Israel's Struggle

End of Arab Christianity

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Wed, 11 Jan 2012 09:43:00 -0500

In new, Islamic Middle East, Christianity quickly becoming a thing of the past

Byט Giulio Meotti

Welcome to a Christians-free Middle East. Arab Christianity is near its extinction everywhere. “Christianity in Iraq could be eradicated in our lifetime, partially as a result of the US troop withdrawal,” declared Leonard Leo, chairman of the US Commission on International Religious Freedom.

Up to 900,000 Christians already fled the country since 2003, according to a recent study by Minority Rights Group International. Benjamin Sleiman, archbishop of Baghdad, also spoke of “the extinction of Christianity in the Middle East.”

In Egypt, 100,000 Christians already left the country after Hosni Mubarak’s fall earlier this year. The Egyptian Union of Human Rights is denouncing this “mass exodus.” This week Egyptian authorities arrested Gamal Massoud, a Coptic Christian student accused of posting a drawing of Islam’s prophet on Facebook that triggered two days of violence in southern Egypt; meanwhile, Muslims were attacking Massoud’s house and chanting “Allahu akbar” or “God is Great.”

In Syria, the major Christian leaders are supporting Bashar Assad’s bloodbath, fearing an Islamic takeover by the Muslim Brotherhood. The Catholic Patriarch of Lebanon, Bechara Rai, blessed Assad as a “reformer” while Greek-Orthodox Bishop Louqa al-Khouri organized ecumenical shows to support the regime.

For the first time in Syrian history, the current Minister of Defense, Dawud Rajha, is a Christian. Yet this is not a sign of power, but rather, of desperation. Adnan al-Aroor, the Syrian sheikh who has become the religious voice of the uprising against Assad, is urging his followers to “tear apart, chop up and feed” the meat of Christian supporters of the regime “to the dogs.”

The Syrian puppets in Lebanon waged a campaign of terror against Lebanon’s Christians starting in 2005. Christian politicians and journalists were assassinated and bombs detonated in Christian areas.

Elsewhere, in Gaza, the 3,000 Christians who remain are subjected to persecution and death. Meanwhile, every year some 1,000 Palestinian Christians are leaving their citadel Bethlehem. In a recent Christmas celebration hosted by the Fatah movement, Mohammad Shtayyeh, a central committee member, appealed to Christians to “remain in the land.”

Tiger devouring the lamb
The process of eradication began immediately after Yasser Arafat assumed control of the Palestinian Authority. Christian sites and cemeteries were desecrated by Muslims. Slogans like “Islam will win” and “First the Saturday people then the Sunday People” have been painted on walls, and PLO flags were draped over Jesus crosses.

Now that the Nasserite mixture of socialism and secularism is outclassed by the Islamist travesty of “Arab Spring,” Christians are vanishing from their cradle.

Christians are paying the anti-Israel appeasing choice: they feed the Islamic crocodile hoping it would eat them last. Many ministers in all the anti-Zionist regimes of the Fertile Crescent were Christian: For example, Tariq Aziz, former Iraq’s deputy prime minister, and Michel Aflaq, the cofounder of the Ba’ath Party who played a pivotal role in the history of both Iraq and Syria.

Moreover, Arab Christians like George Habash and Nayef Hawatmeh emerged as the most effective terrorist commanders. There is also the head of the Coptic Church, Pope Shenouda III, is a fierce anti-Semitic figure. Meanwhile, in Lebanon’ the Christian movements of General Michel Aoun and Sleiman Frangieh are allied with Hizbollah. Christians have also been part of municipal councils headed by Hamas.

Nonetheless, the Islamic tiger is now devouring the Christian lamb. Indeed, the Christian era in the Middle East is coming to an end.

Giulio Meotti, a journalist with Il Foglio, is the author of the book “A New Shoah: The Untold Story of Israel's Victims of Terrorism”

Ynet

The Land-for-Peace Hoax

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 12:55:00 -0500

The rise of the forces of jihadist Islam in Egypt places the US and other Western powers in an uncomfortable position. The US is the guarantor of Egypt's peace treaty with Israel. That treaty is based on the proposition of land for peace. Israel gave Egypt the Sinai in 1982 and in exchange it received a peace treaty with Egypt. Now that the Islamists are poised to take power, the treaty is effectively null and void.

The question naturally arises: Will the US act in accordance with its role as guarantor of the peace and demand that the new Egyptian government give Sinai back to Israel? Because if the Obama administration or whatever administration is in power when Egypt abrogates the treaty does not issue such a demand, and stand behind it, and if the EU does not support the demand, the entire concept of land-for-peace will be exposed as a hoax.

Indeed the land-for-peace formula will be exposed as a twofold fiction. First, it is based on the false proposition that the peace process is a two-way street. Israel gives land, the Arabs give peace. But the inevitable death of the Egyptian-Israeli peace accord under an Egyptian jihadist regime makes clear that the land-for-peace formula is a one-way street. Israeli land giveaways are permanent. Arab commitments to peace can be revoked at any time.

Then there are the supposedly iron-clad US and European security guarantees that accompany signed treaties. All the American and European promises to Israel - that they will stand by the Jewish state when it takes risks for peace - will be exposed as worthless lies. As we are already seeing today, no one will stand up for Israel's rights. No one will insist that the Egyptians honor their bargain.

As it has become more apparent that the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafist parties will hold an absolute majority in Egypt's democratically elected parliament, Western governments and media outlets have insistently argued that these anti-Western, and anti-Jewish, movements have become moderate and pragmatic. Leading the charge to make the case has been the Obama administration. Its senior officials have eagerly embraced the Muslim Brotherhood. Indeed, the spiritual head of the Muslim Brotherhood Yusuf Qaradawi is reportedly mediating negotiations between the US and the Taliban.

Qaradawi, an Egyptian who has been based in Qatar since 1961, when he was forced to flee Egypt due to his jihadist politics, made a triumphant return to his native land last February following the overthrow of president Hosni Mubarak. Speaking to a crowd of an estimated two million people in Cairo's Tahrir Square, Qaradawi led them in a chant calling for them to invade Jerusalem.

Over the years, Qaradawi has issued numerous religious ruling permitting, indeed requiring, the massacre of Jews. In 2009, he called for the Muslim world to complete Hitler's goal of eradicating the Jewish people.

As for the US, in 2003, Qaradawi issued a religious ruling calling for the killing of US forces in Iraq.

BOTH THE Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafists are happy to cater to the propaganda needs of Western journalists and politicians and pretend that they are willing to continue to uphold the peace treaty with Israel. But even as they make conditional statements to eager Americans and Europeans, they consistently tell their own people that they seek the destruction of Israel and the abrogation of the peace deal between Egypt and Israel.

As the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs' Jonathan D. Halevi documented last week in a report on Muslim Brotherhood and Salafist positions on the future of the peace between Egypt and Israel, while speaking to Westerners in general terms about their willingness to respect the treaty, both groups place numerous conditions on their willingness to maintain it. These conditions make clear that there is no way that they will continue to respect the peace treaty. Indeed, they will use any excuse to justify its abrogation and blame it on Israel. And they will do so at the earliest available opportunity.

It is possible, and perhaps likely, that the US will cut off military aid to Egypt in the wake of Cairo's abrogation of the peace treaty. But it is impossible to imagine that the Obama administration will abide by the US's commitment as the guarantor of the deal and demand that Egypt return Sinai to Israel. Indeed, it is only slightly more likely that a Republican administration would fulfill the US's commitment as guarantor of the peace and demand the return of Sinai to Israel after Egypt's democratically elected Islamist regime finds an excuse to abrogate the peace treaty.

It is important to keep this sorry state of affairs in mind when we assess the prospects for a land-for-peace deal between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. This week, following months of intense pressure from the US and the EU, Israeli and Palestinian negotiators met face to face for the first time in 16 months. According to Jordanian Foreign Minister Nasser Judeh, who hosted the meeting, the Palestinians submitted their proposal on security and border issues to Israel. The sides are supposed to meet again next week and Israel is expected to present its proposals on these issues.

There are several reasons that these talks are doomed to failure. The most important reason they will fail is that even if they lead to an agreement, no agreement between Israel and the Palestinians is sustainable. Assuming for a moment that PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas goes against everything he has said for the past three years and signs a peace deal with Israel in which he promises Israel peace in exchange for Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria, this agreement will have little impact on the Palestinians' view of Israel. Abbas today represents no one. His term of office ended three years ago. Hamas won the last Palestinian elections in 2006.

And Hamas's leaders - like their counterparts in the Muslim Brotherhood - make no bones about their intention to destroy Israel. Two weeks ago at a speech in Gaza, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh proclaimed, "We say today explicitly so it cannot be explained otherwise, that the armed resistance and the armed struggle are the path and the strategic choice for liberating the Palestinian land, from the [Mediterranean] sea to the [Jordan] river, and for the expulsion of the invaders and usurpers [Israel]... We won't relinquish one inch of the land of Palestine."

In his visit with his Muslim Brotherhood counterpart, Mohammad Badie, in Cairo this week Haniyeh said, "The Islamic resistance movement of Hamas by definition is a jihadist movement by the Muslim Brotherhood, Palestinian on the surface, Islamic at its core, and its goal is liberation."

WITH HAMAS'S Brotherhood colleagues taking power from Cairo to Casablanca, it is hard to imagine a scenario in which supposedly peaceseeking Fatah will win Palestinian elections. It is in recognition of this fact that Abbas has signed a series of unity agreements with Hamas since May.

So the best case scenario for a peace deal with the Palestinians is that Abbas will sign a deal that Israel will implement by withdrawing from Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria and expelling up to a half a million Israeli citizens from their homes. Hamas will then take power and abrogate the treaty, just as its brethren in Cairo are planning to do with their country's peace treaty.

This leads us to the question of what the diplomatic forces from the US, the EU, and the UN who have worked so hard to get the present negotiations started are really after. What are they trying to achieve by pressuring Israel to negotiate a deal that they know will not be respected by the Palestinians?

In the case of some of the parties involved it is fairly obvious that they want to weaken Israel. Take the UN for example. In 2005, Israel withdrew all of its military forces and civilians from Gaza. Rather than reward Israel for giving up land with peace, the Palestinians transformed Gaza into a launching pad for missile attacks against Israel. And in June 2007, Hamas took over the territory.

Despite the fact that Israel is wholly absent from Gaza, and indeed is being attacked from Gaza, no one has called for the Palestinians to give the territory back to Israel. The UN doesn't even recognize that Israel left.

Last September, the UN published yet another report labeling Israel as the occupier of Gaza. And in accordance with this fiction, the UN - along with the EU and the US - continues to hold Israel responsible for Gaza's welfare.

Ironically, Hamas itself denies that Gaza is under Israeli occupation. In an interview with the Ma'an news agency on Tuesday, Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar openly admitted that Gaza is not under occupation. Speaking of Fatah's plan to launch massive demonstrations against Israel, Zahar said, "Against whom could we demonstrate in the Gaza Strip? When Gaza was occupied, that model was applicable."

Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood and Fatah can all freely tell the truth about Israel and their commitment to its destruction without fear of any repercussions. They know that the Western powers will not listen to them. They know that they will never have to pay a price for their actions. Indeed, they know they will be rewarded for them.

Since the inauguration of the land-for-peace process between Israel and the PLO 19 years ago, the Palestinians have repeatedly demonstrated their bad faith. Israeli land giveaways have consistently been met with increased Palestinian terrorism. Since 1996, US- and European- trained Palestinian security forces have repeatedly used their guns to kill Israelis. Since 1994, the PA has made it standard practice to enlist terrorists in its US- and European-funded and trained security forces.

The US and Europe have continued to train and arm them despite their bad faith. Despite their continued commitment to Israel's destruction and involvement in terrorism, the US and the EU have continued to demand that Israel fork over more territory. At no point have either the US or the EU seriously considered ending their support for the Palestinians or the demonstrably fictitious land-for-peace formula.

As Israel bows now to still more US and EU pressure and conducts land-for-peace talks with Fatah, our leadership may be seduced by the faint praise they receive from the likes of The Washington Post or even from the Obama administration. But this praise should not turn their heads.

To understand its feckless emptiness, all they need to do is direct their attention to what happened this week in Cairo, as the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafists secured their absolute control over Egypt's parliament. Specifically, our leaders should note the absence of any voices demanding that Egypt respect the peace treaty with Israel or return Sinai.

The time has come for Israel to admit the truth. Land-for-peace is a confidence game and we are the mark.

Originally published in The Jerusalem Post.

Iran - Beyond Top Secret

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Mon, 28 Nov 2011 19:50:00 -0500

5 parts of the TV show "Iran - Beyond Top Secret", exposing the tactics of Iran on the way to achieve nuclear bomb and her intention of using it, likewise, you will see the tactics of the CIA to stop Iran. This film contain excellent and rare footage that photographed in Iran, as well as intelligence experts who shows an updated view on the dangerous of Ahmedinejad and nuclear Iran to the free world. Excellent movie of History Channel.
Enjoy watching..

Language: English
Subtitles: Hebrew

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Islamic Apartheid: Mecca and Medina

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Mon, 28 Nov 2011 19:44:00 -0500

According to Saudi Arabian Law it is illegal for any non-Muslim to step foot in the cities of Mecca and Medina. In Medina however, non-Muslims are allowed to enter the Sheraton hotel on the outskirts of town. The Islamists allow a man made exception in their divinely inspired Shariah for the Sheraton Hotel Corporation, yet they make no exception for anyone else.

The equivalent of the Mecca/Medina Apartheid would be the Vatican issuing a decree excluding all non-Catholics/Christians from entering Vatican City, at threat of arrest and imprisonment. The Vatican however, welcomes all people without regard to race, religion, or national origin. Israel also welcomes all faiths, including Muslims, to their most holiest of places, the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem. Conversely, during the period of Jordanian occupation from 1948 to 1967, all Jews were barred entry into the entire Old City and the Wailing Wall was desecrated by the Islamists.

So what it is about non-Muslims that Muslims find so revolting that it is illegal for them to step foot inside the city limits of Islam’s two holiest cities, Mecca and Medina?

In order to understand the Islamist ideology we must understand what the codified Islamic texts teach at the most basic of levels. Once we connect with what the Islamists believes to be true, we can understand the foundation for the actions of the Islamist.

The only thing that matters now is what the codified Islamic texts say and what most Muslims believe. What you as a non-Muslim think and feel is irrelevant. The Islamist believes they are helping the non-Muslim find peace and the straight path through both violent and non-violent Jihad. If an Islamist is forced to use violence on the non-Muslim it is always the non-Muslims fault for not choosing the Islamic path that is “best” for them.

“The Holy Qur’an is the Divine Word of Allah revealed to the Prophet Muhammad through the Archangel Gabriel to save mankind from darkness unto light.”
(Qur’an 14: 1).

“Allah sent it as the Book in truth and the balance to judge between right and wrong.”
(Qur’an 42: 17).

“Since it is the Book of Allah, He Himself guards it from corruption (Qur’an 15: 9) for man to learn wisdom.”
(Qur’an 12: 2) and, hence, receive the most righteous guidance (Qur’an 17: 9). “Allah enlightens mankind to the truth.” (1)

“Allah the Almighty sent Muhammad (the seal of all the prophets) as His universal Messenger to mankind, giving them glad tidings, and warning them against sin .”
(Qur’an 34: 28).

“Allah sent him to perfect all moral values and to serve as the best example for mankind to follow.”
(Qur’an 33: 21).

Islamists believe Muhammad is the last Prophet on earth and the Qur’an is the final divine revelation for all mankind. The Islamist believes every word of the Qur’an is the exact word of Allah, uncorrupted by man, down to the last letter. As the final divine revelation on earth, the Qur’an, is considered superior to all previously written man made texts like the Old Testament, New Testament, Torah, and U.S. Constitution to name a few. Shariah/Islamic Law is the practical application of Allah’s revelations to Muhammad. The followers of Islam believe the Shariah (Islamic Law) is the perfect divinely inspired legal system and code of life for all mankind.

Islamic scholars teach that the divinely inspired Qur’an and Shariah outline the specific obligations for all mankind to follow, ushering in an era of peace and coexistence among all men. The Islamist believes, in his heart, he is bringing peace to the world by utilizing violence and terrorism, if necessary, to show the non-Believer the way back to the social, religious, and political governmental system known as Shariah Compliant Islam. Da’wa is the Arabic word for the obligatory proselytizing of Islamic doctrine to the non-Muslim. In the eyes of the Islamist, it is up to the non-Islamic individual or country to decide if they accept Political Islam by the word or the sword. The followers of Islam believe that when they use coercion and violence it is because the non-Muslim left him no choice. The Islamist believes in his soul they are the compassionate peacemakers either through violent or non-violent means.

In this video Imam Musri blames the United States for radicalizing the Muslim youth . “This radicalization culminated in 9/11”, Musri says.

Musri implies we left our Islamist adversaries no choice but to attack us.

There is no difference in the “Supremacist Islamic Ideology” of the violent and non violent Jihadist, only a difference of tactics. You can put the Jihadist in an Armani suit but the goals of “peace” through Jihad will always be the same no matter if it is in the USA or Afghanistan. It doesn’t matter if it is the well dressed Americanized stealth Jihadist’s of CAIR, ISNA, and the Muslim Brotherhood here in the United States. The only ideological difference between the violent Jihadist’s and non-violent stealth Jihadist’s is one of tactics. The Muslim advocacy groups in America like ISNA and CAIR will condemn the “act” of terrorism but will “never” condemn the Islamic doctrine that justifies violence to further advance Shariah Compliant Islam in America.

Understanding how the Islamist views the Kufr or non-believer is one of the most important elements of this equation that is misunderstood by Western culture.

“The Qur'aan uses the word Kufr to denote people who cover up or hide realities. The Qur'an uses this word to identify those who denied Allaah's favors by not accepting His Dominion and Authority. Kufr thus is an antonym for Iman or disbelief in Allaah and a Kaafir is a non-believer. This type of Kufr is called AL-KUFR UL AKBAR or major kufr.”2

Make no mistake, when you hear or read a Muslim calling you a Kufr, Kufar, or Kaafir it is considered a derogatory term by the Muslim aimed directly at you as an individual. The word Kufr or Kaafir is meant to be as offensive as calling someone the “N” word, a kyke, cracker, racist, etc... When a Muslim calls someone a Kufr it is pure bigotry, intolerance, and hatred. Take offense because offense is intended by those who use the vile epithet, Kufr or Kaafir, when describing you. Kufr is modern day hate speech.

The Islamist must take disbelief of Political Islam very seriously because Muhammad and Allah, made disbelief a punishable offense. For an Islamist to publicly state his disbelief in Islam, he then becomes an apostate. Umdat al-Salik Wa-‘Uddat al Nisak or “Reliance of the Traveller” is a codified Islamic text, with Ijma (consensus), of Shariah / Islamic Law. Ijma means there can be no debate about the legality of what I’m about to tell you. Page 595, o8.1, of Reliance of the Traveller states,

“When a person who has reached puberty, and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.”

o8.0 of Reliance states,

“Leaving Islam is the ugliest form of unbelief (Kufr) and the worst.”

Watch this video taken at the 2011 Dearborn Arab International Festival (WARNING – contains bad language and scenes of intimidation).

You will see many different street scenes of how the Dearborn 46% Muslim majority feel and act during their most emotional and unscripted moments. Many say that Dearborn, MI is an “emerging No Go Zone” and this explosive video validates that claim.

Muslim on Muslim violence began immediately after Muhammad died. Scores of Arab Muslim tribes left Islam after Muhammad’s death and those that remained loyal to Muhammad’s successor Caliph Abu Bakr considered this a political rebellion. These Muslim apostates were graciously given the opportunity to submit to Islam or die. These bloody wars became known as the Ridda or Apostasy Wars lasting from 632-633 AD. The practice of death to apostates is considered the worst of offenses to Allah. Muslims here in the United States who leave Islam are persecuted and often killed by their fellow Muslims. Visit the website, Former Muslims United, to hear their heroic stories.

If a Muslim deserves to be killed by his fellow Muslims for leaving Islam, it is factual to conclude the apostate is viewed by the Islamist as subhuman and worthy of death according Islamic Shariah doctrine.

We learned earlier a devout Muslim believes the entire Qur’an is the word of Allah and infallible down to the last letter. For a Muslim to challenge the word of Allah is blasphemy and carries severe punishment in Shariah Islam. Therefore, most all Muslims keep their mouths shut if their voice strays from the Shariah Compliant line.

Islamist superiority over all non-Muslims comes straight from Qur’an verse 3:110,

“Ye are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind, enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, and believing in Allah. If only the People of the Book had faith, it would be best for them: among them are some who have faith, but most of them are perverted transgressors.”

The arrogance and superiority dripping from this Qur’an verse offends me. I am offended the devout Muslim believes in this Allah given Qur’an verse that infers most all non-Muslims are second class citizens, perverted transgressors, and sub human. I am offended for all the Muslims who choose to leave Political Islam and risk death by their fellow Islamists’ hands. I am offended that Muslim Advocacy Groups in America try to attack and silence anyone with vile epithets and frivolous lawsuits who publicly criticize Shariah Compliant Islam. I am offended that Muslims make up only 1% of the U.S. population but are demanding Shariah Compliant accommodations on the other 99% who are non-Muslim. Our founding fathers called this practice the tyranny of the minority. I see the signs that American Muslim Advocacy Groups like the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), and The Muslim Student Association (MSA) want to change American culture rather than assimilate. I am offended the Islamists see themselves as culturally superior to our man made laws and refuse to submit to Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution which states, “United States Law shall be the Supreme Law of the Land.”

It is this Muhammad inspired Islamist cultural superiority that makes Apartheid possible in Mecca and Medina. I am offended that every Mosque and Islamic Center in America supports these Apartheid practices by promoting trips to Mecca and Medina knowing the other 99% of their fellow American’s would be arrested or not allowed admittance for the crime of being non-Muslim.

I am outraged Eric Holder’s Department of Justice filed a civil rights lawsuit in December of 2010 against a Chicago School on behalf of, Safoorah Khan. Khan requested three weeks off in the middle of the school year to attend the pilgrimage to Mecca. Ms. Khan’s Shariah compliant superiority over manmade rules and contracts is in accordance with Islamic doctrine. When the non-Islamic government school district failed to submit to Ms. Khan’s extraordinary demands and special rights, she viewed herself as the victim. Khan filed a discrimination lawsuit costing our government hundreds of thousands of dollars. Ms. Khan is not the victim but a player in the game of Legal Jihad and you should be angered, outraged, and offended by Ms. Khan’s and The Department of Justice’s pro-Shariah Compliant position over our manmade laws.

The next step in the evolution of Shariah Compliance in America will be the obscene demand that Shariah Family Courts become a legal and parallel court system in America, just as they are in Europe. Now why in the world would an American Muslim wish to challenge Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution which states that, “...United States Law Shall be the Law of the Land...”?

Now you know the answer: The followers of the Qur’an, Muhammad, and the Shariah Compliant Islam believe their divinely inspired texts are superior to our man made laws such as the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights.

You must understand the devout Islamist believes they are helping us to shed our corrupted man made laws by forcefully introducing Shariah Compliant Islam into our unique Representative Republic form of Government. The devout Islamist believes in their heart they are leading us as a country down the “right path” as transmitted by Allah to his last and final messenger Muhammad. They believe that Shariah Compliant Islam is the right path for all mankind.

The Muslim Advocacy Groups and The Muslim Brotherhood are achieving their strategic military objective of Shariah Family Courts in America one lawsuit at a time mixed in with terrorism to instill fear into the hearts of non-believers.

Motto of the Muslim Brotherhood in America:

- Allah is our objective.
- The Prophet is our leader.
- Qur'an is our law.
- Jihad is our way.
- Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.

Editor's Note:

God Bless America and God Bless our Troops
As Vito, my Radio Jihad cohost, says, “Mama Mia, No Shariah!”

Family Security Matters Contributing Editor Alan Kornman is Regional Coordinator for The United West - Uniting Western Civilization for Freedom and Liberty. He can be contacted at: alan@TheUnitedWest.org.

Family Security Matters

The Racist Exile of Jews from Arab Countries

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 20:02:00 -0400

Alot of people totally ignore how the Jews from Arab countries were murdered, attacked, ridiculed, threatened and forced to leave!

* Where is their compensation?
* Where is their right of return?
* Why are they totally ignored by the Liberals, main stream media, the UN, Human Rights and Leftist groups??

Here's a brief account of what happened, where and how:

JEWS IN SYRIA BEFORE 1948:

The last Jews who wanted to leave Syria departed with the chief rabbi in October 1994. Prior to 1947, there were some 30,000 Jews made up of three distinct communities, each with its own traditions: the Kurdish-speaking Jews of Kamishli, the Jews of Aleppo with roots in Spain, and the original eastern Jews of Damascus, called Must'arab. Today only a tiny remnant of these communities remains.

The Jewish presence in Syria dates back to biblical times and is intertwined with the history of Jews in neighboring Eretz Israel. With the advent of Christianity, restrictions were imposed on the community. The Arab conquest in 636 A.D, however, greatly improved the lot of the Jews. Unrest in neighboring Iraq in the 10th century resulted in Jewish migration to Syria and brought about a boom in commerce, banking, and crafts. During the reign of the Fatimids, the Jew Menashe Ibrahim El-Kazzaz ran the Syrian administration, and he granted Jews positions in the government.

Syrian Jewry supported the aspirations of the Arab nationalists and Zionism, and Syrian Jews believed that the two parties could be reconciled and that the conflict in Palestine could be resolved. However, following Syrian independence from France in 1946, attacks against Jews and their property increased, culminating in the pogroms of 1947, which left all shops and synagogues in Aleppo in ruins. Thousands of Jews fled the country, and their homes and property were taken over by the local Muslims.

For the next decades, Syrian Jews were, in effect, hostages of a hostile regime. They could leave Syria only on the condition that they leave members of their family behind. Thus the community lived under siege, constantly under fearful surveillance of the secret police. This much was allowed due to an international effort to secure the human rights of the Jews

JEWS IN EGYPT PRIOR TO 1948:

Jews have lived in Egypt since Biblical times, and the conditions of the community have constantly fluctuated with the political situation of the land. Israelite tribes first moved to the Land of Goshen (the northeastern edge of the Nile Delta) during the reign of the Egyptian pharaoh Amenhotep IV (1375-1358 B.C).

During the reign of Ramses II (1298-1232 B.C), they were enslaved for the Pharaoh's building projects. His successor, Merneptah, continued the same anti-Jewish policies, and around the year 1220 B.C, the Jews revolted and escaped across the Sinai to Canaan. This is the biblical Exodus commemorated in the holiday of Passover. Over the years, many Jews in Eretz Israel who were not deported to Babylon sought shelter in Egypt, among them the prophet Jeremiah. By 1897 there were more than 25,000 Jews in Egypt, concentrated in Cairo and Alexandria. In 1937 the population reached a peak of 63,500.

Friedman wrote in "The Myth of Arab Tolerance", "One Caliph, Al-Hakem of the Fatimids devised particularly insidious humiliations for the Jews in his attempt to perform what he deemed his roll as "Redeemer of mankind", first the Jews were forced to wear miniature golden calf images around their necks, as though they still worshipped the golden calf, but the Jews refused to convert. Next they wore bells, and after that six pound wooden blocks were hung around their necks. In fury at his failure, the Caliph had the Cairo Jewish quarter destroyed, along with it's Jewish residence, in".

In 1945, with the rise of Egyptian nationalism and the cultivation of anti-Western and anti-Jewish sentiment, riots erupted. In the violence, 10 Jews were killed, 350 injured, and a synagogue, a Jewish hospital, and an old-age home were burned down. The establishment of the State of Israel led to still further anti-Jewish feeling: Between June and November 1948, bombs set off in the Jewish Quarter killed more than 70 Jews and wounded nearly 200. 2,000 Jews were arrested and many had their property confiscated. Rioting over the next few months resulted in many more Jewish deaths. Between June and November 1948, bombs set off in the Jewish Quarter killed more than 70 Jews and wounded nearly 200.

Jews In 1956, the Egyptian government used the Sinai Campaign as a pretext for expelling almost 25,000 Egyptian Jews and confiscating their property. Approximately 1,000 more Jews were sent to prisons and detention camps. On November 23, 1956, a proclamation signed by the Minister of Religious Affairs, and read aloud in mosques throughout Egypt, declared that "all Jews are Zionists and enemies of the state," and promised that they would be soon expelled.

Thousands of Jews were ordered to leave the country. They were allowed to take only one suitcase and a small sum of cash, and forced to sign declarations "donating" their property to the Egyptian government. Foreign observers reported that members of Jewish families were taken hostage, apparently to insure that those forced to leave did not speak out against the Egyptian government. AP, (November 26 and 29th 1956); New York World Telegram).

By 1957 it had fallen to 15,000. In 1967, after the Six-Day War, there was a renewed wave of persecution, and the community dropped to 2,500. By the 1970s, after the remaining Jews were given permission to leave the country, the community dwindled to a few families. Nearly all the Jews in Egypt are elderly, and the community is on the verge of extinction.

JEWS IN IRAQ PRIOR TO 1948:

The Iraqi Jews took pride in their distinguished Jewish community, with it's history of scholarship and dignity. Jews had prospered in what was then Babylonia for 1200 years before the Muslim conquest in AD 634; it was not until the 9th century that Dhimmi laws such as the yellow patch, heavy head tax, and residence restriction enforced. Capricious and extreme oppression under some Arab caliphs and Momlukes brought taxation amounting to expropriation in AD 1000, and 1333 the persecution culminated in pillage and destruction of the Baghdad Sanctuary. in 1776, there was a slaughter of Jews at Bosra, and in bitterness of anti Jewish measures taken Muslim rulers in the 18th century caused many Jews to flea.

The Iraqi Jewish community is one of the oldest in the world and has a great history of learning and scholarship. Abraham, the father of the Jewish people, was born in Ur of the Chaldees, in southern Mesopotamia, now Iraq, around 2,000 A.D. The community traces its history back to 6th century A.D, when Nebuchadnezzar conquered Judea and sent most of the population into exile in Babylonia.

