Americans for Peace and Tolerance (APT) and Tennessee Freedom Coalition call Tennessean news reports on Nashville's radical Islamists "intentionally deceptive," call on publisher Carol Hudler to uphold journalistic standards at the newspaper. Activist groups cite 5 cases of deceptive reporting, fault Tennessean for covering up Muslim group's promotion of Anwar Al Awlaki's writings.
Awlaki Links on Olive Tree Site
Today Americans for Peace and Tolerance called upon the publisher of the Nashville Tennessean to cease the paper's whitewashing of radical Islamic activities in Middle Tennessee, which include hateful statements in the community and local universities.
Dr. Charles Jacobs, APT President, said, "The Tennessean's reporting consistently accepts as valid and true all claims put forward by the extremist Islamic leadership, but always questions, rejects or distorts what its critics say. Has it ever occurred to the reporters and the editorial board of the Tennessean that Islamic radicals have serially deceived the American people, especially about their extremist activities? Truth at the Tennessean seems not to be a function of facts and evidence but of who is speaking."
On May 13, APT released a 15 minute video - "Losing our Community" - which documented the anti-Jewish, anti-Christian, anti-Western and homophobic teachings of radical Islamists who had been embraced by the civic leadership in Nashville.
These leaders include liberal Christian clergy, "progressive" rabbis, as well as Vanderbilt and Tennessee State Universities.
"Losing our Community," criticized the Tennessean's religion reporter, Bob Smietana for ignoring what he knew, or could easily have known, about the hateful teachings on the Vanderbilt campus and at the Islamic Center of Nashville (ICN) mosque in his reporting.
In his May 18th article that covered the APT video, Tennessean reporter Chas Sisk continued to mislead the Nashville community about the threat of extremist Muslims.
Jacobs said, "Sisk's article is replete with easily detectable distortions of the video. Any fair-minded person who watches our video and then reads Sisk's description of it will be given a powerful example of how political correctness has corrupted journalism. The Tennessean is obviously reluctant to report the news honestly when confronted with Islamic leaders behaving badly."
"The Tennessean uses the cover of journalism to promote its ideology. Indeed, Sisk's intentional mischaracterization of Muslim leader Binhazim's statements in our film is a model lesson in the disappearance of journalism standards," he added.
There are 5 cases of Sisk being clearly dishonest with his readers about the video. Each case represents an important, sensitive issue:
1. The mandated killing of homosexuals
The video shows Binhazim teaching Vanderbilt students that Islam commands Muslims to execute homosexuals.
When a Vanderbuilt student asks Binhazim about his own opinion on the matter, Binhazim explains that under Islam he has no choice but to follow the teaching. In another lecture on our film, Binhazim says:
"Allah is the one who commands me and tells me what to do. This is number one. This requires removing from ourselves any personal opinions. One must always remember that Islam is not about personal opinions."
Sisk tries his best to exonerate Binhazim:
"The video does not quote Binhazim as calling for violence, but he does say traditional Islamic law calls for the death penalty for homosexuality. Binhazim said he was simply giving an academic answer to a question."
"This was not, is not an endorsement of one view point of religion or the other," he said. "This does not mean that this is the position I hold."
Sisk gives him a pass, allowing his readers to think that Binhazim does not hold that view personally, omitting the key part where Binhazim says he cannot hold a different personal opinion according to Islam.
2. On the necessity of Muslims living under Sharia law
Sisk says our video shows Benhazim saying only "That many Muslims around the world are drawn to Sharia, or Islamic Law."
But Binhazim clearly states something much more problematic: Islam demands Sharia law must be applied to matters of state and community:
"The idea that you can separate Islam to become an individual experience to everyone, that Islam is a private matter, and that it cannot be a state matter, and a community matter - that is not the teachings of Islam."
3. On science vs. religious belief
Sisk says our film has Binhazim stating simply, "that science and technology should not lead to the abandonment of Islamic beliefs."
Actually, Binhazim said that science should be SUBORDINATE to Islamic beliefs in order to prevent secularization of Muslim society. He said this in the context of attacking Westernization as something Muslims have a problem with:
"In its original sense, Muslims have a problem with Westernization. Science and technology are accepted in our culture and our tradition, but they are to be subordinate to Islamic beliefs and values in order to guard against the secularization of Muslim societies."
4. How Muslims should behave in the West
Sisk claims that Binhazim says in our film only "that Western Muslims should set an example for Muslims in other parts of the world on how to behave toward westerners."
This is a complete fabrication. In the context of his prior assertion that "Muslims have a problem with Westernization," Binhazim actually insists that Western Muslims must lead the Muslim world in a reactionary confrontation with Western thought and civilization:
"You, as the leaders of tomorrow, will guide the Muslim world's reaction to Westernization and Western thought. Your reaction to that - by you living in the West, you are not necessarily removed from that responsibility, because this is really where the engagement and the encounter is taking place."
Sisk's misleading reporting purposely whitewashes extremist Muslims leaders'agenda of keeping Muslim immigrants separate from American society and radicalizing the established and historically moderate Muslim population in America.
5. To Binhazim, who are the Jews and Christians? What are their Holy Texts? What does he tell us about his thoughts? What does he really believe?
Sisk says that our video claims that Binhazim teaches only, "that Jewish and Christian scriptures have been changed from their original meaning."
This is a travesty. Our film shows Binhazim explaining that he cannot or does not tell Jews and Christians what he actually believes about their holy texts. He says:
"When Muslims say they believe in the Gospel and in the Torah, they qualify that...They believe that there has been a change in the text of the Torah and the Gospel... Therefore originality was lost. Authenticity was lost."
