Dan McLaughlin's Timeline of Islamic Expansion In The Dark Ages

From: RedState

Let me put down here some facts that are worth returning to from time to time, as arguments over the history of Islam and Islamism are back in the news with today’s beheading in London. In debates over the history of tension between Muslims and Christians, the Crusades are often cited, out of their historical context, as the original cause of such clashes, as if both sides were peaceably minding their own business before imperialist Westerners decided to go launch a religious war in Muslim lands.

This is not what actually happened, and indeed it is ahistorical to treat the fragmented feudal states of the West in the Eleventh Century as capable of any such thing as imperialism or colonialism (although, as Victor Davis Hanson has noted, even in the centuries after the fall of Rome, Western civilization retained a superior logistical ability to project force overseas due to the scientific, economic and military legacies of ancient Greece and Rome). Moreover, when Islam first arose, much of what we think of today as Islamic ‘territory’ in Anatolia, the Levant and North Africa was Christian until conquered by the heirs of Muhammad, such that speaking of one side’s incursions into the other’s territory requires you to ignore how that territory was seized in the first place. That entire region had been part of the Roman and later Byzantine empires, and was culturally part of the West until it was conquered by Muslim arms – Rome is closer geographically to Tripoli than to London, Madrid is closer to Casablanca than to Berlin, Athens is closer to Damascus than to Paris.

Liberals and Islam

From: Family Security Matters

Daniel Greenfield penned a perceptive and welcome critique, "What the Left Does not Understand About Islam" (February 15th), of the cluelessness of the Left vis-à-vis Islam. The Left, he writes, is naïve about its rival ideology, and ideologically will always remain naïve. The Left, he writes, has never been able to think outside of the cardboard box it has built for itself.

The left has never adapted to the transition from nationalistic wars to ideological wars. It took the left a while to grasp that the Nazis were a fundamentally different foe than [sic] the Kaiser and that pretending that World War 2 was another war for the benefit of colonialists and arms dealers was the behavior of deluded lunatics. And yet much of the left insisted on approaching the war in just that fashion, and had Hitler not attacked Stalin, it might have remained stuck there.

From my own observations, what the Left refused to acknowledge was that it was Hitler's Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan, and Soviet Russia that behaved like unrepentant imperialists and colonialists, invading and conquering other nations for all the loot they could lay hands on. It was the consistent kneejerk evasion of that fact which demoted the Left from a noisy avante- garde to a commune of deluded lunatics. Greenfield goes on to remark:

Muslim Brotherhood website demands that West criminalize 'assaults' on Islam

From: The Times of Israel

Without the “criminalization of assaults on the sanctities of all heavenly religions,” the Muslim 

Brotherhood warned on Thursday, insults to Islam “will continue to cause devout Muslims across the world to suspect and even loathe the West, especially the USA.”

The remarks were part of a statement posted on the English-language website of the Brotherhood in response to a trailer for a new film, which the Egyptian ruling party says is insulting to Islam.

Since the publication of the trailer earlier this week, violent anti-American riots have been raging at US diplomatic missions throughout the Middle East. In Benghazi, Libya, the American ambassador and three others were killed in a violent takeover of the consulate, and in Cairo and Sanaa, enraged mobs converged on the US embassies.

According to the statement, “one and a half billion Muslims [were] subjected to humiliation and abuse in the person of their leader, Mohammed, the Messenger of God, the Prophet of Islam,” due to the film.

The statement cited bigotry and hatred as motives for “repeated abuse,” and denounced as “ignorant” those who permit the abuse — a reference to Western authorities. Islam guarantees all people freedom of belief and freedom of opinion and expression, the statement said, but these freedoms should not extend to attacks on Islam.

“They are crimes and assaults against Muslim sanctities and must not be tolerated by the countries where they are produced or launched.”

The statement cited restrictions on Holocaust denial as an example of legislation that prohibits offensive speech, and suggested that laws should be passed that criminalize insults to Islam. Although legislation against Holocaust denial is in place in Europe, the US does not have similar laws.

According to the statement, Western condemnation of the film would not have been issued were it not for the riots. ”[The West] never made a move regarding the abuse [film] until after the strong reaction seen across the Muslim world,” the statement said.

The Muslim Brotherhood condemned the “bloodshed and violent response” of recent days, but asserted that Muslim peoples and governments had the right to peacefully and legally condemn “this new violation and heinous attack” — a reference to the film — and “to take appropriate action to deter repeats of such acts of barbaric aggression.”

“Those who insult the sanctities wish to poison budding relations between the peoples, to disrupt the efforts to build bridges between civilizations, and to sow discord between the peoples,” the statement said.

'Nigeria’s Christians must convert,' says Islamist group

From: Christian News

Islamist militants have claimed responsibility for the deaths of more than 50 people in north-central Nigeria – and called on the country’s Christians to convert to Islam.

Boko Haram spokesman Abu Qaqa, issued a statement that the Islamist group carried out the attacks on more than a dozen villages last weekend and said it will continue to attack the country’s Christians.

According to the statement: “Christians in Nigeria should accept Islam, that is true religion, or they will never have peace.

“We do not regard them as trusted Christians as some illiterates are campaigning because it was Christians that first declared war on Muslims with the support of government.”

Violence in Plateau state last weekend was blamed on members of the predominantly Muslim Fulani ethnic group, which attacked Christian tribes in the region in March 2010 due to political and social tensions.

According to a Red Cross statement issued late 1 July, aid workers counted 58 dead – but other estimates place the number higher. Press Trust of India reporters stationed in the capital Abuja stated that 135 people were killed.

In the statement Boko Haram thanked God for the massacre: “We praise God in this war for Prophet Mohammed, we thank Allah for the successful attack in... [the] Plateau state on Christians and security men.”

Speaking to Catholic charity Aid to the Church in Need last month Bishop Martin Igwe Uzoukwu Minna said: “If we have to die for Christ, we will die for Christ, but why should we be forced to make the choice?”

Nigeria’s bishops have repeatedly called for Christians not to retaliate – but following the bombing of three churches on 17th June Muslim shops were targeted by Christians.

Aid to the Church in Need is calling for prayer for the country during this time of crisis.

