Holger Awakens

Qatar Funding Jihadis in Global Sharia Push

2013-05-19T04:37:00.003-07:00

Qatar Funding Jihadis in Global Sharia Push

As the Syrian civil war continues to tear that country apart, with possible use of chemical weapons (by somebody) reported and certain commission of atrocities on all sides, calls for Western and especially U.S. intervention are mounting.

Some want a “no fly zone” so that Bashar al-Assad’s forces can be prevented from aerial bombardment of his people, civilians and rebels alike. Some want the Obama administration to arm the rebels directly (or at least more directly than it already has been for the last year or more). Some, like U.S. Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC), want both a no-fly zone and more weapons for the rebels. Sen. Graham has even pushed for the insertion of U.S. ground forces into the Syrian conflict.

The trouble is that most U.S. lawmakers realize there just aren’t a lot of good candidates among the rebels whose victory would actually advance core U.S. national security interests in the region. Where in Syria is there a capable, credible rebel force openly dedicated to anything but Sunni Islam and Islamic Law?

Aside from some out-funded, outgunned and outmanned militias among the umbrella Syrian Free Army (SFA) that have been identified and met by Major General Paul Vallely, USA (ret.), thanks to decades of inaction and neglect of pro-Western voices by U.S. leadership, the most powerful forces now opposing the Assad regime are Islamic jihadis, sponsored by Qatar, Saudi Arabia and other theocratic regimes.

The loss of SFA commander Col. Riad al-Assad in March 2013 to a bomb that left him seriously injured and out of the fight was a critical blow to opposition forces not aligned with either the al-Qa’eda militia, Jabhat al-Nusra, or the Muslim Brotherhood.

Since at least October 2012, when it first warned that most of the weapons being shipped to the rebels by Qatar and Saudi Arabia were going to “hard-line Islamic jihadists,” even the New York Times has been sounding some well-considered notes of caution about calls for deeper U.S. involvement. Following up in April 2013, Times journalist Ben Hubbard reported that “nowhere in rebel-controlled Syria is there a secular fighting force to speak of” but rather that “[a]cross Syria, rebel-held areas are dotted with Islamic courts staffed by lawyers and clerics, and by fighting brigades led by extremists.”

So, acknowledged hard-line Salafis like al-Qa’eda and Saudi Arabia aside, what might be expected in Syrian territory seized by Qatari-backed (i.e., Muslim Brotherhood-aligned) fighters?

While ostensibly a U.S. ally, Qatar in fact shares little with American core principles such as gender, ethnic and faith equality, genuine pluralism, tolerance, individual liberty or liberal secular democracy.

For starters, Qatar is an authoritarian monarchy whose legal system is dominated by sharia (Islamic) law. Article I of the 1972 Qatari constitution declares with finality that “its religion is Islam and the Islamic Shari'a is the main source of legislation.” Qatari judges are graduates of Saudi schools of Islamic jurisprudence or Egypt’s al-Azhar University. Qatar’s sharia courts have full jurisdiction in all civil and criminal matters over both Qatari nationals and resident or visiting Muslims from other countries.

The reach of Qatar’s draconian sharia mandate obviously extends beyond its Muslim subjects, however, as Dorje Gurung, a Nepali chemistry teacher at Qatar Academy in the capital of Doha, found out recently. In early May 2013, Gurung was jailed pending felony charges for insulting Islam. The accusation resulted from Gurung’s interaction with some insolent and undisciplined students at the school who had launched racist taunts and even a physical assault against him. Freed after an international outcry, the veteran Tibetan-Buddhist educator who’d been educated by Jesuits in Italy, and taught in Australia, Britain and the U.S., could have faced up to seven years in prison had he been convicted.

None of this should come as any surprise, given Qatar’s identification as ‘banker to the global jihad’ and ‘home away from home’ for Yousef al-Qaradawi, the Muslim Brotherhood’s senior jurist (as I wrote in a January 2013 piece for the Clarion Project, here).

As owner and home base for the Al-Jazeera , Qatar also provides the satellite television and news outlet of choice for a panoply of jihadist groups, from al-Qa’eda, HAMAS and Hezbollah to the Muslim Brotherhood. Qatar, quite simply, is a jihadist state, not a moderate one. Its objectives mirror those of official Islam for the last 1400 years—and of its Muslim Brotherhood guests since that group’s 1928 founding: Establishment of Islamic government and enforcement of Islamic Law (sharia).

Qatar’s co-sponsorship with the U.S. administration of the 2011 Libyan revolution that was dominated (and won) by al-Qa’eda-affiliated militias predictably ushered in a chaotic post-Qaddafi situation in which Muslim Brotherhood thugs on the streets and al-Qa’eda militias across Cyrenaica demand what they fought for: Strict application of sharia.

The so-far unavenged murderous September 11 attack against the U.S. mission in Benghazi by the al-Qa’eda affiliate, Ansar al-Shariah, has spawned a spike in al-Qa’eda threats against U.S. Embassies in Egypt, Libya and Yemen.

Christians and their churches are under assault across Libya, something that happened rarely, if ever, under Qaddafi. Islamic Law, the Islamic Law of Qatar, al-Qaradawi and the Brotherhood, in fact, demands the suppression of all non-Muslim expressions of faith, especially free speech and proselytizing.

In Syria, Qatar’s investment in the rebellion, estimated by some to be as much as three billion dollars, increasingly is being seen for what it most likely is: An attempt to buy influence and build networks among the jihadist opponents of the Assad regime in order to shape the post-Assad battlespace.

What Qatar’s ruling al-Thani family wants in Syria is the same outcome it sought by backing the Tunisian Brotherhood party, al-Nahda, and the Muslim Brotherhood takeover of Egypt: Qatar-friendly Sunni Islamic government under sharia law. While the Sunni Islamic part of this objective is shared by the Saudis and other backers of the Syrian rebellion, divisions and rivalries among the anti-Assad opposition mean that the post-Assad period almost inevitably will be at least as contentious as the rebellion itself.

Continuing civil war seems unavoidable, not just against the stay-behind insurgent cell networks being set up by Shi’ite Iran and Hezbollah, but among Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the rest of the competing opposition interests which already are visibly splintering even before (perhaps well before) Assad goes down.

Syria is a morass of intra-Islamic hatreds at the moment. While disposing of Iran’s only real ally in the region and severing a critical land bridge to Lebanese Hezbollah and Islamic jihad’s front line against the State of Israel surely are worthy objectives, trading an Iranian proxy for yet another new Muslim Brotherhood outpost is not.

U.S. Drone Strike Kills 4 Al Qaeda In Yemen

2013-05-19T04:21:00.002-07:00

Well, this has been a long time coming.

The story comes from The Long War Journal.

US drones kill 4 'militants' in first strike in Yemen a month

US drones launched the first strike in Yemen in a month, killing four "militants" in an attack on a vehicle carrying explosives in a southern town plagued by al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.