So what to Jews and Christians are holy, sacred texts, are actually in the view of Islam as taught by Binhazim, surely not: they are false texts. But Sisk could never report this deception. How could Jews and Christians dialogue in good faith with a person who is lying to their faces?
REGARDING CLAIMS OF INACCURACIES IN OUR VIDEO:
1. Sisk complains that our film does not mention Carlos Bledsoe's trip to Yemen. It's true for this video, but our first video - "Losing Our Sons" - on Nashville radical preachers, released two months ago, described the trip, which was facilitated by a Muslim leader from Nashville.
According to investigations launched after he committed his crimes, Carlos's recommendation was provided by Abdul Aziz, the former imam of the Somali Al Farooq mosque.
Carlos had decided to study Arabic and teach English at the Al Khair Institute in Yemen. Al Khair Institute promotes itself as an academy specializing in teaching languages and computer technology.. Yet all incoming students must sign a promise to abide by a list of conditions that seem strange for a language and computer school:
"These are the conditions required of the student who wishes to study at the "Yemen al-Khair" Institute for Languages and I.T.: It is incumbent upon the student to be firm upon the way of the Pious Predecessors, as Muhammad and his companions are known. It is essential for the student to have a real desire and to make a strong effort to acquire knowledge of the religion, by attending the general lectures."
The Yemeni school also requires references, but not from professors of languages or computers, but from an imam in the applicant's local area who follows the most radical type of Islam, the Salafi sect, which is practiced by Al Qaeda and the Taliban, and which includes Saudi Arabia's Wahhabi state religion.
2. Sisk faults APT for failing to mention that the 1998 New York Times article we cited stated that former ICN Imam Abdulhakim Mohamed had cleaned up the radical Brooklyn mosque by 1998. But it is Sisk who fails to tell his readers that in 2003, 5 years after Abdulhakim supposedly cleaned the mosque up, the FBI raided it again for raising money for Al Qaeda's Yemeni branch. It seems that despite Abdulhakim's protestations to the contrary, extremist activity continued at the Brooklyn mosque unabated.
"Surrounded by Islamic incense shops and booksellers on Atlantic Avenue in the Boerum Hill neighborhood, imposing Al Farooq Mosque in Brooklyn has a history of raising money for Osama bin Laden, dating to the days when Mr. bin Laden and the United States had a common enemy in the Soviet occupiers of Afghanistan.
Those days were supposed to be gone, though. Five years ago, the imam at the time, Abdulhakim Ali Mohamed, said that ''in 1994, this mosque finally settled down'' and broke ties with terrorists.
Yesterday, however, news crews crowded around the mosque again, drawn by the federal government's charge that a Yemeni cleric bragged last year that he had raised money for Al Qaeda through the mosque."
The Tennessean's most glaring omission:
The Tennessean's reporting completely avoids one of the most salient findings in our film: That Awadh Binhazim's organization and Amar Razali, Olive Tree's Communications Director, both promoted online writings by Anwar Al Awlaki.
Awlaki is considered to be the most dangerous Al Qaeda leader alive, primarily because his online publications are able to reach, appeal to, and incite Western Muslims. Yet the Tennessean chose to avoid addressing this point in our video.
Jacobs said, "It is now generally accepted by most Americans that mainstream media reporters are not motivated by reporting the facts; instead they see themselves as righteous fighters who through their careers improve the world. This means that they have to report only those facts that advance their mission.
We suspect that Mr. Sisk did not report the hateful things he knew about Nashville's Muslim leaders perhaps because he does not trust the citizens of Nashville. He seems concerned about bigoted backlash against what he perceives as a vulnerable minority.
The Tennessean has lost its way. The paper no longer believes that its mission is to inform its readers in the honest and fair way expected by a democratic society. Instead,it has become an advocate of a particular politically-correct narrative, that trumps the truth.This sort of "reporting" hides inconvenient truths from the citizens the Tennessean is supposed to serve. Worse, the paper has denied a voice to authentically moderate Muslims who want to assimilate and become peaceful Americans.
We call upon the Tennessean to honor the foundational ethics of journalism by dropping the ideological template with which it shapes its coverage of this difficult and challenging issue."
Israeli PM calls for “just solution” to end the conflict.
Aboard Air Force Aleph (Reuters) – Speaking to reporters accompanying Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on his long flight to the United States tonight, Netanyahu spoke of the injustice and hardship Mexicans have endured since American forces annexed Texas in 1845. “Tens of thousands of ordinary Mexicans were driven out of their homes – the only homes they had known for centuries - and forced to live in poverty and squalor south of the border imposed by American aggression,” Netanyahu said. “The Israeli and Mexican people agree on this: This festering wound will never heal until America takes bold steps to return to the internationally accepted lines of 1845. Clearly the settlement activity that’s taken place occupied Mexico since then is illegal. When I meet the President tomorrow I will tell him to halt all building activity in Texas immediately. Two lands for two peoples, yes, but not on land taken by force from Mexico,” the Prime Minister said.
Asked if his hard-line stance could hurt the U.S.-Israel relationship, Netanyahu reiterated Israel’s commitment to America’s security and the unshakeable friendship shared by the two countries, then added, “But who was it who said, part of friendship is being able to tell your friend the truth. The ball is now in Obama’s court.”
This is a co-production of Active Voice and BeCause Foundations promoting the efforts of the Welcoming America NGO backed by George Soros’ Open Society Institute and several other foundations.
The focus on Shelbyville, located in Bedford County in middle Tennessee, derives from its emblematic cultural clashes from the influx of 1,100 un-assimilated Somali Muslim poultry processing workers and families in a community of 18,000. The Bible Belt has been impacted by the multi-billion dollar refugee resettlement programs implemented by our State Department and the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) at the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) during the Clinton era that vectored refugees to Gateway Cities in the American Heartland.
