VISIT BLOGZILLA ON MYSPACE FOR ARCHIVED INFO PRIOR TO OCTOBER 2008 - CLICK ICON BELOW NOW
Rally Against the Ground Zero Mosque
By Fern Sidman
“No mosque at Ground Zero!”
This was the rallying cry of the day as thousands of angry demonstrators gathered for a rally to oppose the proposed construction of a 13-story mosque just blocks away from the site of the 9/11 attacks. A palpable patriotism and zeal filled the air on Sunday afternoon, June 6th, as Zucotti Park at the corner of Church and Liberty Streets in lower Manhattan was filled to capacity. Rally attendees who came from as far as Chicago and Los Angeles held signs saying, “Ground Zero is a War Memorial – No Mega Mosque here,” ”You Can Build a Mosque at Ground Zero – When Can We Build a Synagogue in Mecca?”, “Pack Your Sharia and Get Out,” and “Mayor Bloomberg: This Mosque Has Radical Ties – and you still approve?” Hundreds of American flags blew in the summer breeze as speakers representing every walk of life condemned the notion of a mosque being erected near the site of the former World Trade Center’s twin towers.
The Cordoba Initiative, headed by Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, is the chief sponsor of the project that is to be called The Cordoba House, a name that refers to the city in Spain which, in the Middle Ages, was a center of Islamic culture and learning. Cordoba was also the seat of an Islamic caliphate in which Jews and Christians suffered under second-class dhimmi status and was the site of a large-scale pogrom, perpetrated by Muslims, in the year 1011.
The proposed mosque will be built at 45 Park Place, which is the site of a four story edifice built in 1857 and was a Burlington Coat retail store until 9/11, when part of the plane’s landing gear crashed through the roof. The building, which currently houses a mosque, will be razed to make room for the new structure. The New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission could conceivably thwart the intended project if they determine that the building has historic status. Elisabeth de Bourbon, a spokeswoman for the Landmarks Commission said a hearing is scheduled to take place on that very subject. New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg has weighed in on the issue and has expressed support for the project.
Imam Rauf insists that the $150 million project is meant to heal the wounds of 9/11. “We’ve approached the community because we want this to be an example of how we are cooperating with the members of the community, not only to provide services but also to build a discourse on how Muslims and non-Muslims can cooperate together to push back against the voice of extremism,” he said.
Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, says there are more productive ways to fight Islamic extremism and has questions about the financing. According to reports, the building that occupies the site was purchased last year for $4.85 million in cash by Soho Properties, a real estate company run by Muslims. Imam Rauf, who is also the founder of the American Society for Muslim Advancement was an investor in that transaction.
Dr. Jasser said that with such a financial commitment, there needs to be full disclosure about where the money is coming from. “There should be transparency about who those investors are; whether that money is coming from a domestic source or not, and if it’s coming from foreign interests we need to know, because I think that’s a liability, and it shows that there is another agenda rather than domestic security and tranquility,” he said.
Organized by such organizations as Stop the Islamization of America, Families of the 9/11 Victims, The New York City Firefighters, the Tea Party Activists of Brooklyn and Staten Island among other such groups, the rally goers stood in the scorching heat and listened to the impassioned words of the litany of speakers. “We’re not here today to condemn Muslims or Islam,” said Pamela Geller, executive director of Stop the Islamization of America, “but we are here today to condemn the kind of mosque that will teach the very same radical ideology that gave birth to the 9/11 attacks,” she intoned. “Building a mosque just several blocks away from Ground Zero is an insult and an affront to every single person that was killed on 9/11, to their families, to the first responders and every concerned American who cherishes liberty, democracy and freedom,” she continued.
“3000 pairs of eyes are looking down at us today,” declared James Lafferty of the Virginia Anti-Sharia Task Force who traveled to New York to speak at the rally. “We must stand together as a free people and tell the world that we will fight the imposition of Sharia law until our last breath. These evil, cowardly bastards who took the lives of those proud Americans on 9/11 will be remembered forever and this mosque which represents the triumph of Islamic fanaticism will not be built if we have anything to say,” he said. Mr. Lafferty received thunderous applause when he said, “The good people of the USA must also stand in solid unity with the Israel Defense Forces who are waging a war against Hamas terrorism as was evidenced several days ago when they intercepted a Turkish based flotilla of ships whose aim it was to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza. It is the IDF who is on the front lines in the battle against Islamic radicalism and we must support them.”
Dr. Babu Suseelan, a Hindu human rights activist, told the crowd, “We Hindus and Sikhs have a story to tell. Islamists killed 80 million of us since 700 AD and they continue to kill us. They destroyed 3000 glorious temples and built mosques over them. In the last 60 years, Islamists in Pakistan wiped out infidel Hindu and Sikh populations. At one time we represented 25% of the population and now we are less that 1%. Know this: The 9/11 mosque is not a symbol of understanding. It is a symbol of conquest. Imam Rauf is a master of Taqiyya, which is the use of deception to forward the agenda of Islam. What Faisal Shahzad failed to accomplish in Times Square on May 1st with overt jihad, Imam Rauf will succeed with stealth jihad.”
“Not here! Not now!” was the resounding theme of the speech delivered by Jay Townsend, the GOP candidate of the US Senate from New York who will be challenging the incumbent Charles Schumer in the upcoming November elections. “The wounds have not healed, Imam,” he said. “And we cannot so soon forget. The hatred that spawned this assault on our sensibilities is still taught in too many of your mosques and inscribed into too many of your prayer rugs. Not here, not now, until you have excised the hatred that is inscribed in the school books of your impressionable young. Not here, not now, until you are willing to say that Israel has the right to exist, that the people of Israel have a right to a life absent of fear of a nuclear armed tyrant who denies the Holocaust,” he declared.