The community also maintained strong ties with the Land of Israel and, with the aid of rabbis from Israel, succeeded in establishing many prominent rabbinical academies. By the 3rd century, Babylonia became the center of Jewish scholarship, as is attested to by the community's most influential creation, the Babylonian Talmud.

Under Muslim rule, beginning in the 7th century, the situation of the community fluctuated. Many Jews held high positions in government or prospered in commerce and trade. At the same time, Jews were subjected to special taxes, restrictions on their professional activity, and anti-Jewish incitement among the masses.

Under British rule, which began in 1917, Jews fared well economically, and many were elected to government posts. This traditionally observant community was also allowed to found Zionist organizations and to pursue Hebrew studies. All of this progress ended when Iraq gained independence in 1932.

In June 1941, the Mufti-inspired, pro-Nazi coup of Rashid Ali sparked rioting and a pogrom in Baghdad. Armed Iraqi mobs, with the complicity of the police and the army, murdered 180 Jews and wounded almost 1,000.

Although emigration was prohibited, many Jews made their way to Israel during this period with the aid of an underground movement. In 1950 the Iraqi parliament finally legalized emigration to Israel, and between May 1950 and August 1951, the Jewish Agency and the Israeli government succeeded in airlifting approximately 110,000 Jews to Israel in Operations Ezra and Nehemiah. This figure includes 18,000 Kurdish Jews, who have many distinct traditions. Thus a community that had reached a peak of 150,000 in 1947 dwindled to a mere 6,000 after 1951.

Additional outbreaks of anti-Jewish rioting occurred between 1946-49. After the establishment of Israel in 1948, Zionism became a capital crime.

JEWS IN IRAQ AFTER 1948:

In 1950, Iraqi Jews were permitted to leave the country within a year provided they forfeited their citizenship. A year later, however, the property of Jews who emigrated was frozen and economic restrictions were placed on Jews who chose to remain in the country. From 1949 to 1951, 104,000 Jews were evacuated from Iraq in Operations Ezra and Nehemiah; another 20,000 were smuggled out through Iran. In 1952, Iraq's government barred Jews from emigrating and publicly hanged two Jews after falsely charging them with hurling a bomb at the Baghdad office of the U.S. Information Agency.

With the rise of competing Ba'ath factions in 1963, additional restrictions were placed on the remaining Iraqi Jews. The sale of property was forbidden and all Jews were forced to carry yellow identity cards. After the Six-Day War, more repressive measures were imposed: Jewish property was expropriated; Jewish bank accounts were frozen; Jews were dismissed from public posts; businesses were shut; trading permits were cancelled; telephones were disconnected. Jews were placed under house arrest for long periods of time or restricted to the cities.

Persecution was at its worst at the end of 1968. Scores were jailed upon the discovery of a local "spy ring" composed of Jewish businessmen. Fourteen men-eleven of them Jews-were sentenced to death in staged trials and hanged in the public squares of Baghdad; others died of torture. On January 27, 1969, Baghdad Radio called upon Iraqis to "come and enjoy the feast." Some 500,000 men, women and children paraded and danced past the scaffolds where the bodies of the hanged Jews swung; the mob rhythmically chanted "Death to Israel" and "Death to all traitors." This display brought a world-wide public outcry that Radio Baghdad dismissed by declaring: "We hanged spies, but the Jews crucified Christ." (Judith Miller and Laurie Mylroie, Saddam Hussein and the Crisis in the Gulf, p. 34).

Jews remained under constant surveillance by the Iraqi government. Max Sawadayee, in "All Waiting to be Hanged" writes a testimony of an Iraqi Jew (who later escaped): "The dehumanization of the Jewish personality resulting from continuous humiliation and torment...have dragged us down to the lowest level of our physical and mental faculties, and deprived us of the power to recover.".

In response to international pressure, the Baghdad government quietly allowed most of the remaining Jews to emigrate in the early 1970's, even while leaving other restrictions in force. Most of Iraq's remaining Jews are now too old to leave. They have been pressured by the government to turn over title, without compensation, to more than $200 million worth of Jewish community property. (New York Times, February 18, 1973).

Only one synagogue continues to function in Iraq, "a crumbling buff-colored building tucked away in an alleyway" in Baghdad. According to the synagogue's administrator, "there are few children to be bar-mitzvahed, or couples to be married. Jews can practice their religion but are not allowed to hold jobs in state enterprises or join the army." (New York Times Magazine, February 3, 1985).

In 1991, prior to the Gulf War, the State Department said "there is no recent evidence of overt persecution of Jews, but the regime restricts travel, (particularly to Israel) and contacts with Jewish groups abroad.".

Persecutions continued, especially after the Six-Day War in 1967, when many of the remaining 3,000 Jews were arrested and dismissed from their jobs. Finally In Iraq all the Jews were forced to leave between 1948 and 1952 and leave everything behind. Jews were publicly hanged in the center of Baghdad with enthusiastic mob as audience.

The Jews were persecuted throughout the centuries in all the Arabic speaking countries. One time, Baghdad was one-fifth Jewish and other communities had first been established 2,500 years ago. Today, approximately 61 Jews are left in Baghdad and another 200 or so are in Kurdish areas in the north. Only one synagogue remains in Bataween, - once Baghdad's main Jewish neighborhood.- The rabbi died in 1996 and none of the remaining Jews can perform the liturgy and only a couple know Hebrew. (Associated Press, March 28, 1998).

JEWS IN MOROCCO PRIOR TO 1948:

The Jewish community of present-day Morocco dates back more than 2,000 years. There were Jewish people in the country before it became a Roman province. in 1032 AD, 6000 Jews were murdered. Indeed the greatest persecution by the Arabs towards the Jews was in Fez, Morocco, nothing was worse than the slaughter of 120,000 Jews in 1146. In 1391 a wave of Jewish refugees expelled from Spain brought new life to the community, as did new arrivals from Spain and Portugal in 1492 and 1497.

From 1438, the Jews of Fez were forced to live in special quarters called mellahs, a name derived from the Arabic word for salt because the Jews in Morocco were forced to carry out the job of salting the heads of executed prisoners prior to their public display. Chouraqui sums it up when he wrote: "such restriction and humiliation as to exceed anything in Europe". Charles de Foucauld in 1883 who was not generally sympathetic to Jews writes of the Jews: "They are the most unfortunate of men, every Jew belongs body and soul to his seigneur, the sid [Arab master]". Similarly, in 1465, Arab mobs in Fez slaughtered thousands of Jews, leaving only 11 alive, after a Jewish deputy vizier treated a Muslim woman in "an offensive manner." The killings touched off a wave of similar massacres throughout Morocco.

JEWS IN MOROCCO AFTER 1948:

In June 1948, bloody riots in Oujda and Djerada killed 44 Jews and wounded scores more. That same year, an unofficial economic boycott was instigated against Moroccan Jews. In 1956, Morocco declared its independence, In 1963, more then 100,000 Moroccan Jews were forced out and went to Israel.

JEWS IN YEMEN PRIOR TO 1948:

In Yemen from the seventh century on the Jewish populations suffered the severest possible interpretation of the Charter of Omar. For about 4 centuries, the Jews suffered under the fierce fanatical edict of the most intolerant Islamic sects. The Yemen Epistle by Rambam in which he commiserated with Yemen's Jewry and besought them to keep the faith, and in 1724 fanatical rulers ordered synagogues destroyed, and Jewish public prayers were forbidden. The Jews were exiled, many died from starvation and the survivors were ordered to settle in Mausa, but later, this order was annulled by a decree in 1781 due to the need of their skilled craftsmen.

Jacob Sappir a Jerusalem writer describes Yemeni Jews in Yemen in 1886: "The Arab natives have always considered the Jew unclean, but his blood for them was not considered unclean. They lay claims to all his belongings, and if he is unwilling, they employ force...The Jews live outside the town in dark dwellings like prison cells or caves out of fear...for the least offense, he is sentenced to outrageous fines, which he is quite unable to pay. In case of non-payment, he is put in chains and cruelly beaten every day. Before the punishment is inflicted, the Cadi[judge] addresses him in gentle tones and urges him to change his faith and obtain a share of all the glory of this world and of the world beyond. His refusal is again regarded as penal obstinacy.

On the other hand, it is not open to the Jew to prosecute a Muslim, as the Muslim by right of law can dispose of the life and the property of the Jew, and it is only to be regarded as an act of magnanimity if the Jews are allowed to live. The Jew is not admissible as a witness, nor has his oath any validity." Danish-German explorer Garsten Neibuhr visited Yemen in 1762 described Jewish life in Yemen: "By day they work in their shops in San'a, but by night they must withdraw to their isolated dwellings, shortly before my arrival, 12 of the 14 synagogues of the Jews were torn down, and all their beautiful houses wrecked". The Jews did not improve until the establishment of the French Protectorate in 1912, when they were given equality and religious autonomy. In 1922, the government of Yemen reintroduced an ancient Islamic law that decreed that Jewish orphans under age 12 were to be forcibly converted to Islam.

In 1947, after the partition vote, Muslim rioters, joined by the local police force, engaged in a bloody pogrom in Aden that killed 82 Jews and destroyed hundreds of Jewish homes. Aden's Jewish community was economically paralyzed, as most of the Jewish stores and businesses were destroyed. Early in 1948, looting occurred after six Jews were falsely accused of the ritual murder of two Arab girls. (Howard Sachar, A History of Israel). 50,000 Jews were kicked out of Yemen in 1948.

JEWS IN TUNISIA PRIOR TO 1948:

The first documented evidence of Jews in this area dates back to 200 A.D and demonstrates the existence of a community in Latin Carthage under Roman rule. Latin Carthage contained a significant Jewish presence, and several sages mentioned in the Talmud lived in this area from the 2nd to the 4th centuries. During the Byzantine period, the condition of the community took a turn for the worse. An edict issued by Justinian in 535 excluded Jews from public office, prohibited Jewish practice, and resulted in the transformation of synagogues into churches. Many fled to the Berber communities in the mountains and in the desert.

After the Arab conquest of Tunisia in the 7th century, Jews lived under satisfactory conditions, despite discriminatory measures such as a poll tax. From 7th century Arab conquest down through the Almahdiyeen atrocities, Tunisia fared little better than its neighbors. The complete expulsion of Jews from Kairouan near Tunis occurred after years of hardship, in the 13 century when Kairouan was anointed as a holy city of Islam. In the 16th century, the "hated and despised" Jews of Tunis were periodically attacked by violence and they were subjected to "vehement anti-Jewish policy" during the various political struggles of the period. In 1869 Muslims butchered many Jews in the defenseless ghetto. Conditions worsened during the Spanish invasions of 1535-1574, resulting in the flight of Jews from the coastal areas. The situation of the community improved once more under Ottoman rule.

During this period, the community also split due to strong cultural differences between the Touransa (native Tunisians) and the Grana (those adhering to Spanish or Italian customs). Jews suffered once more in 1956, when the country achieved independence. The rabbinical tribunal was abolished in 1957, and a year later, Jewish community councils were dissolved. In addition, the Jewish quarter of Tunis was destroyed by the government. Anti-Jewish rioting followed the outbreak of the Six-Day War; Muslims burned down the Great Synagogue of Tunis. These events increased the steady stream of emigration.

JEWS IN LIBYA PRIOR TO 1948:

The Jewish community of Libya traces its origin back to the 3rd century B.C Under Roman rule, Jews prospered. In 73 A.D, a zealot from Israel, Jonathan the Weaver, incited the poor of the community in Cyrene to revolt. The Romans reacted with swift vengeance, murdering him and his followers and executing other wealthy Jews in the community. This revolt foreshadowed that of 115 A.D, which broke out not only in Cyrene, but in Egypt and Cyprus as well. In 1785, where Ali Burzi Pasha murdered hundreds of Jews.With the Italian occupation of Libya in 1911, the situation remained good and the Jews made great strides in education. At that time, there were about 21,000 Jews in the country, the majority in Tripoli. In the late 1930s, Fascist anti-Jewish laws were gradually enforced, and Jews were subject to terrible repression. Still, by 1941, the Jews accounted for a quarter of the population of Tripoli and maintained 44 synagogues.

In 1942 the Germans occupied the Jewish quarter of Benghazi, plundered shops, and deported more than 2,000 Jews across the desert, where more than one-fifth of them perished. Many Jews from Tripoli were also sent to forced labor camps. Conditions did not greatly improve following the liberation. During the British occupation, there was a series of pogroms, the worst of which, in 1945, resulted in the deaths of more than 100 Jews in Tripoli and other towns and the destruction of five synagogues. The establishment of the State of Israel, led many Jews to leave the country.

A savage pogrom in Tripoli on November 5, 1945 were more than 140 Jews were massacred and almost every synagogue looted. (Howard Sachar, A History of Israel).In June 1948, rioters murdered another 12 Jews and destroyed 280 Jewish homes. Thousands of Jews fled the country after Libya was granted independence and membership in the Arab League in 1951. (Norman Stillman, The Jews of Arab Lands in Modern Times). After the Six-Day War, the Jewish population of 7,000 was again subjected to pogroms in which 18 were killed, and many more injured, sparking a near-total exodus that left fewer than 100 Jews in Libya. When Col. Qaddafi came to power in 1969, all Jewish property was confiscated and all debts to Jews cancelled. Today, no Jews are believed to live in Libya. Although emigration was illegal, more than 3,000 Jews succeeded to leave to Israel.

When the British legalized emigration in 1949, more than 30,000 Jews fled Libya. At the time of Colonel Qaddafi's coup in 1969, some 500 Jews remained in Libya. Qaddafi subsequently confiscated all Jewish property and cancelled all debts owed to Jews. By 1974 there were no more than 20 Jews, and it is believed that the Jewish presence has passed out of existence. JEWS IN ALGERIA PRIOR TO 1948

Jewish settlement in present-day Algeria can be traced back to the first centuries of the Common Era. In the 14th century, with the deterioration of conditions in Spain, many Spanish Jews moved to Algeria. Among them were a number of outstanding scholars, including the Ribash and the Rashbatz. After the French occupation of the country in 1830, Jews gradually adopted French culture and were granted French citizenship. On the eve of the civil war that gripped the country in the late 1950s, there were some 130,000 Jews in Algeria, approximately 30,000 of whom lived in the capital.

Nearly all Algerian Jews fled the country shortly after it gained independence from France in 1962. Most of the remaining Jews live in Algiers, but there are individual Jews in Oran and Blida. A single synagogue functions in Algiers, although there is no resident rabbi. All other synagogues have been taken over for use as mosques. In 1934, a Nazi-incited pogrom in Constantine left 25 Jews dead and scores injured. After being granted independence in 1962, the Algerian government harassed the Jewish community and deprived Jews of their principle economic rights. 150,000 Jews were forced out of Algeria when France left Algeria.

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 04:27:00 -0400

Tears of Jihad

270 million dead by Muslims

Whereas Islam began with killing of unbelievers right from the start.

For the first century of its existence, Islam was absolutely soaked in blood. The killing only slowed down as the Islamic empire finally ran into boundaries in the 8th century, after about a century of expansionist, imperialist, unprovoked Islamic aggression. Even after the initial expansion slowed, the killings did not end.

These figures are a rough estimate of the death of non-Muslims by the political act of jihad.

Africa
Thomas Sowell [Thomas Sowell, Race and Culture, BasicBooks, 1994, p. 188] estimates that 11 million slaves were shipped across the Atlantic and 14 million were sent to the Islamic nations of North Africa and the Middle East. For every slave captured many others died. Estimates of this collateral damage vary. The renowned missionary David Livingstone estimated that for every slave who reached a plantation, five others were killed in the initial raid or died of illness and privation on the forced march.[Woman’s Presbyterian Board of Missions, David Livingstone, p. 62, 1888] Those who were left behind were the very young, the weak, the sick and the old. These soon died since the main providers had been killed or enslaved. So, for 25 million slaves delivered to the market, we have an estimated death of about 120 million people. Islam ran the wholesale slave trade in Africa.

120 million Africans

Christians
The number of Christians martyred by Islam is 9 million [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, World Christian Trends AD 30-AD 2200, William Carey Library, 2001, p. 230, table 4-10] . A rough estimate by Raphael Moore in History of Asia Minor is that another 50 million died in wars by jihad. So counting the million African Christians killed in the 20th century we have:

60 million Christians

Hindus
Koenard Elst in Negationism in India gives an estimate of 80 million Hindus killed in the total jihad against India. [Koenard Elst, Negationism in India, Voice of India, New Delhi, 2002, pg. 34.] The country of India today is only half the size of ancient India, due to jihad. The mountains near India are called the Hindu Kush, meaning the “funeral pyre of the Hindus.”

80 million Hindus

Buddhists
Buddhists do not keep up with the history of war. Keep in mind that in jihad only Christians and Jews were allowed to survive as dhimmis (servants to Islam); everyone else had to convert or die. Jihad killed the Buddhists in Turkey, Afghanistan, along the Silk Route, and in India. The total is roughly 10 million. [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, World Christian Trends AD 30-AD 2200, William Carey Library, 2001, p. 230, table 4-1.]

10 million Buddhists

Jews
Oddly enough there were not enough Jews killed in jihad to significantly affect the totals of the Great Annihilation. The jihad in Arabia was 100 percent effective, but the numbers were in the thousands, not millions. After that, the Jews submitted and became the dhimmis (servants and second class citizens) of Islam and did not have geographic political power.

This gives a rough estimate of 270 million killed by jihad.
"Egypt was 14.5 Million people when first opened in Umar's time. When Napoleon walked in 1000 years later, the country was down to 2.5 Million people. 1000 years of bad management causing famines, ethnic cleansings, genocides, revolts. And that happened to one of the world most advanced civilizations.

1000 years and instead of increasing, instead of remaining 14.5 Million, they went down to 2.5 Million.

If we assume the number should have remained 14.5 Million. I we estimate One generation every 25 years. Then we have 250 generations over 1000 years. Over 250 generations, the population lost 12 Million from its total count.

on average each generation would have had to lose 48,000 people over 250 generations over 1000 years so that the minimum number of losses would be 12 Million Egyptians. Of course the number of loss is higher since people usually give more birth when facing poverty and hard times and there was no birth control available.

Political Islam

Jewish Population in Arab and Muslim Countries

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Sat, 30 Jul 2011 19:46:00 -0400

The vast majority of Leftists attitude toward Israel, particularly in the United Kingdom, have decided to trade in their civil liberties for the munificent benediction of those who would not think twice about destroying a secular democracy.

For example:

1) Why is it that many Muslim nations have legislated 'Jew/Christian free' land space (e.g.: Jordan), but Christians and Jews have no such right? Jews are not even allowed to be citizens in Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Jews and Christians cannot live in Mecca or even enter it as tourists. It seems that Muslim entitlement to live free from infidels is unquestioned, but any intimation of the reverse is met with ardent accusations of 'racism'

2) Why is it that the 23 Muslim countries in the Middle East, that have 600 times the land of tiny Israel, demand that the Israelis give up parts of their infinitesimally small land space? The holy land was virtually absent in population prior to the 1880s. Arabs who call themselves 'Palestinians' hail from persons who lived in Egypt, 'Trans-Jordan,' Lebanon, and Syria 150 years ago. Such was the irony seen in PLO leader, Yassir Arafat. Muslim Arabs already "OCCUPY" 600 times the amount of land that tiny Israel does, so why deprive the Jews of this 1/600 fraction of land space?

3) Why is it that Jewish Settlers can't live in parts of Israel, but Arabs can live anywhere in Israel, often living on Jewish owned land? The Israeli gov't tosses Jews off of Arab land, but does not do the same to Arabs because of media hypersensitivity to Arabs.

4) Statistics from Arab sources about decimated Jewish populations in the M.E.:

Exodus from Arab Muslim countries:

Country 1948 vs 2011

Algeria (1948) 140,0000 - (2011) 0
Bahrain (1948) 550-600 - (20011) 37
Egypt (1948) 80,000 - (20011) 100 or less
Iraq (1948) 140,000 - (2011) 11
Lebanon (1948) 20,000 - (2011) 0
Libya (1948) 38,000 - (2011) 0
Morocco (1948) 300,000 - (2011) 3,000 or less
Syria (1948) 40,000 - (2011) 100 or less
Tunisia (1948) 105,000 - (2011) 500 or less
Yemen (1948) 80,000 - (2011) 350 or less
Jordan (1948) 10,000 - (2011) 0
Sudan (1948) 350 - (2011) 0

Total (1948) 953,950 (2011) 4,098 or less

Ma'abarot transit camp, 1950

Exodus from non-Arab Muslim countries:

Country 1948 vs 2011

Afghanistan (1948) 5,000 - (2011) 1
Iran (1948) 210, 000 - (2011) 35, 000 0r less
Kurdistan (1948) 120, 000 - (2011) 100 or less
Pakistan (1948) 2,500 - (2011) 100 or less
Turkey (1948) 115, 000 - (2011) 2,500

Total (1948) 452, 500 - (2011) 37, 701

Beit Lid's Maabara 1950

Looking at these statistics, I think that Arab/Muslims definitely need more living space--NOT

After getting rid of the Jews in Arab/Muslim countries, I would like to say a word to my Christian friends: try paying a little bit of attention to how Christians are being massacred in tens of Muslim countries, the latest being Pakistan and Egypt where women and children are terrorized for going to Church!

Not to mention over than 2,000,000 (two millions) Christians already murdered in Indonesia.

The Islamic idea is: convert to Islam OR die!!!

Palestinian Islamic Jihad

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Sat, 2 Jul 2011 20:36:00 -0400

by Alden Oreck

Harakat al-Jihad al-Islami al-Filastini, better known as Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), was formed in 1979 by Islamic fundamentalist Fathi Shaqaqi and other radical Palestinian students in Egypt who had split from the Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood in the Gaza Strip whom they deemed too moderate. The 1979 Islamic revolution in Iran influenced the group's founder, Shaqaqi, who believed the liberation of Palestine would unite the Arab and Muslim world into a single great Islamic state. Today, PIJ is committed to the creation of an Islamic Palestinian state and the destruction of Israel through a jihad (holy war).

The Egyptian government expelled the PIJ to the Gaza Strip after learning of their close relations with radical Egyptian students who assassinated President Anwar Sadat in 1981. Still, PIJ members remained active in Egypt, attacking a tour bus in Egypt in February 1990 that killed 11 people, including nine Israelis. PIJ agents were arrested in Egypt in September 1991 while attempting to enter the country to conduct terrorism.

The PIJ began its terrorist campaign against Israel in the 1980s. In 1987, prior to the intifada, it carried out several terrorist attacks in the Gaza Strip. In August 1988, the faction`s leaders, Shaqaqi and `Abd al-`Aziz `Odah, were expelled to Lebanon, where Shaqaqi reorganized the faction, maintaining close contacts with the Iranian Revolutionary Guards unit stationed in Lebanon and with Hizballah. Although several other factions of Palestinian Islamic Jihad were formed in the 1980s, the main faction remains the group founded by Shaqaqi. After the 1993 Olso Peace Accords between Israeli and the Palestinians, Shaqaqi expanded the political connections of the organization to become a member of the new Syrian influenced Rejection Front.

PIJ and Hamas (The Islamic Resistance Movement), a separate Palestinian terrorist organization, were regarded as rivals in the Gaza Strip until after the foundation of the Palestinian Authority (PA) in 1994 when Hamas adopted the strategy suicide terrorist bombings. Since then, there has been some operational cooperation between the two organizations in carrying out attacks like the one in Beit-Lid, in February 1995, where two suicide bombers killed eight Israelis and wounded 50.

When PIJ leader Shaqaqi was killed in October 1995 in Malta, allegedly by Israeli agents, the PIJ position among Palestinian terrorist organizations dipped because his successor, Ramadan Abdallah Muhammad Shalah, who lived in the United States for several years, lacked Shaqaqi's charisma and intellectual and organizational skills. That did not stop PIJ's terror campaign, however, which included the March 1996 suicide bombing of the Dizengoff Center in downtown Tel Aviv, which killed 20 civilians and wounded more than 75, including two Americans.

The group is currently based in Damascus and its financial backing is believed to come from there and Iran. PIJ also has offices in Beirut, Tehran and Khartoum. It has some influence in the Gaza Strip, mainly in the Islamic University, but not in a way that can endanger the dominant position of Hamas as the leading Islamic Palestinian organization. Unlike Hamas, PIJ has no social or political role in the PA.

Aside from Israel, PIJ also considers the United States an enemy because of its support for Israel. The PIJ also opposes moderate Arab governments that it believes have been tainted by Western secularism and has carried out attacks in Jordan, Lebanon and Egypt.

Since September 2000, PIJ has been responsible for scores of terrorist attacks, including 15 suicide and car bombings, which have claimed the lives of more than 25 Israelis and wounded almost 400. On December 22, 2001, despite a declaration by Hamas to halt suicide bombings inside Israel, in response to a crackdown on militants by Yassir Arafat, PIJ vowed to continue its terror campaign. PIJ's representative in Lebanon, Abu Imad Al Rifai, told Reuters, "Our position is to continue. We have no other choice. We are not willing to compromise."

Pictured above is the emblem of Islamic Jihad. In the center, on a background of the Dome of the Rock, the map of greater Palestine is represented flanked by assault rifles. Above it and between the rifles appears the inscription Allah huAkbar [“Allah is Great,” the famous Islamic battle cry and usually the last words of a suicide bomber]. It is an excellent example of the radical Islamic religious message promulgated by the organization, whose goals are the destruction of the State of Israel (which they refer to as “the full liberation of the Palestinian lands”) by means of an armed and uncompromising jihad (holy war) and the establishment of a religious Islamic Palestinian state in its place.

Jewish Virtual Library

Islamic Hypocrisy in Europe

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Sat, 2 Jul 2011 20:25:00 -0400

by Khaled Abu Toameh

European countries are certainly not the right place for Muslims who want to live under sharia law.

Muslims who are unhappy with France's recent decision to ban the veil should find a more suitable place to live, such as Sudan, Saudi Arabia or Iran. There, they would feel free to wear the burqa and the niqab and build as many mosques as they want.

Just as Saudi Arabia bans the construction of a church or synagogue in Mecca and Medina, the Italians and the Spaniards have the right to limit the number of mosques in their countries. Muslims who see the establishment of a church or synagogue in their neighborhood as a provocation have no right to complain when non-Muslims express the same sentiments about mosques.

Would it ever occur to a Christian or Jew to move to Saudi Arabia and demand the right to drink alcohol and eat pork?

Can anybody imagine what would happen to a Christian if he or she were wearing the cross on the streets of Jeddah in Saudi Arabia? Or if a Jew wearing a skullcap were seen walking in the streets of Kabul or Khartoum?

Just as most non-Muslim women do not feel comfortable living in Islamic countries where women must cover their heads and faces and are not allowed to drive a car, Muslims have no right to impose their lifestyle, culture and religion on others.

Non-Muslims who travel to Islamic countries often respect the laws, traditions and religious beliefs of their hosts. Christians who have broken sharia laws in some Islamic countries often find themselves behind bars and end up facing deportation.

But why is it that when Muslims goes to live in a France, Britain and Canada, they do not hesitate to demand that the people living in these countries accept their ways?

A Muslim woman who wants – or is forced – to wear a veil is entitled to do so – but she has no right to protest if a Western government bans her from covering her face.

The ban should not be seen as an act of hostility toward Islam; instead, it should be regarded as a move intended to prevent a phenomenon that even many Muslims see as an act of degradation against women.

Radical Muslims who are trying to impose their will on Western societies are only causing damage to their faith.

The campaign launched by some Muslims against the French ban will only alienate non-Muslims and increase their concerns about Islam.

By challenging the French ban, for example, Muslims are telling the French people that they are more interested in separation from Western culture than integration.

Muslims living in Western countries have the right to practice their religious beliefs and traditions, but they should not expect non-Muslims to accept everything they want.

Hudson NY

The Myth of Islamic Democracy and the Middle East Crisis

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Sat, 2 Jul 2011 20:03:00 -0400

By alfadi

Time and time again we hear that Islam is a religion that emphasizes the equality of people, the accountability of leaders to community, and the respect of diversity and other faiths. That it is a faith which is fully compatible with democracy. However, such statements are rich with false dreams and void affirmations.

In my previous two blogs I revealed the teachings of the Quran, Islam’s holiest book, regarding two very important issues; freedom of religion and equality. The two articles addressed the treatment of people of other faith under Islamic law, and the status of women in general. The outcome of these articles was very obvious; Islam despises women and does not offer others any type of religious freedom under which they can worship and have their rights be protected at the same time.

Today I like to continue on with the same theme, with the emphasis more on the overall concept of Islam Sharia Law. However, the angle I will be taking has to do with the myth of the so called Islamic Democracy and the hope for new era in the Middle East.

Not that many people realize that in order for Islam to accept the concept of democracy, a cultural reformation must take place at first. Such reformation will have to cause drastic face lifting of values and beliefs that must be compatible with Islamic teachings and its religious values. In other words, in order for the Middle East to have any hope for any democracy, under Islamic ideology, there need to be a major adaptation of Islam and its Sharia Law. However, the concept of and Islamic democracy is a wishful thinking.

For how can Islam offer any type of democracy when it teaches certain realities as the ones discussed below:

Democracy & Islam

Any system of man-made law is considered illicit under Islamic law, for whose adherents Allah already has provided the only law permitted sharia. Islam and democracy can never co-exist in harmony.

The Quran clearly teaches that “. . . if any fail to judge by the light of what Allah has revealed, they are no better than unbelievers.” (Q 5:47)

“The sharia cannot be amended to conform to changing human values and standards. Rather, it is the absolute norm to which all human values and conduct must conform.” (Muslim Brotherhood ‘spiritual leader’ Yousef al-Qaradawi)

Freedom of Religion and Apostasy

The established ruling of sharia is that apostates are to be killed wherever they may be found. This ruling is derived directly from the Quran “Anyone who, after accepting Faith in Allah, utters Unbelief, except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in Faith—but such as open their heart to Unbelief—on them is Wrath from Allah, and theirs will be a dreadful Penalty.” (Q 16:106)

And from other classical Islamic sources such as:

“Leaving Islam is the ugliest form of unbelief (kufr) and the worst…..When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostasizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed…There is no indemnity for killing an apostate…” (‘Umdat al-Salik, Reliance of the Traveler, Chapter 08.0-08.4)

Islamic Supremacism

Islam explicitly teaches it is superior to every other culture, faith, government, and society and that it is a religion ordained by Allah to conquer and dominate them. This sense of superiority comes directly from the Quran, with instructions such as these below:

Islam is the only acceptable religion “And whoever desires a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the hereafter he shall be one of the losers.” (Q 3:85); Muslims are superior to all other faith groups “Ye are the best of Peoples, evolved for mankind.” (Q 3:110); Non-Muslims are “the most vile of created beings” (Q 98:6); Muslims should only extend mercy to other Muslims “merciful to one another, but ruthless to the unbelievers” (Q 48:29).

