Honour killing in Kolkata: Man beheads sister, walks to the police station with her head

Kolkata: In what seems like a clear case of honour killing, a man beheaded his younger sister in full public glare. The incident took place on Friday. 29-year old Mehtab Alam, a tailor by profession, allegedly beheaded Nilofer with a stroke of a sword. Reports indicate he then walked to the Nadial police station in South 24 Parganas district with his sister's head and the sword. The police said Mehtab asked to be charged and that he confessed to killing his sister for an extra marital relationship. "Hussain told our stunned colleagues that he killed his sister because she was having an extra-marital affair," a police officer said. He said her body was dumped on a road in Ayubnagar. According to him, the young woman was in a relationship with a man. She later married another man but recently eloped with her paramour. "Hussain said he killed her to protect the honour of his family," police said. "He wanted to kill her paramour also." Alam has been remanded to judicial custody till December 22. He will make a confessional statement before a magistrate under section 164 of Criminal Procedure Code of India or CrPC on Monday.

The Battle for the Future of Tunisia

Almost two years after the Arab Spring got its start in Tunisia, Salafists are intimidating women, artists and intellectuals. Many fear that the government is tacitly supporting the radical Islamists in their efforts to turn the young democracy into a theocracy. For reasons of data protection and privacy, your IP address will only be stored if you are a registered user of Facebook and you are currently logged in to the service. For more detailed information, please click on the "i" symbol. Info It was a Friday in February 2011 when the Jasmine Revolution reached the prostitutes on Impasse Sidi Abdallah Guech, a dead-end street tucked away in the dingiest corner of the medina in Tunis, the Tunisian capital. The women leaning against the walls there are registered with the government and pay taxes. The red-light district on this small street is only a stone's throw from a large mosque in the heart of an Islamic country. ANZEIGE On this day, shortly after the fall of the old regime in Tunisia, several hundred outraged citizens had gathered near the prostitutes' street. Some were bearded and others were wearing jeans, but they were all loudly demanding moral cleanliness. Before long, they began making their way toward the women, sticks and torches in hand. That this could happen was no surprise. Imams preaching on satellite stations from Qatar and Saudi Arabia routinely rage against this hotbed of vice. Arabs from the Persian Gulf don't need the women from Abdallah Guech when they come to Tunisia in the summer since they usually bring along their own escorts. The Guech and hundreds of other so-called maisons closes in Tunisia are for ordinary people, have always been tolerated and were legalized in 1942. Men come and go, leaving behind a handful of dinars. On that Friday, the military stepped in and police fired warning shots into the air to fend of the Muslim moralists' attack on the women. A militia of pimps, porters and day laborers barricaded the entrance to the lane. After the incident, the sign "Impasse Sidi Abdallah Guech" was removed for security reasons. A gate was installed, and the women posted a sign above it saying "Closed on Fridays and during Ramadan" in an effort to accommodate the Islamists. Maisons closes in other Tunisian cities were not so lucky. In places such as Sousse, Médenine, Sfax and Kairouan, brothels were set on fire, and women were hunted down and beaten. The attacks of February 2011 marked the beginning of a development that has grown to become a cultural revolution and a model for the post-revolutionary countries of North Africa: the government-tolerated offensive of Salafist fundamentalists against aspects of modern secular society, even if they amount to nothing more than the bleak activities of prostitutes and their customers on a small street in Tunis. In April 2011, the filmmaker Nouri Bouzid was beaten with an iron bar after he had spoken out in favor of a secular constitution. A few weeks later, in June, a gang of Salafists forcibly entered the AfricArt art-house cinema in Tunis, sprayed tear gas and roughed up the management. The cinema was planning to show what the Salafists viewed as a heretical film about religion in Tunisia. The police only intervened after prolonged pressure. AfricArt has been closed ever since. In October 2011, a few hundred Islamists tried to set the house of the owner of the private television station Nessma on fire. The station had broadcast the animated film "Persepolis," by Iranian exile Marjane Satrapi, in which Allah is briefly depicted. In June 2012, morality police attacked the exhibition "Spring of the Arts" in the El Ebdellia palace, destroying about a dozen paintings. Fear and Intimidation The scar on Nouri Bouzid's bald head is hardly visible anymore. "Luckily I was wearing a hat," says the 67-year-old director. "All that's left of our revolution is that there are no longer scissors," he adds, referring to government censorship. "But there is a censorship of deeds carried out by the Salafist brigades and the so-called Leagues for the Protection of the Revolution." Bouzid seems more alarmed than bitter. "Hundreds of events" have already been quietly obstructed, he says. Summer festivals and rock concerts have been interrupted, and actors have been threatened. All of this is happening, Bouzid explains, with the tacit consent of the ruling Islamist party, Ennahda. "They're playing a double game," Bouzid says. "They use the radicals to test how far they can go. Not a single artist is involved with Ennahda." Located on the extreme northern tip of Africa, Tunisia is very close to Europe. It has a tradition of tolerance that artists like Bouzid now believe is threatened. "They want to destroy this identity, using all the money they get from the Gulf," Bouzid says. "But, unlike in the past, we are no longer afraid of the police. We can express our views, we are willing to take risks and we don't take everything lying down. That can be inspiring." Tunis is still a city where women don't have to be brave to show their hair. In contrast to Cairo, for example, veiled women are a minority in Tunis. In many neighborhoods, Tunis looks like the twin sister of Marseille, a pleasant and open metropolis on France's Mediterranean coast, where most people refuse to be told what to wear in public or on the beach in the summer. Given Tunis's reputation, it's all the more shocking to hear a young female journalist talk about how terrified she was to find her photograph on the Facebook page of a Salafist group. Her address was also listed there. Above it were a skull and the word "traitor." This isn't uncommon, she says. "You have to expect that 30 Salafists will be outside your door the next morning, shouting that the devil lives there." It's a Salafist chorus of online outrage. It would be a continuation of the Facebook revolution, using the same tools, but for a different purpose: to intimidate lawyers, artists, university lecturers and filmmakers -- and, of course, women. Controlling the Mosques The offensive by the ultra-conservative group has been most successful in the mosques. "It's an invasion. They control most of the mosques in Tunis. They demonize the old imams and berate them as accomplices of the old regime," says Sheikh Ahmed Touati, until recently the imam at the large Zitouna Mosque, and the current head of a group calling itself the "Party of Conservatives." The 32-year-old Touati is a large, imposing figure. He is sitting with his legs apart, wearing baggy trousers, in front of the Sekajine souk, drinking tea. Most passers-by greet Touati, but not all, especially not those wearing the calf-length robes favored by radical Islamists. "In their view, I'm even a kafir, an infidel," he says. "They aren't allowed to greet an infidel." He describes the day the Islamists first turned up at the large mosque, a week after the overthrow of former dictator Zine El Abidine Ben Ali. They demanded different prayer positions and didn't want the Koran to be recited out loud by the congregation. Within a year, the chief imam had been driven out. "Why? They have the money and the satellite dishes," Touati say. "Their message appeals to the practicing faithful, especially the younger ones. The others keep their distance. Our mistake was that we waited too long." Touati was slapped when he removed an Islamist treatise from the wall of his mosque. He also received threats, with the Islamists telling him things like: "Get out of here and don't come back -- or someone will slit your throat." Charges of Government Duplicity Many of the Islamists are also involved in militant activities. The Leagues for the Protection of the Revolution collect donations and allegedly recruit young men to fight in Syria's civil war. The ruling Ennahda Party has yet to distance itself from the radicals. Ennahda founder Rachid Ghannouchi even encouraged "our young Salafists" to patiently embark on a long march. "Why the hurry?" he said in a video of a meeting with Salafists. "The Islamists must fill the country with their organizations, establish Koran schools everywhere and invite religious imams." The video was secretly recorded and posted online, but Ghannouchi claims his words were taken out of context. The opposition accuses Ennahda of duplicity, saying that while it publicly encourages tolerant discourse, it also uses the young radicals to intimidate independent voices in what seems like a joint effort. Ennahda bridles at the accusation and claims it is being misunderstood. "We support tolerance and freedom of expression in the arts. After all, Ennahda means renaissance, right?" says Ajmi Lourimi, a member of the party leadership in charge of educational and cultural matters. Lourimi is wearing a cap backwards. He turns his computer around and points to the screen, where there is a YouTube interview with the Jewish philosopher Emmanuel Levinas: "You see? I'm a philosopher myself," says Lourimi. "An Islamic philosopher." The purpose of culture is to educate the people, Lourimi says. And of course, he adds, he is against raids on art galleries. When asked about demonstrations against airing the "Persepolis" film, he says: "No one is against this film. It's just that there are few scenes that hurt the feelings of many people when it's shown publicly. Most directors realize that this is where cuts are needed." When asked about his favorite film, he mentions a crime thriller starring Alain Delon and Jean Gabin. "My favorite painter? Oh, I'm too old to go to exhibitions anymore." He's in his early 50s. The party newspaper al-Fajr has an article about the short film "Bousculades" entitled "The Latest Flashes of Genius of Tunisian Cinema." The film tells the story of how prostitutes in a brothel participated in the country's war of liberation from France. Sawssen Saya, the film's 26-year-old director, sees the article as a call to action. "The governing party's newspaper denounces a film without having seen it," she says. "Why? So that there will be boycotts in keeping with the motto: Defend yourselves." At the same time, "Bousculades" received a government grant and has since collected an award at a film festival. This could be a sign of liberalization -- or of what is left of freedom for the arts. By Alexander Smoltczyk

