Tuesday, November 25, 2014

Profs Blame ISIS on ‘Islamophobia’ and ‘Grievances’

Profs Blame ISIS on ‘Islamophobia’ and ‘Grievances’


Cinnamon Stillwell is the West Coast Representative for Campus Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum. She can be reached at stillwell@meforum.org.


President Obama’s infamous proclamation that ISIS (the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria) is “not Islamic” was received sympathetically within the ranks of Middle East studies. While many scholars of Islam and the Middle East have condemned ISIS’s heinous actions, a stubborn refusal to acknowledge their theological underpinnings lingers. Those who do concede ISIS’s Islamic supremacism are branded “Islamphobes.” Others attribute ISIS’s rampage of mass murder, beheadings, rape, slavery, and strict Sharia law in pursuit of a caliphate to Western-inspired “grievances” or “root causes.”

John Esposito, director of the Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University, is at the forefront of such obfuscation. Disregarding ISIS’s adherence to Quranic literalism, Esposito declared:
I do not think that this is a very Islamic vision at all. . . . Theirs is a kind of religion that is extraordinarily full of violence and abuse that is not in accordance with the Quran, the traditions of the Prophet or even with Islamic Law.
Hatem Bazian, director of the Islamophobia Research & Documentation Project at the University of California, Berkeley, lived up to his title by invoking victimhood. Bazian claimed that:
When Islamophobes point to the Koran and Islam as the problem, they are epistemically reinforcing ISIS’s claims and also pushing every Muslim into the same categorization. . . . For me, religion is a rationalization rather than the root cause.
Responding to British Prime Minister David Cameron’s public acknowledgement that British Muslims are joining ISIS, University of Michigan history professor Juan Cole ranted, “It’s just a way of beating up on the Muslims in the UK. . . . Cameron is grandstanding about this and it’s Islamophobia, it’s just racism.” Perhaps Cole is unaware that Cameron, speaking at a reception for British Muslims, kowtowed to political-correctness by declaring that ISIS has “nothing to do with the great religion of Islam, a religion of peace.”

Meanwhile, Sahar F. Aziz, Texas A&M University law professor, condemned those who are “blindly blaming religion . . . rather than root causes,” lamenting that, “Thousands of miles away from the Middle East, it is tempting for Americans to view the atrocities committed by the Islamic State (ISIS) as further evidence that something is wrong with Islam.” Instead, she asserted, “The politics of authoritarianism, rather than religion, explain the rise of ISIS.” Given that ISIS arose in a power vacuum, there is little basis for blaming authoritarianism.

Going to ridiculous lengths, Omid Safi, director of Duke University’s Islamic Studies Center, faults humanity itself:
I am mindful of the fact that much of the Islamophobic discourse of today holds Muslims in the West accountable for atrocities of ISIS. In that context, it makes a fundamental mistake. . . . All of us, Muslims and Jews and Christians and Hindus and Buddhists and people of no faith and people of occasional faith, we are all responsible.
That is, since everyone is responsible for ISIS, no one is responsible.
After conceding that “Muslims have a responsibility to speak out against ISIS,” Safi then entreated,
[A]ll of us to speak out with the same vehemence . . . about the victims of the American drones, about the victims of the allies of the United States? Can we mourn Palestinians? Can we mourn Mike Brown and Trayvon Martin? Can we mourn the 2.5 million Americans caught in a penal industrial complex?
A better question for Safi would be whether there is any unrelated societal ill that cannot be associated with condemning ISIS?

University of California, Riverside creative writing professor Reza Aslan denied that ISIS has any appeal whatsoever to devout Muslims, marveling over “how little religion plays a role in this group, how little the idea of reading the Koran or praying or those kinds of things play a significant role on the ground among these militants.” Granting that “religion is the sort of underlying, unifying aspect of it,” Aslan then contradicted himself: “But the idea that ISIS is drawing excessively religious people to it is factually incorrect.” Elsewhere, he alluded to the “grievances . . . that a lot of Muslims around the world have” and warned that ISIS’s appeal would remain, “unless those grievances can be addressed.”

Tariq Ramadan, professor of contemporary Islamic studies at Oxford University, suggested that Muslim scholars respond to ISIS by proclaiming:
What you are doing, killing innocent people, implementing so-called “Sharia” or the so-called “Islamic State”, this is against everything that is coming from Islam. . . . It is not a caliphate. It is just people playing with politics referring to religious sources.
While it is indeed necessary for Muslim moderates—a group that does not include Ramadan—to condemn ISIS, it is self-defeating to deny the Islamic basis for its behavior.

Other academics engage in moral relativism, equating ISIS’s unbridled aggression with the defense of Western democracies. Absurdly, Musa al-Gharbi, a University of Arizona instructor, described the U.S. as the bigger evil: “It would not be a stretch to say that the United States is actually a greater threat to peace and stability in the region than ISIS.” Al-Gharbi also dubbed Mexican drug cartels more destructive than ISIS and maintained that, “What is fueling the disproportionate reaction to ISIL is Islamophobia.”

Mark LeVine, a professor of Middle East history at the University of California, Irvine, simultaneously absolved Islam and demonized Zionism by likening ISIS fighters to religious “fanatics” of all types:
[The Islamic State] is as real a form of expression of Islam as the violent and chauvinist Israeli settler movement is to Judaism or as extreme Hindu nationalism, Rahkine Buddhism and militant Christianity are to their religions in India, Myanmar and the United States.
Georgetown University history professor Abdullah Al-Arian drew a cruder comparison on Twitter:
Israel and ISIS sitting in a tree, K-I-L-L-I-N-G, First come the bombs, then come the savages, then come the U.N. to survey the damages.
Likewise, Steven Salaita, a former Virginia Tech University English professor whose offer of a position at the University of Illinois was withdrawn, tweeted nonsensically, “#Israel and #ISIS are but two prongs of the same violent ethnonationalism.”