The founder of The Muslim Brotherhood once declared that “It is the nature of Islam to dominate, not to be dominated, to impose its law on all nations and to extend its power to the entire planet.” (Hassan al-Banna, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood).

The Real Question

With teachings like the ones above, how can we have any hope of an established democracy in the Middle East, when Islamic ideology and Sharia Law are its biggest threat, and will serve as its own obstacle rather than its self-motivation.

The real question to ask is:

If Islam is a religion that promotes democracy and freedom, then how come we do not hear of such freedom under the current Islamic regimes in the area, whether it is Saudi Arabia; a pure Islamic state, or Egypt, a semi-democratic state.

And if someone would argue that the real reason for the current crisis in the region has to do with the lack of an Islamic state, and then we are left with a puzzling question; how can an Islamic state be the real answer to the problem when it promotes teachings as the ones listed above. At the end we are left with a myth called “Islamic Democracy.”

The Quran Dilemma

The Road Ahead for Al-Qaeda

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Sat, 2 Jul 2011 19:51:00 -0400

The Role of Aymaan Al Zawahiri

By Siddharth Ramana

The death of Osama Bin Laden at the hands of American Special Forces in May 2011 has left a major void in the leadership of Al-Qaeda Central, or the base group to which numerous splinter outfits have pledged their allegiance. Bin Laden’s death is significant as it comes as a time when the senior leadership of the organization has been severely dented through extraordinary intelligence efforts resulting in capturing and killing senior functionaries including Khaled Sheikh Mohammad, the chief architect of the Sept 11 attacks, and Mohammed Atef, the military head of Al-Qaeda.

Traditional watchers of Al-Qaeda have already asserted that as per hierarchical ascension Dr. Aymaan Al Zawahiri would have to handle the reins of a group which is a shadow of its former self, and having to deal with a cadre who would be disoriented and demoralized after the death of their charismatic leader.

The problems which Zawahiri will inherit are many; firstly, to elude the fate of his predecessor, second to avenge the death and capture of his colleagues, and thirdly, and equally importantly, shoring confidence among his cadre and sympathizers by successfully attacking mainland USA.

This piece analyses the growth of Dr. Zawahiri among jihadist ranks and tries to forecast the future direction of Al-Qaeda under his aegis. This essay concludes that Zawahiri’s present weakness among jihadists is an initial irritant to the wider plans of Zawahiri, which would include re-focusing efforts towards the Arab world’s unrest before returning to target the West.

Personal life

Zawahiri’s personal upbringing provides a cursory glance into the origins of his radical behaviour. Developing his growing years, we can map avenues which have played an important role in Zawahiri’s psyche and elucidate upon his behavioral patterns in the future.

Zawahiri was born on June 19, 1951, and he grew up in an upper-class neighborhood in Cairo, Egypt, the son of a prominent physician and grandson of renowned scholars. He boasted of an impressive lineage in the Arab world, with his grandfather, Rabi'a al-Zawahiri, being the grand imam of Cairo's al-Azhar university, a centre of Islamic learning in the Arab world, his father Rabi, a professor of pharmacology and his great maternal uncle the first Secretary of the Arab league. His maternal grandfather, Abdul-Wahab Azzam, was a professor of Oriental literature, president of Cairo University and Egyptian Ambassador to Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Yemen.

His interest in Islamist thought and ideology could have been influenced by his family’s background, his grandfather was known for his piety, and encouraged Zawahiri’s active interest in attending Islamic sermons. According to an uncle of Zawahiri, “He was known as a good Muslim, keen to pray at the mosque and to read and to think and to have his own positions”.

Zawahiri pursued his educational interests in medicine, graduating from Cairo University's medical school in 1974, obtaining a masters degree in surgery four years later. During his college days he was heavily influenced by leading Islamic scholars including Syed Qutb, whose ideological writings he incorporated into his own interpretations on Jihad and Sharia in Egypt.

This influence would prove to be the cornerstone of jihadist thought in the man.

Syed Qutb’s influence on Zawahiri

The influence of family in Zawahiri’s earliest tryst with Islamism is both documented and obvious in their professional and ideological leanings. Zawahiri’s uncle, Mahfouz Azzam, a lawyer, was associated with Syed Qutb, and regarded him as a teacher. The role of Qutb in shaping the early vestiges of Islamism in Zawahiri is important to understand since it offers a glimpse into the psychological thinking of Zawahiri, and indeed many other jihadists who have been influenced by the works of Qutb.

According to Lawrence Wright, the author of “The Looming Towers: The Road to 9/11”, Azzam signified the close relationship he held with Qutb, describing how “He (Qutb) taught me Arabic in 1936 and 1937. He came daily to our house. He held seminars and gave us books for discussion. The first book he asked me to write a report on was “What Did the World Lose with the Decline of the Muslims?”

Qutb’s radical thought led the opposition against the Egyptian government led by Gamel Nasser. What had riled Qutb was the assassination of Hasan al Banna, and Egypt’s perceived subservient behavior to the West. When a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, attempted to assassinate Nasser in 1954, the state machinery cracked down on the group, imprisoning and torturing Qutb.

Qutb’s influence on radical Islamist thought was presented in his seminal piece called Ma`alim Fil Tariq (Milestones/ Signposts), written while in prison. The book was published in 1964, and reflected Qutb’s distrust of Western influences in the Arab world.

His views on Jihad were exemplified by his interpretation of Takfir and Jahiliya. The Arab world according to him was divided into Islam and Jahiliyya. Jahiliya, in traditional Islamic discourse, refers to a period of ignorance that existed throughout the world before the arrival of the Prophet Muhammad. Qutb classified the entire world under Jahiliyya.

As Qutb saw it, “Europeans, under Christianity's influence, began to picture God on one side and science on the other - Religion over here, intellectual inquiry over there. On one side, the natural human yearning for God and for a divinely ordered life; on the other side, the natural human desire for knowledge of the physical universe - ”The church against science and the scientists against the church”. Everything that Islam knew to be one, the Christian Church divided into two. And, under these terrible pressures, the European mind finally split asunder. The break became total - Christianity, over here; atheism, over there. It was the fateful divorce between the sacred and the secular”. One of the reasons for Qutb’s growing critical view of the west was also based on his interpretations of how the Western culture had sidelined religion for scientific research. This was a sacrilegious division which resulted in decadency and primitive actions of the west.

According to him “The Muslim community has long ago vanished from existence”. “It is crushed under the weight of those false laws and customs which are not even remotely related to Islamic teachings.” “Humanity cannot be saved unless Muslims recapture the glory of their earliest and purest expression. We need to initiate the movement of Islamic revival in some Muslim country”. Qutb’s reinterpretation of the concept of jahiliya is a “subtle reworking of the traditional Islamic division of the world into two spheres, dar al-Islam (the abode of Islam), and dar al-harb (the abode of conflict, i.e., an imperfect, non-Islamic social order). While a Muslim might ignore conditions in the dar al-harb, it was his duty to combat the threat to Islam posed by the jahiliya”. By painting the whole world in a state of jahiliya, he threw open the floodgates for his followers to embark upon his notion of Jihad against secular, western and communist regimes. “The most subversive aspect of Milestones, from the point of view of secular, multicultural governments and peoples, is its insistence that personal belief in and worship of God is insufficient to avoid Jahiliya. You can be as devout as you like, but if you tolerate and obey jahili institutions, you are defying God”.

Images of an ill Qutb being dragged to prison, and his fiery sermons during court sessions served to galvanize a whole new generation of young Islamists, among them was Zawahiri, who started to idolize Qutb’s position against an anti-Islamic government. In an incident which reflects his following, Zawahiri in the mid-sixties had famously refuted an offer to ride with Hussein al-Shaffei, the Vice-President of Egypt and one of the judges in the 1954 roundup of Islamists. His rebuttal was punctuated with the argument that “We don't want to get this ride from a man who participated in the courts that killed Muslims”.

When Qutb was executed in 1966, it had a profound effect on Zawahiri who earnestly took up the cause of Jihad against the Egyptian government, and became a part of an Islamic underground movement working for a violent takeover the government. In 1967, the six day war with Israel occurred, which strengthened Zawahiri’s belief in Qutb as a prophetic intellectual.

Egypt’s rout in the war destroyed its standing as a major Arab military power, and demoralized Egyptian citizens into looking for a way to cope with the loss of Arab face. Qutb’s writings played a role for Zawahiri in assessing that the reasons for the defeat lay in the immoral ways of the present Egyptian regime. For Zawahiri, the idea was to reinvigorate the country. According to him “Our first task is to change society in deed, to alter the jahiliyah reality from top to bottom. We must get rid of this jahiliyah society; we must abandon its values and ideology”.

Zawahiri viewed events in a case-effect relationship with an Islamist spin to it. He argued that the far enemy (Israel) can only be defeated when the near enemy (The Egyptian republic) is defeated. To do this, a jihad must be declared on them. Thus according to Zawahiri, the road to Jerusalem lay through conquering Cairo.

Prison and international Jihad

In pushing for his goal of overthrowing the Egyptian government, he was facilitated inadvertently by Nasser’s successor Anwar Sadat. Sadat sought an electoral alliance with the Islamists and released them en masse from prisons, in hopes to befriend them. What followed thereafter was a sociological coup by the Islamists in universities and trade unions, pushing forward an increasingly non-liberal and non-secular outlook, which provided more cadres to the underground Islamist movement. The subsequent defeat of Egypt in the Yom Kippur war of 1973, served to further rile up the Islamists into believing that the revolution should occur at the earliest, lest their society was further denigrated.

Zawahiri as a result of his imprisonment, state sponsored torture and collective humiliation at having lost to Israel, started following a more radical interpretation of Islam described as Salafist, which shunned any religious practices which were adopted after the death of Prophet Muhammad. During the 1970s-1980s, the two main operating jihadist groups in Egypt were Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) under the leadership of Zawahiri and al-Jama'a al-Islamiyya headed by the blind Sheikh Omar Abdul Rahman. Ideological differences between the two leaders had prevented the groups from merging, with Zawahiri focused on Egypt, & his rival advocating pan-Islamism.

According to Zawahiri’s memoirs, “My connection with Afghanistan began in the summer of 1980 by a twist of fate”. Zawahiri visited the country and Pakistan, on the invitation of a senior physician, and was deeply moved by stories of heroism by the Afghan Mujahideen who were fighting the Soviet invaders. On his return, he became a part of the plot to assassinate Anwar Sadat, who had the previous year signed a peace treaty with Israel. He was convicted for possession of arms, and sentenced to three years, escaping the more serious charge of conspiracy to murder.

In prison, Zawahiri with his charisma and fluent English, emerged as an international spokesman for the imprisoned Islamic activists. “We want to speak to the whole world,” he said in 1983. “We are Muslims who believe in our religion. ... We are here, the real Islamic front and the real Islamic opposition”.

Zawahiri succumbed to torture while in prison, and betrayed his accomplices including his friend and hero Al-Qamari. With information from Zawahiri, there was a massive security clampdown on the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, and following his release in 1985, Zawahiri fled to Saudi Arabia and from there to Afghanistan, where during his visits to the region he met Osama Bin Laden.

Relationship with Bin Laden

According to some, the first meeting between the two was cordial but meek, but it bloomed under the tutelage of Palestinian mentor Abdullah Azzam. Some skeptics of the relationship call it an alliance of convenience, based on a symbiotic relationship which could have allowed either leader to carry a movement based on their thought process. Others have suggested that the relationship was strong from its initial years, including the possibility that the actual idea of Al-Qaeda was Zawahiri’s as early as 1988.

What made Bin Laden attractive to Zawahiri was his financial status as the heir to a multi-billion dollar construction company in Saudi Arabia, while Bin Laden was impressed by Zawahiri’s organizational skills and superior jihadist credentials. This allowed for an alliance wherein Bin Laden would be operating as the CEO of Al-Qaeda, while Zawahiri would be architect of the organizational build up of the group.

According to Wright, Lawrence, “Zawahiri is cunning and experienced; he knows how to run underground cells, from his clandestine experience in Egypt. But he's not Bin Laden -he's not charismatic, and he's not a natural leader. People don't want to give up their lives for Zawahiri in the same way they want to for bin Laden.”

While Bin Laden and Zawahiri parted ways at the end of the Afghan Jihad, they were soon reunited in Sudan, where both Bin Laden and Zawahiri had taken refuge from state prosecution from their respective countries[22]. Zawahiri’s theological expertise provided a base for Bin Laden to further hone his worldview, but in many ways there was a sense of dependency which came from Zawahiri’s leadership skills and organizational capability- Key elements when forming any revolutionary outfit.

Merger with Al-Qaeda

The merger of Zawahiri’s Islamic Jihad faction with Al-Qaeda in 1996 is unique since it highlighted one of the earliest instances of Zawahiri compromising on his principled stand on how to conduct an Islamic revolution. Zawahiri was of the firm belief of prioritizing the downfall of the Western backed regime in Egypt, while Bin Laden, had his focus on Saudi Arabia. What the two groups eventually agreed upon was to prioritize their attacks on the United States. While a strong opposition to the United States was based on the ideological teachings of Qutb, what would have cemented vitriol hatred for the United States was the American role in pressuring European states in extraditing Islamic Jihad members from Europe.

According to Khalil Gebara, a Lebanese researcher, there were three reasons surrounding the Bin Laden-Zawahiri alliance. Firstly, the massive crackdown of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad by Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak led to a divided and disoriented self of the group. Zawahiri would have found it difficult to manage affairs being on the run from security forces, and being based outside Egypt. Compounding woes for him was international assistance extended by the United States, in pushing for a crackdown on his interests in Europe. This led to a trove of information leading to further arrests back home, which further weakened him.

Secondly, the move by Egyptian Islamic groups, particularly the Muslim Brotherhood, to condemn violence and work within a political framework isolated Zawahiri’s ideological followers. His reaction was to lash out at peers, in a book titled “The Bitter Harvest” (1991), a powerful critique of the Muslim Brotherhood. This move forced him to look elsewhere for a refuge, and he turned towards Bin laden for assistance.

The third reason for Zawahiri to turn to Bin Laden was financial. As with every terrorist outfit, access to financial capital is not forthcoming, and having Bin Laden as a potential bankroller would have considerably eased matters for Zawahiri. According to Lawrence Wright, Zawahiri confided to a close associate that joining Bin Laden was the “Only solution to keeping the Jihad organization alive”.

But while Bin Laden provided financial succor to Zawahiri, the latter’s role in propping up the organizational structure of Al-Qaeda and providing it with significant cadres from Egypt needs to be acknowledged. Important Egyptian members of Al-Qaeda are/were Mustafa Ahmed Hamza, a chief adviser to bin Laden, Mohammed Islambouli, the brother of Sadat assassin Khaled Islambouli; and Rifie Ahmed Taha, another military leader of Gamaat al-Islamiyya. Additionally, Egyptian jihadists like the late Abu Hafs (Head of Security), Saiid Al-Masri (Finance), the captured Mohammad Omar Abdul Rahman (Operations and Training), and Midhat Mursi (Weapons and Research), were all handpicked Egyptian Islamic Jihad members.

The role of Egyptians in Al-Qaeda was documented by risk analysis company STRATFOR, which in an analysis dated 18 October 2001, mentioned “it is the Egyptians that bring a cohesive agenda and operational focus. Many are former military, intelligence and police officials, and their unique experience is clearly reflected in the organization’s far-flung networks and operational capabilities. More important, perhaps, is the influence that they have over Al-Qaeda’s agenda. Much like bin Laden himself, most of the Egyptians are dissidents. Their ultimate goal is not war with the United States or the West but the overthrow of their own governments”.

While the merger seemed to be mutually beneficial, many cadre of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad were averse to the idea of joining Bin Laden, whom they viewed as a publicity hungry leader. In an attempt to scuttle the relationship, Zawahiri as the leader of Islamic Jihad was ousted and replaced with Tharwat Shehata, who wanted to limit the relationship with bin Laden and concentrate the group's fight against Egypt, not America. However, as finances were running low and significant strides were made by security forces against the group, Zawahiri regained control of the faction.

Role in Al-Qaeda

For Bin Laden, Zawahiri was not only a personal doctor, and a friend, but an ideological mentor who filled the gap left behind from the death of Abdullah Azzam. Zawahiri’s strong outlook helped shape many facets of how Bin Laden was to mould his organization. This in turn leads to assessments that Zawahiri was the true force behind Al-Qaeda, and managed to successfully navigate this marriage of convenience. According to El-Zayat, Zawahiri “was able to reshape Bin Laden’s thinking and mentality and turn him from merely a supporter of the Afghan Jihad [against the Soviet Union] to a believer in and export[er] of the Jihad’s ideology”.

Zawahiri in his stint with Al-Qaeda has additionally donned the role of deputy leader, spokesman, military strategist, liaison manager and even financial scout. These roles, which run concurrently, display the utility and importance of Zawahiri in the smooth functioning of the outfit.

Zawahiri’s official designation in Al-Qaeda was being deputy leader to Bin Laden. His most notable role however, was to become the face of Al-Qaeda during the last few years when Bin Laden went into hiding. It can be speculated that this was to provide the religo-ideological justification which Al-Qaeda needed to counter increasing criticisms directed against the group.

Zawahiri understood the importance of the role of the media in promoting Al-Qaeda, and he was instrumental in incorporating media management into Al-Qaeda. One of the earliest influences on Zawahiri was the Iranian revolution of 1979, wherein cassette tapes were smuggled into Iran to foment a revolution. For Zawahiri, his role as spokesman for the Egyptian Islamic Jihad members during their incarceration in Egypt also furthered his interest in using media as a tool against the enemy. His role as spokesman in Al-Qaeda came to the fore with the 1998 terror attacks against the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. At the time of the bombings, a reporter in Pakistan, Rahimullah Yusufzai, said he received a call from Zawahiri, who identified himself as a spokesman for Bin Laden and said, “I have nothing to do with the bombing of American embassies in Africa, but I urge the Muslims all over the world to continue their jihad against the Americans and Jews”. Media outreach was further developed with Al-Qaeda’s active use of technology including sophisticated computer graphics and dissemination of (propaganda or information) through the internet. Zawahiri was seen as the face of Al-Qaeda’s ideological tutorship, appearing in over 40 videotaped messages, and even replaced Bin Laden as the face of Al-Qaeda leadership in recent years. His last media appearance was in April 2011.

Zawahiri played a strong role in developing the military capability of Al-Qaeda, and was a proponent for Al-Qaeda to use weapons for mass destruction. In 1998, Zawahiri took time out from his travels to create some computer documents describing his biological and chemical program, which he code-named “Curdled Milk.”. Confiscated computer hard drives have indicated that Mohammad Atef in an email to Zawahiri wrote “a) The enemy started thinking about these weapons before WWI. Despite their extreme danger, we only became aware of them when the enemy drew our attention to them by repeatedly expressing concerns that they can be produced simply with easily available materials …b) The destructive power of these weapons is no less than that of nuclear weapons. c) A germ attack is often detected days after it occurs, which raises the number of victims. d) Defense against such weapons is very difficult, particularly if large quantities are used. I would like to emphasize what we previously discussed—that looking for a specialist is the fastest, safest, and cheapest way [to embark on a biological- and chemical-weapons program]. Simultaneously, we should conduct a search on our own…”

Zawahiri’s may also have been Al-Qaeda’s liaison officer with other jihadist groups. He offered reasoned advice to other groups, and also worked with other groups towards securing financial benefits for Al-Qaeda. For example, Zawahiri’s role can be inferred in the correspondence he held with Tawid ul Jihad, turned Al-Qaeda in Iraq, head Abu Musab Zarqawi. In his letter dated 9 July 2005, he tried to moderate Zarqawi’s notorious anti-Shiite attacks arguing that “The majority of Muslims don't comprehend this and possibly could not even imagine it. For that reason, many of your Muslim admirers amongst the common folk are wondering about your attacks on the Shia. The sharpness of these questioning increases when the attacks are on one of their mosques, and it increases more when the attacks are on the mausoleum of Imam Ali Bin Abi Talib, (may God honor him) (sic). My opinion is that this matter won't be acceptable to the Muslim populace however much you have tried to explain it, and aversion to this will continue”. Another instance of Zawahiri playing intermediary is his reported contacts with Hezbollah leader Imed Mugniyeh, among others, to move fighters loyal to Bin Laden from Afghanistan to Iraq, through Iranian territory in 2006.

Zawahiri’s letter to Zarqawi also brings to fore his efforts to help facilitate additional funding for the group. In the letter he writes to his counterpart for a loan until the Al-Qaeda leadership was able to re-establish links with its financiers, which had been severed with the arrest of Al-Qaeda’s operational commander in Pakistan, Abu Farj al-Libi[36].

Zawahiri’s primary benefit to Al-Qaeda would have to be his resourcefulness in identifying cadre to help facilitate the groups operations. One such example was in the recruitment of Mustafa Abu Al Yazid, or Mustafa Ahmed Mohamed Osman Abu Al Yazid. Yazid was an Egyptian member of the Islamic Jihad, who had served in prison with Zawahiri. He was named by the 9/11 commission as the man responsible for funding the operation via accounts based in the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

Relationship with Iran and Shiites

Are Zawahiri’s ideological diatribes against Iran are a ruse to avoid focus on what has been described as an ‘unnatural alliance’ in some quarters? Indications are that it is. It can be speculated that the anti-Shiite rhetoric of Zawahiri, is associated with attempts to rally support of extreme Salafist outfits, which would be averse to dealing with groups operating with Al-Qaeda. Alternatively, it may just be a change of heart from Zawahiri, who realizing his own group’s floundering capabilities needs to rely on state patronage which can only come from Iran. According to Samuel H. Brown VI and Norman T. Lihou, the relationship with Iran needs to be seen from the twin leadership perspectives of Osama Bin Laden being open to the idea of working with Iran, while Zawahiri is opposed to it.

Zawahiri’s relationship with Iran is evidentiary of his outlook towards the Shiite question. Iran being the most populous and powerful Shiite country, his outlook to the country and the Islamic sect is an important component of understanding his outlook towards West Asia. Belonging to the Salafist School of Islamic thought, in his writings, he has called for militant opposition not only to Christians and Jews, but also to Muslims who break with Salafist practice and are thus “infidels”. This would include Shiites who are viewed as heretics by the Salafist school of thought. Zawahiri on repeated occasions has spoken about the rationality in attacking Shiite centers, and it was elucidated upon in his letter to Zarqawi as well.

However, as the letter to Zarqawi observes a degree of political consideration does go into evolving a militaristic view against the Shiite community. This has led to circumstances wherein, despite pronounced differences, there has been cooperation between Shiite groups and Iran, with Al-Qaeda. For Zawahiri, the earliest form of cooperation was during his early day in working with the Iranian government in attempting to foster an Islamic revolution in Egypt. According to the testimony of EIJ operative Ali Mohammed, Zawahiri had received from Iran $2 million and training of members of al-Jihad in a coup attempt that never actually took place.

This cooperation highlights the complex relationship which Al-Qaeda’s holds with Hezbollah as well. Despite strong statements against Hezbollah, Al-Qaeda is known to have a degree of collaboration, including using Hezbollah units in Saudi Arabia to target expatriates. Cooperation however has not resolved the rifts between the two camps, which do come out in the open.

In April 2006, for example, an Al-Qaeda cell in Lebanon tried to assassinate Hassan Nasrallah, the spiritual head of Hezbollah. Furthermore, in an interview to the Washington Post in July 2006, Nasrallah condemned the September 11 attacks in New York and the Taliban regime which was harboring Bin Laden.

Interestingly, in a videotaped message delivered on 17 December 2007, Zawahiri alluded to previous collaboration saying “In the past, the emphasis had been on jointly fighting the Zionists-Crusader alliance against the Muslim ummah, but that Iran had surprised Al-Qaeda by collaborating with the U.S. in its invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, and had even come to an agreement with the Americans before they entered Iraq, over the division of that country”.

In 2008, Zawahiri came out with a more pronounced criticism of Iran, including calling it a part of the “Iranian-Crusader alliance” against Islam. This pronounced opposition to Iran comes at a time, when Iran’s power has been growing in the region, concerning many Arab regimes, over its influence in significant states and its covert nuclear program. This reflects Zawahiri’s own fears of the Islamic ummah being usurped by the Shiite revolutionary thought. Such a move is seen as sacrilegious by Salafist groups.

Zawahiri’s criticism has not been limited to Iran itself, but has been extended to Hezbollah as well, accusing Hezbollah’s channel Al-Manar of promoting a lie that Israel, and not Al-Qaeda, was behind the 9/11 attacks. According to him “The purpose of this lie is clear - [to suggest] that there are no heroes among the Sunnis who can hurt America as no-one else did in history”.

Opposition to Iranian backed groups has not been limited to Shiite groups such as Hezbollah alone, but clashes have also been reported with Muslim Brotherhood affiliated Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Hamas which subscribes to a Sunni-Salafist ideology has, since its electoral victory in 2005, been supported financially by Iran. Zawahiri has repeatedly criticized Hamas’s political approach with Israel and, while it is not clear if the central leadership provided any inputs to Al-Qaeda affiliates in the territories, the incidents of violent clashes between the two clearly indicate divisions between the two.

Ties between Iran and Al-Qaeda, however, continue to be surrounded in a large degree of uncertainty, especially since Iran, it is reported by American intelligence agencies, is closely working with Al-Qaeda officials in plotting attacks. The Wall Street Journal quotes US Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell as saying, ‘The release or escape (by Iran) of bin Laden's son, Saad bin Laden, suggests possible collaboration between Iran and Al-Qaeda and the potential that Saad bin Laden is a go-between for the two’. Saad bin Laden, is alleged to have assisted in communicating between Zawahiri and the Iranian Qods Force after an Al-Qaeda attack on the US embassy in Sana’a in 2008. This was the same year when Zawahiri’s public strictures against Iran had come.

Even more curiously, Zawahiri, in a letter to Iran’s Revolutionary Guards in November 2008, thanks Iran for “monetary and infrastructure assistance” to establish new bases in Yemen after al-Qaeda was forced to abandon much of its terrorist infrastructure in Iraq and Saudi Arabia.

These continuing contradictions reflect Zawahiri’s standing to use relations with Iran as an unnatural alliance which shares a degree of common goals. The future partnership between the two groups would continue to be dependent on the financial and military resources which Iran can extend to Al-Qaeda, and this is the reason why Iran and Zawahiri would be looking for opportunities in the aftermath of Bin Laden’s death.

Is there a reality disconnect?

The Al-Qaeda leadership has, since October 2001, been under intense surveillance from intelligence agencies worldwide. A consequence of this has been Al-Qaeda’s inability to adequately follow news developments and analyze how it should respond. Zawahiri’s letter to Zarqawi reflects the difficulties when he speaks about “following your news, despite the difficulty and hardship”.

Monitoring political developments in the Arab world is a must for Zawahiri, for his sermons to the Arab world are determinate on a sound understanding of the political ground realities of the audience he is trying to reach out to. His efforts to foster a violent revolution in the Palestinian territories against Israel, for example, have met with mixed results, with both Hamas and the Palestinian National Authority choosing to dismiss his rhetoric.

Al-Qaeda attempts to lend a face to every development in the Arab/Islamic world in an attempt to gain supporters among disgruntled cadre in affected regions. This has led to Al-Qaeda widening its target list and pushing forward a violent agenda which is bound to backfire. One only needs to have a look at the downfall of the Algerian Islamist movement in 1994-1995 as indication this. The Islamists failed to take over the government owing to alienation of people and increasing infighting. These signs of alienation were indicated when the Arab media gave short shrift to Zawahiri’s 17 June 2005 message which praised Al-Qaeda’s efforts in Iraq. Zawahiri’s message was met with scorn across the Arab world, with one editorial in the Jordanian paper, al-Arab al-Yawm describing Zawahiri as a “leech for the blood of Iraqis, as well as haughty, stupid and lacking any connection to reality, just like George Bush junior”.

Zawahiri’s declining appeal was also reported in a 2006 study done by West Point. In its study, it was reported that among Al-Qaeda’s ideologists, Zawahiri and Bin Laden come to be seen more as propagandists than strategic thinkers. In a further indication of a reality disconnect, the response to Zawahiri’s videotape on the ‘Jasmine revolution’ in Egypt is telling. In the video, Zawahiri claimed that the country's rule has long “deviated from Islam” and warned that democracy “can only be non-religious”, in an attempt to shift focus from the secular-liberal demands of the protestors.

His opposition to the Muslim Brotherhood, the most organized and disciplined underground opposition was particularly stinging. In his message, he sarcastically said, “Today you are winning 80 seats and after five years you will win 100 seats. Hence, at whatever time your behavior improves, we will offer you more. Once you become secular and falsely affiliated with Islam…we will let you assume power provided that you forget about the rule of Sharia, welcome the Crusaders' bases in your countries, and acknowledge the existence of the Jews who are fully armed with nuclear weapons, which you are banned to possess”.

This message was refuted in a statement from Issam al-Aryan, a Muslim Brotherhood leader, who retorted, “The Muslim Brotherhood opposes a religious state that creates fear in the West, because Islam is against such a state. We support a secular state because Islam believes in freedom of religion and does not want anyone to impose his faith on someone else”.