Robert Spencer, director of Jihad Watch, a program of the David Horowitz Freedom Center, and a co-organizer of the rally referenced a June 5th article in the New York Post that said, ”The imam behind a proposed mosque near Ground Zero is a prominent member of a group that helped sponsor the pro-Palestinian activists who clashed violently with Israeli commandos at sea this week. Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is a key figure in Malaysian-based Perdana Global Peace Organization, according to its website. Perdana is the single biggest donor ($366,000) so far to the Free Gaza Movement, a key organizer of the six-ship flotilla that tried to break Israel’s blockade of the Hamas-run Gaza Strip Monday.”
Members of the Human Rights Coalition Against Radical Islam (HRCARI) also made their presence known at the rally through their visual depiction of the heinous murders committed by radical Islamists around the globe. “We are glad that the speakers here today drew a distinction between the Islamic faith and those who commit murder in the name of Allah. We work with Muslims and ex-Muslim dissidents who oppose the pernicious ideology of radical Islam and we are an inclusive alliance of people of all religions and nationalities who cherish freedom,” said Dr. Marvin Belsky, a retired internist.
Responding to the remarks of the “Dean” of the White House Press Corps, 89 year old Helen Thomas who told a reporter on May 27th, following a celebration of Jewish Heritage Day at the White House that, “the Jews should get the heck out of Palestine. The Palestinians are occupied by those who stole their land. They should go home to Poland and Germany, America, anywhere.” Dr. Belsky said, “Ms. Thomas is a disgrace to the White House Press Corps and she should have her press credentials revoked. She is a virulent anti-Semite that should be roundly condemned.”
Other speakers included: Anders Gravers of Stop the Islamization of Europe; Simon Deng, the Sudanese ex-slave and campaigner for human rights for Sudanese Christians; Richard Connerney, a philosophy professor at Pace University; Nonie Darwish, an Egyptian ex-Muslim and author of “Now They Call Me Infidel” and “Cruel and Unusual Punishment;” Nelly Braginskaya, a 9/11 family member who lost her son; Larry Savinkin, father of Vladimir Savinkin, 21 and president of the September 11th Family Group uniting 9/11 families from the Russian-American community; Dan Maloney, New York Director of the Gathering of Eagles organization and congressional candidate in District 4 in New York; Germano Rivera, who recovered remains on 9/11; Nabil Asaad and Dr. Esmat Zaklama, Coptic Christian human rights activists; Pamela Hall of SIOA-NY and a human rights activist; Herb London of the Hudson Institute and Beverly Carlson of the Band of Mothers, among others.
The rally organizers urged those in attendance today to continue their work against the mosque in their localities and they were exhorted to return for yet another rally in opposition to the mosque on September 10th. The rally concluded with the singing of “God Bless America.”
Why There Should Be No Mosques at Ground Zero
By Robert Spencer
Now that it has been revealed that not one, but two mosques are planned for the area around Ground Zero, the supremacist and triumphalist character of this effort is clearer than ever. Is the Muslim population of lower Manhattan so huge that one projected mosque—even one so large as to be housed within a 15 story Islamic Center—would immediately be bursting at the seams, and thus yet another is required even before the first is built?
Of course not. Muslims are already praying at the projected site of the massive Islamic Center, an old Burlington Coat Factory outlet that was damaged by a piece of one of the hijacked airplanes fell through the roof on 9/11. (A Muslim real estate company paid $4.85 million in cash for the building. Where that cash came from has not been explained).
That building doesn’t appear to be overflowing, although Muslims are reportedly holding prayers on the sidewalk outside another lower Manhattan mosque, apparently in order to give the impression that they’re in dire need of more space. This is, however, more for show than for necessity.
The placement of mosques throughout Islamic history has been an expression of conquest and superiority over non-Muslims. Muslims built the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock on the site of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem in order to proclaim Islam’s superiority to Judaism. The Umayyad Mosque in Damascus was built over the Church of St. John the Baptist, and the Hagia Sophia Cathedral in Constantinople was converted into a mosque, to express the superiority of Islam over Christianity. Historian Sita Ram Goel has estimated that over 2,000 mosques in India were built on the sites of Hindu temples for the same reason.
But the Ground Zero mosque, or mosques, won’t be another example of that Islamic supremacism, will they? After all, the mosque initiative’s organizer, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, has said that the building of the mosque by the World Trade Center site was intended to make “the opposite statement to what happened on 9/11.”
The group behind the 15 story Islamic Center sent a statement to Mike Huckabee’s show on Fox News (declining an opportunity to meet my colleague, Pamela Geller, to discuss the mosque issue), claiming that the planned mosque was “a project to honor those who were harmed on September 11. It is a project to proclaim our patriotism to this country and to stand side-by-side all men and women of peace.”
And Ground Zero is not a holy site, so the symbolism of Islam conquering and replacing other religions isn’t there—or is it?
The Twin Towers, after all, were the symbol of America’s economic power. Placing a mosque by the site of their destruction (at the hands of Islamic jihadists) symbolizes the taming of that power. Abdul Rauf has placed the blame for 9/11 not on jihadists at all, but on the U.S. and the West, saying that they “must acknowledge the harm they have done to Muslims before terrorism can end.” Statements like that call into question just who the mosque organizers have in mind when they say the mosque is intended to honor “those who were harmed on September 11.”
The possibility of deception cannot here be ruled out, given that Abdul Rauf has a history of making smooth statements that appear to endorse American principles and values, when on closer examination he is upholding Sharia law, denigrating freedom of speech, and advocating against anti-terror measures.
It was to honor the Americans who really were harmed on September 11 that Pamela Geller has organized, with help from me and our new group, Stop Islamization of America, a rally against the 9/11 Mosque. The rally will be held on June 6 in lower Manhattan. June 6, D-Day, was chosen because on that day Americans began to beat back from Europe the scourge of a totalitarian and genocidal ideology. Today, no less unmistakably, it is incumbent upon us to stand and defend the principles of freedom that are once again threatened, this time by Islamic jihadists.
___________________
Mr. Spencer is director of Jihad Watch and author of "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades)", "The Truth About Muhammad," "Stealth Jihad," and most recently "The Complete Infidel's Guide to the Koran" (all from Regnery -- a HUMAN EVENTS sister company).