The remotely piloted Predators or the more deadly Reapers launched several missiles at a truck "carrying grenades and explosive belts" in the Al Mahfad area in the southern province of Abyan on Friday night, AFP reported. Four suspected members of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula were killed in the airstrike.

Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula fighters and leaders regrouped in the Al Mahfad area after being driven from cities such as Zinjibar, Jaar, Lawdar, and Shaqra during a Yemeni military offensive that began in the spring of 2012 [see Threat Matrix report, AQAP regroups in Abyan province]. AQAP controlled the cities in Abyan, as well as other cities and towns in neighboring Shabwa province after launching their own offensive in 2011.

Since losing control of large areas of Abyan and Shabwa, AQAP has spread out into the provinces of Aden, Al Baydah, Al Jawf, Damar, Hadramout, Hodeida, Ibb, Marib, Saada, and Sana'a. Of the 29 drones strikes recorded by The Long War Journal over the past 11 months, 25 of them have taken place in the provinces of Aden, Al Baydah, Al Jawf, Damar, Hadramout, Hodeida, Ibb, Marib, Saada, and Sana'a.

The US has launched nine drone strikes in Yemen so far this year. The last strike took place on April 21 in the Wadi Abida area of Marib province; two AQAP operatives were reported killed.

In 2012, the US launched 42 drone strikes in Yemen against AQAP and its political front, Ansar al Sharia. The previous year, the US launched 10 drone and air strikes against the al Qaeda affiliate.

Although five senior AQAP operatives were killed in strikes in Yemen in 2012, the group's top leadership cadre remains intact. In January, the Yemeni government claimed that Said al Shihri, the deputy emir of AQAP, died following an attack last fall; AQAP has not confirmed his death, however, and recently released a statement that hinted he may be alive.

The US has targeted both senior AQAP operatives who pose a direct threat to the US, and low-level fighters and local commanders who are battling the Yemeni government. This trend was first identified by The Long War Journal in the spring of 2012 [see LWJ report, US drone strike kills 8 AQAP fighters, from May 10, 2012]. Obama administration officials have claimed, however, that the drones are targeting only those AQAP leaders and operatives who pose a direct threat to the US homeland, and not those fighting AQAP's local insurgency against the Yemeni government.

Video: A Tank Does Come In Handy

2013-05-19T04:17:00.000-07:00

Video: Remember the Science That Liberals Always Claim Is Theirs?

2013-05-19T04:16:00.000-07:00

The War on the Streets of Alexandria, Egypt Between Christians and Muslims

2013-05-18T15:00:00.000-07:00

Remember everyone...this is what Democracy looks like! The Arab version of democracy basically means a political system that allows the murder of Christians by Muslims - that's the Arab Spring that Obama and the main stream media in America endorsed. Barack Hussein Obama subtly endorsed the extermination of Christians.

The story comes from The Telegraph.

Clashes between Muslims and Christians leave one dead and dozens injured in Egyptian city of Alexandria

One person died and dozens were wounded during clashes between Muslims and Christians late Friday night outside a Coptic church in Egypt's second city, state newspaper Al-Ahram reported, in the latest violent sectarian row in the Muslim-majority country.

A quarrel between two young men, one Christian and one Muslim, morphed into a family feud that sparked clashes in a western district of Alexandria.

The two sides threw firebombs at each other before security forces intervened and cordoned off the area around the church.

Police arrested eight people after about two hours of fighting.

In addition to the political and economic turmoil Egypt has endured since Hosni Mubarak was overthrown in February 2011, tensions have risen between Muslims and Christians, especially since the election of Islamist President Mohamed Mursi in June.

Christians make up about 10 per cent of Egypt's 84 million people and have complained that the authorities have failed to protect them since Mubarak was ousted, giving radical Islamists a free hand.

At least five people were killed and more than 80 injured in clashes last month between Christians and Muslims at the Coptic Orthodox Cathedral in Cairo after a funeral service for four Christians killed in sectarian violence with Muslims.

Video: Didn't Obama Know About the IRS Targeting of Conservatives?

2013-05-18T14:30:00.000-07:00

Report: Islam could become dominant UK religion in 10 years

2013-05-18T09:14:00.001-07:00

I ask you...is that about the scariest headline you've seen in a long time? We had heard a few years ago how the baby's name of "Mohammed" had skyrocketed up the most popular name charts in the UK but to thing that there would be more Muslims in Great Britain than Christians and now, to know that could happen in 10 BLOODY YEARS, is beyond amazing.

The story comes from Digital Journal via The Religion of Peace.

Report: Islam could become dominant UK religion in 10 years

+
London - According to a new analysis of 2011 UK census, one in 10 people under 25 are Muslim, Christianity is declining 50 percent faster than previously thought and in 10 years Islam may become the dominant religion with only a minority identifying as Christian.
The analysis of the 2011 UK census by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) revealed that earlier analysis which showed only a 15 percent decline in Christianity was bolstered about 1.2 million foreign-born Christians such as Polish Catholics and Nigerian evangelicals. That is, foreign-born Christian immigrants masked the extent of decline of Christianity among the British-born population.
The Telegraph reports that the latest analysis showed that there were 5.3 million fewer British-born people professing Christianity, a decline of 15 per cent in a decade, and about 6.4 million increase in people describing themselves as having no faith.
In the same period, the number of of people professing Islam in England and Wales rose sharply by 75 percent. This massive surge was caused by about 600,000 foreign-born or immigrant Muslims.
According to The Telegraph, the massive demographic shift is being driven significantly by young people. The census analysis showed that nearly half of British Muslims are under the age of 25 and nearly a quarter of Christians over 65. The proportion of young British who describe themselves as "Christian" even in the "nominal" sense, has dropped below half for the first time. But in the past 15 years the British Muslim population has gone through a dramatic surge increasing by 75 per cent in England and Wales.
The ONS calculated on the basis of the demographic trend that although Christianity is still the dominant religion in the UK with about 50 percent of the population claiming the Christian religion, in 10 years only a minority will identify as Christian.
The portent of "Islamization"?
The portent of "Islamization" is a growing preoccupation among ethnic whites in the UK. The recent statistics will do nothing to allay growing xenophobia.
The Telegraph reports that Prof David Coleman, Professor of demography at Oxford University, comments: "This is a very substantial change – it is difficult to see whether any other change in the census could have been remotely as big. But I wonder how far it reflects an overarching change in society where it is more acceptable more normal to say that you are not religious or are not Christian."
Dr Fraser Watts, a Cambridge theologian, agreed that on the basis of the trend it was possible that people identifying as Christians could become a minority in 10 years. He said: "It is still pretty striking and it is a worrying trend and confirms what anyone can observe - that in many churches the majority of the congregation are over 60."
RT reports that a spokesman for the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales, said: "While this is a challenge, the fact that six out of 10 people in England and Wales self-identify as Christians is not discouraging. Christianity is no longer a religion of culture but a religion of decision and commitment. People are making a positive choice in self-identifying as Christians."
The analysis also showed that the number of people who identify as atheists increased by 10 percent, from 15 percent to 25 percent. RT reports that the British Humanist Association described the change as a "significant cultural shift."
Keith Porteous Wood, executive director of the National Secular Society, said that the erosion of the influence of Christianity among young people was "unstoppable." He summarized the implications of the ongoing demographic changes: "In another 20 years there are going to be more active Muslims than there are churchgoers."
Calls for de-establishment of the Church of England
The trend that points to an erosion of the influence of Christianity and surge in number of atheists and secularists is driving calls by secular campaigners for the de-establishment of the Church of England.
The Telegraph reports Wood said: "The time has now come that institutional Christianity is no longer justified, the number has dropped below critical mass for which there is no longer any justification for the established Church, for example, or the monarch going through a religious ceremony at coronation. The expressions of optimism by the church are just completely misplaced."
But a spokesman for the Church of England reacted, saying: "These figures highlight the diversity of Christianity in this country today, something which has been increasing for decades and shows the relevance of Christianity to people from all backgrounds. These figures once again confirm that this remains a faithful nation and that the fall in the numbers identifying themselves as Christians is a challenge but – as you can see from the stability of Church of England attendance figures – the committed worshiping center of the church remains firm. The challenge to the Church is to reconnect with the nominal."
The challenge of "segregation"
RT notes that increasing immigration and influx of people with diverse ethnic backgrounds is driving segregation in the UK, a phenomenon closely associated with what has been labelled "white flight," that is, white Britons leaving areas where minorities have settled.
According to RT, population statistics show that the number of white Britons in London has decreased from 4.3 million to 3.7 million, that is, about 600,000 white Britons have moved out of the London in the past decade, although the total population of the city has increased by more than a million.
David Goodhart, the director of Demos, a social equality "think-tank," told RT: "We do have an integration problem. Changing ethnic composition of the capital is causing a large exodus of ethnic white out of the city."
Goodhart pointed out that the problem of integration was not uniquely British but widespread in the EU in spite of efforts to eradicate it. He told RT: "Part of the point of the euro was to disperse German power and prevent the rise of nationalism in Europe, but it has done precisely the opposite on both fronts. We now have serious national resentments in countries like Greece."

