OOTDnews

smoking-dragon is open for business

2012-08-08T05:13:00.001-04:00

Destruction of Copts Is Islamically Correct

2011-10-14T15:17:00.002-04:00

Written by: Diana West

Coptic funeral, Muslim generals

I am looking at a reproduction of an old engraving of Jerusalem's Church of the Holy Sepulcher. It is in Bat Ye'or's book "The Dhimmi," which collects primary documents from history to chronicle the impact of Islamic law on non-Muslims through the centuries.

What is notable about the image, which is based on an 1856 photograph, is that the church, said to be at the site of Jesus Christ's crucifixion and burial, has no cross and no belfry. Stripped of its Christian symbols, the church stood in compliance with the Islamic law and traditions of the Ottoman (Turkish) Empire, which ruled Jerusalem at the time.

I went back to the book to find this image for a reason. It had to do with last weekend's massacre of two dozen Coptic Christians in Cairo by Egyptian military and street mobs, which also left hundreds wounded. The unarmed Copts were protesting the destruction of yet another church in Egypt, St. George's, which on Sept. 30 was set upon by thousands of Muslim men following Friday prayers. Why? The trigger was repair work on the building – work that the local council and governor had approved.

Does that explanation make any sense? Not to anyone ignorant of Islamic law. Unfortunately, that criterion includes virtually all media reporting the story.

Raymond Ibrahim, an Islam specialist, Arabic speaker and author of "The Al Qaeda Reader" (Broadway, 2007), catalogs the key sequence of events that turned a church renovation project into terror and flames. With repair work in progress, he writes online at Hudson New York, "It was not long before local Muslims began complaining, making various demands, including that the church be devoid of crosses and bells – even though the permit approved them – citing that 'the cross irritates Muslims and their children.'"

Those details drove me to re-examine the de-Christianized 19th-century image of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher – no cross, no bells. It becomes a revealing illustration of Islamic history repeating itself in this "Shariah Autumn," the deadly but natural harvest of the grotesquely branded "Arab Spring."

Given our see-no-Shariah media (and government), we have no context in which to place such events. That context is Shariah society, advanced (but by no means initiated) by "Arab Spring," where non-Muslims – "dhimmi" – occupy a place defined for them by Islamic law and tradition. Theologian, author and Anglican pastor Mark Durie elaborates at markdurie.com: "Dhimmi are permitted to live in an Islamic state under terms of surrender as laid out in the 'dhimma' pact." Such terms, Durie writes, "are a well-established part of Islamic law and can be found laid out in countless legal text books." When non-Muslims violate these terms, they become subject to attack.

To place the dhimmi pact in comparable Western terms is to say the West has its Magna Carta, Islam has its Pact of Umar. Among other things, this seminal pact governing Muslim and non-Muslims relations stipulates, Durie notes, the condition that Christians "will neither erect in our areas a monastery, church or sanctuary for a monk, nor restore any place of worship that needs restoration."

Thus, this anti-Coptic violence, which for the moment has caught world attention, is Islamically correct. This is the piece of the puzzle Westerners fail to grasp. But Durie takes us through the theological steps: "For some pious Muslims in Egypt today, the act of repairing a church is a flagrant provocation, a breach of the peace, which amounts to a deliberate revocation of one's right to exist in the land." As such, it "becomes a legitimate topic for sermons in the mosque (where) the faithful are urged ... to uphold the honor of Islam." In Islamic terms, then, the destruction of the church is no injustice, as Durie writes. It is "even a duty to destroy the church and even the lives of Christians who have the temerity to repair their churches." That's because dhimmi who take to the streets to protest the Islamically just destruction of the church "are also rebels who have forfeited their rights (under the pact) to 'safety and protection.'" As violators of the "dhimmi" pact, they become fair game.

It's quite simple, but the theology eludes us. Why? I think the answer is that to expose the facts about Shariah in the Western milieu is to invite their criticism. Such criticism is forbidden under Shariah. So, we remain silent – which is what good "dhimmi" do.

Saudi Beheader

2011-10-13T15:47:00.000-04:00

The Trouble With Muslim Democracy

2011-10-12T21:18:00.000-04:00

From: sultan knish

The ultimate symbol of Muslim Democracy may not end up being the purple fingers of the Iraqi ballots but the smoke from burning churches and dead Coptic Christians in Egypt. While Iraq was tenuously balanced between Shiites and Sunnis, Arabs and Kurds, there is no such balance in Egypt. The average Egyptian is a Sunni Arab and thinks Christians are dogs. Church burnings are as close as Egypt is ever likely to get to democracy and we should be happy for that.

The Muslim world is so enthusiastic about democracy because it allows the majority to slap around the minority-- at least more so than it's already doing. And when there isn't a clear majority to sit in the driver's seat, they throw in musical chairs coalitions of different ethnic and religious factions in between bouts of civil war.

That's the situation in Lebanon and in Iraq, but those countries are lucky because the minority there is a sizable enough to have a shot. That's more than can be said for Egypt's Christians who are big enough to be targets, but not big enough to take on the majority. Egypt and Iraq were the region's last bastions of Pan-Arabism, which allowed Christians Arabs a limited stake in the country, but an Iraq and Egypt defined by an Islamic identity are countries incompatible with a non-Muslim minority.

Minorities may do better under Muslim tyrannies than Muslim democracies, because dictators find a minority group with few options other than the regime to be useful. Libya's Africans did better under Khaddafi. Egypt's Christians did better under Mubarak. Dictators like a little divide and conquer because it keeps their people off balance. Democracies are another matter.

Democracy is a great slogan for Westerners who approach it from their own blinkered perspective and assume that it means the same thing to the people using it thousands of miles away as it does to them. To Americans, democracy is the unexamined assumption that popular power goes hand in hand with freedom. To Muslims it's the equally unexamined assumption that democracy is the national will to unite a country by purging it of all its divisive elements.

American pundits on the left and right made the fallacious assumption that democracy equates to tolerance for minorities when they thoughtlessly endorsed Tahrir Square and the Arab Spring. An assumption that was not founded on history or reason, but on wishful thinking. The modern state which provides maximum political representation to minorities is if anything quite undemocratic and brought into being through mainly undemocratic institutions.

The same unexamined assumption that led Bush to frame the problem as one of tyranny standing against democracy, led his successors who despised his legacy and ideas, to go ahead and follow a variation of the same path. But tyranny need not be the opposite of democracy, if it is what most of the people want. And Islamism need not contradict democracy.

Women can vote in Iran, they just can't vote to change their status. Christians can vote in Egypt, they just can't vote themselves equal rights. Islamism can function as a democratic tyranny, so long as the majority of the population agrees with their basic premises. And if the population doesn't, then elections are rigged, the bullets start flying and the prisons fill up.

Saddam's chief Shiite oppositionist cleric, Mohammad Baqir al-Sadr, (father-in-law of the troll of Sadr City) came up with an Islamist democracy by treating the public as the guardians of Islam. The obvious motivation for that was to deny the legitimacy of Saddam and his Sunni allies by moving the point of legitimate authority from the rulers as the guardians of Islam, to the Shiite majority.

That selectivity also delineates the borders of Islamic democracy. The Koran is still the Constitution and the people derive their power from the Koran, rather than the other way around. And this form of democracy can only empower Muslims to enforce Islam. If they deviate from Islamic norms, then they have lost the right to govern themselves. Non-Muslims cannot serve as guardians of Islam at all.

Treating popular democracy as a means of enforcing Islamic norms may seem progressive to the same sort of people who lecture enthusiastically on Mohammed's enlightened treatment of women, but it's really just a way for the Islamists to displace the dictators who may be brutal bastards, but aren't particularly interested in enforcing veiling or flogging men who don't grow beards.

It may make a small degree of difference to us how the population of a place thousands of miles away chooses to be oppressed, but for the minor fact that their Islamist rulers hate us quite a bit more and their hatred has global ambitions.

The Bush era assumption that the hostility was driven by dictatorships was one of the odder canapes served at diplomatic dinner parties. While dictatorships certainly did everything they could to spread hate toward America and the West, they were riding on the backs of an existing hatred. Much as the attacks on Christians in Egypt today are not populist in planning, but are populist in execution.

The problem with Muslim democracy is at the heart of all the fallacious assumptions that said it could be fixed through a change of government. The problem did not originate with governments. And that means it will not go away with a change of government. A change of government is fine for removing a Saddam or a Khaddafi, just so long as it's not done on the assumption that what will follow will be a happy place full of frolicking bunnies and the Bill of Rights in Arabic.

Our collision with Islamic democracy is a result of their dysfunction and ours. They cannot justify any course of action without resorting to the Koran and national pride. We cannot justify any course of action without turning it into a humanitarian mission to make the world a better place.

Our response to September 11 shifted from getting those responsible to creating women's rights in Kabul and civil rights for the Shiites in Sadr City. Ten years and thousands of deaths later, the former is as likely to survive our departure as an ice sculpture in the desert, and the latter has empowered our enemies.