Saudi Arabia: Muslim cleric labels women "whores" for working with men

Hazmat suits for work at Hardee's: understandable. But why aren't the men wearing them? Even though they were all gussied up in their hazmat suits. Sharia Alert from the Kingdom of the Two Holy Places: "Saudi cleric under fire for labelling waitresses as ‘prostitutes,’" from al-Arabiya, November 30 (thanks to The Religion of Peace): A Twitter post ignited a battle of arguments over a post tweeted by a Saudi cleric describing the newly-introduced waitress at a fast-food restaurant in Saudi Arabia as “prostitutes”. The debated topic sparked when Saudi Sheikh Ali Al Mutairi reacted to a number of Saudi tweets calling for the boycott of popular American fast-food restaurant, Hardee’s. The reason? The burger chain had recently allowed women – for the first time – to work as waitresses at their branches across the coastal city of Jeddah. “At the beginning of her shift she’s a waitress. When her shift ends she becomes a prostitute. The more she’s around men the easier it becomes to get closer to her”, tweeted Al-Mutairi, whose twitter account (@4aalmutairi ) boasts more than 5,000 followers. Despite this cleric’s views reflecting an existing frustration amongst some conservative segments in Saudi Arabia which oppose women’s right to work and fear that allowing females to mix with men may lead to unwanted social behaviours, Mutari’s rather controversial tweet was deemed too extreme to many Saudis on Twitter. “Prostitution is not in working trying to survive but it is in corrupted minds that use religion to distort other’s reputation,” posted one male in response to Mutar’s tweet. “Prostitute? So any female employee in my country is a whore now?” wrote a female tweep by the handle of @Sulafa_97. Many commented by telling Sheikh Al Mutairi that through doubting the morality of ‘chaste’ women and describing them in the way he did, the cleric would be committing a serious vice, according to well-known Islamic teachings. Another tweep posted pictures of some Hardee’s waitresses posted over social media by saying “These women are all covered up that I wouldn’t look at them, plus if your sister goes to that restaurant would you prefer a man or a woman taking her order?” Despite the reaction to Sheikh Al-Mutairi’s views being mostly critical, there were some supportive tweets like one which says, “We know your intention and we give you the benefit of the doubt; stay as you are, a splinter in the throats of liberals”. As reactions mounted and a hashtag was created to discuss his tweet, Al-Mutairi replied to many of his critics saying: “In the name of God, I have seen this hashtag and some are asking to apologise because they think I have defamed Hardee’s waitresses – the truth is I warned from the dangers of sexes mixing, at the beginning she is a waitress and in the end they will want her to become a prostitute and between are the devil’s steps”, tweeted the sheikh. “As for hypocrites who shave their beards and moustache (a common way of describing liberals in Saudi Arabia), there is no apology for them because their zeal isn’t for God,” he added.... Off with their heads!

Egypt: Koran-burning preacher, seven Coptic Christians sentenced to death

Noted Chinese author, dissident and free-speech advocate Murong Xuecun (pen name of Hao Qun) once sarcastically stated; "Actually, I am a coward. I say only what is safe to say, and I criticise only what is permissible to criticise." Freedom of both speech and thought in Western civilization have a 2,500 year history and have almost been elevated to the status of sacred dogma by many. Yet when Pastor Terry Jones of Gainesville, Florida's theologically and politically conservative Dove World Outreach Center burned a copy of the Muslim Qur'an early last year, liberal-minded defenders were few and far between. Much the same can be said of many of the Hollywood elite who often pontificate on "artistic freedom," yet were conspicuously silent during the overwhelming condemnation of the makers of the low budget film "Innocence of Muslims." Fruits Of The Arab Spring... As reported by the Philadelphia Inquirer, a purportedly secular court in Egypt has sentenced Reverend Jones to death in absentia for his support of the film. Seven other individuals, Orthodox Coptic Christians all, also received the same sentence as the Florida preacher. As reported by CBS News, the official Egyptian news agency stated the specific charges against all eight of the defendants include; "Harming national unity, insulting and publicly attacking Islam and spreading false information - charges that carry the death sentence." Just Say What The Rest Of Us Were Already Thinking... As The Inquirer's Howard Gensler asked rhetorically in his article, presumably with tongue firmly placed in cheek; "Can we agree that sentencing someone to death over a movie - unless it's a snuff film in which people are actually killed - sort of prohibits you from being considered a 21st century country?" If you like with this article, please forward it to family and friends. Please click on the "SUBSCRIBE" button above to receive e-mail updates whenever new articles are published. To become a writer for Examiner.com, please click here - http://exm.nr/y8utl8.

Is Islamophobia Racism?

The claim continues to be raised that Islamophobia is not racism. Let’s examine that issue, breaking it down into its individual issues, and see what conclusions we can draw. Before we begin, I must make a slight change to the original thesis, because I forgot that some of the hate mongers who read this are learning impaired, in addition to being reality impaired. My thanks to Cristy Li for reminding me of this. Legitimate, fact-based criticism of a particular problem of Islam is not racism. As we will see, an irrational fear or hatred of Islam, resulting in a pattern of or doctrine of discrimination, hatred or intolerance of Islam, is indeed racism. This is further defined below. For those who claim that the definitions below are "Sutter's" or that the conclusion of "Islamophobia is racism" is "Sutter's", I suggest you read this again. I am using source material from dictionaries, encyclopedias, the United Nations, the European Union Charter, highly-respected universities, the United States Declaration of Independance, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the U.S. Supreme Court, more than twenty world reknowned scholars, and the Runnymede Trust. So it is very inaccurate to claim these are my opinions, these are the opinions and definitions (and in some cases the legal decisions) of the afore-mentioned. First let’s define the root of “racism”, that being “race”. There are two different types of classifications of the term “race”. The first is the used by Physical Anthropologists and Biologists, therefore an anthropological, biological definition, based on physical characteristics, this definition is used almost exclusively by biologists and geneticists in their studies and peer-reviewed papers. This definition has also become quite controversial within the scientific community because of the mixture of physical characteristics in multicultural societies, and is considered antiquated and no longer accurate in its use. Scientists are in the process of eliminating this term and changing it to “Genetic qualities” or something similar. Since none of the people listed in this blog are physical anthropologists or biologists with peer reviewed publications, the first definition (aside from being antiquated, as noted above) does not apply here. We will, therefore, look at the second category, the second classification of the term “race” as used by Cultural Anthropologists and sociologists, therefore a cultural definition, based on any common characteristics of a large group . This is also the definition of “race” used in the contemporary vernacular, and is the one that applies to the people listed in this blog. Let’s look at several definitions to answer these questions: What is the definition of “race”? What is the definition of “racism”? What is the definition of “racist”? Is Islamophobia considered racism? In sites where there are multiple definitions, the highlighted ones are the definitions that apply to this thesis: Definitions of “Race”: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/race Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source race2 /reɪs/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[reys] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun 1. a group of persons related by common descent or heredity. 2. a population so related. 3. Anthropology. a. any of the traditional divisions of humankind, the commonest being the Caucasian, Mongoloid, and Negro, characterized by supposedly distinctive and universal physical characteristics: no longer in technical use. b. an arbitrary classification of modern humans, sometimes, esp. formerly, based on any or a combination of various physical characteristics, as skin color, facial form, or eye shape, and now frequently based on such genetic markers as blood groups. c. a human population partially isolated reproductively from other populations, whose members share a greater degree of physical and genetic similarity with one another than with other humans. 4. a group of tribes or peoples forming an ethnic stock: the Slavic race. 5. any people united by common history, language, cultural traits, etc.: the Dutch race. 6. the human race or family; humankind: Nuclear weapons pose a threat to the race. 7. Zoology. a variety; subspecies. 8. a natural kind of living creature: the race of fishes. 9. any group, class, or kind, esp. of persons: Journalists are an interesting race. 10. the characteristic taste or flavor of wine. –adjective 11. of or pertaining to the races of humankind. [Origin: 1490–1500; Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006. American Heritage Dictionary - race 1 (rās) n. 1. A local geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical characteristics. 2. A group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographic distribution: the German race. 3. A genealogical line; a lineage. 4. Humans considered as a group. 5. Biology a. An interbreeding, usually geographically isolated population of organisms differing from other populations of the same species in the frequency of hereditary traits. A race that has been given formal taxonomic recognition is known as a subspecies. b. A breed or strain, as of domestic animals. 6. A distinguishing or characteristic quality. Home > Library > Reference > Britannica Concise Encyclopedia race "Race" is today primarily a sociological designation, identifying a class sharing some outward physical characteristics and some commonalities of culture and history. Now that we’ve defined the root word “race”, let’s look at the words “racism”, “racist”, and “Islamophobia”, so that we can see if Islamophobia is considered racism. Definitions of “racism” and “racist” (keeping in mind we’ve already defined “race”): Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) rac·ism /ˈreɪsɪzəm/ Show Spelled Pronunciation[rey-siz-uhm] –noun 1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others. 2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination. 3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races. [Origin: 1865–70; —Related forms racist, noun, adjective Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006. American Heritage Dictionary - rac·ism (rā'sĭz'əm) Pronunciation Key n. 1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others. 2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race. rac'ist adj. & n. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/racism Main Entry: rac·ism Pronunciation: 'rA-"si-z&m also -"shi- Function: noun 1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race 2 : racial prejudice or discrimination WordNet - racist adjective 1. based on racial intolerance; "racist remarks" 2. discriminatory especially on the basis of race or religion WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University. WordNet racism noun 1. the prejudice that members of one race are intrinsically superior to members of other races 2. discriminatory or abusive behavior towards members of another race WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University. Definition of Islamophobia WordNet - islamophobia noun prejudice against Muslims; "Muslim intellectuals are afraid of growing Islamophobia in the West" WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University. Wikipedia: Entry in Wikipedia Islamophobia is the fear and/or hatred of Islam, Muslims or Islamic culture. Islamophobia can be characterised by the belief that all or most Muslims are religious fanatics, have violent tendencies towards non-Muslims, and reject as directly opposed to Islam such concepts as equality, tolerance, and democracy. It is viewed as a new form of racism whereby Muslims, an ethno-religious group, not a race, are nevertheless constructed as a race. A set of negative assumptions are made of the entire group to the detriment of members of that group. During the 1990's many sociologists and cultural analysts observed a shift in forms of prejudice from ones based on skin color to ones based on notions of cultural superiority and otherness. Declarations Against Racism: Racial discrimination contradicts the 1776 United States Declaration of Independence, the 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen issued during the French Revolution and the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, signed after World War II, which all postulate equality between all human beings. In 1950, UNESCO suggested in The Race Question —a statement signed by 21 scholars such as Ashley Montagu, Claude Lévi-Strauss, Gunnar Myrdal, Julian Huxley, etc. — to "drop the term race altogether and instead speak of ethnic groups". The statement condemned scientific racism theories which had played a role in the Holocaust. It aimed both at debunking scientific racist theories, by popularizing modern knowledge concerning "the race question," and morally condemned racism as contrary to the philosophy of the Enlightenment and its assumption of equal rights for all. Along with Myrdal's An American Dilemma: The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy (1944), The Race Question influenced the 1954 U.S. Supreme Court desegregation decision in "Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka". (“Toward a World without Evil: Alfred Métraux as UNESCO Anthropologist (1946-1962)”, by Harald E.L. Prins, UNESCO (English) ) The United Nations uses the definition of racial discrimination laid out in the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, adopted in 1966: ...any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, color, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.(Part 1 of Article 1 of the U.N. International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination) (Text of the Convention, [['International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, 1966) In 2000, the European Union explicitly banned racism along with many other forms of social discrimination: Article 21 of the charter prohibits discrimination on any ground such as race, color, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, disability, age or sexual orientation and also discrimination on the grounds of nationality. (http://www.lbr.nl/internationaal/charter%20uk.html) Is Islamophobia Considered Racism? Islamophobia refers to prejudice or discrimination against Islam or Muslims. (Sandra Fredman, Discrimination and Human Rights, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0199246033, p.121.) The term dates back to the late 1980s, [1] but came into common currency after the September 11, 2001 attacks. [2] In 1997, the British Runnymede Trust defined Islamophobia as the "dread or hatred of Islam and therefore, to the fear and dislike of all Muslims," stating that it also refers to the behavior of excluding Muslims from the "economic, social, and public life of the nation." It includes the perception that Islam has no values in common with other cultures, is inferior to the West, is a violent political ideology rather than a religion, and that discriminatory practices against Muslims are justified. A number of individuals and organizations have made attempts to define the concept. Kofi Annan told a UN conference on Islamophobia in 2004: "[W]hen the world is compelled to coin a new term to take account of increasingly widespread bigotry, that is a sad and troubling development. Such is the case with Islamophobia." [1] In 1996, the Runnymede Trust established the Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia, chaired by Professor Gordon Conway, the vice-chancellor of the University of Sussex. Their report, Islamophobia: A Challenge for Us All, was launched in November 1997 by the Home Secretary, Jack Straw. In this report, Islamophobia was defined by the Trust as "an outlook or world-view involving an unfounded dread and dislike of Muslims, which results in practices of exclusion and discrimination." The first documented use of the word in the United States was by Insight magazine in 1991, used to describe Russian activities in Afghanistan. The Runnymede report identified eight perceptions related to Islamophobia: Islam is seen as a monolithic bloc, static and unresponsive to change. It is seen as separate and "other." It does not have values in common with other cultures, is not affected by them and does not influence them. It is seen as inferior to the West. It is seen as barbaric, irrational, primitive, and sexist. It is seen as violent, aggressive, threatening, supportive of terrorism, and engaged in a clash of civilizations. It is seen as a political ideology, used for political or military advantage. Criticisms made of "the West" by Muslims are rejected out of hand. Hostility towards Islam is used to justify discriminatory practices towards Muslims and exclusion of Muslims from mainstream society. Anti-Muslim hostility is seen as natural and normal. [4] The above perceptions are seen as closed views on Islam. These are contrasted, in the report, with open views on Islam which, while founded on respect for Islam, permits legitimate disagreement, dialogue and critique. [5] [1] Islamophobia: A Challenge for Us All, Runnymede Trust, 1997, p. 1, cited in Quraishi, Muzammil. Muslims and Crime: A Comparative Study, Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 2005, p. 60; Annan, Kofi. "Secretary-General, addressing headquarters seminar on confronting Islamophobia", United Nations press release, December 7, 2004. [2] Casciani, Dominic. "Islamophobia pervades UK - report", BBC News, June 2, 2004. Rima Berns McGowan writes in Muslims in the Diaspora (University of Toronto Press, 1991, p. 268) that the term "Islamophobia" was first used in an unnamed American periodical in 1991. [3] Runnymede 1997, p. 5, cited in Quraishi 2005, p. 60 [4] "Islamophobia: A Challenge for Us All"PDF (69.7 KiB), Runnymede Trust, 1997. [5] Benn; Jawad (2004) p. 162 Conclusion We have now seen the definition of “race” from Random House, American Heritage Dictionary, and the Britannica Encyclopedia, showing that “race” means any group or class of people united by cultural traits, language, etc., sharing a common heritage (summarizing the various definitions). We have seen the definition of the words “racist” and “racism” from Random House Dictionary, American Heritage Dictionary, Merriam Webster Dictionary, Princeton University, the United Nations International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and the European Union’s International Charter. Racism is (again summarizing what we see here) discrimination, hatred or fear of anyone of a specific race. A “racist” is someone who commits racism. We have seen the definition of “Islamophobia” from Princeton University and from Wikipedia, with a very detailed definition from the Runnymede Trust. We have seen the UN condemnation of Islamophobia. We have seen, from reading the above, that Islamophobia is an unfounded dread and dislike of Muslims, which results in practices of exclusion and discrimination. Under the definition of “race” Muslims definitely qualify as a “race”, even the UN, the EU and the Runnymede Trust agree on this. Under the definition of “racist” and “racism”, acts of Islamophobia (as defined herein) are most definitely racist acts and Islamophobia itself is a racist attitude. The Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center consider Islamophobia as racism. The inescapable conclusion: Islamophobia is racism, ergo, Islamophobes (those who practice Islamophobia) are racists (those who practice racism). "Racism is a disease of the heart, soul, and mind, and only when it is extirpated from the individual consciousness and replaced with the love and peace of God will true personal and communal healing begin." Liu, et al., "Eracing" Mistakes, November/December 1990, p. 14. Posted by DrMaxtor at 11:59 AM

