Ishmael and Isaac. In the Torah, in the New Testament, in Zabour [David's book of psalms], and in the Koran it is stated that Allah had promised Abraham's descendents the Holy Land. [But] which 'seed'?! To the sane among them. To the believers among them. To the pure among them. To the god-fearing among them. To those who went after Abraham - that patriarch and prophet - and followed his religion. [2]

"As for the criminal and murderous limb of Abraham's progeny, who killed the prophets, spread corruption in the land, and committed atrocities and sins... these were not given any promises to start with... They were not given promises from the outset. It is found in the Old Testament and in history books, that after Moses brought the Israelites across to the blessed land of Palestine, they began to worship the calf and idols, disobeyed God, [and] hurt and conspired against his prophet and his brother Aaron. Consequently, God ordered them out to wander through the desert for 40 years, away from the reaches of their land.

"So, no promises were made to them.

President Barack Obama has refused to meet the Dalai Lama in Washington this week in a move to curry favor with the Chinese.

The decision came after China stepped up a campaign urging nations to shun the Tibetan spiritual leader.

It means Mr Obama will become the first president not to welcome the Nobel peace prize winner to the White House since the Dalai Lama began visiting Washington in 1991.

The Buddhist monk arrived in Washington on Monday for a week of meetings with Congressional leaders, celebrity supporters and interest groups, but the president will not see him until after he has made his first visit to China next month.

Samdhong Rinpoche, the Tibetan prime minister-in-exile, has accused the United States and other Western nations of "appeasement" toward China as its economic weight grows...

Not that the Chinese are the only ones he's appeasing.

Mr. Obama's decision dismayed human rights and Tibetan support groups, who said he had made an unnecessary concession to the Chinese, who regard the Dalai Lama as a "splittist", despite his calls for autonomy rather than independence for Tibet. The Chinese invaded in 1950, forcing the young leader to flee.

Sophie Richardson, Asia advocate for Human Rights Watch, said: "Presidents always meets (sic) the Dalai Lama and what happens? Absolutely nothing.

"This idea that if you are nice to the Chinese Communist Party up front you can cash in later is just wrong. If you lower the bar on human rights they will just move it lower and lower."

Could this principle be applied to other contexts beyond China?

Over several months of discussions the Tibetans resisted entreaties to delay the meeting, arguing that a refusal would make smaller countries more vulnerable to pressure from China not to meet the Dalai Lama.

Good point. Conversely, if the U.S. won't stand up to Islamic militants and for human rights in majority Muslim contexts, what does that imply for governments with less clout?

But they were told by US officials they wanted to work with China on critical issues, including nuclear weapons proliferation in North Korea and Iran, according to The Washington Post. Mr Obama then sent a delegation to the Dalai Lama's home in exile in India last month that confirmed the meeting would be deferred. Mr Obama has changed his position on Tibet since his election campaign...

Is the president then open to changing his positions on other points of foreign policy, like those regarding Israel, Pakistan, or Iran?

Lodi Gyaltsen Gyari, the Washington-based special envoy to the Dalai Lama, issued a brief statement, saying: "We came to this arrangement because we believe that it is in our long-term interests."

INN: Why did you and a group ostensibly dedicated to preserving European culture from Islamic conquest come equipped with Israeli flags?

Spencer: "The group members generally seemed to recognize that Israel is on the front line of the same global Islamic jihad that threatens Europe and the United States, and all free people."

INN: How did others in the group react to the police demand to conceal the Jewish state's flag?

Spencer: "They reacted with indignation, and a determination to keep the Israeli flag flying."

INN: Was there actually any trouble as a result of your "provocation" with the Israeli flag?

Spencer: "No. When I came close to the counterdemonstrators while holding the flag, I was pushed back away from them by police. They said something to me in German, but I don't speak German. That was all."

INN: Did you feel the demand to conceal the flags was anti-Semitic on the part of the German authorities, or mere cowardice in the face of thugs?

Spencer: "It seemed to me to be the latter. Of course, that cowardice enables and abets the thugs' anti-Semitism."

Read it all.

"Well, don't fret about that, Pilgrim."

"Jerusalem Tense as Arab Leaders Visit Disputed Holy Site," by Robert Berger for the Voice of America, October 7:

Israeli border police officer, masked plainclothes police officers detain Palestinian youth during clashes in east Jerusalem

Kids Today!