The Golden Opportunity We Now Have To Expose the Marxists of America

2013-05-18T09:01:00.002-07:00

From Family Security Matters.

If There Was Ever a Golden Opportunity…

The recent "scandals" plaguing the Obama Administration serve to illustrate that nothing lasts forever. The honeymoon with the mainstream media has ended after a record run and their steamroller approach to Washington politics has hit a "bump in the road," and one they cannot circumvent. This moment in time presents some golden opportunities for those of us who identify it as one of vulnerability for those who quest to "fundamentally transform the United States of America." But in every golden opportunity exists some danger. And while we of the constitutional and conservative bent never cease to protest this truth, it is a truth nevertheless. We could be winning a baseball game by 15 runs in the bottom of the ninth inning and find a way to lose by three.

While all the so-called "Republican strategists" and conservative pundits debate the depth of the Obama Administration's "evil deeds," and while everyone in the conservative blogosphere is screeching "impeachment" at the top of their cyber-lungs, we who possess level heads; who deal in facts and realism instead of emotion and appearance, understand that the probability of impeachment is next to zero. This is because for all the misdeeds and ethical lapses of this administration; with the very serious issues they have exploited for political gain - including those that took place at the expense of American lives and the sanctity of constitutional rights, "high crimes and misdemeanors" have not been executed by Mr. Obama, personally, that anyone can prove.

Additionally, there are two reasons why impeachment would never result in the removal of President Obama from office.

First, we have a Democrat majority in the US Senate. And while impeachment happens in the US House of Representatives, the trial conducted due to impeachment is held in the Senate, presided over by the Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court. In the end, anyone who believes that a Democrat controlled Senate would vote to convict, thus executing Mr. Obama's removal from office, is smoking something that is now legal in Colorado.

Second, the Republican establishment and elected leadership would never agree to move on impeachment for fear of losing a messaging battle with the Progressive machine that would leave them with the scarlet letter of "racist" around their organizational neck. Moving on the impeachment of Mr. Obama on charges of "high crimes and misdemeanors" would energize the Progressive base, motivate the race-baiter activists and give the Progressive-sympathetic mainstream media a reason to re-champion Mr. Obama, thus destroying any advantage the GOP may have thought they gleaned from the Obama-induced "scandals."

And while there are some in this administration that very well should don orange jumpsuits for a period of time, the responsibility of prosecuting these people to conviction is predicated one of two events.

There can be an appointment of a special prosecutor - which requires an appointment of one by...wait for it...US Attorney General Eric Holder. With Mr. Holder's contempt for Congress and anything not Progressive or "social justice," and with his track record of biased prosecutions and non-prosecutions, pigs will fly before we see a special prosecutor appointed by Mr. Holder.

Then there is the option of the Department of Justice taking up the prosecution. Again, this would require action on behalf of Attorney General Holder. And again, because he would be - in at least one if not two of the "scandals" - implicated as a "wrong-doer," well, pigs...wings...you get the picture.

I know, it sounds as if conservatives can't win for losing. But that's not the case. There are two opportunities that could not only seal Mr. Obama's fate, but that could save the United States from one-hundred-plus years of Progressive incremental victories.

First, in light of the fact that the IRS is at the center of a scandal of mammoth proportions, a scandal that reeks of Progressive and/or Chicago-Progressive thug politics, the forces that champion comprehensive and radical tax reform could combine forces to affect true and real reforms in the tax code in either a flat tax, with absolutely no deductions, loopholes or exceptions; or a consumption tax. Either could completely replace the existing Progressive tax code (have you figured out why they call it that yet?) and literally neuter the IRS completely. Truly, it would be just desserts for an agency that has moved from the honest collection of taxes under a dysfunctional and politically charged tax code to a tyrant agency that routinely attacks the innocent, striking fear into the hearts of the law abiding.

But second, and frankly I believe more important, is the opportunity to spotlight the Progressive Movement for the tyrannical, oligarchical elitist, Fabian socialists that they really are; to educate the no- and low-information voters - in real time and with "in-the-news" issues that directly affect them - on how the Progressives actually despise the masses, even as they say they champion the worker (if they really champion the worker how come their signature achievement in Mr. Obama's tenure - Obamacare - is set to raise the taxes on union health insurance plans in 2018 by 40%?).

If, by the grace of God Almighty, conservatives can dispose of the egos and join in an effort to communicate, if establishment Republicans can lose their penchant for "know-it-all," "my-way" inside-the-beltway arrogance to provide the national apparatus by which to communicate, and if the TEA Parties can enjoin cohesively with both of the aforementioned to move the message; to educate; to inform the no- and low-information voters, in a non-aggressive and non-inflammatory way - if conservatives of all stripes can craft and move a message that defines the Progressive Movement for exactly who they are and exactly what their goal is for our country, then we have an opportunity to send their movement into a thousand years of darkness.

Imagine.