Stretching credulity even further, Rashid Khalidi of Columbia University, alleged that ISIS “would be positively affected if the United States stopped its biased support of Israel.”

Seemingly bucking these trends is an open letter to ISIS “caliph” Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi signed by over 120 Muslim leaders and scholars, including the aforementioned Hatem Bazian, Hamza Yusuf of Zaytuna College, and Brandeis University’s Joseph E.B. Lumbard. However, the letter calls its sincerity into question in its calculated ambiguity, endorsement of Sharia law, and the Islamist bent of many of its signatories.

Plainly, these Middle East studies academics are reluctant to admit the existence of Islamic supremacism. The rise of ISIS has challenged their ideology even more than the growth of al-Qaeda. Instead of addressing the monster to which Islam has given birth, as French Muslim philosopher Abdennour Bidar recently put it, they blame the non-Muslim world. Quite simply, the “experts” have buried their heads in the sand.

Cinnamon Stillwell is the West Coast Representative for Campus Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum. She can be reached at stillwell@meforum.org.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  
Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

Cannibal Diet Forced onto Unsuspecting Westerners

Cannibal Diet Forced onto Unsuspecting Westerners


How far will appeasement go, and should freedom of religion apply to those who actively contribute to our possible pending destruction?

By: Rachel Molschky

The cannibal tribespeople of a distant island so far removed from the rest of the planet, the name is impossible to pronounce, have been arriving in droves to the United States, Canada, Australia and countries in the European Union. After brutal attacks from a neighboring tribe, attempting to conquer the small territory made up of a series of islands whose name can be loosely translated as “Blood Suckers Islands,” (BS for short), Western leaders are appalled.

Seeing the horrific imagery of the savage attacks from one cannibal tribe on another, Western authorities visited the BS to see for themselves. The media accompanied world leaders along with UN representatives to document the ongoing tribal war and show the world the victims of this dreadful conflict, sadly, many of them children. A pact was made between the nations, who reached  the only decision possible, which was to bring over the cannibalistic victims as refugees. After all, it would be heartless to forsake them.

Before long, cannibals began arriving to Western nations. It wasn’t easy. The cannibals needed financial help, and our governments did not disappoint. New employees were hired to handle the overwhelming demand for welfare checks to the new refugees, who collected their checks but otherwise had nothing but criticism for their adopted countries. As it turned out, Westerners did “serve” a purpose, one which occurred in the temples the cannibals were able to build, complete with fire pits and specially designed pedestals for sacrifices to the gods.

These temples were perfectly legal with building permits approved by the government, along with security provided after threats were made from angry, racist, right-wing natives who mysteriously did not want to see cannibal temples in their hometowns.

The townsfolk of Christianville deep in America’s heartland were dumbfounded when the neighboring city, known affectionately by its inhabitants as “PC,” not only built a mega-temple but also hosted a parade in honor of the cannibal refugees, a new tradition which the city plans to continue on an annual basis. New commemorative days and months were also added to the calendar, in honor of our new cannibal friends, their BS culture and above all, their tremendous contribution to our nations. Still, it seems PC is not enough to make the BS happy.

Others have tried to appease them, and their rich BS culture is  celebrated in many towns across the world, including artwork depicting their religious acts, plays portraying their history, told purely from the BS point of view, and even new restaurants that are popping up everywhere.

“Not in my town!” said the mayor of Christianville when the cannibal refugees began moving into his suburban town and applied for a permit to build a new temple there. “We’re taking it all the way to the Supreme Court if we have to!” exclaimed the mayor.

And that’s what he did. The Supreme Court decided in favor of the cannibals because everyone deserves freedom of religion, and to deny them their temple would be racist. Besides, who wouldn’t support the BS culture?

These temples are only one battle the cannibals have fought and won. Despite what the racist natives think, the cannibals are people too, and they have rights. These rights include their religious dietary laws.

This strict diet of the cannibals has caused confusion in the school system, where cannibal parents have complained when their children were refused human meat. Massive protests ensued, quickly turning into violent riots. Cannibals repeatedly demanded their rights, fighting with the native counter-protesters, throwing firebombs and stones, and on multiple occasions, the police quickly shuffled the counter-protesters away, even arresting some for disturbing the peace. The cannibals, however, were free to “protest.”

The racism got so bad that a few cannibals even found broccoli plastered on the front of their temples, which was completely offensive, as their religion forbids broccoli, and they are persecuted refugees, who have rights like anyone else.

Eventually after so much chaos, schools began including a cannibal diet in school lunches, but it became too confusing to get the right meals to the right students. As a result, and to appease the refugees, many who have since become citizens, the cannibal diet was given to all students. This practice spread, and soon human meat was sold in most major grocery stores because if not, it would be racist, and no one wants to be called a racist.

But who is supplying this meat? There have been odd disappearances of those who have protested against the appeasement of the cannibal refugees from the BS culture. No one can explain them, but anyway, there has been no shortage of cannibal-approved food in the school system or grocery stores.
Sadly, a select few from the cannibal group abandoned their former religion, despite receiving death threats. One woman wrote a book about her life as a cannibal, revealing the shocking news that, “their holy book is a cookbook!”

The woman appeared on CNN but was shouted down by competing commentators, two who were cannibals and two who were Western natives, and all four of them apologists for the cannibals and their BS culture. Soon, the ex-cannibal woman appeared on a website created by cannibals about crazy, loony anti-cannibals and their hateful anti-cannibal propaganda.

When a reporter asked one of the commentators about these anti-cannibal allegations, he stated that the woman is nothing more than a racist.

“A racist?” the reporter asked. “But she came from the BS culture herself!”

“Racism knows no bounds,” he retorted.

“But what about the claim that your holy book is a cookbook? We’ve had it translated, and it does appear to be a series of recipes for eating people.”

“No, no,” the apologist answered, explaining that, “Our language cannot be translated. Our holy book is beyond comprehension for Western liberals. Your translation cannot possibly be accurate, and besides, you are taking it all out of context.”

