Dog Brothers Public Forum


Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 18, 2017, 05:04:15 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
106242 Posts in 2398 Topics by 1094 Members
Latest Member: Ice Dog
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  Dog Brothers Public Forum
|-+  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities
| |-+  Politics & Religion
| | |-+  Islam in America (and pre-emptive dhimmitude)
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 21 Print
Author Topic: Islam in America (and pre-emptive dhimmitude)  (Read 290093 times)
Power User
Posts: 15391

« Reply #300 on: August 03, 2010, 10:32:09 AM »

in an interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, Rauf told the newspaper that funding would come from Muslims in the United States and from overseas.

"Imam Abdul Rauf . . . told Asharq Al-Awsat that the Islamic center will be financed through contributions from Muslims in the US, as well as by donations from Arab and Islamic countries," the newspaper reported.

Rauf did not return a call for comment.

In interviews with US media, Rauf has insisted funds would be raised here.

Read more:
« Reply #301 on: August 04, 2010, 06:43:38 AM »

Okay, are we talking the bingo club is providing financing- or some more "active group" like Christian Identity?  If the money is coming from local sources then they would KNOW what kind of crap they were pulling.........
Power User
Posts: 41791

« Reply #302 on: August 04, 2010, 10:56:58 AM »

Saudi/Wahabi money has financed a shockingly large % of mosques in the US (the number slips my mind).  And in the rare cases that someone has invested the time and money to get the Arabic materials used translated and read, it usually reveals the worst of Wahabbi Islam being taught despite the previous promises made in English.
Power User
Posts: 15391

« Reply #303 on: August 04, 2010, 02:22:14 PM »

Claudia Rosett does some great work here.
« Reply #304 on: August 05, 2010, 04:01:05 AM »

Hmmm, definately looks fishy.  Too bad there aren't better details, which is the point.  No details, so this easily could be something more like a Templar Priory instead of a more sedate sect.......... 
Power User
Posts: 41791

« Reply #305 on: August 05, 2010, 10:02:44 AM »

OK erudite one, please save me having to look it up.  What is/was "Templar Priory"?
« Reply #306 on: August 06, 2010, 03:42:00 AM »

The Templars were a military/ mlitant order in the days of the crusades.  A priory would have bacically been a fortified outpost watching an important piece of terrain.
Power User
Posts: 15391

« Reply #307 on: August 24, 2010, 02:48:16 PM »

Glad he's doing "outreach" on our dime. Thanks Obama!
« Reply #308 on: August 24, 2010, 11:20:40 PM »

A Test of Tolerance
The "Ground Zero mosque" debate is about tolerance—and a whole lot more.
By Christopher Hitchens
Posted Monday, Aug. 23, 2010, at 2:01 PM ET

Two weeks ago, I wrote that the arguments against the construction of the Cordoba Initiative center in lower Manhattan were so stupid and demagogic as to be beneath notice. Things have only gone further south since then, with Newt Gingrich's comparison to a Nazi sign outside the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum or (take your pick from the grab bag of hysteria) a Japanese cultural center at Pearl Harbor. The first of those pseudo-analogies is wrong in every possible way, in that the Holocaust museum already contains one of the most coolly comprehensive guides to the theory and practice of the Nazi regime in existence, including special exhibits on race theory and party ideology and objective studies of the conditions that brought the party to power. As for the second, there has long been a significant Japanese-American population in Hawaii, and I can't see any reason why it should not place a cultural center anywhere on the islands that it chooses.

From the beginning, though, I pointed out that Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf was no great bargain and that his Cordoba Initiative was full of euphemisms about Islamic jihad and Islamic theocracy. I mentioned his sinister belief that the United States was partially responsible for the assault on the World Trade Center and his refusal to take a position on the racist Hamas dictatorship in Gaza. The more one reads through his statements, the more alarming it gets. For example, here is Rauf's editorial on the upheaval that followed the brutal hijacking of the Iranian elections in 2009. Regarding President Obama, he advised that:

He should say his administration respects many of the guiding principles of the 1979 revolution—to establish a government that expresses the will of the people; a just government, based on the idea of Vilayet-i-faquih, that establishes the rule of law.

Coyly untranslated here (perhaps for "outreach" purposes), Vilayet-i-faquih is the special term promulgated by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini to describe the idea that all of Iranian society is under the permanent stewardship (sometimes rendered as guardianship) of the mullahs. Under this dispensation, "the will of the people" is a meaningless expression, because "the people" are the wards and children of the clergy. It is the justification for a clerical supreme leader, whose rule is impervious to elections and who can pick and choose the candidates and, if it comes to that, the results. It is extremely controversial within Shiite Islam. (Grand Ayatollah Sistani in Iraq, for example, does not endorse it.) As for those numerous Iranians who are not Shiites, it reminds them yet again that they are not considered to be real citizens of the Islamic Republic.
I do not find myself reassured by the fact that Imam Rauf publicly endorses the most extreme and repressive version of Muslim theocracy. The letterhead of the statement, incidentally, describes him as the Cordoba Initiative's "Founder and Visionary." Why does that not delight me, either?

Emboldened by the crass nature of the opposition to the center, its defenders have started to talk as if it represented no problem at all and as if the question were solely one of religious tolerance. It would be nice if this were true. But tolerance is one of the first and most awkward questions raised by any examination of Islamism. We are wrong to talk as if the only subject was that of terrorism. As Western Europe has already found to its cost, local Muslim leaders have a habit, once they feel strong enough, of making demands of the most intolerant kind. Sometimes it will be calls for censorship of anything "offensive" to Islam. Sometimes it will be demands for sexual segregation in schools and swimming pools. The script is becoming a very familiar one. And those who make such demands are of course usually quite careful to avoid any association with violence. They merely hint that, if their demands are not taken seriously, there just might be a teeny smidgeon of violence from some other unnamed quarter …

As for the gorgeous mosaic of religious pluralism, it's easy enough to find mosque Web sites and DVDs that peddle the most disgusting attacks on Jews, Hindus, Christians, unbelievers, and other Muslims—to say nothing of insane diatribes about women and homosexuals. This is why the fake term Islamophobia is so dangerous: It insinuates that any reservations about Islam must ipso facto be "phobic." A phobia is an irrational fear or dislike. Islamic preaching very often manifests precisely this feature, which is why suspicion of it is by no means irrational.

From my window, I can see the beautiful minaret of the Washington, D.C., mosque on Massachusetts Avenue. It is situated at the heart of the capital city's diplomatic quarter, and it is where President Bush went immediately after 9/11 to make his gesture toward the "religion of peace." A short while ago, the wife of a new ambassador told me that she had been taking her dog for a walk when a bearded man accosted her and brusquely warned her not to take the animal so close to the sacred precincts. Muslim cabdrivers in other American cities have already refused to take passengers with "unclean" canines.

Another feature of my local mosque that I don't entirely like is the display of flags outside, purportedly showing all those nations that are already Muslim. Some of these flags are of countries like Malaysia, where Islam barely has a majority, or of Turkey, which still has a secular constitution. At the United Nations, the voting bloc of the Organization of the Islamic Conference nations is already proposing a resolution that would circumscribe any criticism of religion in general and of Islam in particular. So, before he is used by our State Department on any more goodwill missions overseas, I would like to see Imam Rauf asked a few searching questions about his support for clerical dictatorship in, just for now, Iran. Let us by all means make the "Ground Zero" debate a test of tolerance. But this will be a one-way street unless it is to be a test of Muslim tolerance as well.
Power User
Posts: 7696

« Reply #309 on: August 25, 2010, 11:28:59 AM »

Laura Ingram said it best last night while subbing for Hannity.

"Tolerance only works one way with the Muslims."

The USA must tolerate them. Not the other way around.

Hence we have a woman suing Disney because of their dress code claiming it discriminates against her religious rights.

Our enemies have learned well how to beat this country and make us look like fools.
Power User
Posts: 15391

« Reply #310 on: August 26, 2010, 10:12:06 PM »

The mask slips.
Power User
Posts: 15391

« Reply #311 on: September 03, 2010, 08:30:17 PM »

Shocking!  rolleyes
Power User
Posts: 7696

« Reply #312 on: September 04, 2010, 10:19:02 AM »

Those who don't listent to history are doomed to repeat it:

""We were expecting Islam to adapt to France and it is France adapting to Islam," Robin said"

If the Bloomberg's of the country have their way it will happen here too.

****'Islamization' of Paris a Warning to the West
By Dale Hurd
CBN News Sr. ReporterSaturday, September 04, 2010RSSPodcasts

The latest version of Adobe Flash Player is required to watch this video. Please click on the link below to download the latest version. Thanks!

Embed:  Link:   
Ad Feedback PARIS - Friday in Paris. A hidden camera shows streets blocked by huge crowds of Muslim worshippers and enforced by a private security force.

This is all illegal in France: the public worship, the blocked streets, and the private security. But the police have been ordered not to intervene.

It shows that even though some in the French government want to get tough with Muslims and ban the burqa, other parts of the French government continue to give Islam a privileged status.

An ordinary French citizen who has been watching the Islamization of Paris decided that the world needed to see what was happening to his city. He used a hidden camera to start posting videos on YouTube. His life has been threatened and so he uses the alias of "Maxime Lepante. " 

Lepante's View

His camera shows that Muslims "are blocking the streets with barriers. They are praying on the ground. And the inhabitants of this district cannot leave their homes, nor go into their homes during those prayers."

"The Muslims taking over those streets do not have any authorization. They do not go to the police headquarters, so it's completely illegal," he says.

The Muslims in the street have been granted unofficial rights that no Christian group is likely to get under France's Laicite', or secularism law.

"It says people have the right to share any belief they want, any religion," Lepante explained. "But they have to practice at home or in the mosque, synagogues, churches and so on."

Some say Muslims must pray in the street because they need a larger mosque. But Lepante has observed cars coming from other parts of Paris, and he believes it is a weekly display of growing Muslim power.

"They are coming there to show that they can take over some French streets to show that they can conquer a part of the French territory," he said.

France's Islamic Future?

If France faces an Islamic future, a Russian author has already written about it. The novel is called "The Mosque of Notre Dame, 2048," a bestseller in Russia, not in France.

French publisher Jean Robin said the French media ignored the book because it was politically incorrect.

"Islam is seen as the religion of the poor people, so you can't say to the poor people, 'You're wrong,' otherwise, you're a fascist," Robin explained.

The book lays out a dark future when France has become a Muslim nation, and the famous cathedral has been turned into a mosque.

Whether that plot is farfetched depends on whom you ask. Muslims are said to be no more than 10 percent of the French population, although no one knows for sure because French law prohibits population counts by religion.

But the Muslim birthrate is significantly higher than for the native French. Some Muslim men practice polygamy, with each extra wife having children and collecting a welfare check.

"The problem of Islam is more than a problem of numbers," said French philosopher Radu Stoenescu, an Islamic expert who debates Muslim leaders on French TV. "The problem is one of principles. It's an open question. Is Islam an ideology or just a creed?"

"It doesn't matter how many there are," he aded. "The problem is the people who follow Islam; they're somehow in a political party, which has a political agenda, which means basically implementing Sharia and building an Islamic state."

In Denial or Fed Up

From the 1980s until recently, criticizing or opposing Islam was considered a social taboo, and so the government and media effectively helped Islam spread throughout France.

"We were expecting Islam to adapt to France and it is France adapting to Islam," Robin said.

About the burqa controversy, one French Muslim man told a reporter that Europeans should respect Muslim dress. One Parisian woman wearing a headscarf said "the veil is in the Koran" and "we only submit to God and nobody else."

But even if many government elites are in France are in denial over Islam, the people in the streets increasingly are not. Some have become fed up with what they see as the growing Islamization of France.

They've started staging pork and wine "aperitifs," or cocktail parties in the street. They're patriotic demonstrations meant to strike back against Islam.  Another national demonstration is planned for Saturday, Sept. 4. 

A Warning to the West

The French parliament is expected to debate the burqa law in September. Jean-Francois Cope, president of the Union for a Popular Movement political party, has a warning for the West and for America. 

"We cannot accept the development of such practice because it's not compatible with the life in a modern society, you see," he said. "And this question is not only a French question. You will all have to face this challenge. "

For more insight on the slide toward a post-Christian Western society, check out Dale Hurd's blog Hurd on the Web.

For more insight on 'Islamization' around the world, check out Stakelbeck on Terror.

**Originally published September 1, 2010.****
Power User
Posts: 41791

« Reply #313 on: September 06, 2010, 12:57:19 PM »

For nine years after the attacks of Sept. 11, many American Muslims made concerted efforts to build relationships with non-Muslims, to make it clear they abhor terrorism, to educate people about Islam and to participate in interfaith service projects. They took satisfaction in the observations by many scholars that Muslims in America were more successful and assimilated than Muslims in Europe.

Eboo Patel, the director of an interfaith youth group, said some politicians were whipping up fear and hatred of Muslims.
Now, many of those same Muslims say that all of those years of work are being rapidly undone by the fierce opposition to a Muslim cultural center near ground zero that has unleashed a torrent of anti-Muslim sentiments and a spate of vandalism. The knifing of a Muslim cab driver in New York City has also alarmed many American Muslims.

“We worry: Will we ever be really completely accepted in American society?” said Dr. Ferhan Asghar, an orthopedic spine surgeon in Cincinnati and the father of two young girls. “In no other country could we have such freedoms — that’s why so many Muslims choose to make this country their own. But we do wonder whether it will get to the point where people don’t want Muslims here anymore.”

Eboo Patel, a founder and director of Interfaith Youth Core, a Chicago-based community service program that tries to reduce religious conflict, said, “I am more scared than I’ve ever been — more scared than I was after Sept. 11.”

That was a refrain echoed by many American Muslims in interviews last week. They said they were scared not as much for their safety as to learn that the suspicion, ignorance and even hatred of Muslims is so widespread. This is not the trajectory toward integration and acceptance that Muslims thought they were on.