9/11 Sacrilege
By Steven Bernstein
The morning of September 11, 2001 dawned clear and crisp over New York City, as tens of thousands of commuters made their way to work. Around mid-morning, this mundane scene was marred by the unbelievable sight of a huge airliner flying into one of the World Trade Center towers, followed shortly thereafter by another airliner flying into the second tower. The wrenching scenes that followed — of people jumping out of the burning buildings to their deaths a thousand feet below, of a huge smoke cloud obscuring the World Trade Center, of the twin towers burning and collapsing in pancake fashion to the ground — will never leave us.
Many terrorist attacks on the U.S. have been attempted since 9/11; nearly all have been thwarted. Yet less than 9 years later, less than 600 feet from where 19 radical Islamists flew two airliners into the World Trade Center, killing 3,000 innocent Americans, the Islamic assault on America is being ratcheted up. The American Society for Muslim Advancement (ASMA), and its sister organization, The Cordoba Initiative, purchased the old Burlington Coat Factory building at Park Place and Broadway last December for $4.85 million. ASMA was founded, and is led by, New York City Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf. The Cordoba Initiave was founded by Rauf and former Aspen, Colorado Mayor and Aspen Institute CEO, John S. Bennet. Their goal is to raze the building, replace it with a 15 story mosque to look down on the site of Ground Zero and to hold the grand opening on September 11, 2011, 9/11’s 10th anniversary.
ASMA and the Cordoba Initiative presented the strangely named Cordoba House Project (after the supposed Golden Age in medieval Cordoba, Spain where Jews and Christians allegedly lived harmoniously with their oppressive Muslim rulers) on May 5th at a public meeting to the Community Board of Lower Manhattan (CB1) whose 12 members unanimously approved it. Committee Chairman Ro Sheffe summed up the bizarre thinking of CB1’s members stating, “I think [the Cordoba House] will be a wonderful asset to the community.” Even more troubling, it was reported that “not one person from the community [who] came to the meeting was in opposition….” Daisy Khan, Cordoba Initiative board member and Rauf’s wife, has stated that the project has received little opposition. The project is expected to cost about $100 million. [1]
However, support for the Cordoba House goes well beyond CB1, right to the office of New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg. Strangely, the Mayor’s Office of Immigrant Affairs supports the project. What’s the connection between “Immigrant Affairs” and the project? It’s also been reported that there have already been numerous illegal construction complaints at the site which have been ignored. Nevertheless, the site already serves as a mosque; every Friday afternoon, an Imam leads prayers in the building. Should the project be completed, between 1,000 and 2,000 Muslims are expected for prayer every Friday. [2]
The funding for the project is the key element in the mystery. Where is the money to construct a $100 million mosque going to come from? On the ASMA web site, under “Financial statements–Year Ending 06/30/09,” under the category “Temporarily Restricted Net Assets,” various organizational donors are listed. They are: the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) — $53,664, Millennium Development Goals (MDG3) –$481,942, Hunt Alternatives Fund — $15,000, Carnegie Corp. of New York — $122,000, Rockefeller Brothers Fund — $50,000 and Qatar Government Fund — $576,312 for total donations of $1,298,918. On the MGD3 Fund website, it states, “The MGD3 Fund invests in equality and in improving rights and opportunities for women and girls” and “on property and inheritance rights for women; gender equality in employment and equal opportunities on the labour market; participation and representation of women in national parliaments and political bodies; and combating violence against women.” Given these goals, why is the MGD3 Fund supporting a project designed to strengthen a religion that offers very few rights to women?
In addition, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund is listed as supporting the project to the tune of $50,000. The Rockefeller Brothers Fund was begun in 1940, by David, Winthrop, Nelson, Laurance, and John D. Rockefeller III, and it has a long history of supporting the leftist agenda. At the beginning of WWII, Nelson Rockefeller leased naval fueling stations in Venezuela to the Nazis; in 1942 his actions were described as treasonous by Senator Harry Truman.
However, the funding listed above is only about 1.3% of the project’s total cost. Where is the remaining $98-$99 million going to come from? Neither ASMA nor the Cordoba Initiative has divulged this information. Nevertheless, “…a significant percentage of the mosques built in the USA in the past two decades are receiving a disproportionate amount of their funds not only from the Saudis, but from the UAE, Qatar, and Iran.” The Qatar Government Fund is listed above as a contributor, and its likely that Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Malaysia (with a large Muslim population where a Cordoba Initiative office is located) are contributing substantial amounts. [3]
The driving force behind the project is Feisal Abdul Rauf. In a calm and reassuring voice, Rauf has stated that all religions are welcome at Cordoba House, and that interfaith understanding and tolerance are, and will be fostered. Don’t believe it.