The difficulties which Zawahiri faces are also ideological, and being the religious face of the organization, his credibility is even more at stake when counter-terrorism tactics include de-legitimization. For example, when former leader of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad and chief ideologue of al-Qaeda, Dr. Sayyid Imam al-Sharif criticized Al-Qaeda and Zawahiri in particular in his book 'Rationalizing Jihad in Egypt and the World', it created serious ripples among jihadist cadre. For example, in a discussion between Richard Barrett, Frank J. Cilluffo, Daniel W. Sutherland and Mona Yacoubian, it was mentioned that al-Sharif’s renunciation, was far more significant in undermining support for groups like Al-Qaeda than anything the United States or the United Kingdom can do or have done. Al-Sharif in his book provides a detailed rebuttal to the theological argument of Jihadism. For example, he concludes that the attacks on Sept. 11 were “treacherous acts” and that calling them a “Ghazwa”, is mocking the prophetic tradition of Muhammad.

Additionally, the book suggests “We are prohibited from committing aggression, even if the enemies of Islam do that”. Adding, “There is a form of obedience that is greater than the obedience accorded to any leader, namely, obedience to God and His Messenger,” claiming that hundreds of Egyptian jihadists from various factions had endorsed his position.

In addition to theological arguments against Zawahiri, al-Sharif also engages in a smear campaign, arguing that Zawahiri was an agent for the Sudanese intelligence agencies, and had personally told him of receiving one hundred thousand dollars to create unrest in Egypt. He furthermore condemns Arab fighters in Afghanistan of not observing Sharia law, and being more concerned about matters of military dominance.

As the de-facto military and ideological head of Al-Qaeda, Zawahiri was the in-charge man, for the involvement of Arabs worldwide in Afghanistan. In an email sent in the early years of Al-Qaeda, to jihadists worldwide, he described the country as “the lions den of jihadists”. However, Arab fighters were quite condemning of conditions they experienced, and their differences with the Taliban nearly resulted in their expulsion.

According to Sajjan Gohel, Director for International Security, Asia-Pacific Foundation, “Afghan Taliban resented people like Ayman Zawahiri and his Egyptian brigade. Zawahiri was very overbearing in the relationship between al-Qaeda and the Taliban, and it created problems in the relationship”.

Persistent rumors of Zawahiri being an Arab supremacist, who discriminates against South Asians and other ethnicities within Al-Qaeda, has cast aspersions on his ability to hold the organization together. In mid 2009, an internet post on the Hanein Forum cited the diminishing readership of Zawahiri's posts. It lamented that Zawahiri’s writings had a significantly diminished readership compared to previous years. Zawahiri, in an attempt to effuse praise of his outfit, also ended up stepping on the toes of affiliates such as Al-Qaeda in Iraq, which too resulted in differences between him and his cadre.

These differences can be attributed also to an inflated ego perception which Zawahiri holds of his position. On 7 December 2007, Zawahiri invited questions from individuals and media outlets to be submitted to Jihadi websites, for him to answer. The online session was to be an alternative to Al-Jazeera, which was denounced as a “station of infidels”. In the interview session which followed, Zawahiri selectively chose questions, and in his discourse promoted his new book ‘The Exoneration’ on fourteen occasions. While attempting to engage in operational secrecy, he avoided any questions which dealt with the future strategy of Al-Qaeda, but this was perceived to be an indicator of poor outlook. Combined with the constant references to his new book, the entire exercise came across as one of self aggrandizement, and failed to address the motives behind the interaction.

Rebuttal of criticism

Since al-Sharif’s book was released, Zawahiri has been at pains to defend his position. He has repeatedly attempted deflecting criticism of Al-Qaeda, against the then Mubarak regime in Egypt, and the Israeli blockade of Gaza. In March 2008, he published a 188-page Arabic book online titled ‘The Exoneration: A Treatise Exonerating the Community of the Pen and the Sword from the Debilitating Accusation of Fatigue and Weakness’.

To insulate himself from the criticisms, he takes a dig at the apparatus behind al-Sharif’s treatise, suggesting the obvious role of the Egyptian state in allowing for the release of such an acrimonious document. In a videotaped message which followed the release of al-Sharif’s work, he said “Do they now have fax machines in Egyptian jail cells?” Adding in similar sarcasm, “I wonder if they’re connected to the same line as the electric-shock machines”.

In his book Zawahiri acknowledges that he was forced to respond to al-Sharif, and share in public, “an exercise in mutual recriminations in full sight of the world against brothers”, with whom he otherwise exchanges sincere amity and friendship. He argues against al-Sharif, in favor of the killings of innocent people by saying, “Those who claim that killing innocent persons is absolutely forbidden are in a position of accusing the prophet, may God's peace and prayers be upon him, his companions, and the generation following them that they were killers of innocent persons, as they see it”.

He further argues “If a Muslim’s family is threatened by an oppressive regime or foreign power, why would he adopt nonviolence to protect them? “If a Muslim never attacks the enemy for fear of killing fellow believers or innocent people, how can he put pressure on a much more powerful enemy?” Whereas Al-Sharif maintains that fighting on in a hopeless situation, claiming innocent Muslim lives in greater proportion to those of the infidel, with no tangible benefit is unacceptable, till such time as a parity is reached, Zawahiri believes that it is especially in this situation, that Muslims have no choice but to fight on since anything else would imply an acceptance of apostasy and heresy.

Zawahiri argues vehemently that attacking targets in the United States and Israel provides for an increase of Muslim support for Al-Qaeda after the inevitable U.S. reprisals, and argues that the western ploy to use clerics to defame the group are bound to fail, owing to a significant number of supporters he cites in his treatise. Interestingly, as a measure of added support, he includes Taliban leaders including Jalaluddin Haqqani as a show of solidarity with the Taliban. The inclusion of Taliban leaders, and Taliban allied warlords, is an important facet because of their reportedly strained relationship with Al-Qaeda in recent years. According to a brief in Foreign Policy, this can be attributed to the close relationship between the Haqqani group, and Pakistan’s intelligence agencies, which Al-Qaeda is opposed to.

Zawahiri’s close equations with Haqqani are also important since it helps in Al-Qaeda’s future operational capabilities, and safe sanctuary which the Haqqani network can offer.

Is Zawahiri’s time up?

The death of Bin Laden places a great load of expectations over Zawahiri. It can be speculated that the initial silence of Al-Qaeda forums on officially naming the successor to Bin Laden may be because of the initial confusion in circumstances surrounding his death, and opposition which Zawahiri has been facing from Jihadist circles. It has also been argued by a Saudi newspaper that Bin Laden may have been betrayed by his friend, in order to expedite the processes of Zawahiri leading Al-Qaeda and this could be a cause of silence among supporters. These reports have sought to expand the anti-Zawahiri ranks in Al-Qaeda. These elements are most likely to be found among the Yemeni-Saudi elements of Al-Qaeda, owing to their belief of superiority in race belonging to the Arab Peninsula.

These features reflect the underlying tensions, which the death of Bin Laden has resulted in, and initiate a review of how Zawahiri’s policies will take Al-Qaeda forward. Alternatively, it may be another ploy by intelligence agencies in capitalizing on Bin Laden’s death in widening the internal rifts in the organization.

For Zawahiri to lead the group, he would need to re-focus his efforts in countering the government agencies which have weakened Al-Qaeda within the safe sanctuaries. However, what is working against his operational capability is his thought process. Zawahiri believes in the theory of revolutionary vanguards. This theory posits that “a small, revolutionary elite uses violence to rouse the people to fight against the government”. However, the converse of this belief is that is that terrorism usually diminishes the support of both the government as well as the terrorist organization. This is because of the repressive reaction of the government, and the civilian casualties caused by terrorists. This has led to declining popularity of Al-Qaeda in important countries across the Islamic world, including Pakistan.

Zawahiri’s beliefs and resultant actions mark him out to be a self thinking leader who refuses to think beyond his own beliefs and chooses not to negotiate a possible solution.

This was particularly documented when he strongly condemned the transitional government formation in Egypt. Such an attitude is an intelligence boon for agencies seeking to further isolate and track down the Al-Qaeda leader.

An added aspect which would help security forces in tracking down Zawahiri would be the traditional hostilities which Zawahiri held with the Taliban. If the Taliban were to choose to continue negotiations in private, the beliefs of Zawahiri would be deemed incompatible, and despite Pashtun traditions, can find a way to disclose his whereabouts to security forces.

The road ahead

It is widely expected that Zawahiri will overcome the internal schisms which surround Bin Laden’s successor, and will herald his leadership with a refocusing of priority away from the United States, despite its arch rival status, and towards the transitional environs of West Asia. Zawahiri, having learnt the bitter lessons of having lost territorial sanctuary on three previous occasions (Egypt, Sudan and Afghanistan), would most likely seek to re-establish an Islamic caliphate in the Arab world. This was suggested as much in the letter to Zarqawi, where he spoke of Iraq being only a foothold for establishing a greater Islamic caliphate to include Syria and Egypt.

Zawahiri’s statements in the aftermath of the Jasmine revolution in Egypt indicate that he is still very much interested in carving a role for himself in post-revolution developments. According to Mike Schuster, “Egypt has been central to al-Qaida’s narrative of repression and political change in the Arab world”, and this reflects Zawahiri’s need to re-focus efforts on his home country. To do so, Zawahiri would need to rely on his contacts within Egypt and a rapprochement with the Muslim Brotherhood. An additional challenge which faces him is the belief that the Jasmine revolutions have made the violent coup ideology of Al-Qaeda obsolete.

The most disturbing aspect for Zawahiri would be the irrelevance of his position if the Muslim Brotherhood were to take control of the state through electoral means. It would make Zawahiri’s claims of the need for a violent takeover moribund. On the other hand, Islamist groups can enforce their way into the legislative system in accordance with the existing legal systems. For example, we can look at the situation in Gaza in 2005, when Hamas won the elections, or the case of Lebanon wherein elections have resulted in Hezbollah being king maker in a coalition political setup.

Zawahiri’s faces an even more uphill task since even his former group the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, has done a volte-face on the use of violence, in light of the revolution. According to Abboud al-Zumar, a founding member of Islamic Jihad, who too was sentenced to prison for his role in Sadat’s assassination, “The revolution created a new mechanism: the mechanism of strong, peaceful protests” adding that “the coming period does not at all require armed struggle with the ruler”.

However, the seeds of militant unrest continue to reside in the region, with salafism deeply embedded in majority of the Arab and North African world. In the case of Egypt, this can be seen for example in the increasing attacks on Coptic Christians in the country. It is worthy of noting here that in the days preceding and post-revolution, Egypt has seen an increasing Salafist view from sections of society. It could be possible for Zawahiri to re-develop his roots to his home country by rallying these dissipated forces together. Tying this aspect to an electoral victory of the Muslim Brotherhood, it can be expected that Al-Qaeda styled Salafist groups will come out in open conflict with the elected leadership of Egypt. This open conflict and view to a violent coup is the only way for Zawahiri to take this view forward.

To develop these links however, Zawahiri needs to build his credentials once more among a new generation of jihadists. To do so, he would need to align himself with Islamic leaders in the region who have gained ideological following and are seen to be more pragmatic. In this light, the successes of Imam Anwar al-Awlaki need to be viewed with greater scrutiny. Awlaki’s response to the Jasmine revolutions, was seen as both calm and composed which contrasts with Zawahiri’s need to lend an Al-Qaeda face to every happening in the Muslim world. This self-confidence may be important in gaining renewed following in the Arab world.

Conclusion

Zawahiri’s main interest will be in upgrading the franchisee status of Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) to a full-fledged organizational role without endangering his own constituency. This is because, in recent years, AQAP has been much more successful in staging attacks against American interests than Al-Qaeda central has been. It has resulted in Awlaki being declared, by some accounts, as enemy number one for the United States over Zawahiri. A crucial vote of support to Zawahiri was extended by Rashad Mohammad Ismail, a top commander of (AQAP), when he described Zawahiri as the “best candidate and right person” to lead Al-Qaeda. Yemen’s importance to Al-Qaeda has been well documented and even Zawahiri has on repeated occasion’s identified Yemen as one of “our most important fronts” in the global war on terrorism.

In addition to developing credibility among jihadists, Zawahiri’s role would also be dependent on his skills in managing to secure financial resources. Analysts suggest that the group is presently in dire financial condition as well and terrorist recruits were charged for their training. These indications firmly place Zawahiri in a far weaker position than his predecessor and would require his collaboration with wealthier jihadist outfits or adopting the more inexpensive plans of AQAP.

With Zawahiri’s present shaky control over Al-Qaeda, it would be prudent for him to act through the shadows in the interim period till he gains complete allegiance. This could be the reason behind naming Saif Al-Adel as the new interim leader of Al-Qaeda. While Adel and Zawahiri are known to have had differences, it can be argued that these differences will be glossed over in the overall scheme of Al-Qaeda’s operations. For example, Adel is known to have opposed the 9/11 attacks against the United States, an operation which Bin Laden held in high regard, but yet was considered a close associate of the slain terror leader.

The future for Al-Qaeda under Zawahiri therefore indicate a short term return to the West Asian political dynamics, which would be prudent on the electoral success of the Muslim Brotherhood, and any overtures made towards it. Zawahiri’s need to keep an international cadre based support will come in his way during this period, and therefore will continue to plot attacks against the West for larger credibility.

The International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism

The Dilemma of Islamic Jihad

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Sat, 2 Jul 2011 19:48:00 -0400

Is Bin Laden The End of Terrorism?

By alfadi

Osama Bin Laden is no more. The official announcement came on May 1st, 2011 when President Obama revealed to the world that the US has captured and killed the leader of Al-Qaeda via a covert operation conducted by the NAVY Seal and the CIA.

However, as a former Muslim myself, who was born and raised in Saudi Arabia in the same town where Bin Laden lived, who was an acquaintance and a close friend with some of Bin Laden’s family and cousins, who once was radical and at some point, almost joined in with Bin Laden’s effort to fight the soviets in Afghanistan, I asked myself this very important question: DID WE WIN THE WAR ON TERROR?

Unfortunately, the answer would be a resounding NO. Simply because the issue of terror has nothing to do with an individual, as Bib Laden. It has to do with a much deeper issue that must be faced head-on. This issue is the SOURCE of the terror activities that inspired Bin Laden to form Al Qaeda in 1990 to fight whom he believed to be; the enemies of God, including innocent people and children.

Was Bin Laden alone in doing so, or was he inspired by others before him who followed the same calling and carried the banner of Holy War against the infidels? Take for example Hasan al-Banna who founded the Muslim Brotherhood movement in the 1920’s for the sole purpose of rejecting Western values, to establish a Sharia Law or Islamic state. Al-Banna was inspired by the same SOURCE.

How about HAMAS which was founded in 1988 as an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood by Ahmad Ibrahim, whose goal is to destroy the enemies of God and their agents. He too was inspired by the same SOURCE. However, if we want to know the SOURCE, we must evaluate what these movements stand for and the answer will be revealed from the moment we take a closer look.

First, the name these movements chose; Al Qaeda “The Foundation”; Muslim Brotherhood; or HAMAS “The Islamic Resistance Movement,” reveal to us a religion: ISLAM. All of these names incorporated it directly or indirectly.

Second, all of these movements, and others like them, share the same values which include: complete rejection of the West, communism, and freedom; establishment of a pan-Islamic state founded on the basis of Sharia Law, an ideal state to be ruled by a Caliph, a title bestowed upon the successor s of the prophet of Islam Muhammad from the very beginning of Islam almost 1,400 years ago.

Third, all of these movements inspire followers at all social levels by declaring to them that Muslims are oppressed by the West who occupy Islamic nations and shed the blood of Muslims whether it was the crusaders’ in 1192 A.D. or as recent as the Afghanistan and Iraq wars since 2001, or even for the mere existence of American forces in Saudi Arabia. For instance, Osama Bin Laden in a fatwa issued in 1996 entitled “Declaration of War against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places,” stated the following: “. . . It should not be hidden from you that the people of Islam had suffered from aggression, iniquity and injustice imposed on them by the Zionist-Crusaders alliance and their collaborators; to the extent that the Muslims blood became the cheapest and their wealth as loot in the hands of the enemies. Their blood was spilled in Palestine and Iraq.”

Hasan al-Banna once said “Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it,” or what Ahmad Ibrahim said “Six million descendants of monkeys [i.e., Jews] now rule in all the nations of the world, but their day, too, will come. Allah! Kill them all, do not leave even one!”

By now we can see a pattern emerging, which instills hatred towards the West and their so-called Zionist agents, and to liberate Muslims from their oppression. In other word, to make Islam supreme. But where did all of these terror leaders get these ideas or inspirations from. They got them from the SOURCE, which is the Quran. The Quran is the foundation for all terror and radical groups and their activities.

So what does the Quran teaches regarding some of these terror group’s agenda? The following verses from the Quran should speak from themselves:

“You are the best of the nations raised up for -the benefit of- men; you enjoin what is right and forbid the wrong and believe in Allah” Q 3:110

“O you who believe! be careful of -your duty to- Allah with the proper care which is due to Him, and do not die unless you are Muslim” Q 3:102

“I desire nothing but reform so far as I am able, and with non but Allah is the direction of my affair to the right and successful path; on him do I rely and to him do I turn” Q 11:88

“. . . and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are the unbelievers” Q 5:44

“. . . And a soul will not die but with the permission of Allah, the term is fixed” Q 3:145

“. . . and -so far- those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will by no means allow their deeds to perish. He will guide them and improve their condition and cause them to enter the garden -paradise- which He has made known to them” Q 47:4-6

“”so when you meat in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks…” Q 47:19

“. . . slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush. . .” Q 9:5

“Fight them, Allah will punish them by your hands and bring them to disgrace, and assist you against them and heal the hearts of a believing people. “ Q 9:14

“Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection. “ Q 9:29

“He it is Who sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth [Islam], that He might cause it to prevail over all religions, though the polytheists may be averse.” Q 9:33

“. . . strive hard against the unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their abode is Hell,- an evil refuge indeed.” Q 9:73

With commands such as these, emanating from the Muslims most Holy book, the Quran, which is believed as the absolute word of Allah, DID WE REALLY WIN THE WAR ON TERROR by killing Bin Laden?

It may sound as if I am a pessimist, however, the point I am trying to raise here and bring to light, is that our issue is not with individuals such as Bin Laden, our war is against an ideology found in a so-called divine book which inspires young men and women to kill themselves and others for one cause: to make Islam supreme. This is the same ideology that kept Islam surviving for 1,400 years via the use of violence against anyone who dares to stand against it.

The only way we can face this issue and deal with it, is by understanding the fuel behind it. This fuel can be found in the pages of the Quran. In our recent book “The Quran Dilemma” we as former Muslims analyze this ideology in depth for the purpose of helping others finally grasp the deeper problem of Radical Islam and Terrorism. Unless we are willing to become familiar with it and deal with it in a straight forward approach, another Osama will rise in the scene of Holy Jihad faster than we can react.

For more on the in-depth teachings of Islam concerning Jihad and Holy War against non-Muslims and moderates, you can obtain our book through: www.thequran.com or www.amazon.com

You can also visit my blog at: The Quran Dilemma

Crash Course in Islam and Arab Lies

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Sat, 2 Jul 2011 19:44:00 -0400

MYTH 1: ISRAEL OCCUPIES ARAB PALESTINE

This is a genocidal claim made by the Muslim Students Association and other pro-Arab groups. It is genocidal because it obliterates the Jewish state. If Israel is actually “Occupied Palestine” then there is no legitimate Jewish state in the Middle East.

Since Roman times when the Philistines inhabited the region around the Jordan (hence the name “Palestine”) there has never been a political entity – neither a province nor a state – called “Palestine” and no one claimed there was until well after the United Nations created Israel in 1948. The land on which Israel was created by the U.N. was also used by the colonial powers to create Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and Jordan. It was land that had belonged to Turkey for 400 years. The Turks are not “Palestinians” and are not even arabs.

There never was an Arab country called “Palestine” or inhabited by “Palestinians.” Before the creation of the Palestine Liberation Organization in 1964, which was sixteen years after the birth of Israel, no Arab political entity was called by that name.

MYTH 2: ISRAEL IS AN APARTHEID STATE

The term Apartheid refers to the segregation of groups on the basis of ethnicity or race, and the denial of basic civil rights to the segregated group. There is no such segregation in Israel. Arabs are granted full civil rights under Israeli law, which forbids discrimination on the basis of race, creed, or sex. Arabs take part fully in Israeli society and government. Arab citizens of Israel vote in national elections, have representatives in the Israeli Parliament, sit on the Israeli courts and on the Israeli Supreme Court benches, and serve as tenured professors teaching in Israeli colleges and universities. The Arab citizens of Israel have more rights, and enjoy more freedom, education, and economic opportunity than the Arabs of any Arab state.

MYTH 3: THE ARABS WANT PEACE AND A STATE ON THE WEST BANK

The Arab nations rejected peace and a state on the West Bank first in 1948 when it was offered to them by the U.N. and then in 2000 when it was offered by Presidents Clinton and Barak. In 1949, the West Bank and Gaza Strip, which the U.N. had designated as a homeland for the Arabs, were annexed respectively by Jordan and Egypt. When the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) was formed in 1964 its covenant made no mention of liberating the West Bank or Gaza from Jordan and Egypt. The PLO leadership stated that its goal was to “push the Jews into the sea.” Today the “liberation” of Palestine “from the river to the sea” is still the goal of Hamas and the Palestinian Authority (PA). The war in the Middle East is about the desire of the Arab nations and Muslims to destroy Israel; it is not about the desire for a Palestinian state.

There are 1.4 million Arabs living in Israel with civil rights that are the envy of the Arab world. Israeli Arabs vote in Israel’s elections, have representatives in the Israeli Parliament, sit on Israeli courts and on the Israeli Supreme Court, and serve as tenured professors teaching in Israeli colleges and universities. The Arab citizens of Israel have more rights, and enjoy more freedom, education, and economic opportunity than the inhabitants of any Arab or Muslim state.

MYTH 4: THE HOLOCAUST IS EUROPE’S PROBLEM; PALESTINIANS HAD NO ROLE IN IT

The father of Palestinian nationalism, Haj Amin Al-Husseini, planned death camps for the Jews in the Middle East. Haj Amin Al-Husseini, was a devoted follower of Hitler who spent the war in Berlin, recruited an Arab legion to the Nazi cause and planned a “Final Solution” for the Jews of the Arab world. The Muslim Brotherhood, which created Hamas, the government of Gaza, translated Mein Kampf into Arabic in the 1930s and called for the destruction of the Jewish state at its birth.

MYTH 5: ISRAEL’S SECURITY FENCE IS AN “APARTHEID” WALL

This is two myths in one. The West Bank fence is a fence, not a wall. About 97% of the fence is made of chain-link material. The remaining 3% is concrete, designed to repel sniper fire in particular areas. The fence was built in 2003 in response to thousands of suicide bombings and rocket attacks on Israeli citizens by Palestinian terrorists, sponsored and armed by the Palestinian Authority and Hamas. The fence was built to keep out terrorists, not Arabs.

In the years since the construction of the fence, terrorist attacks have declined by more than 90%. The fence is Israel’s legitimate defense against a ruthless and amoral terrorist aggressor.

MYTH 6: ISRAEL IS THE CAUSE OF THE REFUGEE PROBLEM

The Palestinians claim there are 5 million Palestinian refugees who fled Israel during the 1948 war. This is false. There were only 500,000 Arab refugees from the 1948 war – an unprovoked war that Egypt and four other Arab states had launched against the newly created state of Israel. In the aftermath of the war, 500,000 Jewish refugees were driven out of the Arab states in the Middle East. There are no Jewish refugees today, sixty years later, because Israel resettled them. Why are there still Arab refugees? The Arab regimes have been given billions of dollars by Israel and the United States to relocate their refugees. But the Arabs are still in refugee camps. While Israel resettled Jewish refugees, no Arab country would take in the “Palestinians” who were forced into camps and were kept there by the Arab regimes to stir up hatred against the Jews. The refugee “issue” has been created by the Arab regimes as a weapon in their war against the Jews. It should be resolved by resettling the inhabitants of the refugee camps in the West Bank and Gaza where almost all of them have lived all their lives.

MYTH 7: ISRAEL COMMITS WAR CRIMES BY KILLING CIVILIANS

This is the Big Lie, coming as it does from some Palestinians who have made terrorist attacks on civilians a weapon of choice, and who make martyrs and national heroes out of suicide bombers.

The Gaza strip was a base for 7,000 rocket attacks against schoolyards and townships in Israel before the Israelis responded in 2007. During Israel’s airstrikes on Gaza rocket sites there was one civilian death for every 30 terrorists. By contrast, a 2001 study by the International Committee of the Red Cross found that the civilian-to-military death ratio in wars fought since the middle of the 20th Century has been 10:1 – ten civilian deaths for every soldier death. In other words, the Israelis protect civilians at a rate 300 times greater than any other national army. As Harvard Law School Professor Alan Dershowitz observes, “No army in history has ever had a better ratio of combatants to civilians killed in a comparable setting.”

MYTH 8: JEWS HAVE LITTLE HISTORICAL CONNECTION TO ISRAEL

Jews have lived continuously in the land of Israel for over 3000 years; the Arabs arrived through multiple invasions, beginning in the 7th Century AD. In the year 70 AD, when the Jewish civilization was already over 1000 years old, the Romans forced most of the Jews of Judea and Samaria (now the West Bank) into exile. By the end of the 19th Century, the majority population of Jerusalem was Jewish.

MYTH 9: THE KORAN DESCRIBES JERUSALEM AS HOLY TO ISLAM

The Koran does not mention Jerusalem because Mohammed never set foot in the city. Jerusalem was conquered by Muslim armies in 636 after the death of Mohammed. Muslim jihadists claim that the Koran mentions “The Furthest Mosque” — Al-Aqsa in Arabic – and that this is a Koranic reference to Jerusalem. This is a lie. The Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem had not been built when the Koran was written, so the reference is to some other (or any other) “furthest mosque.” In contrast, Jerusalem is and has always been a holy city to Jews. The daily prayers of the Jews are focused on Jerusalem. The Hebrew Bible mentions Zion and Jerusalem a total of 809 times.

MYTH 10: THE TEMPLE OF SOLOMON IS NOT JEWISH

This myth is one of many designed to steal the history of the Jews in order to justify erasing them from the Middle East. When the Palestinian Authority was established in 1994, it immediately began a campaign to delegitimize Israel by rewriting history with the intention of denying Israel’s right to exist. Among its false claims is that the remains of the Temple of Solomon – the Western Wall – are in fact the remnants of the Al-Aqsa Mosque. The Al-Aqsa Mosque was deliberately built on top of the Temple after the Muslim conquest to humiliate the conquered.

Rad More:
Wall of Truth

The Acre Prison Break

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Fri, 1 Jul 2011 03:10:00 -0400

Acre was conquered by the Ottomans at the beginning of the 16th century. The governor of Galilee, Ahmed al-Jazzar, developed the town, building a fortress and markets and turning it into the 'main gateway' to Eretz Israel (Palestine). Under the British Mandate, the fortress served as a jail, where underground fighters were imprisoned and where eight Irgun fighters went to the gallows. Acre prison was the most highly-guarded fortress in the country; surrounded by walls and encircled to the east and north by a deep moat; the sea to the west. It was located in the heart of an Arab town with no Jewish inhabitants.

Despite these factors, the underground never ceased to plan their escape. The turning point came when an Arab inmate, in charge of supplying oil to the kitchen, related that while working in the oil storeroom (in the south wall of the fortress), he had heard women's voices. This was reported to Eitan Livni, the most senior Irgun prisoner, who deduced that the south wall of the prison bordered on a street or alley in the Old City. The information was conveyed by underground post to the Irgun General Headquarters, with a proposal that the wall of the oil storehouse be exploited for a break-in to rescue the Irgun inmates.

Amichai Paglin (Gidi), chief operations officer, toured Acre disguised as an Arab, and after thorough scrutiny of the area, concluded that a break-in was indeed possible. After discussions at headquarters, Livni received a letter stating that it was possible to breach the wall from outside, but that the success of the operation depended on the ability of the prisoners to reach the south wall on their own. To that end, explosives, detonators and a fuse were smuggled into the jail by the parents of prisoners, who were permitted to bring their sons delicacies, such as jam, oil, and fruit. The explosives were smuggled in inside a can, under a thick layer of jam. A British sergeant opened the can and examined its contents. When he poked inside, he felt hard lumps (in fact gelignite), but accepted the story that the jam had not gelled properly. The detonators and the fuse were concealed in the false bottom of a container of oil, which was also thoroughly examined. The sergeant poked in a long stick to examine the level of the oil, but since the fuse and the detonators were less than one centimeter thick, he did not notice the false bottom.

At that time, 163 Jews were being held in Acre prison (60 of them Irgun members, 22 Lehi and 5 Haganah, the remainder felons) and 400 Arabs. The Irgun General Headquarters decided that only 41 could be freed (30 Irgun members and 11 Lehi members) because it was technically impossible to find hiding places for a larger number of fugitives. Eitan Livni was given the task of deciding who was to be freed and who would remain in jail (the Lehi prisoners chose their own candidates for escape).

The break-in was planned for Sunday, May 4, 1947 at 4 pm. The day before, the fighters met at a diamond factory in Netanya. A map was pinned up and the briefing began. The first speaker was Amichai Paglin, who explained the plan in detail. He was followed by Dov Cohen (Shimshon), who had been appointed commander of the operation. He revealed that the fighters would be disguised as British soldiers and instructed them to conduct themselves in Acre like 'His Majesty's troops'.

After the fighters had been assigned to their units, they were all given an 'English' haircut. The next day, they were taken to Shuni, a former Crusader fortress (between Binyamina and Zichron Yaakov), then serving as a settlement for the Irgun supporters. Twenty of them wore British Engineering Corps uniforms, while three were dressed as Arabs. After they had been briefed and armed, they set out in a convoy of vehicles including a 3-ton military truck, two military vans with British camouflage colors, and two civilian vans. The convoy was headed by the command jeep, and Shimshon, dressed as a be-medalled British captain, sat beside the driver.

When the convoy reached Acre, the two military vans entered the market, while the truck waited at the gate. Ladders were removed from one of the vehicles and the 'engineering unit' went into the Turkish bath-house in order to 'mend' the telephone lines. They climbed the ladders to the roof adjacent to the fortress wall, and Dov Salomon, the unit commander, helped his deputy, Yehuda Apiryon, to haul up the explosive charges and to hook them to the windows of the prison.