Some American Muslims said they were especially on edge as the anniversary of 9/11 approaches. The pastor of a small church in Florida has promised to burn a pile of Korans that day. Muslim leaders are telling their followers that the stunt has been widely condemned by Christian and other religious groups and should be ignored. But they said some young American Muslims were questioning how they could simply sit by and watch the promised desecration.

They liken their situation to that of other scapegoats in American history: Irish Roman Catholics before the nativist riots in the 1800s, the Japanese before they were put in internment camps during World War II.

Muslims sit in their living rooms, aghast as pundits assert over and over that Islam is not a religion at all but a political cult, that Muslims cannot be good Americans and that mosques are fronts for extremist jihadis. To address what it calls a “growing tide of fear and intolerance,” the Islamic Society of North America plans to convene a summit of Christian, Muslim and Jewish leaders in Washington on Tuesday.

Young American Muslims who are trying to figure out their place and their goals in life are particularly troubled, said Imam Abdullah T. Antepli, the Muslim chaplain at Duke University.

“People are discussing what is the alternative if we don’t belong here,” he said. “There are jokes: When are we moving to Canada, when are we moving to Sydney? Nobody will go anywhere, but there is hopelessness, there is helplessness, there is real grief.”

Mr. Antepli just returned from a trip last month with a rabbi and other American Muslim leaders to Poland and Germany, where they studied the Holocaust and the events that led up to it (the group issued a denunciation of Holocaust denial on its return).

“Some of what people are saying in this mosque controversy is very similar to what German media was saying about Jews in the 1920s and 1930s,” he said. “It’s really scary.”

American Muslims were anticipating a particularly joyful Ramadan this year. For the first time in decades, the monthlong holiday fell mostly during summer vacation, allowing children to stay up late each night for the celebratory iftar dinner, breaking the fast, with family and friends.

But the season turned sour.

The great mosque debate seems to have unleashed a flurry of vandalism and harassment directed at mosques: construction equipment set afire at a mosque site in Murfreesboro, Tenn; a plastic pig with graffiti thrown into a mosque in Madera, Calif.; teenagers shooting outside a mosque in upstate New York during Ramadan prayers. It is too soon to tell whether hate crimes against Muslims are rising or are on pace with previous years, experts said. But it is possible that other episodes are going unreported right now.

“Victims are reluctant to go public with these kinds of hate incidents because they fear further harassment or attack,” said Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations. “They’re hoping all this will just blow over.”

Some Muslims said their situation felt more precarious now — under a president who is perceived as not only friendly to Muslims but is wrongly believed by many Americans to be Muslim himself — than it was under President George W. Bush.

Mr. Patel explained, “After Sept. 11, we had a Republican president who had the confidence and trust of red America, who went to a mosque and said, ‘Islam means peace,’ and who said ‘Muslims are our neighbors and friends,’ and who distinguished between terrorism and Islam.”

Now, unlike Mr. Bush then, the politicians with sway in red state America are the ones whipping up fear and hatred of Muslims, Mr. Patel said.

“There is simply the desire to paint an entire religion as the enemy,” he said. Referring to Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the founder of the proposed Muslim center near ground zero, “What they did to Imam Feisal was highly strategic. The signal was, we can Swift Boat your most moderate leaders.”

Several American Muslims said in interviews that they were stunned that what provoked the anti-Muslim backlash was not even another terrorist attack but a plan by an imam known for his work with leaders of other faiths to build a Muslim community center.

This year, Sept. 11 coincides with the celebration of Eid, the finale to Ramadan, which usually lasts three days (most Muslims will begin observing Eid this year on Sept. 10). But Muslim leaders, in this climate, said they wanted to avoid appearing to be celebrating on the anniversary of 9/11. Several major Muslim organizations have urged mosques to use the day to participate in commemoration events and community service.

Ingrid Mattson, the president of the Islamic Society of North America, said many American Muslims were still hoping to salvage the spirit of Ramadan.

“In Ramadan, you’re really not supposed to be focused on yourself,” she said. “It’s about looking out for the suffering of other people. Somehow it feels bad to be so worried about our own situation and our own security, when it should be about empathy towards others.”
Power User
Posts: 41791

« Reply #314 on: September 06, 2010, 01:05:19 PM »

second post of the day:

In the Heat of Camp, the Hunger of Faith
Published: September 5, 2010

EDEN PRAIRIE, Minn. — For Minnesota Vikings defensive back Husain Abdullah, the most important clock inside the Metrodome was not the one keeping time for his team’s recent preseason game with the Seattle Seahawks. Another, showing the time of day, held greater significance for him and for the Vikings’ training staff.

 Husain Abdullah in action against the San Francisco 49ers last month. In 2008, as a rookie, he fasted without telling anyone.
Abdullah, a third-year safety, is a Muslim who keeps the traditional fast during the holy month of Ramadan; he cannot eat or drink from sunup to sundown. So while his teammates slugged down water and sports drinks on the sideline during the first quarter, Abdullah had to abstain until sunset, at 7:57 p.m. Abdullah went by the clock because the game was indoors.

“So I told them, as soon as it’s 8 o’clock, remind me so I can pour some down,” Abdullah said. “We did a kickoff, had a long drive on defense, and then they scored a field goal. On the sideline they said: ‘It’s 8 o’clock. Start pounding.’ ”

The physical demands of an N.F.L. training camp, which entail two practices on some days, can tax even the best-hydrated and well-fed players. Yet Abdullah, 25, and his brother Hamza, a 27-year-old defensive back for the Arizona Cardinals, are committed to fasting throughout Ramadan, which ends at sundown Thursday — the night the Vikings open the season in New Orleans.

An N.F.L. spokesman was not aware of any other Muslim players who were fasting.

The fast is not required if a person is ill or it poses an undue hardship, according to Hamza Abdullah, who skipped several days in 2008 because of an injured hip and made them up later. Denver offensive tackle Ryan Harris, a converted Muslim and Hamza Abdullah’s former teammate, is not fasting, according to a Broncos spokesman.

“It’s hard to be a professional athlete, and it’s hard to fast,” Hamza Abdullah said in a telephone interview from the Cardinals’ complex in the Phoenix area.

But it means so much to Husain Abdullah that he has fasted every year since he was 7, even during football season while at Washington State and with Minnesota. That reflects the influence of his parents, who raised 12 children in the Muslim faith in Southern California. All are fasting, Hamza Abdullah said.

“A lot of people may look at things differently, but I feel it is required for us to fast,” Husain Abdullah said, basing his conviction on his reading of the Koran. “And we’ve been fasting my whole life, pretty much. I try to protect my fasting because it really means a lot to me.”

To do so, Abdullah needed help from the Vikings because Ramadan coincided with training camp. Abdullah fasted as a rookie in 2008, when Ramadan began and ended in September, but he never told anyone in the organization.

“I’m a quiet person,” said Abdullah, who led the Vikings in special teams tackles as an undrafted free agent.

Last year, Ramadan started Aug. 22, the day after the Vikings’ second preseason game. Abdullah told only Derek Mason, the assistant defensive backs coach, about his fasting. Coach Brad Childress learned about it in early September, when he wondered why Abdullah lacked energy and could not keep up his weight. The 6-foot Abdullah usually plays at 200 to 202 pounds, he said, but dropped to 194 during Ramadan.

So last April, the team’s nutrition consultant, Carrie Peterson, devised a Ramadan meal plan for Abdullah, based on a 3,800-calorie diet.

Every day, Abdullah wakes briefly at 2 a.m. to consume a protein and carbohydrate shake.

“I hate to make the guy get up at 2 a.m., but that’s about 400 calories he’s getting,” Peterson said. “That’s about a pound a week he’d lose if he didn’t get up to have that shake.”

He rises again at 5 with his wife, Zhavon, to pray and eat a predawn meal, known as suhoor. Dietary choices include scrambled eggs with vegetables, a nonpork breakfast meat (pork is forbidden in a Muslim diet), oatmeal with fruit and various liquids. Abdullah tops it off with another shake. Then nothing until the evening meal at sundown.

“My weight has always fluctuated, but of course during Ramadan, it fluctuates a little more,” he said after a recent practice. “When I come out here and work out, I probably lose two or three pounds during a practice. During Ramadan, it’s probably around four or so.

“Even if I tap out, drain myself, the next morning, after I’ve eaten at night and eaten in the morning, I’m right back to my normal weight. I weighed in today at 200.

“This year, I’m doing a whole lot better maintaining with the plan I put in place.”

The Vikings’ defensive backs coach, Joe Woods, said he never coached a fasting Muslim before Abdullah, a versatile athlete who fills in at both safety positions and at nickel back.

“It’s hard to imagine somebody being able to do that, out here practicing, 50 reps a day, and not have any water,” Woods said. “But he’s done it. He has a very good plan.”

Both Abdullahs say their teammates have been supportive and inquisitive. Muslims traditionally break the daily fast by eating a date, and Hamza Abdullah said a bag of dates he brought to a night practice this summer drew puzzled looks.

“Some of my teammates were looking at the bag, like, what is that weird-looking fruit?” he said. “It was pretty funny.”

To those who know Husain Abdullah, his commitment to fasting is nothing to joke about. “It’s really a testament to how important his religion is in his life,” Peterson said. “It’s amazing. He’s kind of an inspiration to me in a lot of ways.”
Power User
Posts: 15391

« Reply #315 on: September 06, 2010, 01:51:06 PM »

**In Crafty's first post, the puff piece fails to point out the jihadist links various "spokespeople"/islamic organizations have. Kind of important, no?**

Power User
Posts: 41791

« Reply #316 on: September 07, 2010, 03:04:59 PM »
Power User
Posts: 41791

« Reply #317 on: September 08, 2010, 07:26:43 AM »

Building on Faith
Published: September 7, 2010

AS my flight approached America last weekend, my mind circled back to the furor that has broken out over plans to build Cordoba House, a community center in Lower Manhattan.I have been away from home for two months, speaking abroad about cooperation among people from different religions. Every day, including the past two weeks spent representing my country on a State Department tour in the Middle East, I have been struck by how the controversy has riveted the attention of Americans, as well as nearly everyone I met in my travels.

We have all been awed by how inflamed and emotional the issue of the proposed community center has become. The level of attention reflects the degree to which people care about the very American values under debate: recognition of the rights of others, tolerance and freedom of worship.

Many people wondered why I did not speak out more, and sooner, about this project. I felt that it would not be right to comment from abroad. It would be better if I addressed these issues once I returned home to America, and after I could confer with leaders of other faiths who have been deliberating with us over this project. My life’s work has been focused on building bridges between religious groups and never has that been as important as it is now.

We are proceeding with the community center, Cordoba House. More important, we are doing so with the support of the downtown community, government at all levels and leaders from across the religious spectrum, who will be our partners. I am convinced that it is the right thing to do for many reasons.

Above all, the project will amplify the multifaith approach that the Cordoba Initiative has deployed in concrete ways for years. Our name, Cordoba, was inspired by the city in Spain where Muslims, Christians and Jews co-existed in the Middle Ages during a period of great cultural enrichment created by Muslims. Our initiative is intended to cultivate understanding among all religions and cultures.

Our broader mission — to strengthen relations between the Western and Muslim worlds and to help counter radical ideology — lies not in skirting the margins of issues that have polarized relations within the Muslim world and between non-Muslims and Muslims. It lies in confronting them as a joint multifaith, multinational effort.

From the political conflicts between Israelis and Palestinians to the building of a community center in Lower Manhattan, Muslims and members of all faiths must work together if we are ever going to succeed in fostering understanding and peace.

At Cordoba House, we envision shared space for community activities, like a swimming pool, classrooms and a play space for children. There will be separate prayer spaces for Muslims, Christians, Jews and men and women of other faiths. The center will also include a multifaith memorial dedicated to victims of the Sept. 11 attacks.

I am very sensitive to the feelings of the families of victims of 9/11, as are my fellow leaders of many faiths. We will accordingly seek the support of those families, and the support of our vibrant neighborhood, as we consider the ultimate plans for the community center. Our objective has always been to make this a center for unification and healing.

Cordoba House will be built on the two fundamental commandments common to Judaism, Christianity and Islam: to love the Lord our creator with all of our hearts, minds, souls and strength; and to love our neighbors as we love ourselves. We want to foster a culture of worship authentic to each religious tradition, and also a culture of forging personal bonds across religious traditions.

I do not underestimate the challenges that will be involved in bringing our work to completion. (Construction has not even begun yet.) I know there will be interest in our financing, and so we will clearly identify all of our financial backers.

Lost amid the commotion is the good that has come out of the recent discussion. I want to draw attention, specifically, to the open, law-based and tolerant actions that have taken place, and that are particularly striking for Muslims.

President Obama and Mayor Michael Bloomberg both spoke out in support of our project. As I traveled overseas, I saw firsthand how their words and actions made a tremendous impact on the Muslim street and on Muslim leaders. It was striking: a Christian president and a Jewish mayor of New York supporting the rights of Muslims. Their statements sent a powerful message about what America stands for, and will be remembered as a milestone in improving American-Muslim relations.

The wonderful outpouring of support for our right to build this community center from across the social, religious and political spectrum seriously undermines the ability of anti-American radicals to recruit young, impressionable Muslims by falsely claiming that America persecutes Muslims for their faith. These efforts by radicals at distortion endanger our national security and the personal security of Americans worldwide. This is why Americans must not back away from completion of this project. If we do, we cede the discourse and, essentially, our future to radicals on both sides. The paradigm of a clash between the West and the Muslim world will continue, as it has in recent decades at terrible cost. It is a paradigm we must shift.

From those who recognize our rights, from grassroots organizers to heads of state, I sense a global desire to build on this positive momentum and to be part of a global movement to heal relations and bring peace. This is an opportunity we must grasp.