Rauf’s father, Dr. Muhammad Adbul Rauf, was a contemporary of Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna and was a radical Islamist. He became the head of the Islamic Cultural Center in Washington DC and founded three Malaysian Islamic Studies programs, including the International Islamic University of Malaysia. Feisal has followed his father’s plan for Islamic expansion in the United States. He is currently the Imam at Masjid Al-Farah Mosque at 245 W. Broadway, New York City, a scant 12 blocks from Ground Zero. Masjid Al-Farah is located between two bars. Why? Recently, the New York State Liquor Authority has notified three businesses on W. Broadway that it will revoke their liquor licenses based on the state’s alcohol beverage control law. After local residents told the State Liquor Authority of the existence of Masjid Al-Farah last May, the SLA began investigating local bars. One bar owner’s bid for a liquor license has been denied and he has claimed a loss of $13,000 per month as a result. Rauf is also the Imam of the Islamic Center of Long Island in Westbury, New York which includes the Crescent School at 835 Brush Hollow Road. Anti-Christian and anti-Semitic textbooks were used at the school. When pressured about their hateful content, Rauf stated that the use of the books would be discontinued. As of 2007, the books were still in use. [4]
Presently, Rauf has written a slick, disingenuous book, What’s Right with Islam: A New Vision of Muslims and the West, in which he blames the West for the Islamic assault on America and has also stated that the West must act to end jihad. He tries to equate the freedom that Americans have in the United States with life under Sharia law. For example, he calls America ”a Sharia compliant state,” and says that “the American Constitution and system of governance uphold the core principles of Islamic law” and that “for America to score even higher on the ‘Shariah Compliance” scale, America would need to…allow religious communities more leeway to judge among themselves according to their own laws.” [5]
However, America is in no way ”a Shariah compliant state.” Sharia law has always denied the rights of women and non-Muslim minorities, while non-believers are given a choice of death or conversion and Jews and Christians are treated as dhimmis — second classs citizens. In the so-called ”Golden Age” of Muslim-ruled Spain, Jews and Christians were required to pay jizya – a poll tax — often collected in a humiliating manner for the right to live and worship behind closed doors. In stark contrast, in 1790, George Washington told the congregation of the Touro Synagogue in Newport, RI that every man and woman in America has the right to worship under their own “vine and fig tree” free from the fear of persecution. America ended slavery in 1865; Islam still allows it. In addition, Rauf conveniently fails to mention that in 1805, President Thomas Jefferson sent an American Naval squadron to the Mediterranean to protect American merchant ships from Muslim pirates sailing from North Africa.
Under Sharia law, individuals are not at liberty to think for themselves. Women are inferior to men to the point of being counted as half a man in matters of evidence and inheritance. As dhimmis, non-Muslims “must wear distinctive clothing, and must mark their houses, which must not be built higher than those of the Muslims…they must yield the way to Muslims; they must not scandalize the Muslims by openly performing their worship or their distinctive customs, such as drinking wine; they must not build new churches, synagogues, and hermitages, they must pay the poll tax under humiliating conditions….” [6]
In What’s Right with Islam, Rauf doesn’t acknowledge the cruel conditions Islam imposes on dhimmis and further states, “Core Islamic values overlap with core American values.” No, they don’t. He also criticizes America for not always living up to its ideals. Okay, America isn’t perfect — but when has Islam ever changed?
Rauf further betrays his hostile intentions towards America when he states, as quoted above, “America would need…to allow religious communities more leeway to judge among themselves according to their own laws.” Is Rauf implying that American Muslims be allowed to change U.S. law to suit themselves or be allowed to ignore it entirely? Thoughtful readers will conclude that he is.
Building a mosque close to Ground Zero is entirely in keeping with the Islamic ideals of conquest, domination, and humiliation. It is also entirely unacceptable and unnecessary. Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg needs to withdraw his support for the project, and respect those who were murdered, those who lost loved ones, and all those who suffered and sacrificed at Ground Zero on 9/11. Not surprisingly, some 9/11 families are offended by the proposed mosque. As Rosemary Cain of Massapequa, Long Island, whose son, firefighter George Cain, was killed on 9/11, stated, “I think its despicable. That’s sacred ground. How could anyone give them permission to build a mosque there? It tarnishes the area.” [7]
Footnotes
1. Jackson, Joe & Hutchinson, Bill. “Plan for mosque near World Trade Center site moves ahead.” New York Daily News. May 6, 2010.
2. Ibid.
3. “Pittsburgh’s Key Role in Israel’s Birth,” article by author, Jewish Chronicle, April 30, 1998; “Exclusive: Spitting in the Face of Everyone Murdered on 9/11,” by Gadi Adelman
4. Rauf, Feisal Abdul. “What’s Right with Islam: A New Vision of Muslims and the West.” Harper Collins, 2004.
5. Schacht, Joseph. “An Introduction to Islamic Law.” Oxford University Press, 1983.
6. Wariq, Ibn. “Why I am Not a Muslim.” Prometheus Books, 2003.
7. Jackson, Joe & Hutchinson, Bill. “Plan for mosque near World Trade Center site moves ahead.” New York Daily News. May 6, 2010.
CLICK HERE
The Islamization of Canada
By Christine Williams
Seven years after its application, Al Jazeera English has been launched in Canada. The three largest cable providers (Bell TV, Rogers and Videotron) are carrying the digital channel. Al Jazeera (AJ), a.k.a. the “CNN of the Arab World” was given its approval papers by the Canadian broadcast regulator—the CRTC (Canadian Television and Telecommunications Commission).
Not surprisingly, the Managing Director of Al Jazeera English is Tony Burman, former Editor in Chief of the CBC—the leftist network propped up by its infinite bank payroll—taxpayer dollars. Yet the publicly funded CRTC has blocked several applications by Fox News, which by the way is in demand in Canada, but not Liberal and politically correct enough for a country long dominated by leftist media ideologues.
Oh, and there’s something else funded by Canadian taxpayers: Harems! Hundreds of GTA (Greater Toronto Area) Muslim men in polygamous marriages are receiving welfare and social benefits for each of their spouses.
Mumtaz Ali, president of the Canadian Society of Muslims, said wives in polygamous marriages are recognized as spouses under the Ontario Family Law Act, providing they were legally married under Muslim laws abroad. – Toronto Sun
So here we “stand on guard” in Canada incorporating foreign Muslim laws into our provincial social benefits system. This is possible because, while polygamy is officially outlawed in Canada, there is a loophole in the law which is, it goes without saying, being capitalized upon by fundamentalist Muslims.
"Canada is a very liberal-minded country, Ali said…way ahead of Britain in this respect."– Toronto Sun
It’s a troubling statement given that Canada shares its borders with the United States – the leader on the terrorist war front. And let’s not even mention the fact that Britain has actually gone so far as to sanction Sharia law to rule to replace common law in civil cases between Muslims.
That’s bad, but it becomes even worse. A Montreal man, Mohamed Omary, has been collecting welfare cheques for nearly two decades, crisscrossing Europe to meet with six other men who have since been killed, convicted or linked to global terrorism.