Of course, to do this would require conservatives to - at least for the moment - work together, something the "too-many-chiefs-and-not-enough-Indians" Conservative Movement does very poorly.

So, Conservatives of all stripes, establishment Republicans and TEA Partiers, it's the bottom of the ninth and the score is tied. We're at bat, their pitcher is tired and they have exhausted their bullpen.

How about it?...

Video: The Saudi Cleric's Sign of Satan

2013-05-18T08:55:00.000-07:00

Video: " You Are Out of Order "

2013-05-18T08:54:00.001-07:00

15 Year Old British Girl Finds Muslim Husband and Converts To Islam Through Website

2013-05-17T14:28:00.004-07:00

Convert: The girl had become a Muslim before being apparently abducted by a criminal gang (file photo)

Just when you think things can't get much more fucked up in Britain, you read a story like this. I've seen fields of wheat left in better stead after a wave of locusts come through than the nation of Britain has been left by the wave of Islamic immigration.

A bloody shame.

The story comes from The Daily Mail via The Religion of Peace.

Schoolgirl who converted to Islam 'ran away from home after getting married over the phone to older man she had never met'

A schoolgirl who secretly converted to Islam left home to live with an older man after being forced to marry him over the phone, it was claimed today.

The 15-year-old, whose British father is a Christian, is set to give evidence against seven men arrested in Mulhouse, eastern France.

All are accused of removing a child from her parents' care while running a sinister online dating site for Muslim converts.

After being introduced to young girls on the internet, men who subscribed to the site were allowed to wed them over the phone.

In the case of the teenager, who cannot be named for legal reasons, she completed her marriage vows and then immediately left home to live with him.

Detectives believe she was forced to convert to Islam in secret, along with three female friends aged 17, 18 and 19.

he girl's father informed local prosecutor Herve Robin after his daughter started wearing a burka and expressing 'extreme Islamist views', according to prosecutors.

'She had converted without her parents' knowledge after browsing social network sites on the internet,' said a source close to the case. 'Her father, who is British, was deeply shocked when he found out what had happened.'

Mr Robin confirmed that the schoolgirl was forced to marry the unnamed Muslim man, who is 28, 'over the phone'.

It was on May 6 that the girl's father first called police to tell them that his daughter had run away.

Using a signal from the 28-year-old man's mobile phone, police were able to trace him to an address in Valence, some 300 miles from the girl's home in Mulhouse.

When police raided the property they found the man living with his new teenage 'wife'.

She told investigating officers that it was her second 'marriage' on the site, and that her 'first husband' had denounced and rejected her.

The girl is now back in the care of her parents, while assisting police and prosecutors with their enquiries.

Her convert 'husband' has, meanwhile, been remanded in custody, along with four of the seven other suspects who all face prison sentences if found guilty.

Redad Rabih, a spokesman for the Muslim regional council in Mulhouse, said: 'Islam and the Muslim community had nothing to do with these despicable practices.'

He added that such internet sites, together with the abuse of young girls, made a 'mockery' of Islam.

Video: I Just Needed To See a Jihadi Die Today

2013-05-17T14:20:00.001-07:00

Is the College Your Kid Will Attend This Fall Infested By the Muslim Brotherhood?

2013-05-17T04:33:00.003-07:00

Nazareth College in Rochester, NY, is just one of many American universities who are "partnering" with the International Institute of Islamic Thought, a verified Muslim Brotherhood front group.

The story comes from The Clarion Project.

Muslim Brotherhood Inside American Colleges

The strategy is part of a six-phased plan to 'get inside the U.S. government and also American universities,' said an FBI informant on the inside.

In 1988, an FBI informant inside the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood network warned that it had a front called the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT). The IIIT leadership, the source reported, said they were in the first of six phases to “institute the Islamic Revolution in the United States.” Their current objective was to “peacefully get inside the United States government and also American universities." And they have.

The source warned that the Muslim Brotherhood in America has “unlimited funds” and has “set up political action front groups with no traceable ties to the IIIT or its various Muslim groups.” The source’s identification of IIIT as a front is verified in a 1991 U.S. Muslim Brotherhood memo. The Brotherhood itself lists IIIT as number 28 of “our organizations and the organizations of our friends,” working toward the Brotherhood’s self-defined goal, which it says is a “grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within.”

IIT’s Director of Academic Outreach from 1984 to 1994 was Sayyid Syeed, a founder and former secretary-general of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). Footage from 2006 shows him saying, “Our job is to change the Constitution of America” (you can view it in The Grand Deception).

ISNA is also identified as a Muslim Brotherhood front group in the 1991 memo and was labeled as a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity by federal prosecutors. It was also designated an unindicted co-conspirator in the terrorism-financing trial of the Holy Land Foundation. Syeed is now the director of ISNA’s Office for Interfaith and Community Alliances.

In 2002, federal agents raided the Herndon, Virginia offices of IIIT as part of a terrorism-financing investigation. The organization was the top donor to another group run by Sami a-Arian, a Muslim Brotherhood member that was later convicted of being a Palestinian Islamic Jihad leader. In a 1992 letter, Sami al-Arian said that his organization and IIIT were essentially one.

However, IIIT lives on, with offices and affiliates in the U.K., Belgium, Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Jordan, Bosnia, Bangladesh, Morocco, Nigeria, Indonesia, India and Brunei.

Its website proudly hosts a picture of two IIIT leaders, Dr. Abubaker Al-Shingieti and Dr. Hisham Altalib, meeting with Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi in New York on September 24, 2012 as part of an “interfaith meeting.” Tellingly, the website says Morsi “welcomed the participation of IIIT in the rerform [sic] of higher education in Egypt.”

IIIT has "agreements" with:

George Mason University, who signed an agreement at IIIT headquarters on September 18, 2008. The IIIT representative was its Vice President, Jamal Barzinji.

A 1988 FBI file states that Barzinji was “characterized as” a Muslim Brotherhood leader. In 2003, his home was raided because, in the words of U.S. Customs Service Special Agent David Kane, Barzinji “is not only closely associated with PIJ [Palestinian Islamic Jihad] … but also with Hamas.” In 2011, it was reported that the Justice Department stopped a planned indictment of Barzinji.

On November 5, 2008, George Mason University, a public university just outside Fairfax, Virginia, announced that IIIT had donated $1.5 million to establish an endowed Chair in Islamic Studies at its College of Humanities and Social Sciences. On November 13, the president of the University held a dinner for the IIIT leadership.

George Mason University professor Dr. Andrea Bartelo spoke at a IIIT fundraiser on August 26, 2011. IIIT sponsored a lecture at George Mason University by the IIIT Chair on February 20, 2013.

The University’s 2008 press release boasts that it has been named as the #1 university in the nation to watch by U.S. News and World Report.

Nazareth College: Located in Rochester, NY, Nazareth College’s Center for Interfaith Studies and Dialogue signed a "Memorandum of Understanding" with IIIT in January 2006. On December 7, 2011, IIIT endowed an academic Chair in Interfaith Studies and Dialogue.