I therefore call upon all Americans to rise to this challenge. Let us commemorate the anniversary of 9/11 by pausing to reflect and meditate and tone down the vitriol and rhetoric that serves only to strengthen the radicals and weaken our friends’ belief in our values.

The very word “islam” comes from a word cognate to shalom, which means peace in Hebrew. The Koran declares in its 36th chapter, regarded by the Prophet Muhammad as the heart of the Koran, in a verse deemed the heart of this chapter, “Peace is a word spoken from a merciful Lord.”

How better to commemorate 9/11 than to urge our fellow Muslims, fellow Christians and fellow Jews to follow the fundamental common impulse of our great faith traditions?

Feisal Abdul Rauf is the chairman of the Cordoba Initiative and the imam of the Farah mosque in Lower Manhattan.
Power User
Posts: 15391

« Reply #318 on: September 08, 2010, 07:56:59 AM »

"Moderate" Ground Zero mosque Imam Rauf: "In a true peace, Israel will, in our lifetimes, become one more Arab country, with a Jewish minority"

Ground Zero mosque Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf's "moderate" facade continues to be exposed as the exercise in deception that it is. He has said of Israel, according to audio revealed by Pamela Geller, that "a one-state solution is...more coherent...than a two-state solution."

By that, of course, he meant a Sharia state with Muslims holding all the political power and Jews relegated to the institutionalized discrimination of dhimmi status. Any doubt of that was dispelled when he said: "In a true peace it is impossible that a purely Jewish state of Palestine can endure. . . . In a true peace, Israel will, in our lifetimes, become one more Arab country, with a Jewish minority."


Power User
Posts: 41791

« Reply #319 on: September 09, 2010, 06:56:06 AM »
Power User
Posts: 15391

« Reply #320 on: September 09, 2010, 07:55:30 AM »

The muslim celebrations of 9/11 in the US will be even more subdued and covert.
Power User
Posts: 15391

« Reply #321 on: September 17, 2010, 08:09:20 PM »

"Oh yeah, didn’t you hear? Separation of church and state only applies to Christianity."
Power User
Posts: 41791

« Reply #322 on: September 20, 2010, 08:53:08 AM »

BELL, Calif.—Infuriated residents of this small southern California city made a national name for themselves when they ousted three municipal officials after revelations of high six-figure salaries. Lesser known is that Bell's citizen revolution is being run from an Islamic community center.

Taxpayer outrage has washed away the wariness that once separated the working-class Roman Catholic and Protestant Latinos who make up Bell's majority and a quietly flourishing minority of Shi'ite Muslims. The nascent unity in Bell—where 100 people meet regularly at the El-Hussein Center about the ongoing scandal—comes amid controversies in other U.S. cities over the construction or expansion of Islamic institutions.

More than 100 residents met last week in Bell, Calif.'s El-Hussein center. The banner in back, in Arabic, proclaims love for and acceptance of God.

"We're all victims here," said Ali Saleh, a Muslim resident and member of the Bell Association to Stop the Abuse, which hosts the community meetings. "Sad to say, but that's what's bringing us together."

A Pew Research report released last month showed 30% of Americans have a positive view of Islam, compared with 42% who held a positive view in 2005. Muslim-American leaders have urged Muslims to counter that image by becoming more visibly involved in political life, but with limited success. Bell has the potential to become the kind of turnaround Muslim-Americans are after as the nation debates their place in American society.

Bell's former city manager, one of the officials forced out, took home nearly $800,000 a year in pay, and some part-time city council members earned $100,000. Alleging fraud and conspiracy, the state is suing current and former Bell officials.

Tightly packed across just two square miles, Bell is among several small cities tucked amid the sprawling industrial areas southeast of Los Angeles. It's wedged between four freeways, commercial railway lines and a concrete-lined stretch of the Los Angeles River. In the 1950s and '60s, Bell's population exploded.

Longtime Bell residents say white residents began to leave Bell in the 1960s for more spacious suburbs in neighboring Orange County. Race riots in Los Angeles drove more whites away. By 2000, says the U.S. Census, 90% of Bell's 37,000 population identified as Latino.

For most Bell residents, the community meetings that started at the Islamic center in early August are the first real contact they've had with a Muslim community that has been in the city for at least four decades.

"Since I was a little girl, I remember going to school with the Muslim children and they really kept to themselves," said Cynthia Rodriguez, a 29-year-old mother and lifelong resident of Bell.

She was nervous the first day she walked into the El-Hussein Center, unsettled by the unfamiliar images and Arabic writing. But "disgust and fury" at city officials outweighed her fear.

Then someone offered her a chair. Now, she attends every meeting and is getting to know some of her Muslim neighbors for the first time.

Bell's Muslims, numbering between 1,000 and 2,000, are Lebanese immigrants who fled civil war in their country in the 1970s and began arriving from the same village, called Yaroun.

They took jobs in the garment industry, bought homes, and built the mosque and community center. Some Lebanese immigrants opened clothing shops in the area and picked up Spanish to communicate with their largely Latino customer base.

Bell's Muslims said they felt an affinity with their Latino neighbors, if not a closeness. Both groups are immigrants who worked at low-wage jobs or opened small businesses, and both groups sent money to family in their home countries. Even soccer connected them "They work hard, we work hard. Everybody is just working and taking care of their kids" said Mr. Saleh. Bell's Muslims didn't get involved with local politics because "we just concentrated on our families and work," Mr. Saleh said.

But some began to feel it was time for a change in Bell. Last year, another local Muslim named Ali Saleh ran for city council. Then anonymous fliers appeared with images of the candidate's head on the body of a radical Muslim cleric, with New York's burning Twin Towers and a message: "Vote NO Muslims." Mr. Saleh lost.

At a recent city council meeting, the 35-year-old Mr. Saleh, who was born and raised in Bell, stood in front of the city council and a packed house of rowdy Bell residents.

"You told me you were running to protect your people from people like me," Mr. Saleh said, addressing Luis Artiga, a former opponent in the city council race who won the seat. "Let me tell you, these are all my people!" Mr. Saleh shouted to sustained cheering and applause. "Whether they're Arab, whether they're Mexican, whether they Salvadoran, Guatamalan, we are all one." He then repeated his words in Spanish.

After attending the most recent meeting at the El-Hussein Center, Mr. Artiga, a local pastor of a Southern Baptist church, said he regretted what he said during the campaign and that he had nothing to do with the fliers portraying Mr. Saleh as a terrorist. He and Mr. Saleh shook hands.

The new unity in Bell may soon be tested, however. The community association faces some criticism for its political ties and motives.

But as they have opened up to Bell, Muslim community members said, the response has been mostly positive. Recently a local grocer that caters to Latinos called the Islamic center to ask about stocking Halal items— food that meets Islamic dietary standards.

Muslim leaders say no one has bothered them about their mosque or community center until recently, when they received a letter that read "All I need to know about Islam I learned from 9-11"—from an anonymous sender in Texas.

The meetings at the center are conducted in Spanish and English, with the doors to the center thrown open to the evening air. At a recent meeting, more than 150 residents filled rows of green plastic chairs. Their bored children fidgeted in the back of the room, munching on churros and sipping hot chocolate under stacks of the Quran.

Meanwhile, 76-year-old Robert Mackin, who has lived in Bell since 1941, angry that city council members hadn't stepped down, shouted at the interim city attorney: "What about the crooks you still work for?"

Unsatisfied, Mr. Mackin walked toward a row of bearded Muslim men and shook their hands. "Good question, good question," one of the men told him.

Mr. Mackin said he has learned a few things about Islam as he had attended the meetings at the community center. He said he wasn't sure about one photograph on the wall until one young Muslim man told him it was Mecca. The same young man had asked him whether he was "Christian or Catholic."

"Well I laughed and said 'I'm Catholic but Catholics are Christians'," recalled Mr. Mackin. "He was young, and I guess he didn't know. Anyway, we're all learning."

Write to Tammy Audi at
Power User
Posts: 41791

« Reply #323 on: September 20, 2010, 08:58:22 AM »

Islam's Encounters With America
A survey by Elaph, the most respected electronic daily in the Arab world, saw 58% object to the building of the WTC mosque.

From his recent travels to the Persian Gulf—sponsored and paid for by the State Department—Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf returned with a none-too-subtle threat. His project, the Ground Zero Mosque, would have to go on. Its cancellation would risk putting "our soldiers, our troops, our embassies and citizens under attack in the Muslim world."

Leave aside the attempt to make this project a matter of national security. The self-appointed bridge between America and the Arab-Islamic world is a false witness to the sentiments in Islamic lands.

Deputy Editorial Page Editor Bret Stephens and Editorial Board member Matthew Kaminski on the plan for a 'Mosque at Ground Zero,' and Senior Editorial Writer Joseph Rago reports on the Missouri results.
The truth is that the trajectory of Islam in America (and Europe for that matter) is at variance with the play of things in Islam's main habitat. A survey by Elaph, the most respected electronic daily in the Arab world, gave a decided edge to those who objected to the building of this mosque—58% saw it as a project of folly.

Elaph was at it again in the aftermath of Pastor Terry Jones's threat to burn copies of the Quran: It queried its readers as to whether America was a "tolerant" or a "bigoted" society. The split was 63% to 37% in favor of those who accepted the good faith and pluralism of this country.

This is remarkable. The ground burned in the Arab-Islamic world over the last three decades. Sly preachers and their foot soldiers "weaponized" the faith and all but devoured what modernists had tried to build in the face of difficult odds. The fury has not burned out. Self-styled imams continue to issue fatwas that have made it all but impossible for Arabs and Muslims to partake of the modern world. But from this ruinous history, there has settled upon countless Muslims and Arabs the recognition that the wells are poisoned in their midst, that the faith has to be reined in or that the faith will kill, and that the economic and cultural prospects of modern Islam hang in the balance.

To this kind of sobriety, Muslim activists and preachers in the diaspora—in Patterson, N.J., and Minneapolis, in Copenhagen and Amsterdam—appear to be largely indifferent. They are forever on the look-out for the smallest slight.

Islam in America is of recent vintage. This country can't be "Islamic." Its foundations are deep in the Puritan religious tradition. The waves of immigrants who came to these shores understood the need for discretion, and for patience.

It wasn't belligerence that carried the Catholics and the Jews into the great American mainstream. It was the swarm of daily life—the grocery store, the assembly line, the garment industry, the public schools, and the big wars that knit the American communities together—and tore down the religious and ethnic barriers.

There is no gain to be had, no hearts and minds to be won, in Imam Rauf insisting that Ground Zero can't be hallowed ground because there is a strip joint and an off-track betting office nearby. This may be true, but it is irrelevant.

A terrible deed took place on that ground nine years ago. Nineteen young Arabs brought death and ruin onto American soil, and discretion has a place of pride in the way the aftermath is handled. "Islam" didn't commit these crimes, but young Arabs and Muslims did.

There is no use for the incantation that Islam is a religion of peace. The incantation is false; Islam, like other religions, is theologically a religion of war and a religion of peace. In our time, it is a religion in distress, fought over, hijacked at times, by a militant breed at war with the modern world.

Again, from Elaph, here are the thoughts of an Arab writer, Ahmed Abu Mattar, who sees through the militancy of the religious radicals. He dismisses outright the anger over the "foolish and deranged" Pastor Terry Jones who threatened to burn copies of the Quran. "Where is the anger in the face of dictatorships which dominate the lives of Arabs from the cradle to the grave? Would the Prophet Muhammad look with favor on the prisons in our midst which outnumber the universities and hospitals? Would he take comfort in the rate of illiteracy among the Arabs which exceeds 60%? Would he be satisfied with the backwardness that renders us a burden on other nations?"

The first Arabs who came to America arrived during the time of the Great Migration (1880-1920). Their story is told by Gregory Orfalea in his book, "The Arab Americans: A History" (2006). The pioneers were mostly Christians on the run from the hunger and the privations of a dying Ottoman empire. One such pioneer who fled Lebanon for America said he wanted to leave his homeland and "go to the land of justice." Ellis Island was fondly named bayt al-hurriya (the house of freedom). It was New York, in the larger neighborhood of Wall Street, that was the first home of the immigrants.

Restrictive quotas and the Great Depression reduced the migration to a trickle. This would change drastically in the 1950s and '60s. The time of Islam in America had begun.

It was in 1965, Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf tells us, that he made his way to America as a young man. He and a vast migration would be here as American identity would undergo a drastic metamorphosis.

The prudence of days past was now a distant memory. These activists who came in the 1990s—the time of multiculturalism and of what the late Arthur Schlesinger Jr. called the "disuniting of America"—would insist on a full-scale revision of the American creed. American liberalism had broken with American patriotism, and the self-styled activists would give themselves over to a militancy that would have shocked their forerunners. It is out of that larger history that this project at Ground Zero is born.

There is a great Arab and Islamic tale. It happened in the early years of Islam, but it speaks to this controversy. It took place in A.D. 638, the time of Islam's triumphs.

The second successor to the Prophet, the Caliph Omar—to orthodox Muslims the most revered of the four Guided Caliphs for the great conquests that took place during his reign—had come to Jerusalem to accept the city's surrender. Patriarch Sophronius, the city's chief magistrate, is by his side for the ceremony of surrender. Prayer time comes for Omar while the patriarch is showing him the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.
The conqueror asks where he could spread out his prayer rug. Sophronius tells him that he could stay where he was. Omar refuses, because his followers, he said, might then claim for Islam the holy shrine of the Christians. Omar stepped outside for his prayer.

We don't always assert all the "rights" that we can get away with. The faith is honored when the faith bends to necessity and discretion.