Brussels 2012: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff’s Speech

By ICLA Admin • Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff is an Austrian activist for Bürgerbewegung Pax Europa (BPE), a lecturer on Islamic politics, and a victim of sharia-compliant “hate speech” laws. Below is the speech given by Elisabeth at the Brussels Conference on July 9, 2012. Many thanks to Europe News for recording this video, and to Vlad Tepes for uploading it: VIDEO : http://www.libertiesalliance.org/2012/07/22/brussels-2012-elisabeth-sabaditsch-wolffs-speech/

Saudis protest after chicken prices soar

Andrew Liddle Saturday 06 October 2012 inShare2 Print A social media campaign is encouraging shoppers in Saudi Arabia to stop buying chicken in protest at price hikes of up to 40 per cent. The Twitter movement – entitled "Let it Rot" – asks Saudi citizens to punish traders for raising the price of chicken in recent weeks. The Saudi Agriculture Minister, Dr Fahad Balghunaim, blamed the price rise on a production shortfall. He said suppliers could only meet about 45 per cent of demand due to a rise in the cost of animal feed. The Saudi government has blocked the export of chickens in an attempt to stem the shortfall, but the move has sparked fears that prices will rise across the region. In Iran, there were protests when the price of chicken doubled in July. This was largely due to Western sanctions which limited Iranian farmers' ability to buy feed and stock from abroad.

Defecting Iranian cameraman brings CIA priceless film of secret nuclear sites

reveals one of the CIA’s most dramatic scoops in many years, and epic disaster for Iran. Our most exclusive Iranian and intelligence sources disclose that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s personal cameraman, Hassan Golkhanban, who defected from his UN entourage in New York on Oct. 1, brought with him an intelligence treasure trove of up-to-date photographs and videos of top Iranian leaders visiting their most sensitive and secret nuclear and missile sites. The cameraman, who is in his 40s, is staying at an undisclosed address, presumably a CIA safe house under close guard. He stayed behind when Ahmadinejad, after his UN speech, departed New York with his 140-strong entourage. For some years, Golkhanban worked not just as a news cameraman but personally recorded visits by the Iranian president and supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei of top-secret nuclear facilities and Revolutionary Guards installations. When he left Tehran in the president’s party, his luggage was not searched and so he was able to bring out two suitcases packed with precious film and deliver it safely into waiting hands in New York. The Iranian cameraman has given US intelligence the most complete and updated footage it has ever obtained of the interiors of Iran’s top secret military facilities and various nuclear installations, including some never revealed to nuclear watchdog inspectors. Among them are exclusive interior shots of the Natanz nuclear complex, the Fordo underground enrichment plant, the Parchin military complex and the small Amir-Abad research reactor in Tehran. Some of the film depicts Revolutionary Guards and military industry chiefs explaining in detail to the president or supreme leader the working of secret equipment on view. Golkhanban recorded their voices. Our sources also disclose that, in late September, he took the precaution of sending his wife and two children out of Iran on the pretext of a family visit to Turkey. They are most likely on their way to the United States by now. From his years as a member of the loyal Bassij militia, the cameraman earned the complete trust of Iran’s security services and was able to reach his professional pinnacle as personal photographer for the two most eminent figures in the country, Khamenei and Ahmadinejad, with the task of recording their most confidential pursuits. This was his second visit to New York. The first time, a year ago, US intelligence was able to make contact and persuade him to defect with his stock of priceless photos and film. Although Golkhanban’s defection to the United States and request for asylum was disclosed to the media some days ago, Tehran has not made any comment. DEBKAfile Exclusive Report October 5, 2012