It is also reflected in the local opposition to a number of Mega Mosque projects in nearby locations like Antioch, Murfreesboro and Nashville, Tennessee. These have captured national attention, most recently in the CNN, Soledad O’Brien In America documentary; Unwelcome: Muslims Next Door (see here). That documentary was about the controversy over the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro expansion project. The controversy concerning the spate of mosque building projects and concerns expressed by local citizens over accommodation of Sharia Islamic law are reflected in the Republican-controlled Tennessee legislature’s deliberations over a Material Support Act for Designated Entities. This legislation is directed at curbing home grown terrorism. It likely to pass this session in Nashville, despite protests of Muslim advocacy groups and minority Democratic allies, including many Somali immigrants.
If you go to the Welcome to Shelbyville, website and view the multimedia presentation by production partner Active Voice, the impression one receives is that the community has a decided racist and bigoted past with inferences that it might have spawned the KKK created by Confederate Gen. Nathan Bedford Forest (not the case and Bedford County is named after a revolutionary war hero). It was subsequently embroiled in Jim Crow segregation episodes up through the Civil Rights era of the 1960’s. Only passing mention is made of the county’s first African American Mayor, Eugene Ray.
In the course of reviewing the multi-media presentation you will come across Brian Mosely, AP-award winning journalist of the Shelbyville Times Gazette. We interviewed Mosely about Somalis and the severe cultural clash occasioned by Tyson Foods hiring these refugee émigrés to replace illegal Hispanic aliens at a local poultry processing plant. Mosely appears in the Welcome to Shelbyville documentary, mainly as a target for local immigrant groups, Latino and Somali, castigating the community for not accommodating the Somali Muslim workers, despite Mosely’s carefully and well documented evidence of severe conflicts.
Perhaps, it was Mosely’s revelations about the less than helpful efforts of the Tennessee Immigration and Refugee Rights Coalition (TIRRC) that placed billboards throughout middle Tennessee promoting the community acceptance of Somali immigrants that may have set off the producers patent attack on him in the documentary. The TIRRC billboard campaign led to the formation of the Welcoming America NGO started in 2007. This NGO’s aim is to foster similar efforts in a number of locales through the American Heartland including Welcoming projects in more than 11 states involving Latinos, Somalis and other immigrant groups. The fundamentalist Somali Muslims’ demands in Shelbyville for obligatory Islamic Sharia compliance have created problems. These have disrupted labor management relations at the Tyson Food plant, hampered absorption problems compounded by lack of English language proficiency and communications. The Somalis have evinced offensive and arrogant attitudes demeaning women and other minorities.
The Shelbyville culture clash was the subject of interviews by Christian Broadcasting Network counterterrorism analyst, Erick Stakelbeck in the community, including Times-Gazette writer, Mosely. Note this exchange drawn from Stakelbeck’s new book, The Terrorist Next Door.
“They’ve had an impact here. Unfortunately, it’s not been a good impact,” said Brian Mosely, a reporter for the Shelbyville Times-Gazette newspaper.
“I found that there was just an enormous culture clash going on here,” Mosely said.
“The Somalis were—according to a lot of the people I talked to here—being very, very rude, inconsiderate, very demanding. They would go into stores and haggle over prices. They would also demand to see a male salesperson; [they] would not deal with women in stores.”
“We’re talking about people who have not had any experience with Western civilization,” Mosely explained.
“They don’t know the language. Things like running water are a miracle to some of these folks.
. . You don’t take people from a totally alien culture, put them into a community, and then say, ‘Alright, you must get along.’”
Welcome to Shelbyville was premiered in the community in October, 2010. The production was selected by the US State Department to be shown in more than 38 diplomatic legations in the third world. One presentation occurred in our embassy in the capitol of sectarian strife-torn Lagos, Nigeria.
There have been over 90 previews in the run up to the May 24th nationwide PBS presentation. One of those took place on May 9th in Los Angeles sponsored by the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) with its founder, Salam Al Mayarti. MPAC is one of several Muslim Brotherhood fronts like CAIR, ISNA and the ICNA engaged in promoting the Welcome to Shelbyville documentary. Perhaps this MPAC presentation of Welcome to Shelbyville was done out of solidarity with their fundamentalist Somali Muslim brethren, or perhaps to promote the liberal supported views that all Muslims are being discriminated against, or both.
Al Mayarti is someone to be watched. He is a ‘truther’ having accused the Israelis of fomenting 9/11. He is a defender of designated foreign terrorist groups, Hamas and Hezbollah.
An alum of MPAC is Arif Alikhan, the former Los Angeles Deputy Mayor and Bush US Department of Justice aide, who nixed an L.A.P.D. Muslim community profiling project endeavoring to detect Jihadists.
Alikhan was appointed in 2009 as Assistant Secretary for Policy at the US Department of Homeland Security under Secretary Janet Napolitano.
Piercing the veil of the Welcome to Shelbyville production sponsors, BeCause Foundation, Active Voice and Welcoming America, we find an assortment of former PBS producers, Obama Campaign Aides, a former TIRRC director, funding by Chicago property mogul Sam Zell, international hedge fund billionaire George Soros and other foundations. Further investigation of these co-producers reveals connections to Arab American, immigration advocacy groups, UN and US refugee resettlement programs and voluntary agency contractors.
The Chicago-based BeCause Foundation website describes itself as:
[driving] social change through the powerful fusion of documentary filmmaking …implementing engagement campaigns and coalition building around the films… helps transform such solutions into broad based movements for social change.
Richard Kincaid, founder and President of the group since 2003 was a financial officer with Chicago real estate mogul and billionaire Sam Zell’s Equity Office Property Trust as was executive director, Debbie Ferruzzi.
