World Terrorism: News, History and Research Of A Changing World #6 Disinformation, Inc.

VEVAK learned its methodology from the Soviet KGB and many of the Islamist revolutionaries who supported Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini actually studied at Moscow's Patrice Lumumba Friendship University, the Oxford of terrorism. Documented Iranian alumni include the current Supreme Leader (the faqih) Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, under whose Velayat-e Faqih (Rule of the Islamic Jurisprudent) apparatus it has traditionally operated. Its current head is Cabinet Minister Hojatoleslam Gholam-Hussein Mohseni-Ezhei, a graduate of Qom's Haqqani School, noted for its extremist position advocating violence against enemies and strict clerical control of society and government. The Ministry is very well funded and its charge, like that of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (the Pasdaran) is to guard the revolutionary Islamic Iranian regime at all costs and under all contingencies.

From the KGB playbook, VEVAK learned the art of disinformation. It's not so difficult to learn: tell the truth 80% of the time and lie 20%. Depending on how well a VEVAK agent wants to cover his/her tracks, the ratio may go up to 90/10, but it never drops below the 80/20 mark as such would risk suspicion and possible detection. The regime in Teheran has gone to great lengths to place its agents in locations around the world. Many of these operatives have been educated in the West, including the U.K. and the United States. Iranian government agencies such as embassies, consulates, Islamic cultural centers, and airline offices regularly provide cover for the work of VEVAK agents who dress well and are clean shaven, and move comfortably within our society. In this country, because of the severance of diplomatic relations, the principal site of VEVAK activities begins at the offices of Iran's Permanent Mission to the UN in New York.

Teheran has worked diligently to place its operatives in important think tanks and government agencies in the West. Some of its personnel have been recruited while in prison through torture or more often through bribery, or a combination of both. Others are Islamist revolutionaries that have been set up to look like dissidents - often having been arrested and imprisoned, but released for “medical reasons”. The clue to detecting the fake “dissident” is to read carefully what he/she writes, and to ask why this vocal “dissident” was released from prison when other real dissidents have not been released, indeed have been grievously tortured and executed. Other agents have been placed in this country for over twenty-five years to slowly go through the system and rise to positions of academic prominence due to their knowledge of Farsi and Shia Islam or Islamist fundamentalism.

One of the usual tactics of VEVAK is to co-opt academia to its purposes. Using various forms of bribery, academics are bought to defend the Islamic Republic or slander its enemies. Another method is to assign bright students to train for academic posts as specialists in Iranian or Middle East affairs. Once established, such individuals are often consulted by our government as it tries to get a better idea of how it should deal with Iran. These academics then are in a position to skew the information, suggesting the utility of extended dialogue and negotiation, or the danger and futility of confronting a strong Iran or its proxies such as Hizballah (Hezbollah). These academics serve to shield the regime from an aggressive American or Western policy, and thereby buy more time for the regime to attain its goals, especially in regards to its nuclear weaponry and missile programs.

MOIS likes to use the media, especially electronic media, to its advantage. One of VEVAK's favorite tricks is setting up web sites that look like they are opposition sites but which are actually controlled by the regime. These sites often will be multilingual, including Farsi, German, Arabic French, and English. Some are crafted carefully and are very subtle in how they skew their information (e.g., Iran-Interlink, set up and run by Massoud Khodabandeh and his wife Ann Singleton from Leeds, England); others are less subtle, simply providing the regime's point of view on facts and events in the news (e.g., www.mujahedeen.com or www.mojahedin.ws). This latter group is aimed at the more gullible in our open society and unfortunately such a market exists. However, if one begins to do one's homework, asking careful questions, the material on these fake sites generally does not add up.

Let's examine a few examples of VEVAK's work in the United States. In late October, 2005, VEVAK sent three of its agents to Washington to stage a press event in which the principal Iranian resistance movement, the Mojahedin-e Khalq (MeK), was to be slandered. Veteran VEVAK agent Karim Haqi flew from Amsterdam to Canada where he was joined by VEVAK's Ottawa agents Amir-Hossein Kord Rostami and Mahin (Parvin-Mahrokh) Haji, and the three flew from Toronto to Washington. Fortunately the resistance had been tracking these three, informed the FBI of their presence in Washington, and when the three tried to hold a press conference, the resistance had people assigned to ask pointed questions of them so that they ended the interview prematurely and fled back to Canada.

Abolghasem Bayyenet is a member of the Iranian government. He serves as a trade expert for the Ministry of Commerce. But his background of study and service in the Foreign Ministry indicates that Bayyenet is more than just an economist or a suave and savvy businessman. In an article published in Global Politician on April 23, 2006, entitled “Is Regime Change Possible in Iran?”, Bayyenet leads his audience to think that he is a neutral observer, concerned lest the United States make an error in its assessment of Iran similar to the errors of intelligence and judgment that led to our 2003 invasion of Iraq, with its less than successful outcome. However, his carefully crafted bottom line is that the people of Iran are not going to support regime change and that hardliner President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad actually has achieved greater popularity than his predecessors because of his concern for the problems of the poor and his fight for economic and social justice. To the naive, Bayyenet makes Ahmadinejad sound positively saintly. Conveniently overlooked is the occurrence of over four thousand acts of protest, strikes, anti-regime rallies, riots, and even political assassinations by the people of Iran against the government in the year since Ahmadinejad assumed office. So too, the following facts are ignored: the sizeable flight of capital, the increase in unemployment, and the rising two-figure rate of inflation, all within this last year. Bayyenet is a regime apologist, and when one is familiar with the facts, his arguments ring very hollow. However, his English skills are excellent, and so the naОve might be beguiled by his commentary.