Instead of dreaming of Bin Laden's head on a platter, we began entertaining lunatic visions of the patron saint of democracy climbing down the Muslim chimney to leave presents of civil rights under the big Eid tree. And the root cause of that fallacy is that we thought that if we made them like us, there would no longer be any reason to fight them.

Such cultural colonialism when consciously practiced is a tool of empire, but we did not practice it consciously because we were no longer aware of our own exceptionalism. Our reality had become universal. We thought that everyone had our rights or wanted them, forgetting that our idea of rights and its accompanying form of government evolved from our centuries of political struggle. They could no more be grafted on to an alien society, than you could convey everything that has made you who you are to a stranger.

Our governments are outgrowths of our culture, so are theirs. Ours depend on unspoken assumptions that we rarely question or that we simply take for granted. So do theirs. And when we tried to graft a government that was more like ours on a culture that was nothing like ours, it was their culture that ended up defining the government more than ours.

The internationalist assumption that laws are more important than cultures, and that global bodies can make law for all is an absurdity from the minds of Western progressives and a few international accomplices. The very idea that legal rationalism is more important than the traditions of culture and religion could only have been conceived of by a certain type of Western progressive, who is also the only type of creature who could believe that anyone outside his or her circle would accept such a thing at face value.

The American assumption that democracy would be issue based, rather than ethnic or religion based hardly passes the smell taste even back in the old 50, where districts are gerrymandered by law to fit certain ethnic and racial groups, and the current occupant of the White House got there more on the color of his skin than the content of his character. But overall we actually do manage to vote on the issues. At least most of us and in most elections.

Over near the pyramids, the driving issue is not the cost of health care or whether there is a right to bear arms, but how to solve all the problems in one neat bundle by unifying the country under some grand philosophy. Either Pan-Arabism or Pan-Islamism. Pick the right national identity and the rest takes care of itself.

Some of that ugly taint was in the air in the last presidential election. A taint that some conservative commentators peculiarly cheered as if tens of millions of people voting on race, rather than issues, was not a perversion of democracy to be ashamed of. It was the engine behind a campaign that was built on the insistence that updating our identity would also fix a constellation of problems. The folly of that had been demonstrated by Tony Blair's reign across the ocean, but few Americans had ever paid attention to him as anything but the neighbor next door who occasionally stopped by to offer military assistance or borrow a cup of steel tariffs.

The mistake that Americans rarely make, is the one that Muslim countries make all the time. The idea of an issue based democracy sounds good to them in theory, but the only issue that really ends up mattering is what role the Koran will play and what to do about all those "outsiders" who are causing all the problems. Attack their embassy and burn their churches. That will show them.

It takes a certain degree of maturity to take responsibility for causing your own problems. And that degree of maturity may also be what is required for representative government to be anything more than a lynch mob with a ballot box.

In the Muslim world problems are external, the work of secret conspiracies, international enemies and witches, not to mention black dogs, women and infidels. Unity comes from identifying that outside source of the problem and uniting against it. Then everyone can smile at a burning church, exchange photos of the Israeli flag being pulled down and feel like they have something in common.

The trouble with Muslim democracy is that democracy is only as good as the demos. When most of the population is unwilling to engage in self-criticism, but eager to create unity through bigotry, then its democracy will be a lynch mob with a ballot box. And no amount of rhetoric will change that. Only responsible people can use power responsibly, and while we are all irresponsible to a degree, the degree of our irresponsibility can be seen in the practice of our politics.

In the final analysis the trouble with Muslim democracy is the Muslims.

Egypt's army defends action in protest crackdown

2011-10-12T14:11:00.000-04:00

From: reuters.com

By Marwa Awad

CAIRO (Reuters) - Egyptian generals defended on Wednesday the army's actions in cracking down on a Christian protest over a church attack that left 25 dead, denying charges that troops used live ammunition or that army vehicles crushed demonstrators under their wheels.
In the worst violence since Hosni Mubarak was ousted and which drew a storm of criticism of the army, activists said armored vehicles sped into a crowd on Sunday to disperse a protest in Cairo over an attack on a church building in southern Egypt.

Online videos showed mangled bodies. Activists said some people were crushed by wheels. Activists and a doctor said some dead had bullet wounds. The generals showed footage they said showed army vehicles avoiding demonstrators.

The violence, which drew criticism from Muslims and Christians alike, cast a shadow over the first election for parliament since Mubarak was ousted. Candidate registration began on Wednesday, while voting starts on November 28.

Generals called for unity between Christians and Muslims.

"The armed forces would never and have never opened fire on the people," said General Mahmoud Hegazy, a member of the council that has ruled since Mubarak, himself a former military commander, was driven out by a popular uprising.

The army was praised when it took control during the uprising for restraint in handling protests. But anger at the army has mounted as the transition to civilian rule has dragged on and for what activists say are increasingly tough tactics.

"We are careful to ensure a secure environment for parliamentary elections," General Adel Emara said.
The generals showed footage of an armored personnel carrier swerving around protesters. They also sought to pin the blame for inciting violence on "foreign elements."

"There has not been a case of rolling over people with vehicles," Emara said. Pointing at footage he showed at the news conference, he said: "They are trying to avoid running into protesters, not rolling over them."
Protesters had complained of people they described as "thugs" attacking the demonstration before the worst violence kicked off. The generals pledged to find the "group or party" that was seeking to derail Egypt's uprising.

"SAW IT WITH MY EYES"

One journalist, Samwel el-Ashay, described his experience to the generals: "There were thugs who tried to intercept the protest ... At a certain point, things got out of hand and the armored vehicles running around were actually rolling over protesters. I saw it with my eyes."

General Emara responded: "We welcome your comments and thank you for your testimony."
Amnesty International said some of the dead had bullet wounds. A doctor at a Coptic hospital had told reporters on Monday that 14 of the 17 dead brought in to his hospital had been hit by bullets. The doctor said three bodies were crushed.

"Egypt's Copts are part of the fabric of this society. All Egyptians are citizens with the same rights and obligations," Hegazy said. "This is a lesson that cannot simply pass us by. We must learn a lesson from this."
Christians, who make up 10 percent of Egypt's roughly 80 million people, had taken to the streets after accusing Muslim radicals of partially demolishing a church in Aswan province last week. They also demanded the sacking of the province's governor for failing to protect the building.

Christians have long complained of discrimination, pointing to laws they say make it easier to build a mosque than a church. Disputes over building places of worship are common in Egypt. But there has been a rise in violence against churches since the ousting of Mubarak, who had repressed Islamist groups.

"Regarding the issue of the church ... I think the issue is being looked into by the judiciary," Emara said.
Christians turned their fury on the army. They said protesters responded with stones and other projectiles only after the military used heavy-handed tactics. Military and other vehicles were set on fire in the violence.
"The power of the Egyptian people is in its unity. Egypt was never more in need of unity than it is now. The armed forces belong to the people whether Christian or Muslim," Hegazy said.

Sharjah TV to broadcast arrest of 30 absconding housemaids

2011-10-11T18:00:00.004-04:00

From: gulfnews.com

The raid and how police personnel break into the flat where 30 illegal housemaids hid will be shown on Wednesday

By Aghaddir Ali, Staff Reporter

Sharjah: The arrest of 30 absconding housemaids will be broadcasting on Sharjah TV on Wednesday at 10.30pm, a Sharjah police official said.

The raid and how police personnel break into the flat where 30 illegal housemaids hid will be shown on Wednesday, said Colonel Sultan Abdullah Al Kheyyal, Sharjah Police's Director of Media and Public Relations.

An agent had informed the headmistress of a Sharjah school on how he was hiring the illegal housemaids and where he hid them. The headmistress called a police programme on Sharjah TV to inform them about the matter, said Colonel Al Kheyyal.

The headmistress told police she was scared to hear such news and she felt that she must inform authorities about the matter to protect the society from the danger of illegal maids, Colonel Al Kheyyal said.
He added that the raid took place with the cooperation of Sharjah Naturalisation and Foreign Affairs Department in addition to a number of Anjad patrols.

The police programme on TV went to the scene of the incident and showed how the illegal maids, belonging to different nationalities, were arrested , Colonel Al Kheyyal said

Md. Governor names four Circuit Court judges in Pr. George’s

2011-10-11T18:00:00.003-04:00

From: washingtonpost.com

By Ruben Castaneda

Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley (D) this week appointed four people to serve as Circuit Court judges in Prince George’s County.

Three of the appointees have been serving as District Court judges.

The new Circuit Court judges are former District Court judges Krystal Q. Alves, Daneeka Varner Cotton, and Hassan A. El-Amin.

The governor also appointed John Paul Davey, an attorney who has practiced in Prince George’s for more than two decades, to the Circuit Court bench.

Alves was named to the District Court bench in 2005. She previously worked as an assistant state’s attorney in Prince George’s and also in the county’s Office of Law, which defends the county against civil lawsuits.

Cotton was appointed to the District Court bench in 2006. In the 1990s, she worked as an assistant state’s attorney in Prince George’s for several years, until she was appointed to the position of master in the family division of Circuit Court, a post she held until she was named to the District Court. She is the chairperson of the Domestic Violence Coordinating Council in Prince George’s County.