Six Things the $450 Million Aid to Egypt Will Pay For

Six Things the $450 Million Aid to Egypt Will Pay For Tue, October 2, 2012 Muslim Brotherhood by: Ryan Mauro Attack on US Embassy in Egypt (Photo: Reuters)The U.S. government is about to add $450 million to its $16 trillion debt for the sake of Muslim Brotherhood-run Egypt. According to the New York Times, the emergency cash transfer is part of a $1 billion aid package pledged in May. The original plan was to provide $190 million as soon as possible, but the declining economic conditions of Egypt convinced the Obama Administration to more than double that amount. Another $260 million will be delivered once Egypt secures a $4.8 billion loan from the International Monetary Fund. And it doesn’t stop there. The Times reports: “In addition to the $1 billion in assistance, the administration is working with Egypt to provide $375 million in financing and loan guarantees for American financiers who invest in Egypt and a $60 million investment fund for Egyptian businesses. All of that comes on top of $1.3 billion in military aid that the United States provides Egypt each year (emphasis mine).” Here are six things that American taxpayers’ money will pay for once it arrives in Egypt: 1. The Unraveling of the Peace Treaty With Israel. The pledge by Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood President Mohammed Morsi to honor the peace treaty with Israel means nothing. The Brotherhood’s line has always been that Israel is the one violating, and therefore nullifying, the treaty. After a meeting with Secretary of State Clinton, the Egyptian Foreign Minister said, “Mr. President [Morsi] has repeatedly reaffirmed, on all occasions, that Egypt continues to respect all treaties signed as long as the other party to the treaty respects the treaty itself.” He then implied that Israel was in violation of the treaty. “…Egypt’s understanding of peace is that it should be comprehensive, exactly as stipulated in the treaty itself. And this also includes the Palestinians, of course, and its right to – their right have their own state on the land that was – the pre June 4, 1967 borders with Jerusalem as its capital.” Secure America Now’s excellent new pamphlet about Morsi quotes him as saying on April 24, 2004 hat a parliamentary committee is needed “to draft a popular political program to restructure Egyptian-American relations and set a timetable to dispose the so-called peace agreement with the Zionist entity.” There is no reason to believe that his opinion has changed, especially when the Brotherhood openly states its objective as the destruction of Israel. The Brotherhood Supreme Guide, Mohammed Badie, said on June 14 that Muslims are required to perform “jihad of self and money” for the sake of “imposing Muslim rule throughout beloved Palestine.” 2. Supporting Hamas. The charter of the Hamas terrorist group states it is “one of the wings of the Muslim Brothers in Palestine.” In December 2011, Hamas even changed its name to “The Islamic Resistance Movement—a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood-Palestine.” The Brotherhood has never condemned Hamas. On the contrary, it has endorsed the terrorist group at every turn and preached to the Muslim world that it is the “resistance” to Israel. In June 2007, Morsi said, “Muslim Brotherhood support of Hamas is a support of the Palestinian resistance.” In 2011, he told CNN, “We do not use violence against anyone. What’s going on [in] the Palestinian land is resistance.” At one of Morsi’s campaign stops, a musician performed a song with lyrics that included “brandish your weapons, say your prayers” and “Come on, you lovers of martyrdom, banish the sleep from the eyes of all Jews. Come on, you lovers of martyrdom, you are all Hamas. Indeed, all the lovers of martyrdom are Hamas.” Hamas, with good reason, believes Egypt will end cooperation with Israel’s blockade of the Gaza Strip. Hamas chief Khaled Meshal praised the “new era” in the Egyptian-Palestinian relationship after he met with Morsi in June. The next month, Morsi told Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh that “Egypt and Palestine are one entity.” 3. Sharia Law. Don’t be fooled by the Brotherhood’s adoption of popular terms like “democracy.” Its senior cleric, Sheikh Yousef Qaradawi, explains that their version of “democracy” is different than that in the West. To them, democracy means the level of freedom permitted within the confines of Sharia Law. Consider the Muslim Brotherhood’s official motto: “Allah is our objective/The Prophet is our leader/The Quran is our law/Jihad is our way/Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.” On April 21, Morsi pledged his commitment to “instituting the religion of Allah” because “every aspect of life is to be Islamicized.” He even promised the radical Salafists, who are even more radical than the Brotherhood, that he’d appoint a clerical council to review all legislation to make it is in compliance with Islam as they see it. Of the 27 members of the National Council for Human Rights, 9 are Islamists, including two Salafists and the Secretary-General of the Brotherhood. On May 13, Morsi recited the Brotherhood pledge to an adoring audience. “The Sharia, then the Sharia and finally, the Sharia…I take an oath before Allah and before you all that regardless of the actual text [of the constitution]…Allah willing, the text will truly reflect [Sharia], as will be agreed upon by the Egyptian people, by the Islamic scholars, and by legal and constitutional experts,” he said. Morsi’s government has arrested a Coptic Christian for allegedly posting the anti-Islam “Innocence of Muslims” film online. Another was sentenced to six years in prison for posting cartoons of Mohammed on Facebook. This is only the beginning. The Brotherhood follows a doctrine of "gradualism" where Sharia Law is implemented in stages. For example, Sheikh Qaradawi advised Egypt to wait five years before cutting off the hands of robbers. On September 30, a Brotherhood preacher named Wagdy Ghoneim (who used to be an imam in California until he was arrested in 2004) called for prosecution secularists for apostasy. “If anyone tells you that he is a liberal, tell him directly that he is an infidel,” he said. 4. Anti-Semitism and Anti-Americanism The Brotherhood views the U.S. and Israel essentially as one unit. To them, the U.S. is secretly controlled by the anti-Muslim Zionists. In July 2004, Morsi talked about the “crisis of the Zionist and American enemy.” In 2010, Brotherhood Supreme Guide Badi preached that “resistance is the only solution against the Zio-American arrogance and tyranny.” The context of the statement clearly referred to violent jihad. He opined, “The U.S. is now experiencing the beginning of its end, and is heading towards its demise.” Morsi has insinuated that the 9/11 attacks were an “inside job” on numerous occasions, claiming in 2007 that the U.S. “never presented any evidences on the identity of those who committed that incident.” This conspiracy theory almost invariably holds that “Zionist” elements within the U.S. government collaborated with Israel to carry them out. The Muslim Brotherhood’s former Supreme Guide, Mohammed Akef, came to Ahmadinejad's defense in 2005 about “the myth of the Holocaust.” Strangely, Ahmadinejad caused a furor in the U.S. and around the world when he said the 9/11 attacks were an “inside job” and denied the Holocaust but not a word is said when the Brotherhood says the exact same things. The Brotherhood’s anti-Semitism is just as vulgar as anything that has come from Ahmadinejad’s mouth. In November 2004, Morsi said the “Quran established that the Jews are the ones with the highest degree of enmity towards Muslims” and “there is no peace with the descendants of the apes and pigs.” In July 2007, he talked about the “way to free the land from the filth of the Jews.” The charter of Hamas is explicit in its anti-Semitism, quoting an Islamic verse that reads, “The time will not come until Muslims fight the Jews (and kill them); until the Jews hide behind the rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him!” 5. Building the Caliphate This isn’t an exaggeration. The Brotherhood and its allies won the elections in Egypt, Tunisia and Somalia. Hamas controls the Gaza Strip. In Yemen, the Brotherhood’s Islah affiliate is the strongest party as the country undergoes a transition. The Brotherhood is a major force behind the rebels in Syria and the Brotherhood is gearing up to destabilize Jordan. The Sudanese regime says it is instituting full-blown Sharia Law and if it doesn’t, the Muslim Brotherhood’s affiliate may overthrow it. The Brotherhood suffered a major setback in Libya’s elections, but it remains a potent force in that country. Resurrecting the Caliphate sounds like a fantasy but the Brotherhood is certain that it is destiny and, if you look around the region, it’s easy to see why they are confident that it will happen soon. At one of Morsi’s campaign rallies, a cleric proclaimed, “We are seeing the dream of the Islamic Caliphate come true at the hands of Mohammed Morsi” and “the capital of the Caliphate and the United Arab States is Jerusalem.” Morsi nodded. 6. Keeping the Brotherhood in Power If American money helps the Egyptian economy succeed, it helps the Brotherhood succeed. It’s as simple as that. If Morsi succeeds in improving the economy, even if it’s because of international assistance, he gets the credit. At the same time, Morsi is doing whatever he can to preserve the Brotherhood’s hold on power. There was an argument to be made in favor of U.S. financial assistance when the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces were the real power-brokers and served as a check on the Brotherhood’s power. That is no longer the case. Morsi was able to depose the top leaders and replace them with Brotherhood supporters. At the same time, Morsi is issuing administrative orders to shut down independent television stations. About 50 editors of state newspapers have been replaced with his allies. The state television is giving him positive coverage. The individual who was arrested for posting “Innocence of Muslims” online was also charged with insulting the President and a newspaper that criticized Morsi was confiscated, the best examples attacks on free speech you could ever ask for. This is what Americans are paying $450 million for. And there’s no money-back guarantee if they are unsatisfied. Recent Articles * Egypt - Christian Children Arrested for Desecrating the Quran * Iranian Protests - An Opportunity to Support Forces of Freedom * Violence Breaks Out in Iran as Economy Falters * Turkey Says Syrian Mortar Fire is the "Last Straw" Stay Informed With Our Biweekly Newsletter. * EmailEmailEmail * * What do you think: Do you support more US aid to Egypt? Your email: * Your name: Send to: * Enter multiple addresses separated by commas. Click to enable autocomplete from your Gmail contacts Send to all your gmail contacts (recommended) Subject: * Page to be sent: Six Things the $450 Million Aid to Egypt Will Pay For Message: Stay Informed With Our Biweekly Newsletter 100,000 + Subscribers Spam Free. Most Popular Articles NYC Muslim Day Parade: "This is My Country"News Is Fighting Islamic Extremism Racist? Islamophobia?News Analysis The Soviet-Jihad Connection: Interview with Pavel StroilovNews Analysis Morsi Blasts UN With Brotherhood AgendaNews Analysis Imam Zaid Shakir: Marine Barracks Bombing Not TerrorismNews Analysis Embed scroller on your blog or site

Allah Akbar - helloooooooo

Death of Terrorist http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9BDHFu-C1IM