“But don’t you eat human meat?” the journalist asked.

Chuckling, the apologist told the reporter, “What we eat is a humanesque meat-like substance, which is sanctified by a cannibal priest in a process which cannot be duplicated by any Westerner and cannot be described in your language. Furthermore, we have a right to our religious practices, as we are living in a democracy where freedom of religion applies to all. If you disagree, you must be a racist.”

“The name of your holy book is ‘The Blood of Man.'”

“You as a Westerner will never be able to comprehend the meaning of that.”

“Your worshippers arrive at the temple with axes, forks and knives.”

“I’ve had enough of this interview and your racism!”

With that, the apologist stormed out.

There were more riots that followed, more disappearances, but the West was determined to continue bringing over swarms of cannibals from the BS culture. And it continues to this day. The bottom line is, the poor cannibals must be rescued, as their very existence is under attack. Racist Westerners must come to terms with the fact that cannibals from the BS culture are here to stay, and multiculturalism is our new way of life.

Disclaimer: The above article is a work of fiction, meant to illustrate a point. In anticipation of the upcoming Thanksgiving holiday, a little “food” humor… Any similarities to real people, places or actual events are purely coincidental. Purely.

Islamism, Islamofascism, and Islam

Islamism, Islamofascism, and Islam


Words matter. Alas, neologisms come into the language all the time, especially when the drama index is high. Ironically, polemicists on the Right and Left abhor words like Islamism.

Liberals think the word unfairly links radicals or terrorists with religion. Some on the Left, team Obama for example, would have you believe that mayhem in Mohamed’s name has nothing to do with Islam, a little like claiming that the Crusades were sponsored by Rotarians. The thought police at the White House, at CIA, and even at the Associated Press have stricken words like Islamism from their vocabularies by fiat.  The Left traditionally believes that candor, or the action that truth might require, will make a problem worse. Appeasement is an honored liberal idiom.

Conservatives, on the other hand, suspect the “ism” is a hedge, a reluctance to call a spade a spade. Some on the Right would have you believe that Islam and its adherents are coherent; a kind of terror, rhetoric, and religious monolith.

Here ends are confused with means. The objective of imperial Islam may be monoculture. Yet, with 1.5 billion followers, realities will always be at odds with utopian dreams. The Shia/Sunni schism, for example, has plagued the Ummah for 1300 years. To suggest that all Muslims are militant radicals or terrorists is a little like confusing the bulls with the dairy cows.

Arabs, Muslims, and the Islamic Press use words like Islamism. Why is that?

Islamism, as opposed to Islam, suggests movement and militancy. You might think of Islamists as Muslim crusaders. Such distinctions are self-evident when militants are parsed from the so-called “moderate” majority. That majority in turn are happy to be separated from the swords, shooters, and beards. Unfortunately, these asserted distinctions do nothing to moderate the menace.

If only ten percent of Muslims (150 million) are militant, then the threat is substantial by any measure.
Icon translation: “I have been ordered by Allah to fight against the people until they testify….”

Neologisms are born when ordinary language fails to capture a phenomenon or an idea. Terms like Islamism and “Islamofascism” fill a void of meaning. Yes, the majority are not terrorists.  They are worse! Passive aggressors might be a better description for most of the silent Muslim majority.

How many Russians were Communists and how many Germans were Nazis in the beginning? The numbers never have to be large. Militancy and terror are usually a minority and minorities still prevail. A kinetic vanguard can always depend on the silence and apathy of majorities. The Islamist menace is no different today.

Indeed, the propagandists and the swords are the lesser of two evils. We know what they believe, what they fight for, and we see what they do on a daily basis. Militants make no secret of their Islamic motivation. Whatever the number of radicals, they will never be as numerous, or as guilty, as the larger Ummah which is routinely disingenuous, routinely apathetic, routinely absolved, routinely hypocritical, and routinely given a pass on accountability.  

Most Americans and Europeans believe that most Muslims are innocents. How is this different than what most Muslims believe? Sadly, the great crimes of any century are more a function of apathy and appeasement, and less a product of militancy. Apathy and denial about the Islamism problem is as much a problem in the West as it is in the East.

A malignant force, once set in motion, tends to stay in motion unless confronted by an equal or superior force (hat tip to Isaac). The real strength of Islamists is the apathy of 57 Muslim nations worldwide, a sixth of the world’s population. Islamofascism is an Ummah community problem. The progressive West cannot save the Islamic East from itself.

Calling Islamists criminals, militants, radicals, fundamentalists, or even terrorists might be necessary but not sufficient. These are half-truths, euphemisms at best. Proselytizers, apologists, and jihadists must also be linked precisely, directly, and routinely to the ideology that motivates them. Without motive, crime or any barbarity would not be a problem. That culture is Islam! Culture is the primary culprit midst James Clapper’s “nefarious” characters.
So let’s be clear when we speak of the enemy. With the Muslim wars, there are probably three relevant semantic distinctions to be made. Islam is the big tent phenomenon, for the most part an apathetic, apologetic, passive, or mostly bovine majority.  Islamists are the proselytizing militants or financiers, missionaries, domestic or immigrant activists who believe they act in the name of a “great” religion. Islamofascists are the kinetic Muslims, those who oppress or kill in the name of Mohamed, the Koran, or imperial Islam. The terms are related, but not necessarily interchangeable.*

The necessity to distinguish militants from moderates is not trivial. The so-called moderate is the more difficult problem, numerically and ideologically.  Islamism is in the end a philosophical, political, religious, now kinetic, quest to reverse the vector of Emanuel Kant’s optimism. There is more than a little evidence to support the irredentist world view. The passage of time is not progress. The vector of history moves forward -- or backwards. Contemporary Islamism is a very large sanguinary bet on door number two, the recidivist option.