ACN spokesperson Patricia Hatton said: “Church sources in the country have alerted us to the scale of the problems faced by Christians in the north.

“Please remember Nigeria and its Christian community in your prayers – and please pray for peace.”

Sodomy "For the Sake of Islam"

From: The Gatestone Institute

As a possibly convenient way of rationalizing what one desires while still being able to feel "pure," anything and everything that is otherwise banned becomes permissible. All that supposedly matters is one's intention, or niyya.

Not only did the original "underwear bomber" Abdullah Hassan al-Asiri hide explosives in his rectum to assassinate Saudi Prince Muhammad bin Nayef—they met in 2009 after the 22-year-old holy warrior "feigned repentance for his jihadi views"—but al-Asiri apparently had fellow jihadis repeatedly sodomize him to "widen" his anus in order to accommodate the explosives— all in accordance with the fatwas [religious edicts] of Islamic clerics.

A 2010 Arabic news video that is making the rounds on the Internet gives the details. Apparently a cleric, one Abu al-Dema al-Qasab, informed jihadis of an "innovative and unprecedented way to execute martyrdom operations: place explosive capsules in your anus. However, to undertake this jihadi approach you must agree to be sodomized for a while to widen your anus so it can hold the explosives."

Others inquired further by asking for formal fatwas. Citing his desire for "martyrdom and the virgins of paradise," one jihadi, (possibly al-Asiri himself) asked another sheikh, "Is it permissible for me to let one of the jihadi brothers sodomize me to widen my anus if the intention is good?"

After praising Allah, the sheikh's fatwa began by declaring that sodomy is forbidden in Islam,

Son of Hamas: 'Time to Expose Muhammad'

From: Jerusalem Post

Mosab Hassan Yousef stepped out of the airport terminal in a dark suit and tie, looking every inch the Hollywood darling. It’s perhaps not surprising then, that his close friend and the man who accompanied him on his trip to Israel this month, is producer and actor Sam Feuer.  Feuer played the role of Yousef Romano in Steven Spielberg’s Munich, a movie about the aftermath of the Black September. Full of intrigue, spies, and clandestine operations—not to mention terror attacks on Israeli citizens—the plot of Spielberg’s cloak-and-dagger movie is not unlike Mosab’s own life as a secret agent.

Most people know the story by now, so I’ll be brief: In 1978, Mosab is born to the son of one of Hamas’ seven founders, Sheikh Hassan Yousef. Prepped to follow in his father’s footsteps and become a terrorist, Mosab starts asking questions until gradually, over the years, he becomes convinced that the ways of Hamas cannot be the truth. He subsequently converts to Christianity. He becomes an agent for Shin Bet. The intelligence he provides prevents terror attacks and leads to the incarceration of Hamas terrorists. In 2007, he leaves the West Bank in favor of the west coast. He gains political asylum in the US and remains there before coming back to Israel for a surprise visit last month.

Something about his life story—and indeed, certain aspects of his personality, including the fearless chutzpah with which he deceived Hamas—is distinctly reminiscent of Frank Abagnale, the real-life protagonist of yet another of Spielberg’s classics, Catch Me If You Can. But unlike the notorious confidence trickster, the former Shin Bet agent did not do what he did to advance his own interests (and neither did he forge millions of dollars worth of checks.) In his own words, Mosab Yousef did what he did in order “to save lives.”

Upon first meeting Yousef, there were a number of things I was curious to discover about his personality. Is he naïve or a realist? Is he extraordinarily foolish or extraordinarily brave? Has playing with fire become a way of life for him or does he take risks out of a sense of moral duty? More than once I was asked by other people, “Is he normal?” Considering the mind-boggling events that have shaped the life of Hamas’ prodigal son, the question is forgivable.

Normal or not, one thing about Mosab Yousef is that he is no politician. When asked whether he has any political aspirations, Yousef answers with a categorical “no.” Given his personality, his answer is hardly surprising. Yousef doesn’t seem to have a single trait that is conducive to being a politician. He has no sense of political correctness, and even though he is polite and refined, he lacks the diplomatic airs and graces of successful politicians. With utmost sincerity and an almost child-like earnestness, Yousef simply states the truth as he sees it.   

When one considers that his upbringing was entrenched in a black-and-white value system (Israel is evil, destroying the Jewish State and its citizens is a divinely righteous pursuit, and so on), Yousef’s 180 degree turnaround seems rather miraculous. But then again, perhaps it is precisely because of his black-and-white upbringing that Yousef is now able to view things in such an uncomplicated manner, untainted by the confusion and ideals that so often color Western sensibilities.

Devoid of underlying messages or double entendre, he states his opinions eloquently.  “I love Israel because Israel is a democratic country,” he has said on more than one occasion. Attending a panel on Israel’s future borders at the President’s conference last month in Jerusalem, Yousef loudly applauded the following statement from one of the panelists: “The issue is not whether the world can accept the Jews’ right to this land. The issue is whether Jews will accept their right to this land.” Regarding sovereignty, Yousef maintains an unequivocal party line: “All I can say is that the Israeli historic right to this land is obvious and clear to any person who can read.”

At a press conference a few days prior, Yousef caused a flurry with his explosive comments. “Islam is not a religion of peace, it is a religion of war,” he said. “If people don’t see the truth we will keep spinning an empty cycle of violence.”

But he balances his bombastic remarks by adding that Muslims themselves are a peaceful people. The problem, according to Yousef, is that most Muslims are not educated enough about their religion. “Out of 1.6 billion Muslims, perhaps only 300 million actually understand the language of the Koran,” he said. This is because for most Muslims, Islam is far more than a religion – “it is an identity and culture, it is everything they know.” He further posited that a full understanding of the text and of Mohammed’s life necessarily leads Muslims towards extremism and terrorism. According to Yousef, anyone who studies the life and the behavior of the prophet will arrive at the conclusion that Islam is a religion of war.

Yousef declares, “It is time to expose the life of Muhammed.”

Finland's War on Free Speech

From: Gatestone Institute

"Stating of facts cannot and must not be criminal, even if they offend someone." — Jussi Kristian Halla-aho, Finnish blogger convicted of defaming Islam.

Finland's Supreme Court has found a prominent politician guilty of defaming Islam for "Islamophobic" comments he made on his personal blog.