Lawyers for RCMP and CSIS have filed documents, alleging Omary has been living off taxpayers ever since he arrived from Morocco, yet finding cash to fund his escapades throughout Europe.
Some advice: if Canadian taxpayers’ dollars aren’t lucrative enough, then go the Arar route, which means: sue, big time. Maher Arar originally had the audacity to demand $400-million, but settled for a meager 10.5 million. He’s still on a U.S. terrorist list, yet received an apology from Prime Minister Stephen Harper and 10.5 million dollars in a legal settlement from the government (read: taxpayers) because of a s0-called injustice. Arar - with dual Syrian and Canadian citizenship – was detained by American authorities in New York on terrorism suspicions, sent back to his country of origin (Syria), where he was imprisoned and tortured. A judicial inquiry subsequently found that the Canadian RCMP mislabeled him as an Islamic extremist with suspected ties to al Qaeda (al Qaida) (AQ) and shared that “misinformation” with U.S. authorities which led to his deportation to Syria.
Down the road, Omar Kadhr, the Canadian kid raising all kinds of controversy among naïve, bleeding hearts because he’s stuck in Guantanamo, said he saw Arar in safe houses and Al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan. Well, 10.5 million dollars later, who cares? Arar is happy with his new found wealth and personal apology from the Prime Minister’s Office. It takes little imagination to predict what he’ll do with these millions.
Conclusion: with its lucrative potentials and its strategic location so close to the United States, dhimmi Canada has made itself the ideal place to live for extremist Muslims.
Rising World Powers Align
By William R. Hawkins
The coalition of major developing nations known as BASIC (Brazil, South Africa, India and China) continues to pull closer together while becoming more alienated from the United States. The Obama administration has made constant pushes to limit BASIC’s economic growth in an effort to curb their greenhouse gas emissions. However, the agenda of BASIC at the United Nations has been to pressure the industrialized nations (America, Europe, Japan) to commit to ambitious cuts in emissions while staying free of any restrictions on their own activities. They have also demanded technical and financial support to speed the transfer of production capabilities from the West to the Third World.
The three core members of BASIC are also part of BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China.) The BRIC group met in Brasilia on April 14-16 to draw up a common plan for a “new international order” to be presented at the G20 meeting in June. The BRIC nations account for 42% of the world’s population but only 15% of the world’s gross domestic product. Promoting economic growth to improve per capita incomes and living standards is their top priority, but they believe they will need greater political clout in world affairs to gain the wealth they seek.
The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ report on the meeting between President Hu Jintao of China and President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva of Brazil at BRIC emphasized “investment cooperation” between the two countries which would entail that “both sides…actively encourage two-way investment…in the areas of energy, mining, agriculture, industry and infrastructure construction.” Brazil has been leery of China’s economic pattern in Latin America which resembles that of the old colonial model. Beijing trades manufactured goods for raw materials and fuel which stunts the economic development of its trading partners. In the case of Brazil last year, 76.8% of exports to China were basic products and 98.1% of Chinese imports were manufactured goods. Trade rose from $6.7 billion in 2003 to $36.1 billion last year, with China surpassing the United States as Brazil’s main trading partner.
In the wake of the international financial crisis, any inflow of capital is welcome in Latin America.
China has been investing in the mining and the oil industries and in building infrastructure. A common interest in promoting growth and a shared antipathy towards the United States is pulling Brasilia and Beijing together despite concerns in Brazilian industrial circles about the influx of Chinese goods. The developing countries hold the American banks responsible for the financial crisis, which they see as another negative manifestation of U.S. “hegemony.” Calls for global financial reform and a “multipolar” world were major BRIC themes articulated by all four nations.
The first BRIC meeting was held in June, 2009. The central topic was the need to move trade away from dependence on the dollar as the world’s reserve currency. At Brasilia last week, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev again raised this issue. His statement called for “multilateral cooperation in nuclear energy, aircraft engineering, space exploration and nanotechnologies. Such cooperation can be enhanced through financial interaction of the BRIC countries, in particular in the form of agreements on the use of national currencies in mutual trade.” While still well short of calling for a new non-dollar reserve currency, in its final statement, BRIC called for a greater role of its members in the International Monetary Fund and World Bank.
At the BRIC summit, President Hu spoke of the same goals of an international transfer of wealth as China has insisted upon in the UN climate talks. He said the developed countries should honor their commitments of increased assistance, debt relief, market access and technology transfer while helping developing countries promote economic growth and improve people’s well-being. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh joined in, calling for a “multipolar” world order in which the UN would play a central role.
The unity on economic goals provides a foundation which allows Beijing and Moscow to pull Brasilia and New Delhi in their direction on other strategic issues. Though Iran was not mentioned in the final BRIC communiqué, Lula made Brazil’s opposition to new UN sanctions on Tehran known at the close of his private meeting with Hu. Indeed, Brazil’s position seemed identical to China’s.
Though President Obama tried to give the impression that he had persuaded President Hu to support new sanctions on Iran when they met at the Nuclear Security Summit, this was not the case. When Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Jiang Yu was asked about this at a press conference April 13, he stated, “On the Iranian nuclear issue, our position has been consistent….Sanctions and pressure are not the fundamental way out. Relevant actions of the UN Security Council should be conducive to the turn-around of the situation and proper settlement of the issue through dialogue and negotiation.” News reports cited Brazilian officials as saying that their country shares “great affinity” with China over what course to take on Iran.
The visit to Brazil by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in March proved a failure. Clinton had urged Brazil, who currently holds one of the rotating seats on the UN Security Council, to support sanctions. But she had combined talks about Iran with discussions about how to move the UN climate talks forward, a combination that did not go over well. Brasilia kept its distance from Washington DC on both issues.
After the BRIC summit, President Hu had to return home to deal with the Tibet earthquake, but the Chinese delegation continued on to Venezuela as planned. The rabidly anti-American strongman President Hugo Chavez was offered $20 billion in “soft loans” from the state-owned China Development Bank and a $16 billion investment package for oil development in the eastern Orinoco region. The loan will be paid back with increased oil exports to China. Venezuela has already increased oil shipments to China by 21% over the last year while cutting back exports to the U.S. Beijing’s strategy has been to lock up oil supplies rather than be dependent on a volatile world market where increasing demand is driving up prices.