El-Amin was appointed to the District Court in 2000, becoming the first Muslim named to the bench in Maryland. In March 2009, El-Amin landed in controversy when he released an 18-year-old man charged with murder to the custody of the defendant’s mother. A spokesman for then-State’s Attorney Glenn F. Ivey criticized the judge’s decision. Murder defendants in Prince George’s are rarely released on bond, and when they are, it is often for a high amount, generally no less than $500,000.

In an interview with The Washington Post, El-Amin defended his decision, saying the defendant, Sean Sykes, was entitled to the presumption of innocence and that he did not consider him a danger to the community or a flight risk.

“Our whole bond system is problematical,” El-Amin said then. “It’s barely constitutional.”
Sykes eventually pleaded guilty to second-degree murder in connection with the stabbing of a man in Oxon Hill.

Davey has worked in private practice in Prince George’s for 21 years, officials said. From 1991 to 2003, Davey served as the county’s representative to the Washington Metropolitan Transit Authority.
Davey also worked as the county’s chief administrative officer from 1987 to 1991.

By Ruben Castaneda

The revisionist history of Sari Nusseibeh

2011-10-11T18:00:00.002-04:00

by Efraim Karsh
The Jerusalem Post

Sari Nusseibeh has done it again. In an article titled "Why Israel Can't be a 'Jewish State,'" published on the Jewish New Year of all dates, the supposedly moderate president of al-Quds University goes to great lengths to explain why Jews, unlike any other nation on earth, are undeserving of statehood.

"[T]he idea of a 'Jewish State' is logically and morally problematic because of its legal, religious, historical and social implications," he wrote. "The implications of this term therefore need to be spelled out, and we are sure that once they are, most people – and most Israeli citizens, we trust – will not accept these implications."

Not that this should have come as a surprise. For decades, Nusseibeh has tirelessly advanced the "one-state solution" – a euphemistic formula that proposes the replacement of Israel by a country, theoretically comprising the whole of historic Palestine, in which Jews will be reduced to the status of a permanent minority.

This advocacy of the destruction of a long-existing state, established by an internationally recognized act of national self-determination, has hardly dented Nusseibeh's "moderate" credentials. That can be partly explained by the desperate yearning among Jews and their supporters worldwide for Palestinian and Arab peace partners. That desire dates back to the 1920s and the 1930s, despite countless setbacks and disillusionments. It is also a corollary of the narcissist and patronizing mesmerization among educated westerners with the "noble savage" in general, and the Westernized native in particular. With his posh Jerusalem high school education, his Oxford and Harvard degrees and impeccable western demeanor, Nusseibeh, like cultured Arabs and Muslims before him, represents the ultimate product of the "white man's civilizing mission," a contemporary replica of George Antonius, the Cambridge-educated Syrian political activist who was the toast of the British chattering classes in Palestine and beyond during the 1930s.

I was personally privy to this feting during a London meeting in the spring of 1989. I was then a senior fellow at Tel Aviv University's Jafee Center for Strategic Studies, and like many well intentioned Israelis at the time and since, we aspired to lay the ground for Israeli-Palestinian reconciliation through secret talks with Palestinian interlocutors, including members of the Palestinian Liberation Organization, then an outlawed organization in Israel. The group we met was headed by Faisal Husseini, then the PLO's most senior official in the disputed territories, flanked by Nusseibeh and a few prominent London-based Palestinian academics.

The meeting was pleasant and informative enough, with the courteous British hosts going out of their way to keep their Palestinian guests sweet. Yet I was taken aback when Nusseibeh, the celebrated epitome of Palestinian moderation, turned out to be the most extreme member of the group. Dismissing out of hand the two-state solution – Israel and a Palestinian state in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip – he sang the praise of the "one-state paradigm," demanding the incorporation of the West Bank and Gaza population into the Jewish state as full-fledged citizens, to be followed by Palestinian "refugees" from the neighboring Arab states and beyond.

In subsequent years, Nusseibeh would pay customary lip service to the two-state solution while consistently questioning the very legitimacy of the state with which he ostensibly wished to make peace. On a few occasions he even let the mask drop, unveiling his true agenda. In the late 1990s, for example, he told an old Oxford friend that "one day, in the near or further future, all this [Israel and Palestine] will be one binational state. It's just a question of how we get there."

In an April 2005 debate at Dartmouth College, Nusseibeh advocated the creation of a bi-national state as the only viable solution to the Israeli-Palestinian dispute.

"We will have spent 100 years killing and fighting each other, doing our best to avoid a one-state solution, and we will find ourselves in that exact situation in 40 or 50 years," he argued.

IN A 2007 political memoir Nusseibeh missed no opportunity to denigrate and delegitimize the Jewish state through sharp, short, often subtle yet always false readings of history.

He does this in spades in his latest article. A Jewish state cannot exist, he argues, because "no state in the world is – or can be in practice – ethnically or religiously homogenous." But the Jewish state that has existed for over 63 years has never been, nor aspired to be, totally homogenous: unlike the Palestinian Arab leadership which, since the early 1920s to date, has insisted on a Judenrein Palestine. Rather, Israel has been home to diverse religious and ethnic minorities accounting for nearly 20 percent of its total population.
As David Ben-Gurion told the leadership of his own (Mapai) party in 1947, the non-Jews in the Jewish state "will be equal citizens; equal in everything without any exception; that is, the state will be their state as well."

Nusseibeh claims that a Jewish state must by definition be either a theocracy or an apartheid state, and that its Jewish nature opens the door to legally reducing its substantial non-Jewish minority (whose very existence he previously denied) "to second-class citizens (or perhaps even stripping them of their citizenship and other rights)." This, too, flies in the face of Israel's 63-year history, where Arabs have enjoyed full equality before the law, and have been endowed with the full spectrum of democratic rights – including the right to vote for and serve in all state institutions.

In fact, from the designation of Arabic as an official language, to the recognition of non-Jewish religious holidays as legal resting days for their respective communities, to the granting of educational, cultural, judicial, and religious autonomy, Arabs in Israel enjoy more formal prerogatives than ethnic minorities anywhere in the democratic world.

Small wonder that whenever an Israeli politician proposes the inclusion of some frontier Israeli-Arab settlements in the future Palestinian state, as part of a land exchange within the framework of a peace agreement, the residents of these localities immediately voice their indignation. Moreover, recent surveys show that more Palestinians in east Jerusalem, who are entitled to Israeli social benefits and are free to travel across Israel's pre-1967 borders, would rather become citizens of the Jewish state than citizens of a new Palestinian one.

But Nusseibeh is not someone to be bothered by the facts. His is the misconception, prevalent among Arabs and Muslims, that Jews are a religious community and not a nation deserving of statehood.

Hence, instead of insisting on being accepted for what it has been for 63 years, or what the UN partition resolution envisaged it to be, Israel should shed its Jewish identity and become "a civil, democratic, and pluralistic state whose official religion is Judaism" like many of its Arab neighbors which have Islam as their official religion "but grant equal civil rights to all citizens."

This of course is the complete inverse of the truth.

The Jewish state is a civil, democratic and pluralistic society, something that none of its Arab neighbors can stake a claim to. On the contrary, precisely because Islam is enshrined as state religion throughout the Middle East, the non-Muslim minorities have been denied "equal civil rights" and have instead been reduced to the historic dhimmi status whereby they can at best enjoy certain religious freedoms in return for a distinctly inferior existence, and at worst suffer from systematic persecution and oppression.

And this is the "one-state paradigm" offered by Nusseibeh to Israel's Jewish citizens.

The writer is research professor of Middle East and Mediterranean Studies at King's College London, director of the Middle East Forum (Philadelphia) and author, most recently, of Palestine Betrayed.

Iranians charged in U.S. over assassination plot

2011-10-11T18:00:00.001-04:00

From: reuters.com

By Jeremy Pelofsky and Basil Katz

WASHINGTON/NEW YORK

WASHINGTON/NEW YORK (Reuters) - U.S. authorities broke up a plot by men linked to the Iranian government to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in the United States, U.S. officials said Tuesday.

Attorney General Eric Holder said the United States would hold Tehran accountable for the plot.

Two men, originally from Iran, were charged in a U.S. court for the plot. One of them, Gholam Shakuri, was described in the criminal complaint as a member of the Quds Force, a branch of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Shakuri is still at large but the officials said U.S. authorities arrested the other man, Manssor Arbabsiar who is a naturalized U.S. citizen, at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York on September 29.

U.S. officials said there had also been initial discussions about other alleged plots, including attacking the Saudi and Israeli embassies in Washington, however no charges for that were revealed Tuesday.

Relations were already sour between the Islamic republic and Washington, which accuses Tehran of backing terrorism and pursuing nuclear arms.

Holder declined to say what measures the Obama administration would take, but said they would be coming soon.

"The disruption of this alleged plot marks a significant achievement by our law enforcement and intelligence agencies, as well as the close cooperation of our partners in the Mexican government," Holder told a news conference in Washington.