The ruling represents a major setback for free speech in a Europe that is becoming increasingly stifled by politically correct restrictions on free speech, particularly on issues related to Islam and Muslim immigration.

The Helsinki-based Supreme Court ruled on June 8 that Finns Party MP Jussi Kristian Halla-aho was guilty of "inciting hatred against an ethnic group" for blog posts he made in 2008 which compared Islam to paedophilia, and for sarcastic comments which insinuated that immigrants from Somalia are predisposed to stealing and living off welfare.

In its ruling, the court said that hate speech does not fall under the protections afforded by the freedom of speech, even though Halla-aho said his comments were a protest against public policy and not against Islam and Mohammed per se.

Halla-aho, who has become well known in Finland and elsewhere for his well-argued essays criticizing multiculturalism and runaway immigration, was ordered to pay a hefty fine and delete the comments from his blog.

Halla-aho maintains a blog called Scripta, which deals with issues such as "immigration, multiculturalism, tolerance, racism, freedom of speech and political correctness." His blog attracts thousands of readers every day, and the Tampere-based newspaper Aamulehti has described him the best-known political blogger in Finland. Halla-aho's notoriety has placed the guardians of Finnish multiculturalism on maximum alert.

In a blog post in June 2008, Halla-aho wrote that the Islamic prophet Mohammed was a paedophile, and that Islam is a religion of paedophilia because Mohammed had sexual intercourse with his wife, Aisha, when she was only nine years old.

According to Halla-aho: "This sentence is related to a discussion where I criticize the idea of the subjective offensiveness of some sentence as being sufficient criteria for its judicial offensiveness. In other words, if some group is offended by sentence X, sentence X is illegal irrespective of whether it is true or not. In my opinion, stating of facts cannot and must not be criminal, even if they offend someone. This is also a problem of equality. For example, a Muslim is offended by criticism of his religion far more easily than an average Christian. If subjective offensiveness suffices as the elements of a crime, the law protects a Muslim with greater force than it protects a Christian."

He continued: "My sentences about Mohammed and Islam were not opinions, but inescapably logical conclusions based on known facts. I did not use the word 'paedophile' as psychopathological concept, but in its popular meaning of a person having sex with children. The traditional Muslim knowledge, the Hadith literature, tells us that Mohammed had sex with his wife Aisha when she was nine years old. A nine-year-old is seen as a child today, and physically she was a child in 7th century, no matter what her judicial status was.

Therefore, if Mohammed had sex with Aisha and Aisha was a child, Mohammed had sex with a child. That Mohammed is a holy figure to Muslims cannot make him immune to criticism in West, especially if criticism is based on undisputed facts."

In another post, Halla-aho responded to a Finnish columnist who wrote that drinking excessively and fighting when drunk were cultural and possibly genetic characteristics of Finns. In order to show the double standards of such arguments, Halla-aho asked sarcastically if it could be stated that robbing passersby and living at the expense of taxpayers are cultural and possibly genetic characteristics of Somalis.

According to Halla-aho, "I turned the newspaper Kaleva's sentence into parody where 'Finns' were replaced by 'Somalis.' My hypothesis was that Somalis are under the special protection of the media and government officials, and my argument is that what is permissible to present about Finns becomes impermissible when it is about Somalis. My own version was as follows: 'Robbing passers-by and living as parasites on tax money is the national, maybe even genetic characteristic of Somalis.'"

"I Own the World" Owns the New York Times

I saw this and had to share it.

FROM: I OWN THE WORLD

Have you seen this ad?

U.S. State Department Actively Promoting Islam in Europe

From: Stonegate Institute

The United States ambassador to Spain recently met with a group of Muslim immigrants in one of the most Islamized neighborhoods of Barcelona to apologize for American foreign policymaking in the Middle East.

U.S. Ambassador Alan Solomont told Muslims assembled at the town hall-like meeting in the heart of Barcelona's old city that the United States is not an "enemy of Islam" and that U.S. President Barack Obama wants to improve America's image in the Middle East as quickly as possible by closing the "dark chapters" of the U.S. invasion of Iraq and the war in Afghanistan.

"There are things that the United States has done badly," Solomont said at the February 28 gathering organized by a non-profit organization called the Cultural, Educational and Social Association of Pakistani Women. "But now the Obama government wants to improve relations with Muslims," he promised.

During the one-and-a-half-hour question-and-answer session, Solomont asked those in attendance simple rhetorical questions, including: "Did you know that the United States sends a lot of money to Pakistan?" and "Did you know that the decision to destroy Osama bin Laden's house was made by the United States?"

After responding to queries about the "Talibanization of Pakistan due the war in Afghanistan" and the "demonization of Islam in the West," Solomont said Obama wants to end the long-time American practice of establishing alliances with dictators in the Middle East, a strategy which he said has failed to prevent the rise of "the bearded ones" [radical Islamists], this according to the Barcelona-based newspaper La Vanguardia, which also interviewed Solomont on the sidelines of the event.

The Barcelona meeting, which was held in a Muslim ghetto called Raval (a.k.a. Ravalistan because Muslim immigrants now make up 45% of the barrio's total population), is an example of the Obama administration's so-called Muslim Outreach.

The U.S. State Department -- working through American embassies and consulates in Europe -- has been stepping-up its efforts to establish direct contacts with largely unassimilated Muslim immigrant communities in towns and cities across Europe.

Proponents of Obama's approach to public diplomacy -- some elements of which originated with his immediate predecessor -- say it is part of a "counter-radicalization" strategy which aims to prevent radical Muslims with European passports from carrying out terrorist attacks against the United States.

A key component of the strategy is to "empower" Muslims who can help build a "counter-narrative" to that of terrorists. In practice, however, Obama ideologues are crisscrossing Europe on U.S. taxpayer funded trips to "export" failed American approaches to multiculturalism, affirmative action, cultural diversity and special rights for minorities.

Further, American diplomats are repeatedly apologizing to Muslims in Europe for a multitude of real or imagined slights against Islam, and the U.S. State Department is now spending millions of dollars each year actively promoting Islam -- including Islamic Sharia law -- on the continent.