Tension remains high between Jews and Muslims at a disputed Jerusalem holy place after several days of unrest that have overshadowed a Jewish festival of pilgrimage. Israeli Arab leaders visited the Mosque of Al Aksa in Jerusalem's Old City and blamed Israel for provoking recent clashes between police and Palestinians. The confrontations are occurring during the week-long holiday of Sukkot or the Feast of Tabernacles, when thousands of Jewish and Christian pilgrims have been visiting Jerusalem.

The "provoking" and unrest seems to be simply the presence and prayer by Jews and Christians at the Temple Mount.

The unrest was sparked by rumors that Jewish militants planned to pray at the Al Aksa compound, the third holiest place in Islam. For Jews, it is the Temple Mount, the site of the two biblical Temples and holiest place of all. Israel has closed the site to Muslim worshippers for several days, in an attempt to contain the unrest.

Israeli Arab parliamentarian Taleb al-Sana said Israel is denying Muslims freedom of worship by closing down the Mosque of Al Aksa.

Repeating a rumor that has spread in recent days, Al-Sana accused Israel of conducting secret excavations under the mosque, provoking Muslim fears of a Jewish takeover of the Islamic holy place.

As opposed to a...Muslim takeover of a Jewish holy place?

Jewish officials say Arab and Palestinian leaders are deliberately inciting violence during the Feast of Tabernacles. Elisha Peleg is a member of the Jerusalem City Council. "It is well organized," Peleg alleges. "They know when to increase the riots and where to make the riots; and unfortunately, our neighbors do not like to see us very much celebrating and praying to our God."

Perfectly in line with what Robert reminds us about restrictions on dhimmis here.

The Arabs have warned that Israel is provoking a third Palestinian uprising. But Israel has deployed thousands of police and soldiers in and around Jerusalem's Old City, in an effort to prevent the spread of violence.

In FrontPage this morning I wrote about the latest assaults to the freedom of speech:

Does the United States Constitution protect the freedom of speech of American citizens, or does it not? In this era of globalization, the answer is becoming increasingly muddled. Thursday, an American citizen, Paul Williams, went on trial in Canada. He is charged with violating Canadian libel laws in charges he made in his book The Dunces of Doomsday about a jihad terror cell at McMaster University in Ontario. Likewise in Brazil, an American business writer, Joseph Sharkey, is on trial for what he wrote about Brazilian air-traffic controllers after he survived an airplane crash in Brazil.

Williams and Sharkey both live in the United States, which guarantees that its citizens' freedom of speech not be infringed. Should Canadian and Brazilian libel laws apply to them? Williams has already had to pay enormous amounts of money for his defense, and Sharkey is likely to be found guilty and given a $500,000 fine. McMaster University wants a cool two million dollars from Williams.

Shouldn't the United States government protect American citizens from such bullying by foreign powers?

If nothing is done, the problem is certain to get worse -- for Williams and Sharkey are not the first American victims of the tactic that has come to be known as "libel tourism." The late Saudi billionaire Khalid Salim bin Mahfouz sued Rachel Ehrenfeld, founder and director of the American Center for Democracy, several years ago. Bin Mahfouz was upset about Ehrenfeld's book, Funding Evil, in which she wrote that he was involved in funding Hamas and al Qaeda - a charge for which there was abundant evidence from Western intelligence agencies. Nevertheless, taking advantage of British libel laws that place the burden of proof on the defendant, rather than the plaintiff, bin Mahfouz sued not in the United States, where Ehrenfeld lives and published her book, but in Britain, where neither he nor Ehrenfeld lived and where his entire case depended upon a handful of copies sold in that country mostly through special orders from Amazon.com, and the appearance of one chapter of the book on the Internet, where could have been read by British readers. A British court awarded bin Mahfouz $250,000, and Ehrenfeld had to devote the bulk of her time for years to fighting this judgment....

Harrow stop mosque building demo 13th December

The Prime Minister of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan, publicly read an Islamic poem including the lines: "The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and Muslims our soldiers..."

HAMMER THEIR HELMETS! BLUNT THEIR BAYONETS! (metaphorical reference to no more mosques).