Mohsen Sazegara is VEVAK's “reformed revolutionary”. A student supporter of Khomeini before the 1979 revolution, Sazegara joined the “imam” on his return from exile and served in the government for a decade before supposedly growing disillusioned.

He formed several reformist newspapers but ran afoul of the hardliners in 2003 and was arrested and imprisoned by VEVAK. Following “hunger strikes”, Sazegara was released for health reasons and permitted to seek treatment abroad. Although critical of the government and particularly of Ahmadinejad and KhameneМ, Sazegara is yet more critical of opposition groups, leaving the impression that he favors internal regime change but sees no one to lead such a movement for the foreseeable future. His bottom line: no one is capable of doing what needs to be done, so we must bide our time. Very slick, but his shadow shows his likely remaining ties to the MOIS.

DNC's Imam Reacts over Hezbollah and Terror Questions (back)

February 11, 2007

Follow-up to Imam who offered prayer of conversion at DNC retreat

Should those two questions be difficult to answer, if so why... what does it mean if you don’t want to discuss those questions:

... 'nothing,' 'its just politics, geopolitics,' or does it mean that he refuses to describe Hezbollah as a terror organization because they are engaged in legitimate jihad activities in his worldview? How would the last square with ecumenicism, which was the basis of his invitation to the DNC in the first place?

DNC's imam goes wild

LGF has a must-listen mp3 of the DNC's imam Husham Al-Husainy on Hannity's radio show.

Hannity keeps trying to ask him two questions: Is Hizballah a terrorist group? and Is Ahmadinejad an antisemite? Note Al-Husainy's reaction: not only does he squirm and dance, but he starts accusing Hannity of hating him, hating peace, hating God. This is an extraordinarily common reaction, and is akin to the predictable response that always follows any discussion of the elements of Islam that give rise to violence, supremacism, fanaticism: instead of dealing with those elements of Islam and working to formulate some positive way to mitigate their destructive force, Islamic apologists routinely shift the focus to the one raising the questions, accusing him of hatemongering, bigotry, racism, 'Islamophobia.' And there is always the accusation that the questioner is worse than, or equivalent to, the terrorists.

This is a very effective tactic, which is why they keep doing it. It makes naive and uninformed people turn away from the alleged bigot without considering what he is saying, and it deflects attention away from the Islamic roots of jihadist violence, so as to allow the jihadists to continue their work without harsh scrutiny.

Here are some of the things Al-Husainy says to Hannity -- all in response to one or both of those questions:

You paid to talk like this.

God my witness, you are breaking the law and you are accusing me...Because you are breaking the peace of this world, you wanted to create animosity between the religions, Christian and Muslim and Jewish...

(Do you support Ahmadinejad?) I won't answer you unless you just withdraw the question...

See? See now? See, 'ducking the question' -- this is an insult. See? ...You are Christian, let's follow Jesus' rule. If you are a Jewish, let's follow Moses' rule. Please just follow God's rule, not insult each other.

People like you, my friend, you are playing with fire.

Honest to God, you need to bring the peace to this world, you need to bring God to this world, you are out of the spiritual circle. You are justifying politics and the world is really burning. Let's cool it down. Let's go back to the law of Abraham and Muhammad and Jesus and Moses...But don't insult, please. Don't insult nobody.

You belong to a minority of people burning the world. You just have to come back to God. Go read the Bible. Go read the Torah. And let's talk, is that the language, is that the behavior of Jesus and Moses? You are really away of your faith. So let's go back to the moral value of the Bible. And let's see: does the Bible teach [unintelligible] each other like that? We are Muslim, a billion and a half just like the Christians. Is that the way we aggravate each other, trouble each other? You are really making God mad at you, making Jesus mad at you, making Moses mad at you...

Give me time, I will answer it. But let's respect each other. The trouble is, you are humiliating me and God is against that. Jesus against that...

You are. You are against prophet Muhammad. You are against the faith of Muslims. You are against Qur'an. And God is my witness. And God's gonna get mad at you. Jesus gonna get mad at you. You are working against the unity of the world. And the unity of Muslims, and Jewish, and Christians. You are working against America. You are disturbing the peace between East and West. You are really, you are the anti-peace person.

And then the Imam hung up on Hannity.

Incidentally, which do you like better?

Source: http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/015094.php.

Propaganda Workshop Held for British Muslims (back)

February 11, 2007

A group of eight journalists held a media workshop to help build and develop essential skills and expertise to ensure British Muslims are better equipped to represent their faith, views and values in broadcast and print media.

The workshop, held at Mahfil Ali Islamic Center, in Harrow, northwest London Saturday, was designed to especially benefit Muslims working in various organizations, university and local youth societies as well as individuals representing community groups.

The initiative, organized by the recently formed Muslim Consultancy Group, comes at a time when Muslims in Britain are facing unprecedented public and media scrutiny prompted by the so-called war on terrorism.

Opening the program, editor of the Muslim News Ahmed Versi gave an overview of the history of Islamic publications in the UK dating back from the 1960s, but most of which have been forced to close due to a lack of financial resources.

Versi argued that the importance of having a Muslim media was to influence debate and add to, if not set, the news agenda in the face of much misunderstanding and hostility towards Islam.

Aaqil Ahmed, commissioning editor for religious program at Channel Four television also discussed his experiences in making documentary films.

Hamed Chapman from IRNA London bureau presented a brief on the importance of press releases and how they are used as an effective tool for Muslim organization to get their voice across into the public domain and influence the political agenda.

Arifa Akbar of the Independent newspaper discussed others sources of news, and news writing from its most basic format to features and commentary articles. She also offered an insight into the working of a British national daily.

Sarah Mirza gave an overview of her personal experiences as a training journalist with Independent Television News, while Fatema Haji discussed her work as a press officer for the Government News Network.