"In addition to holding these individual conspirators accountable for their alleged role in this plot, the United States is committed to holding Iran accountable for its actions," he said.

Last month hopes were raised of improved ties when Iran released two U.S. hikers accused of spying when they were arrested on the Iran-Iraq border in 2009. Holder said there was no link between the hikers' case and the alleged plot.

SAUDI AMBASSADOR

Officials said that the Saudi ambassador, Adel Al-Jubeir, was never in danger. President Barack Obama was briefed in June about the alleged plot and through a spokesman expressed gratitude for it being disrupted.

The assassination plot began to unfold in May 2011 when Arbabsiar approached an individual in Mexico to help, but that individual turned out to be an informant for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration.

The confidential source, who was not identified, immediately tipped law enforcement agents, according to the criminal complaint. Arbabsiar paid $100,000 to the informant in July and August for the plot, a down payment on the $1.5 million requested.

Shakuri approved the plan to kill the ambassador during telephone conversations with Arbabsiar, the complaint said.

After Arbabsiar was arrested in New York, he allegedly confessed and provided U.S. authorities with more details about the Iranian government's alleged involvement, Holder said.

The men are charged with one count of conspiracy to murder a foreign official, two counts of foreign travel and use of interstate and foreign commerce facilities in the commission of murder for hire and one count each of conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction and conspiracy to commit an act of terrorism.

Authorities said no explosives were acquired for the plot and the weapon of mass destruction charge can range from a simple improvised device to a more significant weapon. They face up to life in prison if convicted.

(Reporting by Basil Katz in New York, James Vicini, Mark Hosenball, Tabassum Zakaria and Matt Spetalnick in Washington; Writing by Jeremy Pelofsky; Editing by David Storey)

Horrific ordeal of bride in forced marriage who was knocked out with chloroform and raped by husband she had just met

2011-10-11T18:00:00.000-04:00

Rapist regarded wife as a 'chattel' says judge
Husband is jailed for eight years

By Graham Smith

A husband who knocked out his virgin wife with chloroform and raped her has been jailed for eight years.

The 35-year-old man tied the woman to a bed and knocked her out using the 'obsolete Victorian anaesthetic' on at least two occasions during their six weeks of marriage.

The woman, a Bangladeshi immigrant who was 21 at the time, had repeatedly refused to have sex with her new husband because she was too nervous.

The husband, who cannot be named for legal reasons, poured the chloroform onto a towel, pressed it over her face, then tied her up before raping her at his home in Poplar, east London.

Judge Timothy King said the rapist had regarded his wife as a 'chattel' he could use as he wanted.

He said: 'The victim was a vulnerable young woman, she had made her unwillingness abundantly clear and you would not take no for an answer.

'Her views were of no consequence as far as you were concerned.

'Given that you used chloroform to rape her, this was very much a contrived and premeditated act in which you subdued her capacity to resist.'

The husband had denied administering chloroform and two counts of rape but was convicted by a jury at the Old Bailey with an 11-to-one majority on all three charges.

Prosecutor Richard Hearnden then revealed the man had already been found guilty of carrying out the attack in November 2009, but that the conviction was overturned.

Forced marriage: The Bangladeshi immigrant had repeatedly refused to have sex with

her new husband at his home in Poplar, east London (pictured), because she was too nervous

The Court of Appeal had ruled that the first trial was compromised when evidence of the defendant's previous convictions - which include assault causing actual bodily harm, handling stolen goods, possession of cannabis and possession of crack cocaine - were revealed to the jury.

Mr Hearnden described chloroform as an 'obsolete Victorian anaesthetic' which is no longer used in any British hospitals, although it is still available and used as an industrial strength cleaner.

CAMERON 'TO CRIMINALISE' FORCED MARRIAGE

Forcing someone into marriage could be made a criminal act under possible changes to British law, David Cameron said yesterday.

Alongside moves aimed at cracking down on sham marriages used to cheat immigration rules, Mr Cameron said he has asked interior ministry officials to discuss creating a new offence aimed at those who force people to marry against their will.

Currently, a potential victim of forced marriage can apply to a court for a protection order, which is intended to stop intimidation or violence and prevent someone from being sent overseas.

Although anyone breaching the order can be jailed for two years, the sanction is made under civil - not criminal - law and is rarely imposed.

Only one person had been imprisoned under the legislation, which was introduced in 2008.

Mr Cameron said: 'Forced marriage is little more than slavery
'To force someone into marriage is completely wrong, and I strongly believe this is a problem we should not shy away from addressing.'

'It is perfectly possible in the wrong hands, to use chloroform to commit crimes, and this fact had been known since at least 1861,' he said.

The victim married her husband in a 'simple Islamic ceremony at his flat in Poplar' on 12 April 2009, the court heard.

'She says she was forced to marry him, and it certainly seems that the period of time between the defendant first meeting her and the marriage ceremony was extremely short,' said the prosecutor.

On the night of their marriage, the husband tried to have sex with his wife, but she refused, saying it was normal to wait two days before sleeping together.

When he tried again 48 hours later, she tried to put him off again with another excuse.
'The defendant would not take no for an answer,' said Mr Hearnden.

'On at least two occasions between the day of the marriage ceremony and 9 May, the defendant had sexual intercourse with her without her consent.

'The method, we say, was the same each time. He would tie her hands up with a scarf in the bedroom and he would make her senseless by putting some of the chloroform onto a towel, wetting it, and holding it against her mouth.

'It would make her totally helpless during the rapes,' he said. 'She could feel pain and burning.'

The situation continued until 9 May, when a blazing row broke out at the marital home and the woman was badly beaten.

Police were called to the flat, at which point the woman took them to her bedroom and showed them the bottle of chloroform, which was large enough to hold around a litre of the drug.

She indicated what had been done to her in broken English and sign language, the court heard.
When her husband was questioned, he initially said they had never had sex and then said they had slept together but it was consensual.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2047806/Horrific-ordeal-bride-knocked-chloroform-raped-husband-just-met.html#ixzz1aVNThnDm

IAEA expected to give details on Iran atom bomb fears

2011-10-11T06:00:00.003-04:00

From: jpost.com

By REUTERS

Diplomats say UN nuclear agency could lay out evidence of military aspects of Iranian nuclear program in report due in November.

VIENNA - The UN atomic watchdog is expected to spell out in more detail soon the reasons for its growing concern that Iran may be working covertly to develop a nuclear missile, diplomats say.

Such a move by the International Atomic Energy Agency, possibly in a new quarterly report on Iran due early next month, could raise pressure on Tehran and offer more arguments for Western powers to tighten sanctions on the major oil producer.

The United States and its allies have urged IAEA Director-General Yukiya Amano to declare plainly whether he believes that there have been military aspects to Tehran's nuclear activities and whether such work may still be going on.

It remains to be seen whether the report's conclusion will be sufficiently clear-cut to prompt the agency's 35-nation board of governors to take action at a Nov. 17-18 meeting, possibly by reporting Iran once again to the UN Security Council.

"Many countries have called on Amano to give his best possible assessment of the possible military dimension of Iran's nuclear program," one Western envoy said.

But it is hard to know now what Amano will say and it is "much too early to make a judgment" on whether it could provide the basis for referring the issue to the Security Council in New York, as happened in 2006, the diplomat added.

A divided board decided in June to report Syria, Iran's ally, to the Security Council for stonewalling an IAEA probe into a suspected reactor site that was bombed by Israel in 2007.

Russia and China opposed the US-led diplomatic crackdown on Syria, highlighting big power rifts that the West would want to avoid in any similar IAEA board vote on Iran.

"Russia and China appear to be in no mood for imposing additional pressure on Iran without a pressing reason for concern," said Ali Vaez, an Iran expert at the Federation of American Scientists think-tank.

Vatican: Pope urges freedom for Indonesia's Christians

2011-10-11T06:00:00.002-04:00

From: adnkronos.com

Vatican City, 7 Oct. (AKI) - Pope Benedict XVI on Friday appealed for religious freedom and tolerance for Christians in Indonesia, where Muslim extremists have carried out attacks on churches, opposed their construction and tried to shut them down.

"Indonesia's constitution guarantees the fundamental human right of freedom to practice one's religion," the pontiff told a delegation of Indonesian bishops visiting the Vatican.

"The freedom to live and preach the Gospel can never be taken for granted and must always be justly and patiently upheld. Nor is religious freedom merely a right to be free from outside constraints," Benedict said.

"It is also a right to be authentically and fully Catholic, to practice the faith, to build up the Church and to contribute to the common good," he added.

The pope urged the bishops to foster inter-religious dialogue in overwhelmingly Muslim Indonesia, where Christians are a religious minority.

"Your country, so rich in its cultural diversity and possessed of a large population, is home to significant numbers of followers of various religious traditions", he said.

Muslims form 86.1 percent of the population , protestants 5.7 percent, Roman Catholic 3 percent, Hindus 1.8 and other religions 3.4 percent of the population in the ethnically diverse nation of 245.6 million people, according to the last census in 2000.