. . . using film, television and multimedia to spark social change from grassroots to grass tops. Our team of strategic communications specialists works with media makers, funders, advocates and thought leaders to put a human face on the issues of our times.
Active Voice counts among its non-profit clients, groups engaged in Arab American advocacy, Immigration Reform and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees that controls who gets vectored into the American heartland by our State Department and HHS refugee resettlement programs.
Among these are:
• American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee*
• American Civil Liberties Union
• American Constitution Society*
• Amnesty International USA*
• Heartland Alliance’s Midwest Immigrants
• National Coalition for Dialogue and Deliberation National Council of La Raza
• National Immigrant Justice Center
• UN High Commissioner for Refugees.
Active Voice has been involved with a number Immigration Advocacy and Faith-Based groups, including a number of Voluntary Agencies, contractors with the State Department Refugee and HHS resettlement programs:
• California Council of Churches
• Catholic Charities*
• Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc. (CLINIC)*
• Center for Islamic Studies
• Church World Service*
• Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society
• Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service (LIRS)
• National Council of Churches USA
• World Relief.
Executive director Ellen Schneider was formerly the executive producer of P.O.V., PBS's independent documentary series. She created reality TV pilots and sits on juried film festivals like Sundance. Greg Ligon, Active Voice’s Online communications Associate helped organize the youth vote programs at Obama for America and Corzine for Governor in New Jersey and was an aide in the legislative office of Congressman Bill Pascrell Jr. (D-NJ), whose district includes significant local Hispanic and Muslim constituencies. Pascrell has sponsored seminars for Muslim constituents and CAIR at the US Capitol.
The Atlanta-based Welcoming America NGO is headed by David Lubell, the former director and founder of TIRRC, host organization for Welcoming Tennessee and the inspiration for Welcoming America. Welcoming America now has advocacy educational projects based on the TIRRC model in more than 11 states in America.
TIRRC is now considered a model for emerging immigrant’s rights coalitions forming across the U.S., and was named “Advocacy Affiliate of the Year” in 2008 by the National Council of La Raza (NCLR), the largest Latino civil rights organization in the U.S.
Listen to Lubell and others on a PBS NPR Forum panel discuss ‘the receiving communities movement’ dealing with immigrant integration and advocacy for undocumented aliens and refugees.
Welcoming America has been the recipient of grants from several foundations: $150,000 from the Open Society Institute of George Soros; a $300,000 ‘entrepreneur’ grant from The Draper Richards Kaplan Foundation; and, $90,000 from the JM Kaplan Foundation.
According to Lubell, his group Welcoming America allegedly avoids immigration reform or politics instead concentrating on building rapport with resident populations via community building rather than creating immigrant infrastructure and power bases. That is allegedly what attracted the group’s significant backing from these philanthropies.
The problem, as exemplified by what Mosely and others have encountered with Somali Muslim immigrants is that they reject the very same resident populations that Welcoming America is trying to reach. That makes for volatile relations and possible violence in communities that host these alien immigrants rejecting basic Western values. Which means that the Welcome to Shelbyville documentary doesn’t convey the realities of absorption. It glosses over them, while attacking the truth tellers.
Five British soldiers killed in an attack by a rogue Afghan policeman were there because of a "blood feud" between a police commander and the Taliban, an inquest heard.
Speaking at the inquest at Wiltshire and Swindon Coroner's Court in Trowbridge, Lt Col Walker said there was a feud between "one of the local villager boys [who] was a local Taliban commander" and the police commander over land elsewhere in the region. "I think there was an element of blood feud which is a cultural practice."
The troops were gunned down without warning by an officer, known only as Gulbuddin, alongside whom they had been living at an Afghan National Police (ANP) checkpoint in Nad-e-Ali, Helmand Province.
Warrant Officer Class 1 Darren Chant, 40, Sergeant Matthew Telford, 37, and Guardsman Jimmy Major, 18, from the Grenadier Guards, died alongside Corporal Steven Boote, 22, and Corporal Nicholas Webster-Smith, 24, from the Royal Military Police on November 3, 2009.
David Ridley, coroner for Wiltshire and Swindon, recorded a verdict of unlawful killing following a four-day inquest in Trowbridge, Wilts.
The Taliban claimed responsibility for the murders and some reports suggested Gulbuddin had escaped back to them, but military sources have suggested the attack was probably unconnected to the insurgents.
No one knows why Gulbuddin opened fire, (of course we know - jihad) killing the five and also wounding six troops and two Afghan policemen. He fled the checkpoint and has never been caught.
The British soldiers were at the checkpoint in the village of Shin Kalay, which was on a vital supply route, to defuse a "blood feud" between a police commander and the local Taliban. That had caused tensions between villagers and the ANP, which had been accused of beatings, paedophilia and corruption. The ANP were poorly paid and many regularly abused opium and cannabis and were often insubordinate and ill-disciplined. On patrol with the British, some wore nail varnish or would hold each other's hands, the inquest heard.
An Afghan interpreter said the ANP were insolent and would tell the British in Pashto to "f*** off" or call them "f****** infidels".
Gulbuddin was nicknamed "Errol Flynn" by troops for his moustache and "Pretty Boy" because of his camp behaviour. In the weeks before the shootings he had run-ins with British soldiers, including touching their bottoms, twanging the elastic on their shorts and grabbing one in a headlock. He was also in a "strop" on the day of the killings, having been admonished for not wearing his police-issue hat. On one occasion Gulbuddin had taken so much cannabis he could "barely walk straight".
Lance Corporal Peniasi Namarua, who was badly injured in the incident, said: "I didn't trust them. I can't explain why I could not trust them, it was just a feeling I could not suppress."