Shenandoah University: The Dean of its College of Arts and Sciences, Dr. Calvin Allen Jr., signed a "Memorandum of Agreement" with IIIT, who was represented by Barzinji. The website states, “IIIT’s instructional division, The Fairfax Institute, will designate an instructor to co-teach with Dr. Allen a course on Islamic civilization.” Dr. Calvin Allen spoke at a IIIT fundraiser on August 26, 2011. Shenandoah university is located in Winchester, Virginia.

Hartford Seminary: On March 17, 2013, the Connecticut theological college announced that it had received the necessary funding for an endowed chair in Islamic Chaplaincy. The largest donor was IIIT who had given the college $1 million.

The press release about the endowed chair says the Islamic Chaplaincy program began in 2003 “to prepare Muslims for chaplaincy positions in hospitals, prisons, universities and the military. It remains the only accredited such program in the United States, and graduates have been named to positions in many such institutions across the United States, most notably at Yale University, Williams College, and Princeton University.”

The President of Hartford Seminary, Professor Heidi Hadsell, said it has “established a productive, creative and effective relationship” with IIIT.

On July 25, 2012, Hadsell spoke at a IIIT fundraiser. She talked about “the continued support that the seminary receives from IIIT, particularly in the area of imam training and education, and the study of Christian-Muslim relations in general.”

Huron University College (Canada): In December 2010, the London, Ontario college began a "cooperative venture" with IIIT to add an Islamic Studies program to its college. It states, “IIIT has agreed to match funds raised by the Muslim Association of Canada and the London Muslim Mosque, both based in London, Ontario, Canada.”

Ingrid Mattson, former ISNA President and a member of IIIT’s Advisory Council, became the London and Windsor Community Chair in Islamic Studies on July 1, 2012.

According to the press release, Huron University College is affiliated with the University of Western Ontario and is an affiliate member of the Toronto School of Theology.

IIIT also has links to:

United States Naval Academy: Dr. Ermin Sinanovic, Assistant Professor in the Political Science Department, lectured at IIIT headquarters on December 7, 2012. The Global Muslim Brotherhood Watch discovered that he is also teaching for IIIT’s 2013 Summer Students Program.

Binghamton University: On November 31, 2012, IIIT "partnered" with the school to host two lectures by Professor Ali Mazrui on “The Study of Islam in African Universities: Is It a Priority?”

In 2002, Mazrui said: “There is also suspicion that some members of the Bush administration in collusion with Israel are more than ready to plunge the Middle East into turmoil in the hope that the final outcome would be to the territorial advantage of Israel and the strategic advantage of the United States. All this is part of the emerging external sadism of the United States, a readiness to hurt others abroad.”

On May 6, 2011, IIIT hosted a book launching event for Ricardo Rene Laremont, Professor of Political Science and Sociology at Binghamton University.

Eastern Mennonite University: On April 20, 2012, two of the school’s professors attended a seminar on Muslim-Jewish relations at IIIT headquarters. Dr. Ed Martin, director of the university’s Center for Interfaith Engagement, attended a IIIT fundraiser on August 26, 2011.

University of Delaware: On January 5, 2012, Dr. Muqtedar Khan, Professor of International Relations and Islamic Studies, took part in a panel about Islamist political victories at IIIT headquarters.

American University: On January 5, 2012, Dr. Mohammad Nimer, Professor of International Relations, took part in a panel about Islamist political victories at IIIT headquarters. He suggested that the U.S. engage the Muslim Brotherhood, but criticized their “us vs. them” politics.

University of Maryland: On December 16, 2011, Dr. Ahmad Kazemi Moussavi, Professor of Political Science and International Relations and a former Iranian diplomat, spoke for IIIT about Iran.

On August 24, 2011, Dr. Charles Butterworth, Professor Emeritus of Government and Politics, spoke at a IIIT fundraiser. Former New Hampshire Governor John Sununu, who was also Chief of Staff in the first Bush Administration, also spoke at the event.

Manhattanville College: On June 10, 2011, James Jones, Professor of Religion and African Studies, lectured at IIIT about victimhood and U.S. foreign policy.

Georgetown University: On May 27, 2011, IIIT hosted Louay Safi, Common Word Fellow at the Saudi-funded Prince Al-Waleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University. Safi has strong Muslim Brotherhood ties. He spoke about Muslim-Christian relations.

University of Virginia: On April 29, 2011, Dr. Abdulaziz Sachedina, Professor of Islamic Studies, spoke at IIIT. He talked about human rights and democratic pluralism in Islam. On October 22, 2010, Adjunct Professor Rachel Mann spoke at IIIT about non-violent activism.

Middle Tennessee State University: On March 18, 2011, Dr. Ron Messier, Professor Emeritus of History, spoke at IIIT about Muslim-Christian relations.

The Muslim Brotherhood President of Egypt values IIIT—and so does American universities. The FBI source in 1988 warned that IIIT sought to advance the Brotherhood agenda by doing exactly what it is doing now.

Jihadis In Pakistan Bomb Two Mosques, 10 Dead

2013-05-17T04:23:00.002-07:00

Welcome to the weekend in Pakistan. For those new here, the weekends in Pakistan mean one thing.

Blood.

Lots of blood.

The story comes from DAWN.

Blasts in Malakland kill 10

PESHAWAR: Two bombs exploded near two separate mosques after Friday prayers in Malakand Division’s Bazdara area killing 10 persons and injuring at least 20 others.

Deputy Commissioner of Malakand Amjad Ali confirmed that 10 persons were killed and 20 others injured in the two blasts adding that the number of casualties was expected to increase.

An eye witness, Aalam Khan told Dawn.com that two blasts rocked the Bar Kalley and the main Jamia Masjid of the Bazdara region after Friday prayers.

"At least 12 bodies were brought to the Palai Hospital whereas only 30 of the 100 or so injured were treated at the Palai Hospital. Moreover, the remaining casualties were referred to Dargai and Mardan hospitals."

Security forces imposed a curfew in the area which is 35 to 40 kilometres to the border of Buner District.

An emergency was also imposed in Dargai and Mardan Hospitals.

Video: Keeping the Taliban Off the Ridge

2013-05-17T04:13:00.000-07:00

Video: So, You Want To Be a Corrections Officer?

2013-05-17T04:12:00.000-07:00

Syrian rebels call off Aleppo prison siege after troops throw inmates out window

2013-05-16T15:05:00.002-07:00

From The Telegraph.

Syrian rebels call off Aleppo prison siege after troops throw inmates out window

Rebel forces besieging the main prison in Aleppo claimed they were forced to call off an assault after the troops defending it began shooting inmates and throwing them out of the windows.

Forces belonging to the Free Syrian Army have managed to fight their way around the northern outskirts of the city, where the jail is situated, since seizing the nearby Rangers Academy three months ago.

They drove troops out of an unfinished extension to the prison earlier this week, and on Wednesday drove holes, including by blowing up two cars, in the wall surrounding the main compound where up to 4,000 prisoners are being held by several hundred troops.