Mr. Ajami is a professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution.
Power User
Posts: 41791

« Reply #324 on: September 24, 2010, 08:46:30 PM »

Why did Obama go to Church? To Listen to a Muslim Speak!
September 21, 2010 by Roberto Santiago
Filed under Islam

And embrace your future!
So, why do you think Barack Obama and family really went to church on
The mainstream media won't tell you, but Obama went to St. John's Episcopal
Church to hear a MUSLIM GUEST SPEAKER!
via Bare Naked Islam ( you are the best! )

The Post Email Yesterday, on Sunday, September 19, 2010, the Obama family
attended church for only the third time in a year. They went on foot to the
St. John's Episcopal Church situated across the Lafayette Park.
But what is widely not reported by the White House and the MSM is that on
that particular Sunday in that particular church, Dr. Ziad Asali, M.D., a
Muslim, founder and president of the American Task Force on Palestine, was
the guest speaker. He was there to speak on the subject of "Prospects of the
two-state solution in the Middle-East."
According to the website of the American Task Force on Palestine, it is a
"non-profit, non-partisan organization based in Washington, DC." The
organization describes itself as "dedicated to advocating that it is in the
American national interest to promote an end to the conflict in the Middle
East through a negotiated agreement that provides for two states - Israel
and Palestine - living side by side in peace and security."

Dr. Ziad J. Asali is described as "a long-time activist on Middle East
issues" who has testified to both chambers of Congress about Palestinian
interests, increased U.S. aid to the Palestinian Authority, and "Israel's
disproportionate use of force" in Gaza. A retired physician, Asali received
his early medical training at the American University of Beirut.  He
previously served as President of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination
Committee (ADC) and Chairman of the American Committee on Jerusalem (ACJ),
which he also co-founded   He also served as the President of the
Arab-American University Graduates (AAUG). H/T Another Infidel

Power User
Posts: 41791

« Reply #325 on: November 18, 2010, 11:54:04 PM »

Two faiths, two women and their friendship
In the film, Arranged, shared values bridge the faith divide in an unexpected way.

Jennifer S. Bryson is Director of the Islam and Civil Society Project at the Witherspoon Institute in Princeton, New Jersey. Her article is reproduced here with the permission of The Public Discourse.

“I heard that the Muslims want to kill all the Jews,” says a fourth-grade student to his Muslim teacher while an Orthodox Jewish teacher sits with them in the classroom. Just about any way one looks at this it sounds like a recipe for disaster.

And yet, by this point in the film Arranged the students’ Muslim teacher, Nasira, and the Orthodox Jewish special education teacher, Rochel, have begun to suspect that they may have more in common with each other as religious women than with anyone else in the secular environment of their Brooklyn public school.

The lunchtime chit-chat of the other female school teachers is about parties and sleeping with guys. Nasira and Rochel have, however, opted for a different approach to life. This means eating lunch alone instead—until they discover each other, that is.

There are those who would like to get Nasira and Rochel to abandon their “backward” ways. In the view of the school principal, for example, the religiosity and consequent modesty of Nasira and Rochel are outdated and irrational. At a workshop to instruct teachers about tolerance, the principal simply assumes and then goes on to tell the whole group that she thinks Nasira wears a headscarf because her father forces her to do so. Nasira, however, refuses to let this snide remark pass and shares with the group an eloquent explanation of her personal choice to follow her religious faith and how this informs her understanding of feminine modesty. She does so gracefully and confidently, not angrily or bitterly. This piques Rochel’s interest. Rochel discovers that Nasira too is facing the challenge of trying to fit in but not give in to the culture at their school.

Nasira’s explanation of why she chooses to wear the hijab does, however, not alleviate the principal’s crusade to ‘enlighten’ and ‘liberate’ Nasira and Rochel with her own brand of feminism.

The principal’s enthusiasm for diversity and tolerance wanes when it comes to the modest attire these young women have chosen out of their religious convictions. The principal considers these women among her two best teachers in the school, but for her that’s not enough. She tells them, “You’re successful participants in the modern world, except for this religious thing. You know I mean—the rules, the regulations, the way you dress… I mean come on we’re in the 21st century here for crying out loud. There was a women’s movement!” Nasira and Rochel try to be polite, but clearly they feel more irritation than liberation at hearing this. The principal, on the other hand, is so flustered by Nasira and Rochel’s calm, confident disinterest in the type of free-for-all feminism she promotes that she finally resorts to offering them her own personal money for them to go out and buy some “designer” clothes as a replacement for “those farkakte outfits” (which seems to be a Yiddish nod, from the secular Jewish principal, to the line from the Blues Brothers, “What are you guys gonna do? The same act? Wearing the same farkakte suits?”). Nasira and Rochel decline and walk out of her office.

This is a delightful film with a positive, substantive message. It deserves more viewers than its somewhat confusing title might attract. Arranged, as in arranged marriage, conjures up for many images of child marriage and forced marriage. This film does not attempt to downplay the abusiveness of such practices. Rather, in this film the “arranging” of marriage refers to family engagement in the process of searching for a suitable spouse.

(In fact, it is worth noting that today there are devout Muslims and Jews working to protect women and men from potential abuses resulting from distorted concepts of marriage. For example, this Fall the Muslim chaplain at New York University, Imam Khalid Latif, devoted a Friday sermon to differentiating between marriage and forced marriage.)

Nasira and Rochel discover they are both exploring the possibility of getting married, and that both of them are from devout religious families with cultural traditions of parents’ involvement in suggesting and getting to know eligible bachelors.

At the same time, even with a role for their families in seeking a suitable spouse, each woman has veto authority over any of the proposed suitors. And they exercise it.

But when Rochel spots a handsome, single Orthodox Jewish student with kind, bright eyes in a university study group with Nasira’s brother, some dreaming and scheming ensue. The most helpful person along the way proves to be her Muslim friend Nasira, who comes up with a humorous ploy to bring him to the attention of the women helping Rochel find a husband.

In a day and age in America when public discussion of marriage tends to be limited to either vicious fighting or depressing divorce statistics, Arranged provides a welcome respite from this. The film offers instead a focus on the centrality of relationship, commitment, and family in marriage.

This story—devout Muslim and Orthodox Jewish women discovering common ground in valuing feminine dignity and family—is not just some fictional tale of unrealistic wishful-thinking. Arranged is based on the real life account of an Orthodox Jewish woman, a teacher in the New York public schools, and her experiences getting to know the Pakistani-American Muslim mother of one of her pupils.

These filmmakers are not naïve. As one of them explains in an interview about the making of the film, included on the DVD, Israel and Lebanon were at war during the shooting of this movie. Challenges abound and they are very real. And in the film Nasira and Rochel have to maneuver their budding friendship through the obstacles of family members’ skepticism and even opposition to their Muslim-Jewish friendship. But even so, real friendships are also possible, and alliances to protect religious freedom can cross unexpected lines.

(For example, in Montreal the Orthodox Jewish community is fighting against a bill which would ban the Muslim facial veil, niqab, in Quebec for women seeking government services. The Orthodox Jewish community there has expressed concern about the government trying to regulate the attire of religious believers and doing so by targeting one minority.)

Shared values provide a bridge for Nasira and Rochel. They are women with humble self-dignity in a world not disposed to support integrity or family. What these women learn is that kindness begets friendship, and genuine friendship can handle differences. They don’t have to deny their difference to get along. The bridge they build proves to be stronger than cross-currents around them. Friendship, and healthy relationships, ensue and grow.

Jennifer S. Bryson is Director of the Islam and Civil Society Project at The Witherspoon Institute in Princeton, NJ.

Copyright 2010 the Witherspoon Institute. All rights reserved.

Power User
Posts: 41791

« Reply #326 on: November 30, 2010, 06:06:37 PM »

Worth noting is that the Portland wannabe was first brought to the FBI's attention by his father.
Power User
Posts: 41791

« Reply #327 on: December 01, 2010, 10:23:07 AM »

Its POTH, so caveat lector:

Terror Cases Strain Ties With Some Who Can Help
Published: November 30, 2010
PORTLAND, Ore. — The arrest in a plot to bomb a popular Christmas tree-lighting ceremony here has renewed focus on the crucial but often fragile relationship that many Muslim communities have with federal law enforcement agencies.

Many Muslim leaders nationwide say they are committed to working with the authorities to fight terrorist threats and applauded the work in Portland. But some say cases like the one in Oregon, in which undercover agents said they helped a teenager plan the attack, risk undermining the trust of Muslim communities that federal agents say is essential to doing their jobs.
The failed Portland plot is one of several recent cases, from California to Washington, D.C., in which undercover agents helped suspects pursue terrorist plans. Some Muslims say the government appears to be enabling and even sensationalizing threats that can lead to backlashes against Muslim communities.

On Sunday, a mosque in Corvallis, Ore., was firebombed. It had been attended by the Portland suspect, Mohamed Osman Mohamud, 19, a naturalized American citizen from Somalia.

“Unlike the so-called plot at Pioneer Square, that was a real terrorist attack, against a house of worship,” said a man who attends the Islamic Center of Portland and Masjed As-Saber, another mosque where Mr. Mohamud worshiped.

“What the F.B.I. did can be seen in Corvallis,” the man said, one of several people who spoke with a reporter but refused to give their names out of concern that they would bring negative attention to the mosque.

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. defended the Oregon investigation and others this week as part of what he called a “forward-leaning way” that law enforcement is “trying to find people who are bound and determined to harm Americans and American interests around the world.”

Hussam Ayloush, the executive director of the Los Angeles chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said law enforcement was going too far.

“ ‘Forward-leaning’ seems to be basically if someone has not crossed the bridge, we will push them forward, we will tip them over the edge,” he said. “And that is not how a government should be treating its citizens.”

“My worry would be that the F.B.I. is pushing to a point where it becomes difficult to trust the F.B.I.,” said Mr. Ayloush, who added that he was a graduate of an F.B.I. Citizens’ Academy. “When people start doubting, then they might feel like, ‘Well, maybe it might make things worse if I call,’ and we don’t want this.”

Amid the tension, Muslim leaders say their communities are doing more than ever to help in investigations — a fact they say is overlooked by many Americans.

A November report by the Muslim Public Affairs Council said Muslim communities had helped law enforcement agencies foil almost 4 of every 10 Qaeda-related terrorism plots since the Sept. 11 attacks. The report is based on information the group draws from news media accounts, affidavits, academic studies and other sources.

“There is an enormous countertrend that has emerged within the last few years,” said Alejandro Beutel, the author of the report. “People are saying: ‘This is a serious issue, and we are dealing with this. We are not tolerating this.’ ”

Even as federal law enforcement officials have been criticized, they say their investigations have been strengthened by their outreach efforts and good relations with Muslims, including here in Oregon.

Leaders of mosques, including those attended by Mr. Mohamud, regularly attend meetings with law enforcement officials. And Mr. Mohamud’s father, Osman Barre, provided information before his son’s arrest about his increasing radicalization, officials have said.

Dwight C. Holton, the United States attorney for Oregon, said he would travel to Washington next week to meet with Mr. Holder to discuss Oregon’s participation in a new Justice Department program called Enhanced Muslim Community Outreach.

“The minute I heard about this program, I signed Oregon up,” Mr. Holton said, adding that the meeting was scheduled before Mr. Mohamud’s arrest. “It’s so important to do this outreach, and this program will allow us to do even more work, to do more face-to-face meetings with not just the community leaders but with members of the community.”

The events in Oregon have put many Muslims in unexpected and uncomfortable roles.

Shahriar Ahmed is a jovial 55-year-old engineer and a self-described member of a group of “nerdy folks” with postgraduate degrees living in suburban Portland. He is also the president of his local mosque, Bilal Masjid, with skills that he said leaned more toward fund-raising than faith-building.

“I’m not a theologian by trade,” said Mr. Ahmed, who knows only enough Arabic to get through his prayers. “I’m just good at begging for money.”

But with the arrest of Mr. Mohamud and then the fire in Corvallis, Mr. Ahmed has been fielding questions on topics ranging from Islam in general to how the aftermath could affect worshipers at his mosque. For him, the broader questions are not necessarily the most pressing.

“My 11-year-old son started crying in the back of the car,” Mr. Ahmed said, recalling a conversation about the fire. “I could not make him stop. He was saying: ‘Is our mosque going to get burned? Is our mosque going to get burned?’ ”

Colin Miner contributed reporting from Portland, Ore.; Isolde Raftery from Eugene, Ore.; and Malia Wollan from San Francisco.

Power User
Posts: 15391

« Reply #328 on: December 01, 2010, 11:05:15 AM »

"Muslim leaders express concern at backlash from tomorrow's terror attack."  rolleyes
Power User
Posts: 15391

« Reply #329 on: December 24, 2010, 11:55:27 AM »

NY Mayor Bloomberg Was " In Cahoots" With Planners of Ground Zero Mosque

This past summer it seemed as if every day Michael Bloomberg, the arrogant, out of touch Mayor of New York was making another speech implying that the opponents of the ground-zero mosque were either stupid or bigoted.  And when he wasn't calling the mosque opponents names, he was  proclaiming there should be no compromise. What the Arrogant Mayor neglected to mention during any of his many rants is that the Ground Zero Mosque fight was fixed from the beginning. The Mayor had his top aides helping the mosque planners, writing letters for them and helping them politically navigate around the anti-mosque forces.

Emails released due to a FOIA lawsuit by The American Center for Law and Justice reveal

    ...City Hall had direct communications with the Mosque’s developers, explicitly tried to assist with the political process, and was involved with discussions between the developers and the Community Board 1.  An email from the developers’ attorney, Shelly Friedman, also acknowledged that Robert Tierney, the Chairman of the LPC, was seeking “political cover” from politicians in order not to landmark the building. 

 The emails released by City Hall revealed the coaching Bloomberg's brass gave to the imam pushing to build the mosque, Feisal Abdul Rauf.  At one point, Community Affairs Commissioner Nazli Parvizi even drafted a letter for Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf's wife, Daisy Khan, to send to Community Board 1, which was voting on the project.

    "As a Muslim-American and a New Yorker, I take my role in keeping New York the greatest City in the world serious," the draft said. Parvizi also provided the contact information for the board.