At the same time, the two blocking squads had scattered mines along the routes leading to the site of the break-in. One three-man squad was commanded by Avshalom Haviv and the second consisted of two fighters, Michaeli and Ostrowicz.

An additional three-man squad, disguised as Arabs, was positioned north of Acre, and when the operation began they fired a mortar at the nearby army camp. The command jeep halted at the gas station at the entrance to the new town, laid anti-vehicle mines and set fire to the station.

While these units were taking up positions outside the fortress, the plan was being put into effect inside the prison. At 3pm, the doors of the cells were opened for afternoon exercise. Those prisoners who were not scheduled to escape went down to the courtyard to create a diversion, while the escapees remained in their cells. They were divided into three groups, each in a separate cell.

At 4:22 pm. a loud explosion shook the entire area, as the wall of the fortress was blasted open.

The first group of escapees leap out of their cell and ran down the corridor towards the breach in the wall. They had to push their way through a crowd of Arab prisoners who ran out of their cells in panic and blocked their path. The first escapee, Michael Ashbel, attached explosive charges to the locks barring the gate of the corridor, and lit the fuse. There was an explosion, and the gate blew open. The second gate was blown open in the same way, opening the route to freedom. At that moment, the second group went into action; they created an obstruction by igniting kerosene mixed with oil. The ensuing fire blocked the escape route, so that the guards could not reach it. The third group threw grenades at the guards on the roof, who fled. In the confusion created by the explosion, the gunfire and the fire, 41 prisoners made their way to freedom.

The first group of escapees boarded a van and drove off, but the driver mistakenly drove towards Haifa, instead of Mount Napoleon. On the shore, a group of British soldiers who had been bathing in the sea opened fire on them. The driver tried to turn back, but hit the wall of the cemetery and the van overturned. The escapees ran towards a gas station, the soldiers pursuing them. Dov Cohen fired his Bren at them, but was mowed down by a volley of 17 bullets. Zalman Lifshitz, at his side, was also killed. When the firing stopped, five of the first group of 13 escapees were dead, six injured and only two were unscathed. The survivors were returned to jail.

The blocking unit, consisting of Avshalom Haviv, Meir Nakar and Yaakov Weiss, also suffered a mishap. They did not hear the bugle signal to withdraw and stayed put when the other units had already left Acre. After a protracted battle with British soldiers, they were caught and arrested. The second blocking unit, consisting of Amnon Michaeli and Menahem Ostrowicz, also failed to hear the bugle (which signalled withdrawal) and were likewise caught by the British.

The remaining escapees and members of the strike force in the truck and the second van escaped safely. They reached Kibbutz Dalia, abandoned their vehicles, and made their way on foot to Binyamina. There they were given refuge in the Nahlat Jabotinsky quarter and the following morning were dispersed throughout the country to pre-designated hiding places.

Haim Appelbaum of Lehi, wounded during the retreat, succeeded in boarding the last van, but died soon after. His body was left in the vehicle, and members of Kibbutz Dalia conveyed it to the burial society in Haifa the following day.

To conclude, 27 inmates succeeded in escaping (20 from the Irgun and seven from Lehi). Nine fighters were killed in clashes with the British army; six escapees and three members of the Fighting Force. Eight escapees, some of them injured, were caught and returned to jail. Also arrested were five of the attackers who did not make it back to base. The Arab prisoners took advantage of the commotion, and 182 of them escaped as well.

Despite the heavy toll in human lives, the action was described by foreign journalists as 'the greatest jail break in history'. The London Ha'aretz correspondent wrote on May 5:

The attack on Acre jail has been seen here as a serious blow to British prestige... Military circles described the attack as a strategic masterpiece.

The New York Herald Tribune wrote that the underground had carried out 'an ambitious mission, their most challenging so far, in perfect fashion'.

In the House of Commons, Oliver Stanley asked what action His Majesty's Government was planning to take 'in light of the events at Acre prison which had reduced British prestige to a nadir'.

Shortly after the Acre jail break, Andrei Gromyko, USSR representative to the UN, caused a sensation when he informed the stunned delegates that his country took a favorable view of the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine.

Three weeks after the jail break, the five Irgun fighters who had been captured after the operation were put on trial. Three of the defendants - Avshalom Haviv, Yaakov Weiss and Meir Nakar - were carrying weapons when they were caught close to the jail wall. They challenged the authority of the court and, after making political statements, were all sentenced to death.

The other two, Michaeli and Ostrowicz, were captured, unarmed, at some distance from the jail. Since there was a chance of saving them from the death penalty, the Irgun General Headquarters decided to conduct a proper defence procedure. The counsel for the defence succeeded in producing documents proving that the two were minors, and the court sentenced them to life imprisonment.

Irgun Fighters in British Uniform

Acre Prison

After-noon walk of Acre prisoners

The Bombing of the King David Hotel

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Fri, 1 Jul 2011 02:45:00 -0400

The King David Hotel in Jerusalem was built by the Moseri family, members of the wealthy and influential Jewish establishment in Cairo and Alexandria. They set up a shareholding company to finance its construction, consisting mainly of Egyptian businessmen and wealthy Jews from all over the world. The luxurious seven-storey building, with 200 rooms, was opened to the public in 1931. In 1938, the Mandatory government requisitioned the entire southern wing of the hotel, and housed the military command and the Mandatory government secretariat there. The British chose the King David for its central location and because it was easy to guard. They built a military communications center in the hotel basement and, for security reasons, added a side entrance linking the building to an army camp south of the hotel. Fewer than a third of the rooms were reserved for civilian use.

It will be recalled that after Black Sabbath (Saturday), Menahem Begin received a letter from Moshe Sneh (chief of the Haganah General Headquarters) with instructions to blow up the King David. After preparatory work and several postponements, Irgun fighters gathered at 7 am. on Monday, July 22, 1946 at the Bet Aharon Talmud Torah seminary in Jerusalem. They arrived one by one, gave the password and assembled in one of the classrooms. They realized that they were being sent on a mission, but none of them knew what the target was. Shortly afterwards, the senior command arrived and it was only when the briefing began that the assembled fighters discovered that they were going to strike at the King David Hotel.

After the weapons had been distributed, the first unit - the group of "porters" - commanded by Yosef Avni, set out. Their assignment was to reach the hotel by bus and to wait at the side entrance so as to assist in unloading the explosives from the van when it arrived. All six "porters" were disguised as Arabs so as to avoid arousing suspicion. The strike force left next in a van loaded with seven milk-churns, each containing 50 kilograms of explosives and special detonators. The commander of the operation, Yisrael Levi (Gidon), rode in the van dressed as a Sudanese waiter, while his deputy, Heinrich Reinhold (Yanai), and the other members of the unit, were dressed as Arabs. The van drove through the streets of Jerusalem, its tarpaulin cover concealing the milk-churns and the passengers, and halted at the side entrance of the hotel, through which foodstuffs were brought into the basement 'La Regence' restaurant. The fighters easily overcame the guards by the gate and hastened to the basement, where they searched all the rooms, and assembled the workers in the restaurant kitchen. They then returned to the van, brought the milk-churns into the restaurant, and placed them beside the supporting pillars . Gidon set the time fuses for 30 minutes, and ordered his men to leave. The staff gathered in the kitchen were told to leave the building 10 minutes later to avoid injury.

During the withdrawal from the basement, heavy gunfire was levelled at the group and two fighters were injured. One of them, Aharon Abramovitch, later died of his wounds.

After exiting the hotel, Gidon summoned two women fighters who were waiting nearby, and ordered them to carry out their mission. They ran over to a nearby telephone booth, and delivered the following message to the hotel telephone operator and to the editorial office of the Palestine Post:

I am speaking on behalf of the Hebrew underground.
We have placed an explosive device in the hotel.
Evacuate it at once - you have been warned.

They also delivered a telephone warning to the French Consulate, adjacent to the hotel, to open their windows to prevent blast damage. The telephone messages were intended to prevent casualties.

Some 25 minutes after the telephone calls, a shattering explosion shook Jerusalem, and reverberated at a great distance. The entire southern wing of the King David Hotel - all seven storeys - was totally destroyed. For reasons unclear, the staff of the government secretariat and the military command remained in their rooms. Some of them were unaware of events, and others were not permitted to leave the building, thus accounting for the large number of victims trapped in the debris.

For ten days, the British Engineering Corps cleared the wreckage, and on July 31 it was officially announced that 91 people had been killed in the explosion: 28 Britons, 41 Arabs, 17 Jews and 5 others.

The success of the Jewish underground in striking at the heart of British government in Palestine, and the high toll of victims, sent shock waves through England and the rest of the world. At first, the Mandatory government denied having received a telephone warning, but testimony submitted to the interrogating judge made it clear beyond a doubt that such a warning had in fact been given. Moreover, the Palestine Post telephone operator attested on oath to the police that, immediately after receiving the telephone message, she had telephoned the duty officer at the police station. The French Consulate staff opened their windows as they had been told to by the anonymous woman who telephoned them, and this was further evidence of the warning.

It is almost impossible to recapitulate what occurred in the government secretariat offices in the half hour preceding the explosion, but all the evidence suggests that there were numerous flaws in the security arrangements in the King David, and that a series of omissions occurred. The telephone warning was disregarded, and although the warning signal was given, an all-clear was sounded shortly before the explosion. These facts indicate that there were serious errors in the decision-making process and that internal communication did not function properly.

The heads of the Jewish Agency were stunned. They feared that the British would adopt even more severe retaliatory measures than on Black Sabbath, and hastened to denounce the operation in the strongest terms. The statement they issued the following day expressed "their feelings of horror at the base and unparalleled act perpetrated today by a gang of criminals." Even David Ben-Gurion, who was then in Paris, joined the chorus of condemnation, and in an interview to the French newspaper 'France Soir', declared that the Irgun was "the enemy of the Jewish people".

The denunciation by the Jewish Agency totally ignored the fact that the bombing of the King David was carried out as part of the activities of the United Resistance, and on the explicit instructions of Moshe Sneh. At the request of the Haganah, the Irgun issued a leaflet accepting responsibility for the operation. It stated, among other things:

[...]
e. The telephone warnings were given at 12:10-12:15. And if it is true, as the British liars have announced, that the explosion occurred at 12:37, they still had 22 minutes at their disposal in order to evacuate the building of its residents and workers.
Therefore responsibility for loss of life among civilians rests solely with them.

f. It is not true that the persons who delivered the warning spoke 'on behalf of the United Resistance' (as the press reported)... On this matter, we are refraining at present from making any further statement, but it is possible that - in the context of the savage and dastardly incitement - it will be necessary to issue such a statement at the appropriate time.

g. We mourn the Jewish victims; they too are the tragic victims of the tragic and noble Hebrew war of liberation
[...]

A year later the Irgun issued the following statement:

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE KING DAVID HOTEL

[...]
On July 1 - two days after the British raid on the National Institutions and on our towns and villages -we received a letter from the headquarters of the United Resistance, demanding that we carry out an attack on the center of government at the King David Hotel as soon as possible...

Execution of this plan was postponed several times - both for technical reasons and at the request of the United Resistance. It was finally approved on July 22...

Notwithstanding this, days later, Kol Yisrael broadcast a statement - in the name of the United Resistance - abhorring the high death toll at the King David caused by the actions of the 'dissidents'...

We have kept silent for a whole year. We have faced savage incitement, such as this country has never before known. We have withstood the worst possible provocations - and remained silent. We have witnessed evasion, hypocrisy and cowardice - and remained silent.

But today, when the United Resistance has expired and there is no hope that it will ever be revived... there are no longer valid reasons why we should maintain our silence concerning the assault against the center of Nazi-British rule - one of the mightiest attacks ever carried out by a militant underground. Now it is permissible to reveal the truth; now we must reveal the truth. Let the people see - and judge.

July 22, 1947.
[...]

The Hebrew press, and the Haganah publications, continued to condemn the Irgun in the strongest possible terms. They were echoed by the British press, which was briefed by the Mandatory government. However, the effect of the British denunciations was blunted to a large extent by the publication of instructions issued by General Sir Evelyn Barker (British army commander in Palestine) several hours after the explosion. He ordered all the Jewish places of entertainment, restaurants, shops and Jewish homes - "out of bounds for all British officers and soldiers". The instructions ended by saying that:

"The aim of these orders are to punish the Jews in a way the race dislikes as much as any, namely by striking at their pockets"

Barker's letter reached the Irgun's intelligence service and was immediately made public in Palestine and throughout the world. The antisemitic tone of the letter greatly embarrassed the British government and diverted public opinion from the attack on the King David Hotel. Questions were asked in the House of Commons about the letter and the London Daily Herald wrote, among other things, that if General Barker had in fact written the letter, he was demonstrating his unsuitability for his position.

The order was officially rescinded two weeks after it was issued, but the damage to the British cause in Palestine could not be erased.

However, as a result of Black Sabbath, the moderates now held the upper hand, and at a meeting of the Jewish Agency Executive in Paris on August 5, 1946, it was decided to terminate the armed struggle against the British in Palestine. This marked the end of the glorious ten-month period when all the Jewish forces in Eretz Israel (Haganah, Irgun and Lehi) fought together against foreign rule.

The terminating of the armed struggle provoked considerable resentment among many members of the Haganah, and Yitzhak Sadeh (commander of the Palmach) gave vent to this emotion in his article "Proposal and Response" in Ahdut Ha'avoda, October 15, 1946 which he signed Noded (Wanderer).

There will be no capitulation, because there is nobody to order capitulation, and should such a person be found, he would find nobody to carry out the order.

The Haganah focused its efforts on bringing in illegal immigrants, and in order to appease those activists in the Haganah ranks who continued to favor armed struggle, it sanctioned the sabotaging of British naval vessels which were hunting down illegal immigrants. Thus, on August 18, 1946, Palmach fighters sabotaged the Empire Haywood and two days later damaged the Empire Rival, the two ships used for deporting immigrants from Haifa to Cyprus.

When the United Resistance ceased to exist, the Irgun and Lehi continued the armed struggle alone. The Irgun was now both morally and materially stronger than ever before. Support for its cause had grown, since the United Resistance had legitimized its activities. The number of recruits increased, and its stock of weapons and ammunition was expanded as a result of its acquisitions from British army depots. Free of the restrictions imposed by the Haganah command, the Irgun now intensified its anti-British activities.

King David Hotel after the explosion

The "Massacre" of Deir Yassin

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Fri, 1 Jul 2011 02:20:00 -0400

The day after the UN resolution of November 29, 1947, seven Jews were killed, including four passengers on a bus attacked by Arabs on the road to Jerusalem. The acts of hostility grew more frequent, and in December 1947, 184 Jews were killed throughout the country. In January 1948, the situation was particularly difficult. On February 1, a car bomb exploded in Hasolel Street (present-day Hahavatzelet Street) near the Palestine Post building. Three weeks later there was another catastrophe in Jerusalem. Three booby-trapped trucks positioned in Ben-Yehuda Street exploded, destroying four large buildings, killing 50 and injuring more than 100. On March 11, a car bomb exploded in the courtyard of the Jewish Agency building, killing 12 people, injuring 44, and causing great damage.

Arab acts of hostility had reached their peak by March, moreover, Arabs now controlled all the inter-urban routes. The road to Jerusalem was blocked, settlements in the Galilee and the Negev were also cut off and daily attacks were perpetrated on convoys. In the four months since the UN resolution, some 850 Jews had been killed throughout the country, most of them in Jerusalem or on the road to the city.

Operation Nachshon was launched on April 6, 1948, with the aim of opening up the road to Jerusalem. The village of Deir Yassin was included on the list of Arab villages to be occupied as part of that operation. Indeed, while fierce fighting was going on at Kastel, Arab reinforcements flooded onto the battlefield through Deir Yassin, which helped to drive back the Jewish occupying force.

When the Haganah command learned of the plan of the Irgun and Lehi to conquer Deir Yassin, David Shaltiel, Haganah Commander in Jerusalem, asked them to coordinate the timing of the operation with the scheduled renewed assault on Kastel. He despatched identical letters to Mordechai Raanan (Irgun Commander in Jerusalem) and Yehoshua Zetler (Lehi Commander in Jerusalem), in which he gave their operation his approval:

To: Shapira (code-name of Zetler)
From: District Commander

I have learned that you intend to carry out an operation against Deir Yassin. I would like to call your attention to the fact that the conquest and continued occupation of Deir Yassin is one of the stages in our overall plan. I have no objection to your carrying out the operation on condition that you are capable of holding on to it. If you are incapable of doing so, I caution you against blowing up the village, since this will lead to the flight of the inhabitants and subsequent occupation of the ruins and the abandoned homes by enemy forces. This will make things difficult rather than contributing to the general campaign, and reoccupation of the site will entail heavy casualties for our men. An additional argument I would like to cite is that if enemy forces are drawn to the place, this will disrupt the plan to establish an aerodrome there.

On April 2, 1948, the inhabitants of Deir Yassin began sniping at the Jewish Quarters of Bet Hakerem and Yefe Nof. According to reports by the Shai (Haganah Intelligence), fortifications were being constructed in the village and a large quantity of arms being stockpiled. Several days before the attack on Deir Yassin, the presence of foreign fighters was reported, including Iraqi soldiers and irregular forces. An Arab research study conducted at Bir Zeit University (near Ramallah) relates that the men of Deir Yassin took an active part in violent acts against Jewish targets and that many of the men of the village fought in the battle for Kastel, together with Abd-el-Kadr el-Husseini. The report also stated that trenches had been dug at the entry to the village, and that more than 100 men had been trained and equipped with rifles and Bren guns. A local guard force had been set up and 40 inhabitants guarded the village every night. (Knaana Sherif, The Palestinian villages destroyed in 1948 - Deir Yassin. Bir Zeit University, Documentation and Research Department 1987).

GOING INTO BATTLE
On Thursday, April 8, about 70 Irgun fighters assembled at the Etz Hayim base (at the entrance to Jerusalem). This was the first time that so large a number of underground fighters had gathered openly, without fear of British policemen or soldiers. The atmosphere was optimistic - after four months of attack, retaliation was finally in sight. The fact that two underground movements were acting together enhanced the sense of security and solidarity, and the password chosen was 'Fighting Solidarity' (Ahdut Lohemet).

Raanan, Commander of the Irgun in Jerusalem, opened the meeting and explained that the conquest of Deir Yassin had both military and political objectives. From the military viewpoint, the aim was not only to liberate the western quarters of Jerusalem from the threat of Deir Yassin, but finally to seize the initiative. It was essential to move from defence to attack and to transfer the fighting to enemy territory. The conquest would also raise the morale of the Jewish population of Jerusalem and restore their self-confidence.

Politically speaking, it would represent a change of approach and constitute a turning point in the war: no further retaliation operations, but from that point on conquest with the aim of holding on to an area. The Jewish people and the entire world would realize that the Jews were not going to give up Jerusalem and, if necessary, would take it by force. (It will be recalled that, according to the UN resolution, Jerusalem was to come under international rule). Raanan added that since the operation was an act of conquest and not of reprisal, the fighters had to avoid inflicting needless injury on Arabs. In particular, he cautioned against harming old people, women and children. Moreover, any Arab who surrendered, including combatants, was to be taken prisoner and not harmed in any way.

In order to prevent unnecessary casualties, it had been decided that the strike force would be preceded by an armored car equipped with a loudspeaker, which would enter the village ahead of the troops. The villagers would be informed that the village was surrounded by Irgun and Lehi fighters, and would be exhorted to leave for Ein Karem or to surrender. They would also be informed that the road to Ein Karem was open and safe.

At 2 a.m. the Irgun fighters, commanded by Ben-Zion Cohen (Giora), were driven from the Etz Hayim base to Bet Hakerem. The force moved into the wadi (riverbed), where the squads split up, each squad climbing up the terraced slope to its allotted field of action.

The Lehi unit assembled at Givat Shaul and proceeded from there towards the target. Some of the force advanced behind the armored car which was proceeding along the path towards the center of the village.

Close to 4:45 am, the village guards spotted suspicious movements. One of them called out in Arabic: 'Mahmoud'; an Irgun fighter, mishearing the cry, thought that someone had shouted the password 'Ahdut' (Solidarity) and responded with the second half of the password in Hebrew: 'Lohemet'. The Arabs opened fire and shooting commenced from all sides.

The armored car advanced along the path and, on reaching the outskirts of the village, encountered a trench and was forced to come to a halt. The loudspeaker was switched on and the message was read out. Heavy fire was directed at the armored car from the adjacent houses and the fighters trapped inside had to be rescued. Injuries were reported, and a first-aid unit set out from Givat Shaul towards the armored car.

The other units began their attack, but Arab resistance was strong, and every house became an armed fortress. Fierce fighting was conducted from house to house. Many of the attackers were injured in the first onslaught, including a number of commanders who had been advancing ahead of their units.

After the center of the village had been occupied, all the wounded were concentrated in one of the courtyards and ways were sought to evacuate them. It turned out that the road to Givat Shaul was impassable because of gunfire from the mukhtar's (local leader) house, which stood on a hilltop overlooking the area.

Since the fighting was taking place in a built-up area, the pace was slow, and both sides suffered heavy losses. In order to silence the source of gunfire, the fighters were forced to use hand-grenades, and in some cases even to blow up houses. There was firing from all sides and half the attackers were put out of action. On top of this, the remaining fighters suffered a shortage of ammunition.

A report on the course of the battle was transmitted by courier to headquarters at Givat Shaul. When word started coming in about the number of casualties and ammunition shortage, several Lehi people went to the Schneller camp and asked a Palmach unit to come to the attackers aid. After receiving the consent of the brigade HQ, the Palmach troops set out in an armored car, equipped with a machine-gun and a two-inch mortar. On arrival in the village, they fired several shells and machine-gun rounds at the mukhtar's house. At that very moment, without prior co-ordination with the Palmach, Yosef Avni charged and captured the mukhtar's house. With the mukhtar's house occupied, firing ceased and the occupation of the village was completed.

When the fighting was over, it was discovered that hundreds of villagers had retreated to Ein Karem, taking advantage of the fact that the road was open. Those who remained in the village surrendered and were taken prisoner. The prisoners, mostly women and children, were loaded onto trucks and taken to East Jerusalem, where they were handed over to their Arab brethren.

Word of the occupation of Deir Yassin spread through the city, and was viewed positively by the Jews of Jerusalem. Not only could the Jewish residents of the western quarters now breath freely, but they felt proud to have finally taken the initiative. The capture of the village marked the completion of the breakthrough of Operation Nachshon, and instilled new hope in the hearts of Jerusalemites. The slogan 'Ahdut Lohemet', which had grabbed the attention of the Jewish community in Jerusalem, reflected the turning point in the response to Arab aggression. In the days that followed, crowds flocked to the Etz Hayim base to express their solidarity with the Irgun fighters.

FACTS AND COMMENTARIES
So much has been written and said about what happened at Deir Yassin that the battle waged on the morning of April 9 has become known as the 'Deir Yassin Massacre'. It is important to analyze the events and to distinguish between fact and fiction.

Massacre means the killing of defenceless people. The 1929 slaughter of the Jews of Hebron by Arabs in the middle of the night was a massacre. When Arab workers at the Haifa refinieries assailed their Jewish co-workers in February 1948, murdering more than 40 of them, a massacre can be said to have taken place. In both cases, the killings were premeditated. The brutal murder of settlers at Kfar Etzion by Arab Legion soldiers in May 1948, after the defenders had surrendered and were defenceless, was also a massacre.

But Deir Yassin?
Firstly, strict orders were given in advance to the fighters not to harm the elderly, women and children. It was also stated explicitly that any Arab who surrendered was to be taken prisoner.

Secondly, an unprecedented action took place at Deir Yassin - a loudspeaker was installed on an armored car to inform the population that the road to Ein Karem was open and safe, and that whoever left the village would not be harmed. The strike force was actually prepared to forfeit the surprise element of battle in order to issue these instructions and thus to prevent Arab civilian casualty.

The Arabs do not deny the use of a loudspeaker; indeed, an Arab League publication entitled "Israeli Aggression" states, inter alia:

"On the night of April 9, 1948, the peaceful Arab village of Deir Yassin was surprised by a loudspeaker, which called on the population to evacuate it immediately."

Thirdly, it is universally agreed that there was bitter fighting at Deir Yassin. More than 100 Arab fighters were well equipped and had large amounts of ammunition. The Arabs occupied fortified positions in stone buildings, while the attackers were exposed to enemy fire. The fierce gunfire directed from the houses forced the attackers to charge, throw grenades and, in several cases, to blow up houses. As a consequence, women and children were among the dead.

According to all the documents and testimonies, it is clear today that fewer than one hundred Arabs were killed at Deir Yassin, and not the 240 as published. Moreover, this was the first instance in the War of Independence where battle had taken place in a built-up area, and such fighting typically claims numerous victims. For the same reason, the number of Irgun and Lehi members injured by Arab fire was 35% of the force (5 dead and 35 wounded).

All the Arab casualties were killed in the course of the fighting. Villagers - men, women and children - who surrendered, were taken prisoner and came to no harm. When the firing ceased, they were transported by truck to East Jerusalem and handed over to their Arab brethren.

The Deir Yassin affair had a strong impact on the course of the War of Independence; the battle was summed up as follows in the "History of the War of Independence", prepared by the History Division of the IDF General Staff:

The Deir Yassin affair was publicized throughout the world as the 'Deir Yassin Massacre', causing great harm to the reputation of the Yishuv. All the Arab propaganda channels disseminated the story at the time, and continue to do so to the present day. But the battle indubitably served to expedite the collapse of the Arab hinterland in the period which followed. More than the deed itself, this was achieved by the publicity it received from Arab spokesmen. They wanted to demonstrate to their people the savagery of the Jews and to instill in them a spirit of religious fervor. In fact, however, they intimidated and alarmed them. They themselves now admit their mistake.

Hazen Nusseibeh, an editor of the Palestine Broadcasting Service's Arabic news in 1948, was interviewed for the BBC television series "Israel and the Arabs: the 50-year conflict." He describes an encounter with Deir Yassin survivors and Palestinian leaders, including Hussein Khalidi, the secretary of the Arab Higher Committee, at the Jaffa Gate of Jerusalem's Old City.

"I asked Dr. Khalidi how we should cover the story," recalled Nusseibeh, now living in Amman. He said, "We must make the most of this". So we wrote a press release stating that at Deir Yassin children were murdered, pregnant women were raped. All sorts of atrocities."

A Deir Yassin survivor, identified as Abu Mahmud, said the villagers protested at the time.

"We said, 'there was no rape.' Khalidi said, 'We have to say this, so the Arab armies will come to liberate Palestine from the Jews'."

In an arlicle "Deir Yassin a casualty of guns and propaganda", by Paul Holmes (Reuters) (http://www.metimes.com/issue98-16/reg/deir.html) he interviewing Mohammed Radwan, who was a resident of Deir Yassi in 1948, and fought for several hours before ruing out of bullets.

"I know when I speak that God is up there and God knows the truth and God will not forgive the liars", said Radwan, who puts the number of villagers killed at 93, listed in his own handwriting. "There were no rapes. It's all lies. There were no pregnant women who were slit open. It was propaganda that... Arabs put out so Arab the armies would invade" he said. "They ended up expelling people from all of Palestine on the rumor of Deir Yassin."

In the book "War Without End", by Anton La Guardia (Thomas Dunne Books, N.Y. 2000) we find the following: "Just before Israel's 50th anniversary celebration, I went to Deir Yassin with Ayish Zeidan, known as Haj Ayish, who had lived in the village as a teenager.

'We heard shooting. My mother did not want us to look out of the window. I fled with my sister, but my mother and my other sisters could not make it. They hid in the cellar for four days and then ran away.'

He said he never believed that more than 110 people had died at Deir Yassin, and accused Arab leaders of exaggerating the atrocities.

'There had been no rape', he said. 'The Arab radio at the time talked of women being killed and raped, but this is not true. I believe that most of those who were killed were among the fighters and the women and children who helped the fighters.'

Deir Yassin - The Village After the Attack

Etzel.Org

The Jihadi Forums, Blogs & Social Media

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Wed, 22 Jun 2011 14:04:00 -0400

Understanding Online Radicalization: The Jihadi Forums

Rising terrorism arrests in America, particularly the breaking up of 22 plots between May 2009 and November 2010, have sparked questions about how young Muslim men become terrorists. Although radicalization has become a catch phrase in the media, little has been written about the methods, websites, and actors involved in the process.

This series, “Understanding Online Radicalization,” seeks to shed light on how the Internet functions as a tool for radicalizing would-be terrorists. It will answer questions about the kinds of websites popular among jihadists, how these sites have used new media and technology, and how they appeal to young people.

Understanding the world of online jihadists gives us insight into what motivates its participants and what drives some of them to act out their violent fantasies.

Jihadi Forums: The Ansar al-Mujahideen Network

For converts to violent Islamism, the ideology that has motivated attacks ranging from 9/11 to the Fort Hood massacre, the Internet is the ultimate tool in their arsenal. It guides, educates, and provides a sense of community among the isolated Western followers of the path of jihadists.

In particular, jihadi forums provide a one-stop shop for news, publications, and media. Though the forums lack the organized worldview of jihadi blogs, they do provide some of the strongest links bonding would-be terrorists to one another and to larger networks abroad.

Among the jihadi forums, Ansar al-Mujahideen [AM] and its sister site Ansar al-Mujahiden English Forum [AMEF] provide a readily accessible example of the potential of websites in this genre. AM began in 2008 as a “rather low-frills, Arabic-language clone forum with questionable credibility and a membership of mostly silent observers,” according to counterterrorism expert Evan Kohlmann. Although the website grew by leaps and bounds even before Kohlmann’s February 2010 article on the site, it has since become one of the primary beacons among aspiring radicals in the West.

The construction of the Arabic-language edition of the site is simple but graphically sharp. Well-designed ads at the top of the page highlight the latest publications by a number of jihadi media groups, including al-Qaeda branches, Somali terrorist organization al-Shabaab, and independent scholars of jihad. Underneath these ads is a ringing endorsement of the site by Jordanian Islamist Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi, followed by links to general news about the ummah (Muslim nation), specific theaters of war, a “College of Electronic Jihad,” and many more dedicated sub-forums.