But they failed to take the prison itself on Friday. "I saw ten bodies being thrown out today," said Anas, 30, a soldier speaking after withdrawing from the rebels' front line. "Yesterday, we attacked at about 5 o'clock, but when we began they started throwing bodies through the window.

"The bodies are still there, and we are close enough to smell them. We cannot get them because they are in the line of fire." He said the attack had stopped to prevent more prisoners being killed.

The prison was for regular criminals, the local FSA leader, Jaber Abu Madian, said, but that political prisoners had been taken there in recent months. He feared it was these men who were being killed. "We can hear shouts of 'God is Great' from inside when we begin opening fire," he said.

The Daily Telegraph saw mortar fire being exchanged from either side of the prison compound, which is sited on a 500-metre long site in a valley stretching north from the city limits. It could not verify the story of the bodies being thrown out of the window.

Syrian state media said its forces had managed to repel the assault.

The FSA said it had lost six men dead and 12 wounded in the assault so far.

Video: Dealing With the Taliban

2013-05-16T14:36:00.002-07:00

Benghazi: Obama's ‘Wag the Dog’ in Reverse

2013-05-16T04:05:00.003-07:00

What is it like to be the man in Washington, D.C. whose job it is to cover for an destroyer of a President and orchestrate the lies to deceive the American people?

The story comes from Family Security Matters.

Benghazi: Obama's ‘Wag the Dog’ in Reverse

Some time ago speculation ran through the Mainstream Media and the Internet about which "playbook" the Obama administration has been following in terms of its domestic and international policies. Was it George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four, or Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged?

The consensus came down for Atlas Shrugged, a novel whose villains seemed to have enjoyed a kind of ethereal, literary karma and wound up in President Barack Obama's administration. The premise behind the consensus was that before you can depict a country in ruins governed by an all-knowing, all-controlling totalitarian régime, it must first be ruined.

I agreed with that consensus. But, here's a new twist on that hypothesis.

In 1997, Hollywood released a cinematic spitball aimed at President George H.W. Bush, Wag the Dog, about a phony war concocted by - don't be too surprised - a Hollywood producer to distract attention away from a fictive president's sex scandal just before an election. The ruse succeeds, and the (presumably Republican) president is reelected. The ruse is so successful that its creator is bursting with frustrated pride and wants to tell the world about it. He is warned not to. He insists. Consequently, he has a heart attack at poolside and dies, an unfortunate "tragedy" arranged for him by a fellow spin-doctor working for the government.

Lately, reality has had a habit of emulating fiction, even Hollywood's leftist digital and celluloid fiction. Today we have, in the geyser of revelations about what happened in Benghazi on September 11th, 2012, just the reverse of what transpired in the movie. There is a real war, a president and former Secretary of State are embroiled in a scandal, and there have been real deaths, and not so much a covered-up sex scandal as a set of lies and fabrications intended to distract Americans' attention from the criminal behavior and statements of the administration just before an election, in this instance, the 2012 election.

President Barack Obama, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and advisor and fiction writer Ben Rhodes apparently failed to wag this particular dog convincingly enough to stop the truth from coming out, although it wasn't for lack of trying by the stooges and cheerleaders in the MSM and by Obama's geekish press secretary, Jay Carney. In fact, a whole kennel of dogs is barking outloud about how their owners mangled their tails in multiple attempts to wag them. These are dogs that date back to Obama's first term in office.

There is the IRS scandal over Associated Press phone records being seized by the Department of Justice to see who was saying, writing, and doing what, and when, and the IRS scandal over that beloved "service" targeting the Tea Party and other organizations for special attention, all with the implied sanction of an all-too-real president to weaken their opposition to Obama's reelection.

There is "Fast and Furious," Attorney General Eric Holder's pack of rabid pit bulls concocted to implicate private gun owners and sellers in the Mexican drug cartel's depredations with the aim of imposing gun controls on the country to reduce "gun violence."

There are the Solyndra-class, fascist subsidies to companies that ultimately failed and continue to cost taxpayers.

There was TARP and the whole subprime mortgage meltdown that cost billions and billions of taxpayer dollars. There were the car industry bailouts that continue to cost billions. There is Obama's opposition to any energy plan that would make the country independent of the whims and political influence of OPEC and especially of Mideast oil potentates.

There is Obama's endorsement of the so-called "Arab Spring," which was heralded as a chance to bring "democracy" to Egypt and Tunisia and Libya, but which has resulted in the establishment of one of this country's most determined and deadly enemies, the Muslim Brotherhood, not to mention the murderous turmoil in Syria.

There is the astronomical debt rung up by the Obama administration for which we might need to coin a new term that would describe it.

There is Obamacare, a dictatorial "health insurance" scam that forces all Americans to participate in, and whose true costs are now beginning to reveal themselves.

There is terrorism itself, and Obama ordering the destruction or redacting of all government training materials that would identify our enemy, Islam, reducing our law enforcement agencies to a blinded, bumbling Mr. Magoo.

But, it's Ben Rhodes who is the focus of attention here. I focus on him because, as a novelist, I wish to redeem the good name of novelists who produce fiction. I cannot speak for other novelists, but I can distinguish between writing fiction for a reading public and concocting lies to be consumed by the same public. Rhodes is billed as Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications and Speechwriting, overseeing President Obama's national security communications, speechwriting, and global engagement. And, before being appointed to that post, was Deputy Director of White House Speechwriting, and as a Senior Speechwriter for the Obama campaign.

In short, Rhodes is the Dustin Hoffman character in Wag the Dog, Stanley Motss. It is too early to project whether or not he will meet Stanley Motss's fate. Probably not. More likely he will be thrown under another of Obama's buses, figuratively speaking, in the guise of a tearful resignation. He is, after all, an important "advisor," and he advised Obama, not too well, and wrongly, at that. His hand was in the talking points cookie jar, and the jar was fabricated by his fellow staff spin-doctors.

Rhodes apparently is implicated in the "talking points" issue over what to say and what not to say about what happened in Benghazi, why the consulate was attacked, by whom, and who knew it and when. By "who knew it," I mean anyone in the government outside of Al Qada and the Muslim Brotherhood, two organizations which seem to be formulating our foreign policy.

Obama has more or less laughed off the Benghazi investigation. As the Washington Post reported:

"We don't have time to keep playing these political games in Washington," Obama said, arguing that the more important work is ensuring that U.S. diplomats are adequately protected. "We dishonor them when we turn things like this into a political circus."

Rhodes was apparently aided in the deceit by Samantha Power, consort of former would-be speech censor and Obama staffer Cass Sunstein. Having resigned from the first Obama term because of an "off-the-record" remark she made about Hillary Clinton, she is back in the administration and heads the Office of Multilateral Affairs and Human Rights as Senior Director of Multilateral Affairs on the Staff of the National Security Council. She is a Pulitzer Prize winning author and is closely entrenched in Harvard University's liberal establishment.