Bulgaria is one of the few countries in Europe which for more than 50 years has been an example of tolerance - ethnic, religious and other forms - and no one should damage this, Foreign Minister Nikolai Mladenov said after a clash outside a mosque in central Sofia between supporters of ultra-nationalist party Ataka and Muslims led to injuries and arrests.
Three Ataka supporters were arrested and one of the party's MPs, Denitsa Gadzheva, was injured in the incident at the Banya Bashi mosque, which followed a protest by Ataka against the use of loudspeakers to broadcast the call to prayer.
Siderov told Parliament that unless the Ataka members who were arrested were released, his party would "go into opposition", a reference to the fact that since 2009 it generally has been supportive of Prime Minister Boiko Borissov's centre-right Government.
Siderov said that the police had arrested what he called "Bulgarian patriots" but "not a single Islamist wearing a turban, who were making fun of Bulgaria, preaching jihad and calling for the deaths of Christians, was detained".
He showed photographs of an injured Gadzheva, telling Parliament, "here is evidence of Islamist terror in Bulgaria".
On Islam, The Middle East, And The Endless Jihad Against Israel, Can President Obama Get Real?
1) had an understanding of the world-wide threat from those who take Islam to heart,
and if Obama
2) realized that after the loss of American bases in Morocco, and then Libya, and the unlikelihood that Iraq will be granting the Americans a base, or that Qatar or Kuwait or Bahrain will keep Americans around save to save the ruling houses, and we all know about Saudi Arabia's treatment of the American airmen who were temporarily allowed in to protect the Al Saud when Saddam Hussein in 1991 seemed to threaten them (remember the Saudi prince who told other Saudis about how he could now "summon my blue-eyed slaves"), in the mighty military contests that are likely to come, between Italy and East Asia, the only American base, or bases that the Americans can count on to be firmly in the hands of those who are unswervingly on the American side, are those in Israel,
and if Obama
3) further understood how maltreated the Israelis -- and not simply Netanyahu, who has been subject to a campaign of vilification and demonization when his position on putting trust in the "Palestinians" or allowing the American government to decide, when it flails about on the matter of Islam, and what to do about the wasteful messes and general hopelessness and utterly predictable treacheries by Muslims in Iraq, in Afghanistan, in Pakistan, to sacrifice Israel's security, by ignoring the history of the Middle East and the history of the Jews which explain that Mandate (the most legitimate of all the Mandates which the League of Nations created out of the former Ottoman-ruled lands), and by ignoring -- or never learning --what Islam inculcates, and how it is a doctrine that originated in the need for Arabs to both promote, and justify, their conquest of many other, far more advanced and rich and settled peoples, throughout the Middle East and North Africa. And what it inculcates is the duty of all Muslims to participate in Jihad, the struggle to remove all obstacles to the spread, and then the dominance, of Islam. And the war on the Jewish state is not about borders, or armistice lines, or this business of the recently-invented "Palestinian people." The diplomatic and propaganda campaign against Israel has been going relentlessly since the defeat of three Arab armies in 1967, and the Arabs have used the fruits of Israel's victory in that war of self-defense to re-present the Jihad against Israel as, in truth, merely an attempt to win a "state" for the "Palestinian people." That the Muslim Arabs made war agaisnt Israel, on the battlefield and through terrorism, long before the "Palestinian people" were invented, and long before there was a single Israeli either in Gaza or "the West Bank" apparently has escaped everyone's notice.
The Israelis have not been vigilant about words. They have accepted the use of that term "Palestinian people" and some Israelis, including some leaders, have been criminally negligent in using that phrase themselves, instead of holding it up for critical scrutiny and never once endorsing it or seeming to. They have not fought to end the misuse of that word "occupied" -- see here for more -- and have allowed the BBC and now NPR to describe with that loaded epithet territory to which Israel has a claim that has nothing to do with being a military occupier. Rather, it was Jordan and Egypt that occupied territory to which, under the Mandate, they had no claiim, and it was Israel, that in a war of self-defense took possession of land to which it already had a pre-existing claim. That is very different from, say, Occupied Paris or Occupied Vienna or Occupied France -- all terms that correclty use the word "Occupied" to indicate an occupation by foreign military troops who temporarily rule but who have no legitimate claim to the place that is -- temporarily -- "Occupied."
The Israelis not only have a right to keep everything that they currently possess, but they would have been completely within their rights in June 1967 had they simply annexed, the tiny territory between the Jordan and the sea that they need, to survive, as a buffer. They could have done this at the time, when the world had just lived through those weeks when Nasser demanded the U.N. peacekeepers get out of the Sinai, and called up his troops, and addressed screaming Cairene crowds, playing to their hysterical hate of the Zionist enemy, and threatened a blockade of the Straits of Tiran (cutting off Israel's lifeline to Asia), and doing much else, until, in early June, his plans went agley, and more than agley. That they did not do so has resulted in decades of blundering, and of bullying, and constant "plans" by endless meddlers from the West who presume to tell Israel what it can or cannot do in order to survive. And successive American governments, headed by people who have never even understood the need, when dealing with anything in the Middle East, to study and then grasp what Islam inculcates, what Islam does, what Islam requires of its followers, what attitudes and atmospherics of Islamic societies allow us to say, with absolute certainty, that the Muslim Arabs (whose ethnic identity does not play against, but reinforces, the power of Islam) will never accept the state of Israel, and that the only way to keep the peace -- if that is the goal -- is to have Israel's deterrent power so obvious, and so overwhelming, and the Arab leaders aware of this and their people too, so that they will not try again by open warfare what, of course, they will continue to try to win, through relentless world-wide campaigns intended to vilify Israel and to hide the real nature of the conflict, and to confuse people about the Mandate, and about the history of Muslim treaty-making and treaty-breaking with Israel.