The world of jihadi forums is a fast-moving place, where groups post links to books, articles, videos, and other multimedia using mostly Western file transfer services. Although there is an expectation that most of these links will be taken down, AM features an archive of key texts and “redeploys” significant ideological manuscripts and technical manuals in a timely fashion.

AMEF, the English-language brand of AM, is a smaller and more focused version of its parent website. It features the same glossy links to new jihadi publications as well as the slightly back-dated English translations of those items, but features less sub-categories. For AMEF, the spotlight is on news of the ummah, jihadi media, publications, and press releases.

Materials posted to the forum can be divided into three general categories: “The War on Islam,” the need to fight back, and a smaller subset of publications that support traditional Islamist points of view.

Using violent sections of traditional Islamic texts linked to historic events, the forum presents the view of constant war between Islam and all other ideologies. In its latest episode of this epic war, the forces of disbelief are led by Americans and Jews, who seek to manipulate and oppress Muslims and Islam.

Grievances with American foreign policy — whether real or imagined — reinforce their beliefs. Self-declared scholars dismiss the sell-out Westernized intellectuals on the circuit of mainstream Islamic conferences, often with a high degree of success. Their message has a strong degree of acceptability among predisposed youth, who believe Islam is under attack and subsequently feel alienated when their local religious leaders fail to take actions to protect Islam and Muslims. Jihadist forums provide a powerful answer to the anger these youth experience, combining violence with theological justification.

Once readers buy into the general notion of conflict between Islam and other ideologies, materials on the forum illustrate the how, when, where, and why of carrying out terrorist attacks.

Biographies of previous attackers provide inspiration, video series and glossy magazines give technical training, and “authentic” scholars of jihad provide targets to strike. Presented in a closed forum session, inspired individuals can confidentially prepare themselves and others to follow through on their ideology and to become heroes of the faith who will be idolized by the next generation of online jihadists.

In recent years, ideologues popular among Western jihadists — such as Yemeni-American scholar Anwar al-Awlaki — have tried to dissuade forum members from travelling to the lands of jihad. Instead, they have encouraged a greater focus on media production and so-called “homegrown” attacks, which are meant to leave the smallest paper trail for American intelligence agencies to follow.

Other major themes include teaching participants how to avoid Western intelligence operations, and expanding dawah (proselytizing). There has also been a growth in “supporting” materials, which supply a more general Islamic education. The move has been a response to the accusations of more moderate clerics, who attack extremists for their weak grasp of general Islamic principles and their calls for conflict without tangible ends.

AM and AMEF have made strong headway among American and European audiences. Faical Errai, a 26-year-old Moroccan living in Spain who founded the webpage, was arrested by Spanish Guardia Civil forces and later deported to his home country. According to Spanish trial documents and researcher Raff Pantucci at the ICSR, Errai had personally used the AM website to fundraise and direct fighters to Chechnya and the Taliban-dominated Pakistani province of Waziristan. From Spain, Errai boasted of directing Libyan terrorists to war zones, a marker of the international success of AM. After Errai’s arrest, the website was taken over by other jihadists, who continued the same mission and expanded the group to include AMEF.

AMEF became a major site for American and European jihadists who did not possess fluency in Arabic. Examples include convicted American terrorists Colleen LaRose (Jihad Jane), Zachary Chesser (Abu Talha al-Amriki), and Emerson Begolly (Asadullah al-Shishani), who were all major contributors to AMEF. German couple Fritz and Filiz Gelowicz, both convicted of providing material support to jihadi groups, were also regular participants.

For Chesser and Jihad Jane, the radicalization process was fairly similar. Both were converts who bought into “The War on Islam” narrative, who experienced significant radicalization outside the Internet, and who later became major participators in online forums. Chesser, who was apprehended before joining al-Shabaab, told investigators about his participation in AMEF and al-Shabaab forum alqimmah.net. He was also a leading activist for the Revolution Muslim blog, and was the founder of “themujahidblog.” Jihad Jane was also an active participant on AMEF and Revolution Muslim, which later became islampolicy.com.

Begolly, a would-be terrorist who was nabbed well before becoming operational, was an active participant in several forums including AMEF, Shumukh al-Islam, and Fallujah, according to SITE intelligence group.

With large numbers already radicalized, AMEF and AM have also begun to expand their reach into new technology. In October 2009, AM’s “Mobile Detachment” created a special data package for cell phones, according to expert Nico Prucha at jihadica.com. Aside from speeches and educational materials, the package includes an encryption program for jihadists to communicate securely, as well as new data packages that capitalize on new and older materials.

Part 2 - Understanding Online Radicalization: The Jihadi Blogs
In the next part of the series, we will examine jihadi blog Revolution Muslim and its successor, Islam Policy. Unlike jihadi forums, which are online warehouses of information, blogs take a more limited amount of data and weave a narrative from the chosen items.

Revolution Muslim / Islam Policy

Few websites, even in the jihadi world, can claim to have singlehandedly created terrorists. One American blog, the now-defunct Revolution Muslim [RM] site, and its successor, Islam Policy [IP], illustrate the power that jihadi blogs can wield.

If jihadi forums represent a one-stop shop for jihad material, jihadi blogs are the ideological factories that put the pieces together. Although lacking the sophisticated graphics of professional jihadi sites, Revolution Muslim and Islam Policy provided a narrative that justifies jihad.

The group also strived to exploit freedom of speech to encourage al-Qaeda’s mission of destroying the West, although they would eventually step over the line and into the waiting hands of law enforcement.

RM’s message was so powerful that it motivated a secular British woman to become an extremist, and then an attempted murderer. Roshonara Choudhry, an aspiring teacher studying at King’s College in London, underwent a total change after watching Anwar al-Awlaki videos and participating in RM’s forums.

Choudhry’s plot targeted her local member of parliament at a meet-and-greet. While pretending to shake hands with him she stabbed him twice in the stomach. She later told the judge that she wanted to be a “martyr,” and refused to defend herself in a secular court she didn’t recognize.

The key to the blog and the organization’s success comes from its humble origins. RM started as a small collection of misfits in 2007, when founders Yousef al-Khattab and Younes Abdullah Muhammad gathered together a handful of like-minded Islamists to promote the teachings of radical cleric Abdullah el-Faisal. El-Faisal guided the group through online classes taught in video chat rooms, as the group’s small and fringe street dawah (proselytizing) team recruited stray Islamists.

The group’s vocal presence in New York City’s Times Square and outside of the Islamic Cultural Center of New York encompassed more than shouting slogans and passing out pamphlets; RM’s blunt support for the 9/11 attacks, al-Qaeda, and its affiliate organizations gave it a recruiting edge over similar Islamist organizations.

That’s not to say that RM’s message was much different than that found on many jihadi forums. Revolution Muslim preached the common message that the West is at war with Islam, and that means Islam must defend itself.

But RM’s distinguishing factor was its ability to reinforce these sentiments with Western and jihadi news sources and to connect terrorists to relevant videos by catchy preachers like Anwar al-Awlaki. RM drilled its message home with protests, online speeches by el-Faisal, and chat room sessions discussing jihad. By catching young converts early, RM shaped the worldview of these new Muslims and molded them into supporters of al-Qaeda.

RM was so successful at its mission that it absorbed other jihadi startup blogs, as described in the criminal complaint against Abdel Hameed Shehadeh. Although he was charged with making false statements in a matter involving international terrorism, agents alleged that Shehadeh had additional connections to terror, including RM. Shehadeh created a jihadi blog called civiljihad.com, which quickly became a mirror site of RM.

RM’s success can also be measured in the number of terrorists it produced. Zachary Chesser, a Muslim convert and former leader of the group, was convicted of trying to join Somali terrorist group al-Shabaab and for making threats to the South Park cartoonists. The currently leader of IP, Jesse Morton (aka Younus Abdullah Muhammad), was arrested last month in Morocco and will be extradited to the U.S. to face charges for his role in those threats.

Several other terrorists participated in RM’s activities. Neil Bryant Vinas, who plotted to blow up trains on the Long Island Rail Road, was a friend of RM’s former leader Yusuf al-Khattab. Tarek Mehanna, convicted on material support charges, and Daniel Maldonado, who is serving 10 years for training with al-Shabaab, were also acquaintances of the group.

Ultimately, the fame that brought new members to RM would bring it down. In April 2010, Zachary Chesser was drawn into RM’s sphere and issued threats against South Park’s creators for their Muhammad cartoon. The threat, coupled with Chesser’s later indictment for trying to join al-Shabaab, was the first time someone was convicted for information posted on RM’s blog. It would not be the last.

On November 4, 2010, a British member of RM posted a detailed threat against British parliamentarians, as well as a salute to Roshanara Choudhry’s involvement with the blog. The post prayed for Choudhry release, encouraged others to follow her path, reposted the documents that most inspired her, and outlined how and where to strike the politicians. Shortly thereafter, RM’s website was shut down and British police arrested Bilal Zaheer Ahmad for making the post.

RM leader Younus Abdullah Muhammad, the senior leader of RM following the arrest of Chesser and the departure of senior member Yusuf al-Khattab, refused to let the group die. Muhammad founded a successor group called Islam Policy, and linked various Revolution Muslim websites to it. He added other elements, such as an emphasis on Islamic economics and TV commentary for anti-American English news site Russia Today. By mainstreaming the group, he could continue promoting al-Qaeda’s ideology while becoming an international media star.

However, the South Park incident soon caught up with Muhammad. An indictment showed that he was a key player in formulating the “credible” threats for which Chesser took the fall.

Although RM/IP’s history is more developed than many blogs, it shows the power that the jihadist narrative has. Without RM, those indicted for terrorism would not have had the reinforcement and community that motivated their attacks.

Ali Teymouri is a researcher specializing in jihadi publications and translations. He believes that moderate Muslims need to support American counterterrorism efforts, and is committed to making that happen.

Part 3 - Understanding Online Radicalization: Facebook and Social Media
The first two parts of this series covered the two primary website types that jihadists create to radicalize individuals, namely blogs and web forums. The third part of this series will focus on jihadi social media and how jihdaists use Facebook.

“Islam can dominate, over the world, only by jihad,” says the very plain jihadi website realjihad.tk. It reminds readers that jihad doesn’t have stages, and that “lame excuses” like making a living shouldn’t stand in the way.

RealJihad lacks the sharp graphics, interactive chat rooms, and other tools used by more sophisticated jihadi blogs and forums. Despite this, it has a leg up on its competitors: it is one of the primary links provided on the Facebook page of Jaish-e-Mohammad, a Pakistani terror organization.

Jihadi radicalization occurs on a number of sites and is not limited to the dedicated sites, blogs, and forums commonly used by terrorist supporters. Jihadists exploit popular Western social media sites, like Facebook, to radicalize, build contact networks, and pass information.

“All users, to learn all detailed rules related to JIHAD, read from this source,” says a user on Jaish-e-Mohammad’s Facebook page, directing readers to an English-language recruiting site. “All users, plz try to read and understand the rules and virtues of JIHAD, through this weblink,” he states on another post with another link. Likewise, Jaish-e-Mohammad’s reputation for daring attacks on the Indian army and even on India’s parliament provides a base around which social media users rally.

Other designated terrorist organizations ranging from Hamas to al-Shabaab have already taken advantage of Facebook, with their spokesman units and media groups establishing pages dedicated to terror. Popular jihadi forums like Ansar al-Mujahideen and its English counterpart also operate closed discussion groups on Facebook.

Facebook’s terms of use rejects violent content: “You will not post content that: is hateful, threatening … incites violence; or contains … graphic or gratuitous violence,” the guidelines state. Yet terrorist organizations bypass the rules by linking to third party sites and by posting in obscure foreign languages like Somali and Urdu.

Facebook is also inconsistent about applying standards against unofficial terrorist pages. Al-Shabaab, whose media page on Facebook was recently taken down after the Investigative Project on Terrorism wrote about it, can still influence Facebook users through an unofficial page run by the group’s supporters. More specific pages are dedicated to al-Shabaab’s followers in Kenya and elsewhere.

Self-appointed teachers — “ustadhs” — and other young radicals are also creating their own communities outside of mainstream mosques and social groups. “I don’t have sabr [patience] for the jahil [ignorant] Westernized Muslim,” says self-appointed teacher and internet extremist Khalifah al-Akili, in a posting praising Osama bin Laden and criticizing a young Muslim against extremism. “Osama [bin Laden] dedicated his life to Islam and I don’t see why his acts weren’t justified in Islam,” chimes in al-Akili’s friend, Amir Khan.

Al-Akili’s radical postings and his open support for al-Shabaab and other al-Qaida-linked terrorist groups are characteristic of the Facebook-brand extremist. “May Allah bring death to the kuffar [disbelievers] and the munafiqeen [hypocrites] that wish to celebrate the death of any of the mujahideen,” al-Akili said in response to the killing of bin Laden. “Read it and learn it … and practice it,” he wrote about 44 Ways to Support Jihad, a text by al-Qaeda ideologue Anwar al-Awlaki.

Many of those who believe in al-Akili’s brand of extremism don’t follow through on it. Although many buy into the critical ideas of radicalization, such as the glorification of martyrdom and Islam’s war with the West, most are wannabe terrorists without the means or ability to carry out attacks. However, a small minority carry ideology into action.

A Muslim convert from Baltimore, Antonio Martinez [Muhammad Hussain], was a test case for how far social media extremists might actually go. On his Facebook page, he describes himself as just “a yung brotha from the wrong side of the tracks who embraced Islam.” But it didn’t take long for him to buy into the radical narrative being preached on Facebook.

Martinez was caught by the FBI in a Facebook sting operation after using the site to call for violence to stop the oppression of Muslims. In December 2010, the FBI set up the 21-year-old with a fake car bomb, and apprehended it after he drove to an intended target and attempted to detonate it. Martinez’s affidavit also describes his Facebook affiliations with “Call to Islam” and “Authentic Tawheed,” two online movements promoting jihadi ideology.

Government agents have even discovered terrorist plots conceived entirely on Facebook. Awais Younis, who plotted to bomb the D.C. metro and the capital’s shopping district Georgetown, was discovered when someone reported threats he made through the site’s chat function. Younis described a plan to build a pipe bomb and stated that he knew “what types of shrapnel would cause the greatest damage.”

Younis’ threats developed over a short period of time. “That is the problem with Americans[,] they cant leave well enough alone until something happends [sic] then they sit there wondering why we dropped the twin towers like a bad habit hahaha,” he told an unnamed Facebook friend. By the time police swooped in on him, Younis was already planning to place a pipe bomb underneath a sewer head in Georgetown during rush hour to maximize casualties.

The growth of social networks and even full-fledged plots on Facebook defies the expectations of some experts. In 2008, George Washington University professor Marc Lynch wrote that Facebook extremists would struggle with the question of how to “get your people in, and keep intelligence agents out.” The past few years have proven that security may be a consideration; but, the draw of the world’s largest social network has penetrated even the jihadi world.

Poster Note:
This is a great research of Ali Teymouri on the jihadi forums and blogs. Please go inside the links of Pajamas Media web page to find out the jihadi websites Ali is talking about. Thank you.

Photo: Ansar al-Mujahideen Forum

Read More - Part 1:
Pajamas Media - Jihadi Forums

Read More - Part 2:
Pajamas Media - Jihadi Blogs

Read More - Part 3
Pasjamas Media - Facebook & Social Media

Honor Killing is Absolutely Islamic!

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Tue, 21 Jun 2011 13:07:00 -0400

by Syed Kamran Mirza

Honor killings, which occur with shocking regularity in certain parts of the Middle East and South Asia, target women whose actions – actual or suspected – violate the honor of their family, an honor which is thought to depend on the sexual purity of its female members. Victims are always being killed/slaughtered mercilessly by her own family members. Honor killing is a manifestation of global phenomenon in general and Muslim nations in particular. Since this terrible inhumane practice does exists only among the Muslims of the world—very often civilized people do blame Islam as the precursor of this dreadful act. Most others do not agree with this notion at all; and they try to put the blame on the tribal/cultural practice, and do not consider Islam is anyway responsible for it. In this essay I shall analyze the real issues, cause and origin, and pattern of this heinous act amongst the Muslims of the world to postulate if there is any link, or incitements that originates from the very core of Islam.

What is honor killing?

Honor killing is the bone chilling horrific cruelty committed by the family members—father, mother, brothers, brother-in-laws, even in some cases own sisters also. In this terrible episode the victim is always the daughter/sister or other blood related young women who get killed. Perpetrators are always the family members stated above. Family honor is one of the core values of Arab society. Anything from speaking with an unrelated man, to rumored pre-marital loss of virginity, to an extra-marital affair, refuses forced marriages; marry according to their will; or even women and girls who have been raped—can stain or destroy the family honor. Therefore, family members (parents, brothers, or sisters) kill the victim in order to remove the stain or maintain, and protect the honor of the family. Killers are given light sentences, sometimes with little or no jail time at all. The killers mainly defend their act of murder by referring to the Koran and Islam. Family guardian will say that they are merely following the directives set down in their Islamic ethical beliefs.

Honor killing is committed by the family members - father, mother, brothers, brother-in-laws and even in some cases sisters

These barbaric killings occur only to save the honor of the family, and not for any animosity or for wealth or gold. In 100% of cases—the killers have no animosity, rather they love the girl as their own daughter or sister, but they kill the girl anyway upon their ethical compulsion to save their family honor, or to erase family stigmas. The victims cry, beg for their life but the family members become merciless (out of their ethical prejudices and also religious burden of fear) and kill the victim. After killing family members usually mourn and cry for the victim (usually loving daughter or sister) but feel solace that they have done the right thing to save their family honor.

And this kind of cruel killings to save family honor had happened, still happening, and will remain to happen—only to a Muslim family. Honor killings happen only to some designated Muslim nations such as Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, Yemen, Lebanon, Egypt, Sudan, the Gaza strip and the West Bank (Palestine), Jordan, Pakistan, Indonesia, Malaysia, Nigeria, Somalia, Turkey, Iran and some other south and central Asian countries. Bangladesh though a Muslim majority country—regular pattern of honor killings never happened as of today. But it is not unknown or impossible to record some stray incidences in Bangladeshi rural Muslim family (only) in which girl was poisoned by family members, or asked to commit suicide after being impregnated by unwed sexual intercourse. However, this same kind of case history was never heard, or recorded in the non-Muslim family of Bangladesh.

Honor killing is different from other killings

Honor killing should never be confused with wife beating, or wife killings by husbands or other relatives. Since pre-historic ancient time people assassinated, killed, or poisoned their wives or husbands, or other family members for either adultery, love affairs (Poro-keya prem) with other man besides her husband, or for property disputes—and these are simple homicide in English terminology. They are never called honor killing. This kind of homicides did occur, still occurs, and will occur in any nations, or race throughout the human history and these are not any race, or religion related happenings by any standard. Honor killings also should never be confused, or mixed up with killings for dowry, acid throwing by unsuccessful/disappointed love stalkers (as frequently happened in the Indian sub-continent), or any other violence against women. These are simply not honor killings, which is the topic of this essay.

Honor killing should never be confused with wife beating, or wife killings by husbands or other relatives.

Some sample cases of horrific honor killing:

Case-1: " Two months ago, when she tried to run away yet again, Kina (father of the girl) grabbed a kitchen knife and an ax and stabbed and beat the girl [his daughter] until she lay dead in the blood-smeared bathroom of the family's Istanbul apartment. He then commanded one of his daughters-in-law to clean up the mess. When his two sons came home from work 14 hours later, he ordered them to dispose of the 5-foot-3 corpse, which had been wrapped in a carpet and a blanket. The girl's head had been so mutilated, police said, it was held together by a knotted cloth."

Case-2: "Kifaya Husayn, a 16-year-old Jordanian girl, was lashed to a chair by her 32-year-old brother. He gave her a drink of water and told her to recite an Islamic prayer. Then he slashed her throat. Immediately afterward, he ran out into the street, waving the bloody knife and crying, 'I have killed my sister to cleanse my honor.' Kifaya's crime? She was raped by another brother, a 21-year-old man. Her judge and jury? Her own uncles, who convinced her eldest brother that Kifaya was too much of a disgrace to the family's honor to be allowed to live. The murderer was sentenced to fifteen years, but the sentence was subsequently reduced to seven and a half years, an extremely severe penalty by Jordanian standards."

Case-3: “A 25-year-old Palestinian who hanged his sister with a rope: "I did not kill her, but rather helped her to commit suicide and to carry out the death penalty she sentenced herself to. I did it to wash with her blood the family honor that was violated because of her and in response to the will of society that would not have had any mercy on me if I didn't . . . Society taught us from childhood that blood is the only solution to wash the honor."

Case-4: "Samia Sarwar, 29, mother of two boys aged 4 and 8, was shot dead today in lawyer Hina Jillani's office by a bearded man accompanying her mother and uncle. `He's my helper, I can't walk,' said the mother, when Hina told the two men to get out. As the mother went to sit down in front of Hina's desk, and Saima stood up from her chair, the bearded man whipped out a pistol from his waistcoat and shot Saima in the head, killing her instantly."

When Samia Sarwar sought a divorce from her violent husband she was gunned down in the office of her lawyer Hina Jilani. The killer was taken there by her own mother.

Case-5: ABU QASH, Palestine: Amira Abu Hanhan Qaoud (mother of 9 children) killed her daughter ‘Rofayda Qaoud’ who had been raped by her brothers and was impregnated. Armed with a plastic bag, razor and wooden stick, Qaoud entered her sleeping daughter's room last Jan. 27, 2003. "Tonight you die, Rofayda," she told the girl, before wrapping the bag tightly around her head. Next, Qaoud sliced Rofayda's wrists, ignoring her muffled pleas of "No, mother, no!" After her daughter went limp, Qaoud struck her in the head with the stick. The 43-year-old mother of nine said. "I had to protect my children. This is the only way I could protect my family's honor."

Case-6: A 23 year old Rania Arafat, whose plight was broadcast live on national TV in Jordan. Rania was promised to her cousin as a very young child. Rania repeatedly told that she doesn't love him and she is in love with someone else. She pled with her family to allow her to marry her lover, instead. She ran away twice, including two weeks before her forced marriage. She wrote to her mother and pled for forgiveness and understanding. Her parents promised that she would not be harmed and she could return home. On August 19, 1997, Rania returned home. The same night, her younger brother, Rami, shot her five times in the head and chest, killing her immediately. Her youngest brother was chosen to commit the murder not only to allow his defense to find protection under the laws protecting so-called honour crimes, but also because he was a juvenile. Rami served six months in jail for his crime.

Case-7: Amal, another Arab woman and victim of honour killing was run away because she insisted on her independence. Her family said that they were ashamed because of that and the gossip of neighbors. One night, when she returned home and went sleep, her brother accompanied by Amal's father, strangled her. He said: "I strangled her. She didn't fight back. I recited the "Holly Koran" as she was dying… it took a few minutes and she was dead." He and his father both given light sentences.

Every two weeks a young woman is killed in Jordan alone in the name of family honour

Case-8: Death of Aqsa Pervez: A reflection on Canadian Muslim-Pakistanis-Honor killing in Canada!, December 16, 2007
A young Mississauga teenager (16-year old) Aqsa Pervez, was killed by her father last week who later called the police and confessed. Mohammad Pervez is now in police custody and his case hearings have begun. The young girl was killed by strangulation for her refusal to wear the hijab.

Case- 9: Texas manhunt on for father of slain his two girls (January 3, 2008)
Texas authorities continued a manhunt today for an Egyptian-born taxi driver accused of murdering his two teenage daughters. Yaser Abdel Said, 50, was wanted on a warrant for capital murder after police say he shot the girls Tuesday and left them to die in his taxi, which was found parked in front a hotel in Las Colinas, a suburb north of Dallas. Police said Mr. Said should be considered armed and dangerous.

Friends of Amina Yaser Said, 18, and Sarah Yaser Said, 17, described the girls to the Dallas Morning News as "extremely smart — like geniuses," saying the slain sisters had been enrolled in advanced placement classes and were active in soccer and tennis at suburban Lewisville High School. Family and friends told reporters that the girls' Westernized lifestyle caused conflict with their Muslim father, who immigrated from Egypt in the 1980s.

"He was really strict about guy relationships and talking to guys, as well as the things she wears," Kathleen Wong, a friend of the girls, told KTVT-TV, the Dallas CBS affiliate. Two boys who said they had been dating the sisters told KXAS-TV in Dallas that Mr. Said was upset that his daughters were involved with non-Muslims.

"She just wanted a normal life, like any American girl wanted," one of the boys told the NBC affiliate station, adding that Sarah "was always kind, gentle, always cheerful, always had a smile on her face."

Honor killing is a cultural/tribal phenomenon!!!

Most Muslim apologists and also some gullible westerners want to argue that the ‘so called “honor killing” is not Islamic and it’s a tribal/cultural vice.’ This statement is utterly untrue and only a wish full covers up. It’s true that in pre-Islamic Arab culture this heinous honor killing of women did exist; likewise, many other uncivilized practices like stoning, flogging, beheading, slavery etc also existed in the pre-Islamic Arab society. But Islam did incorporate entirely most of these inhumane/uncivilized practices of pagan society, which they now call them Allah’s laws.

Had it been the tribal/cultural practice, ‘honor killing’ would exist amongst the Arabs only. But honor killing does happen amongst the non-Arab Muslims also. Also Arabs belonged to all religions (Muslims, Christians, Jews, Bhai etc.) would practice honor killing with equal prevalence. Fact of the matter is—no Arab Christians, Jews or Bahai etc do practice this uncivilized act at all. Only Arab Muslims do practice this heinous act with a regular pattern.

Honor killing does happen only amongst the Muslims and these honor killings get support and encouragement from the ethical teachings of religion Islam. In 1986 this kind of honor killing did happen in the United States of America in an Arab Muslim family. In 2003 honor killing happened in Sweden again in a Muslim family. However, some very rare, sporadic case of such killing might have happened in other society or people of other religion. But they are no where near to compare with the regular pattern, or routine feature of honor killings which do happen in the Muslim nations that I have mentioned. It has been reported that in Pakistan and in Jordan several hundreds of “honor killings” do happen every year. Perhaps, it will be more plausible to name this so called ‘honor’ as the “Islamic honor”, which Muslims stupendously try to save by killing their love one!

Dictums of Quran and Hadiths which may dictate/incite honor killing:

Quran- 4:15 “If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, take the evidence of four (reliable) witness from amongst you against them; if they testify, confine them to houses until death do claim them. Or God ordain for them some (other) way.”

Quran-24:2 “The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication—flog each of them with hundred stripes: Let no compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by God, if ye believe in God and the last day.”

Quran-17:32 “ Nor come nigh to adultery: for it is a shameful (deed) and an evil, opening the road (to other evils).

Quran-33:33 “stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display.”

Now some sahih hadiths:

Bukhari: Volume 7, Book 63, Number 196:
Narrated Abu Huraira: A man from Bani Aslam came to Allah's Apostle while he was in the mosque and called (the Prophet ) saying, "O Allah's Apostle! I have committed illegal sexual intercourse." On that the Prophet turned his face from him to the other side, whereupon the man moved to the side towards which the Prophet had turned his face, and said, "O Allah's Apostle! I have committed illegal sexual intercourse." The Prophet turned his face (from him) to the other side whereupon the man moved to the side towards which the Prophet had turned his face, and repeated his statement. The Prophet turned his face (from him) to the other side again. The man moved again (and repeated his statement) for the fourth time. So when the man had given witness four times against himself, the Prophet called him and said, "Are you insane?" He replied, "No." The Prophet then said (to his companions), "Go and stone him to death." The man was a married one. Jabir bin 'Abdullah Al-Ansari said: I was one of those who stoned him. We stoned him at the Musalla ('Id praying place) in Medina. When the stones hit him with their sharp edges, he fled, but we caught him at Al-Harra and stoned him till he died.
(See also Bukhari: Volume 7, Book 63, Number 195.)

Sahi Bukhari: 8:6814:
Narrated Jabir bin Abdullah al-Ansari: “A man from the tribe of Bani Aslam came to Allah’s Messenger [Muhammad] and informed him that he had committed illegal sexual intercourse; and he bore witness four times against himself. Allah’s Messenger ordered him to be stoned to death as he was a married person.”

Sahi Muslim No. 4206:
“A woman came to the prophet and asked for purification by seeking punishment. He told her to go away and seek God’s forgiveness. She persisted four times and admitted she was pregnant. He told her to wait until she had given birth. Then he said that the Muslim community should wait until she had weaned her child. When the day arrived for the child to take solid food, Muhammad handed the child over to the community. And when he had given command over her and she was put in a hole up to her breast, he ordered the people to stone her. Khalid b. al-Walid came forward with a stone which he threw at her head, and when the blood spurted on her face he cursed her.”

Sahih Al-Bukhari Vol 2. pg 1009; and Sahih Muslim Vol 2. pg 65:
Hadhrat Abdullah ibne Abbaas (Radiallahu Anhu) narrates the lecture that Hadhrat Umar (Radiallaahu Anhu) delivered whilst sitting on the pulpit of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam). Hadhrat Umar (Radiallahu Anhu) said, "Verily, Allah sent Muhammad (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) with the truth, and revealed the Quran upon him. The verse regarding the stoning of the adulterer/ess was from amongst the verse revealed (in the Quraan). We read it, secured it and understood it. Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) stoned and we stoned after him. I fear that with the passage of time a person might say, ‘We do not find mention of stoning in the Book of Allah and thereby go astray by leaving out an obligation revealed by Allah. Verily, the stoning of a adulterer/ress is found in the Quraan and is the truth, if the witnesses are met or there is a pregnancy or confession."

Al-Bukhari:
The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “Whoever guarantees me that he will guard his chastity, I will guarantee him Paradise”.

Al-Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, An-Nisa’i and others:
Abu Hurayrah reports that the Messenger of Allah said, “No one commits adultery while still remaining a believer, for faith is more precious unto Allah than such an evil act!” In another version, it is stated, “When a person commits adultery he casts away from his neck the bond that ties him to Islam; if, however, he repents, Allah will accept his repentance”.