"By doing everything possible to ensure that the rights of minorities in your country are respected, you further the cause of tolerance and mutual harmony in your country and beyond," Benedict concluded.

Case of Iranian Pastor Facing Death Penalty Reportedly in Hands of Supreme Leader

2011-10-11T06:00:00.001-04:00

By Joshua Rhett Miller

| FoxNews.com

Attorney Mohammad Ali Dadkhah told AFP on Monday that an Iranian court has decided to seek the opinion of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei -- the Islamic republic's spiritual leader and highest authority -- in the case of Youcef Nadarkhani, a 32-year-old pastor who was arrested in October 2009 and later sentenced to death for converting to Christianity.

Dadkhah and religious rights organizations say Nadarkhani is facing possible execution for apostasy and for refusing to renounce his religion, contradicting reports by Iran state media that have indicated Nadarkhani was found guilty of rape, extortion and security-related crimes. Messages seeking comment from Dadkhah were not immediately returned early Monday.

Jordan Sekulow, executive director of the American Center for Law and Justice, a Washington-based organization that is monitoring Nadarkhani's case, told FoxNews.com that the move was unusual and is part of the "secretive process" within the Iranian judicial system.

"Based on these reports, Pastor Youcef is alive and we have reached the highest level of Iranian government," Sekulow said on Monday. "I don't believe this would've ever reached the level of Khamenei without the media attention and outpouring of support we've seen."

Sekulow said the move to involve Khamenei in a case before a regional court is uncommon and indicates that "Iran is feeling the pressure" of the growing international community in support of Nadarkhani.

As of Friday, at least 39 members of Congress had signed a letter calling on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to put pressure on Iranian authorities to release Nadarkhani, who, according to reports last week from Iranian state-funded Press TV, is now considered a security threat and previously operated a brothel. Judiciary Chief Mohammad-Javad Heshmati of Iran's Gilan Province told the station on Wednesday that no verdict had been reached and that an execution order had not yet been issued.

Documents obtained by the American Center for Law and Justice, however, indicate that apostasy is the only charge against Nadarkhani.

"There was an indication that this would go to one of [Iran's] top leaders," Sekulow said of Nadarkhani's case. "It looks like everything we believed would happen has now happened. This is the time where the international pressure, the media attention, has to increase tenfold."

Sekulow also asked Clinton to call for Nadarkhani's "unconditional release" and said more than 125,000 people have signed a petition in support of the father of two. Calls seeking comment from the U.S. State Department were not immediately returned on Monday.

The White House condemned the conviction and possible death sentence for Nadarkhani late last month, saying the execution would further demonstrate Iranian authorities' "utter disregard" for religious freedom.

"Pastor Nadarkhani has done nothing more than maintain his devout faith, which is a universal right for all people," the statement released by the White House on Sept. 29 read. "That the Iranian authorities would try to force him to renounce that faith violates the religious values they claim to defend, crosses all bounds of decency, and breaches Iran's own international obligations. A decision to impose the death penalty would further demonstrate the Iranian authorities' utter disregard for religious freedom, and highlight Iran's continuing violation of the universal rights of its citizens. We call upon the Iranian authorities to release Pastor Nadarkhani, and demonstrate a commitment to basic, universal human rights, including freedom of religion."

Nadarkhani is the latest Christian cleric to be imprisoned in Iran for his religious beliefs. According to Elam Ministries, a United Kingdom-based organization that serves Christian churches in Iran, there was a significant increase in the number of Christians arrested solely for practicing their faith between June 2010 and January 2011. A total of 202 arrests occurred during that six-month period, including 33 people who remained in prison as of January, Elam reported.

Nadarkhani, a pastor in the 400-member Church of Iran, has been held in that country's Gilan Province since October 2009, after he protested to local education authorities that his son was forced to read from the Koran at school. His wife, Fatemeh Pasandideh, was also arrested in June 2010 in an apparent attempt to pressure him to renounce his faith. She was released in October 2010, according to Amnesty International.

Egyptian leaders vow probe, anti-discrimination push after deadly clashes

2011-10-11T06:00:00.000-04:00

From Mohamed Fadel Fahmy, for CNN

Cairo (CNN) -- Egypt's prime minister chaired an emergency meeting Monday after the worst violence to hit the North African nation since its revolution in February, promising a probe into what happened and vowing to ban all discrimination based on religion, language, gender or ethnicity.

The National Justice Committee meeting comes on the heels of clashes Sunday night involving army troops and pro-Coptic Christian protesters that left at least 25 people dead and 272 wounded, a health ministry official said Monday.

Reports indicated the death toll could be as high as 29 in violence that an army spokesman speculated may have been guided by a "hidden hand" associated with neither side.

Many of those killed were crushed by speeding military vehicles, said Dr. Adel al-Dawi of the ministry.
Those at Monday's meeting deemed the incident shocking and said it marked a "serious escalation" in tensions in Egypt, according to a statement from Prime Minister Essam Sharaf's office. It urged political and religious leaders to together take responsibility for the nation's security, while alluding to possible threats from conspiracies and sedition.

Specifically, the committee established a fact-finding commission that will look at the incident and punish those responsible. It also set a two-week deadline to establish a framework for a law to mandate a uniform process for permitting and construction of houses of worship -- regardless of religious denomination.

The committee also said the government would institute a law imposing jail time and a fine on anyone found guilty of discriminating against others based on religion, language, gender or ethnicity.

Hours earlier, Sharaf acknowledged the divisions, and mounting security concerns, in a speech on state television.

"Instead of going forward, we found ourselves scrambling for security," the minister said, noting that the incident had produced "martyrs, both civilian and from the military."

Tensions remained high Monday, as hundreds of Coptic Christians rallied outside a hospital, chanting, "The army has its tanks, but we have our prayers." Some Muslims attended the rally in an expression of solidarity with Christians.

Egyptian security sources said stones were thrown at the rally, but a CNN reporter saw no evidence of that.
Elsewhere in Cairo late Monday, another crowd of Muslim demonstrators gathered, chanting, "Muslimiya! Muslimiya!" to express their unhappiness with the Copts.

Sunday's violence was an escalation after months of rising sectarian tension between Muslims and the Coptic Christian minority. September 30 destruction at a Coptic church site in southern Egypt heightened emotions. The Copts protested Sunday to demand that the military provide equal protection for Coptic places of worship.

How the violence broke out was unclear. Some protesters said stones were thrown by people in civilian garb who were carrying sticks and machetes. Alla Mahmoud, an Interior Ministry spokesman, said that some protesters began "firing live ammunition at the army."

Demonstrators said they were marching peacefully toward the Egyptian state television building when the violence erupted.

"Suddenly, we were attacked by thugs carrying swords and clubs," protester Magdi Hanna told CNN on Sunday.

The January 25 youth revolution coalition, which has been involved in various anti-government protests, including Sunday's demonstration, denied that any participants shot at the Egyptian forces.

Samir Bolos, one of the demonstrators, added Sunday that "some unknown people may have fired at the army, but not us."

Witnesses said the army fired on the protesters near the state television headquarters. Meanwhile, military trucks could be seen burning on the street.

Sherif Doss, head of Egypt's association of Coptics and a spokesman for the Coptic Church, said 17 civilians died and 40 were wounded in the altercation. He said the church's highest official, Pope Shenuda III, denounced the violence and blamed it on outsiders. "Strangers infiltrated the demonstration and committed the crimes for which the Copts have been blamed," the church said in a statement.

Twelve army troops were killed and more than 50 were wounded, according to Lt. Col. Amr Imam, a military spokesman. He said this was "first time protesters fired at the army."

"There must be a hidden hand behind this," Imam said. "Egyptians don't do that."
Doss said he and other Coptics "demand that the army checks the bullets used on the killed soldiers. They are probably military bullets. We do not have weapons."

Though individual Muslim women outside a hospital wiped tears from the cheeks of Coptic women whose relatives died Sunday, it was unclear whether -- at a state level -- the military-run government has the will to address the problem or the wherewithal to run a country of nearly 90 million people.

In May, during another outbreak of sectarian violence, a National Justice Committee was formed to mitigate sectarian strife. Several committee members resigned in protest, saying they government has done too little to address the mounting problems.

Since then-President Hosni Mubarak's ouster in February, the country remains unstable. The economy is struggling, tourism has yet to rebound and the stock market has dropped.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, U.S. President Barack Obama, European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton and British Foreign Secretary William Hague expressed concern about Sunday's violence.
"Now is a time for restraint on all sides so that Egyptians can move forward together to forge a strong and united Egypt," the White House press secretary said in a statement. "As the Egyptian people shape their future, the United States continues to believe that the rights of minorities -- including Copts -- must be respected, and that all people have the universal rights of peaceful protest and religious freedom."

The statement noted that Sharaf has called for an investigation. "These tragic events should not stand in the way of timely elections and a continued transition to democracy that is peaceful, just and inclusive," it said.
Ashton said Monday that she was "extremely concerned by the large number of deaths and injuries," while Hague condemned the loss of life.