NO MORE MOSQUE BUILDING DEMONSTRATION

Location: Square in front of Harrow Civic Centre, Station Road/Milton Road junction.

Date: 13th December 2009

Time: 14.00 - 16.00 (2pm - 4pm)

APPROVED FOR PROTEST

1. Approved anti-sharia and anti-Islamisation chants, banners and placards will be permitted.

Official chants:-

Hammer their helmets! Blunt their bayonets! (this is a metaphorical reference to no more mosques).
No more mosques!

Stop kuffarphobia!

2. English, Welsh, Scottish, N. Irish, national flags, national flags of other countries, certain other national flags will be permitted and encouraged.

Some flags already known to be represented are:-

Bulgaria
Denmark
Serbia
Israel

Let us know which flag you'll be flying!

3. Certain other flags representing communities struggling against Islamic colonisation such as Papua New Guinea and Biafra will be permitted.

4. Certain civil rights flags, banners and placards will be encouraged provided they are displayed within the no-sharia context of the demonstration.

5. ALL MUST BE APPROVED BY THE ORGANISERS BEFORE THE PROTEST Speakers using hand held megaphones will address the gathering. Names of speakers will be provided to the police prior to the demonstration. Speeches must be approved by the organisers.

WANTED

Speakers to explain Muslim persecution in Islamic countries.

Copts in Egypt
Hindus in Bangladesh
Hindus in Malayasia
Christians in Indonesia
Christians in Pakistan
Papuans in Indonesia
Jews everywhere

BANNED FROM PROTEST

1. As with previous SIOE demonstrations, political parties are banned.

2. Any racist chanting, banners and placards will result in immediate ejection of the perpetrators from the demo as will nazi salutes.

3. Totalitarian symbols such as nazi swastikas, communist hammer and sickles, Islamic star and crescent, UNLESS CLEARLY CROSSED OUT OR DEFACED WITH A STOP SIGN.

Banners, placards and speeches will be shown to the police prior to the protest starting if requested.

Stephen Gash
Stop Islamisation Of Europe - SIOE
Tel 01228 547317

Anders Gravers
Tel: +45 9677 1784
email: sioe@siad.dk

http://sioe.wordpress.com

They praised the Lord by singing their hearts out and chanting prayers at packed services.

But members of a congregation in north London have abandoned their church - because of a council noise ban.

The Immanuel International Christian Centre was ordered to keep its amplified music and sermons quieter after a neighbour complained.

But the church's pastor Dunni Odetoyinbo claimed Waltham Forest council had only told them to keep quiet so as not to offend the Muslim community....

In court Mrs Odetoyinbo, 55, claimed a council officer had asked her 'to keep the noise down so as not to offend the Muslim community'.

But magistrates rejected the appeal, and ordered the church to pay £2,250 costs.

It can now only play music for 20 minutes on a Sunday between 11.30am and 11.50pm....

He may get more than a tongue-lashing. Maybe if his mama washes his mouth out with soap, they'll give him credit for time served.

Over-reaction alert: "Saudi Man Gets 5 Year Sentence, 1,000 Lashes for Sex Talk" from Voice of America, October 7:

A court in Saudi Arabia has sentenced a man to five years in prison and 1,000 lashes for speaking about his sex life on television, in violation of vice laws in the conservative Muslim country.

The lawyer who represents Jeddah resident Mazen Abdul Jawad said he will appeal Wednesday's court ruling. Attorney Sulaiman al-Jumeii says his client was a victim of the Lebanon-based television channel, LBC satellite TV network, on which Jawad appeared.

During an appearance on the talk show "Bold Red Line" in July, the 32-year-old divorced father of four described his first sexual experience at age 14 and the ways he approaches women on the street. Women and men who are unrelated are generally barred from interacting in public in Saudi Arabia.

Good thing he wasn't caught kissing in Indonesia, or his sentence might have been ten years.

Jawad's lawyer says his client's case was hurt by heavy media coverage, which sparked outrage among conservative Muslims.

"Conservative" Christians or Jews outraged about illicit sex in the media = FCC fines, boycotts, accolades by the offender's supporters for "courage" in exercising free speech, book deals.

"Conservative" Muslims outraged about illicit sex in the media = criminal charges, 1,000 lashes, 5 years in the big house.