In Ireland, for example, the U.S. Embassy in Dublin recently sponsored a seminar ostensibly designed to help Muslim immigrants increase their influence within the Irish business and financial communities.

The opening speech at the event was delivered by Imam Hussein Halawa of the Islamic Cultural Center of Ireland, despite the fact that leaked U.S. State Department cables show that the U.S. government has known for many years that Halawi is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood and serves as the right-hand man of the radical Egyptian cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi.

Halawa, an Egyptian immigrant who has dedicated his life to the cause of introducing Islamic Sharia law in Europe, told those in attendance that the main purpose of the conference was to bring the Irish banking system into conformity with Islamic legal principles. U.S. Ambassador Dan Rooney, a lifelong Republican turned Obama acolyte, said at the same conference that the United States was a "solid partner" behind Halawa's venture.

In Austria, the U.S. Embassy in Vienna sponsored a film contest in February on the theme of "Diversity and Tolerance" aimed at teaching wayward Austrians that they should show respect for Muslim immigrants who refuse to integrate into their society.

Ambassador William Eacho, an Obama campaign fundraiser turned political appointee, awarded the first prize to a group of students in the northern Austrian town of Steyr who produced a one-minute silent film promoting tolerance for Muslim women who wear Islamic face-covering veils such as burkas in public spaces.

Obama and his team may think they know what is best for Europeans, but according to recent polls, more than 70% of Austrians are in favor of a law that would ban the burka.

In Belgium, U.S. Ambassador Howard Gutman, another Obama fundraiser turned diplomat, told lawyers attending a conference in Brussels in November 2011 that Israel is to blame for Muslim anti-Semitism in Europe.

According to the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronot, Gutman, who is Jewish, showed conference attendees a video of himself receiving a warm welcome at a Muslim school in Brussels, which he said proved that Muslims are not anti-Semitic. Following a barrage of criticism for rationalizing the growing problem of anti-Semitism in Europe, the U.S. Embassy in Belgium removed the evidence by uploading an amended transcript of Gutman's remarks on its website.

In France, the U.S. Embassy in Paris co-sponsored a seminar to teach Muslims in France how they can politically organize themselves. Operatives from the Democratic Party coached 70 Muslim "diversity leaders" from disaffected Muslim-majority suburban slums known as banlieues on how to develop a communications strategy, raise funds and build a political base.

The French government -- which has been trying to reverse the pernicious effects of decades of state-sponsored multiculturalism -- expressed dismay at what it called "meddling."

The Obama administration's Muslim-oriented coaching sessions on community organizing come as the Persian Gulf Emirate of Qatar is busy peddling the fundamentalist teachings of Wahhabi Islam -- which not only discourages Muslim integration into the West, but actively encourages jihad [holy war] against non-Muslims -- to hundreds of thousands of disgruntled Muslim immigrants in France.

As the Obamans and the Wahhabis compete for influence among Muslim immigrants, forward-looking analysts fret that France may yet end up with politically organized jihadists turning the banlieues into Islamic emirates.

In Norway, where Muslim immigrants already have more rights than native Norwegians, the U.S. Embassy in Oslo organized a "dialogue meeting" designed to "empower" Muslim immigrant women in the country.

According to the Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten, Obama's special envoy to the Muslim world, Farah Pandith, castigated the Norwegian government's integration policies as being insufficiently fair to Muslim immigrants. She also told Norwegians that Muslims are "more free to practice Islam in the United States than in any other country in the world." Conservative Party leader Erna Solberg said Norway has much to learn from the Americans.

In Britain, U.S. embassy employees in London frequently conduct outreach to help "empower" the Muslims across the country. According to a leaked U.S. diplomatic cable, for example, Ambassador Louis Susman "engages with U.K. Muslim communities regularly…he has spoken to Muslim groups in Wales and Scotland, visited the London Central Mosque, and hosted an interfaith breakfast at his residence, among other activities."

Susman has come under fire for visiting another London mosque, namely the East London Mosque, which is one of the most extreme Islamic institutions in Britain. Built with money from Saudi Arabia to propagate Wahhabi Islam, the sprawling facility is home to the London Muslim Center, which the U.S. government has long known is a haven for Islamic extremists. During his visit, Susman spoke of his "great admiration" for the mosque and his enthusiasm for meeting its staff.

According to the leaked cable, "Having the U.S. Ambassador visit and listen respectfully to Muslim points of view has an enormous impact on groups that often feel marginalized and ignored."

Not a Single Christian Church Left in Afghanistan

From: CNSnews.com

There is not a single, public Christian church left in Afghanistan, according to the U.S. State Department.

This reflects the state of religious freedom in that country ten years after the United States first invaded it and overthrew its Islamist Taliban regime.

In the intervening decade, U.S. taxpayers have spent $440 billion to support Afghanistan's new government and more than 1,700 U.S. military personnel have died serving in that country.

The last public Christian church in Afghanistan was razed in March 2010, according to the Statet Department's latest International Religious Freedom Report. The report, which was released last month and covers the period of July 1, 2010 through December 31, 2010, also states that “there were no Christian schools in the country.”

“There is no longer a public Christian church; the courts have not upheld the church's claim to its 99-year lease, and the landowner destroyed the building in March [2010],” reads the State Department report on religious freedom. “[Private] chapels and churches for the international community of various faiths are located on several military bases, PRTs [Provincial Reconstruction Teams], and at the Italian embassy. Some citizens who converted to Christianity as refugees have returned.”

In recent times, freedom of religion has declined in Afghanistan, according to the State Department.

“The government’s level of respect for religious freedom in law and in practice declined during the reporting period, particularly for Christian groups and individuals,” reads the State Department report.

“Negative societal opinions and suspicion of Christian activities led to targeting of Christian groups and individuals, including Muslim converts to Christianity," said the report. "The lack of government responsiveness and protection for these groups and individuals contributed to the deterioration of religious freedom.”

Most Christians in the country refuse to “state their beliefs or gather openly to worship,” said the State Department.

More than 1,700 U.S. military personnel have died serving in the decade-old Afghanistan war, according to CNSNews.com’s database of all U.S. casualties in Afghanistan. A September audit released jointly by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction and the State Department’s Office of Inspector General, found that the U.S. government will spend at least $1.7 billion to support the civilian effort from 2009-2011.