And yes, Islamists claim that their aggression is actually defense, a victim’s posture. Let’s allow that historical delusion. Muslim scholars and clerics have been looking to the past in search of the future for centuries. Recidivism, yea political immaturity, is the fatal flaw of all utopians, especially fascists. There is no question that imperial Islam will fail -- implode or be defeated. The question is how much masochism, denial, and damage the Ummah and the civilized world will endure before that day arrives. Unfortunately, the predicate of all fascism, religious or secular, is coercion. ISIS and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi are the logical products of Islamism unchallenged.
*Some of the best defense for terms like Islamism and Islamofascism often comes, ironically, from serious writers on the American Left. See Christopher Hitchens seminal essay in Slate or almost anything written by Paul Berman on the subject.

G. Murphy Donovan writes about the politics of national security

Ben Shapiro: The Myth of the Tiny Radical Muslim Minority

Is Russia Banning Islam?

Is Russia Banning Islam?


Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, a Judith Friedman Rosen Writing Fellow at the Middle East Forum and a CBN News contributor. He is the author of Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s New War on Christians (2013) and The Al Qaeda Reader (2007). 

Vladimir Putin

Russia appears to be taking serious moves to combat the “radicalization” of Muslims within its border.

Recent pro-Islamic reports are complaining that Russia is banning the Islamic hijab—the headdress Islamic law requires Muslim women to wear—and, perhaps even more decisively, key Islamic scriptures, on the charge that they incite terrorism.

In the words of Arabic news site Elaph, “Russia is witnessing a relentless war on the hijab.  It began in a limited manner but has grown in strength, prompting great concern among Russia’s Muslims.”
The report continues by saying that women wearing the hijab are being “harassed” especially in the “big cities”; that they are encountering difficulties getting jobs and being “subject to embarrassing situations in public areas and transportation.  The situation has gotten to the point that even educational institutions, including universities, have issued decrees banning the wearing of the hijab altogether.”

Moscow’s Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University appears mentioned as one of the schools to ban the donning of the hijab on its premises, specifically, last September (the New York Times bemoaned an earlier instance of anti-hijab sentiment in 2013).

While this move against the hijab may appear as discriminatory against religious freedom, the flipside to all this—which perhaps Russia, with its significant Muslim population is aware of—is that, wherever the Islamic hijab proliferates, so too does Islamic supremacism and terrorism.  Tawfik Hamid, a former aspiring Islamic jihadi, says that “the proliferation of the hijab is strongly correlated with increased terrorism…. Terrorism became much more frequent in such societies as Indonesia, Egypt, Algeria, and the U.K. after the hijab became prevalent among Muslim women living in those communities.”

The reason for this correlation is clear: strict Islamic Sharia commands jihad (“terrorism”) against unbelievers just as it commands Muslim women to don the hijab. Where one proliferates—evincing adherence to Sharia—so too will the other naturally follow.

But Russia’s growing list of Islamic books to be banned on the charge that they incite terrorism is perhaps more significant.  Elaph continues: “This move [ban on the hijab] coincides with a growing number of religious books to be prohibited, with dozens of them being placed on the terrorist list, including Sahih Bukhari and numerous booklets containing verses from the Koran and sayings of the prophet.”

According to Apastovsk district RT prosecutors, Sahih Bukhari is being targeted because it promotes “exclusivity of one of the world’s religions,” namely Islam, or, in the words of a senior assistant to the prosecutor of Tatarstan Ruslan Galliev, it promotes “a militant Islam” which “arouses ethnic, religious enmity.”

This is significant.  While one may expect modern day books and tracts written by the likes of al-Qaeda or the Islamic State to be banned, Sahih Bukhari, compiled in the 9th century, is fundamental to Sunni Islam (that is, 90 percent of the world’s Muslims).   Indeed, the nine-volume book is often seen as second in importance only to the Koran itself and contains the most authentic sayings attributed to the Muslim prophet Muhammad.

And yet, that this important scripture promotes “exclusivity”—that is, supremacism—and “arouses ethnic, religious enmity”—that is, “terrorism”—should not be missed on anyone.  The following few statements contained in Sahih Bukhari and attributed to the prophet of Islam speak for themselves.  Muhammad said:

•“I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings [tawriya, Islamic deception], and I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy).”
•“Whoever changed his Islamic religion [“apostates”], then kill him.”
 •In the end times, a “stone will say, ‘O Muslim! There is a Jew behind me; kill him!’”
•“I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah’s Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity” [i.e., until they become observant Muslims].”

Apparently the Russians are aware that such assertions—whether they come from this or that jihadi or from Prophet Muhammad—are enough to incite chaos on their soil.  Indeed, the “terrorist” writings of modern day Islamic jihad groups are all infused with and based on the intolerant texts found in Islamic scriptures such as Sahih Bukhari.

This begs the following question: what of the Koran?  Can it too be banned on the same grounds?  After all, Islam’s number one holy book is also replete with calls to violence and terrorism against unbelievers.  Koran 8:12 is one of numerous examples: Allah declares “I will cast terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, so strike [them] upon the necks,” that is, behead them, as the Islamic State has been doing—while citing the Koran.

At any rate, back in La La Land, far from banning Islamic texts that incite violence and terrorism, Barack Hussein Obama has banned U.S. intelligence communities from connecting anything Islamic to Islamic terrorism.  In other words, Muslims are free to be incited by Islam’s scriptures—prompting things like beheadings and hatchet jihad attacks in America.  The only ban rests on those who dare connect such acts to the core texts of Islam that so clearly inspire them.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.
Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

#BBCtrending: Why some Arabs are rejecting strict interpretations of Sharia

#BBCtrending: Why some Arabs are rejecting strict interpretations of Sharia 


A minaret silhouetted against the moon
A growing social media conversation in Arabic is calling for the implementation of Sharia, or Islamic law, to be abandoned.

Discussing religious law is a sensitive topic in many Muslim countries. But on Twitter, a hashtag which translates as "why we reject implementing Sharia" has been used 5,000 times in 24 hours. The conversation is mainly taking place in Saudi Arabia and Egypt. The debate is about whether religious law is suitable for the needs of Arab countries and modern legal systems.