Interview preparations and techniques were discussed by deputy executive producer at Sky News, Mehdi Hasan and BBC reporter Shazia Khan.

Source: http://www2.irna.ir/en/news/view/line-20/0702112445183803.htm

This isn't Prejudice (back)

February 11, 2007

We should use Muslims' portrayal on '24' not as another excuse to play the victim, but as an opening to denounce Islamist radicals

American Muslim organizations again have come out in full force to object to something unobjectionable. This time they're angry about 24 , the popular TV drama on Fox. When a recent episode ended with a terrorist network detonating a nuclear device in a Los Angeles suburb, the Council on American Islamic Relations announced its fear that 'this would serve to increase anti-Muslim prejudice in American society.'

This season's premiere follows an 11-week run of suicide bombings, apparently by radical Islamist terror cells, in cities across the country.

It's time for Muslims to stop blaming the messenger and stoking the flames of victimization. Instead of blaming Hollywood for depicting what many New Yorkers, Spaniards and Londoners have already horrifically experienced first hand, we should thank 24's producers for giving us an opportunity to experience within the protection of fiction the grim realities of what we need to wake up to.

What actually harms our current predicament as American Muslims more – television like the fictional 24 or recent factual events across the globe? Arrests in the past few years of known Muslim radicals in Seattle, Lodi, Toronto, Lackawanna, Miami and London seem to spur less activity from leading Muslim organizations than a fictional drama like 24.

As an American and as a Muslim, I find 24 to be a profoundly engaging program. Its plotline ignites the most genuine sense of American Muslim fury within me against the radicals who attack our citizens and malign our faith with their political barbarism.

24's portrayal of Muslims is actually quite fair. In the show, the president's sister works for a leading Muslim civil rights organization in D.C.; she is portrayed as a protector of constitutional freedoms. The head of this Muslim organization, who is in detention, actually risks his life in order to report to authorities on other Muslim prisoners and terrorism-related conversations that have alarmed him.

The show also shows the darker, extremist side of political Islam, or Islamism. For example, an Arab Muslim youth, a previously beloved neighbor in suburban LA, turns out to be a terrorist thug who provides a key part of the nuclear device.

Many heroic Muslims have certainly privately aided our security in finding and dismantling such networks behind the scenes. But, as a faith community we have done virtually nothing publicly to fight the core political religious ideology that breeds terror.

For American Muslims, 24 offers an opportunity to address a key question: To the extent Muslims have a bad image on TV and in American culture, what can we do to change that? We need to provide a new and very public American Muslim reality that can then be written into future Hollywood scripts.

The public face of American Muslim activity against terror – and against the ideology that feeds it – has so far been inadequate. Other than press-release condemnations, there has been virtually no palpable concerted public effort from the greater Muslim community in this regard. If that public American Muslim movement against Islamism and its radical offshoots existed, 24's writers would have included it in the story line.

So if this drama hits too close to home, perhaps offended Muslims should use that fear as a visceral stimulus for change. It's time for hundreds of thousands of Muslims to be not only private but public in their outrage – and to commit themselves to specific open engagement of the militants and their Islamism.

We, as American Muslims, should be training and encouraging our Muslim youths to become the future Jack Bauers of America. What better way to dispel stereotypes than to create hundreds of new, real images of Muslims who are publicly leading this war on the battlefield and in the domestic and foreign media against the militant Islamists.

We need to create organizations – high-profile, well-funded national organizations and think tanks – that are not afraid to identify al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah or the Muslim Brotherhood by name and by their mission, as the enemies of America.

Political Islam cannot be defeated by non-Muslims. It can only be defeated from the position of a spiritual love for our own faith, which needs to be liberated from theocracy.

To regain our credibility, this movement will need to specifically launch the following:

•Public Muslim analysis and criticism of Islamist sermons and their exclusivist ideologies.

•Public debate over the rightful place of sharia (literal religious laws) at home, not in government.

•Public effective encouragement of our youth to enlist in the military, homeland security and other frontline security agencies.

•Public deconstruction of the so-called Islamic goal of a caliphate and the political nature of the ummah (the Muslim community), which threatens national sovereignty.

•Public and specific identification of the enemies of America and the enemies of a pluralistic Islam.

That is just a start. We should also remember to never give any one Muslim organization or any single Muslim too much credit on behalf of the entire faith community.

The reality remains that if Muslims, our organizations and various Muslim leaders publicly created just such a national and generational plan to fight Islamism – rather than searching for reasons to claim victimization – the issues and complaints surrounding such TV shows as 24 would disappear.

M. Zuhdi Jasser is the chairman of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy. He is a former U.S. Navy lieutenant commander. His e-mail address is zuhdi@aifdemocracy.org.

Source: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/ points/stories/DN-jasser_11edi.ART.State.Edition1.29d604a.html

June 27, 2006

by Daniel Pipes

How do Muslims worldwide think?

To find out, the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press carried out a large-scale attitudinal survey this spring. Titled 'The Great Divide: How Westerners and Muslims View Each Other,' it interviewed Muslims in two batches of countries: six of them with long-standing, majority-Muslim populations (Egypt, Indonesia, Jordan, Nigeria, Pakistan, and Turkey) and four of them in Western Europe with new, minority Muslim populations (France, Germany, Britain, and Spain).

The survey, which also looks at Western views of Muslims, yielded some dismaying but not altogether surprising results. Its themes can be grouped under three rubrics.