According to that report, the $1.7 billion excludes additional security costs, which the report says the State Department priced at about $491 million.

A March 2011 report by the Congressional Research Service showed that overall the United States has spent more than $440 billion in the Afghanistan war. Christian aid from the international community has also gone to aid the Afghan government.

Nevertheless, according to the State Department, the lack of non-Muslim religious centers in Afghanistan can be blamed in part on a “strapped government budget,” which is primarily fueled by the U.S. aid.

“There were no explicit restrictions for religious minority groups to establish places of worship and training of clergy to serve their communities,” says the report, “however, very few public places of worship exist for minorities due to a strapped government budget.”

The report acknowledged that Afghanistan’s post-Taliban constitution, which was ratified with the help of U.S. mediation in 2004, can be contradictory when it comes to the free exercise of religion.

While the new constitution states that Islam is the “religion of the state” and that “no law can be contrary to the beliefs and provisions of the sacred religion of Islam,” it also proclaims that “followers of other religions are free to exercise their faith and perform their religious rites within the limits of the provisions of the law.”

However, “the right to change one’s religion was not respected either in law or in practice,” according to the State Department.

“Muslims who converted away from Islam risked losing their marriages, rejection from their families and villages, and loss of jobs,” according to the report. “Legal aid for imprisoned converts away from Islam remains difficult due to the personal objection of Afghan lawyers to defend apostates.”

The report does note that “in recent years neither the national nor local authorities have imposed criminal penalties on coverts from Islam.” The report says that “conversion from Islam is considered apostasy and is punishable by death under some interpretations of Islamic rule in the country.”

Also, in recent years, the death punishment for blasphemy “has not been carried out,” according to the State Department.

According to the State Department report, the United States continues to promote religious freedom in Afghanistan--even though the country no longer has even one Christian church.

“The U.S. government regularly discusses religious freedom with government officials as part of its overall policy to promote human rights,” according to the report.

According to the State Department report, more than 99 percent of the population, estimated between 24 and 33 million people, is either Sunni (80 percent) or Shia (19 percent) Muslim. Non-Muslim religious groups, including the estimated 500 to 8,000 strong Christian community in the country, make up less than 1 percent of the population. Other non-Muslim groups in the country are Sikhs, Bahais, and Hindus.

The Silent Extermination of Iraq’s ‘Christian Dogs’

From: Front Page Magazine

Last week an Iraqi Muslim scholar issued a fatwa that, among other barbarities, asserts that “it is permissible to spill the blood of Iraqi Christians.” Inciting as the fatwa is, it is also redundant. While last October’s Baghdad church attack which killed some sixty Christians is widely known—actually receiving some MSM coverage—the fact is, Christian life in Iraq has been a living hell ever since U.S. forces ousted the late Saddam Hussein in 2003.

Among other atrocities, beheading and crucifying Christians are not irregular occurrences; messages saying “you Christian dogs, leave or die,” are typical. Islamists see the church as an “obscene nest of pagans” and threaten to “exterminate Iraqi Christians.” John Eibner, CEO of Christian Solidarity International, summarized the situation well in a recent letter to President Obama:

The threat of extermination is not empty. Since the collapse of Saddam Hussein’s regime, more than half the country’s Christian population has been forced by targeted violence to seek refuge abroad or to live away from their homes as internally displaced people. According to the Hammurabi Human Rights Organization, over 700 Christians, including bishops and priests, have been killed and 61 churches have been bombed. Seven years after the commencement of Operation Iraqi Freedom, Catholic Archbishop Louis Sako of Kirkuk reports: “He who is not a Muslim in Iraq is a second-class citizen. Often it is necessary to convert or emigrate, otherwise one risks being killed.” This anti-Christian violence is sustained by a widespread culture of Muslim supremacism that extends far beyond those who pull the triggers and detonate the bombs.

ex cathedra: Crusader?

ex cathedra: Crusader?

One of the rules of the current PC regime is that the Crusades were evil Western invasions of Muslim lands, for which we should ashamed and for which current retaliation is understandable.

Is there an instance where the question of whether the fault lies in the West or elsewhere and it does NOT belong with the West?

The Islamization of Chechnya

From: American Thinker

A recent report by Human Rights Watch (HRW), entitled "You Dress According To Their Rules," should highlight the growing need for policymakers in Moscow to counter the increasing entrenchment of Shair'a in Chechen society.

HRW's analysis documents extensively the enforcement of Islamic law vis-à-vis women's rights in Chechnya, as part of Chechen President Ramzan Akhmadovich Kadyrov's "Campaign for Female Virtue." In fact, Kadyrov, who was first appointed president of the Chechen Republic by the Kremlin in February 2007, has never disguised his advocacy for Shari'a. Soon after becoming president, he defended polygamy as part of Chechen tradition, and in 2009, he praised the male relatives of seven young women, whom they shot in the head and dumped by a roadside as part of a series of honor killings. Speaking to journalists on a Friday afternoon outside a mosque in Grozny, the capital of the Chechen Republic, Kadyrov said that the women had "loose morals," thereby deserving death, and that "no one can tell us not to be Muslims." Even so, polygamy and honor killings are unambiguously prohibited according to Article 14 of the third chapter of the Family Code of the Russian Federation.

U.S. Muslims Shouldn’t Talk With FBI Unless They Have a Lawyer, Activist Tells Senators

From: CNSnews.com

A Muslim civil rights activist told Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) that she stands by the advice posted on her Web site that tells Muslims not to speak with the FBI or other law enforcement personnel unless a lawyer is present.
Kyl said he was “stunned” that Farhana Khera, president and executive director of Muslim Advocates, would “issue those kind of instructions,” given the connection between many domestic terror attacks and radical Islam and the importance of cooperation from American Muslims to help thwart those attacks.

“I would think that Muslim Americans would feel a special obligation to help intelligence agencies root this out,” Kyl said Tuesday at a hearing on the civil rights of American Muslims held by the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Human Rights.