Al-Bayhaqi:
The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “O mankind! Beware of fornication/adultery for it entails six dire consequences: three of them relating to this world and three to the next world. As for the three that are related to this world, they are the following: it removes the glow of one’s face, brings poverty, and reduces the life-span. As for its dire consequences in the next world they are: it brings down the wrath of Allah upon the person, subjects him to terrible reckoning, and finally casts him in hell-fire.”

The above Quranic verses and authentic sahih hadiths clearly demonstrate beyond doubt that Prophet Muhammad, under Allah’s direction, stoned adulterers to death and flogged fornicators. Allah’s decree/choice of death for fornicators (Quran: 4:15) and flogging adulteress 100 times with no mercy (Quran: 24:2, which also could lead to certain death) has clearly sanctioned/dictated dreadful punishment for sexual intercourse outside marriage. It is from these scriptural divine spirits Iranian fundamentalist Islamic government practices stoning and flogging adulterers even today. The Iranian Supreme Court sanctioned that an adulteress should be buried up to her chest and stoned to death. Mullahs of Iran know the hadiths quite well. This august body is closely following Allah’s prophet. It is also quite prudent to consider that Muslim parents those who are practicing honor killing are directly motivated, or influenced by the above scriptural and historical (Hadiths) support; hence they are able to commit heinous crime called ‘honor killing’ with (almost) impunity, exultantly and with ample satisfaction that they are following the strict Islamic ethical code to guard chastity, as the holy Prophet repeatedly cautioned Muslims so seriously to guard their women’s chastity.

Islamic ethics for adultery:

The Arabic word ‘Zina’ means all extramarital sexual intercourse between a man and a woman. According to Islam “Zina” constituted social suicide—an entire society commits suicide over time if it allows fornication and adultery to go unpunished in the Islamic style. As per Islamic justice—unmarried fornicators receive a hundred stripes, but married adulterers must die by stoning, as described in the sahih hadiths.

Opinion of some famous Islamists about Zina

The Saudi Ambassador to London, Ghazi al-Qusaibi, says that stoning may seem irrational to the western mind, but it is "at the core of the Islamic faith." An intellectual, the Saudi ambassador to London asserted that stoning adulterers to death is a legitimate punishment for society. He also says that Westerners should respect Muslin culture on this matter.

Sheikh Ahmad Kutty, a senior lecturer and Islamic scholar at the Islamic Institute of Toronto, Ontario, Canada, states:
“Adultery in Islam is one of the most heinous and deadliest of sins. Its enormity can be gauged from the fact that it has often been conjoined in the Qur’an with the gravest of all sins: shirk or associating partners with Allah.”

Hani Ramadan head of the Islamic Center in Geneva (Hani Ramadan is the elder brother of famed Swiss Muslim intellectual Tarek Ramadan, who are both the grandsons of Hassan Al-Banna, the founder of Egypt’s outlawed Muslim Brotherhood.) stated,
“Islam has taken a firm and decisive stance against Zina (fornication or adultery). Allah, the Almighty, commands in explicit and unequivocal words: “And come not near unto adultery. Lo! it is an abomination and an evil way.” (Al-Isra’: 32).”

Mufti Muhammad Aashiq Illahi Muhajir Madani (Illuminating Discourses on the Noble Qur’an, Karachi, Pakistan, Zam Zam, 2003) also follows this tactic of describing society that does not undergo Islamic punishments for the two sexual crimes. Families fall into ruin, which means society also is ruined. Sexual sins also cause widespread disease (vol. 6, pp. 360-66).

Al Skudsi bin Hookah , (roving reporter and foreign correspondent for The Gaza Gajeera.):
“I am very unhappy. Our way of life is under attack. And we are not fighting back. Deep down, we know that when a woman has disgraced her family, nothing will restore honor except by killing her. This is understood in Jordan, Syria, Yemen, Lebanon, Egypt, the Gaza strip and the West Bank. So why are we Arabs telling the Western press that honor killing is cultural, that it is not really part of Islam? Our way of life is based on maintaining our honor. And make no mistake about it: a woman does tarnish her family's honor by engaging in pre-marital sex, or by getting herself raped, when she seeks divorce and when she marries against her family's wishes. And keeping our women pure is a big part of our honor. So there's no point saying honor killing isn't really part of our religion. Honor and Islam are inextricably bound; they are what give our life meaning. A strong religion demands we choose to maintain our honor.”

Bassam al-Hadid, (A Jordanian with an American doctorate who spent 12 years as a hospital administrator in the United States): “I would do what I have to do,” said, when asked whether he would kill a daughter who had sex outside marriage."

Status of Women in Muslim society:

According to Islamic tradition the woman is an object owned by the man who assumes responsibility for her behavior and her life. The social and religious traditions lead to the isolation of the woman in her home. She is required to cover her entire body in order to maintain the honor of the man. In Qur’an, prophetic tradition and law, one finds a very strong presumption of women’s chastity along with numerous safeguards to prevent any imputation of un-chastity A Muslim feminist sexual ethics must help create the conditions for the Qur’anic and traditional values of modesty and chastity to be lived by Muslim women and men in ways that are faithfully chosen and equitably maintained.

A woman who is either raped or commits adultery becomes the source of shame to her family. People will not marry her because she has been spoiled; she and her family becomes the object of gossip of everyone in the society; hence the entire family can lose prestige. No one would give a daughter to the brothers of that girl in marriage and no one would marry her sisters. The family and even the extended family are maligned and become outcasts. This can only stop if the family cleanses that stain with blood. The woman thus defiled must be killed even if she is a victim of rape.

Role of Misogynistic attitude in Islam:

Islam is dreadfully anti-women. This statement can be proven with 100% guarantee by the well known and established fact that—women folks in every Muslim country in general, and in every Islamic paradise (country where Islamic Shariaat is enforced) in particular, are severely subjugated, oppressed, and considered less than second class citizen. Women in Islam are considered half human and in the Quran women have half the rights of men, sister has half the rights of brother, and women are considered deficient in intelligence.

Practically and Literally Islam consider women as the sources of great shame. Prophet Muhammad said women are awrah which can be translated as object of shame. What is awrah? The Encyclopedia of Islam defines 'awrah’as pudendum, which is the external genitals, especially of the female. The word Pudendum derives from the Latin pudor which means sense of shame and modesty. Therefore, awrah signify an object of shame that needs to be covered.

Interestingly, in the Indian sub-continent (Bangladesh-India-Pakistan)—women have another alternative name calling, in spite of having their usual name for the English word woman in the respective language. And this famous name calling is “Auraat” and common in all the three countries of the Indian sub-continent. Obviously this common word “Auraat” for women came from the Arabic word Awrah. This common word “Auraat” is usually used as the synonym for woman with empathy, hatred, mercy and shame.

According to the following Hadiths, women not only have ten 'awrah, but the woman herself is perceived as 'awrah: "The woman is 'awrah. When she goes outside (the house), the devil welcomes her" (Ihy'a 'Uloum ed-Din by Ghazali, Dar al-Kotob al-'Elmeyah, Beirut , Vol II, Kitab Adab al-Nikah, p. 65. Reported by Tirmizi as a true and good Ahadith).

Hazrat Ali (rightly guided Caliph) reported the Prophet saying:
“Women have ten ('awrah). When she gets married, the husband covers one, and when she dies the grave covers the ten." ( Kanz-el-'Ummal, Vol. 22, Hadith No. 858. See also Ihy'a).

In most fanatical Islamic nations when a woman loses her awrah by e.g. through rape, she becomes the object of shame for her entire family, and also for the society. Only way to remove that shame and restore the honor is to remove that defiled woman. It is practiced in most Islamic countries with a regular pattern. The more religious is a country, the more is widespread the honor killing. As for example, Pakistan a Muslim majority nation did not have practice of honor killing until the fanatic and despotic Military dictator General Ziaul Hoq came to power. This despotic ruler by his decade long dictatorship turned Pakistan into an Islamic Sharia country. Along with intense acceleration of making Pakistan into a hub of Talibans, and Islamic terrorist’s country, citizens of Pakistan also started vigorous practicing of honor killing on a regular basis.

Conclusion:

Judging everything I have described in this essay, one can very genuinely lead to the conclusion that ‘honor killing’ is indeed the vice of Islam. Islam has much to do with honor killing practices which only do exist amongst the Muslims of the world. Had it been un-Islamic practice, we would have seen some Muslim nations prohibiting such cruel practice by Sharia law. We have not seen any Muslim country did enact any such law to curve honor killing. We have seen innumerable cases of fatwas by Mullahs to prohibit alcohol drinking, pork eating or listening western music; but never ever heard any such fatwa against honor killing. Rather, honor killing has silent support from the devout Islamists of all kinds. Islamists condone honor killing silently! No wonder that the Al Skudsi bin Hookah (reported of Gazagejeera) so passionately said: “So there's no point saying honor killing isn't really part of our religion. Honor and Islam are inextricably bound; they are what give our life meaning. A strong religion demands we choose to maintain our honor.”

One may argue that Quran does not say clearly about honor killing! Fact is there are plenty of things Muslims practice that are also not mentioned in the Quran. Stoning death also not available in the Quran. Yet Iranian Islamic government does practice stoning death by the decree of Islamic court. Afghan Taliban government did routinely practice stoning and flogging of adulterers. Most importantly, Quran did not create any scriptural instruction to ban the so called Arab tribal practice of “honor killing” either! Besides, if the honor killing was simply a tribal practice—then it would have been prevailed amongst the Arabs of all religions. There is no evidence to support that a Christian or Jewish family of Jordan or Palestine did practice honor killing.

Muslims who are stunningly devout and laden with Islamic superstitious beliefs do commit crime of Honor killing to fulfill their obligation of preserving Islamic ethics, and women chastity. The more a country gets fanatically religious the more frequent are honor killings (Pakistan is a perfect example). Islam has incorporated many pre-Islamic practices of Arab pagans (stoning deaths, flogging the fornicators, slavery, war booty, beheading the criminals, cutting hands and foots of thieves, many rituals of animal sacrifice, annual pilgrimage to Mecca etc.) and readily called them Islamic or Allah’s laws. Honor killing is one such pre-Islamic practice of Arab pagans which has been practicing by some devout Muslim families of many good Islamic nations of the world.

Because of the fact that the “honor killings” do have silent support from Islam, the killers are given light sentences, sometimes with little or no jail time at all. The killers are primarily influenced by Islamic ethics, and mainly defend their act of murder by referring to the Koran and Islam. They usually justify their evil deeds by the directives set down in the Islamic ethical beliefs and principles. Koran is very strict and belligerent regarding how to control women's sexuality, and Islamic Law; Sharia, rules harsh punishments including lashing and stoning to death for women's voluntary sexual activities. And it is because of these Islamic elements of support, no Islamic government dares to enact any criminal law to ban this barbaric slaughtering of innocent family girls. Even then some Islamists will still say that “honor killing” has nothing to do with Islam; just the way they say “Islamic terrorism” has nothing to do with the so called peaceful Islam. Their hypocritical denial is utter nonsense and stupendously deceptive. I urge those Islamists to tell us why this “honor killing” never happens among the non-Muslim Arab families? They must also tell us—why no Arab and non-Arab Muslim government dare to make any strict law to ban honor killings in their land?

Denying the truth is tantamount to committing this heinous crime to humanity, and denying will never solve this chronic problem of Islamic nations. Only way honor killing can be stopped is to admit the truth (real cause), and stop controlling public lives by the draconian laws (Sharia) of Islam. Let there be a strict separation of ‘Mosque and State’ in every Muslim majority nation of the world. Honor killing will definitely cease to exist.
References:

1. Honor killing-maintaining family honor: by Al Skudsi bin Hookah, roving reporter and foreign correspondent for The Gaza Gajeera. Jan 20, 2003

2. The Seattle Times: 'Honor killing' shakes up Sweden after man slays daughter who wouldn't wed: By Carol J. Williams, Los Angeles Times.

3. Culture of death? Palestinian girl's murder highlights growing number of 'honor killings’.

4. Honor Killing: By Ali Sina.

5. The Holy Qur’an, Translated by A. Yousuf Ali, Published by Amana Corporation, Brentwood, Maryland, 1983

6. Buchari Sharif, Bengali Translation by Maulana Muhammad Mustafizur Rahman, Sulemani Printers and Publishers, Dhaka, Second edition-1999.

7. "Crimes of Honour" Women's Tragedy under Islam & Tribal Customs By Azam Kamiguian.

Syed Kamran Mirza is the author of Roots of Terrorism in Islam. He has also contributed in Beyond Jihad — Critical Voices from Inside Islam and Leaving Islam — Apostates Speaks Out. He can be contacted at mirza.syed@gmail.com.

This article originally appear on Islam-Watch.Org

Israel's Special Forces

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 15:17:00 -0400

Israel has 40 Special Forces units, here are some of them:

Sayeret Matkal - General Staff Reconnaissance Unit 269:

Founded: 1957

Sayeret Matkal, also known as General Staff Reconnaissance Unit 269, is the unit most people are referring to when discussing the Israeli war against terrorism. Operatives from this unit have led, or been an instrumental part of, almost every notable counter-terrorist (and anti-terrorist) operation conducted on behalf of Israel from 1957 to the present. It is also the primary unit dedicated to hostage rescue missions within Israel. Sayeret Matkal has been assisted on occasion by other Israeli units such as the elite Sayeret Tzanhanim, Flotilla 13, and Sayeret Golani. During periods of war, this unit is tasked with the most risky intelligence gathering operations, a function it has reportedly accomplished successfully on numerous occasions.

Operations of note include the following:

Operation Isotope - On May 8-9, 1972, Sayerot commandos disguised themselves as Lod Airport maintenance personnel before storming a Sebena Belgian Airlines jetliner that had been hijacked by Black September terrorists. Operation Crate 3 - In June of 1972, concern was mounting over the fate of three Israeli airmen who had been taken captured by Syrian authorities. The decision was made that in order to be in a position to negotiate their release, Israel would need bargaining chips of their own. In response, Sayeret operatives, in an operation that has become their trademark, kidnapped five Syrian intelligence officers who were conducting a border tour with Palestinian terrorists at the time.

Operation Spring of Youth - On the night of April 9-10, 1973, Sayeret commandos, one disguised as a woman, conducted the assassinations of Black September leaders. What was remarkable about this operation was that the targets were in three separate locations and all in West Beirut, which was at the time enemy-held territory.

Worth mentioning also are press reports that operatives from this unit were responsible for the assassination of Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) deputy commander and wanted terrorist, Abu Jihad in 1988.

Sayeret Duvdevan:

Duvdevan (cherry) is an elite special forces unit within the Israel Defense Forces, directly subordinate to the West Bank Division. Duvdevan are particularly noted for conducting undercover operations against militants in urban areas. During these operations, Duvdevan soldiers typically drive modified civilian vehicles and wear Arab civilian clothes as a disguise.

Duvdevan is one of the most prestigious units of the IDF, and thus recruitment to it is highly desirable among recruitment-aged youths in Israel.

The Duvdevan unit motto: "For by clever deception thou shalt wage war." (Proverbs 24:6)

The unit is actually recognized with only a unit identity number and Duvdevan is simply the nickname given to the unit. The commando units of the IDF are known as the katzefet, or "whipped cream" in English, of the combat forces. In the unit's short 20 year history it has stood above and beyond the traditional special units of the IDF and was thus nicknamed "Duvdevan," or "cherry" in English, in reference to its elite status even among the other special units of the IDF. The unit is unique in several ways: it is the only IDF unit (not including police units) that has no war time mission, just day-to-day hit and run operations. The unit, unlike other SF units, can operate in more than one place at once, and can operate independently. This means providing its own intelligence, backup, rescue, medical teams, extraction, snipers, demolitions, etc... The unit can perform high-risk arrests, raids, targeted killing, kidnappings and a range of other urban warfare operations.

Mission:

The unit falls under the command of the Judea and Samaria division (West Bank Division) of the IDF. This means the unit is under an area command, not a manpower or brigade command like most other Israeli Army units. This allows the unit to operate anywhere in the country and nowhere specific, unlike other special units that are attached to brigades, like Egoz to the Golani Brigade, Maglan to the Paratroopers Brigade, or Oketz and Lotar to the Adam army base. Only Duvdevan and Sayeret Matkal are authorized to wear their uniforms without identifying shoulder tabs. The unit is most similar to the Yamam and Yamas-Iosh police units.

History:

The unit underwent some major changes around 2002. They are as follows:

1. The unit's basic training was relocated to the paratrooper's base. It used to be held independently at the Adam base along with Rescue Unit 669 and Oketz. When 2 men died in training the basic training was delegated to the infantry. Basic training is 7 months and is done with the Tzanchanim.
2. Special units within Duvdevan were opened but remained classified.
3. The unit's base was relocated and newly built. It now stands alone and independently – most IDF units have their base within a larger base.

The unit prides itself on being the spearhead of Israeli counter terror operations. In 2002 the unit was awarded as such by the prime minister for having the most significant effect on the war on terror. The Duvdevan unit is regarded as one of the world's most successful counter-terror units. In January 2008, the unit successfully killed a major Islamic Jihad commander in the West Bank.

In April 2008, the unit tracked down and killed Hani Ka’abi after surrounding his house in the Balata neighborhood of Nablus. He headed a terrorist cell belonging to the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades, linked to Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah. He was the mastermind of a plot to carry out a terrorist attack by slipping a slow-acting poison powder, virtually undetectable, into the food of diners at the “Grill Express” restaurant in Ramat Gan, where he had recruited two Arab kitchen workers as operatives.[2] Hosni Tzalag, Ka’abi’s deputy, and another terrorist were arrested during the operation. The soldiers recovered two rifles, ammunition magazines, and bulletproof vests at the home.

Yamam - SWAT Unit:

Mission:

The Yamam (?an acronym for Special Central Unit) is the elite civilian counter-terrorism unit in Israel. The Yamam is capable of both hostage-rescue operations and offensive take-over raids against targets in civilian areas. Besides military duties, it also performs SWAT duties and undercover police work.

History:

The Yamam was established in late 1974 after the Ma'alot massacre, where a failed operation by military special forces units resulted in the 21 children being murdered before the hostage takers were killed. Since hostage rescue in friendly territory is different from that in hostile areas, it was decided to establish an elite civilian force, which develops and practices a special CQB (Close Quarters Battles) doctrine for "counter-terrorism" operations in friendly territory and hostage rescue.

The Yamam has carried out many paramilitary operations. Some of the missions known to the public prior to the al-Aqsa Intifada are listed below:

* March 1978, a Yamam force engaged the terrorists who took over a bus in an event known as the "Coastal Road Massacre".
* In March 1988, the Yamam was called into action after a group of three Palestinians hijacked a bus full of women returning from work at the Negev Nuclear Research Center near Dimona, in an incident known as the "Mothers Bus". The Yamam struck, killing all three hijackers, but not managing to prevent three Israeli passengers from being killed.
* September 8th 1992: Yamam snipers shot and killed Eithan more, who killed 4 women in Mental Health clinic in Jerusalem.
* May 3rd, 1994: Yamam snipers shot and killed armed man in Uzi Meshoolam's compound after he shot on a police helicopter.
* On 3 March 2000, the Yamam captured an armed group hidden in the Israeli-Arab town of Tayibe with the aid of Sayeret Duvdevan and an IDF Caterpillar D9 bulldozer. In the end of the raid, one man was arrested and four were killed.

During the Second Intifada, under the Shin Bet's command, Yamam forces intercepted many terrorists, either by arresting them or killing them. Several high profile terrorists were killed by Yamam operators. Often, when the wanted Palestinian militants barricaded inside a building, Yamam force put a siege on it while IDF Caterpillar D9 armored bulldozers forced them out by razing the structure.

The unit is primarily responsible for civilian hostage rescue within Israel's borders, but from about the mid-1990s it has also been used for tasks such as arresting police suspects who have barricaded themselves in structures and requiring specialized extraction methods, as well as in personal security for VIPs and in counter-terror operations within the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The Yamam are schooled in basic Arabic and dress to assimilate within the Arab population to avoid detection in order to carry out raids to arrest those suspected of conducting terrorist activities within Israel.

However, most of the Yamam's activity is classified, and published Yamam operations are often credited to other units.

Yamas - Mistaravim:

Mission:

Mistaravim, lit. Arabized, is the name given to those counter-terrorism units of the Israel Defense Forces in which soldiers are specifically trained to disguise themselves as Arabs in order to kill or capture a wanted terrorist. These are also commonly known as the 'Arab Platoons'. In Tom Clancy's Op-Center: Acts of War, it is stated that Mistaravim do not allow their real identities to become known to people outside their unit, and that even when they are undercover, they go to great lengths to avoid being recorded. They are also said to be trained in counter-detection of human or mechanical surveillance.

Training:

Training for this unit is about fifteen months:

* Four months basic infantry training in the Mitkan Adam army base - the IDF Special Training Center.
* Two and a half months of advanced infantry training in the same base.
* Two months unit's basic training, which focus on advanced urban navigation exercises and the beginning of CT training.
* Four months Mistaravim course, which covers everything from learning the Arabs' traditions, language and their way of thought to civilian camouflage (hair dying, contact lenses, Arabs' clothing).
* One-month courses - sniper, driving and different instructors courses.

669 - Airborne combat search & rescue:

Mission:

669, Airborne Rescue And Evacuation Unit 669 is the Israel Defense Forces heliborne medevac extraction unit, subordinate to the Special Air Forces Command of the Israeli Air Force. It is considered one of the IDF's premier elite units.

History:

Unit 669 was founded in 1974, in the aftermath of the 1973 Yom Kippur War, when an ad-hoc medevac unit made some 5000 extractions. Its initial mandate was to extract and provide initial medical treatment to downed (and possibly injured) pilots beyond enemy lines. However, in later years the unit also participated in extraction of soldiers of other arms of the Israeli Defense Forces, especially Sayeret (Special Forces) fighters in operations beyond enemy lines and seamen in distress.

Training:

Due to the possibility of having to fight their way to casualties beyond enemy lines, unit soldiers are highly trained in special forces tactics and become highly efficient ground soldiers in addition to their high level of paramedic training. Typically, their training and selection lasts 18 months. Courses that candidates must pass include:

* Combat medics' course
* Parachuting course in the IDF Parachuting School
* Scuba Diving course
* Counter-terrorism course in the IDF Counter-Terror Warfare School
* Rappelling course
* Rescue under harsh conditions
* Navigation
* Commanders' course

Upon completion of their training, unit soldiers are expected to sign on for an extra 16 months of service following their three-year mandatory service.

Shaldag:

Unit 5101, better known as Shaldag, is primarily tasked with targeting enemy structures and vehicles for assault by Israeli fighting aircraft. Using their high-energy laser designators, they can mark targets for fighter-bomber launched laser-guided bombs or Hellfire missiles from Israeli AH-64 helicopters.

Many times this involves long range patrols to the target sites. Because of this Shaldag is also sometimes used for reconnaissance. They also provide assistance and operate in Counter Terrorism and hostage rescue operations.

They are staged out of Palmahaim Air base; the unit comprises 40-50 soldiers, with five to six teams of eight to nine operators. They are regularly outfitted with M-16 or M4A1 assault rifles with the M203 grenade launcher attached. When performing Counter-Terrorist/hostage rescue duties they carry the Sig-Sauer or Glock 9mm series pistols and the Mauser SR 82/66 sniper rifle.

Members of Shaldag are considered elite, and go through a rigorous selection and training phase musch like members of other Israeli units such as Sayeret Matkal and Sayeret Tzanhanim. Their training consists oflong marches, basic and advanced land navigation, and coordination and radio communications with Israeli Air Force and Army pilots. It is reported that these soldiers go through a minimum of 1 year and 8 months of training before they are considered operationally ready.

Members of Shaldag were able to prove their worth in the 1996 Lebannon action by finding and designating mobile rocket launchers for destruction. These launchers had been used in unguided terror attacks along the Lebannon-Israeli border.

Shayetet 13 - Flotilla 13:

Within the IDF (Israeli Defense Force) Navy exists an elite unite of commandos known as the Bat Men. Their official name is Shayetet 13, or Flotilla 13, and they are responsible for the IDF Navy's Special Warfare capabilities. Flotilla 13 can trace it's roots back to the birth of the Israeli nation, and in their service they have managed to carve an international reputation as one of the best, if not most experienced, naval special warfare units in the world.

Israel's Naval Commandos under go a rigorous selection phase like most other elite units. In the case of the Naval Commandos, however, the initial selection phase stresses psychological toughness and tests hopefulls in their ability to take and operate under stress and fear. There is not a big push to weed out those unfit for the unit quickly, the training process is long and hard, with plenty of time for those who don't quite match up to move on to other units. In all, a potential Shayetet 13 operator will have to undergo almost a year and 8 months or training before he can pin on the coveted crest of the unit.

After the selection phase, trainee's attend the IDF's Bislach (infantry school) for two-and-a-half months of advanced infantry training. Following completion of this school, they next are sent to a 3 week HALO HAHO school to learn the foundation of parachute ops. Following this school the trainees are asigned to Atlit Naval Base to complete their training, receiving their underwater and counter-terrorism training at this point.

As with other special forces units, the training and selection is arduous, but Shayetet 13's training phase is considered to be the most difficult in the entire IDF.

Oketz Unit:

The Oketz Unit, lit. sting, is the independent canine special forces (sayeret) unit, founded in 1939 as part of the Haganah, within the Israel Defense Forces. The unit specialises in training and handling dogs for military applications. Originally, Oketz trained dogs to attack kidnappers, but training has become more specialized, and now the canine unit. Each dog is now trained to have a particular speciality. Attack dogs are trained to operate in urban areas, as well as in rural, bushy areas (they were used extensively in Lebanon). Dogs are trained as tracking and chasing dogs, for manhunts and detecting breaches at the borders. Dogs are also trained as weapons and ammunition dogs, to search for guns and munitions, as explosive dogs, to sniff out hidden explosives and as search and rescue dogs, to find people in collapsed buildings.

Oketz operators are often assigned to other units in the case of a particular need for their specialist skills, such as in the extraction of terrorists from fortified buildings. Though not affiliated with the IDF Paratroopers Brigade, Unit Oketz operators wear the same distinctive red berets and the unit's graduation ceremony is held at the Paratroopers headquarters. However, in order to join Oketz, the recruit must choose Kfir Infantry Brigade as first priority in the request form and then pass through trials.

Dogs:

Oketz prefers Belgian Shepherd Dog (Malinois), over the German Shepherd Dog and Rottweiler, which were employed formerly. The reasons for the choice are twofold: they're the perfect size to be picked up by their handler while still being able to attack an enemy, and their coats are short and general neutral to fair in color, making them less prone to heatstroke.

Egoz Reconnaissance Unit:

The Egoz Reconnaissance Unit is an elite special forces unit of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) that specializes in guerrilla and anti-guerrilla warfare among other things. The Egoz Battalion is part of the Northern Command's Golani Brigade.

Before the year 2000, Egoz operated mainly in Israel's Northern Command, combating threats from the Hezbollah. Following Israel's withdrawal from Southern Lebanon, its operations were moved to the West Bank and Gaza Strip. In 2003 and 2004, Egoz prevented more terrorist acts than any other IDF unit.[citation needed] The unit still does some reconnaissance in southern Lebanon.

The Egoz Unit was founded in 1956 as a special forces unit (sayeret), but was disbanded and re-organized in 1964 due to a friendly fire incident. After the Six-Day War, it became a battalion. It was disbanded again following the Yom Kippur War due to manpower shortages in other units, and re-formed in 1995 as an anti-guerrilla unit (company). Most of the initial fighters came from the Shimshon Unit. Its commander was from the Navy Commandos and as a result, much of the discipline, tactics and professionalism come from the Navy Commandos, and are the foundations upon which the unit was built on.

The training of an Egoz unit begins with basic training, advanced exercises, and unit marches, after which each soldier is interviewed by Israeli intelligence to determine if he should be screened out from the second phase of training. The second phase consists of learning camouflage warfare, various kinds of assaults, land navigation, completing the squad leaders course, jeep driving course, counter-terrorism course, parachute course, reconnaissance course and the alpine course – if there is snow in the Hermon area- among other courses that are highly classified.

When operating in Lebanon, the unit uses unmarked cartridges, as well as the Russian-made RPD and PK light machine guns. Soldiers using the M16 standard issue weapon have the Litton Akila night vision system mounted on it.

Sayeret Tzanhanim:

Sayeret Tzanhanin is a commando force roughly analogous to the United States Army's Rangers. They are capable of airborne operations, and have conducted many long range patrols into Lebanon since the Lebanon War.

Sayeret Tzanhanin's most public mission was the raid on the Entebbe Airport in Uganda. In that action they assisted Sayeret Mat'kal in the liberation of 103 Israeli and Jewish hostages being held there. Sayeret Tzanhanin was responsible for preventing the Ugandan Army from posing as a threat to the operation as well as placing beacons that allowed the Israeli C-130s to take off from the pitch dark runways.

During Operation Law and Order, Sayeret Tzanhanin neutralized the Shi'ite Hizbollah terrorist presence in the strategically located town of Maidun. During the urban battle that saw RPGs, .50 caliber machine guns, and LAW rockets used at point blank range, over 50 terrorists were killed. Two Sayeret Tzanhanin officers and one NCO were killed, dozens of others were wounded.

During the Gibush, a three day long training and testing period, potential recruits are rigorously monitored as they are taken to the limits of their physical and mental stamina. Only the strongest survive. Out of a hundred candidates, only a few dozen will be allowed to progress beyond the Gibush. One of the final events in their training is the Masa'a Kumta, or Beret March. During this exercise Tzanhanin candidates endure a 90km forced march (roughly 50 miles) with full gear (this can include anti tank missile launching units) over rough terrain.

Sayeret Tzanhanin commandos are trained in the use of numerous weapons. Assault rifles such as the M-16, AK-47, and Galil 5.56mm are familiar to its members; as are the FN-MAG and a IMI modified M-14 sniper rifle. Grenades, mortars, LAW rockets, and RPGs are also part of their arsenal.

Sayeret Maglan:

Also known as Unit 212 or Sayeret Maglan is an Israeli Special Forces unit which specializes in operating behind enemy lines and deep in enemy territory using advanced technologies and weaponry.