It is not only conceivable but likely that Barack Obama, and those around him who speak about a "solution" to the Arab war -- the Jihad -- against Israel have no real grasp of the ideology of Islam, and cannot understand its deep effect on the minds of Believers. It is out of their experience, it is beyond their imaginative range. Instead, they insist, or believe, or allow themselves to believe, or pretend to believe, that what Islam inculcates, and what apostate witness after witness arrives to tell us Islam inculcates, simply cannot be true, for were it to be true, then they would be faced with a problem that has no end, that has no solution, and that merely for the distress caused by that problem to be ameliorated would require acts of imaginative intelligence that are simply beyond them. They are Podnsaps of policy; they don't want to hear about it, and they won't, for it offends them.
And the Israelis for years did not grasp the nature of Islam themselves. It was especially hard to do so during those years when Israel reached out to cultivate allies among non-Arab but Muslim neighbors -- Iran under the Shah and his secular courtiers, and Turkey still under the sway of Kemalism and the Turkish officer corps that stood ready to enforce the Kemalist dispensation. Furthermore, it is just as hard for Israelis, as for Europeans and Americans, to admit that Islam inculcates the idea of permanent Jihad, because for Israelis the problem, if recognized, is far more upsetting. Humans like to deny, like to postpone that fateful anagnorisis, unless they have all along steeled themselves, and come to understand that recognition even of a grim reality, a grim and "sober" reality (in contrast to the sentimental inebriation of hope and always-ever-assumedly-upward change on display in Obama's latest speech), can itself be salutary and bracing.
Israelis themselves have not yet publicly raised that Hudaibiyya issue -- of how, again and again, Arab states have pocketed the tangible things -- the land, the infrastructure -- that Israel has promised to yield, and done so, in exchange for promises on the other side to make "peace" -- which "peace" is supposed to include an end to hostile behavior, an end to participation in all the ways of war-making -- economic boycott, propaganda, diplomatic offensives -- that all of the Arab states, including the two, Egypt and Jordan, that have signed ballyhooed "peace treaties," have engaged in with impunity, the issue never being raised by that Great Guarantor of Peace Across the Seas, the American government.
Egypt's military -- the most corrupt and malign force in Egyptian life -- has for decades been wrongly hailed as being a "staunch ally" of the United States (it is not, and never has been) and what's more, praised -- for god's sake, it got the entire Sinai, didn't it? -- for having "kept the peace" with Israel, and the American government has seen fit to reward Egypt, beyond the vast Sinai (with $15 billion in improvements that the Israelis included) that Egypt received, and has so far given Egypt more than $70 billion in economic and military aid. That has all been a mistake, a mistake about to be compounded by Obama when he offers still more aid to a country whose military are preparing to fight, sometime in the future, only one country -- Israel -- and whose civilian ruling clique is corrupt, and helps itself to American aid which is the easiest piggybank to rob if you are in that frame of mind, and many in that ruling clique regard corruption as one of the natural perquisites of rule.
And if Egypt "kept the peace with Israel" it never fulfilled any of its promises to encourage friendly relations and halt the hostile and vicious anti-Israel propaganda that used to pour out of Egypt -- and that pours out of its press, its radio, its television still. Egypt "kept the peace" only in the sense that it did not wage open warfare. But Syria didn't either, nor Iraq, nor Libya, nor Saudi Arabia, nor many other Muslim lands that "kept the peace" because they feared what Israel would do by way of retaliation. No document, no peace treaty, was necessary for Israel, through its military strength, to "keep the peace."
I don't know if Netanyahu, who knows all about the Treaty of Hudaibiyya, will start talking about it, or will start discussing the ideology of Islam. He likely will not do it publicly. But he, and other Israelis, and those who are not Israelis but care about the survival of Israel and, of course, about the survival of the West in conditions other than those of maximum peril and expense, should also start talking first to those who make policy, so that they realize they can no longer hide from the Western publics these aspects of Islam, and to force those who make policy to begin to put aside sentimentality about Arabs emulating dignified Rosa Parks (but Rosa Parks would never have attacked Coptic churches, never have been eager to lord it over others as so many Musliims in Egypt, or even in Tunisia among the rachid-ghannouchi followers, would be perfeclty content, even delighted to do, with non-Muslims) and to get real. .
Yet another shocking revelation about yet another (accused) terrorist-who-just-happens-to-be-Muslim, Akbar Muhammad, from AP:
Farrakhan aide denies terror, drug allegations
GEORGETOWN, Guyana – A longtime aide to Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan is denying Guyana police allegations of ties to drugs and terrorism.
Akbar Muhammad tells The Associated Press that the accusations against him are a massive distortion. he says he has never been involved in terrorism or drugs.
Muhammad spoke briefly Friday as he was being taken back to hotel where police detained him so he could retrieve his heart medications.
Assistant Police Commissioner Seelal Persaud has said he has information that links Muhammad to drugs and terrorism. Persaud has declined further comment, except to say that Canadian-Guyanese citizen Phillip Muhammad also was arrested.
Court orders 'Islamic extremist' out of the capital
Thats all well and good, but as he is such a danger what did the 'midlands town' do wrong to deserve him. Surely he should be deported, as he has dual nationality. From the London Evening Standard.
A man security services say was the leading figure in "a close group of Islamic extremists based in north London" must be moved out of the capital to protect the public, the High Court has ruled.
The man, who is subject to a control order and can only be referred to as "CD", has attempted to obtain firearms, according to intelligence reports. CD was reported to have attended the training camp organised by Muhammed Hamid, and also attended by the 21/7 bombers, at Baysbrown Farm in Cumbria in May 2004.
Mr Justice Simon said CD's removal to an undisclosed address "in a Midland city" was "a necessary and proportionate measure to protect the public from the risk of what is an immediate and real risk of a terrorist-related attack".