Coptic Christians, an ancient sect, make up about 9% of Egypt's population, according to the U.S. State Department.

They have suffered serious violence in recent months.

A Coptic church in the city of Alexandria was bombed on New Year's Day, killing 23 people -- the deadliest attack on Christians in Egypt in recent times.

Clashes involving Coptic Christians in May left at least 12 dead.

Egypt's Coptic Christians base their theology on the teachings of the Apostle Mark, who introduced Christianity to Egypt, according to St. Takla Church in Alexandria, the capital of Coptic Christianity.

The religion split with other Christians in the 5th century over the definition of the divinity of Jesus Christ.

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, an independent bipartisan federal agency, added Egypt this year to a list of countries named as the worst violators of religious freedom.

There has also been mutual support between the minority Christians and majority Muslims in Egypt, with reports of Christians protecting anti-Mubarak Muslim demonstrators when they stopped for daily prayers during the uprising.

The Video the Palestinians Do Not Want You to See

2011-10-11T01:23:00.000-04:00

Egypt: Destroying Churches, One at a Time

2011-10-10T18:00:00.000-04:00

by Raymond Ibrahim
Hudson New York
October 10, 2011

http://www.meforum.org/3065/egypt-destroying-churches

What clearer sign that Egypt is turning rabidly Islamist than the fact that hardly a few weeks go by without a church being destroyed, or without protesting Christians being attacked and slaughtered by the military?

The latest chaos in Egypt—where the military opened fire on unarmed Christians and repeatedly ran armored vehicles over them, killing dozens—originates in Edfu, a onetime tourist destination renowned for its pharaonic antiquities, but now known as the latest region to see a church destroyed by a Muslim mob.

This church attack is itself eye-opening as to the situation in Egypt. To sum, St. George Coptic church, built nearly a century ago, was so dilapidated that the local council and governor of Aswan approved renovating it, and signed off on the design.

It was not long before local Muslims began complaining, making various demands, including that the church be devoid of crosses and bells—even though the permit approved them—citing that "the Cross irritates Muslims and their children."

Coptic leaders had no choice but to acquiesce, "pointing to the fact that the church was rebuilt legally, and any concessions on the part of the church was done for the love for the country, which is passing through a difficult phase."

Acquiescence breeds more demands: Muslim leaders next insisted that the very dome of the church be removed—so that the building might not even resemble a church—and that it be referred to as a "hospitality home." Arguing that removal of the dome would likely collapse the church, the bishop refused.

The foreboding cries of "Allahu Akbar!" began: Muslims threatened to raze the church and build a mosque in its place; Copts were "forbidden to leave their homes or buy food until they remove the dome of St. George's Church"; many starved for weeks.

Then, after Friday prayers on Sept. 30, some three thousand Muslims rampaged the church, torched it, and demolished the dome; flames from the wreckage burned nearby Coptic homes, which were further ransacked by rioting Muslims.

This account of anti-church sentiment in Egypt offers several conclusions:

First, the obvious: animosity for churches, demands that they be left to crumble, demands to remove crosses and stifle bells, are an integral part of Islamic history and dogma. That church attacks in Egypt always occur on Friday, Islam's "holy day," and are always accompanied by religious cries of "Allahu Akbar!" should be evidence enough of the Islamist context of these attacks.

Because there was a lull in this animosity from the colonial era to just a few decades ago, most Westerners, deeming events closer to their time and space more representative of reality, incorrectly assume that church toleration is the rule, not the exception in Islamic history, which has more frequently been draconian to churches, and is back: "the Muslim Brotherhood announced immediately after the revolution that it is impossible to build any new church in Egypt, and churches which are demolished should never be rebuilt, as well as no crosses over churches or bells to be rung."

This is also why Muslim authorities are complacent, if not complicit. According to witnesses, security forces, which were present during the Edfu attack, "stood there watching." Worse, Edfu's Intelligence Unit chief was seen directing the mob destroying the church.

As for the governor of Aswan, he appeared on State TV and "denied any church being torched," calling it a "guest home" (a common tactic to excuse the destruction of churches). He even justified the incident by arguing that the church contractor made the building three meters higher than he permitted: "Copts made a mistake and had to be punished, and Muslims did nothing but set things right, end of story."

Equally telling is that perpetrators of church attacks are seldom if ever punished. Even if sometimes the most rabid church-destroying Muslims get "detained," it is usually for show, as they are released in days, hailed back home as heroes (this, too, goes back to Muslim dogma, which naturally sides with Muslims over infidels).

This year alone has seen the New Year church attack, which left 23 dead; the destruction of the ancient church of Sool, where Muslims "played soccer" with its sacred relics; the Imbaba attacks, where several churches were set aflame; and now Edfu, wherein, as usual "none of the attackers were arrested."
Indeed, three days after Edfu, Muslims attacked yet another church.

Aware that they are untouchable, at least when it comes to making infidel Christians miserable, anti-Christian Muslims have a simple strategy: destroy churches, even if one at a time, safe in the knowledge that, not only will they not be prosecuted, but Egypt's military and security apparatus will punish the infidel victims should they dare to protest.

Raymond Ibrahim, a widely published Islam-specialist, is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum.

Woman in Labor Survives PA Lynch Attempt

2011-10-10T14:57:00.000-04:00

From: israelnationalnews.com

PA terrorists attempted to lynch a Jewish couple as
they rushed to the hospital on Yom Kippur with the
wife in labor.

Maayana Miskin

Palestinian Authority terrorists continued their attacks on innocent Jewish motorists over Yom Kippur, this time attacking a woman in labor and her husband as they rushed to the hospital. The husband, Ariel Goldman of Pnei Kedem, told Arutz Sheva that the two were lucky to escape with their lives.

Their ordeal began near Har Homa at 2:30 a.m., as they drove to Hadassah Ein Karem hospital in Jerusalem. Suddenly, they encountered a point in the road that had been blocked by large stones.

As Goldman slowed the car, looking for a way around the trap, several Palestinian Authority terrorists jumped out and began to hurl rocks at the car.

The attack turned into a game of cat and mouse, as Goldman looked for ways around the rocks and tried to keep moving, while the terrorists followed the car and continued to pelt it with heavy stones, using a tactic that recently resulted in two deaths near Hevron.

The terrorists “had murder in their eyes,” Goldman said.

He finally managed to pass the stone barrier and speed away from the group of attackers, only to encounter a second group that attempted to stone the car near the Jerusalem neighborhood of Talpiot. Goldman managed to speed away a second time.

A policewoman he later encountered appeared uninterested by his story, but promised to notify her superiors, he said.

Ariel Goldman and his wife managed to reach the hospital, where she gave birth to a baby boy. Both the baby and mother are in good condition.

"There's no place for Jews in Libya"

2011-10-10T08:28:00.000-04:00

From JPost

A few hundred angry protesters gathered in central Tripoli on the eve of Yom Kippur on Friday, calling for the deportation of a Libyan Jew who has been trying to reopen a synagogue sealed since ousted Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi expelled the country’s Jewish community in 1967.

The protesters carried signs reading, “There is no place for the Jews in Libya,” and “We don’t have a place for Zionism.”

The crowds tried to storm Italian Libyan Jewish psychoanalyst David Gerbi’s Corinthia Hotel in central Tripoli. There was also a demonstration in Benghazi in the east of the country.

According to Gerbi, the crowd wanted to forcibly remove him from the hotel.

“They were impeded by hotel and Libyan security and government officials,” he said.

Gerbi said that National Security Adviser Abdel Karim Bazama, rebel leader Mustafa Saghezli, Interior Minister Ahmed Dharat and Justice Minister Muhammad Allaghi were among the government officials present at the hotel.

“The Tripoli crowd dispersed after Allaghi warned that any use of force on the part of the protesters would immediately result in strong international condemnation,” Gerbi said.

“He [Allaghi] reassured them the ‘problem’ would be resolved within 48 hours.”

The demonstrations were ignited by an attempt by Dr.Gerbi to clean the debris and pray in Tripoli’s abandoned Dar Bishi Synagogue. Dr. Gerbi had joined the National Transitional Council (NTC) rebel group last spring, first as a volunteer at the Benghazi Psychiatric Hospital and then joining and helping the rebels themselves.

“This incident has served to expose the dangerous reality simmering beneath the surface,” he said.

On Sunday, after a personal meeting with Libyan and Italian diplomatic representatives, he agreed to return to Rome on Tuesday by military plane in order to ease the tension.

To me, the most remarkable part of this story is that a protester actually tried to translate "There's no place for Jews in Libya" into Hebrew just for a protest sign.

The poster behind it says "Libya for the Libyans - not for the Jews" with "Jews" crossed out.

And the protesters in this photo are women.

200 suicide bombers 'planning attacks in UK'

2011-10-09T15:13:00.000-04:00

From: telegraph

At least 200 potential terrorists are actively planning suicide attacks while living freely in Britain, intelligence chiefs have warned ministers.