In a email sent in May, Shelly Friedman, the organizers' lawyer, wrote that Manhattan Community Board 1's vote in support of the project would be helpful as organizers urged landmark commission Chairman Robert Tierney and other panel members to reject landmark status for the building currently on the site. "I do know that chairman Tierney was looking forward to having the 'political cover' their support would bring him," Ms. Friedman wrote.

Parvizi also sent the Imam an email advising  Rauf not to go back to Community Board 1 for approval for the project after the Landmarks Preservation Commission gave the project the green light.

    "Hi Feisal," the letter begins. "I know that [Community Board 1 President] Julie [Menin] is incredibly anxious to get the letter and she was really upset to hear that such a landmarking issue exists and was not even mentioned.

    "My recommendation is given you mau [sic] have to go up to the community board again to discuss this issue, send the letter to julie asap and keep her on your good side. Tommorow or monday am at the latest.

    "I would at this point keep the issues separate. What the letter will do I hope is get the media attention off everyone's backs and give you guys time to regroup on your strategy, as discussed."

    Another email reveals that Immigrant Affairs Commissioner Fatima Shama expedited a temporary public assembly permit for the group to conduct prayers in January at Park 51

    In another letter, Shama congratulated the group after the project was approved by CB1's finance committee, writing,

    "Sharif, Daisy, Iman Faisal,
    Again—congratulations!!! This is very exciting for all of you and our community at large!"

The Mayor's office contends that they get behind everyone's projects just as much:

    City Hall says it is the job of the community and immigrant affairs commissioners to assist community groups, including drafting letters for them. Officials noted Bloomberg has always been in favor of building the mosque near Ground Zero.

    "The Community Affairs Unit exists to help groups navigate city government, and from helping prepare for a Papal visit to expediting approval of a Sukkah in a midtown Manhattan park, this kind of assistance is typical of its regular work," said Bloomberg spokesman Stu Loeser.

It seems that these emails show more than the usual amount of support coming from the mayor's office.  In fact they reveal another example of  Mayor Bloomberg's contempt for the vast majority of  people of his own city, indeed the people of the United States. While people worked so hard to protect what they see as hallowed grounds, the Mayor's office was sneaking behind their backs to fight against them.

Sources: NY Observer, Wall Street Journal, NY Post and The ACLJ

Power User
Posts: 41791

« Reply #330 on: January 05, 2011, 09:12:52 PM »

In Defense Of The Constitution

News & Analysis
January 5, 2011

     CAIR: “We Are First Defenders Offenders Of The Constitution”

     On December 23, Ibrahim Hooper, Communications Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) was interviewed on Press TV.  Press TV is an English language TV station controlled by the Iranian government through Republic of Iran Broadcasting. Hooper complained about law enforcement authorities training programs and went on to say: "I’m talking about twenty-five percent to 1/3 of Americans having an active hostility toward Islam and Muslims."

     What are the facts regarding “anti-Muslim bias” in America?  From the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) (2009) the following “hate crime” percentages are reported:

Year                             Religious Group

2009             Islam  9.3%                   Jewish  70.1%   
2008             Islam  7.7%                   Jewish  65.7%   
2007             Islam  9.0                      Jewish  68.4   

     The numbers of “victims” of anti-Muslim “hate crimes” is fairly unchanged from 2007 – 2009.  The largest group is, unsurprisingly, Jewish.  Although Jews are victims of “hate crimes” far more often than Muslims, we do not see any mainstream Jewish groups giving interviews for TV stations controlled by governments that are state sponsors of terrorism. Nor do we see Jewish groups railing against Law Enforcement or the American people for harboring an anti-Jewish sentiment or bias.

     Is CAIR defending our Constitution when so many “Anti-Muslim hate crimes” CAIR pushes are revealed to be committed by Muslims or fabricated in an attempt to either cover up criminal activity or to falsely demonstrate that Islam and Muslims are under "attack" in the United States?

     In the interview, Hooper's claim that “We are first defenders of the Constitution” is a pathetic joke and Hooper knows it. Consider CAIR-San Fransico's Director Zahra Billoo proudly claiming to be a "Muslim Anarchist" on her Twitter page and it can be fairly put to rest that any CAIR official has even a modicum of respect for the U.S. Constitution.

     CAIR is either at the throat of law enforcement officials or kissing their feet, depending on the mood du jour at CAIR headquarters. This is a confusion ploy and it can work very well. The threat of being branded an "Islamophobe" can make some people turn away from the facts. FOX's Bill O’Reilly even considered CAIR-Chicago supremacist Ahmed Rehab a “stand up guy” and long ago gave up any idea of investigating CAIR or CAIR’s connections to Islamist terrorists.

      CAIR often defensively whines over the violent actions of common street thugs and Islamic militants who have plotted, committed, or openly declared violent jihad against us. Hooper has the nerve to make the outrageous claim that 1/3 of Americans have an "active hostility" toward Muslims yet CAIR is demonstratively apathetic that 10-15% of One Billion Muslims actively support militant Jihadists.

     In New York City, CAIR pushed authorities to levy “hate crime” charges against two men involved in a 3AM brawl with “Imam” Rod Peterson.  This “Imam” or “religious leader” has a record of arrests for burglary, robbery, and illegal gun possession. Why is it that Muslim “religious leaders” CAIR shills for seem to have rap sheets or a history of taking part in odious crimes?  One man involved in the brawl was completely cleared of any wrongdoing and the other had charges reduced to misdemeanors. Once again, CAIR failed to add another statistic in its miserable campaign to claim that Americans hate Muslims.  Despite CAIR’s tireless efforts to create discord, in 2009 CAIR could only squeak out 11 “hate crimes” against Muslims in New York City.  The Jews?  Once again, they lead the pack in the Big Apple with over 250.  Perhaps it's safer to be a Muslim in New York than a Jew?

     The only thing that keeps civil people from pointing at CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper in public and exposing his obvious character flaws and outright lying nature is the fact that he calls himself a Muslim.  If Hooper weren’t claiming to be Muslim, he’d have been labeled just another has-been kook representing a supremacist fringe group that has pretensions of greatness based on religious bigotry. 

     Knowledge is power. CAIR works hard to hide the facts of radical Islam from ordinary Americans.  If the majority of Americans ever wake up to the truth of CAIR, we can be sure that the call for CAIR’s removal from our shores would ring so loud that every local, state, and national law enforcement agency would be forced to act.

     The large majority of Muslims in America and around the world know that fascist, political Islam is not compatible with our Constitution and it never will be. This is what attracts many to our shores. They know that fanatical religious police cannot bother them here, that accusations of blasphemy will not result in stoning, or that their body parts cannot be cut off for theft, real or imagined. They are Free.

     CAIR and Hooper have breathlessly pushed the lie of "Islamophobia" and continuously fail to prove it actually exists. Where CAIR finds "Islamophobia", the reality is often nothing more than Americans showing concern for radical Islamist groups involving themselves in endeavors that are designed to weaken our Constitution or promote the ideals of Islamist supremacy. Hooper can thank himself, his organization, and his fellow travelers for any “misunderstandings” Americans have regarding Islam.

Andrew Whitehead

Story Links:
Power User
Posts: 41791

« Reply #331 on: January 07, 2011, 06:08:13 AM »

When New York Rep. Peter King, the new chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, called for congressional hearings on radical Islam in America this fall, the reaction from the official Muslim community was swift. Ibrahim Hooper, president of the Council on American- Islamic Relations, said he feared the hearings would become an "anti-Muslim witch hunt." Abed A. Ayoub of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee asserted that Mr. King's proposal had "bigoted intentions."

While Mr. King has a reputation for adopting polarizing positions—particularly when it comes to immigration—his hearings deserve serious consideration. "There has to be an honest discussion of the role of the Muslim community—what they are doing, what they're not doing," he explained to the New York Observer in a Nov. 30 article. "I talk to law enforcement people across the country; they will tell me. . . . They don't feel any sense of cooperation."

These concerns are reasonable. Histrionic objections to them only deter Muslims from fulfilling a fundamental Islamic obligation: Meeting our duty to the society in which we live.

According to Islamic law, Muslims are obligated to three entities: the self, God and society. This last has been overlooked too often by Muslims and their adopted societies.

Similar to the Christian obligation to "render unto Caesar what is Caesar's," the Quran and the derived corpus of Islamic jurisprudence support Muslims' engagement with those to whom power is entrusted. Chapter 4, verse 59 of the Quran reads: "Verily, Allah commands you to give over the trusts to those entitled to them, and that, when you judge between men, you judge with justice."

That patriotic majority has a duty not only to follow the laws of the United States, but to make sure that their fellow Muslims do the same. Islam calls this duty "commanding the right and forbidding the wrong." It is an obligation that is sourced widely in Islamic scripture, beginning with the Quran. The scriptures even underline that this duty is shared by both men and women.

In one verse, Muslims are instructed: "Let there be one community of you, calling good and commanding right and forbidding wrong" (3:110). Another instructs: "Believers, the men and the women, are friends of one another; they command right, and forbid wrong" (9:71). Impartiality is critical to fulfilling this duty. As it is written: "And let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice" (5:Cool.

The holy texts of Islam emphasize that one's greatest allegiance should be to justice—superseding family and co-religionist ties. "Be strict in observing justice, and be witness for Allah, even though it be against yourselves or against your parents or kindred," the Quran says in chapter 4, verse 36.

Justice is the cornerstone of Islamic life—despite the appalling reality of many Muslim-majority countries today. Every faithful Muslim must contribute to the preservation of justice within their society.

How we respond to possible hearings on radicalism will reveal our own commitment to Islam. Cooperation can take the form of expert testimony, informing on radical entities, and perhaps foremost, educating ourselves about our religion. Lest any doubt remain as to how Muslims must respond to Mr. King's call, an anecdote from the hadith (the Prophet's sayings) makes it explicit.

Marwan, a twice-appointed Muslim governor of Medina in the seventh century, performed two actions considered religiously unorthodox by his contemporaries: He brought out a pulpit, even though it was a feast day, and then delivered a sermon before leading prayer.

These ritual infractions precipitated an outcry, compelling one congregant to speak up: "Marwan, you've gone against sunna [a normative practice demonstrated by the Prophet]!" A companion of the Prophet, Abu Sa'id Al Khudri, observing the scene, supported this public admonition and turned to the objector: "You have done your duty." Promptly, he quoted the Prophet, "Whoever sees a wrong and is able to put it right with his hand, let him do so; if he can't, then with his tongue; if he can't, then in his heart, and that is the bare minimum of faith."

Exposing nefarious forces at play within our community is a Muslim responsibility—the "bare minimum of faith" for every Muslim man and woman.

Dr. Ahmed is author of "In the Land of Invisible Women: A Female Doctor's Journey in the Saudi Kingdom" (Sourcebooks, 2008).
Power User
Posts: 15391

« Reply #332 on: January 07, 2011, 08:07:17 AM »

Nice sentiments from Dr. Ahmed, however the koran doesn't teach what the good doctor says it does.

"Let there be one community of you, calling good and commanding right and forbidding wrong" (3:110)

YUSUFALI: Ye are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind, enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, and believing in Allah. If only the People of the Book had faith, it were best for them: among them are some who have faith, but most of them are perverted transgressors.
PICKTHAL: Ye are the best community that hath been raised up for mankind. Ye enjoin right conduct and forbid indecency; and ye believe in Allah. And if the People of the Scripture had believed it had been better for them. Some of them are believers; but most of them are evil-livers.
SHAKIR: You are the best of the nations raised up for (the benefit of) men; you enjoin what is right and forbid the wrong and believe in Allah; and if the followers of the Book had believed it would have been better for them; of them (some) are believers and most of them are transgressors.

YUSUFALI: They will do you no harm, barring a trifling annoyance; if they come out to fight you, they will show you their backs, and no help shall they get.
PICKTHAL: They will not harm you save a trifling hurt, and if they fight against you they will turn and flee. And afterward they will not be helped.
SHAKIR: They shall by no means harm you but with a slight evil; and if they fight with you they shall turn (their) backs to you, then shall they not be helped.

YUSUFALI: Shame is pitched over them (Like a tent) wherever they are found, except when under a covenant (of protection) from Allah and from men; they draw on themselves wrath from Allah, and pitched over them is (the tent of) destitution. This because they rejected the Signs of Allah, and slew the prophets in defiance of right; this because they rebelled and transgressed beyond bounds.
PICKTHAL: Ignominy shall be their portion wheresoever they are found save (where they grasp) a rope from Allah and a rope from men. They have incurred anger from their Lord, and wretchedness is laid upon them. That is because they used to disbelieve the revelations of Allah, and slew the prophets wrongfully. That is because they were rebellious and used to transgress.
SHAKIR: Abasement is made to cleave to them wherever they are found, except under a covenant with Allah and a covenant with men, and they have become deserving of wrath from Allah, and humiliation is made to cleave to them; this is because they disbelieved in the communications of Allah and slew the prophets unjustly; this is because they disobeyed and exceeded the limits.
Power User
Posts: 15391

« Reply #333 on: January 07, 2011, 08:16:56 AM »

"Believers, the men and the women, are friends of one another; they command right, and forbid wrong" (9:71)

YUSUFALI: But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
PICKTHAL: Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
SHAKIR: So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! take not for protectors your fathers and your brothers if they love infidelity above Faith: if any of you do so, they do wrong.
PICKTHAL: O ye who believe! Choose not your fathers nor your brethren for friends if they take pleasure in disbelief rather than faith. Whoso of you taketh them for friends, such are wrong-doers.
SHAKIR: O you who believe! do not take your fathers and your brothers for guardians if they love unbelief more than belief; and whoever of you takes them for a guardian, these it is that are the unjust.

YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter.
PICKTHAL: O ye who believe! What aileth you that when it is said unto you: Go forth in the way of Allah, ye are bowed down to the ground with heaviness. Take ye pleasure in the life of the world rather than in the Hereafter? The comfort of the life of the world is but little in the Hereafter.
SHAKIR: O you who believe! What (excuse) have you that when it is said to you: Go forth in Allah's way, you should incline heavily to earth; are you contented with this world's life instead of the hereafter? But the provision of this world's life compared with the hereafter is but little.