The risk was "significant", notwithstanding the high level of protection implicit in his control order obligations. It was the Home Office case that relocation was necessary to prevent covert meetings with his associates in London to plan attacks.
The judge said the family of CD, who is married with two children, are entitled to a travel allowance to visit him, but that did not mean such allowances should be made available in every relocation case.
CD, who has dual British and Nigerian nationality, was served with a control order in February this year. The 12-month order was imposed following Government assertions that putting him on trial risked revealing intelligence sources.
Osama bin Laden planned Easter bomb campaign, files seized in US raid show
The Daily Telegraph has learnt that MI5 has been passed intelligence from their American counterparts linking bin Laden directly to the so-called “Easter shopping” bomb plot. The Manchester terrorist cell – suspected of plotting to blow up landmarks in the city during the Easter holiday – was arrested in 2009.
But the police were unable to press charges because of a lack of evidence and their treatment at the time became a cause célèbre for MPs, lawyers and human rights groups. An attempt last year to deport the alleged ringleader of the plot then failed on human rights grounds because he claimed he would be tortured if he was returned to Pakistan. Most of the alleged cell members have now left Britain.
The disclosure of the links to bin Laden is likely to lead to renewed concern over the British operation to apprehend the men – and the evidence which can be used in terrorist prosecutions in this country.The CIA has already told its British counterparts that it has found a list of names that included the men allegedly behind the Manchester plot.
The discovery is among the first evidence that bin Laden may have been playing an operational role in al-Qaeda from his hideout at a compound in Abbottabad, before his death on May 2.The Americans have already disclosed that bin Laden was plotting to blow up US trains and he is said to have been “obsessed” with the anniversary of 9/11.
The intelligence services intercepted messages that they believed showed the British-based extremists were communicating with a commander in Pakistan to carry out bombings in Easter 2009.
However, the operation turned into a farce after Bob Quick, the head of counter-terrorism police at the time, was photographed entering Downing Street with details of planned raids under his arm. This forced detectives and intelligence agents to make arrests immediately. The 12 men arrested were released without charge, then detained on immigration grounds as a threat to national security.
Two Muslim Labour MPs wrote to the Home Secretary at the time to complain about the “gravely unjust” treatment of the men.
Islamofascism: Obama wants to reward "democratic Egypt" with $1 billion in debt relief. Only, "democratic" Egypt is torching churches and slaughtering Christians left and right.
There's a howling disconnect between the president's Pollyannaish narrative of an 'Arab Spring' and the reality on the ground in beneficiary countries such as Egypt, where religious intolerance and human-rights abuses are on the rise.
In his speech calling for a Mideast Marshall Plan, he failed to mention increasingly violent attacks against Coptic Christians throughout post-Mubarak Egypt. For them, the "Arab Spring" has turned into a bitter and bloody winter.
Among recent attacks:
• An angry mob of Muslims last week threw rocks and firebombs at Christians gathered in Cairo for a sit-in to demand the new regime reopen nearly 50 churches it shuttered. The attacks left more than 65 injured.
• Jihadists on May 8 stormed and set ablaze the Virgin Mary Church in Cairo, shouting: "With our blood and soul, we will defend you, Islam." They also burned down nearby homes occupied by Coptic families, killing a dozen people and wounding more than 200.
• Muslim rioters in Qena demanded in April the ouster of a governor because he is Christian.
• Muslim mobs in March torched another Cairo church and attacked Christian worshipers there.
• Muslims in December bombed a church in Alexandria, killing 23.
An estimated 3,000 Muslims have joined in these attacks. They've done this while Egyptian troops and police did little or nothing to stop the violence.
In a Pew Research poll taken after the allegedly pro-democracy riots in Tahrir Square, only a third of Egyptian adults said they think it's important for Coptic Christians to practice their faith freely.
Meanwhile, a whopping 89% of them say laws under a post-Mubarak government "should follow the values and principles of Islam." And nearly two-thirds want laws to enforce Shariah — the barbaric legal code practiced in Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan under the Taliban.
In a separate survey last spring, Pew found that a startling 84% of Egyptians favor the death penalty for people who leave the Muslim faith.
Clearly, Muslim hatred for Christians (as well as Jews) has not thawed with the "Arab Spring." While there are some Facebook modernists mixed in with reformers, the vast majority of Egyptians are hardly Westernized Muslims yearning for our freedoms. These are Islamofascists yearning to be free of non-Muslims in their society.
In fact, a pogrom against Copts may have begun in the absence of Mubarak's protections. The bloodshed is well-documented in U.S. Embassy cables from Cairo.
WASHINGTON — With NATO officials expressing increased confidence on Friday that Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi’s military position in Libya was weakening, the Obama administration appeared to ignore a statute requiring hostilities to cease after two months if Congress had not authorized them to continue.
The War Powers Resolution of 1973 says that a president must terminate military operations 60 days after notifying Congress that he had introduced armed forces into actual or imminent hostilities. The Libyan operation reached that deadline on Friday.
But Pentagon and military officials said the United States’ participation in the Libyan mission was going forward unchanged. That includes the intermittent use of armed Predator drones to fire missiles at Libyan government forces, as happened on Thursday and Friday, they said.
“We will not halt our current operations, which are limited and in support of this critical, NATO-led humanitarian operation,” said Tommy Vietor, a National Security Council spokesman.
While the legal debate was playing out, NATO commanders seemed to go beyond their typically cautious statements on the conflict, saying that allied airstrikes had prevented Colonel Qaddafi’s forces from making sustained attacks on rebel fighters and had driven the Libyan leader into hiding.
“NATO nations and partners agree we have taken the initiative; we have the momentum,” the alliance spokeswoman, Carmen Romero, said at a Friday news briefing, summarizing the view of NATO ambassadors who met earlier in the week.