Muslims Demand Pope Apologise for The Reconquest of Spain

A couple of weeks ago, just before the Pope was due to visit Lebanon, the International Union of Muslim Scholars (IUMS), based in Qatar, called for him to issue an apology during his visit. This received some media coverage but, as far as I can see, the news reports only touched on the demand that he apologise for the speech he gave in Ratisbon in 2006. Left out of the mainstream reporting, though, was the fact that the “Muslim scholars” also demanded an apology for the Christian reconquest of Spain, or Reconquista as it is known. The IUMS have shown an incredible display of ignorance and hypocrisy here, as they demand that the Pope apologize for the reconquest of Spain by it’s rightful owners, Spain as in the same land in which the Moorish Muslims invaded, stole and colonized to begin with and had no rightful claim to the land whatsoever. On September 13, 2012, the day before Pope Benedict XVI began his visit to Lebanon, the International Union of Muslim Scholars (IUMS), headed by Sheikh Yousuf Al-Qaradhawi, issued a communiqué attacking him. The IUMS called on the pope to apologize for the acts of slaughter committed by the Crusaders in Spain, and for a 2006 lecture in which he claimed that the Muslim religion supports violence. While the [International] Union [of Muslim Scholars] is working to calm the rage of Muslims worldwide, [which was aroused] by non-Muslims insulting the honorable Messenger [i.e. the Prophet Muhammad], [so that they] confine themselves to peaceful protests and not attack any embassy or Christian site – it [also] calls on the pope to apologize to Muslims for his lecture [in 2006 in Regensburg, Germany],[ his apostolic exhortation, and the slaughters committed by the Crusaders [against Muslims] in Andalusia, just as he apologized to the Jews. I personally believe that non-Muslims have absolutely no reason to apologize for anything to Muslims, until the last Barbaric 1400 years of Islam have been redeemed, which is not likely due to the unaccountable barbarity continuing and becoming worse each day, all in the name of Islam. The Body of Truth

Out with colour: Islamists force Timbuktu women to wear black veils

To avoid being whipped, mutilated, and jailed, women in Timbuktu now have to wear black veils and loose-fitting clothing. Radical Islamists, who took control of the city months ago, are laying down their law – Sharia law – and for the first time since they’ve arrived, they’re specifically targeting women. Over the past few weeks, Islamists from two armed groups – Ansar Dine and Mujao, who took over northern Mali in April – have increasingly made use of corporal punishment against the local population. This includes whipping, amputations, and even stoning people to death who do not obey Sharia law. In Timbuktu, the first amputation-as-punishment took place on September 16. Islamists cut the hand of a man suspected of having committed theft. Two months earlier, a man and women accused of having had an extra-marital affair were whipped in public. Contributors Mahaman Dedeou "A woman was forced to give birth on the sidewalk because the Islamists wouldn't let her into the hospital without a veil" Mahaman Dedeou works at Timbuktu’s town hall. Four days ago, in the markets and at the hospital, Islamists began to ask women to cover their heads entirely [Editor’s Note: many women wore light veils that showed some of their hair]. In a message broadcast on the radio on Thursday, they also announced that women were no longer allowed outside after 11 p.m. Since then, the Islamist fighters that patrol the streets have been monitoring the women, and they hit women who don’t obey this new rule with their sticks. Until now, many women in Timbuktu wore light veils that covered part of their hair. But the cloth, often white, was quite transparent. The Islamists have decided women should wear a much larger veil that covers their ears, and that it has to be black. They also banned tight clothes that many of the young women wear. Now, they’re all wearing large flowing dresses or “toungous”, which is a 12 metre long piece of cloth that is traditionally worn in the Sahel desert, on top of regular clothes. "The Islamists announced that any woman who disobeys their rules will have her ears cut off" The Islamists announced that any woman who disobeys their rules will have her ears cut off and be sent to a new, all-female prison. Though they haven’t gone that far yet, they are still quite strict: on Thursday afternoon, as I was visiting a friend at the hospital, I saw a very pregnant woman arrive. She was wearing a white veil, so the Islamists asked her to go home and change. She explained that she was going into labour, and that she lived two kilometres away, so she couldn’t go back. She ended up giving birth outside, on the sidewalk [Editor’s note: another one of our Observers in Timbuktu also witnessed this. According to him, the woman and her baby were in good health after the birth.] Since they had arrived in Timbuktu, the Islamists were rather lenient with women. They mostly targeted men, by for example forcing them to go to the mosque every Friday at noon. However, despite their violent ways, the Islamists haven’t been able to get everyone to obey them. By targeting women, they’re trying to hit the men where it hurts the most.

Filmmakers asking imams to vet movies 'We are even asking if we dare release anything on this subject'

Once upon a time, Hollywood producers and studios routinely consulted with Christian pastors and church denominations for script approval on virtually every new film. Today, they are more likely to consult with Muslim imams and Islamist pressure groups to determine if their movies are appropriate for release. Ads by Google A new report from the Express Tribune, with the International Herald Tribune, last week said filmmakers working on projects depicting the U.S. Navy SEAL mission to Pakistan to kill terrorist Osama bin Laden are having second thoughts. “Filmmakers in Hollywood are terrified of inciting further retribution against America over a string of new films showing the U.S. mission,” the report said. The report said at least “one fearful studio has asked an Islamic cleric to vet its script.” “Senior executives at another studio have entered into intense briefing sessions with the U.S. State Department officials to minimize or expunge any content which otherwise might be viewed as offensive.” The report follows the violence that erupted throughout the Muslim world on the anniversary of 9/11, purportedly over an extended trailer for an anti-Islam film called “Innocence of Muslims.” The White House blamed the video for inciting Muslims who carried out the terror attack that killed the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other Americans. The film also has been cited by various Muslim leaders as a reason that Americans should curb First Amendment rights and impose penalties on people who defame Islam. The Express Tribune report said the concern has gotten so high that several current film projects are under scrutiny. Intelligence sources say the Benghazi attack that killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three others was an orchestrated terror attack, probably by an al-Qaida affiliate, and had nothing to do with the film. Nevertheless, the Express report said, filmmakers are worried that fundamentalists could target cinemas where the films are playing, with one admitting: “We are even asking if we dare release anything on this subject.” Hollywood, which in its early years often reflected the values of mainstream Christian faith in America, in recent years has taken a turn away from that practice, releasing movies that uninhibitedly mock Christianity, such as “The Last Temptation of Christ,” “The Da Vinci Code,” Bill Maher’s “Religulous,” “The Golden Compass” and “Hounddog.” Ted Baehr, founder of Movieguide, told WND that there are all sorts of influences in Hollywood, both good and bad. His organization regularly offers advice about how to treat Christians and Christianity accurately on the screen. “We do as much as we can,” he said. His organization also regularly recognizes the faith components of films and honors the best at its annual Faith & Values Awards Gala. He also monitors the industry, reporting regularly that movies with wholesome family values usually produce the best financial return. But Islamic interests also have been observing Hollywood. It was a little over a year ago that the AP reported the Muslim Public Affairs Council launched a series of workshops to try to influence movie makers. Another project was called Muslims on Screen and Television. “The idea is to really give Muslims an avenue to tell our stories. It’s as simple as that. There’s a curiosity about Islam and a curiosity about who Muslims are – and a lot of the fear that we’re seeing comes from only hearing one story or these constant negative stories,” Deana Nassar, MPAC’s Hollywood liaison, told AP. AP reporter Gillian Flaccus wrote, “With any luck, Hollywood will listen.” She quoted Ahmos Hassan, a Muslim-American talent manager who has been in the business for more than two decades, saying the industry has taken more interest in telling “authentic” Muslim stories in recent years. “There’s a demand for Muslim stories, but whether it’s Muslim writers or not depends on the talent they bring to the table,” Hassan, who owns Chariot Management, told AP. “They need to bring that to the industry … and I think the industry is open to it now, more so than any time before.” The groups already have offered consultation to TV series such as “Bones,” “24,” “Lie to Me” and “Aliens in America.” Earlier this year, the New York Post reported a story that reflected some of the confusion in Hollywood about faith. Sean Stone, son of director Oliver Stone, reported he converted to Islam, but finds it compatible with Judaism and Christianity. “I am of a Jewish bloodline, a baptized Christian who accepts Christ’s teachings, the Jewish Old Testament and the Holy Quran,” he said. “I believe there is one God, whether called Allah or Jehovah or whatever you wish to name him. He creates all peoples and religions. I consider myself a Jewish Christian Muslim.”

Three-Star General: Muslim Brotherhood Has Infiltrated Pentagon, DOD In ‘High Security Clearance’ Positions

Sep 26, 2012 5 Comments Infidel كافر (THOMAS MORE) ANN ARBOR, MI – U.S. Army Lieutenant General (Ret.) William “Jerry” Boykin, in a recent World Net Daily radio interview, confirmed that people with high security clearances connected to the Muslim Brotherhood hold important positions in every major federal agency including the Pentagon and the Department of Defense. The Muslim Brotherhood is a radical Islamist organization that has vowed the destruction of America from within. General Boykin has the credentials to back up his conclusions. He was one of the original members of the U.S. Army’s Delta Force which he ultimately led in combat operations. He also served a tour in the CIA during which time he participated in clandestine operations throughout the world. He served his last four years in the Army as Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence. Lt. Gen. Boykin, who currently serves as Executive Vice President of the Family Research Council, blasted Republicans for condemning Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., who sounded the alarm by questioning the Brotherhood ties of Huma Abedin, a top assistant to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Boykin said that neither Republicans nor Democrats want to protest too loudly over concerns of being branded intolerant. The Thomas More Law Center now represents LTC Matthew Dooley, a 1994 graduate of the U. S. Military Academy at West Point. GEN Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff had LTC Dooley fired as an instructor at the Joint Forces Staff College in order to appease Muslim groups and the White House who wanted all training materials offensive to Islam purged and all trainers using those materials disciplined.

Hyderabad journalists beaten and draged for not covering protesters.