YUSUFALI: Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place; but Him ye would not harm in the least. For Allah hath power over all things.
PICKTHAL: If ye go not forth He will afflict you with a painful doom, and will choose instead of you a folk other than you. Ye cannot harm Him at all. Allah is Able to do all things.
SHAKIR: If you do not go forth, He will chastise you with a painful chastisement and bring in your place a people other than you, and you will do Him no harm; and Allah has power over all things.

YUSUFALI: If ye help not (your leader), (it is no matter): for Allah did indeed help him, when the Unbelievers drove him out: he had no more than one companion; they two were in the cave, and he said to his companion, "Have no fear, for Allah is with us": then Allah sent down His peace upon him, and strengthened him with forces which ye saw not, and humbled to the depths the word of the Unbelievers. But the word of Allah is exalted to the heights: for Allah is Exalted in might, Wise.
PICKTHAL: If ye help him not, still Allah helped him when those who disbelieve drove him forth, the second of two; when they two were in the cave, when he said unto his comrade: Grieve not. Lo! Allah is with us. Then Allah caused His peace of reassurance to descend upon him and supported him with hosts ye cannot see, and made the word of those who disbelieved the nethermost, while Allah's Word it was that became the uppermost. Allah is Mighty, Wise.
SHAKIR: If you will not aid him, Allah certainly aided him when those who disbelieved expelled him, he being the second of the two, when they were both in the cave, when he said to his companion: Grieve not, surely Allah is with us. So Allah sent down His tranquillity upon him and strengthened him with hosts which you did not see, and made lowest the word of those who disbelieved; and the word of Allah, that is the highest; and Allah is Mighty, Wise.

YUSUFALI: Go ye forth, (whether equipped) lightly or heavily, and strive and struggle, with your goods and your persons, in the cause of Allah. That is best for you, if ye (but) knew.
PICKTHAL: Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah! That is best for you if ye but knew.
SHAKIR: Go forth light and heavy, and strive hard in Allah's way with your property and your persons; this is better for you, if you know.

YUSUFALI: If there had been immediate gain (in sight), and the journey easy, they would (all) without doubt have followed thee, but the distance was long, (and weighed) on them. They would indeed swear by Allah, "If we only could, we should certainly have come out with you": They would destroy their own souls; for Allah doth know that they are certainly lying.
PICKTHAL: Had it been a near adventure and an easy journey they had followed thee, but the distance seemed too far for them. Yet will they swear by Allah (saying): If we had been able we would surely have set out with you. They destroy their souls, and Allah knoweth that they verily are liars.
SHAKIR: Had it been a near advantage and a short journey, they would certainly have followed you, but the tedious journey was too long for them; and they swear by Allah: If we had been able, we would certainly have gone forth with you; they cause their own souls to perish, and Allah knows that they are most surely

YUSUFALI: Allah give thee grace! why didst thou grant them until those who told the truth were seen by thee in a clear light, and thou hadst proved the liars?
PICKTHAL: Allah forgive thee (O Muhammad)! Wherefor didst thou grant them leave ere those who told the truth were manifest to thee and thou didst know the liars?
SHAKIR: Allah pardon you! Why did you give them leave until those who spoke the truth had become manifest to you and you had known the liars?

YUSUFALI: Those who believe in Allah and the Last Day ask thee for no exemption from fighting with their goods and persons. And Allah knoweth well those who do their duty.
PICKTHAL: Those who believe in Allah and the Last Day ask no leave of thee lest they should strive with their wealth and their lives. Allah is Aware of those who keep their duty (unto Him).
SHAKIR: They do not ask leave of you who believe in Allah and the latter day (to stay away) from striving hard with their property and their persons, and Allah knows those who guard (against evil).

YUSUFALI: Allah hath promised the Hypocrites men and women, and the rejecters, of Faith, the fire of Hell: Therein shall they dwell: Sufficient is it for them: for them is the curse of Allah, and an enduring punishment,-
PICKTHAL: Allah promiseth the hypocrites, both men and women, and the disbelievers fire of hell for their abode. It will suffice them. Allah curseth them, and theirs is lasting torment.
SHAKIR: Allah has promised the hypocritical men and the hypocritical women and the unbelievers the fire of hell to abide therein; it is enough for them; and Allah has cursed them and they shall have lasting punishment.

YUSUFALI: As in the case of those before you: they were mightier than you in power, and more flourishing in wealth and children. They had their enjoyment of their portion: and ye have of yours, as did those before you; and ye indulge in idle talk as they did. They!- their work are fruitless in this world and in the Hereafter, and they will lose (all spiritual good).
PICKTHAL: Even as those before you who were mightier than you in strength, and more affluent than you in wealth and children. They enjoyed their lot awhile, so ye enjoy your lot awhile even as those before you did enjoy their lot awhile. And ye prate even as they prated. Such are they whose works have perished in the world and the Hereafter. Such are they who are the losers.
SHAKIR: Like those before you; they were stronger than you in power and more abundant in wealth and children, so they enjoyed their portion; thus have you enjoyed your portion as those before you enjoyed their portion; and you entered into vain discourses like the vain discourses in which entered those before you. These are they whose works are null in this world and the hereafter, and these are they who are the losers.

YUSUFALI: Hath not the story reached them of those before them?- the People of Noah, and 'Ad, and Thamud; the People of Abraham, the men of Midian, and the cities overthrown. To them came their messengers with clear signs. It is not Allah Who wrongs them, but they wrong their own souls.
PICKTHAL: Hath not the fame of those before them reached them - the folk of Noah, A'ad, Thamud, the folk of Abraham, the dwellers of Midian and the disasters (which befell them)? Their messengers (from Allah) came unto them with proofs (of Allah's Sovereignty). So Allah surely wronged them not, but they did wrong themselves.
SHAKIR: Has not the news of those before them come to them; of the people of Nuh and Ad and Samood, and the people of Ibrahim and the dwellers of Madyan and the overthrown cities; their messengers came to them with clear arguments; so it was not Allah Who should do them injustice, but they were unjust to themselves.

YUSUFALI: The Believers, men and women, are protectors one of another: they enjoin what is just, and forbid what is evil: they observe regular prayers, practise regular charity, and obey Allah and His Messenger. On them will Allah pour His mercy: for Allah is Exalted in power, Wise.
PICKTHAL: And the believers, men and women, are protecting friends one of another; they enjoin the right and forbid the wrong, and they establish worship and they pay the poor-due, and they obey Allah and His messenger. As for these, Allah will have mercy on them. Lo! Allah is Mighty, Wise.
SHAKIR: And (as for) the believing men and the believing women, they are guardians of each other; they enjoin good and forbid evil and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, and obey Allah and His Messenger; (as for) these, Allah will show mercy to them; surely Allah is Mighty, Wise.

YUSUFALI: Allah hath promised to Believers, men and women, gardens under which rivers flow, to dwell therein, and beautiful mansions in gardens of everlasting bliss. But the greatest bliss is the good pleasure of Allah: that is the supreme felicity.
PICKTHAL: Allah promiseth to the believers, men and women, Gardens underneath which rivers flow, wherein they will abide - blessed dwellings in Gardens of Eden. And - greater (far)! - acceptance from Allah. That is the supreme triumph.
SHAKIR: Allah has promised to the believing men and the believing women gardens, beneath which rivers flow, to abide in them, and goodly dwellings in gardens of perpetual abode; and best of all is Allah's goodly pleasure; that is the grand achievement.

YUSUFALI: O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their abode is Hell,- an evil refuge indeed.
PICKTHAL: O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites! Be harsh with them. Their ultimate abode is hell, a hapless journey's end.
SHAKIR: O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination.
Power User
Posts: 41791

« Reply #334 on: January 14, 2011, 04:21:21 PM »
Power User
Posts: 41791

« Reply #335 on: January 31, 2011, 11:24:01 AM »

The court battle for control of the mosque has turned ugly, with each side using inflammatory rhetoric, claiming to be more assimilated and alleging that it has been threatened or assaulted.

By Raja Abdulrahim, Los Angeles Times
January 31, 2011

On a Friday afternoon in October, men in black security T-shirts and matching cargo pants roamed the parking lot and perimeter of the Islamic Center of Northridge as worshipers arrived for weekly prayers.

Several Los Angeles Police Department patrol cars were parked nearby as officers kept a watchful eye on a demonstration out front. About 30 men yelled and held up signs. One waved a small American flag as another denounced the mosque's religious leader as a devil.

Worshipers, looking uncomfortable, hurried past and into the building.

, , , In a scene reminiscent of others across the country where new and existing mosques have faced heated opposition in recent months. But the protests at the Islamic Center's main mosque in Granada Hills are different, not demonstrations by anti-Islamic groups but a struggle between rival Muslim groups over control of the institution.

The two sides, each made up mainly of Pakistani and Afghan immigrants, are battling in court over leadership elections and greater openness at the Granada Hills mosque and an older satellite center in Northridge. The dispute has taken on an ugly, ethnically charged tone, including heated rhetoric about which group is more American in dress, accent and behavior.

The parties have traded accusations of radicalism as each side tries to discredit the other, sometimes using comparisons and accusations that American Muslims are more accustomed to hearing from critics outside their communities.

In one lawsuit, a dissident group accuses the mosque leaders of methods that "resemble Taliban-style tactics one might presume to exist only outside the boundaries of the United States."

The suit also quotes a threatening, profane voicemail message it says was left for one of the plaintiffs, in which the caller allegedly said, "Don't … with us. We are Pashtuns. We will kill you."

Mitchell Young, formerly an attorney for the mosque's leaders, said the quarrel seems "tribal" at times. "The underpinnings of this conflict are very different than the particulars of the lawsuit," he said.

Such jockeying over who is more American is not uncommon in immigrant communities, said Kamal Sadiq, a UC Irvine political science professor who studies South Asian communities. Proving who is more assimilated is a way of establishing who has a bigger claim on the mosque, he said.

The legal case centers on specifics of California law governing nonprofit corporations, including board elections, open membership and financial transparency.

The plaintiffs, including former board members and their supporters, say some have been barred from membership at the mosque. A spokesman would not say how many members it has.

At a pre-trial hearing in Los Angeles this month, Superior Court Judge Michelle Rosenblatt ordered court-supervised elections for the mosque's board, a victory for those challenging the current leadership. A trial is set for Feb. 7.

The defendants in the case are the Islamic Center's two imams, Qazi Fazlullah and Qari Yousuf, along with board members and supporters, many of whom emigrated from Afghanistan or Pakistan's Pashtun region. The plaintiffs are mainly from Karachi, Pakistan's largest city, and from the country's Punjab region.

Manzar Qureshi, a former board member at the mosque who is acting as a spokesman for the plaintiffs, said many Pakistanis tend to blame those from the Pashtun region, which abuts Afghanistan, for the terrorism-related problems in Pakistan. Qureshi, a native of Karachi, acknowledged that the regional tensions have contributed to the dispute.

Fazlullah, a former member of Pakistan's parliament, has led the San Fernando Valley mosque since 1997. A spokesman said the imam would not comment on the dispute.

The struggle has divided the area's Muslim community and led some who feel uncomfortable with such vitriol at a religious institution to cut back their attendance or seek services elsewhere. The plaintiffs said some of their supporters were prevented from praying at the mosque during a recent religious holiday. They now hold their own services in a rented room at the nearby Granada Hills Masonic Center.

Mosque spokesman Mahmood Payind denied that attendance, which numbers in the hundreds, has dipped because of the dispute. But at two recent Friday prayer services, the parking lot seemed less crowded than it was last fall.

Payind, who is from Afghanistan, said the accusatory language used by the plaintiffs is geared toward gaining support for their case, especially in an American courtroom.

It's easy to say someone "looks like so and so with the beard," the spokesman said, referring to Osama bin Laden. "They're trying to poison the well because of Islamophobia. They are like the Bill O'Reilly of this community."

Indeed, much of the rhetoric appears aimed at swaying public opinion in a case that could go before a jury. After a judge denied emergency motions filed by the plaintiffs to gain control of the mosque's finances, insurance policy and keys, one plaintiff suggested that the center's leaders were sending money overseas — an allegation Young, the former attorney, said was equivalent to an accusation of supporting terrorism.

"If you put us in a room, you can compare who has more of an accent," mosque spokesman Payind said. "We play basketball, we go to the movies, we play soccer. I myself am married to an American woman, so where is my Taliban style? Why they are playing that is because it is inflammatory words or because they can use that card: Muslim terrorist."

But the plaintiffs say the language they use is a result of the violent behavior of the defendants in trying to silence dissent.

"Unfortunately the defendants … are engaged in a series of patterns of conduct which is not very befitting in America," the plaintiffs' attorney Omar Siddiqui said. "It just seems like a lot of these people have brought their Third World ideas into the Valley."

Qureshi says he was once threatened in the mosque parking lot and another time was locked in its office while his two young sons waited outside. In a related lawsuit, another plaintiff alleges that he was assaulted and wrongfully imprisoned by the mosque's security guards in an August incident after Friday prayers. The defendants deny the allegations.

Since the conflict escalated about a year ago, police have been called several times to each of the mosque's locations. The officers took reports on accusations of battery, witness intimidation, trespassing, verbal threats and disturbing the peace, but the city attorney's office has declined to file charges, saying nothing has risen to a criminal act, said Lt. Tom Murrell, formerly of the LAPD's Devonshire division.

Each side also has made accusations to the department's counterterrorism division, Deputy Chief Michael Downing confirmed, but he said the conflict was being handled locally by the Devonshire division. Complaints have also been made to the FBI, the plaintiffs said. A spokeswoman said she could not confirm whether the bureau was investigating.

Murrell, the former commander of Devonshire's detective division who is now in the LAPD's Information Technology Division, said detectives had hoped that the case would be referred to a city attorney hearing, equivalent to dispute resolution.