A proclivity to conspiracy theories: In not one Muslim population polled does a majority believe that Arabs carried out the attacks of September 11, 2001, on America. The proportions range from a mere 15% in Pakistan holding Arabs responsible, to 48% among French Muslims. Confirming recent negative trends in Turkey, the number of Turks who point the finger at Arabs has declined to 16% today from 46% in 2002. In other words, in every one of these 10 Muslim communities, a majority views September 11 as a hoax perpetrated by the American government, Israel, or some other agency.

Likewise, Muslims are widely prejudiced against Jews, ranging from 28% unfavorable ratings among French Muslims to 98% in Jordan (which, despite the monarchy's moderation, has a majority Palestinian Arab population). Further, Muslims in certain countries (especially Egypt and Jordan) see Jews conspiratorially, as being responsible for bad relations between Muslims and Westerners.

Conspiracy theories also pertain to larger topics. Asked, 'What is most responsible for Muslim nations' lack of prosperity?' between 14% (in Pakistan) and 43% (in Jordan) blame the policies of America and other Western states, as opposed to indigenous problems, such as a lack of democracy or education, or the presence of corruption or radical Islam.

This conspiracism points to a widespread unwillingness in the umma to deal with realities, preferring the safer bromides of plots, schemes, and intrigues. It also exposes major problems adjusting to modernity.

Support for terrorism: All the Muslim populations polled display a solid majority of support for Osama bin Laden. Asked whether they have confidence in him, Muslims replied positively, ranging between 8% (in Turkey) and 72% (in Nigeria). Likewise, suicide bombing is popular. Muslims who call it justified range from 13% (in Germany) to 69% (in Nigeria). These appalling numbers suggest that terrorism by Muslims has deep roots and will remain a danger for years to come.

British and Nigerian Muslims are most alienated: Britain stands out as a paradoxical country. Non-Muslims there have strikingly more favorable views of Islam and Muslims than elsewhere in the West; for example, only 32% of the British sample view Muslims as violent, significantly less than their counterparts in France (41%), Germany (52%), or Spain (60%). In the Muhammad cartoon dispute, Britons showed more sympathy for the Muslim outlook than did other Europeans. More broadly, Britons blame Muslims less for the poor state of Western-Muslim relations.

But British Muslims return the favor with the most malign anti-Western attitudes found in Europe. Many more of them regard Westerners as violent, greedy, immoral, and arrogant than do their counterparts in France, Germany, and Spain. In addition, whether asked about their attitudes toward Jews, responsibility for September 11, or the place of women in Western societies, their views are notably more extreme.

The situation in Britain reflects the 'Londonistan' phenomenon, whereby Britons preemptively cringe and Muslims respond to this weakness with aggression.

Nigerian Muslims generally have the most belligerent views on such issues as the state of Western-Muslim relations, the supposed immorality and arrogance of Westerners, and support for Mr. bin Laden and suicide terrorism. This extremism results, no doubt, from the violent state of Christian-Muslim relations in Nigeria.

Ironically, most Muslim alienation is found in those countries where Muslims are either the most or the least accommodated, suggesting that a middle path is best - where Muslims do not win special privileges, as in Britain, nor are they in an advanced state of hostility, as in Nigeria.

Overall, the Pew survey sends an undeniable message of crisis from one end to the other of the Muslim world.

Source: http://www.danielpipes.org/article/3706

Muslim Women Don`t Have to Wear Veils (back)

February 11, 2007

Islam does not require women to wear veils, Queen Rania al-Abdullah of Jordan has said in an interview, calling on Muslim moderates to 'make their voices be heard.'

'Islam neither requires one to be practising, nor to dress in one way or another,' the stylish 36-year-old queen told the Italian daily Corriere della Sera during a visit to Rome on Friday.

'So imposing the veil on a woman is contrary to the principles of Islam,' said Queen Rania, who is in Rome for the launch of a Group of Seven (G7) programme to develop vaccines against diseases that are endemic in poor countries.

'Unfortunately, after all the suspicion weighing on Islam, many people have begun to consider the veil as a political problem, but this is not the case,' she told Corriere. 'Wearing the veil is a free personal choice.'

Queen Rania urged 'all moderates to stand up and let their voices be heard.'

She added: 'Many people are frustrated in the Arab world. Many give in to the anger because they are accused of violence. But instead we should get up, explain who we are and what we believe in.

'Over the last three years, most victims of terrorism have been Muslim. So there`s not a war between Muslims and non-Muslims, but between extremists and moderates of all the religions,' the queen said.

Source: http://www.angolapress-angop.ao/noticia-e.asp?ID=508402

Numbers Don't Lie (back)

February 12, 2007

by Patrick Poole

A recent editorial in Investors Business Daily, 'The 8-Million Muslim Lie', took issue with population figures regularly bandied about by radical Islamic activists since the November 2006 elections as a supposed demonstration of Muslims’ collective political power. Because of the number of elections decided around the country with slim majorities, including critical congressional and senatorial races, the Muslim activists advancing this statistic contend that because of this fictionalized mass of Muslims, the radical agendas of organizations like the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Muslim American Society (MAS), and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) must have their demands for the Islamization of American society catered to by political parties, government officials and law enforcement authorities. At least that’s how their argument goes.

The IBD editorial completely deconstructs the methodology of the report used by these organizations to support their '8-Million Muslim' claims. The report in question, The Mosque in America: A National Portrait, was published in April 2001 by CAIR, and was authored by CAIR National Board member, Ishan Bagby, who has no professional training in demography. The study concluded:

Estimates of a total Muslim population of 6-7 million in America seem reasonable in light of the figure of 2 million Muslims who associate with a mosque. (p. 3)

In fact, more careful scientific studies have placed the population of Muslims in America much lower. A NY Sun op-ed by Dr. Daniel Pipes in October 2001 ('How Many U.S. Muslims?') noted two different scientific university-conducted studies in recent years that place the population of Muslims at less than 3 million:

The American Religious Identification Survey 2001 carried out by the Graduate Center of the City University of New York polled more than 50,000 people and found the total American Muslim population to be 1.8 million.