HYDERABAD: Over a dozen journalists and policemen were assaulted as rioters during Ishq-e-Rasool protests besieged Hyderabad Press Club and the roads outside it were turned into a battlefield on Friday. The exchange of fire and tear-gas shelling, which started more than 75 minutes after the hostilities, sparked at around 4:15 pm and continued for over three hours. At least six journalists were beaten, dragged and pelted with stones while as many policemen including a DSP and SHO were also roughed up. Two motorcycles, one belonging to a reporter Abdul Qadir and another of cameraman Adnan Zai, were set ablaze while the rioters also ransacked the club’s reception before they were pushed out. The peaceful protests outside the club, which started in the morning, took an ugly turn in the afternoon. A group of protesters, who came in a rally of a religious group, began by shouting at the journalists, complaining that they are not being given proper coverage. In an instant they began hurling abuses and stones at the reporters, cameramen and photographers standing in and outside the club. “They were carping that the media was giving coverage to a particular group of protesters and was ignoring them,” said a photographer who was among the first to be hit by a rock inside the club. The siege forced the journalists to escape from the club by climbing the walls of the adjoining Radio Pakistan and into an alley behind the club. “We are stuck in a cul de sac. The only entrance to the street is blocked by the protesters who are attacking anyone with a camera,” said photographer Farhan Khan before the police action began. The assailants also charged upon the Express News team. “They hit me with batons, kicked me and dragged me on the footpath,” reporter Furqan Rajput said. “They were shouting that I deserved this because the media is an associate of the enemies of Islam.” Rajput was saved by Sunni Tehreek workers. They protected him until he could enter the club whose main gate was locked. A huge table was placed under it to prevent it from breaking. The delayed reinforcement from the police as well as the Rangers allowed the situation to get out of hand. The policemen from Cantt, who were on duty outside the club, fought the protesters as they waited for backup. “Two mobiles from the rangers were on duty at Basant Hall [less than 100 metres away] but they didn’t come until the police controlled the situation,” said Hameedur Rehman, the club’s president. According to him, the Rangers came about three hours late despite directives given by Deputy Commissioner Agha Shahnawaz Babur. By 7 pm the police ran out of tear-gas shells and it took over half an hour before fresh supplies came. Information Minister Sharjeel Memon announced that the government would compensate for the damage. In the evening, the rioters also attacked two wine shops in Saddar. In Kotri town of Jamshoro district eight people were injured, including five who were shot. They were hurt when protesters tried to force some shops to close. Published in The Express Tribune, September 22nd, 2012.

Obama official: Benghazi was a terrorist attack

The Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was in fact "a terrorist attack" and the U.S. government has indications that members of al Qaeda were directly involved, a top Obama administration official said Wednesday morning. "I would say yes, they were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy," Matt Olsen, the director of the National Counterterrorism Center, said Wednesday at a hearing of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, in response to questioning from Chairman Joe Lieberman (I-CT) about the attack that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans. As for who was responsible, Olsen said it appears there were attackers from a number of different militant groups that operate in and around Benghazi, and said there are already signs of al Qaeda involvement. "We are looking at indications that individuals involved in the attack may have had connections to al Qaeda or al Qaeda's affiliates; in particular, al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb," he said. The U.S. government just isn't sure yet whether the terrorist attack was pre-planned or whether it was an example of terrorists taking advantage of protests against an anti-Islam film, Olsen said. "It appears that individuals who were certainly well-armed seized on the opportunity presented as the events unfolded that evening and into the morning hours of September 12th. We do know that a number of militants in the area, as I mentioned, are well-armed and maintain those arms. What we don't have at this point is specific intelligence that there was a significant advanced planning or coordination for this attack," he said. His statements go further than those of the White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, who said last week that the protests in Cairo and Benghazi were a reaction to the video and not a pre-planned attack. Today, Carney didn't repeat the assertion that the video was solely to blame, but he said again that there is no evidence the Benghazi attack was pre-planned. "What I can tell you is that, as I said last week, as ... our ambassador to the United Nations said on Sunday and as I said the other day, based on what we know now and knew at the time, we have no evidence of a preplanned or premeditated attack," Carney said Wednesday. "It is a simple fact that there are in post-revolution, post-war Libya armed groups; there are bad actors hostile to the government, hostile to the West, hostile to the United States. And as has been the case in other countries in the region, it is certainly conceivable that these groups take advantage of and exploit situations that develop, when they develop, to protest against or attack either Westerners, Americans, Western sites, or American sites." Committee ranking Republican Susan Collins (R-ME) declared at the hearing that she believes the attacks were planned well in advance and she referenced information she had received from U.S. intelligence officials behind closed doors. "First, I will tell you that based on the briefings I have had, I've come to the opposite conclusion and agree with the president of Libya that this was a premeditated, planned attack that was associated with the date of 9/11, the anniversary of 9/11," she said. "I just don't think that people come to protests equipped with RPGs and other heavy weapons. And the reports of complicity -- and they are many -- with the Libyan guards who were assigned to guard the consulate also suggest to me that this was premeditated." Collins said she was concerned by the lack of security at the Benghazi consulate, especially since there had been an attack on the mission in June and a more serious attack on the British ambassador's convoy as well. Olsen said the U.S. government was aware of the danger but not of impending attack that killed the four Americans. "So there were reports detailing those attacks and detailing generally the threat that was faced to U.S. and Western individuals and interests in Eastern Libya from, again, armed militants as well as elements connected to al Qaeda," he said. "There was no specific intelligence regarding an imminent attack prior to September 11th on our post in Benghazi." Posted By Josh Rogin

Achtung - Muslim sprecht!!!!

17.09.2012 11 Jahre 9/11: „IZ-Begegnung“ mit Paul Schreyer über Hintergründe und Erkenntnismethoden „Das sind Fähigkeiten, die ans Übermenschliche grenzen“ (iz). Jüngst jährte sich zum elften Mal der Jahrestag des 11. September 2001. Zu sehr wurde das offizielle Bild und seine Deutung im Bewusstsein der Menschen verankert, als dass eine Hinwendung zu alternativen Sichtweisen noch möglich scheint. Über Kritikpunkte an der offiziellen Verschwörungstheorie zu 9/11, Unstimmigkeiten, mutmaßliche Insidergeschäfte und dem Unterschied zwischen Paranoia und realen Machenschaften sprachen wir mit dem Publizisten Paul Schreyer. http://www.islamische-zeitung.de/?id=16097

THE MUSLIMS ARE NOT HAPPY!

They're not happy in Gaza .. They're not happy in Egypt .. They're not happy in Libya .. They're not happy in Morocco .. They're not happy in Iran .. They're not happy in Iraq .. They're not happy in Yemen .. They're not happy in Afghanistan .. They're not happy in Pakistan .. They're not happy in Syria .. They're not happy in Lebanon .. SO, WHERE ARE THEY HAPPY? They're happy in Australia . They're happy in Canada . They're happy in England .. They're happy in France .. They're happy in Italy .. They're happy in Germany .. They're happy in Sweden .. They're happy in the USA .. They're happy in Norway .. They're happy in Holland . They're happy in Denmark . Basically, they're happy in every country that is not Muslim and unhappy in every country that is! AND WHO DO THEY BLAME? Not Islam. Not their leadership. Not themselves. THEY BLAME THE COUNTRIES THEY ARE HAPPY IN! AND THEN; They want to change those countries to be like.... THE COUNTRY THEY CAME FROM WHERE THEY WERE UNHAPPY! Excuse me, but I can't help wondering... How dumb can you get?

Stop Islamic Crimes Against Women. Inform your Congressman that Islam is Unlawful per United States Laws

America has welcomed and cared richly for more immigrants from more countries than all other nations in history - combined. IslamoFascism UnWelcomeBut this unparalleled benevolence has one Condition: If your goal is to subvert U.S. Freedom, Democracy and Egalitarian Justice with an Islamofascist Totalitarian system that demonstrably oppresses, stones and beats women, calls for child bride pedophilia, the wanton murder of female adulterers, critics and defectors and authorizes every Muslim to appoint himself a Mujahideen Jihadi executioner of any infidel as he sees fit - then you are not welcome in the United States and are subject to punitive action as stipulated by numerous UNITED STATES LAWS. Laws make Displaying or Disseminating the Q'uran Unlawful in the United States and render the Q'uran a Seditious and Treasonous Document In order to preserve the lives of its citizens, government officials must weigh potential destruction of human lives and subversion of The Constitution against guarantees of religion, speech and press which, although sacrosanct in America, are not more precious than life itself and must be denied to forces which seek to annihilate them if Western Freedoms are to survive. - adapted from the Annotated First Amendment -Cornell Law School The global spread of Islamic Theocracy, if not arrested with all force, will mean the End of Earth's Golden Age of Liberty and Justice for All in the West. Freedoms we LOSE under Islam Barbaric Sharia Laws of Islam 1. Rule of the U.S. Constitution & Amendments 2. Free Speech 3. Religious Freedom 4. Secular Freedom 5. Sexual Freedoms 6. Freedom of the Press 7. Literary Freedoms 8. Freedoms of Marriage and Divorce 9. A Women's right not to be beaten or stoned 10. A Woman's right to claim inheritance, own property & hold Political Office 11. A Woman's right to hold Clerical Positions 12. Delightful Colorful Feminine Fashions 13. The United States Government 14. Gays Lose the Right to Live and are beheaded 1. Stoning and Beating of Women 2. Execution for Criticism 3. Death Penalty for Apostasy 4. Execution for Blasphemy 5. Death Penalty for Satire 6. Amputating hands & feet for petty crimes 7. Burkha Death Bag Face Censorship 8. Mandatory Prayers & Mosque Attendance 9. Honor Killing / Raping Daughters 10. Execution for Atheism 11. Death Penalty for Adultery 12. Women Beaten for Singing 13. Legal Rape of Wives 14. Women & men must be raped before execution 15. Churches & Synagogues are Forbidden Muslims are obligated to obey, imitate and disseminate to children during their most impressionable formative years, the violent teachings and biography of Mohammad, collectively called the Sunnah, comprising the life and sayings of Mohammad in the Sira and Hadith, along with the Q'uran, a frankensteinish plagiarism of the most brutal laws and barbaric practices of the 7th century. Because Mohammad was illiterate and unable to comprehend the Torah, he was unaware that practices of stoning, eye gouging and amputations were abandoned by the Jews by 30 B.C.. Nevertheless, Mohammad insisted on resurrecting these barbarisms and Muslim countries disgracefully practice them to this day. Since Mohammad is held to be the perfect role model for all Muslims for all time, Mohammad's actions and teachings are a VIRAL MEME powered by "divine authority," convincing Muslims they have a SPECIAL PRIVILEDGE TO KILL AND RULE OVER INFIDELS whose offense to allah is worse then their murder. How this SATANIC MEME plays out is not mysterious as the world watches Muslims all over the world imitating Mohammad's pattern of barbaric sadistic violence that included crucifying, burning people alive, pedophillia, rape, brigandry, robbery, looting, pillaging, murder and constant war. In the clearest most certain terms, the Q'uran and Sunnah well articulate a master plan to subjugate the entire world to Islam through violence, coercion, duplicity and subversion. For a United States President or Representative to not acknowledge these incontrovertible truths or take grave extraordinary measures to combat the Islamic threat to everything America stands for, is dereliction of duty and criminal negligence. For the average citizen, respecting evil is evil and respecting, defending and supporting Islam implicates and makes one complicit in every act of stoning, amputation, beheading and terrorism born of the Islamic plague. If one outrageously claims terrorists bear no resemblance to Mohammad, his first Caliphs, Islamic history or the Q'uran, one hasn't studied Islamic history, read the Q'uran or the Sunnah. Read them now: Q'uotes from Mohammad. Q'uranic Muslims walking in the footsteps of Mohammad, comfort, aid, adhere to, harbor and abet by every means, enemies of the State who plot and execute sabotage, mayhem, violence and deadly terroristic coercion through a global Islamic cartel to which every Muslim in America belongs by their pledge to obey the Q'uran and follow Mohammad's desire to annihilate every non-Islamic form of government. 66 countries and cultures have been annihilated and assimilated by Islam: The UK and U.S. are next. Islam will not quit until every Free Western Light of Democracy is extinguished and replaced with brutal Islamic Totalitarian Theocracy. Listen to Thomas Jefferson express his estimation of Islam: The right was founded on the Laws of the Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have answered their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise. - Thomas Jefferson Laws of the United States of America compel our President and America's leaders to acknowledge the threat of Islam and take action to protect America's Freedoms, Democratic Government and People from the Islamic Meme that seeks to DESTROY THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES And REPLACE IT WITH A FASCIST INTOLERANT ISLAMIC THEOCRACY KNOWN AS SHARIA LAW. Every time Muslims congregate and advocate, edit, publish or display the Q'uran they break U.S. laws as they conspire to institute Sharia Law. It's time the full force of the laws of Life were levied against the cult of Death. Islamic teachings of violence and treason are no longer welcome in America. America has incredulously looked the other way for too long. Muslims cannot be allowed to continue breaking our laws and plotting our demise by advocating the violent subversion enumerated in the Q'uran and by giving comfort and adherence to enemies of the state with whom the U.S. is at war.