Earlier in April, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin traveled to Venezuela and promised to help build a nuclear power plant. Putin also discussed arms sales and cooperation on a space program.
The coalition may expand further, as it has been suggested that Indonesia join both BRIC and BASIC.
The Obama administration seems asleep at the switch as new powers not only rise, but cooperate on strategic issues that directly target American interests. If the White House pushes Congress to adopt a crippling energy tax and other restrictions on domestic growth as a result of climate paranoia, the need to adopt universal mandates at the UN will be increased. Unilateral anti-growth policies by the U.S. would put American firms and workers at a terrible disadvantage in global competition. Yet, pushing for UN restrictions on the developing world to make stagnation more “symmetrical” will only make the BASIC-BRIC bloc stronger, with major negative consequences to U.S. security as well as to prosperity in the years to come.
Malaysia and the Myth of Islamic Tolerance
By Rich Trzupek
Malaysia is often held up as the model of what a modern Muslim-majority nation can be. The ruling class, the bumiputra (literally “princes of the earth”) are largely, though not entirely, Muslim. But when Malaysia’s High Court ruled in late December to lift a government ban on non-Muslims using the word “Allah,” Christian churches became the targets of fire-bombing attacks. This eruption of violence suggests that there is trouble brewing just beneath the surface even in this supposed paradise of Islamic moderation.
At last count, eleven Christian churches and one Sikh temple have been attacked in Malaysia. That makes twelve attacks against places of worship in half a month’s time. What does it say about Islamic values when the impetus for these attacks was the use of a particular word?
Everyone agrees that the word “Allah” pre-dates the birth of the Islamic prophet Muhammad. In Malaysia, as in most of the Muslim of the world, Allah simply means God, the same God that, according to the Quran itself, both Christians and Jews worship. Nonetheless, use of the word Allah among non-Muslims has long been prohibited by law in Malaysia. A December 31 ruling by a Malaysian court overturned that law, a move that upset many of the nation’s Muslims, who make up about sixty per cent of the populace. They claim that non-Muslims will use the word to corrupt Muslims into accepting infidel beliefs.
Once again, we are presented with evidence of Islamic intolerance and insecurity. To his credit, Malaysian Prime Minister Dato’ Sri Mohd Najib condemned the attacks, which undermine both his “One Malaysia” policy and his re-election prospects. But no matter how much tolerance the leader of this nation may preach, the actions of his co-religionists speak much louder. Emboldened by an increasingly aggressive, violent, world-wide Islamic resurgence over the last few decades, this episode reveals what expatriates who have lived in Malaysia have long claimed: that the supposed harmony of Malaysia is nothing but a glossy veneer that barely covers up the inequities and prejudices of this society.
The Malaysian constitution grants special privileges to the bumiputra, or as they are called in the constitution, Malays. Malays are defined as those citizens who profess the religion of Islam, habitually speak the Malay language and conform to Malay customs. The constitution directs the King of Malaysia (Malaysia is a constitutional monarchy) to safeguard the special position of the Malays and to ensure that a certain percentage of public services and scholarships and other similar educational privileges are reserved by the federal government for the benefit of Malays.
The bumiputra enjoy other advantages as well. A certain percentage of stock in publicly-traded companies is reserved for the bumiputra. Traditionally, they pay less for real estate than other Malaysian citizens. This is clearly a separate and unequal society. Which is not to say that Malaysia is not governed in a more liberal fashion than reactionary Muslim nations like Iran and Saudi Arabia. Western clothing can be found on the streets of Kuala Lampur. Christians, Buddhists and Hindus, if less than equal compared to their Muslim masters, are at least allowed to practice their faith in relative peace.
Or rather they were allowed to worship in relative peace. The government of Malaysia has officially condemned the attacks, even as it tries to have the troublesome court ruling that set off the firestorm reversed. Troops have been dispatched to protect non-Islamic houses of worship, but it seems unlikely that many of the 2.3 million Christians who live in Malaysia feel safe going to church.
Even in this most mainstream of Muslim-ruled nations, supposed Islamic tolerance has been once again shown to be a matter of style, not substance.
2009: Tipping Point for Domestic Terror?
Multiple terror plots, increased radicalization, and continued government incompetence bode ill for 2010.
By Patrick Poole
This past year is simply without precedent in terms of the number of terror plots and cells exposed and disrupted. For those of us who closely monitor terrorism trends and have consistently warned of the escalating pace of Islamic radicalization — only to be ignored and attacked by Islamic apologists and their allies — 2009 has proven to be a cold and uncomfortable vindication of our concerns. As we move into a new year, we very well may look back at this past year as a tipping point for domestic terror.
The year began with bad harbingers with the November 2008 terror attack in Mumbai — demonstrating the success of a new terror tactic, swarm attacks — and the beginnings of a nationwide investigation here at home into the operations of the al-Qaeda-affiliated Somali al-Shabaab networks (after Shirwa Ahmed, a Minneapolis resident, conducted a suicide bombing in Somalia and became the first ever successful American suicide bomber). That investigation expanded after news of the disappearance of at least a dozen young Somali-American men armed with U.S. passports who turned up in Somalia training with al-Shabaab. The fear remains that some of these individuals may return home determined to wage jihad on these shores.
What 2009 has demonstrated is that the pace and scope of radicalization in the American Islamic community have increased dramatically. From the attempted bombing of Jewish centers in the Bronx in June, to the indictment of seven North Carolina men determined to wage “violent jihad” in July, and most recently to the five Muslim-American men intent on waging jihad who were arrested in Pakistan in November, we see that domestic terror plots are in full bloom. With the increased extremist rhetoric being preached in American mosques, there is no reason to believe that this radicalization and jihadization will diminish in 2010.