Taqiyya and American Education

From: American Thinker

We are all familiar with the historical idea of hand-to-hand combat. Whether it is knights on chargers, samurai warriors, or American Special Forces operators, there is something palpable and visceral about traditional combat. It is an in-your-face reality that the mind readily grasps because the fundamental rules of engagement are self-evident and the existential hazards are clear. But there is a kind of warfare that doesn't fit that mold, a warfare that is much more subtle and far more difficult to recognize. Though its goal is destruction, it is characterized by deception rather than confrontation. It is called taqiyya.

Taqiyya is an Arabic word that refers to the practice of concealing from your enemy what is truly in your heart. [1] Muhammad used taqiyya to defeat non-Muslim tribes during the Battle of the Trench in 627 AD, and he authorized its use in connection with the murder of a poet he didn't like by the name of Kab bin al-Ashruf. According to Islamic scripture, Allah himself is considered to be the "best deceiver" (Koran 3:54), and the Koran specifically approves of deception as a way to conquer unbelievers whenever Islamic military power cannot achieve victory through open warfare (verses 3:28, 2:173; 2:185; 4:29; 22:78; 40:28).

In the United States today, certain factions of Islam are actively practicing taqiyya.[2] They are well funded, politically protected, and deeply embedded in the fabric of our society. I don't mean the New Black Panther Party and the Nation of Islam, who swagger across the national landscape because of their friendship with the Obama administration. Those organizations openly subvert our Judeo-Christian values, but they lack the subtlety to practice taqiyya. I mean the people and organizations that secretly front for the Saudis, whose toxic brand of Wahabi Islam is actively subverting both the public and private sectors of this country. [3]

Of particular importance is America's educational system, because that is our soft underbelly. Every parent knows that children learn by a process of monkey see monkey do, so it doesn't require a rocket scientist to understand that when children are exposed to propaganda they don't come away knowing the truth. In a frightening essay entitled What You Need to Know About Islamic Jihad, Madeline Brooks observes that in America today,

Access to our own history has been blocked by politically correct forces in our educational system. At the college and graduate level, there is deliberate misinformation, funded by the Wahabis. Ultra-rich Saudi Wahabists endow universities with billions of dollars in order to spread ideas that deny radical Islam, undermine American values, and teach a blind hatred of Israel ... Departments of Middle East studies and foreign policy were established with Saudi oil money ... Jihad is ludicrously misrepresented as "a sort of yoga"... The brain and central nervous system of America, its collective academic mind, has been targeted since the 1970's for infiltration ... The germ of disinformation about jihad was cultivated in professors and their students, who then spread it to the worlds of the media, secondary education, government and even the military. A fake tolerance, based on ignorance, has become the ruling paradigm ... Soft jihad infiltrates education. Whether it is textbooks, curriculum, classroom exercises, film screenings, speakers or teacher training, public education in America is under assault.

For proof of Ms. Brooks' charges, one need only look at the recent controversy in Texas, where the state Board of Education announced (in language of studied neutrality) that the history textbook used in public schools was guilty of offending "Texas law with respect to treatment of the world's major religious groups by significant inequalities of coverage" in favor of Islam. In California, too, Islam and Islamic cultures are portrayed in favorable terms, while Western civilization and its Judeo-Christian traditions are deliberately disparaged. If these pro-Islamic schoolbooks were factual and truthful, there might be no ground for complaint. But they are chock full of the kind of lies and distortions that would make Hitler's propaganda minister sit up and take notice.

To a certain extent, the increasing sway of Arabs over our educational system reflects the lamentable influence of petrodollars in our economy. Textbooks are moneymakers and so are legitimate economic targets, but that doesn't explain the subversion of our history and social studies curricula. Publishers can make as much money publishing truthful accounts of Western civilization as they can by publishing pseudo-historical narratives. To understand the pro-Islamic perversions in our school textbooks, we must understand taqiyya.

Taqiyya is nothing less than stealth jihad, part of the traditional Islamic imperative to dominate all nations and all peoples. [4] Since the Wahabi Arabs are not in a position to defeat the United States militarily, they use taqiyya. Like Lenin, they recognize the strategic importance of molding the minds of the young if they are to beat the West. By insinuating half truths and untruths into our school curricula, they deprive our children of the knowledge they need to defend themselves from subversion and Islamic domination. As one member of the Texas State Board of Education put it, "If you can control or influence our education system, you can start taking over the minds of the young people."

As alarming as this statement is, it is not just the product of fanciful or paranoid thinking.

According to a 2008 study of American history textbooks by Gilbert Sewall of the American Textbook Council, the Arabs have acquired such influence over the content of American history textbooks that the "Islam-related lessons ... present an incomplete and confected view of Islam that misrepresents its foundations and [its] challenges to international security." In connection with the Texas school book controversy, for example, Sewall noted that Arab-influenced "textbooks routinely doctor the meaning of jihad (or fail to cover it) and that Muslim intolerance/military aggression, (is) soft-pedaled or excised."

In conjunction with this pro-Islamic deceit in our classrooms is the denigration of Western civilization and American history. The Western tradition of individual freedom to unfold one's life in the highest and best way possible is antithetical to the totalitarian doctrine of submission, from which Islam takes its name. [5] If America is to survive in freedom, it must shake itself out of the deadly lethargy that allows taqiyya to be practiced in our schools. Reclaiming our children's education is the precondition to securing our nation's future. As David Solway recently said, we must "instruct ourselves, recognize that we are involved in a war for our very survival as a civilization, know who the enemy is, and be prepared to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent our ultimate eclipse." In the end, it is up to us to defeat the deception that can lead to our destruction.

____________________

1. According to the authoritative Arabic text, Al-Taqiyya Fi Al-Islam: "Taqiyya [deception] is of fundamental importance in Islam. Practically every Islamic sect agrees to it and practices it. We can go so far as to say that the practice of taqiyya is mainstream in Islam, and that those few sects not practicing it are out of the mainstream."

2. An example of Taqiyya in action can be seen in the assertions of men like Akbar Ahmed, the chair of Islamic studies at American University. He "counsels" U.S. government officials about Islam and makes false public pronouncements on CNN and the BBC, claiming that Islam was considered a legitimate religion by America's Founders, when in fact they considered it an abomination.