Jailed Indonesian cleric: mimic attacks on U.S. in Libya

One of Indonesia's most notorious hardline Muslim clerics has issued a jailhouse proclamation to his faithful: feel free to mimic the coordinated attacks on America's Libyan embassy in Indonesia. There is still speculation as to whether those attacks, which killed U.S. envoy J. Christopher Stevens, were provoked by the poorly made, anti-Islam "Innocence of Muslims" video posted on YouTube. But Abu Bakar Bashir, a cheerleader for violent jihad still in prison for organizing the 2002 bombings in Bali, is clear in stating that the film must be answered with violent reprisals. In an interview with Indonesian outlet "Voice of al-Islam," according to a translation by the Jakarta Globe, Bashir said that "what happened in Libya can be imitated ... If it is defaming God and the Prophet [Muhammad], the punishment should be death. [There are] no other considerations.” This is, to my knowledge, the most extreme call to violence to come from any Southeast Asian Muslim leader. But there is good news: Indonesian security forces have already cracked down on Bashir's followers with a vengeance and scattered them into fragmented groups. They are probably incapable of mounting such an attack at the time being. Better still is that, for the most part, Southeast Asia's varied Muslim societies have registered their disgust at the film but stopped short of advocating violence. As I wrote earlier this week, the region's mainstream Muslim leaders are largely disturbed that America values one troublemaker's freedom of speech rights over the aggrieved feelings of Muslims worldwide. Still, wild rallies outside American embassies in Indonesia, which have degraded into bloody fighting between Muslim protesters and cops, may continue in days to come. According to the Jakarta Post, protests have scared a U.S. consulate in Medan, a bustling provincial capital, into temporarily closing.

Man Allegedly Behind Anti-Islam Film Slams Protesters

A man who says he was behind the private film sparking demonstrations in the Muslim world is criticizing the protesters.

In an interview with U.S.-government-funded Radio Sawa, the alleged director of the film says his fellow Arabs "have to learn demonstrate peacefully against the issues on which we disagree." He says any allegation the United States government was involved in the making of the movie is "funny and ridiculous" and that "America has nothing to do with the film."

Radio Sawa says the man refused to confirm his identity but that a source who provided the contact information identified him as Nakoula Basseley Nakoula.

Several news organizations have linked the inflammatory film, titled "The Innocence of Muslims," to Nakoula, 55, an Egyptian Coptic Christian who lives in California and recently served a prison sentence for bank fraud.

Initially, the film was said to have been produced by a man named Sam Bacile, who told news media he is Israeli-American. A consultant on the film confirmed the name "Sam Bacile" was a pseudonym. There is no record of the film or its producer in Hollywood reference sources.

The man believed to be Nakoula tells Radio Sawa he did not expect the film would cause such strong reactions from the Arab and Muslim world, saying the film's other producers "put my mind at ease." But he also says all the film's advisers were "foreigners who do not know anything about Arabs and have never visited Arab countries."

During a protest over the film outside the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, Tuesday, armed militants killed U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens and three other U.S. staff members.

Nakoula says he is saddened by the deaths but that he does not regret making the film. He also rejected allegations made by some of the actors and crew members that they were tricked into making the movie.

When asked if he misled the actors and crew, he said "This is a producer's right. He can put what he wants in the film without consulting the actors... my answer to them is that they do not belong to a professional association."

Translation of Sawa Interview with the film maker of "Innocence of Muslims"

In a telephone interview with Radio Sawa, the man claiming to have made the film that triggered demonstrations in much of the Islamic world says he has no regrets about the project. The following is a translation of the interview that was conducted in Arabic:

Filmmaker: I'm going to tell you the whole truth. All the names mentioned in the media outlets have nothing to do with my real name.

Sawa: So, introduce yourself to the readers and listeners. Who are you?

Filmmaker: I am an Islamic affairs researcher since 1985 or 1986. When I claim things I always provide documentations and proof. I started my researches since I heard about certain events that concern the Muslims.

Sawa: What are the events that prompted you to write about Islam and Muslims?

Filmmaker: The events that took place in Iran when they started to expel the Jews and the people of other faiths out of Iran. The second thing that followed that was Salman Rushdie's book. He was a man who wrote a book that has nothing to do with Islam. The Muslims put a bounty of $5 million to have him killed and I was angered by that. This was an intellectual terrorism.

Sawa: Those events were the reason that prompted you to write about Islam?

Filmmaker: Of course. And by the way, I graduated from the Faculty of Arts, Cairo University

Sawa: There are media reports that say that you are the producer of the movie "Innocence of Muslims." are you?

Filmmaker: I am the screenwriter of the movie.

Sawa: Who produced the movie?

Filmmaker: I am not going to disclose the identity of the producer.

Sawa: Some are saying that the United States was involved.

Filmmaker: This is funny and ridiculous. America has nothing to do with the film. What is being said about America being the producer of the movie is not logical at all. It is only a way to find an excuse to blame America. ...The movie was produced in a very primitive way just to deliver a message. Now there are prominent producers and directors who plan to produce other movies.

Sawa: Are you claiming that there are other movies in the pipeline?

Filmmaker: This is what I heard, but can't confirm this.

Sawa: What made you decide to write the script of the movie?

Filmmaker: I wrote a book in 1993 or 1994. The producers liked the book and asked me to write a movie script about it.

Sawa: What was the title of that book?

Filmmaker: I refuse to mention the title of the book because this will reveal my true identity.

Sawa: Some of the actors in the movie claim that you misled them and the original script was not the same as the final product. Is that true?

Filmmaker: Absolutely not. Those actors are not members of a professional acting association and therefore do not have the right to appeal the final product. The producer has the right to change the movie's name or script as he wishes. However, I don't blame them for claiming that they were misled to protect themselves from any harm. All that is owed them is pay for their acting. Nothing else.

Sawa: Did you anticipate the film would cause such strong reactions?

Filmmaker: No I did not expect that, but the producer and director assured me not to worry.

Sawa: How did you feel about the violent reaction in the Islamic world and the death of the U.S. Ambassador in Libya?

Filmmaker: First, the U.S. ambassador's death has nothing to do with the film. The people who did this are thugs and thieves. I have a question for those people: If you are defending the Prophet, why do you steal from embassies? President Sadat said in the past: "Such is an uprising of thugs. America is a victim of injustice in this case. What does the U.S. government have to do with these subjects? If a person anywhere in the world does something, should a government be held responsible? Of course not. We have to learn demonstrate peacefully against the issues on which we disagree. But it seems that Omar Suleiman was right when he said, "We are not yet ready for democracy."

Sawa: After the death of the U.S. Ambassador to Libya, do you regret the making of the film?

Filmmaker: No, I do not regret it. I am saddened for the killing of ambassador, but I do not regret making it.

Sawa: If you had the chance again would you produce the same film?

Filmmaker: I believe that I've done my part. I am no longer a young man. I've decided to retire. That is enough for me.

Sawa: Do you have any kind of security protection given the strong reaction to the movie?

Filmmaker: Absolutely not. Nobody knows my name. I never had any kind of protection and why would I need protection while living a normal life.

Sawa: Dozens of the Coptic organization in Egypt have denounced the movie.

Filmmaker: They have the right to do so, and they have nothing to do with the movie and I have nothing to do with them. I want to say that I did not come up with any information other than what is written in the Islamic books. I added nothing of my own.

Sawa: Have you read the Quran?

Filmmaker: Of course I have read the Quran, the Hadiths and more that 3,000 Islamic books.

Sawa: Do you believe that that only Islam has negative sides? What are your views about Judaism and Christianity, for example?

Filmmaker: I am an average reader about other religions and I can write about Judaism and Christianity if I ever resume writing.

Sawa: I see that you are defending America a lot in our interview? Do you have a sense of guilt for what happened?

Filmmaker: Yes, I feel guilty. America has got nothing to do with this film.