Dr Alyaa Gad, an Egyptian doctor living in Switzerland, started the hashtag. "I have nothing against religion," she tells BBC Trending, but says she is against "using it as a political system". Islamists often call for legal systems to be reformed to be consistent with Sharia principles, and some want harsh interpretations of criminal punishments to be implemented. Dr Gad says she is worried about young people adopting the extremes of this kind of thinking. "You see it everywhere now, Islamic State is spreading mentally as well as physically" she told BBC Trending.

One of Dr Gad's tweets compared what action is taken against those who commit crimes under strict interpretations of Sharia to those who do so in Western societies.
A Tweet in Arabic The Tweet says: "A thief under Sharia rule has his hand cut off and becomes a burden on society - and a Norwegian criminal is rehabilitated to become a good citizen"
Many others joined in the conversation, using the hashtag, listing reasons why Arabs and Muslims should abandon Sharia. "Because there's not a single positive example of it bringing justice and equality," one man tweeted. "Because IS and Somalia and Afghanistan implement it, and we've seen the results," commented another. A few Saudis who joined the online conversation shared their experience of coming from a country that adheres to Islamic law. "In Saudi Arabia we tried implementing Sharia, and know first-hand the bitterness of being ruled by a religious power," a Saudi man living in California tweeted. And a Saudi woman commented: "By adhering to Sharia we are adhering to inhumane laws. Saudi Arabia is saturated with the blood of those executed by Sharia".
Cartoon from twitter The caption for this cartoon reads: "Marrying four [women] and underage girls and slaves is moral. But a consensual relationship between two unmarried people is immoral and against Islam".
However a large proportion of those tweeting were less critical. They argued that the problem was not religious law per se, but a flawed understanding and interpretation of it. An Egyptian living in Bahrain tweeted: "There has never been anything wrong with Sharia, but it's how we implement it". Another Egyptian commented: "There is no singular understanding of Sharia. The Muslim Brotherhood have one understanding, the Salafists have another and so do IS, Boko Haram and al-Qaeda".

Others found the hashtag to be offensive to Muslims. Dr Gad, who started it, was called a "non-believer". Another commented: "You don't want Sharia because you want homosexuality, alcohol and adultery."

Dr Gad, who has a popular YouTube channel that discusses sexuality and health issues, says she is used to this kind of reaction to the topics she initiates. She says one of the reasons she started the hashtag is because she values her right to speak out - a right she says her friends back in Egypt don't have in the same way. "If I were living in Egypt I would not be half as courageous as I am now," she says.

Reporting by Mai Noman

Saudi Arabia’s plush rehab facility for jihadists a spectacular failure

Saudi Arabia’s plush rehab facility for jihadists a spectacular failure


Saudi terror rehab

“When Saudi police arrested 88 suspected Al-Qaeda operatives in September, they discovered that 59 of them had been through reform programs and were then released.” And yet the British are staking their nation’s future on a similar program, which will only ensure that Britain’s future will feature blood in the streets.

“Passages Saudi Arabia: Plum Rehab Facility for Terrorists Producing Poor Results,” Washington Free Beacon, November 19, 2014 9:06 am
While Saudi Arabia remains a close ally of the United States, the Kingdom still “is a fertile recruiting ground for Al-Qaeda and ISIS,” Holly Williams of CBS said.
Williams recently investigated Saudi Arabia’s terrorist rehab program, located in Jeddah.
Saudi Arabia spared no expense on former terrorists, pointing out the reform center’s “recreation facilities, comfortable living quarters, and special apartments for conjugal visits.”

The center “looks more like a hotel than a prison,” Williams said.
The three-month program includes various amenities such as healthcare, food, laundry, and education.
“All free, all free,” one rehab worker said.
Saudi officials have boasted of a rehabilitation rate of over 80 percent. They attribute their “success” to financial incentives and by providing jobs for those who pass through the rehab center.
“Saudi Arabian officials admit rehabilitation doesn’t always work,” Williams said. “But they’ve had some spectacular failures. When Saudi police arrested 88 suspected Al-Qaeda operatives in September, they discovered that 59 of them had been through reform programs and were then released.”

Police have 100 Scottish Islamic State sympathisers on their radar amid warnings Britain faces an attack

Police have 100 Scottish Islamic State sympathisers on their radar amid warnings Britain faces an attack


POLICE have said their eye is trained on Scots who have travelled to Syria since the uninterrupted rise of Islamic State.

Islamic State fighters hold Kurdish soldier hostage
DETECTIVES are monitoring up to 100 Islamic State sympathisers in Scotland amid a warning that the UK faces imminent attack.

Police said a number of Scots are among more than 500 UK residents who have travelled to Syria since the start of the bloody conflict.

Officers have uncovered evidence of terrorist fund raising here and yesterday urged the public only to donate to registered charities.

And they warned people to be on their guard with the threat of attack coming from organised groups to highly-motivated loners.

The current UK threat level is “Severe” meaning an attack is imminent.

Police Scotland Deputy Chief Constable Iain Livingstone has urged everyone to play their part in reducing the risk of an atrocity.


ISIS recruiting in SA - report

ISIS recruiting in SA - report 


2014-11-23 08:01
Cape Town - An estimated 140 South Africans have reportedly joined the Islamic State (ISIS) insurgency to fight in Iraq and Syria, with at least three already killed in action.

According to the Sunday Independent, Iraq’s ambassador to South Africa Dr Hushaim al-Alawi has confirmed the men’s deaths, saying they were covered up as car accidents.

He said he had notified the Department of International Relations and Co-operation but Department of State Security spokesperson Brian Dube said he was unaware of any South Africans joining ISIS but said intelligence officials would look into it.

According to the newspaper, ISIS is actively recruiting South Africans in the country, and raising funds under the guise of humanitarian aid.