Court artist's impression of Irfan Nasser, left, and Irfan Khalid, right, who were

arrested over an alleged UK suicide bombing plot Photo: PA

By Sean Rayment, Defence Correspondent

A senior intelligence source has revealed that the figure is a "conservative" estimate of the threat facing the country from UK-based Islamist suicide bombers.

The would-be killers are among 2,000 extremists who the security services have said are based in Britain and actively planning terrorist activity of some kind.

The figures are contained within a secret government report on the "enduring terrorist threat" facing the UK from al-Qaeda and affiliated organisations, The Sunday Telegraph has been told.

While the deaths of Osama bin Laden and Anwar al-Awlaki may have left al-Qaeda without a charismatic leader, both the Secret Intelligence Service, MI6, and the Security Service, MI5, believe the organisation remains as dangerous as ever.

The warning comes as Britain begins preparations for next year's 2012 Olympic Games, which has been described by MI5 as the biggest security operation in the country's history.

But senior sources believe that rather than targeting Olympic venues, where security will be extremely high, terrorists will be tempted to attack areas where crowds are likely to congregate such as train stations and public events.

If terrorists were to mount an attack in Britain of the kind seen in other countries, by packing a single explosive vest with hundreds of ball bearings then detonating it in a crowded enclosed area such as a station terminus at rush hour, they could kill up to 120 people according to one explosives expert.

The 200 British residents thought to be planning suicide attacks, either within the UK or overseas, represent one in 10 of the wider group of 2,000 terrorist plotters.

The intelligence source added that suicide bombers would only be stopped by either a "chance encounter" or by an intelligence-led investigation. But he added that if a terrorist cell was properly organised and secure there was very little the authorities could do to prevent an attack.

The latest disclosure follows the arrest of six men from Birmingham who were remanded in custody two weeks ago over an alleged UK suicide bombing plot.

Two of the six, Irfan Nasser and Irfan Khalid, are accused of preparing for an act of terrorism, including travelling to Pakistan for training in terrorism, making a martyrdom video and planning a bombing campaign.

They are also accused of "being concerned in constructing" a home-made explosive device for terrorist acts and stating an intention to be a suicide bomber.

Earlier this year, classified intelligence documents disclosed by the whistle-blowing website WikiLeaks, showed that MI6 officers believed that Britain was facing a wave of suicide attacks from British-based Muslim extremists who had been trained in terrorist camps in Pakistan.

One report quoted an MI6 officer's briefing to US officials in which he said: "The internal threat is growing more dangerous because some extremists are conducting non-lethal training without ever leaving the country.

Should these extremists then decide to become suicide operatives, HMG [Her Majesty's Government] intelligence resources, eavesdropping and surveillance would be hard pressed to find them on any 'radar screen'."

One intelligence official told this newspaper: "We may have only had one 'successful' suicide attack in Britain but the tactic remains an enduring threat. This is a generational problem we are facing. The terrorists are learning all the time and adapting their tactics. They now operate a cell structure and there security is very tight.

"Suicide bombers know the signs we will be looking for. So they don't pray in the moments before an attack, there will be no heavy coats in summer and they are becoming much more security aware. For every countermeasure we develop they create a new 'measure'. They will always be looking for our exposed flank."

Intelligence experts believe that suicide bombers are motivated by a number of factors including politics, religion, poverty, finance and social factors.

Research has shown that they can be drawn from all social strata and can range from the well-educated to the mentally impaired. In Iraq and Afghanistan, young children and women have been recruited, while in London, the 7/7 bombers who killed 52 people and injured hundreds more in four coordinated attacks on the Tube and bus network came from stable backgrounds with close families.

Another classified report, details of which have been passed to this newspaper, stated that suicide attacks had developed as the weapon of choice for al-Qaeda and its supporters because of the level of fear that such attacks can engender.

The report cited examples of past suicide attacks which were perceived by the organisations which mounted them as having produced successful outcomes, such as the Beirut barracks bombing of 1983 which was followed by the withdrawal of US forces from Lebanon.

Turkey is Rising Quickly

2011-10-09T14:34:00.000-04:00

Christians Fear Islamist Pressure in Egypt

2011-10-08T15:29:00.000-04:00

From: foxnews.com

CAIRO -- On her first day to school, 15-year-old Christian student Ferial Habib was stopped at the doorstep of her new high school with clear instructions: either put on a headscarf or no school this year.

Habib refused. While most Muslim women in Egypt wear the headscarf, Christians do not, and the move by administrators to force a Christian student to don it was unprecedented. For the next two weeks, Habib reported to school in the southern Egyptian village of Sheik Fadl every day in her uniform, without the head covering, only to be turned back by teachers.

One day, Habib heard the school loudspeakers echoing her name and teachers with megaphones leading a number of students in chants of "We don't want Ferial here," the teenager told The Associated Press.

Habib's was allowed last week to attend without the scarf, and civil rights advocates say her case is a rare one. But it stokes the fears of Egypt's significant Christian minority that they will become the victims as Islamists grow more assertive after the Feb. 11 toppling of President Hosni Mubarak. It also illustrates how amid the country's political turmoil, with little sense of who is in charge and government control weakened, Islamic conservatives in low-level posts can step in and try to unilaterally enforce their own decisions.

Wagdi Halfa, one of Habib's lawyers, said the root problem is a lack of the rule of law.

"We don't want more laws but we want to activate the laws already in place," he said. "We are in a dark tunnel in terms of sectarian tension. Even if you have the majority who are moderate Muslims, a minority of extremists can make big impact on them and poison their minds."

In the past weeks, riots have broken out at two churches in southern Egypt, prompted by Muslim crowds angered by church construction. One riot broke out, near the city of Aswan, even after church officials agreed to a demand by local ultraconservative Muslims, called Salafis, that a cross and bells be removed from the building.

The violence is particularly frustrating for Christians because soon after Mubarak's fall the new government promised to review and lift heavy Mubarak-era restrictions on building or renovating churches. The promise raised hopes among Christians that the government would establish a clear legal right to build, resolving an issue that in recent years has increasingly sparked riots. But the review never came, and Salafi clerics have increased their rhetoric against Christians, including accusing them of seeking to spread their faith with new churches.

Habib's experience was startling because in general, Egypt's Christians, who make up at least 10 percent of the population of 80 million, have enjoyed relative freedom in terms of dress and worship. The vast majority of Muslim women in Egypt put on the headscarf, known as the higab, either for religious or social reasons, but there's little expectation that Christians wear it.

The demand that all students wear the higab was a decision by administrators and teachers at the high school in Sheik Fadl, 110 miles south of Cairo in Minya province. They said the headscarf was part of the school uniform, necessary to protect girls from sexual harassment.

A top provincial Education Ministry official, Abdel-Gawad Abdullah, said in an interview with CTV, a private Egyptian Christian television network, that the ministry gives schools the right to decide on school uniforms, and that parents during screening and application can either accept or refuse.

"And if the father wants to move his daughter to another school, it is OK," he said. "All the girls, including the Christians, put on the head cover and they have no problem," he added.

Habib's father Sorial complained to officials, demanding his daughter be allowed to attend without a scarf.

"After the revolution, there are no administration and no officials to go to. The system is lax and there is no supervision from the ministry," he told AP. "If things were under control, extremists would not have a free hand to act as they wish."

Habib was finally allowed to attend last Tuesday.

"I am happy I did what I want and that no one can force something on me. But I am afraid of the students and the teachers," she told AP. "The teachers are not normal with me and I am sure they will give me low grades at the end of the year."

Hossam Bahgat, head of the Cairo-based Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights, which tracks religious discrimination and other civil rights issues, said he had not seen a case like Habib's before. "We know that there is pressure on Muslim girls to put on the higab, especially in secondary school, not from the administration but from the girls."

He said some Muslim girls in general put on the veil to distinguish themselves from Christians.

Recent attacks on churches in southern Egypt also illustrate the heat Christians are under. Under Mubarak-era rules, the building of a church or repairs for an existing one required permission from local authorities and the state security agency -- a rule not applied to mosques. The rules sought to avoid outbursts of violence from Muslim hard-liners. Since permission was rarely given, Christians at times resorted to building churches in secret, often in parish guesthouses.

On Sept. 30, a Muslim mob attacked a church in southern village of Marynab in Aswan province because they believed the Christians were illegally constructing a new church. Church officials had documents showing they had permission to build a new church to replace a previous, run-down one at the same site.

Even before the attack, Muslim protests prompted priests to turn to security officials, who arranged a meeting with local elders and Salafis. In the face of their demands, the priests agreed to take down a cross and bells on the church, according to church officials. Still, after the Christians erected a dome, the mob attacked, setting the church and nearby homes and shops on fire.

Aswan's governor, Gen. Mustafa Kamel al-Sayyed, further hiked tensions by telling the media that the church was being built on the site of a guesthouse, suggesting it was illegal.

In response, hundreds of Christians marched in front of the governor's office last week, demanding those behind the attack be prosecuted and families who lost homes be compensated. Christians also protested in Cairo, cutting off a main avenue in the heart of the capital, demanding the governor's ouster, until soldiers dispersed them by force.