Saudi Arabian authorities shut down two of the Lebanese channel's offices in the kingdom and arrested Jawad on charges of "publicizing vice."

Three men who appeared on the same program as Jawad were each sentenced on Wednesday to two years in prison and 300 lashes....

As we have noted here many times, and as you can see below, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) is waging an all-out war against free speech in the West, trying to silence the voices that dare to sound the alarm about the advancing jihad. After the American Library Association, under pressure from CAIR, canceled my scheduled appearance at the ALA convention just as I was about to travel to that conference, I tried to recoup the expenses of the air ticket and hotel that their cancellation had cost me -- or at least get an apology or a new invitation from the ALA. My attorney, William Becker, explains that what we got instead from the ALA was scorn, more libelous accusations, and an open espousal of censorship.

ALA's War On Free Speech Update: "The American Library Association's Stealth Jihad Against Free Speech," by William J. Becker, Jr at FrontPage, October 9:

[...] On July 12, 2009, Robert Spencer, the editor of JihadWatch.com and author of the recently published "The Complete Infidel's Guide to the Koran," was invited to join a panel forum at the ALA's annual General Meeting on the topic "Perspectives on Islam: Beyond the Stereotyping."

As he was leaving to catch a plane for the event, Spencer learned that it had been cancelled. According to reports he later read on the Internet, Ahmed Rehab, Chicago executive director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), was responsible for bringing about the cancellation. In a letter to ALA, Rehab wrote: "I ask you to rescind the invitation to Mr. Spencer in order to maintain the integrity of the panel and the reputation of the ALA." Mr. Spencer, he argued, offered "grotesque viewpoints that lie well outside the bounds of reason and civilized debate."

The reports were supported with press releases issued by CAIR-Chicago admitting that it along with the Council on Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago (CIOGC), a coalition of more than 50 Muslim organizations, the other ALA panelists and a number of librarians and academics pressured ALA to drop Spencer from the conference. The press releases referred to Spencer as "Islamophobic" and one "who systematically spreads fear, bigotry, and misinformation." [...]

Remarkably, when Spencer offered to eat his expenses if ALA would simply invite him back to speak at another event, ALA's attorney, Paula Cozzi Goedert of the law firm Barnes & Thornburg, accused him of attempting extortion. This from an organization that seemed open to extortionist tactics.

After much legal haggling, ALA eventually agreed to reimburse Spencer a small portion of the amount he claimed he was owed but refused to admit it had made a mistake or to offer him an invitation. This time, it was Spencer's turn to reject, and he did.

Spencer, of course, knows something about Islam's perspective on free speech. In his 2008 book "Stealth Jihad," he pointed to the efforts of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), whose members include fifty-seven governments of Muslim-majority states, to craft a "legal instrument" to fight "Islamophobia," which means any criticism of Islam.

This "legal instrument" is a call to arms to end what the OIC refers to as "defamation of religions." It has been adopted by UN Human Rights Council resolutions and by the General Assembly. Only the US and the EU have resisted endorsement of it.

And it is not some fiction developed by Islamophobes who fear their cultural values being attacked. As the OIC's 2009 Second Observatory Report on Islamophobia suggests, it is an open work-in-progress: "The perceived threat to freedom of expression on the part of the US, the EU and other concerned countries constitutes an obstacle that can only be removed through sustained and constructive engagement."

In Spencer's case, which as his attorney I sought to resolve on his behalf, the threat to freedom of expression is not merely perceived, but is repugnantly demonstrably real, just as it is in the case of Joe Kaufman, a writer for FPM sued by various Islamic groups in Texas for defamation, a case that is testing the power of the OIC's "legal instrument" as the groups petition the Texas Supreme Court to overrule the lower court ruling in Kaufman's favor.

In the end, ALA not only failed to protect Spencer's intellectual freedom, it went out of its way to suppress it, showing complete indifference to either the principle of intellectual freedom or the potential damage to its own reputation, even knowing that this dirty episode would be publicly aired.

As ALA's attorney, Goedert, made sure to point out to me (as though I were a first year law student), this isn't a case of free speech under the First Amendment, because ALA is not a government actor. As a private institution, the First Amendment has no power over it; ALA can censor whomever it chooses. Goedart's unapologetic statement impressed me as somewhat breathtaking. I can't think of a more embarrassing and shameful example of hypocrisy and moral apathy by an institution that holds itself out as a champion of free speech.