The unit's name is derived from the Ibis bird (In Hebrew: Maglan).

The IDF keeps the unit's designated missions a secret and gives no information about it or the operations in which the Unit takes part. Maglan only became publicly known in 2006. Very little is known about the unit, only that the force performs arrests and assassination of high value persons and that the unit specializes in camouflage and stealth operations behind enemy lines, deep within hostile territory. Like Sayeret Matkal, although the troops in the unit wear a red beret and brown combat boots and conduct basic training at one of the paratroopers' bases, they are not part of the Paratroopers. Maglan has a 25 months training program, and many of the cadets drop out due to the harsh nature of the program. Similarly to Sayeret Matkal, Maglan answers to the IDF's General Staff and not to one of its regional commands.

Maglan is a relatively new unit. It is rumored that it was deployed on SCUD hunting missions in Iraq during the First Gulf War in 1991.

During the Second Lebanon War, the unit took part in many operations and achieved great success. During Operation Beach-Boys, the unit operated along the western coastal strip of Lebanon and destroyed 250 targets, among them 40 rocket launchers.

Sayeret Yahalom:

Yahalom is a special elite combat engineering unit of the Israeli Engineering Corps of the Israel Defense Forces. The name "Yahalom" (Diamond in Hebrew) is an abbreviation of "Special Operations Engineering Unit".
Combat Engineering Unit for Special Operations - Yahalom

Sayeret Yahalom specializes in special engineering missions which include:

* Commando and Counter-Terrorism missions.
* Accurate demolitions and planting of pinpoint explosives.
* Defusing bombs, landmines and unexploded ordnance (Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD)).
* Maritime sabotage and obstacles breaching.
* Searching and destroying smuggling tunnels.
* Developing advanced methods and tools for demolitions and EOD.
* Teaching and training engineering corps soldiers and other Special Units in demolitions and EOD.

Sayeret Yahalom is a classified unit and almost none of its special activities are exposed to the public. When its activities are published, they are usually just credited to a "combat engineering force"; a term which can just as well be used to describe regular Engineering sappers, IDF Caterpillar D9 operators and infantry engineering companies.

Jane's Defence Weekly has claimed that Sayeret Yahalom are working closely with Sayeret Matkal and Shayetet 13, by providing them with demolition, explosive and sabotage skills.

___The top 3___

These are the most elite IDF sayeret units. As such they perform the most important missions of the IDF, usually of a strategic nature. Its soldiers undergo longer training regimes than other sayeret units and are also proficient in long range solo navigation (as opposed to other units where long range navigation is done with a minimum of 2 fighters).

* Sayeret Matkal - the IDF principal special operations/commando unit, used mainly to obtain strategic intelligence behind enemy lines, counter-terrorism, and to perform hostage-rescue missions outside of Israel's borders.

* Shayetet 13 - the naval commando unit. Also in charge of maritime hostage-rescue missions. Part of the Israeli Navy, its selection and training is considered the most arduous of the entire IDF, due to its maritime role.

* Shaldag Unit - the Israeli Air Force commando unit, it specializes in forward air control and target designation for the Air Force.

Part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:

Part 4:

Part 5:

Islam, Virgins and Grapes

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Tue, 14 Jun 2011 18:34:00 -0400

by Nicholas D. Kristof

In Afghanistan, 300 brave women marched to demand a measure of equal rights, defying a furious mob of about 1,000 people who spat, threw stones and called the women “whores.” The marchers asserted that a woman should not need her husband’s consent to go to school or work outside the home.

In Pakistan, the Taliban flogged a teenage girl in front of a crowd, as two men held her face down in the dirt. A video shows the girl, whose “crime” may have been to go out of her house alone, crying piteously that she will never break the rules again.

Muslim fundamentalists damage Islam far more than any number of Danish cartoonists ever could, for it’s inevitably the extremists who capture the world’s attention. But there is the beginning of an intellectual reform movement in the Islamic world, and one window into this awakening was an international conference this week at the University of Notre Dame on the latest scholarship about the Koran.

“We’re experiencing right now in Koranic studies a rise of interest analogous to the rise of critical Bible studies in the 19th century,” said Gabriel Said Reynolds, a Notre Dame professor and organizer of the conference.

The Notre Dame conference probably could not have occurred in a Muslim country, for the rigorous application of historical analysis to the Koran is as controversial today in the Muslim world as its application to the Bible was in the 1800s. For some literal-minded Christians, it was traumatic to discover that the ending of the Gospel of Mark, describing encounters with the resurrected Jesus, is stylistically different from the rest of Mark and is widely regarded by scholars as a later addition.

Likewise, Biblical scholars distressed the faithful by focusing on inconsistencies among the gospels. The Gospel of Matthew says that Judas hanged himself, while Acts describes him falling down in a field and dying; the Gospel of John disagrees with other gospels about whether the crucifixion occurred on Passover or the day before. For those who considered every word of the Bible literally God’s word, this kind of scholarship felt sacrilegious.

Now those same discomfiting analytical tools are being applied to the Koran. At Notre Dame, scholars analyzed ancient texts of the Koran that show signs of writing that was erased and rewritten. Other scholars challenged traditional interpretations of the Koran such as the notion that some other person (perhaps Judas or Peter) was transformed to look like Jesus and crucified in his place, while Jesus himself escaped to heaven.

One scholar at the Notre Dame conference, who uses the pseudonym Christoph Luxenberg for safety, has raised eyebrows and hackles by suggesting that the “houri” promised to martyrs when they reach Heaven doesn’t actually mean “virgin” after all. He argues that instead it means “grapes,” and since conceptions of paradise involved bounteous fruit, that might make sense. But suicide bombers presumably would be in for a disappointment if they reached the pearly gates and were presented 72 grapes.

One of the scholars at the Notre Dame conference whom I particularly admire is Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd, an Egyptian Muslim who argues eloquently that if the Koran is interpreted sensibly in context then it carries a strong message of social justice and women’s rights.

Dr. Abu Zayd’s own career underscores the challenges that scholars face in the Muslim world. When he declared that keeping slave girls and taxing non-Muslims were contrary to Islam, he infuriated conservative judges. An Egyptian court declared that he couldn’t be a real Muslim and thus divorced him from his wife (who, as a Muslim woman, was not eligible to be married to a non-Muslim). The couple fled to Europe, and Dr. Abu Zayd is helping the LibForAll Foundation, which promotes moderate interpretations throughout the Islamic world.

“The Islamic reformation started as early as the 19th century,” notes Dr. Abu Zayd, and, of course, it has even earlier roots as well. One important school of Koranic scholarship, Mutazilism, held 1,000 years ago that the Koran need not be interpreted literally, and even today Iranian scholars are surprisingly open to critical scholarship and interpretations.

If the Islamic world is going to enjoy a revival, if fundamentalists are to be tamed, if women are to be employed more productively, then moderate interpretations of the Koran will have to gain ascendancy. There are signs of that, including a brand of “feminist Islam” that cites verses and traditions suggesting that the Prophet Muhammad favored women’s rights.

Professor Reynolds says that Muslim scholars have asked that conference papers be translated into Arabic so that they can get a broader hearing. If the great intellectual fires are reawakening within Islam, after centuries of torpor, then that will be the best weapon yet against extremism.

NY Times

The Dark World of the Arab Child Slave Trade

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Tue, 14 Jun 2011 18:28:00 -0400

by Stephen Brown

In a story last week in the British newspaper The Sun, a private investigator stated that Madeleine McCann, the subject of probably the world’s most famous unsolved kidnapping case, is in the United States. The British girl was three years old when she went missing five years ago from a seaside resort in Portugal, where her parents were vacationing. The Portuguese police, in what has been termed a “bungled investigation,” at first accused the parents of the abduction but later cleared them. Portuguese security officials halted their investigation to find the missing child in 2008 after stating she had probably been “stolen to order.”

Since her disappearance, numerous alleged sightings have been made of the little girl across Europe, Africa, in North America and in Australia. The investigator making the latest claim concerning McCann’s whereabouts is an amateur sleuth originally from Angola. He told The Sun that a Portuguese pedophile ring, also responsible for other child abductions, took the McCann girl and has handed his findings over to authorities. The claim that a pedophile ring is responsible for McCann’s disappearance has been made before, especially concerning one in Belgium. And while Madeleine McCann girl may have very well been snatched by such evil hands, it is surprising that an equally depraved institution — one of gigantic size — has never even been considered by investigators or the media as McCann’s possible kidnapper: namely, the Arab child slave trade.

While tens of thousands of adults are also victims of Arab slavers, many people only first took notice of the Arab slave trade in children when reports of enslaved child camel jockeys emerged from Persian Gulf countries. A 2004 HBO documentary on the subject was especially responsible for making Americans aware of this modern-day barbarism. These boys, who were sold by poor parents hoping their offspring would some day experience a better life, were primarily from South Asia. But instead of a life of dignity and meaningful work, they wound up in the Middle East where they were made to race camels for their Arab masters. Beaten and often sexually abused, they were all kept undernourished, so that the camels would have less weight to carry.

“As many as 6,000 child camel jockeys…languished in hidden slavery on ozbah farms, where their masters beat them and starved them to keep their weight down,” wrote E. Benjamin Skinner in his book, A Crime So Monstrous.

When investigating in the 1990s the enslavement of hundreds of thousands of black Africans in Mauritania by Arab-Berber masters, African-American author Samuel Cotton was stunned to discover that African children were still being kidnapped by Arabs traveling with camels carrying big baskets. The child, usually playing alone, would suddenly be snatched from its play and placed in one such basket, after which its new owners hurried away. The children, he was told, are sometimes found later “hundreds of miles away as slaves.”

Also during his investigation, which was summarized in his highly informative book Silent Terror: A Journey Into Contemporary African Slavery, Cotton was told there was “still a huge trafficking in slaves going on between Mauritania and the United Arab Emirates.”

Black African children are also not always stolen so surreptitiously. Until recently in the southern Sudan, the old-fashioned slave raid witnessed villages being burned down, the men killed and the women and children captured. This was the Arab slavers’ main harvesting tool of humans. Thousands of children were captured by this murderous method and forcibly taken as agricultural, domestic and sex slaves to Arab northern Sudan — where many still languish today. Darfur has also seen many children disappear from both refugee camps and towns subjected to central government attack. They are suspected victims of Arab slave hunters.

But it is not only non-Arab children who are Arab child slave trade victims. An Egyptian newspaper, referring to a 2008 UNICEF report, stated Egyptian children are being bought and sold for about $3,000 for “domestic work and farming, among other things.” This trade in children is so extensive in Egypt, organizations are “employing brokers, and even operating their own web sites.

“Many are also sent to the Gulf States, with orphanages being a major supplier,” the story further reports.

Even from a country as far way as the Philippines children are trafficked to the Middle East. In 2008, for example, 34 minors between the ages of 14 and 16 were rescued at Manila airport by social workers as they were about to depart on fake passports for unnamed Middle Eastern countries. Again, war and poverty played a role in these young people’s desperation. They were from refugees camps in the war-torn southern island of Mindanao where an insurgency is raging between government forces and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front.

While most civilized people nowadays recoil in horror from the idea of slavery, especially when it involves children, many fundamentalist Middle Eastern Muslims do not. In fact, they view the psychological death and destruction of innocent lives as their legal right. Under sharia law, which rules the Sudan and the Gulf States, Muslims are legally allowed to own slaves. Bernard Lewis, the eminent scholar of Islam, writes “…the institution of slavery is not only recognized but is elaborately regulated by Sharia law.” Another reason for this inhuman sense of entitlement is the prophet Muhammad was also a slave owner, setting the example for the fundamentalists.

Besides a codified religious supremacy, there is also the element of racial superiority behind the hideous practice of Arab slavery, especially when it concerns black Africans. Arab racism is at the roots of Islamic slavery that has seen 14 million black Africans enslaved and sold around the Islamic world from the seventh to the twentieth century.

Unfortunately for its victims, the abolition of Arab slavery will be difficult to even initiate — especially when the international community remains deafeningly silent about it. The case of Dr. Abu Zayd, a Cairo University professor and Islamic theologian, amply illustrates the problem. When Zayd contended that “keeping slave girls and taxing non-Muslims” was contrary to Islam, an Egyptian sharia court forcibly divorced him from his wife and declared him an apostate. He later had to flee to Europe to escape Islamic extremists who wanted to kill him because of his apostate status.

Slavery was only abolished in Saudi Arabia and other states of the Arabian Peninsula in the early 1960s, so one cannot expect an institution that has existed for centuries to being away any time soon. For example, the widow of the emir of Abu Dhabi and her four daughters were caught living in Brussels in 2008 with 20 slaves who they were mistreating. And Dubai is the center for the region’s sex industry that Skinner calls “a place of slavery for women.” Promised jobs, thousands of women full of hope arrive there from Eastern Europe, sub-Saharan Africa and Asia annually only to have their passports taken away immediately upon arrival and to be forced into prostitution.

One Gulf State Arab woman, a former candidate for Kuwait’s parliament, does not even hide the fact there should be sex slaves for Arab men and claims sheikhs and muftis she spoke with in Mecca sanctioned this. As a result, Salwa al-Mutairi wants non-Muslim women captured in war made available to Muslim men, so that the men can be “protected from adultery.” She affirmed: “For example, in the Chechnya war, surely there are female Russian captives. So go and buy those and sell them here in Kuwait…I don’t see any problem in this.”

Al-Mutairi’s despicable utterances came only a week after a Muslim preacher announced that, since Islam allows Muslims to buy and sell conquered infidel women, “When I want a sex-slave, I go to the market and pick whichever female I desire and buy her.”

It is not the purpose or intent of this article to engage in sensationalist or unfounded finger-pointing. But what a crime it would be to neglect finding and freeing a child slave because the hunt for his or her captors would be deemed politically incorrect. Indeed, in light of the widespread phenomenon discussed above, why is the possibility of Madeleine McCann being a child slave somewhere in the Middle East not even remotely considered in the investigation of her disappearance? Yes, it is only conjecture, but so is looking into all the other possibilities. Why, for instance, is publicly hypothesizing that she is probably somewhere in the U.S. considered legitimate, but even breathing a word about the possibility of her being somewhere in the Middle East considered illegitimate — when it is a fact that an international Arab human-slave trafficking business is in full effect?

The fact that the McCanns were at a Portuguese seaside resort when Madeleine was taken made the kidnappers’ task easier. Since the child-snatchers may have very well made their escape by sea, there would be no borders to cross until they reached their destination — potentially a Middle Eastern one. The Islamic world, after all, is very close to Portugal.

The British government has recently assigned 30 detectives in a major effort to locate the missing girl. Of course, myriad evils could be behind this tragic crime. And they must all be looked into. But in light of what is known about the Arab child slave trade, will investigators spend even at least a modicum of time considering the distinct possibility of Middle Eastern sex-slave traffickers’ involvement? The empirical reality would justify it — as it would justify the international community starting to be even slightly interested in, and outraged about, this dark and evil phenomenon in general.

Front Page Magazine

Most U.S. Mosques Teach Violence

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Tue, 14 Jun 2011 17:52:00 -0400

by Robert Spencer

Last week came new confirmation that mosques in the U.S. aren’t quite holding potluck suppers and teaching civic pieties. A new study has demonstrated that 80% of mosques right in this country are teaching jihad warfare and Islamic supremacism.

Researchers Mordechai Kedar and David Yerushalmi reported in the Summer 2011 issue of Middle East Quarterly about a new survey that found that “51% of mosques had texts that either advocated the use of violence in the pursuit of a Sharia-based political order or advocated violent jihad as a duty that should be of paramount importance to a Muslim.” Another 30% of mosques in the United States “had only texts that were moderately supportive of violence,” while only “19% had no violent texts at all.”

This yet again contradicts the universally held assumption that U.S. mosques are completely benign institutions, in all respects equivalent to churches and synagogues. As long ago as 1998, Sheikh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani, a Sufi leader, visited 114 mosques in the United States. Then he gave testimony before a State Department open forum in January 1999 declaring that Islamic supremacists controlled most mosques in America .

“The most dangerous thing that is going on now in these mosques,” Kabbani said, “that has been sent upon these mosques around the United States—like churches they were established by different organizations and that is okay—but the problem with our communities is the extremist ideology. Because they are very active, they took over the mosques, and we can say that they took over more than 80% of the mosques that have been established in the U.S. And there are more than 3,000 mosques in the U.S. So it means that the methodology or ideology of extremists has been spread to 80% of the Muslim population, but not all of them agree with it.”

Terrorism expert Yehudit Barsky affirmed the same thing in 2005, saying that 80% of the mosques in this country “have been radicalized by Saudi money and influence.” The Center for Religious Freedom in 2005 found a massive distribution of hateful jihadist and Islamic supremacist material in mosques in this country. The Mapping Sharia Project’s 2008 study likewise found that upwards of 80% of mosques in America were preaching hatred of Jews and Christians and the necessity ultimately to impose Islamic rule.

And in June 2008, federal investigators found that the Islamic Saudi Academy in Virginia, despite promises to stop teaching such material, was still using books that advocated that apostates from Islam be executed and that it was permissible for Muslims to kill and seize the property of “polytheists.”

What is most arresting about these studies is their unanimity. Although each was conducted independently of the others, they all came to the same conclusion: that around three-quarters of mosques in this country are teaching what amounts to sedition. And yet the mainstream media has shown about as much interest in the new survey as they did in the others—that is, none at all.

Maybe they figure that it could be worse. After all, in recent years we have seen mosques used to preach hatred, to spread exhortations to terrorist activity, to house a bomb factory, to store weapons, to disseminate messages from Osama bin Laden, to demand that non-Muslims conform to Islamic dietary restrictions, to fire on American troops, to fire upon Indian troops and to train jihadists. But most of that took place outside the United States, so who cares? We know the mosques inside this country are different! And on what do we base this certainty? Why, nothing, nothing at all except for the bland and smiling assurances of Muslim leaders in this country that mosques are simply places of worship, no more, no less, and that anyone who thinks otherwise is a greasy Islamophobe.

It is time to be more realistic. At the very least, reporters all over the country should be asking pointed questions of local mosque leaders about the books they’re using and what they’re teaching in general. And they should call on them to give honest, verifiable answers.

It is more likely, however, that this study, like the others, will simply be ignored. But don’t let that happen. Call upon your elected officials and the media to take notice of this new survey. Our freedoms depend on it.

Mr. Spencer is director of Jihad Watch and author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades), The Truth About Muhammad, Stealth Jihad and The Complete Infidel's Guide to the Koran (all from Regnery-a HUMAN EVENTS sister company).

Human Events

The Muslim Wall of Silence

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Tue, 14 Jun 2011 16:35:00 -0400

by The Anti-Jihadist

The inaptly dubbed “War on Terror” continues to run up an ever-higher body count. In the nearly ten years since 9-11, the so-called “Religion of Peace” has racked up over 17,000 deadly attacks, killing tens of thousands all over the globe (all carefully documented by the indefatigable folks at aptly-named site The Religion of Peace). With the body count ratcheting ever higher on a daily basis, why do many if not the majority of Muslims seem so indifferent to the carnage, or worse, even enthusiastic about the never-ending bloodshed committed in the name of Islam? In fact, Muslims have proven themselves highly resistant to the idea of criticizing their coreligionists, no matter what outrage has been committed.

For a Malaysian example of this disturbing behaviour, let’s examine the Malaysian reactions to the passing of Dr. Azahari Husin in 2005. Doctor Azahari — a former Malaysian university professor — was a committed jihadist and chief bombmaker for the terrorist group Jemaah Islamiyah. As you may recall, he was directly implicated in both Bali bombings (2002 and 2005), the JW Mariott hotel bombing in Jakarta in 2003, and the Australian embassy bombing in Jakarta in 2004. Azahari was in fact an unrepentant mass murderer, responsible for the deaths of hundreds of innocent people. But, as his family and the Malaysian media would have it, he was also supposedly a ‘genuinely warm and caring kind of guy’ who selflessly went to serve a ‘higher cause’.

Here is the kind of spin his family put on the ‘fondly remembered’ Doctor Azahari, as was published verbatim in a Malaysian newspaper at the time (link unavailable):

…in his family, he was a respected big brother whose skills in Maths and zest for sports were a source of inspiration to his nine siblings. Azahari Husin’s sister, Suraya, 45, recalled that her brother loved cowboy movies and thought girls were “soppy”. … He loved the outdoors and once hitchhiked on a lorry from the premier Malay College (in) Kuala Kangsar, where he studied, to his home in Jasin as a teenager. When he studied in Australia, he took motorcycle excursions across the desert. He loved orchids and sports cars.

And while the family found plenty of wonderful memories to share with the sympathetic Malaysian media, there was nary a trace of condemnation of the late doctor’s multi-year murder spree. Azahari’s family did have this to say about the notorious terrorist in the family:

“… our family and friends never interfered with what my brother did. That’s the integrity of our family,” said (a younger sister of Dr Azahari Husin.) … “People can say what they want, but I know my brother,” she said when pressed for comments by newsmen at her house in Jalan Chin Chin here yesterday.

Azahari also received a hero’s send-off at his funeral in his hometown of Jasin, a small town several hours’ drive south of the Malaysian capital Kuala Lumpur. The ceremony attracted some 600 well wishers, who repeatedly chanted ‘Allahu akbar’ during the funeral. Many present at the ceremony also voiced skepticism of Azahari’s role as a top terrorist. “Azahari will always have friends here. We shouldn’t be asked to believe what is written about him in the newspapers,” said one man who refused to identify himself.

These are very curious reactions all around, at the very least. Given multiple opportunities to condemn terrorism, and to pronounce how un-Islamic all this terrorism supposedly is, Azahari’s family, friends and neighbours all refused to so state. Rather the opposite, actually — in particular, Azahari’s sister said for the record that family and friends “…never interfered with what my brother did”. This is a disturbingly noncommittal thing to say about a man intimately involved in carrying out mass murder, and for conspiring to commit even more mass murder. Indeed, it could even be construed as approval.

Compare the (at best) tepid response of the Azahari family and other Malaysian Muslims to the response of another family that had one of its own become a mass murderer — the family of Cho Seung Hui. Cho, as many no doubt remember, was a Korean American who murdered 32 people in 2007 at a university in Virginia before taking his own life. In the aftermath of this devastating tragedy, the family issued a powerful and eloquent statement to the world and to the relatives of the victims. This statement reads, in part:

On behalf of our family, we are so deeply sorry for the devastation my brother has caused. No words can express our sadness that 32 innocent people lost their lives this week in such a terrible, senseless tragedy. We are heartbroken. … We pray for their families and loved ones who are experiencing so much excruciating grief. And we pray for those who were injured and for those whose lives are changed forever because of what they witnessed and experienced.

It is telling that despite their shock, grief and unimaginable horror, the Cho family managed to compose and release this brief, but articulate public statement. In no uncertain terms, it makes it clear how the Cho family felt about the actions of their loved one, a loved one who, like Azahari Husin, mercilessly slaughtered so many. And still, this one simple statement is light years ahead of anything ever spoken by any of the family or friends of Dr. Azahari.

Why is it that to this day the Azahari family has chosen to say nothing even remotely similar? And in a more general vein, why haven’t any of the families of the 9-11 hijackers (who mostly reside in the supposed US ally Saudi Arabia) issued statements like the Cho family? Or the families of the countless other jihadists who have committed more than 17,000 acts of murder and mayhem in the past ten years? Where are their apologies? Indeed, why do all of these Muslim families to this day steadfastly refuse to denounce the unspeakable crimes of their loved ones?

The explanation for this wall of silence is simple yet troubling: while a lot of Muslims may talk of peaceful co-existence, in actuality they tacitly approve of what Islamic terrorists do. These terrorists are, rather often, lionized as heroes in the Islamic world.

Now, it is admittedly true that some Muslim groups have come forward to denounce Islamic terror. But for every Muslim or Muslim group that publicly comes forward, many others choose not to. And considering what sort of hateful, Quranically inspired rhetoric is being preached in many if not most American mosques nowadays, how can we trust that these Muslim condemnations that are heard are anything close to sincere?

The official policy of Muslim countries like Malaysia is to condemn Islamic terrorism. When need be — often right after a spectacular Muslim terrorist attack — Muslim countries and organisations are quick to release generalised, pro-forma, mealy-mouthed condemnations of ‘terrorism’. Strangely enough, however, they can never get around to disavowing Hamas, Hizbullah, Al Qaeda, etc. specifically and by name. Even if such pronouncements disavowed any group specifically, the feelings expressed in the Muslim media and by the Muslims themselves have shown how worthless Muslim denouncements of terrorism really are.

Many naive Westerners are convinced that all these pro-terrorist attitudes will fade away once economic prosperity comes to the Islamic world. It’s important to remember that many, perhaps most middle and upper class Muslims are firmly in favor of Islamic terrorism. Underscoring this truth is the fact that many Islamic terrorists hail from educated, prosperous middle and upper class families — Osama bin Laden was from the richest non-royal family in Saudi Arabia, and New York Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad’s father is an air vice marshal in Pakistan’s Air Force, to name but two examples.

So let’s just face the fact that, if you are a non Muslim — and most people on the planet are — a whole lot of Muslims want you dead or converted to Islam…unless you’re Jewish, in which case, only dead will do.

But don’t just take my word for it. You can look it up…in the Muslim media.

The Anti-Jihadist is the pseudonym of a counter-jihad htwriter, activist and critic of Islam who resides in a majority Muslim country. His work can also be found at Jihad Watch, Infidel Bloggers Alliance and Pedestrian Infidel.

Front Page Magazine

Islam is Peace

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Wed, 18 May 2011 18:57:00 -0400

Islam is peace said the Muslims as they wiped out the pagans of Arabia. Islam is peace said the Muslims who invaded Egypt and subjugated the Copts. Islam is peace said the Muslims to the Zoroastrians as they fled to India. Islam is peace said the Muslims who slaughtered Hindus and Buddhists. Islam is peace said the Muslims while they slaughtered Sikhs and Armenians. Islam is peace said the Muslims while they the blew the worlds oldest Buddhas into bits. And now Muslims say Islam peace while they... _________________!

Please submit suggestions to fill in the blank in my comment section! We have SO many to choose from...

Why Are European Leaders Instigating All-Out War in the Middle East?

noreply@blogger.com (Speedy) — Mon, 16 May 2011 00:57:00 -0400

by Eldad Tzioni
Posted on May 12 2011 2:00 pm

Since World War II, Europeans have been understandably skittish about doing anything that could lead to armed conflict. Europe, and later the EU, has generally stuck to using negotiations and (in extreme cases) sanctions as the only tools in their arsenal to cajole dictators and despots to get in line.

Not surprisingly, this strategy often fails.

Nevertheless, one can understand the European fear of conflict. Europe was devastated by WWII and the collective memory of the horrors of that war are still raw. Medium-sized towns in Europe lost more people in the war than America lost on 9/11.

All of this makes the recent flurry of stories about European countries being eager to recognize a Palestinian state all the more puzzling.

British Prime Minister David Cameron has said that Britain is prepared to formally recognize an independent Palestinian state in September unless Israel opens peace talks with the Palestinians. (He somehow didn’t seem to notice that it has been “moderate” Mahmoud Abbas who has resisted negotiations, not Israel.)

French President Sarkozy has made a similar statement. So has Norway’s foreign minister. Spain doesn’t look too far behind.

Such a unilateral move is a recipe for disaster.

Negotiations are meant to solve the biggest issues between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs: Israeli towns and villages in Judea and Samaria, Arab prisoners in Israeli jails, water resources, Palestinian Arabs who live in other countries wanting to “return” to Israel, incitement to terrorism in the Palestinian Arab media and schoolbooks, Israel’s security, and Jerusalem. By recognizing a state, Europe would not be solving a single one of these issues. On the contrary, they will be exacerbating them.

Today, despite these outstanding issues, there is relative peace. Palestinian Arabs in the West Bank are doing well economically, they are not worried about Israeli army actions, their travel restrictions have been consistently diminishing, and they have more autonomy than they have ever had in their history. Even in Gaza, under the autocratic rule of Hamas, as long as Hamas is stopping rocket fire the Gazans can start to gain a semblance of normal lives.

If “Palestine” is unilaterally declared, all of the gains over the past two decades would disappear in an instant.

Israel’s Oslo obligations would no longer exist. Security cooperation between Israel and the new “Palestine” would disappear. The Palestinian state would consider Israel to be its enemy (this language is used daily in mainstream Palestinian Arab media). The peace treaty that the PLO signed with Israel would be null and void because the PLO would no longer exist. Israel would no longer provide electricity to Gaza – part of an enemy state. Tax revenue collected by Israel that make up 70% of the PA budget would disappear.

Most importantly, it would solve none of the issues that are outstanding in the conflict. On the contrary, it will encourage Israel to make its own unilateral moves concerning land, water, Jerusalem and so forth.

“Palestine” would not want to naturalize millions of Arabs of Palestinian descent who now live in Jordan, Syria and Lebanon, and their problem of being forced to remain stateless by the Arab League will remain. In fact, the Palestinian entity would continue to insist that they move to Israel, destroying the Jewish state demographically–a negotiating position that they have never wavered on, and a problem that is kept artificially alive by the Arab states.

Any of these issues–”refugees,” land, water, Jerusalem–is enough to spark a regional conflict. Together, such a conflict is inevitable.

Only Israel has made real, concrete concessions during the long Oslo process. The PLO has not only not budged–they have bragged about their own intransigence. If the Europeans decide to recognize a Palestinian Arab state, they would be rewarding intransigence. And if that state includes Hamas, then the EU will also be explicitly rewarding terror.

One thing is certain: if a Palestinian Arab state becomes generally recognized by thttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifhe world community in September 2011, then the Palestinian Arabs who such a state is supposedly meant to help will be in a much worse situation for years, if not decades, afterwards. Terrorism–which has been successfully fought by Israel over the past eight years–will return, as the Palestinian Arab security forces would abandon all cooperation with Israel. Hezbollah and Hamas would be emboldened to increase rocket fire and other terror attacks.

More likely than not, European recognition of a Palestinian Arab state will culminate in another major Middle East war–and possibly a series of them.

Is this what the EU really wants?

Elder of Ziyon