This past year also saw two deadly “lone wolf” attacks directed at our military, demonstrating both the external and internal domestic terror threat to our armed forces. In June, Muslim convert Abdulhakim Muhammad shot two soldiers standing outside a Little Rock Army recruiting center, killing Pvt. William Andrew Long, who had just graduated from basic training. Muhammad later defending the attack in an interview with the Associated Press, saying that it was “an act, for the sake of God, for the sake of Allah, the Lord of all the world, and also a retaliation on U.S. military.” And in November, Army Maj. Nidal Hasan entered the Soldier Readiness Center at Ft. Hood and opened fire, killing fourteen and wounding nearly three dozen others.
As I noted here at Pajamas Media after the Ft. Hood massacre, we can expect more of these domestic attacks on the military. One reason is a perverse paradox at work. The success of our military in Iraq and increased troop levels in Afghanistan dramatically increase the risks for would-be jihadists to attack U.S. military targets overseas, while the successful Little Rock and Ft. Hood incidents demonstrate how vulnerable our military personnel are right here at home. No doubt many jihadists observing these incidents are encouraged by their apparent success and the added benefit of waging “legal jihad” in the court system afterwards, appealing to all the rights and protections afforded them by the very same U.S. Constitution they seek to subvert.
Meanwhile, the investigations into the Ft. Hood incident and the attempted bombing of Northwest Flight 253 last week have exposed the woeful inadequacy and fundamental incompetence of our homeland security infrastructure. In the Ft. Hood case, the FBI was aware of Maj. Hasan’s email communications with al-Qaeda cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, but failed to inform DOD authorities, believing the emails represented legitimate religious inquiries associated with his military duties. Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey afterwards expressed his astonishing sentiment that diversity should trump dead soldiers, saying: “As horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that’s worse.”
And even though the father of the would-be bomber of Flight 253 had informed the U.S. embassy in Nigeria of his fears that his son was being radicalized in Yemen and his name had been placed on a terrorism watch list, the State Department failed to revoke Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s entry visa.
Remember that one of the first acts of the Department of Homeland Security under the Obama administration was to issue a report warning of “right-wing extremism” and the looming terrorist threat of military veterans, pro-lifers, and opponents of illegal immigration. That threat didn’t pan out, while Islamic terrorism has flourished notwithstanding Obama’s “Blame America First” world tour and groveling outreach to the Muslim world.
What 2009 has taught us is how rapidly the nature of the threat from Islamic jihadists is evolving and how utterly unable our government is to recognize and respond to that threat. Sadly, I predict that the coming year will show us how bold, aggressive, and inventive our enemies have become and how little we have learned from the events of the past year. Let’s all hope that prediction doesn’t prove true.
_____________________
Patrick Poole is a regular contributor to Pajamas Media, and an anti-terrorism consultant to law enforcement and the military.
U.S. Intel Lapses Helped Abdulmutallab
CBS News Exclusive: CIA Had Info on Person of Interest Dubbed "The Nigerian" in August But Officials Failed to Connect Dots.
Missed Terror Signs:
Several red flags about the bomb suspect were never pieced together. The lapses go back to when investigators first began tracking Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. Armen Keteyian has this exclusive report.
Sources tell CBS News "The Nigerian" has now turned out to be Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. But that connection was not made when Abudulmutallab's father went to the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria three months later, on November 19, 2009. It was then he expressed deep concerns to a CIA officer about his son's ties to extremists in Yemen, a hotbed of al Qaeda activity.
In fact, CBS News has learned this information was not connected until after the attempted Christmas Day bombing.
"We must get better at collecting these bits of information, putting them together at a central point, analyzing them and then acting," said Lee Hamilton, the vice-chair of the 9/11 Commission.
Also Tuesday, the Foreign Minister of Yemen told the Times of London that there may scores of trained young militants ready to follow in the footsteps of Abudulmutallab, the minister saying, "They may actually plan attacks like the one we just had in Detroit. There may be hundreds of them - 200 to 300."
A Yemini-based Al Qaeda group has claimed responsibility for the attack, praising Abudulmutallab's attempt to blow up Flight 253 with about 3 ounces of the powerful explosive PETN stashed inside a pair of specially-made underwear, reports CBS News chief investigative correspondent Armen Keteyian.
For many the global security breach represents the kind of system failure detailed in the 9/11 Commission Report.
"We're sharing information better than we did prior to 9/11, but this incident surely illustrates we've got a long ways to go," Hamilton said.
In a statement, the CIA did not dispute CBS News' report.
"We learned of him in November, when his father came to the U.S. embassy in Nigeria and sought help in finding him. We did not have his name before then," said Paul Gimigliano, a CIA spokesman.
"Also in November, we worked with the embassy to ensure he was in the government's terrorist database - including mention of his possible extremist connections in Yemen. We also forwarded key biographical information about him to the National Counterterrorism Center. This agency, like others in our government, is reviewing all data to which it had access - not just what we ourselves may have collected - to determine if more could have been done to stop Abdulmutallab."
Thanksgiving in Afghanistan
By Richard Tomkins
Mangulzai, Afghanistan -- As Americans turn off the lights in their homes Thursday after a day of celebration, a group of U.S. Marines and their families will just be starting theirs.
The first units of 1st Battalion, 5th Marines are scheduled to land in California Thursday night after nearly seven months in Afghanistan.
With the joy of reunion will be the satisfaction of knowing they made a difference, no little matter in a war in which skirmishes substitute for decisive battles and in which “progress” in winning over the local population is measured in small incremental steps.
The 500 or so Taliban in Helmand Province’s Nawa District -- 400 square miles of desert and farms near the Helmand River -- have in the main been driven out to other areas. Small Taliban cells remain and infiltrators are a problem, but villagers once terrified of being seen interacting with American and Afghan troops in any way now do so more frequently and increasingly provide live-saving information on hidden mines and suspicious persons.