Al-Alawi said that one of the deceased, a 24-year-old man, was recruited by a group in Gauteng that uses the slogan of supporting refugees and orphans. The deceased had travelled with a group of young men from Azaadville and Lenasia.

Armed forced of foreign states

The other two victims were a 26-year-old from Vereeniging and a 54-year-old man from Cape Town.
It is illegal for South Africans to participate in the armed forces of foreign states, render foreign military assistance and take part in armed groups.

As reported by News24 late last month, Jihadists from more than 80 countries have flocked to fight in Iraq and Syria on an "unprecedented scale",according to a UN report.

The UN claims that about 15 000 people have travelled to fight alongside ISIS and other hardcore militant groups from countries that have not previously faced challenges relating to al-Qaeda.
The number of foreign jihadists travelling to fight since 2010 exceeds the cumulative total of the 20 preceding years "many times", added the Security Council study.

At the time, Britain's top police officer, Bernard Hogan-Howe, estimated that five people a week were leaving the country UK alone to fight with ISIS. British security officials estimate that there are currently around 500 British nationals fighting in Syria and Iraq.

The UN warned that more nations than ever face the problem of dealing with fighters returning from the battle zone.

The report was produced by a committee that monitors al-Qaeda, and concluded that the once mighty and feared group was now "manoeuvring for relevance" following the rise of the even more militant ISIS, which was booted out of al-Qaeda by leader Ayman al-Zawahiri.

Despite the split, the UN concluded that the legal basis for US President Barack Obama's fight against ISIS was justified by its ideological congruence with al-Qaeda, and considered the two groups as part of a broader movement.

"Al-Qaeda core and Isil (ISIS) pursue similar strategic goals, albeit with tactical differences regarding sequencing and substantive differences about personal leadership," the UN wrote.

No boots on the ground

Obama has vowed he will not order a large force into combat in Iraq or Syria, relying instead on air power and local forces.

But his "no boots on the ground" pledge is coming under pressure amid growing calls for advisers and forward air controllers to deploy with Iraqi or Kurdish soldiers to help direct air raids and plan operations.

The ISIS group's "cosmopolitan" use of social media, "as when extremists post kitten photographs", was attracting a new breed of foreign fighters who are put off by the more dogmatic communication tactics of al-Qaeda, said the report.

ISIS leaders recognise "the terror and recruitment value of multichannel, multi-language social and other media messaging," it added.

The UN agreed with the Obama administration that "core al-Qaeda remains weak", but argued that its demise had only paved the way for more bloody groups, for whom "cross-border attacks - or attacks against international targets - remain a minority."

- News24
Read more on:    un  |  isis  |  barack obama  |  brian dube  |  hushaim al-alawi  |  iraq  |  us  |  uk  |  syria

Islamic State has lured 550 Germans into fighting: spy agency

Islamic State has lured 550 Germans into fighting: spy agency


BERLIN Sun Nov 23, 2014 6:17am EST
A member loyal to the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) waves an ISIL flag in Raqqa June 29, 2014. REUTERS/Stringer
A member loyal to the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) waves an ISIL flag in Raqqa June 29, 2014.
Credit: Reuters/Stringer
(Reuters) - The number of Germans fighting alongside Islamic State militants in Syria and Iraq has increased sharply to 550 and around 180 have returned, the head of Germany's domestic intelligence said in a newspaper interview published on Sunday.

"We are concerned about the high number of departures. Especially in the last six weeks, it has risen further," Hans-Georg Maassen told Welt am Sonntag.

"By now we are counting 550 people, that is how many have left Germany to go to Syria and Iraq," he added. The previous number was 450 people.

Around 60 of them have been killed during fighting, with at least nine killing themselves in suicide attacks, Maassen said. "That is a sad success for the Islamist propaganda."

As with other Western European countries, Germany is struggling to stop the radicalization of young Muslims, some of whom want to become jihadists in Syria or Iraq. Officials also worry that they might return to plot attacks on home soil.

Since Germany is part of the alliance fighting Islamic State, the country is "naturally" a target for the militants as well as al Qaeda members, Maassen said.

Intelligence services estimate that around 180 jihadists have returned to Germany after having fought in Syria and Iraq, Maassen said.

In one of the largest sweeps against alleged Islamists in Germany yet, authorities last week arrested nine men suspected of supporting militant groups in Syria and raided numerous properties in several German states.

(Reporting by Michael Nienaber; Editing by Alison Williams)

UK can watch fewer than 50 jihad terror suspects 24/7

UK can watch fewer than 50 jihad terror suspects 24/7



And the jihad murderers of Lee Rigby were known to security services, but not deemed a threat. You can’t blame those security services — they have been taught that jihad is an internal spiritual struggle, so when the future murderers of Rigby started talking jihad, they probably thought, “Oh, how nice.”

Maybe if the Cameron government bans a few more foreign counter-jihadists and destroys the lives of a few more domestic ones, the jihadists will be mollified and end the jihad in Britain. Or maybe not, but the government will try it anyway.

Imminent Demise of Britain Update: “Only a fraction of terror suspects can be watched 24/7,” by Tom Whitehead and Christopher Hope, the Telegraph, November 24, 2014 (thanks to all who sent this in):
MI5 can monitor fewer than 50 terrorist suspects around the clock, it can be disclosed, ahead of a report into the Lee Rigby murder that will highlight the limitations in watching terrorists in Britain.
Restricted resources mean only a fraction of the hundreds of suspected Islamist extremists at large can be subject to intensive 24/7 surveillance at any one time.
It comes as a parliamentary investigation ordered by David Cameron into the murder of Drummer Lee Rigby by two Islamist fanatics is expected to conclude there is little MI5 could have done to prevent his death on the day.
The 25-year-old, who had a son, was run down and hacked to death by Michael Adebolajo, 29, and his accomplice, Michael Adebowale, 22, near his barracks in Woolwich, south-east London, in May last year.
The killers chose him at random after driving around the area looking for a soldier.
It later emerged that both men had been known to the security services for many years and Adebolajo had been approached as a possible informant, which he rebuffed.
He was approached on several occasions after 2010 when he was caught in Kenya trying to cross the border to Somalia to join the terrorist group al-Shabaab.
He appeared in court but was not charged. The intelligence and security committee report is expected to disclose clues in Adebolajo’s online activities which may have pointed to his intentions, but MI5 was unaware of them until after the killing.
The material was held by internet service providers in America which had not raised the alarm, possibly because they were not aware of it themselves.
The committee is understood to have accepted that neither man was assessed as a serious enough risk to have legally justified more intensive surveillance which may have found those clues….