What did she say about Hillary "It doesn't matter" Clinton that forced her to resign? It is precious, and it is correct. The Washington Post wrote:

" 'She is a monster, too -- that is off the record -- she is stooping to anything,' Ms. Power said, hastily trying to withdraw her remark."

... Power was quoted as taking other swipes at Obama's Democratic presidential nomination rival, which Gilson says came after the "monster" comment and which Power did not attempt to place off the record. Power said of Clinton, "You just look at her and think, 'Ergh' . . . The amount of deceit she has put forward is really unattractive."

Ben Rhodes, however, got a master's degree in fiction-writing at New York University. The only fiction he is known to have written is some of Obama's speeches. A puff-piece in the Collegiate School's blog site quotes him:

"For a long time, my focus was on being a writer," Rhodes said. "But I was definitely politically engaged [in school], and I don't think it would surprise anyone I went to high school with that I ended up doing something in politics." [Syntax, sic]

Like writing fiction for the President ever since 2007, and for former Virginia governor and now Senator Mark Warner, and for Representative Lee Hamilton of Indiana.

As for the "talking points" new and old, and how the administration was concerned about their credibility, The Weekly Standard, in Stephen Hayes' May 13th article, "The Benghazi Talking Points: And how they were changed to obscure the truth," reported

In an attempt to address those concerns, CIA officials cut all references to Ansar al Sharia and made minor tweaks. But in a follow-up email at 9:24 p.m., [State Department spokesman Victoria] Nuland wrote that the problem remained and that her superiors-she did not say which ones-were unhappy. The changes, she wrote, did not "resolve all my issues or those of my building leadership," and State Department leadership was contacting National Security Council officials directly. Moments later, according to the House report, "White House officials responded by stating that the State Department's concerns would have to be taken into account." One official - Ben Rhodes, The Weekly Standard is told, a top adviser to President Obama on national security and foreign policy - further advised the group that the issues would be resolved in a meeting of top administration officials the following morning at the White House.

By "resolved," Rhodes did not mean the resolution of conflicts and plots in a work of fiction. That skill, presumably (but doubtfully) acquired for his master's degree in fiction-writing at NYU, did not come into play here. He meant reaching a credible lie in the work of fiction that is Obama's ongoing work-in-progress.

That is, concocting disingenuous statements and postures to preserve the alleged credibility of Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Obama, Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton, Victoria Nuland, and Ben Rhodes all cried havoc, but let slip the dogs of war - on their own houses. For once.

Hezb-i-Islami claim Kabul suicide attack

2013-05-16T03:53:00.003-07:00

Afghan security and firefighters gather at the scene of an explosion in Kabul on May 16, 2013. A suicide car bomb targeting foreign military vehicles exploded in the Afghan capital Kabul shortly after 8:00 am (0330 GMT), police said, confirming there were casualties. – AFP Photo

From DAWN.

Hezb-i-Islami claim Kabul suicide attack

KABUL: The Hezb-i-Islami insurgent group on Thursday claimed responsibility for a suicide car bomb targeting a Nato military convoy in the Afghan capital Kabul that killed six civilians and injured dozens more.

“Our comrades carried out this attack. We take responsibility. Ten foreigners were killed and two of their vehicles were destroyed,” Zubair Sediqi, the Hezb-i-

Hezb-i-Islami claim Kabul suicide attack

Islami spokesman, told AFP by telephone.

Nato declined to comment on reports of foreign casualties.

Government officials said six bystanders died in the explosion in the Shah Shaheed residential district in the southeast of Kabul, while 37 others were wounded.

One Nato sports utility vehicle was completely destroyed in the blast and surrounding streets were cordoned off as US troops arrived at the scene.

Schoolgirls fled the area in tears as the clean-up operation began.

“At around 8:00 am (0330 GMT) this morning, terrorists detonated an explosives-packed (Toyota) Corolla car near a convoy of foreign forces,” Hashmat Stanikzai, the Kabul police spokesman, told AFP.

Afghan health ministry official Sayed Kabir Amiri said local hospitals confirmed six people had died and 37 were wounded, all of them civilians.

“Some of the bodies are badly damaged and can’t be identified,” he added.

Lieutenant Quenton Roehricht, a spokesman for Nato’s US-led International Security Assistance Force (Isaf), confirmed a coalition vehicles had been targeted in Kabul and said further information would be released shortly.

“I was at home when I heard a terrible explosion and our whole building shook,” Mustafa, a young local man, told AFP.

“All our windows are shattered. I rushed outside to bring my little brothers and sisters from school. I saw five or six people covered in blood who were being taken away in police vehicles.”

Police added that at least 10 houses had been severely damaged.

It was the first major attack in Kabul since March 9 when a suicide bomber on a bicycle killed nine people outside the defence ministry during a visit by US Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel.

It comes just weeks after the Taliban launched their annual “spring offensive” on April 27, opening a crucial period for Afghanistan as local security forces take the lead in offensives against the insurgents.

The Islamist militants said multiple suicide bombings, “insider attacks” by Afghan soldiers and “special military tactics” would target international airbases and diplomatic buildings to inflict maximum casualties.

All Nato combat missions will finish by the end of next year and the 100,000 foreign troops deployed across Afghanistan have already begun to withdraw from the battlefield.

More than 11 years after the Taliban regime was ousted in 2001, efforts to seek a political settlement ending the violence have so far made little progress, but pressure is growing ahead of the Nato withdrawal.

In the most recent Nato casualties, a roadside bomb killed three US soldiers in the volatile province of Kandahar on Tuesday.

Three Georgian soldiers were killed in neighbouring Helmand province on Monday when a suicide bomber detonated a vehicle laden with explosives.

Video: Hunting Down the Squirter

2013-05-16T03:47:00.001-07:00

Video: Carjacker Must Have Thought This Was a Relative of Dianne Feinstein

2013-05-16T03:46:00.000-07:00

Muslim Brotherhood: Convention to Protect Women is Anti-Islamic

2013-05-15T15:24:00.002-07:00

So, let's talk about the REAL war on women...

The story comes from The Clarion Project.

Muslim Brotherhood: Convention to Protect Women is Anti-Islamic

The Muslim Brotherhood’s official website in Arabic has published an article highlighting the comments of a senior Egyptian Islamist scholar criticizing the United Nations Violence Against Women Convention for violating Islam and promoting Westernization.

Dr. Muhammad Al-Mukhtar Al-Mahdi, a member of Al-Azhar University’s Council of Senior Scholars and head of the Sharia Association, was reacting to the endorsement of the U.N. convention by Dr. Mervat Al-Talawi, the leader of Egypt’s National Council for Women.

Dr. Al-Mahdi said that the U.N. convention is part of a war on Islam and that women are treated better under Sharia than Western law. He claimed “that Islam has given women a place of honor, and has allowed them to take part in the country’s awakening, while in the West, the women have to search for employment and rely only on themselves. Islam, on the other hand, has given women partners or husbands to take care of them.”

In other words, women in the West are oppressed because they are allowed to work and to be self-sufficient. He also said that their roles as mothers, wives and daughters are protected under Sharia.