Given the amount at stake and the limited reach of the panel discussion's influence, Spencer's ordeal would be perhaps unsettling but inconsequential if it didn't involve the ALA, founded in 1876 in Philadelphia, and whose members consist of America's librarians, some of our most cherished guardians of free expression.

And it would be perhaps unsettling but inconsequential if it did not involve Robert Spencer, the target of frequent death threats due to his candid and authoritative views on Islam and the Koran, making him the Salman Rushdie of our time. [...]

Don't worry. The Nobel laureate will soon sit down with Khamenei and iron all this out. "'Iran will blow up the heart of Israel,'" from the Jerusalem Post, October 9 (thanks to James):

An aide to Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei vowed that if the Islamic republic is attacked by the US or by Israel, Teheran would "blow up the heart" of the Jewish state, Reuters cited a report by the official Iranian news agency on Friday.

According to the report, Mojtaba Zolnour threatened that "Even if one American or Zionist missile hits our country, before the dust settles, Iranian missiles will blow up the heart of Israel."

In March, Iran's deputy army chief made similiar remarks, warning that his country will eliminate Israel if it attacks the Islamic republic.

"Should Israel take any action against Iran, we will eliminate Israel from the scene of the universe," Gen. Muhammad Reza Ashtiani said at the time in Teheran....

"Three blocks of Wisconsin Avenue Northwest were cleared of cars and pedestrians. Adjacent buildings and restaurants were evacuated..."

"DC Security Scare Becomes Federal Case," by Bob Barnard for MyFoxDC, October 8 (thanks to Heidi):

WASHINGTON, D.C. - A man who was arrested in a security scare in Northwest D.C. on Tuesday night threatened to blow up the Friendship Heights Metro station, according to a criminal complaint in the case.

It was a chaotic scene Tuesday night in Friendship Heights when three blocks of Wisconsin Avenue Northwest were cleared of cars and pedestrians. Adjacent buildings and restaurants were evacuated, including both Mazza Gallerie and Chevy Chase Pavilion.

It all happened because of a young man who was caught on camera by FOX 5 sitting in on the sidewalk along Wisconsin Avenue wearing a blue sweater and handcuffs.

Police say the man's name is Ahamed Ali, based on a driver license from Bangladesh. Witnesses and police say Ali had been hanging around Chevy Chase Pavilion for a couple of days, taking notes, making threats, and acting strangely.

Now, according to a police report obtained by FOX 5, more is known about what had concerned passersby and police.

Investigators say Ali was overheard calling out: "I'm not scared to die! I will kill you! I will blow people up and the Metro!"

"He made some statements, threatening individuals," said Sgt. Guy Poirier of the Joint Terrorist Task Force. "At that point we had to take him at his word, what he meant."

Sgt. Poirier says this was not an overblown response.

"Metropolitan Police Department takes everything serious," he said. "We take it as a real event until we can prove otherwise."...

Detectives also searched Ali's backpack right on the sidewalk in front of the Cheesecake Factory. In the backpack, police say they found a notebook with "I will kill you" written inside. It contained diagrams of bridges, mosques and other buildings in Washington....

Yes, all that hand-chopping and stoning really isn't all that bad, if you look at it from the right perspective. Dalia Mogahed, you may recall, along with John Esposito cooked the data from a global survey of Muslim attitudes in order to increase the number of Muslim "moderates" -- classifying people as "moderate" who hate America, want to impose Sharia, and support suicide bombing. "Barack Obama adviser says Sharia Law is misunderstood," by Andrew Gilligan and Alex Spillius in the Telegraph, October 8 (thanks to Andrew Bostom):

President Barack Obama's adviser on Muslim affairs, Dalia Mogahed, has provoked controversy by appearing on a British television show hosted by a member of an extremist group to talk about Sharia Law.

Miss Mogahed, appointed to the President's Council on Faith-Based and Neighbourhood Partnerships, said the Western view of Sharia was "oversimplified" and the majority of women around the world associate it with "gender justice".

Here's some gender justice straight out of the Koran. The Koran likens a woman to a field (tilth), to be used by a man as he wills: "Your women are a tilth for you (to cultivate) so go to your tilth as ye will" (2:223).