Meanwhile, the University of Chicago's Tom Smith reviewed prior national surveys and (in a study sponsored by the American Jewish Committee) found that the best estimate puts the Muslim population in 2000 at 1,886,000. (With a nod toward figures supplied by Islamic organizations, he allowed that this number could be as high as 2,814,000 Muslims.)

Even though critics have decisively shown the fatal assumptions of CAIR’s wildly exaggerated population study, CAIR still promotes this 6-7 million number on their website. As an aside, the CAIR study only evaluated Sunni Muslims. The Shi’ite community, which the Sunnis consider heretic, was curiously not considered in their population 'guesstimates' of Muslims in America.

But what if CAIR and the other Islamist organizations floating these fictional statistics were given the benefit of the doubt? While their population estimates bear no resemblance to reality, it is true that in certain congressional districts the Muslim vote, which trended heavily to Republicans in 2000 but dramatically shifted towards Democrats in 2004 and 2006, did play a role in some House and Senate races in districts with large Muslim population in the last election. That can certainly be conceded.

However, the question has to be asked: if there are in fact 8 million Muslims in America, just how many of them does CAIR actually represent? Of course, if you were to ask that question of Ibrahim Cooper, CAIR National spokesman, he would say all of them. But a close inspection of internal documents of the radical Islamic organizations that represent themselves as advocates of the exponentially increasing Muslim masses betrays a difficult truth – that they actually represent few American Muslims at all:

An inspection of CAIR’s most recent publicly available IRS Form 990 (2004) shows for that year they received $119,029 in membership dues for that year (line 3). But at $25 per membership (the current rate is $35), that would mean that in 2004, CAIR only had 4,761 dues-paying members – less than 5,000 members out of 8 million Muslims in America. This would mean that CAIR only represents 1 out of every 1,680 Muslims. Even if a lower 6 million Muslim population figure were assumed, CAIR would still only be able to claim representation for 1 out of every 1,260 Muslims for that year.

MAS is in even worse shape than CAIR when it comes to actual representation of the American Muslim community. In 2004, MAS received only $87,299 in membership dues, which represents a dramatic decrease in membership from 2003 ($366,613 in members dues received) and 2002 ($378,993 received). Membership has declined so rapidly for MAS that they have stopped offering memberships on their website altogether, though MAS has not publicly acknowledged, let alone explained, their stunning membership decline since 9/11.

Data for ISNA is not available because they have claimed exemption as a church, which aren’t required to make their IRS Form 990s publicly available. This is unfortunate, as ISNA has previously claimed in press releases to represent an astounding 10 million Muslim Americans – a population statistic and membership claim that cannot be independently verified.

The implication of these findings threatens to shatter the myth that these radical Islamic organizations are actually representative of American Muslims. In the case of both CAIR and MAS, their actual and documented representation of Muslims is so miniscule that their claims to speak on behalf of Muslims in America put inordinate strain on their credibility. As for ISNA, the simple fact that they publicly claim to represent numbers far exceeding the number of American Muslims than even the most unscientific and evidently biased population study can identify immediately calls into question their veracity.

It seems those that are the quickest to use the '8-Million Muslim Lie' are actually the ones most damaged by it. As population figures for Muslims in America are continually inflated, the hard membership numbers for CAIR and MAS found in their own tax documents shows that they are representing progressively less of the Muslim community if the population figures they cite are to be believed. In a strange twist of fate, at the very moment that these organizations want to capitalize on the opportunity of the supposed growing political clout of Muslims in America, their own numbers show that they are becoming less representative of the community they claim to speak for. Unfortunately for CAIR, MAS and ISNA, there is no escaping that the real numbers don’t lie.

Source: http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=26860

Student in Hiding Due to Islam Fury (back)

February 11, 2007

by James Harper

A Cambridge University student has gone into hiding after publishing an offensive cartoon of the Muslim prophet Mohammed with a 'joke' caption saying 'violent paedophile'.

The cartoon in student magazine Clareification is the same one that caused riots around the world when it was published in a Danish newspaper in 2005.

Together with the caption, it is seen as so inflammatory that the 19-year-old undergraduate from Clare College has been taken to a secret location for his own safety.

The university's Islamic society blasted the cartoon as 'hugely offensive' and 'crude, unabashed prejudice', while student union president Calum Davey expressed 'deep regret' over the publication. He said: 'This material does not reflect the views of Clare students.'

The magazine had been renamed Crucification for a special edition on religious satire, and the front page included headlines stating: 'Ayatollah rethinks stance on misunderstood Rushdie.'

Officials yesterday warned police about the controversy and launched an urgent probe into how the cartoon was published and what action to take against the student.

Source: http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk:80/news/tm_headline=student- in-hiding-over-islam-fury---&method=full&objectid=18606146&siteid= 62484-name_page.html

The Politics of Moderate Islam (back)

February 11, 2007

by Shah Abdul Halim

Why Bangladesh is termed a Moderate Muslim country or why the people of Bangladesh are described as Moderate Muslims. Is it because we do not oppose U.S. hegemony? During the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, at that time we had in our country a caretaker government in power. The then caretaker government invited all former Foreign Ministers of Bangladesh for consultation as to whether to support U.S. invasion in Afghanistan and provide logistic support and accede U.S. demand to use our land and airspace. They all advised the then caretaker government to support U.S. and provide all facilities in the war. This is the reason why West terms us as Moderate Muslims. For the same reason, Egypt and Saudi Arabia are Moderate Muslim countries although Saudi Arabia implements Shariah. They do not question the U.S. authority. But Iran is not a Moderate Muslim country though practicing democracy but rogue state because it questions U.S. illegitimate actions. The West looks at us from their foreign policy perception, from their geo-political and geo-strategic interests. If we follow them we are Moderate Muslims.

continues................