Sawa: Do you have a message to the world that you want to relay through your interview with Radio Sawa?

Filmmaker: Yes. I want the world to watch the movie in its entirety. The duration of the movie is 1.55 hours. Then you can judge for yourselves. I'm now thinking about posting the whole movie on the internet.

Sawa: The US department of State and President Obama denounced that movie.

Filmmaker: President Obama is responsible for the lives of 400 million Americans and he has all the right to say anything and use any means to protect his people. In the end, I would like to relay my condolences to the United States for the death of the U.S. Ambassador and the other Embassy staff.

Cleric Beaten Up By 'Badly Veiled' Woman

"I politely [told] her to cover herself up," said Hojatoleslam Ali Beheshti, an Iranian cleric in the city of Shamirzad in Semnan Province, describing a recent encounter with a woman he believed was improperly veiled.

"She responded to me by saying: 'You [should] close your eyes.'"

The cleric, who spoke to the semi-official Mehr news agency, said he repeated his warning to the “bad hijab” woman, which is a way of describing women who do not fully observe the Islamic dress code that became compulsory following the 1979 revolution.

"Not only didn’t she cover herself up, but she also insulted me. I asked her not to insult me anymore, but she started shouting and threatening me," Beheshti said. "She pushed me and I fell to the ground on my back. From that point on, I don’t know what happened. I was just feeling the kicks of the woman who was beating me up and insulting me."

He said he was hospitalized for three days following the attack.

I’m not a supporter of violence, but as a woman who grew up in Iran and was harassed many times for appearing in public in a way that was deemed un-Islamic, I understand the frustration that woman in Semnan must have felt and why she lashed out at the cleric.

(Here are my thoughts on the hijab in Iran.)

For the past 30 years, Iranian women have been harassed, detained, fined, and threatened by the morality police, security forces, and zealots over their appearance. Women have fought back in different ways, including by pushing the boundaries of acceptable dress and criticizing the rules, which apply only to women.

Officially, the hijab is promoted as “protection” for women against evil in society. For many women, however, the hijab feels like a burden, an insult, a limitation of their freedom and an attempt to keep them under control.

Young girls often cite the mandatory hijab as one of the main reasons they want to leave Iran and move to another country. Women being mistreated by the police because of their hijabs have become a common scene on the streets of the Iranian capital and other cities, especially during the hot summer months when the hijab crackdown intensifies.

There have also been cases of women clashing with the morality police, including a number of cases that have been documented by citizen journalists and posted on YouTube.

The situation has led to conflicts between women and religious zealots such as Beheshti, who believe that the Islamic principle of “commanding right and forbidding wrong” makes it their duty to lecture women about their appearance and choice of dress.

Mehr reports that attacks against clerics similar to the one involving Beheshti are not rare. The news agency issued the names of three other clerics, including a representative of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who have been attacked.

"...Hojatoleslam Seyed Mahmud Mostafavi Montazeri in [a street] in Tehran; Hojatoleslam Farzad Farouzesh, the Friday Prayer leader of Tehran Medical Science University, on the capital’s Shariati Street; a cleric in the Tehranpars region; and Kheirandish, the supreme leader’s representative to Shiraz’s Agriculture University, and...they all have been beaten up for performing their religious duty of [commanding right and forbidding wrong] and in some cases sustained irreparable damages.”

Beheshti says he didn’t file a complaint against the woman who attacked him, despite going through “the worst days of his life.”

According to Mehr, the case is being reviewed by the judiciary. The region’s prosecutor told the news agency that the case is being investigated but wouldn’t give any details. The prosecutor has referred to the case as an incident of a "public beating."

Of course, when the same type of incident is reversed -- a "badly veiled" women beaten in public by police -- it’s simply a necessary enforcement of the dress code.

-- Golnaz Esfandiari

About Shariah Finance - part II.

How is shariah related to jihad?
The mu’amalat part of shariah mandates as a religious obligation, conducting violent jihad against non-Muslims to establish Islam’s rule worldwide in a form known as the caliphate.
How does shariah finance relate to shariah itself?
Shariah finance is indistinguishable from shariah itself, since its followers consider shariah immutable, indivisible, and mandatory for Muslims to follow in all aspects of life. Muslims are not allowed to pick and choose different aspects of shariah to follow. Anyone that infers that shariah finance is something apart from shariah is simply being dishonest. In fact, the main purpose of shariah finance is to promote shariah.
Where is shariah-compliant finance most prominent?
According to the November 2007 edition of The Banker, Iran dominates the world of shariah-compliant finance. Three of the five largest shariah-compliant financial institutions in the world—including the top two—are Iranian. The amount of shariah-compliant financial assets in institutions in Iran is over twice as large as the amount in financial institutions in the world’s second largest shariah-compliant country, Saudi Arabia.
How does shariah finance threaten Americans?
Shariah finance is a threat to Western values, human rights and US national security. Shariah finance has a political objective: to legitimize shariah in the West. Evidence indicates that shariah-compliant finance provides financial support to extremism and terrorism. Shariah-compliant financial institutions employ shariah scholars, many of whom have been shown to be extremists, even to the point of advocating suicide bombing and jihad against America. Among the decisions these scholars make is the donation of 2.5% or more of annual earnings to Muslim charities. Similar to zakat, earnings from investments that are judged to have been unislamic must be purified through donations to charities as well. Given the extremist tendencies of these scholars and the fact that no fewer than 27 charities have been designated as funding terrorism by the US Treasury Department, this presents a hazard which could obviously threaten US national security.
In sum, shariah finance represents a number of potential threats to the US, including possible financing of terrorism and extremist Islamist organizations and movements, infiltrating our financial markets and legitimizing shariah.
Have shariah-compliant financial institutions been tied to terrorism?
There are a number of well-documented cases in which shariah-compliant financial institutions have participated in the financial support of terrorism. For instance, two shariah-compliant banks registered in the Bahamas, Bank Al-Taqwa and Akida Bank, were, according to the US Treasury Department, shell companies actually run out of Italy and Switzerland, whose only real business was laundering money to terrorists. From 1988 until November 2001 when it was designated a terrorist entity by the US government and the UN, Bank Al-Taqwa transferred tens of millions of dollars to HAMAS, Al Qaeda, the PLO, Algerian Armed Islamic Group (GIA), the Taliban, Egyptian Gama’a al Islamiya and the Tunisian An-Nahda.
In another case, prominent members of the Saudi royal family were co-investors with Osama Bin Laden in the Sudanese Shamal Islamic Bank while several designated terrorists maintained accounts there

About Shariah Finance - part I.

Shariah Finance Watch is a project of the Center for Security Policy‘s program to educate the public and policymakers about the dangers of Shariah. For a more in-depth look at Shariah, see Shariah: The Threat to America, a report by 19 top national security practitioners– including the former Director of Central Intelligence, the former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence, and the former Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency. Shariah: The Threat to America is available on paperback and Kindle at Amazon.com.
Below are frequently asked questions about Shariah and Shariah-Compliant Finance, or Islamic Banking.

What is shariah?

Understanding Shariah law is integral to understanding the dangers of Shariah-compliant finance. Shariah law is Islamic law dating back to the 7th century and is today the law of the land in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Sudan and the law under which the Taliban operates.
Shariah law authorities, some of whom are now being paid handsomely by Barclays, Dow Jones, Standard & Poors, HSBC, Citibank, Merrill Lynch, Deutschebank, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, UBS, Credit Suisse and others have the power to dictate Shariah compliance as deemed by “scholarly consensus” on matters of finance, family, penal law, apostasy, and war. Examples of authoritarian Shariah law include: requirement of women to obtain permission from husbands for daily freedoms; beating of disobedient woman and girls; execution of homosexuals; engagement of polygamy and forced child marriages; the testimony of four male witnesses to prove rape; honor killings of those, principally women, who have dishonored the family; death to apostate Muslims who chose to leave Islam; inferior status of non-Muslims, and capital punishment for those who “slander Islam.”
What are some of the risks of shariah-compliant finance?
National Security and Financial Risks: Islamists are attempting to impose Shariah Compliant Finance (SCF) on Western institutions to use our own financial strengths against us. The most serious problem with SCF is that it legitimates and institutionalizes Shariah law (i.e., Islamic law), a theo-political- legal doctrine violently opposed to Western values. With $1 -$2 trillion petrodollars annually looking for an investment home, blind exuberance is driving financial institutions to adopt SCF, without even a minimal baseline for legal compliance. This willful blindness, and lack of both transparency and due diligence may cause SCF to be the next sub-prime crisis, but this time with deadly consequences.
Legal Risks: Western financial institutions which adopt SCF may have criminal and civil exposure to claims of aiding and abetting sedition and the material support of terrorism, securities fraud, consumer fraud, racketeering, and antitrust violations, as well as exposure to tort claims for sedition and terrorism, and for the violation of internationally recognized norms of the law of nations.
Terror Financing Mechanism: SCF as monitored by paid Shariah law advisors to U.S. banking institutions must “purify” certain return on investment (ROI) dollars that do not meet Shariah law standards. This money must be donated to Islamic charities – including some that promote Jihad and support suicide bombing. Investment disclosures state that these profits can be as high as 6% of profits of investments. With $800 billion already in SCF assets, the potential for billions of dollars to be siphoned off for terrorism is real. This would be a serious criminal violation of U.S. law.
Consider this example: Shariah Mutual Funds promote themselves as “ethical funds.” To be Shariah-compliant, they donate “tainted” revenues to Shariah-compliant “charities.” A post 9-11 U.S. investor in a Shariah-compliant “ethical investment” is not told that Shariah law also requires imposing Shariah as U.S. law, execution of gays and female apartheid. Is he a victim of consumer fraud? Is this same post 9-11 investor unwittingly funding terror? The government has shut down the three largest Shariah-compliant charities in the U.S. – the Holy Land Foundation, Benevolence International Foundation, and the Global Relief Foundation – after proving they funded terrorist organizations.The American taxpayer deserves answers to these questions. The Center for Security Policy (CSP) is meeting directly with members of Congress, U.S. regulatory agencies and Wall

ing. Valentin Kusák
chief of AntiMešita o.s. a IVČRN o.s.