The Koran also declares that a woman's testimony is worth half that of a man: "Get two witnesses, out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women, such as ye choose, for witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her" (2:282).

It allows men to marry up to four wives, and have sex with slave girls also: "If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice" (4:3).

It rules that a son's inheritance should be twice the size of that of a daughter: "Allah (thus) directs you as regards your children's (inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females" (4:11).

Worst of all, the Koran tells husbands to beat their disobedient wives: "Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them" (4:34).

It allows for marriage to pre-pubescent girls, stipulating that Islamic divorce procedures "shall apply to those who have not yet menstruated" (65:4).

And here is some gender justice from the Hadith:

Muhammad said: "If a husband calls his wife to his bed [i.e. to have sexual relation] and she refuses and causes him to sleep in anger, the angels will curse her till morning." -- Bukhari 4.54.460

And: "By him in Whose Hand lies my life, a woman can not carry out the right of her Lord, till she carries out the right of her husband. And if he asks her to surrender herself [to him for sexual intercourse] she should not refuse him even if she is on a camel's saddle." -- Ibn Majah 1854

The White House adviser made the remarks on a London-based TV discussion programme hosted by Ibtihal Bsis, a member of the extremist Hizb ut Tahrir party.

The group believes in the non-violent destruction of Western democracy and the creation of an Islamic state under Sharia Law across the world.

Should an adviser to the President of the United States really have given her sanction to such a group? Apparently she has no problem with its goal:

Miss Mogahed appeared alongside Hizb ut Tahrir's national women's officer, Nazreen Nawaz.

During the 45-minute discussion, on the Islam Channel programme Muslimah Dilemma earlier this week, the two members of the group made repeated attacks on secular "man-made law" and the West's "lethal cocktail of liberty and capitalism".

They called for Sharia Law to be "the source of legislation" and said that women should not be "permitted to hold a position of leadership in government".

Miss Mogahed made no challenge to these demands and said that "promiscuity" and the "breakdown of traditional values" were what Muslims admired least about the West.

She said: "I think the reason so many women support Sharia is because they have a very different understanding of sharia than the common perception in Western media.

"The majority of women around the world associate gender justice, or justice for women, with sharia compliance.

"The portrayal of Sharia has been oversimplified in many cases."...

Miss Mogahed admitted that even many Muslims associated Sharia with "maximum criminal punishments" and "laws that... to many people seem unequal to women," but added: "Part of the reason that there is this perception of Sharia is because Sharia is not well understood and Islam as a faith is not well understood."

The video of the broadcast has now been prominently posted on the front page of Hizb ut Tahrir's website.

Miss Mogahed, who was born in Egypt and moved to America at the age of five, is the first veiled Muslim woman to serve in the White House. Her appointment was seen as a sign of the Obama administration's determination to reach out to the Muslim world.

She is also the executive director of the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies, a project which aims to scientifically sample public opinion in the Muslim world.

During this week's broadcast, she described her White House role as "to convey... to the President and other public officials what it is Muslims want."

Not what America might want from Muslims -- i.e., respect for Constitutional pluralism and republican government.

Obama is ready to play ball with the Taliban, and meanwhile, the Taliban are continuing to play a game of their own. "Taliban claim Kabul bombing," from AFP, October 9 (thanks to all who sent this in):

THE Taliban have claimed responsibility for a massive suicide car bomb that targeted the Indian embassy in Kabul yesterday, killing 17 people and injuring another 63, most of them civilians.

A statement on the Islamist insurgent group's website said one of its ''martyrs'' had carried out the attack, and the Indian embassy in the heavily fortified central diplomatic area ''was the main target''.

The attack took place just after 8.30am local time on a busy street outside the Interior Ministry. The ministry's spokesman said two police officers and 15 civilians were killed in the blast.

He said 50 civilians were among the wounded, with 13 police officers also injured.

The Taliban statement, as is usual when it claims responsibility for suicide attacks, exaggerated the extent of the damage and the death toll.

The dead, it said, ''included a few high-ranking officials of the embassy, 35 soldiers of foreign and Afghan nationality''.

''The explosion caused damage to the walls of the Indian embassy, which was the main target,'' the statement added....