A NATO military spokesman, Wing Commander Mike Bracken, said of Colonel Qaddafi: “Effectively he has gone into hiding.”
The briefing on Friday echoed the generally upbeat conclusions contained in a confidential assessment of the operation’s first 60 days that Lt. Gen. Charles Bouchard of Canada, the allied operational commander in Naples, Italy, sent to NATO political and military leaders in Brussels this week, a NATO diplomat said.
While noting the alliance’s steady progress in eroding the combat effectiveness of Colonel Qaddafi’s forces, General Bouchard also outlined three options for how NATO could continue the mission beyond the three months that allied leaders approved in March, said the diplomat, who had been briefed on the report.
One would maintain current NATO force levels. Another option, assuming Colonel Qaddafi was ousted from power, calls for much lower force levels during what could be a transition to a new government. A third plan would increase pressure on Colonel Qaddafi’s government, but does not go into details.
General Bouchard made no recommendations, the diplomat said, leaving that decision to NATO ambassadors.
Late on Friday, the White House released a letter from President Obama to Congressional leaders defending the Libya operation. While he did not directly ask for a resolution authorizing the action or concede that it was necessary, he expressed support for the idea of a legislative endorsement.
“Congressional action in support of the mission would underline the U.S. commitment to this remarkable international effort,” he wrote. “Such a resolution is also important in the context of our constitutional framework, as it would demonstrate a unity of purpose among the political branches on this important national security matter.”
While Congressional leaders have signaled little institutional interest in enforcing the resolution, there are signs that a political controversy is starting to pick up.
On Wednesday, six Republican senators sent a letter to Mr. Obama noting the imminent deadline “for you to terminate the use of the United States armed forces in Libya.” They asked “whether you intend to comply with the requirements of the War Powers Resolution.”
On Thursday, Representative Howard P. McKeon of California, the Republican chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, sent a similar letter to Mr. Obama stressing that the country was about to reach the War Powers Resolution deadline, which he portrayed as a “critical juncture.”
And on Friday, the American Civil Liberties Union also wrote to Mr. Obama expressing its “profound concern” that he was about to violate the War Powers Resolution, and arguing that he had no legal authority to use military force in Libya.
Administration officials offered no theory for why continuing the air war in Libya in the absence of such a resolution and beyond the deadline would be lawful. Jack Goldsmith, a Harvard law professor who led the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel in 2003 and 2004, portrayed it as a significant constitutional moment.
“There may be facts of which we are unaware, but this appears to be the first time that any president has violated the War Powers Resolution’s requirement either to terminate the use of armed forces within 60 days after the initiation of hostilities or get Congress’s support,” Mr. Goldsmith said.
Jay Carney, the White House press secretary, said that the validity of the War Powers Resolution had been so debated that writings about it “over the years could fill this room, and none of it would be conclusive.”
Congress enacted the resolution in 1973, overriding President Richard M. Nixon’s veto, in an effort to reassert its constitutional role in making decisions about whether the country would get involved in significant armed conflicts.
Several parts of the resolution have been repeatedly challenged by presidents. But a 1980 opinion by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel concluded that the 60-day limit was constitutional. (The law allows presidents to extend the deadline by 30 days if necessary to protect the safety of forces as they withdraw, which does not appear to apply to an air campaign.)
“The practical effect of the 60-day limit is to shift the burden to the president to convince the Congress of the continuing need for the use of our armed forces abroad,” the 1980 memorandum says. “We cannot say that placing that burden on the president unconstitutionally intrudes upon his executive powers.”
Such opinions are binding on the executive branch unless they are superseded by the Justice Department or the president. The Justice Department did not respond to a question about whether the 31-year-old memorandum remains in effect.
The administration has argued that Mr. Obama did not need Congressional permission to deploy forces to Libya, saying that a president may order forces into limited military engagements on his own if he decides it is in the national interest, and that the NATO-led campaign in Libya is such a conflict.
Steven Erlanger contributed reporting from Paris, and Eric Schmitt from Naples, Italy.
Al Qaeda Plan To Blow Up Tankers Sailing In "Non-Muslim Seas"
From The Washington Post:
US government warning: Al-Qaida considered hijacking, detonating oil tankers abroad
By Associated Press, May 20
WASHINGTON — The terror group al-Qaida last summer considered hijacking and detonating oil tankers abroad in non-Muslim seas to provoke an “extreme economic crisis” in the West, according to documents seized from Osama bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan, the U.S. government said.
It added there was no specific or imminent threat and said officials didn’t know whether al-Qaida had continued the plotting since last year.
In a confidential warning obtained by The Associated Press, the FBI and the Homeland Security Department said that al-Qaida sought information on the size and construction of oil tankers, and determined that blowing them up from the inside would be easiest due to the strength of their hulls. Al-Qaida recommended test runs of the plot.
“We are not aware of indications of any specific or imminent terrorist attack plotting against the oil and natural gas sector overseas or in the United States,” DHS spokesman Matthew Chandler said in a statement Friday. “However, in 2010 there was continuing interest by members of al-Qaida in targeting oil tankers and commercial oil infrastructure at sea.”
The government warning went to federal, state and local law enforcement and companies in the oil and gas industries. The Homeland Security Department said it was not raising the nation’s terror alert level.
In 2007 the Japanese tanker the Golden Nori was hijacked carrying 40,000 tons of benzene. Initially, American intelligence agents worried terrorists from Somalia’s Islamic extremist insurgency could be involved, and might try to crash the boat into an offshore oil platform or use it as a gigantic bomb in a Middle Eastern port. When the Japanese vessel was towed back into Somali waters and ransom demanded, the coalition was relieved to realize it was a pirate attack.