3. The role of Saudi funding of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is engaged in civilizational jihad in the West, is discussed in this article. Even left-wing comedians like Bill Maher are beginning to be alarmed at the encroachment of Islam in the West. In 1991 a Muslim Brotherhood document entitled An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America outlined a "Civilization-Jihadist Process," and stated that Muslims "must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house." As Frank Gafney recently observed, "the Saudis are never held accountable for their role as prime-movers behind the 'stealth jihad' - the effort to insinuate shariah into nations like ours through the text books, mosques, Muslim Brotherhood front organizations, media ownership and other influence operations they underwrite. This dangerous practice is often lubricated by the Saudis' generous financial and other relationships with former senior U.S. government officials and prominent businesses, who can be counted upon to discourage probing questions or more prudential policies here."

4. Newt Gingrich hit the nail on the head in a speech he gave to the Institute for Public Policy Research: "Stealth jihadis use political, cultural, societal, religious, intellectual tools; violent jihadis use violence. But in fact they're both engaged in jihad and they're both seeking to impose the same end state, which is to replace Western civilization with a [radical] imposition of Sharia."

5. Even in India, where mainstream Islam is alleged to be moderate, we find this conclusion being drawn from a recent study of official Islamic sources: "It is of the very essence of a totalitarian ideology that it enforces its right to regulate the totality of life. The Koran, the Hadith, the fatwas represent one continuous endeavor in this respect: they aim at controlling every single aspect of life."

France: Islam: If Muslims ask for Europe’s "empty" churches...

From: Spero News

Rome - A Muslim group has asked to use the empty churches in France for Muslims to pray in, solving (at the expense of Christians) the traffic problems caused by Muslims who pray in the streets. Fr. Khalial Samir Samir, an expert scholar of Islam, reflects on the embarrassing proposal, calling for Islam in Europe to become more "European" and less "Arab". 

In a press release published Friday, March 11, 2011, the "Banlieuses Respect " Collective asked authorities in charge of organization of the Church of France, to place at Muslims’ disposal "empty churches for Friday prayers". Hassan M. Ben Barek, a spokesman for the Collective, said the measure would "prevent Muslims from having to pray on the streets" and being "politicians’ hostages”.

In fact, for several years now, every Friday, alongside dozens of mosques in France, Muslims have blocked the surrounding streets for an hour or two, spreading mats on the roads to pray. In many cases, local authorities close their eyes to this offense, and in some cases the police are there to ensure the safety of those who block the streets. This situation is on the rise in France (for example, Lyon, Marseille, Montpellier. Montreuil, Nice, Paris, Puteaux, Strasbourg, Torcy ...). A situation that is found all over the world (Athens, Brussels, Birmingham, Cordova, Moscow, New York ...) and also in Italy (Albenga, Canicattì, Como, Gallarate, Milan, Modena, Moncalieri, Naples, Rome ...). In the Muslim world this phenomenon is present, especially in Egypt. On 10 December, in Lyon, Marine Le Pen (National Front) denounced the  Muslims "street prayers", which led to negative reactions towards the Muslim community in France. 

Three points:
1.       first on the reason for this request, namely the lack of space in the mosques;
2.       second on the consequences of this lack of space, namely congested streets near mosques;
3.       third on the proposed solution to solve this problem, namely "the provision of churches empty for Friday prayers."

Lack of space in the mosques
There are some 75 Muslim places of worship in Paris, of which you can find the details in each of the 20 arrondissements (http://mosquee.free.fr/Adresses/Ile_de_France/75_Paris/75_Paris.html). Moahmmed Moussaoui, President of the Conseil francais du culte Muslims (CFCM), since June 2008, professor of mathematics at the University of Avignon, in a very subdued and reflective interview on December 15, 2009 on Europe 1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyyPIfuvo-o&feature=player_embedded) states that if one calculates the number of Muslims in France at five million (some say four million) and assuming that 17% of them go to the mosque on Friday, that number would be about 850 thousand people . Assuming that each person requires one by two metres, the required capacity of Muslim places of worship would be 850 thousand square meters. Currently there are around 250 thousand. Three times more space in the mosques is needed. The figures are obviously fluctuating. It is almost impossible to estimate the number of Muslims in France since French documents do not indicate religion. Moreover the proportion of those who practise their religion is even more difficult to assess. On the other hand, it is unusual for Muslim women go to the mosque to pray, those who want to pray do so more readily at home, which reduces the area required for places of worship. 

A year later in another interview dated December 22, 2010, by the same Mossaoui, we read: "A study on the space for Muslim worship says that 300 thousand square meters are currently available in France. Double that is needed, according to the CFCM. Today, 150 construction projects are underway throughout the country". Which is "an irrefutable recovery" for Massaoui. (http://www.liberation.fr/societe/01012309460-prieres-de-rue-les-fideles-dans-l-impasse). 

Even if it takes twice as much space, it is up to the Muslim community to solve the problem. The State or the Church has nothing to do with it. The same Mossaoui said as much, in a television interview dated to December 2009, that the French state should not have to fund mosques, rather Muslims themselves with the help of funding from abroad. On the other hand, to avoid feeding negative reactions towards the Muslim community, then the rather generalized practise of Mayors in granting long leases of land (most often for one euro per year) for the construction of mosques needs to be reconsidered. The Ordinance of 21 April 2006 allowed for these concessions "for allocation to an association of worship for a religious building open to the public." In many cases, the administrative court has estimated that these practices are “similar to a disguised subsidy”, which is contrary to the 1905 law.  

Blocking streets near the mosques to pray
As we said, this is a common practice in Muslim countries. In fact, population growth, as well as a renewed religious fervour, have meant that the existing mosques and places of worship are not enough to contain all the faithful on Friday at noon. Given that this is the case in Muslim countries where the separation between state and religion is virtually nonexistent, the faithful have been in the habit of occupying sidewalks and streets near the mosques, and of diverting traffic. 

For over a decade, this practise has also developed in Europe, although it is perfectly illegal, since the street belongs to all pedestrians as well as motorists. This situation is recognized as totally unacceptable by all reasonable people, regardless of the principle of secularism. It becomes even more so, if one takes into account that these exceptions are no longer exceptional, since it takes place every Friday. And since this exception is applied to a specific religion, Islam, the impression of many is of an "invasion" of land, a kind of "conquest" of the national territory by the "Muslims" . There are no justifications for this occupation of public territory. 