ISIS Catapulted Via Libya’s Theater of War:Caliphate Implanted! Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

ISIS Catapulted Via Libya’s Theater of War:Caliphate Implanted! Commentary By Adina Kutnicki


{re-blogged at Islam Exposed}

SANS a scintilla of a doubt, this investigative journalist admits to harping on this and that, perhaps like a broken record. Yes, guilty as charged. Not only that, having a bull-like personality accounts for some of said doggedness. But make no mistake, it is absolutely the case that only subjects which impinge upon the safety of America and Israel (by extension, the west) are objects of such constant “obsession”.

NOW that the above is settled, what is absolutely shocking, more than amazing and incontestably dangerous is that anyone who works in a security related arena, let alone has a grasp of the geo-political realm, is at all surprised about Libya’s Caliphate status! Oh my…
SO it truly tries a patriot’s soul when a prior (or on duty) CIA/security operative claims that it is “oh, so shocking” that Libya is in ISIS’s cross hairs. Huh and duh? Can you believe it?
ISIS is taking over Libya and the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), which supported the NATO mission to overthrow Gadhafi, is suddenly concerned. Europe is also suddenly very concerned about Libya being taken over by ISIS. As was the case with the UNSC, NATO signed off on the plan to take out Gadhafi. More specifically, many of the European nations that are NATO member states are very troubled by the ISIS takeover in Libya as well.

Shockingly, a former operative with the CIA, which was intricately involved in the operation to remove Gadhafi by helping the Libyan rebels, appeared on CNN with Wolf Blitzer and expressed outright disbelief at the situation in Libya.


Also, ISIS is not new. The flags that have been identified as ISIS flags were flown in Benghazi ever since the overthrow of Gadhafi. In fact, ISIS was created in late 2011 / early 2012 in Syria and Iraq. Benghazi was attacked on 9/11/12, long after ISIS had been created.

Was ISIS involved in the Benghazi attacks?

When it comes to learning what was really going on in Benghazi before four Americans were murdered there, House Speaker John Boehner admitted to knowing about weapons shipments from Benghazi to Turkey and then onto Syrian rebels.

U.S. policy in the Middle East is clearly being influenced by Muslim Brotherhood infiltration of the U.S. government, which also leads back to Boehner.

In addition to defending Hillary Clinton advisor Huma Abedin while throwing Rep. Michele Bachmann under the bus in 2012, Boehner shockingly introduced an Imam – with highly suspicious connections – who delivered an Islamic prayer on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives.
All the while, Boehner kept his head bowed.

NOW before any further elaboration ensues, it is no secret that this site is hooked into certain experts, some of whom operate in the counter terror area, while others are strategic experts. Moreover, some are out in the open while others – not so much. Regardless, admittedly and resultant, the landscape clears on this end well before most understand what is taking place, aside from what the leadership wants the public to think. Understood. Nevertheless, there are no excuses for those who earn(ed) their living as so-called experts, yet are still dangerously misinformed. Woefully off the mark.

Mark One:

HOW many are familiar with the bull’s eye knock-on effects from Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s illegal war in Libya? Pointedly, its cataclysmic results were cited at this site, well before many other so-called journalists caught on. Mind you, some are still clueless! Bizarre.

STIPULATED, the boots on the ground in Libya were illegal, in so far as Congressional approval was not given for said intervention. Basically, an anti-Constitutional power grab. Simple as that.

He spent seven months bombing Libya without congressional authorization and without complying with the War Powers Resolution. His lawyers argued that thousands of airstrikes, which professor Jack Goldsmith of Harvard Law School notes “killed thousands of people and effected regime change,” did not constitute “hostilities.” Professor Ilya Somin of George Mason University School of Law says, “Claims that large-scale air attacks don’t count as warfare were specious when the administration trotted them out in defense of its intervention in Libya in 2011; and they have not improved with age.”

IN this regard, the entire Brotherhood Mafia, including ISIS, were the intended recipients of said U.S. thrust, and the proofs are manifest. As this investigative journalist noted:

LEST there be any misunderstandings, if not for the consequences generated from Benghazigate, Sunni Brotherhood jihadists – of which ISIS are part and parcel of, on whose behalf Barack HUSSEIN Obama ordered the largest weapons-running operation in Mid East history – would not be knocking on America’s door, nor Israel’s. Others as well. Nevertheless, as an American-Israeli, both nations are my top priorities. Hands down.

OMINOUSLY, a major outgrowth to Obama’s illegal war in Libya (the main goal of the weapons running was to destabilize Syria for the benefit of Syria’s Brotherhood Mafia) allowed countless man-pads to awash Syria and beyond. In this regard, isn’t it likely that this is how ISIS got their hands on said weapons and then some?

Islamic State militants stormed a Syrian airbase over the weekend, routing the remaining elements of the country’s army from northern Raqqah province and reportedly seizing a cache of shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles.
The seizure of Tabqa air base, while not the first installation of its type to fall to militants, highlights the Islamic State’s gains in the region and the group’s continued pilfering of advanced military equipment, particularly the surface-to-air missile systems known as MANPADS, short for Man Portable Air Defense Systems.
Matt Schroeder, a senior researcher at the Switzerland-based research group Small Arms Survey and author of a recent report on MANPADS in Syria, believes that the takeover of Tabqa airbase could mark a “significant proliferation” of the weapons across the region.

BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, thou art an Islamic devil!

Mark Two: 

YES, in a very tangible sense, upending Libya (and Egypt, whereby during Morsi’s rule he flooded the lawless Sinai with tens of thousands of roaming, well-armed jihadis…indeed, the oft mentioned knock-on effects…) will yield the next 9/11/01, whether or not ISIS or another front group claims “credit”. The endless amount of explosive firepower, plus the open sesame created via deposing strong-arm dictators (akin to Mubarak and Qadaffi), gifted Islamist forces a bounty of booty, notwithstanding tens of thousands of man-pads, non conventional weaponry etc. 

THE core questions become: how is the above working out so far, and to whose benefit? is the Mid East and Africa more stable, or in a cauldron of wildfire, as a result of the Jihadi-in-Chief’s machinations?

Mark Three: 

STILL not convinced, as to how “necessary” it was for an Islamist-in-Chief to go from there to here? Okay.

ALAS, as more and more dirt is uncovered re Benghazigate, this site’s prior analyses – having already revealed the Brotherhood Mafia’s “circle of death” – are coming full circle, in a manner of speaking. Many other sites are finally catching on….

Almost immediately following the Benghazi attack, the Obama administration possessed information indicating some Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood participation in the assault, yet the Obama administration kept this critical piece of information from the public, reveals a new book, “The Real Benghazi Story,” by New York Times bestselling author Aaron Klein.

CONSEQUENTIALLY, there should no longer be any doubt: both parties, with Demsters led by the Islamist-in-Chief (and a gaggle of Congressional members) and Repubs led by RINOS Boehner, Rogers and McCain (others too), are duty complicit in the rise of the Caliphate. How so?

IN no uncertain terms, the aforementioned are bent on protecting Islam within America, whatever the costs.

On June 13, 2012, five members of Congress called for an investigation into Muslim Brotherhood influence operations in the Obama administration.  The five members– Michele Bachmann (R-MN), Trent Franks (R-AZ), Louie Gohmert (R-TX), Tom Rooney (R-FL), and Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA)– were widely criticized for doing so, even by their own Republican leadership, including John McCain (R-AZ), John Boehner (R-OH), and Mike Rogers (R-MI).
At the time, Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) said, “It’s not right to question the loyalty of fellow Americans without any evidence.”  Well, now we have the evidence.

BUT let’s get down to brass tacks, in a manner of speaking. Boehner is much more than an addled booze hound, which he is also guilty of being:

Lest you think this is sheer suicidal lunacy just from the Leftists, think again. The Leader of the House, John Boehner, allowed an Imam to say a prayer on the House floor Friday. I guess it was to compliment the service at the Cathedral. Another fool subjugates our leaders to Islam and America barely notices. What is wrong with these people?
Newly re-elected Speaker of the House John Boehner (who was elected by secret ballot, no less), presided and bowed his freaking head, while the Imam for the Islamic Center of Central Jersey praised Islam’s Allah from the House floor as the God who reigns supreme. What? Is the entire political leadership of the US now converted to Islam?

Imam Hamad Chebli didn’t just appear at the House floor; he also delivered Islamic prayers at theNational Cathedral which was prepared for Muslim prayers with rugs. One wonders if a statue of Baal were placed on the House floor, if Boehner would have prostrated himself before that demon as well.

Chebli is no harmless man of faith:

Early in his studies, a teacher named Hassan Khaled chose Chebli to serve at a neighboring mosque. Nearly four decades later, Chebli laughs as he recalls the puzzled expression of the mosques members when a lanky boy in glasses came to lead their prayers …[Hassan] Khaled, his mentor, was chosen Grand Mufti of Lebanon, the nations foremost Islamic legal scholar in the Sunni Muslim sect.”
MOVING right along, let’s hop over to Johnnie boy, you know, the elder “statesman” who continuously believes that having been a POW (decades ago, yup, the Stockholm Syndrome fried his brain) absolves him of this and that. Well, hell no. Just for the record, he and Huma Abedin, the highest, mobbed up Brotherhood/Sisterhood operative in America, are thick as thieves. Yes, this is precisely why he jumped to her defense when Rep Michele Bachmann pointed out her out-sized dangers. Whatever.

IT gets worse. The glued to his seat Senator from Arizona even assisted ISIS’s actual catapult! Bingo, he did.

BUT few deserve more Congressional opprobrium in this arena, other than Rep Mike Rogers, as he is the Intelligence Committee Chair! In other words, if this bastard doesn’t know what’s what and who’s who in the jihadi jungle (having been an FBI special agent too…my heavens…), then who does? 

ATOP said Congressional disasters, enter, Rep Mike Rogers, a piece of work like few others; a multiple-level deceiver. Demonstrably, Rogers is colluding with the Muslim Brotherhood Mafia:
Those of us who are anticipating a measure of (long overdue) justice for Americans who were slaughtered during Benghazigate will likely be waiting, as is said, until the cows come home. This tragic state of affairs revolves around many levels of treachery, but the latest emanates from a particular bastard, a Rep who is overseeing the House Intelligence committee. Wow. A snake in the grass.

At the very least, is it too much to expect that a man of honor sits at the head of said committee, a leader who is capable of discerning justice? Asked and answered.

Alas, this is not the case, even though (Repub) Rep. Rogers was a former FBI Special Agent and should be able to smell the jihad. This blogger has more than a nose for their scents, therefore he has zero excuse. Zip and zilch. Agreed?

Nevertheless, like many Congressional reps, in tandem with other powerful players in tow, Rogers turns deaf, dumb and blind and plays footsie, even to the point of accepting a keynote address at a mobbed up Brotherhood event! Readers, it doesn’t even matter why. What is intrinsic is he in their pockets, one way or another…

THIS site understood, back in Aug 2014, that the “fix was in”, and Rogers assured its pre-ordained result!