(The writer is the Chairman of Islamic Information Bureau Bangladesh.)

Source: http://nation.ittefaq.com/artman/publish/article_33957.shtml

The Problem With Islam (back)

February 12, 2007

Bill Warner, the director of the Center for the Study of Political Islam (CSPI) talks to Front Page's Jamie Glazov about the absence of 'the Golden Rule' in Islam:

Let’s examine the ethical basis of our civilization. All of our politics and ethics are based upon a unitary ethic that is best formulated in the Golden Rule:

Treat others as you would be treated.

The basis of this rule is the recognition that at one level, we are all the same. We are not all equal. Any game of sports will show that we do not have equal abilities. But everyone wants to be treated as a human being. In particular, we all want to be equal under the law and be treated as social equals. On the basis of the Golden Rule—the equality of human beings—we have created democracy, ended slavery and treat women and men as political equals. So the Golden Rule is a unitary ethic. All people are to be treated the same. All religions have some version of the Golden Rule except Islam.

FP: So how is Islam different in this context?

Warner: The term “human being” has no meaning inside of Islam. There is no such thing as humanity, only the duality of the believer and unbeliever. Look at the ethical statements found in the Hadith. A Muslim should not lie, cheat, kill or steal from other Muslims. But a Muslim may lie, deceive or kill an unbeliever if it advances Islam.

There is no such thing as a universal statement of ethics in Islam. Muslims are to be treated one way and unbelievers another way. The closest Islam comes to a universal statement of ethics is that the entire world must submit to Islam. After Mohammed became a prophet, he never treated an unbeliever the same as a Muslim. Islam denies the truth of the Golden Rule.

By the way, this dualistic ethic is the basis for jihad. The ethical system sets up the unbeliever as less than human and therefore, it is easy to kill, harm or deceive the unbeliever.

The CSPI Method for understanding Islam, as quoted on their site (with literature for sale to make Islam accessible to the ordinary non-Islamic person):

1. Islam is a religion and a political system. Only the political system is of interest to non-Muslims, since it determines how Islam treats you. Study the religion of Islam if you want to become a Muslim.

2. All of Islam is based upon the Koran, the Sira (life of Mohammed), and Hadith (Traditions of Mohammed)-the Islamic Trilogy.

3. The entire political doctrine is found in the Trilogy. By reading the Trilogy, you will understand Islam's actions and words.

Posted by aalkon at February 12, 2007 1:49 PM
Comments

Where do I sign up to get all the good stuff Islam offers?

When I suggest Islam is an inherent enemy to societies that value the rule of law, the rejoinder is that the vast majority of muslims are peacable, law abiding, and against the radical jihadists that propagate terrorism. I don't see the 'moderate' muslims as working all that hard to undo the work of their brethren.

Posted by: doombuggy at February 12, 2007 3:46 AM

I don't either. Furthermore, when Muslims talk about the great life non-Muslims have in a Muslims society, don't believe them. Instead, look up dhimmitude.

Also, a Muslim who converts to another religion has committed an offense punishable by death. If Obama truly was a Muslim early on, he may be in some trouble.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam

??????, irtidad or ridda) is commonly defined as the rejection of Islam in word or deed by a person who has been a Muslim.

All five major schools of Islamic jurisprudence agree that a sane male apostate must be executed. A female apostate may be put to death, according to some schools, or imprisoned, according to others.

Here's more on apostasy in Islam from dhimmiwatch:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/001590.php

“A Somali living in Yemen since 1994, Mohammed Omer Haji, converted to Christianity two years ago and adopted the name 'George.' He was imprisoned in January, 2000 and reportedly beaten and threatened for two months by Yemeni security police, who tried to persuade him to renounce his conversion to Christianity. After he was re-arrested in May, he was formally put on trial in June for apostasy, under article 259 of Yemen's criminal law. Haji's release came seven weeks after he was given a court ultimatum to renounce Christianity and return to Islam, or face execution as an apostate. Apostasy is a capital offence under the Muslim laws of 'sharia' enforced in Yemen. After news of the case broke in the international press, Yemeni authorities halted the trial proceedings against Haji. He was transferred on July 17 to Aden's Immigration Jail until resettlement could be finalized by the UNHCR, under which Haji had formal refugee status. One of the politicians who tabled a motion in July 2000 in the British House of Commons was David Atkinson. “Early Day Motion on Mohammed Omer Haji. That this House deplores the death penalty which has been issued from the Aden Tawahi Court in Yemen for the apostasy of the Somali national Mohammed Omer Haji unless he recants his Christian faith and states that he is a Muslim before the judge three times on Wednesday 12th July; deplores that Mr Haji was held in custody for the sole reason that he held to the Christian faith and was severely beaten in custody to the point of not being able to walk; considers it a disgrace that UNHCR officials in Khormaksar stated they were only able to help him if he was a Muslim; and calls on the British Government and international colleagues to make representations immediately at the highest level in Yemen to ensure Mr Haji's swift release and long-term safety and for the repeal of Yemen's barbaric apostate laws.”

Source: http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2007/02/the_ problem_wit_2.html

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=local&id=5031037

Local man accused of terror training
Says he went to Somalia to fight 'jihad'
AP

(2/13/07 - HOUSTON) - A former Houston man arrested in Kenya last month was ordered held without bond Tuesday on charges that he joined with al-Qaeda to help overthrow the Somali government and form an Islamic state there.