On the contrary, should a group of citizens (Muslims, Christians or other religions) make an official request for an exceptional use of a public road for a limited time, for a party or ceremony, this would not pose a problem. It seems to me that the current situation does no more than reinforce and justify Islamophobic reactions. And this, in my opinion, is a fundamental point. It has become commonplace to speak, rightly and wrongly, of "Islamophobia." Of course this may motivated by more or less racist reasons, which is totally unacceptable, even if it happens everywhere. However if people, in the name of the particular group to which they belong, behave in a manner contrary to the laws and rules of the land, or even to the traditions and customs, then, these people are responsible for the resulting negative responses. In this case, Muslims are partly to blame for the Islamophobia which is expanding throughout Europe. It is up to Muslims themselves to protest against those who cause these reactions and educate their co-religionists. 

Moreover, the fact that the phenomenon of praying on the street was born and largely remains in Muslim countries, it means that it is not just the West’s problem, but of Islam. Let me explain: many justify this objectionable behaviour (the occupation of a public place by a certain group) with the fact that there is no space for this group. This tends to insinuate that the group (in this case Muslims) are mistreated or discriminated against. Not so, because in Muslim countries the situation is exactly the same, and even more widespread. The explanation is that the "system of Muslim prayer" has not been redesigned for the modern city. If you were to apply this system to Christians, for example, the roads would be completely blocked. If all Christians were required to meet Sunday at noon, be sure that no church could contain them. This was formerly a problem, and still is for the Coptic Church. There is only one church for the celebration of Mass on Sundays, which gathers the whole community. 

Hence the need to construct two overlapping places of worship (in the Coptic Church) or accept having  numerous Masses per church. Moreover, during the Second Vatican Council, the Catholic Church authorized the anticipation of Sunday Mass to Saturday evening, contrary to the whole Tradition, to allow as many faithful as possible to participate in the Eucharist. It is an internal matter for the community, which, if alive, must find ways to adapt to the world, and not ask the world to adapt to it!

Finally, in the dozens of videos that show Muslims at prayer in the street, which can be seen on Youtube, for example, I have never seen women in prayer. One of two things: either it is because it is not convenient, and then it is equally improper for a man; or, because Friday prayers in the mosque is not an obligation, and if so, then this applies to everyone. Unless it is because the public prayer is "a matter for men," probably because, in this case, it takes on a "political" aspect.

Provision of empty churches for Friday prayer
The March 11 proposal of the Collective, calling on the Church of France, to "provide Muslims empty churches for Friday prayers", is astounding. These "empty churches" are consecrated places and it would never occur to a Christian to use them for anything other than the liturgical ceremonies, or sacred music - an exception that is always possible. It would be unthinkable to use them to celebrate a non-Christian cult. 

On the other hand, a church that served as a mosque would have to be re-equipped for the needs of Muslim prayer. Many typically Christian elements would have to be removed and typically Muslim ones added. And above all these "empty churches" are not destined to remain empty, but on the contrary to be occupied as soon as possible by a Christian community or a monastic community, which is happening more and more throughout Europe. Now it seems unlikely that such a place, more or less once converted into a mosque, could be "repossessed" and turned back to church. It would be a great loss for the Muslim community and could lead to much bitterness and religious conflicts. The Christians would then be accused of being Islamophobic, revanchists, disrespectful of Muslim sensitivities, unbrotherly towards them, and so on.
Finally, imagine for a moment the opposite. If in a Muslim country (Egypt or Algeria, for example) the indigenous Christians (in Egypt) or immigrant Christians (in Algeria) asked Muslims to give them a mosque, since they have many, or to lend them one for Sunday, or only for important celebrations: Christmas, Epiphany, the beginning of Lent, Easter, Pentecost and the Assumption, what would the reaction of Muslims be? 

Conclusion
In conclusion, it seems important that a new relationship between the Muslim community and the European population be established in France and Europe, a relationship based on cooperation, friendship and mutual esteem. There are extremist fringes on both sides, which we should help each other to de-fanaticise. French Muslims represent less than 10% of the population elsewhere in Europe the proportion is lower. Islam in Europe poses a problem, since it is not seen simply as a religion, but also as a culture that penetrates all areas of daily life. Consequently, there may be a conflict of cultures. Europe has worked for centuries to separate religion and society, and everything is marked by a secularized Christian culture. 

I think the Muslim community must make a serious attempt to accept that the religious phenomenon remains, as far as possible, a private affair. The more Islam moves in this direction, the less opposition it will find. This does not mean being less Muslim, far from it, it means being Muslim in a different, more inner, way.

Asking the Church to provide currently unused churches at the disposition of Muslims is a major embarrassment at the very moment when the effort of believers is focused on re-evangelizing those who have strayed from Christian practice. Asking the State for public subsidies in the form of a lease, embarrasses the State and the public who will perceive it as a subterfuge. It is a far better thing to rely on one’s own strengths and the solidarity of Muslims (avoiding, however, that this foreign aid is not subject to certain conditions). 

According to the president of the CFCM there are currently about 150 places of worship under construction. We must insist that the municipalities do not pose ideological obstacles to the construction of mosques, if they adhere to zoning regulations. In my opinion, in order for Muslims and Islam not to be seen as a foreign body, great effort have to be made in the formation of imams in France, imams who are perfectly integrated into French culture and mentality, (or the wider European Union context). 

As long as Islam is culturally "Arab" as long as Muslims believe that to be a true Muslim they must be closer to the original Arab culture, there will be uneasiness. This is, to me, the vocation of the Muslims of Europe: the creation of a Western interpretation (French, European ...) of Islam, which harmonises the Muslim faith and spirituality with Western modernity, namely, secularism and human rights . I am convinced that this is possible - and is already under way - but this requires an effort by all to reach its destination, and above all the desire for an Islam thus conceived. 

Finally, as suggested in point 3, greater reflection is needed on how to maintain the principle of "community of prayer” (salât al-jumu’ah), however,  rethinking its modalities to account for cultural and practical realities. In other words, if there is a conflict of interest, first we must look for the desired goal in the letter of the Law (maqâsid al-shari'ah) rather than the letter of the Shari'ah.