"But in this case there are some cultural, religious things which are beyond what the civil commissioners can grasp," he said.

Each side in the case claims to have the support of the Valley's Muslim community. But many clearly feel torn.

One man who has attended the mosque since 2002, and who did not want to be identified for fear of being seen as taking sides, said he has cut back his attendance because of the controversy. "I don't feel comfortable going into the mosque and seeing cops around and the security guards," he said.

The man, who lives in nearby Sylmar, said he is inclined to believe the plaintiffs but hasn't spoken to Fazlullah to hear his views. He said, though, that a religious scholar like Fazlullah should be treated with more respect.

"I still would like a mosque that doesn't have this propaganda," he said. "I just listen and try to pray for both sides, because it makes us look bad in front of the [American] community."
Copyright © 2011, Los Angeles Times

Power User
Posts: 41791

« Reply #336 on: March 01, 2011, 08:36:19 PM »
Power User
Posts: 41791

« Reply #337 on: March 09, 2011, 09:02:29 PM »

"To model our political system upon speculations of lasting tranquility, is to calculate on the weaker springs of the human character." --Alexander Hamilton

Editorial Exegesis

Maybe there's a reason for being aware of radical Islam"Rep. Peter King, New York Republican and chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, will hold hearings this week on Muslim extremism in the United States. The Obama administration and other pro-Islamic activists argue that because the vast majority of American Muslims aren't violent extremists, Congress has no business examining the growing numbers who are. This redirection is tantamount to saying that because most people are law-abiding, the police should ignore the study of criminal psychology. Mr. King's planned hearings will shine a bright light on a challenge the Obama administration has studiously ignored, with fatal results. Overlooking the motives of Muslim terrorists has become an O Force obsession. ... The Obama administration persistently has stricken the concept of Islamic extremism -- whether foreign or domestic -- from U.S. public policy. In 2009, the Department of Homeland Security drafted a Domestic Extremist Lexicon that listed Jewish extremism as a threat and described various strands of purportedly dangerous Christian extremism but made no mention of any form of Muslim extremism. This document was pulled along with other questionable Homeland Security publications once their contents became public. The February 2010 Quadrennial Homeland Security Review discussed terrorism and violent extremism but didn't refer to radical Islam in any context. Likewise, the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review avoids any terminology related to Islam. Mr. King's hearings are a useful step toward opening up the debate on the pressing problem of domestic Islamic extremism. Mr. Obama's inexplicable tendency to turn aside from the question has harmed the ability of the United States to deal with this threat." --The Washington Times

An Obama administration strategy for building contacts in Muslim communities is taking heat from the left and the right, amid increasing concerns about homegrown Islamic terrorism.

Under the program, which extends one begun under President George W. Bush, U.S. law-enforcement officials meet frequently with Muslim groups to discuss their concerns about discrimination. The hope is that such outreach prevents extremist recruitment of young men by showing good will alongside efforts to investigate plots.

"Striking the right tone in countering violent extremism is something we have to be very careful about," said B. Todd Jones, the U.S. attorney in Minneapolis, who undertakes activities such as attending Ramadan fast-breaking dinners and helping Muslim Americans navigate the immigration bureaucracy.

Many conservatives blast the efforts as ineffective and even dangerous. "There's a whole political correctness that has suppressed discussion" of Islamic radicalization, said Steven Emerson, whose Investigative Project on Terrorism has published articles on radicalization among U.S. Muslims.

Thursday's Schedule for King Hearing
Rep. Keith Ellison (D. Minn.),believed to be first Muslim member of Congress.

Rep. Frank Wolf (R., Va.,), active on religious and terrorism issues.

Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, president, American Islamic Forum for Democracy, physician and former Navy officer.

Abdirizak Bihi, director, Somali Education and Social Advocacy Center, whose nephew traveled to Somalia to join al-Shabaab and was killed.

Melvin Bledsoe, whose son, a Muslim convert, allegedly killed a soldier in a shooting attack at an Arkansas military-recruiting center.

Leroy Baca, Los Angeles County Sheriff, active on outreach efforts in Muslim communities.

Source: House Homeland Security Committee
.Some Muslims, meanwhile, think the outreach is cover for recruiting spiesand doesn't fit with harder-edged tactics such as sting operations. "The FBI's activities are sending a troubling mixed message to the community," said Farhana Khera, president of a San Francisco legal group called Muslim Advocates, which warns Muslim Americans against speaking to law enforcement without a lawyer present.

The program is likely to come up at a House hearing Thursday on Muslim radicalization. Rep. Peter King (R., N.Y.), who is overseeing the hearing, said he largely supported the outreach efforts and that the "overwhelming number of Muslims are good Americans." But he said he was concerned by what he described as a general lack of cooperation with federal law enforcement in Muslim communities.

The administration argues that even as it investigates alleged plots it must show an effort to address Muslim grievances—in part to undercut propaganda from radical groups overseas that say the U.S. is conducting a war on Islam. Mr. Jones, who helps coordinate efforts with agencies including the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Homeland Security, speaks of a balancing act between pursuing potential terrorists and showing goodwill toward a suspicious community.

In Minneapolis, the Somali community became a focus of concern after 20 young Somali-American men allegedly traveled to Somalia to join the al Shabaab Islamist group. Young Somalis in particular are "a little more cynical," Mr. Jones said. "They see an opportunity for the government to develop them as massive snitch networks." He said one way to avoid spying concerns is to "wall off" his investigative attorneys from the outreach efforts.

In Michigan, U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade said meeting with local Muslim groups had helped federal officials send the message that they're here "to protect your rights." Last year, she met with Yemeni-American community leaders to explain how to pack airplane luggage, after two Michigan men of Yemeni descent taped bottles of Pepto-Bismol to cellphones in their checked bags—apparently for tidiness—, inadvertently triggering fears of a bombing plot.

Ms. McQuade brought Muslim American speakers to a meeting with federal immigration agents to educate the agents about potential cultural misunderstandings. One lesson, she said, was that "if someone is averting eye contact, it's not [necessarily] that they are trying to avoid questions or are guilty of something. It's that in their culture, making eye contact is not polite."

Robert Spencer, who runs Jihad Watch, which focuses on Islamic extremism, critiques the outreach effort as "completely fruitless," saying it hasn't resulted "in any significant Islamic efforts to rein in radicals in their community." The program also gets a measure of criticism from some counter-radicalization experts who support outreach but say it shouldn't be led by law-enforcement agencies. Maajid Nawaz, a former jihadist sympathizer in the U.K. who now campaigns against radicalization, says Western countries should reduce their reliance on security agencies to break through to suspicious Muslim communities. "Securitizing a counter-radicalization strategy is unhelpful," Mr. Nawad said at a January speech at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

Officials admit the balancing act can be tricky. At a December dinner in Portland, Ore., Attorney General Eric Holder combined warm words for Ms. Khera of Muslim Advocates and a pledge to defend Muslims against hate crimes with a defense of a sting operation that had led to the arrest of a Somali-American accused of plotting to bomb a Christmas-tree lighting ceremony held in the city. "Those who characterize the FBI's activities in this case as 'entrapment' simply do not have their facts straight," he said at the dinner.

The Justice Department says there have been 49 U.S. citizens, mostly Muslims, charged in international terrorism probes since the beginning of 2009. U.S. officials are especially worried about recruitment by international terror groups of citizens whose U.S. passports allow them easy access to other countries and re-entry to the U.S.

Under pressure from conservative lawmakers, the FBI cut off most contacts with the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the largest U.S. Muslim advocacy group. Federal investigators had found ties between the group's officials and several men convicted in 2008 of providing funds to the Palestinian group Hamas, which the U.S. calls a terrorist group. The council disputes the allegations of terrorism ties and says it is a mainstream body.

« Last Edit: March 09, 2011, 10:19:46 PM by Crafty_Dog » Logged
Power User
Posts: 15391

« Reply #338 on: March 10, 2011, 09:22:56 AM »

Counterterrorism and intelligence sources from the NYPD and FBI say law enforcement faces the same problem with the Mafia, drug cartels and the MS-13 gang.

"Criminals are criminals. It gets dicier because Muslim extremists wrap their work in religion, but the smokescreens, the silence and intimidation are similar," an FBI source said.

"What's different is the risk - the extent of the damage, the number of innocent people who can be hurt."

King has outraged many Muslim-Americans by convening hearings into homegrown radical Islamists and claiming the community has stonewalled terror investigations.

They say the Long Island Republican is on a witch hunt, and some critics have pointed out that he's gone to bat for members of the Irish Republican Army in the past.

He said his probe is no different than a hearing into the Mafia or another ethnicity-based group and that the U.S. must uncover the extent of jihadist recruitment on American soil.

As an example, he cited Queens-born terrorist Bryant Neal Vinas, who allegedly spoke at Long Island mosques about jihadist aspirations. No one told cops, and Vinas admitted to participating in Al Qaeda attacks on U.S. soldiers after his 2008 arrest in Pakistan.

Read more:
Power User
Posts: 15391

« Reply #339 on: March 10, 2011, 10:48:53 AM »

Never in my entire career in Washington have I encountered the hype and scare tactics of those opposing the hearings into Islamic radicalization by Rep. Pete King. A classic example was a headline on "Inquiry by congressional committee looks like inquisition to many Muslims."

The line of attack is now familiar: If King (R-L.I.) were truly interested in violent extremism, his hearings would focus on a wide range of groups that wreak havoc on America, including neo-Nazis and others; by focusing solely on Muslim extremism, the argument goes, he is betraying his bias.

This is utterly ridiculous. Our organization, the Investigative Project on Terrorism, recently did an analysis of all terrorism convictions based on statistics released by the Justice Department. These stats show that more than 80% of all convictions tied to international terrorist groups and homegrown terrorism since 9/11 involve defendants driven by a radical Islamist agenda. Though Muslims represent less than 1% of the American population, they constitute defendants in 186 of the 228 cases the Justice Department lists.

The figures confirm that there is a disproportionate problem of Islamic militancy and terrorism among the American Muslim population.

Read more:

**Funny how this happens, given that islam is a religion of peace, or so I've been told.

Power User
Posts: 7696

« Reply #340 on: March 10, 2011, 01:45:48 PM »

On every single MSM coverage of King's hearings the use the adjective, "controversial".

The "controversial hearings".  It is clearly a liberal jornolist strategy going viral on MSM.
Power User
Posts: 9278

« Reply #341 on: March 10, 2011, 04:35:03 PM »

CCP: "Controversial" hearings. Thanks for that.  One powerful feature of 'right wing radio' is the MSM montage.  It is amazing how so many shows/ newscasts at so many 'different' outlets use the exact same words within minutes to tell one side of a story, with repetition ad nauseum. 

'Controversial' in the Peter King hearings might be to take a closer look at Rep. Keith Ellison's past, calling for violence in the streets of Minneapolis: "We don't get no justice, you don't get no peace."  Not exactly a role model.
""We don't get no justice, you don't get no peace," Mr. Ellison reportedly said at a 1993 rally on behalf of defendants on trial for the murder of a Minneapolis police officer, Jerome Haaf."

I sympathize with the post in the Afghan topic (Kunduz) pointing out there are many, many, many peaceful Muslims.  I see them about town here harming no one.  Meanwhile, behind what is visible, I see that the FBI had 24 al Qaeda related arrests in Minneapolis last year.  How can anyone especially the peaceful Muslims object to at least the concept of trying to find out where terrorism recruiting and the planning of violence on innocents is taking place - and to get it stopped.

Power User
Posts: 15391

« Reply #342 on: March 10, 2011, 04:40:49 PM »


Keep in mind that they are many forms of jihad, not just the bombers/shooters/headcutters. There are those who wage the jihad of the pen and tongue, those that raise money and support the jihad in other ways.
Power User
Posts: 9278

« Reply #343 on: March 10, 2011, 11:13:55 PM »

"Keep in mind that they are many forms of jihad, not just the bombers/shooters/headcutters. There are those who wage the jihad of the pen and tongue, those that raise money and support the jihad in other ways."

You are correct.  Also the public in areas where they stone a rape victim. How does that happen?  Still, whatever the numbers are, 1.5 billion Muslims. then that is a fact. Roughly 1.5 billion of those are not actively trying to attack us.  Question is - what now?  How do we sort it out, how do we root it out and how do we keep people favoring peaceful Islam, like Kundoz, in the discussion?
Power User
Posts: 41791

« Reply #344 on: March 10, 2011, 11:27:36 PM »

For the record, if I am not mistaken, Kundoz is an American convert.
Power User
Posts: 15391

« Reply #345 on: March 11, 2011, 05:30:13 AM »

Most don't have the ability to attack us directly. Thus they are busy attacking other muslims, christians, buddhists, hindus and others within reach. Show me a muslim populations and there is someone being oppressed/killed to the cry of "allah akbar"!
Power User
Posts: 41791

« Reply #346 on: March 19, 2011, 10:23:50 AM »

Former Muslims Excluded From King Hearings

Posted By Nonie Darwish On March 17, 2011 @ 12:20 am In Daily Mailer,FrontPage | 23 Comments

I have admiration and respect for Congressman Peter King and I salute him for holding hearings on the “Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and that Community’s Response.” However, as a former Muslim I have not seen anyone testifying on our behalf in the hearings. At least one former Muslims should have been there to tell America of our plight. To tell them why we left Islam right here in America. How we had to choose between Islam and loving America. How radicals and jihadists followed us right here after we immigrated to the US to try to force us back into the same old culture of jihad, hatred and anti-Semitism — that we had escaped from in the first place. How radicals who want to deny us our freedom of religion under the US constitution threaten our lives and civil rights daily.