Federal officials charged Daniel Joseph Maldonado, 28, a Muslim convert also known as Daniel Aljughaifi and Abu Mohammed, with undergoing military training with a terrorist organization and conspiring to use a destructive device.

Maldonado, a native of Boston, was returned to the United States on Monday night and appeared before U.S. Magistrate Judge Calvin Botley Tuesday afternoon, the U.S. Attorney's office in Houston said. He was ordered held without bond until a detention hearing next week. Nancy Herrera, a spokeswoman for the U.S. attorney's office, said she was unsure whether Maldonado had an attorney yet.

Maldonado's arrest marks the first criminal prosecution of an American suspected of joining terrorists in Somalia, Assistant Attorney General Kenneth Wainstein said in a statement.

According to the criminal complaint, Maldonado traveled from Boston to Houston in August 2005 and left Houston three months later for Cairo, Egypt. By December 2006, the complaint says, he was in Somalia and had joined with the Islamic Courts Union and elements of al-Qaeda to fight in a rebellion designed to overthrow the Somalian government and install an Islamic state.

The complaint says Maldonado was issued an AK-47 rifle and attended two military training camps at which members of al-Qaeda were present.

Maldonado was captured by the Kenyan military on Jan. 21 after two days of fleeing Ethiopian and Somalian forces. He was expelled by Kenya and turned over to U.S. officials for his return to Houston.

Maldonado told FBI agents in Kenya that he went to Somalia to fight "jihad" for a true Islamic government.

"I would be fighting the Somali militia, and that turned into fighting the Ethiopians, and if Americans came, I would fight them too," the complaint quotes Maldonado as telling the agents. He also told the agents he had "no problem" with killing Americans or with the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the U.S.

Although he underwent physical and firearms training with the Islamic Courts Union, he did not finish his training and fight because he contracted malaria. But the complaint says he participated in the interrogation of a flight attendant the group suspected of being a spy. Maldonando told the agents he threatened to kill the flight attendant, who was later killed by others.

(Copyright 2007 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=local&id=5028826

17 Houston-area members of Texas prison gang indicted
AP

(2/13/07 - HOUSTON) - Seventeen Houston-area men accused of being in a prison-based gang face charges of murder, armed robbery and drug trafficking.

Federal authorities say nine of the men already were in prison. Eight others were arrested Monday.

The indictment refers to three murders, two attempted murders, conspiracy to commit murder, five aggravated robberies, trafficking in cocaine and marijuana and of racketeering.

The time frame is August of 1999 through February of 2006.

Fourteen defendants are charged with conspiracy to violate the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization statute, and face up to life in prison if convicted.

The eleven count indictment was returned last week.

All 17 are accused of being members of the Texas Syndicate.

(Copyright 2007 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

Branches to other states, interesting read:

http://www.google.com/search?q=Texas+prison+gang+&client=netscape-pp&rls=com.netscape:en-US

http://www.google.com/search?q=prison-based+gang&client=netscape-pp&rls=com.netscape:en-US

http://www.google.com/search?q=prison-based+gang+Texas&btnG=Search&hl=en&rls=com.netscape%3Aen-US

http://www.google.com/search?q=the+Texas+Syndicate&client=netscape-pp&rls=com.netscape:en-US

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23384294-details/14-year-olds%20studying%20al%20Qaeda%20propaganda%20at%20school/article.do

14-year-olds studying al Qaeda propaganda at school
05.02.07

Osama bin Laden

The report claims that bin Laden's views are not being balanced with opposing views

Pupils as young as 14 are being exposed to Al Qaeda propaganda in history lessons, experts have claimed.

Popular course materials on the 9/11 atocities fail to properly balance Osama bin Laden's rantings with opposing points of view and present "substantial" justification of terrorism.

Historians say the web-based project, produced by the long-established Schools History Project, is a flagrant example of how the subject has been watered down by politically-correct teaching theories which state that children should learn to view the past through different "perspectives".

Another established history course, covering England between 1750 and 1900, either marginalises or completely disregards key figures such as Admiral Nelson, Florence Nightingale, the Duke of Wellington and William Gladstone.

Children instead learn about the American Chief Crowfoot, the Fijian Chief Cakobau, an Aborigine teacher named Bessy Cameron and Josephine Butler, who campaigned against sexually transmitted diseases.

The assault on trendy history teaching comes in an explosive forthcoming book, to be published by the think-tank Civitas, which lays bare how the entire school curriculum has been "corrupted".

It claims that children now learn "skills" and topics which are deemed relevant to their everyday lives instead acquiring a body of knowledge that will help them understand and enjoy crucial subjects.

The devastating critique emerged on the eve of a major shake-up of the secondary school curriculum which is expected to further strip away subject content including key facts and figures.

The Qualifications and Curriculum Authority will launch the revamped curriculum for 11- to 14-year-olds on Monday in a bid to streamline subjects and create more time for classes in the three Rs from 2008.

In history, detailed guidance on landmark British, European and world events is expected to be slashed, although the two world wars, the Holocaust and slavery won a last-minute reprieve.

Meanwhile in science, pupils will debate topical issues such as the MMR vaccine, leading to claims they will be told versions of scientific controversies that are acceptable to the Government.

Science requirements are expected to be slimmed down significantly, with more emphasis on real-world applications and less on knowledge of key topics such as the properties of sound and light.

In the Civitas book, due to be published later in the year with essays from a range of authorities, Chris McGovern claims the history curriculum is increasingly moving away from key personalities, landmarks and events and narrative chronologies of the past.

Pupils are instead required to construct the past for themselves and study the subject through 24 different "perspectives" including gender and ethnic diversity.