Al-Mahdi’s description of a woman’s place under Sharia Law is a good example of how Islamists present the issue of women’s rights. In their view, Sharia Law brings true freedom, justice and equality to women. When they use those comforting terms, they are actually talking about Sharia-based governance.

This word-play was apparent when the Egyptian constitution was being drafted. Originally, Article 68 read as: “The state shall take all measures to establish the equality of women and men in the areas of political, cultural, economic and social life, as well as other areas, insofar as this does not conflict with the rulings of Islamic Shariah” (emphasis mine).

This article was scrapped when it received negative attention, but more carefully-worded sections accomplished the intended purpose.

The constitution makes Sharia the law of the land. Other language sets the stage for enforcement of Sharia.

Article 10 states that “the family is the basis of the society and is founded on religion, morality and patriotism.” The government must “preserve the genuine character of the Egyptian family, its cohesion and stability, and to protect its moral values, all as regulated by law.”

Article 11 states that the government “shall safeguard ethics, public morality and public order, and foster a high level of education and religious and patriotic values…”

The Islamists' claim that Sharia protects women is both patronizing and ingenuous, and their characterization of a convention against the abuse of women as a violation of Islam is extremely telling.

Video: Breaking Out the MK-48

2013-05-15T15:18:00.000-07:00

Belgian Television Meterologist Fired For Posting the Truth About Muslims On His Facebook

2013-05-15T04:26:00.001-07:00

From Family Security Matters.

Juan Williams, Meet Luc Trullemans: All Too Frank Speech in Belgium Leads to Firing

In a case reminiscent of National Public Radio (NPR)'s 2010 firing of commentator Juan Williams, the Belgian television meteorologist Luc Trullemans has lost his job after posting angry and abusive comments upon his Facebook page concerning Muslim immigrants. Trullemans wrote the comments following threatening personal encounters with individuals from such backgrounds. His experience indicates once again the politically incorrect controversies concerning Islam in many modern Western societies and raises questions concerning the limits of free speech on these issues.

Trullemans's employer, Belgium's RTL television, suspended him until further notice on Friday evening, April 26, 2013, for a post on his Facebook page described in a 7 Sur 7 Belgian press account as having a "racist and Islamophobe character." RTL spokesperson Sophie Bailly explained that Trullemans's "racist words" were "unacceptable for RTL." As reported by the Belgian newspaper L'Avenir online earlier on April 26, Trullemans's posting was a self-professed "rant" circulating in the internet for some years accusing Muslim immigrants of being backward and deficient in assimilation. L'Avenir's story displayed as well various satirical photos posted within the last day by Trullemans to his Facebook page criticizing increased Islamic influence in Belgium and France.

The anonymous writer warned in the L'Avenir-linked French text that he "would not be delicate in my words" but rather would "speak like a true Walloon" from Belgium's French-speaking region. "I," added the writer, "will probably appear as a racist, but you know what? I DO NOT GIVE A DAMN!!!" The writer considered "it time to speak openly that which many think inside" and sought to defend "European values" as a self-professed atheist against Muslims. In particular, this atheist devoted several sentences to advocating an unapologetic societal celebration of Christmas traditions, something which he curiously defined as "not a religion, but an event."

The writer described Muslims immigrating because of "war, violence, hatred, and death" in order to receive from "OUR LAND ... everything" in social welfare for successful societal integration. According to such analysis, Muslim immigrant cultural expectations of "importing your crap [merde]" are a self-defeating and ungrateful response to such "hospitality." The writer had "ENOUGH" of such attempts "to change our traditions ... to restrict our rights ... because they are contrary to your religion," and "to treat us as racists because one does not like your manner of behavior." After all, the writer argued, those who did not respect Muslim norms were "subject to death in certain of your countries of monkeys!!!" The writer called upon Muslim immigrants to "throw your hijabs and niqabs in the trash ... forget your primitive demands," and "assimilate or take off!"

Meeting with L'Avenir reporters on the evening of April 26, Trullemans "took responsibility" for his postings condemning immigrants and Islam, yet by 11:00 pm that evening, L'Avenir reported that Trullemans had already reversed course. Gone from his Facebook page were the controversial postings, and in their place was a "personal" apology to the "Muslim community" quoted by L'Avenir and shown in the 7 Sur 7 story. Trullemans explained that "following an assault on a public way and under a fit of emotion in a state of great fatigue, I wrote this text seized by anger." Trullemans emphasized that he was "not a racist at all." Nonetheless, L'Avenir reported that RTL had suspended him shortly before midnight.

Trullemans later explained to 7 Sur 7 that while he was driving on April 26 at about 30-35 mph, a following car's driver found this speed too slow, as Trullemans had decelerated for an upcoming red light. The driver passed Trullemans and suddenly slowed down, prompting Trullemans to honk, whereupon the driver repeatedly made sudden fluctuations in speed. At the light, the occupants described by Trullemans as "people from the south clothed in traditional garments" exited the car.

These individuals told him in a "very aggressive" manner to exit his car as well and that he should not have honked. Remaining in his car, a fearful Trullemans stated that traffic regulations deserved obedience. The other car occupants then said that he could "not impose my rules" as a "little Belgian" upon them in "their" neighborhood, and one of them struck Trullemans's car. After the light changed, Trullemans drove on, followed by the other car until he arrived at the RTL parking lot.

In his interview, Trullemans reiterated again that he was not a racist and had indeed previously had a five-year relationship with an Algerian woman, who in turn confirmed that "Lucky" was not prejudiced. Indeed, Trullemans's Facebook page shows among his preferences various vintage African-American music stars like Sam Cooke. Further support for Trullemans has come from two Facebook pages -- one with 21,026 likes, the other, calling Trullemans a "victim of political correctness," with 7,686.

The Belgian lawyer Mischaël Modrikamen, son of a Polish Jewish immigrant who escaped the Nazis, has also taken up Trullemans's reinstatement claim as a matter of free speech. Modrikamen attributed to Trullemans' words a "political," not a "racist character," under assault from "thought police." Modrikamen, meanwhile, might say as much about the restrictive immigration policies advocated by the Parti Populaire led by him and by his past warnings against the "fascist aspects" of "political Islam."

Trullemans's experience indicates the considerable legitimate concerns many Europeans have with respect to Islamic immigration, however poorly expressed by him in the heat of passion. As the Belgian reactions showed, Trullemans's temporary postings dealt with popular controversies often linked to immigration in general and Islamic immigration in particular, such as disproportionate consumption of social services, deficient assimilation, and native/newcomer conflicts over societal norms. Only the single fleeting pejorative and literally dehumanizing reference to Muslim-majority lands as "countries of monkeys" in the "rant" (one wonders how carefully Trullemans analyzed this text before posting) would count as a purely prejudicial insult, possibly punishable in Belgium and elsewhere under various laws. As Modrikamen would argue, though, only through free speech can such passions find a proper venting, cold critique, and channeling into more fruitful long-term policy discussions.