Days after the Aswan attack, Muslim villagers in the southern province of Sohag tried to storm Saint Girgis church, shouting "No to church construction," as Christians on rooftops rained stones down on them. The assault was prompted by construction of a church in a guesthouse

Indian Catholic jailed in the Maldives over a Bible and a rosary

2011-10-08T06:00:00.002-04:00

From: asianews

by Nirmala Carvalho

Shijo Kokkattu, a 30-year-old teacher, was betrayed by his colleagues because he accidentally left a picture of Our Lady and some Marian songs on a school computer. Islam is state religion in the Maldives, where there is no freedom of worship. For Sajan K George, president of the Global Council of Indian Christians, religious intolerance and injustice are the “worst form of persecution”.

Mumbai (AsiaNews) – Shijo Kokkattu, an Indian Catholic from Kerala, has been languishing in a Maldives prison for more than a week because he had a Bible and a rosary at his home. Both items are banned on the archipelago.

“The lack of justice and the degree of religious intolerance” on the islands “are reflected by the actions of the Maldives government,” said Sajan K George, president of the Global Council of Indian Christians (GCIC). “This is the worst form of religious persecution. The Indian government should demand an apology for the shabby treatment inflicted on one of its citizens.”

Islam is state religion in the Maldives. There is no freedom of worship. In 2008, a constitutional amendment denied non-Muslims the right to obtain Maldivian citizenship.

Shijo, 30, has taught at Raafainu School on Raa Atoll for the past two years. Recently, whilst transferring some data from his pen drive to the school laptop, he accidentally copied Marian songs and a picture of Mother Mary into the system. Some teachers reported the matter to the police who raided his home and found a Bible and a rosary in his possession.

Shijo Kokkattu’s case shows the paradox of the Maldives, a nation that “claims to be a major tourist destination, yet arrests innocent people,” George said. “This shows its intolerance and discrimination towards non-Muslims as well as its restrictions on freedom of conscience and religion.”

“Religious freedom remains a taboo on the archipelago,” the GCIC president explained. “Muslims refuse all other forms of worship other than the one approved by the state. Doing the opposite means arrest. Kneeling, folding one’s hands or using religious symbols like crosses, candles, pictures or statues can lead to government action.”

For George, “All this is a clear violation of universal human rights. If Muslims living in non-Muslim countries can enjoy religious rights, the spirit of reciprocity should apply to countries like the Maldives and Saudi Arabia.”

Libya NTC forces surround pro-Gaddafi fighters in Sirte

2011-10-08T06:00:00.001-04:00

From: bbc.co.uk

8 October 2011

Columns of smoke rose above the city as government forces fought their way in, street by street, until they reached the Ouagadougou conference centre where pro-Gaddafi loyalists are holed up.

At least 12 people were killed and more than 190 injured, doctors said.

Thousands of civilians have left Sirte but many have remained behind.

The two sides battered each other with mortar shells, rockets and tank fire in what transitional government forces have described as the final assault on Sirte, some 360km (225 miles) east of the capital, Tripoli.
The battle for Sirte comes nearly two months after the former rebels seized control of virtually all of Libya, ousting former leader Col Muammar Gaddafi.

The BBC's Jonathan Head in Sirte says Libya has been unable to think about the future until the city falls.
Two-pronged assault

Jonathan Head BBC News, Sirte

We're inside one of the housing estates that Col Gaddafi built for the people of Sirte. Early this morning we watched tanks and rockets being fired by government volunteer forces into this housing estate. It was a tremendous barrage. Now we're inside it.

The snipers who were here, firing back at that time, have been driven down almost towards to the coast, into much smaller pockets of Sirte.

These houses are completely full of holes. I can hear sporadic gunfire all around me as the government fighters try and go from house to house to find snipers who are there. There's a thick pall of black smoke from the burning buildings. It's been a dramatic day, a really big push for government forces.

Sirte is like a ghost city: there are very few people here now. The bombardment was so sustained this morning. This is a lost cause for them (pro-Gaddafi forces): it's the last significant piece of territory they hold, and yet they've continued to fight.

The fighters we've been going in with have taken significant casualties. The commander we stayed with last night was hit in the chest and died this morning.

Troops loyal to the National Transitional Council (NTC) converged on Sirte from Misrata in the west and Benghazi in the east.

They faced heavy resistance from pro-Gaddafi snipers and forces as they advanced towards the city centre.
The Ouagadougou conference centre, where many of the Gaddafi loyalists are believed to have barricaded themselves, has become the focus of the fighting.

There was sustained fire from mortars, machine guns and snipers around the centre, holding off NTC forces.
"We entered the Ouagadougou centre compound but fell back because of RPG [rocket-propelled grenade] and sniper fire. There's no cover there," NTC fighter Faisal Asker told the AFP news agency.

The UN envoy to Libya, Ian Martin, called on both sides to respect human rights and appealed to the NTC to avoid reprisals.

Those accused of war crimes should be detained and brought to justice, he said.

"This will lay the foundation for national reconciliation and the future unity of the people of Libya," he added.
Checkpoint queues

Ambulances brought a steady stream of the wounded to a field hospital west of Sirte.

"We are receiving many gunshot wounds, mostly to the head, neck and chest from sniper fire," Dr Ahmed Mohammed Tantoun told the Associated Press.

Cars carrying fleeing civilians queued at checkpoints on the roads out of Sirte.

The NTC gave civilians the opportunity to leave before the assault began.

However, thousands remained in the city, unable to get out or fearful after warnings from pro-Gaddafi fighters that they would be attacked by the interim forces if they surrendered.

The NTC's Information Minister, Mahmoud Shamman, told the BBC that civilians in the city were being "kept hostage by Gaddafi fighters".

Efforts to negotiate with loyalist commanders have also failed. On Thursday, Col Gaddafi urged Libyans to take to the streets "in their millions" to resist the interim leaders.

In a poor-quality audio message broadcast on Syrian-based Arrai television, he said conditions in Libya had become "unbearable", telling people to make their voices heard against "Nato's collaborators" in the NTC.
The colonel fled Tripoli when the capital fell to NTC forces in August. His whereabouts remain unknown. Several of his family member are in hiding or have fled the country.

Pro-Gaddafi forces also control the desert enclave of Bani Walid, but it is seen as less significant as it does not lead to any exit routes from the country.

Getting It Right: Dean of George Mason Law Sets Excellent Example

2011-10-08T06:00:00.000-04:00

From: thefire.org

by William Creeley

All too often here at FIRE, we find ourselves up to our necks in campus censorship. For example, in just the last few weeks, we've seen a professor threatened by campus police for posting a sci-fi quote and a coalition of student groups silenced by a professor who didn't like their free speech wall. Of course, FIRE fights hard to correct these wrongs. But sometimes the constant stream of rights violations on campus gets a little depressing, to be honest.

So that's why it's a real pleasure to come across a sterling example of how a school should react when confronted with a question about campus speech.

Here's the background, quickly: Recently, two student groups at George Mason University School of Law, the Federalist Society and the Jewish Law Students Association, have taken heat for inviting controversial activist Nonie Darwish to campus for a lecture. Specifically, the Council on American-Islamic Relations called on the school to disinvite Darwish because of her past statements regarding Islam. (Above the Law has more.)

So what happened next? Did GMU cancel the speech, as other institutions have done when faced with calls for disinvitations of unpopular or controversial speakers? Did it impose heavy security fees on the student groups, a sadly common tactic for campus censors looking to silence outside speakers?

No. Instead, GMU School of Law Dean Daniel Polsby got it exactly right. In a statement sent to students and faculty late last week, Polsby issued a stirring defense of free speech on campus.
I'm very pleased to reprint his statement in full:

It appears that there is need to clarify the policy affecting speakers at the law school.
Student organizations are allocated budget by the Student Bar Association in order to allow them, among other things, to bring speakers to the law school. Neither the law school nor the university can be taken to endorse such speakers or what they say. Law school administration is not consulted about these invitations, nor should we be. Sometimes speakers are invited who are known to espouse controversial points of view. So be it. So long as they are here, they are free to say whatever is on their mind within the bounds of law. They cannot be silenced and they will not be.

Just as speakers are free to speak, protesters are free to protest. They must do so in a place and in a manner that respects the rights of speakers to speak and listeners to listen, and that is in all other ways consistent with the educational mission of the university. Student organizations which hold contrary points of view have every right to schedule their own programs with their own speakers, and these speakers' rights will be protected in just the same way.

The law school will not exercise editorial control over the words of speakers invited by student organizations, nor will we take responsibility for them, nor will we endorse or condemn them. There has to be a place in the world where controversial ideas and points of view are aired out and given space. This is that place.

Daniel D. Polsby
Professor of Law, Dean

FIRE couldn't have said it any better. Every public college administrator in the country should read Dean Polsby's words—and follow his example

SHARIA LAW IN INDONESIA CREATES CULTURE OF OPPRESSION AGAINST WOMEN

2011-10-08T05:28:00.000-04:00