GCSE coursework materials on terrorism, produced by the long-established Schools History Project to tie in with the national curriculum, do not provide strong enough condemnation of bin Laden, he claims.

"The material being promoted presents terrorism and its victims as having, broadly speaking, equal points of view" said Mr McGovern, a headmaster and director of the History Curriculum Association.

Out of 13 sources of evidence in the teaching pack, four are about Osama bin Laden, including one that provides extracts from his own words across a range of topics - including his claim that "the vast majority of the sons of the Islamic world were happy about these strikes" - and another that transcribes his views about the 9/11 attacks.

"These two pro-bin Laden sources are 'balanced' only by a fairly neutral biography of bin Laden and by a copy of the FBI wanted poster for him" said Mr McGovern.

Another source, containing 16 extracts from world press reports on the third anniversary of the attacks, fails to represent the US press, he said.

"What is clear is that these teaching materials include substantial evidence to justify terrorism," he added.

Other materials in the series cover "The Kidnapping of Ken Bigley".

Meanwhile a Longman textbook, Minds and Machines: Britain 1750 to 1900, sidelines landmark events such as the Crimean War and instead encourages pupils to empathise with historical figures, and imagine what they would say if they came back from the dead.

"Surely, the story of our national past in the birthright of children in this country" he said. Chris Culpin, director of the Schools History Project, established more than 30 years ago, rejected the criticisms, insisting the materials were balanced.

"The questions do not in any way encourage you to sympathise with the views of bin Laden and are not in any way subversive" he said.

"They are intended to help students examine an extremely interesting current issue and get them to look at the historical roots of current situations."

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23385420-details/Four+terror+suspects+free+after+%27rescue%27+from+Africa/article.do

Four terror suspects free after 'rescue' from Africa
13.02.07

Metropolitan Police

The Metropolitan Police have nine hours to detain the four men (file photo)

Four terror suspects were released on to Britain's streets hours after being rescued by the Government from execution overseas.

Suspected as Jihadists, the men had been interviewed by police.

The four, who are British citizens of North-African origin in their twenties, were seized on the Kenyan border with Somalia by special forces - possibly the SAS, who are known to be operating in the area.

They were reportedly trying to escape from Somalia where they were suspected of fighting in a Jihadi struggle with terrorists linked to Al Qaeda.

The suspects were handed over to the Kenyans, who deported them back to Somalia - where they faced the death penalty from authorities engaged in a violent power struggle with Islamic extremists.

But the men - named by Kenya as Mohammed Ezzouek, Hamza Chentouf, Shah Jehan Janjua and Fesal Afshar Zabequn - were plucked to safety by the Foreign Office consul.

At UK taxpayer's expense, they were flown to Kenya on a special charter flight and then to Brize Norton, Oxfordshire, on an RAF plane.

The four, whose families are believed to have sought sanctuary in the UK, were quizzed under the Terrorism Act by Scotland Yard police for more than eight hours.

But just before 4pm yesterday, they were told there was insufficient evidence to arrest them.

Whitehall sources said they would be kept under surveillance but they will not be placed under control orders, which would allow their movements to be restricted.

The men insist they are innocent, but officials in Kenya's capital Nairobi said none of the four had provided a 'credible' reason for being in Somalia.

Unemployed Ezzouek, 22, had told his mother he was in Egypt studying at a Koranic school. The decision to bring them back was met with bewilderment.

Tory homeland security spokesman Patrick Mercer said the Government was 'wishing another problem' upon Britain, adding: 'I just find it amazing that we bring back people apparently bent on Jihad. It really does beggar belief.

'These people will now certainly be another burden upon the taxpayer. But they have also been linked to terrorism overseas.

'We do not have the resources to cope with them. I would be very interested to hear from the Government why they have brought this problem back to our shores.'

The Foreign Office was contacted by the Somalian authorities after the men were deported from Kenya.

Diplomats tried to free them after their lawyer Louise Christian warned publicly they faced torture, arbitrary detention and execution.

Officials in Nairobi suspect some, if not all, were caught up with Somali Islamists accused by the U.S. of training Al Qaeda operatives.

The Britons are suspected by the Kenyans to have fought with Somalia's Islamic movement.

None of the Britons is said to have been armed when they were held by Kenyan police on January 20 as they stumbled out the bush at Kiunga, a fishing village, although one is believed to have been suffering from a bullet wound to the foot.

The Kenyans said they were trying to reach the tropical island of Lamu, part of an archipelago used by Al Qaeda supporters in the past.

The four were said to have been among 15 arrested men who claimed to have walked up to 300 miles from the Somali capital Mogadishu after Ethiopian troops drove Islamist forces from the city.

They were caught after fleeing U.S. airstrikes on a suspected terrorist hideout and an Al Qaeda commander in southern Somalia in January.

Several Britons are said to have been among those in the shelter when it was repeatedly hit by U.S. Special Forces AC-130 gunships at the remote village of Hayo, near the border with Kenya, and then by follow-up attacks on other targets by helicopters.

Ethiopia's Prime Minister Meles Zenawi had claimed several Britons were also killed, injured or captured with other foreign fighters during battles with his country's troops, who invaded Somalia in December to prevent an Islamic movement from ousting the weak government.

The SAS are patrolling the Kenyan border to trap terrorists fleeing American forces.

Ezzouek's mother Malaka said: 'He has done nothing wrong. My son is innocent. He is not an extremist.'

She said the family's London home near Paddington Green police station was raided by police, who removed a computer and photos of her son on holiday in Morocco.

She said he travelled to Egypt in September after she paid his airfare. Neighbours said he had become a devout Muslim about two years ago.

Chentouf is understood to live with his family in the Westbourne Park area of west London. Janjua, 22, is believed to be from Feltham, West London.
!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.