“People have to know we (the Marines and Afghan forces) are not going to leave, that troops will stay to protect them,” said Capt. Brian Huysman, commander of Charlie Company, 1-5.
“We’re telling them that this unit is leaving but is being replaced by another. We’re putting out flyers saying the same and during the transition our Marines will be taking out some of the new guys and introducing them around.”
With increased security has come distribution of seeds to farmers for winter wheat. That wheat, the Afghan government hopes, may eventually help supplant the district’s traditional winter crop and a major source of funding for the Taliban -- opium poppies.
Government aid projects for villages -- better irrigation systems, schools and medical clinics -- are now being planned with the direct involvement of village elders.
Proof positive for the Marines of their success in counter-insurgency came just prior to the start of what the troops call the “rip out.” Weapons Company’s 81 Platoon, operating from an outpost near the villages of Mangulzai and Baghrabad, rounded up 19 suspected Taliban terrorists in just a few days. Eleven of those men, after subsequent investigation by Afghan authorities, were deemed guilty of terrorist activities and sent to prison. Seven of those 11 were detained directly as a result of local villagers informing the Marines of their presence, activities and exact whereabouts.
“This has been a tremendous week,” 1st Lt. Clint Hall, commander of 81 Platoon, said. “It couldn’t have happened at a better time.”
First Battalion, 5th Marines are coming home. For those still on the isolated outposts in the Helmand River Valley Thanksgiving will be observed in their own special way, with brief thoughts of families at home, comrades lost and the camaraderie that keeps them going in between patrols.
“Now that it’s down to the wire you need to be thinking about here,” 1st Sgt. David Wilson told Marines on a Charlie Company outpost.
“You’ve have proved you can do the job, keeping these people safe. Slacking off is just not acceptable. Don’t give it up in the final two minutes of the last quarter. It’s too late in the game to be complacent, it’s too close to going home to get blown up.
“Stay focused,” he said.
For Marines here there won’t be dining halls with heaps of turkey that you’ll see on television news reports from large bases such as Bagram and Kandahar. The Marines of 1-5 will awaken shivering in unheated tents or on cots in the open (it was 25 degrees the other morning) and will eat their meals amid the hinterland dust.
Traditional holiday fare will be helicoptered and then trucked to them, but may not make it on time. Many outposts have already anticipated that problem. At outpost Green Nine, for example, there are three turkeys fattening up in their compound. The Marines, with the help of Afghan police sharing the facility, bought the birds from friendly villagers and will do the butchering and cooking themselves over an open fire.
At Combat Outpost Sullivan, chicken parts are being bought for cooking -- as well as vegetables -- from local merchants.
Home is just a blink away for them. But the war goes on.
___________
Richard Tomkins, a former White House and Pentagon reporter with extensive overseas experience, is embedded with U.S. forces in Iraq and writes for several U.S. publications.
Joys of Muslim Women
By Nonie Darwish
In the Muslim faith a Muslim man can marry a child as young as one year old and have sexual intimacy with this child. Consummating the marriage by 9. The dowry is given to the family in exchange for the woman (who becomes his slave) and for the purchase of the private parts of the woman, to use her as a toy. Even though a woman is abused she can not obtain a divorce. To prove rape, the woman must have four male witnesses. Often after a woman has been raped, she is returned to her family and the family must return the dowry.
The family has the right to execute her (an honor killing) to restore the honor of the family.
Husbands can beat their wives at will and he does not have to say why he has beaten her. The husband is permitted to have four wives, and a temporary wife for an hour (prostitute) at his discretion. The Shariah Muslim law controls the private as well as the public life of the woman. In the Western World (America) Muslim men are starting to demand Shariah Law, so the wife cannot obtain a divorce and he can have full and complete control of her.
It is amazing and alarming how many of our sisters and daughters attending American Universities are now marrying Muslim men and submitting themselves and their children unsuspectingly to the Shariah law. By passing this on, enlightened American women may avoid becoming a slave under Shariah Law.
Ripping the West in Two
Author and lecturer Nonie Darwish says the goal of radical Islamists is to impose Shariah law on the world, ripping Western law and liberty in two. She recently authored the book, Cruel and Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law. Darwish was born in Cairo and spent her childhood in Egypt and Gaza before immigrating to America in 1978, when she was eight years old.
Her father died while leading covert attacks on Israel. He was a high-ranking Egyptian military officer stationed with his family in Gaza. When he died, he was considered a "shahid," a martyr for jihad. His posthumous status earned Nonie and her family an elevated position in Muslim society.
But Darwish developed a skeptical eye at an early age. She questioned her own Muslim culture and upbringing. She converted to Christianity after hearing a Christian preacher on television.
In her latest book, Darwish warns about creeping sharia law - what it is, what it means, and how it is manifested in Islamic countries. For the West, she says radical Islamists are working to impose sharia on the world. If that happens, Western civilization will be destroyed. Westerners generally assume all religions encourage a respect for the dignity of each individual. Islamic law (Sharia) teaches that non-Muslims should be subjugated or killed in this world. Peace and prosperity for one's children is not as important as assuring that Islamic law rules everywhere in the Middle East and eventually in the world.
While Westerners tend to think that all religions encourage some form of the golden rule, Sharia teaches two systems of ethics - one for Muslims and another for non-Muslims.
Building on tribal practices of the seventh century, Sharia encourages the side of humanity that wants to take from and subjugate others. While Westerners tend to think in terms of religious people developing a personal understanding of and relationship with God, Sharia advocates executing people who ask difficult questions that could be interpreted as criticism. It's hard to imagine, that in this day and age, Islamic scholars agree that those who criticize Islam or choose to stop being Muslim should be executed. Sadly, while talk of an Islamic reformation is common and even assumed by many in the West, such murmurings in the Middle East are silenced through intimidation. While Westerners are accustomed to an increase in religious tolerance over time, Darwish explains how petro dollars are being used to grow an extremely intolerant form of political Islam in her native Egypt and elsewhere.
In twenty years there will be enough Muslim voters in the United States to elect the President by themselves.