Most former Muslims in the US started by going to mosques but we soon discovered a political and jihadist agenda. In mosques I was told not to assimilate in America, to have more children and to wear Islamic clothes even though I never wore it in the Middle East before coming to the US. We were encouraged to pray wherever we wanted and do that with assertion even if we have to inconvenience others at airports, baseball games or at work. We soon found out that many mosques in America, as they are in the Middle East, are more of a political organization than a place of worship. We noticed that the more pious Muslims in the mosque were the ones seeking confrontation with American culture, such as getting offended if Americans have dogs or alcohol when riding cabs with Muslim taxi drivers.

Muslims are told openly in mosques that they have a mission in America and that is to make Islam the law of the land. Lying to America and getting offended to cover up the jihadist aspiration was encouraged, and became a perfected art and a religious obligation, which further alienated Muslims from American culture.

Many of us former Muslims have left the religion precisely because of the radicalization we confronted in America. But when we dared to stop going to mosques and left Islam altogether our lives turned into a nightmare. Many former Muslims contact me looking for shelter after their lives have been threatened. Just a couple of days ago I was contacted by a young 21 year old Muslim man telling me he left Islam years ago and has to hide the Bible from his family and friends after his own brother told him he was going to kill him if he does not return to Islam.

I receive testimony after testimony of former Muslims, some of whom are American converts who decided to leave Islam and are afraid for their lives. Many of us have to move from one apartment to another so we are not found by those who threaten our lives. Just last year, we all heard of the plight of the 17 year old apostate Rifqa Bary who had to flee her home after her life was threatened by her father and her local mosque. There are many Rifqa Barys in America where radical Islam is working under the radar to silence and force some of us to return to Islam or else.

I am also in contact with apostates in the Middle East. A student from Yemen told me that when he applied for a scholarship to come to the US, financed by Saudi Arabia, his application was rejected because he believes he was not radical in his Islamic views enough. He complained to me that the ones who won the scholarship were extreme Islamists and that tells us something about the kind of people we are giving student visas to.

How can former Muslims live in peace in America when there are Muslim scriptures sold and bought in all mosques telling Muslims that it is OK to kill apostates, meaning those who left Islam? The tragedy of apostasy from Islam has taken the lives of some in the West and caused mental and physical abuse for many and is never documented as a religious hate crime. Part of the jihad doctrine obliges Muslims to do internal jihad, by forcing Sharia on Muslim citizens. Sharia books in mosques across the US tell Muslims they will be forgiven for murder of an apostate and an adulterer, thus making vigilante street justice and honor killing acceptable religiously.
Muslim groups and their American appeasers are up in arms against the King hearings and are claiming that their civil rights are being violated. I wonder whose civil rights are violated in America? Is it Muslims or former Muslims?

Nonie Darwish is the author of “Cruel and Usual Punishment; the Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law” and founder of Former Muslims United.
Power User
Posts: 15391

« Reply #347 on: March 21, 2011, 11:05:09 AM »

Ex-CAIR Official Faces Sentencing

IPT News
March 16, 2011

Update: A federal judge sentenced Al-Hanooti to one year and one day in prison on March 18.

A Michigan man accused of spying for Saddam Hussein's regime faces nearly four years in prison when he is sentenced on a related charge in federal court Friday.

Muthanna Al-Hanooti pleaded guilty last June to one count of violating an executive order prohibiting people from doing any business with Iraq and imposing sanctions. He had a deal with senior Iraqi officials to control 2 million barrels of oil. By transferring that to a third party, Al-Hanooti stood to make $100,000, a prosecution sentencing memo said.

Al-Hanooti was identified as executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations' (CAIR) Michigan office in 2000. But the charges against him deal with his work with a charity called Life for Relief and Development (LIFE) and its spinoff group, called Focus on American and Arab Interests and Relations (FAAIR). He worked for LIFE from 1995-2006, the sentencing memo said, noting the organization was "created after the first Gulf War in response to the economic sanctions that the United States imposed on Iraq."

In addition to charitable work, the sentencing memo said, Al-Hanooti told the FBI that FAAIR was created "to lobby against the sanctions that were imposed on Iraq during the Saddam Hussein regime and to promote good relations between the U.S. and Iraq."

U.S. Reps. Mike Thompson (CA), Jim McDermott (WA) and David Bonior (MI) in Basra in 2002. Taken from Spring 2003 FAAIR Newsletter.

According to the 2008 indictment, Iraqi intelligence officials targeted LIFE and FAAIR "to cooperate with and serve" them in trying to get rid of the sanctions. He allegedly provided them with names of sympathetic congressmen and organized a 2002 delegation to Iraq that included Democratic Reps. David Bonior of Michigan, Jim McDermott of Washington and Mike Thompson of California. While the trip was paid for by Life for Relief and Development, the money actually came from Iraqi intelligence after being routed through an intermediary, the indictment alleged.

Al-Hanooti's work put him in contact with other powerful political leaders in Washington, and he was photographed with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

The case was prosecuted by the Department of Justice's National Security Division and many court filings appear to be under seal, including Al-Hanooti's plea agreement.

Al-Hanooti was born in Iraq and came to America in 1980. He was naturalized as a citizen in 1995.

But prosecutors cast him as maintaining loyalty to his native land over his adopted one. As he struck the oil deal in late 2002, "war between the United States and Iraq was imminent," prosecutors wrote. Al-Hanooti "chose to ignore the national emergency that had been declared with respect to Iraq and, instead, consummate for his own benefit a significant financial transaction with the highest levels of the Saddam Hussein regime."

Read more at:
« Reply #348 on: March 31, 2011, 01:50:48 PM »

Words you can’t say at the Pentagon
Stewart Baker • February 20, 2011 6:23 pm

The Ft. Hood shooting has finally been the subject of a careful after-action analysis — a study that DOD should have done but didn’t.  The analysis was done instead in a bipartisan report by Senators Lieberman and Collins, who lead the Homeland Security committee.  Their report reveals few new facts but offers disturbing insights into DOD’s cultural dysfunctions.

On November 5, 2009, witnesses say, Maj. Nidal Hasan leaped on a desk at a Ft. Hood readiness center, shouted “Allahu Akbar” and began executing the unarmed soldiers all around him.  Thirteen people were dead and thirty-two wounded before an armed police officer managed to shoot Hasan five times.  Now confined to a wheelchair, Hasan is expected to go on trial shortly.

Anyone who paid attention to news coverage after the rampage knows that the Army had plenty of warning about Hasan’s Islamist views.  Classmates say that he questioned whether he could fight against other Muslims and made presentations justifying the murder of non-Muslims, suggesting that Muslim-Americans in the armed forces might kill other servicemembers, defending Osama bin Laden, and justifying suicide bombers.  The servicemembers in the audience were so appalled that the instructor finally stopped one of Hasan’s presentations.  Off the record, it seems, everyone thought Hasan was dangerous, a nutjob, or an Islamist, and perhaps all three.

On the record, though, no one would criticize him.  You don’t rise in the armed forces if you can’t read your superiors.  And the rising officers who met Hasan knew what their superiors wanted without having to be told.  Islam was a religion of peace, and Muslims in the Army were a welcome sign of diversity. Treating Hasan as a dangerous Islamist would put those messages at risk.

And that might be bad for their careers.  So instead they spun Hasan’s rants into gold.  His 2007–2008 evaluation praises Hasan for having “focused his efforts on illuminating the  role of  culture and  Islamic faith  within the Global War on Terrorism.”  It adds that his “work in this area has extraordinary potential to inform national  policy and military strategy. … His unique interests have captured the interest and attention of  peers and mentors alike.”

The next year was the same, full of praise for Hasan’s “keen interest in  Islamic culture and  faith  and his shown capacity to contribute to our psychological understanding of  Islamic  nationalism and how it  may relate to events of  national security and Army interest.”

So far, no surprises.  It was clear within a few days of the shootings that political correctness had played a role in Hasan’s promotion and retention.  What the Lieberman-Collins report tells us, though, is how big a role political correctness played even after the government discovered through intercepts that Hasan was corresponding with the Yemeni-American Islamist, Anwar al-Awlaki.  (Awlaki’s name is redacted from the report but has been widely reported in the press.)

The intercepted correspondence went to the FBI’s San Diego office. According to the Lieberman-Collins report, Hasan’s initial correspondence wasn’t conclusive proof that he was a risk, but it begged for investigation.  His messages, it says, “meandered in  a ‘stream of consciousness,’ hinted at the answer Hasan  wanted to hear, and  had content that contravened officership standards.”  According to the report, “The communications on their face  raised questions of  whether Hasan was a potential counterinteligence or  counterterrorism threat.”  That’s how the FBI office in San Diego saw it too. Because Hasan was stationed at Walter Reed medical center, San Diego asked the FBI’s Washington field office to follow up.

The Washington field office booted the assignment.  It waited until the 90-day deadline for responding to inquiries was nearly up.  Then a detailee spent four hours looking at Hasan’s records.  The detailee found no mention of Hasan in terrorism databases but he did find the evaluation reports in which Hasan’s public displays of radicalization were cleverly repackaged as praiseworthy research into the “role of culture and Islamic faith within the Global War on Terrorism.”

So, put yourself in the place of the agent assigned to this problem.  You’ve got an Army major sending weird but not quite damning emails to al-Awlaki.  The Army seems to know he’s working in the area of Islam and terrorism, and he isn’t in the suspected terrorist database.  You could go talk to him, or send an official request for information to the Army.  If you do, though, there’s a chance you’ll be accused of trying to wreck Hasan’s career on flimsy evidence — on the basis of his protected religious and political speech, no less.  In addition to constitutional violations, you could be slammed for racism, or Islamophobia, or cultural insensitivity. After all, this is happening in May of 2009, and the Justice Department is under new management, management that is sending very different signals about its priorities in dealing with terrorism and Islam.

Meanwhile, the evaluation reports are staring you in the face.  They offer an easy way out of the dilemma.  “Research, yeah, that’s the ticket,” I imagine the agent saying to himself, “Hasan could be doing research.”  So he blows off San Diego’s concern without interviewing Hasan or doing anything else that might cause waves.   San Diego complains. Washington fires back. And neither office does enough followup to discover the rest of Hasan’s correspondence with Awlaki.  (There’s a long and interesting inside-baseball story about that, and the FBI’s relationship with other agencies, in the report that I may discuss in another post.)

Next thing the FBI in San Diego knows, there are thirteen dead and 32 wounded at Ft. Hood.  As the reports hit the wire, one San Diego agent points and says to another, ““You know who that is?  That’ s  our boy!”

It was indeed. You’d think a loss like that would cure DOD of political correctness.

You’d be wrong.

DOD quickly stood up an independent review of the Ft. Hood shooting by former Secretary of Veterans Affairs Togo West and retired admiral Vern Clark.  A staff of full-time contractors and military personnel served West and Clark, who were asked to look hard at internal threats to the military. The result of all this effort is a model of politically correct mush — a classic of contractor-speak, in fact.

Fifty members of the military community were gunned down, their ears still ringing with “Allahu Akbar!” shouted by a man wearing their own uniform. And the official DOD report on the attack never mentions Islam once.  In contrast, it touches on the threat posed by “low self-esteem” four times.

The closest the report comes to blaming Islamic extremism for the attack is a single sentence identifying the sources of domestic terrorism.  In case you’re wondering, they include “animal rights, environmentalism, nationalism, white supremacy, religious causes, and right-wing politics.”

So there you are.  I can’t help wondering if Secretary West and Adm. Clark expect the Pentagon to take on the threats in that order. That way, DOD would first stem the threat of excessive nationalism in the military; then it could turn to the threat posed by “religious causes.”  And maybe, just to avoid discrimination, it could do the religions alphabetically — getting to Islamic extremism after it mops up Episcopalian extremism and just before tackling Jehovah’s Witness extremism.

Okay, that’s a little unfair to Secretary West and Adm. Clark.  But only a little.  In its delicate sidestepping of Hasan’s obvious motivation, and its irresponsible sidestepping of the shocking PCness epitomized by Hasan’s evaluations, the West/Clark report is part of DOD’s problem.  It stands in stark contrast to the aggressive DOD action in 1996, when two Army soldiers carried out a racially motivated murder of an African-American couple.  Then, the Army had no trouble adopting a policy on extremist activities that forthrightly named white supremacist activities as a basis for disciplining soldiers.

When it comes to jihad, though, the mealy-mouthed West/Clark report tells us everything we need to know about DOD’s thinking. As the Lieberman-Collins report makes clear, the Army had all the tools it needed to deal with Hasan’s radicalization; it had used them recently and to good effect against racist and white supremacist groups in the Army.  As the Lieberman/Collins report makes clear, however, Islamic supremacy is an ideology that DOD refuses to acknowledge:

Neither of  Secretary Gates’ two memoranda directing implementation of particular West/Clark recommendations mentions violent Islamist extremism explicitly.  Both memoranda continue to down play the unique threat of violent Islamist extremism by portraying it as a subset of a more general threat — either workplace violence or undefined “extremism” more generally.  We remain concerned that DoD will  not appropriately revise policies to address violent Islamist extremism among servicemembers and that DoD personnel will not be specifically trained concerning violent Islamist extremism.

That sounds like a safe bet to me.  But it’s a bet likely to be measured in deaths not dollars.

If there’s anything I’ve learned in government, it’s that intellectual climate matters.  The 9/11 attacks were aided greatly by an intellectual climate in which privacy and civil liberties had far more practical value than preventing terrorist attacks. And a climate in which Islamic radicalization is described only in euphemisms didn’t just protect Hasan from scrutiny.  It help the next recruit as well.

That’s why efforts to shut the Overton window on inquiries into domestic radicalization are not just wooly-minded.  They’re dangerous.  This time, political correctness runs the risk of getting Americans killed – by discouraging counterterrorism officials from doing their jobs properly.

Senators Lieberman and Collins deserve credit for their courage in holding the window open.
Power User
Posts: 41791

« Reply #349 on: June 07, 2011, 05:23:03 AM »

According to POTH the Turkish charter schools in question are of a moderate form of Islam:

I've read only the first of 7 pages so far.
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 21 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!