 The liberal milieu and mainstream media are baffled: What could have possibly led the 23-year-old Nigerian boy Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to attempt jihadi suicide on a passenger plane? How could such a nice, educated Islamic boy, who grew up in a rich and prosperous family, have come under the “radical” and “extreme” influences that set him on his violent course? It’s just all so mysterious. It’s so mysterious that the news anchors on CNN continue to incredulously ask each other and their guests these questions — back and forth, over and over again, in a cyclical circus that has no end and that never produces the most obvious answer staring any sensible person right in the face.
In the liberal imagination, there is just this “extremist ideology” out there somewhere and somehow this unfortunate Muslim boy fell under its spell, but no one can be exactly sure how or why it happened. All one can be sure of is that an adversarial culture or ideology must not be blamed and that America, somewhere, somehow, must definitely be at fault. And so, when it comes to the liberal left trying to digest Abdulmutallab and his suicidal quest, perplexed dismay becomes a much safer hiding place than honesty, because the basic truth threatens the very survival of the liberal faith.
For the liberal to accept the evident reason why Abdulmutallab set off on his suicide odyssey would necessitate him having to completely shed himself of his entire worldview and personal identity.
The much easier route, therefore, is to keep oneself confused and to stay focused on how American capitalism and imperialism must have surely had something to do with it — even though, as is the case with the cause of Islamic terror itself, these factors are so obviously not involved in Abdulmutallab’s suicidal and murderous yearnings (i.e., Abdulmutallab comes from a privileged, wealthy, and educated life, etc.). What the lib-left milieu simply can’t digest is what Islamic terrorists like Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab themselves insist motivated them. And these are things like, you know, reading certain religious texts and following a certain religion’s teachings. They are things, sort of like, well, following Islam and reading the Koran and stuff like that. When all is said and done, the true reasons why Abdulmutallab embarked on his murderous mission of suicide are completely understandable — and only to be expected — in the context of his Islamic odyssey. And Abdulmutallab himself clearly points to the influence of his religion in his own personal writings on the internet. To continue reading this article, click here. FPM 
 By Ian Drury and Andy Dolan More than 120,000 people had last night signed an internet petition protesting about plans by Islamic extremists to march through Wootton Bassett. Hate preacher Anjem Choudary sparked outrage by saying his radical group Islam4UK would parade through the town renowned for honouring soldiers killed in Afghanistan. The firebrand cleric said 500 of his supporters would carry 'symbolic coffins' in memory of the Muslim civilians ' murdered by merciless' coalition forces.
In remarks designed to cause maximum offence, he compared fallen British heroes to Nazi stormtroopers and the September 11 and July 7 terrorists. He even claimed his plan was backed by families of servicemen and women. But MPs, military chiefs, moderate Muslims and councillors expressed horror that 42-year-old Choudary was 'hijacking' the town for political purposes. In less than 48 hours, more than 120,000 people joined a Facebook campaign opposing the march by Islam4UK, which calls itself a 'platform' for the banned extremist group al-Muhajiroun. Petition organiser Jo Cleary, who works with service families, urged supporters to express their 'alarm and distress' to Wiltshire Police in a bid to stop the plan. She said: 'This group can march anywhere it wishes in the country but has chosen Wootton Bassett to cause outrage and offence. We need our politicians to make a statement saying that this march will never take place.'
Peter Fullarton, whose son James, 24, was killed by a Taliban bomb only weeks after proposing to his fiancee last year said the Government must ban the march or risk an 'uproar'. He said: 'Not only will it be an incredible insult to our war dead and to the fantastic town of Wootton Bassett, but there could be a riot, white extremists could use it as justification for attacks, people could end up being killed. We lost 108 soldiers in Afghanistan last year. For them, if for nobody else, these sickening plans must be stopped.' Steve Minter, whose son-in-law Serjeant Paul McAleese was also killed by a bomb, said: 'I am all for free speech, but this is an abuse of our tolerant democracy.
'Too many of these extremists have been allowed to make Britain their home because they have won the right to political asylum, then they abuse our decency by putting forward views that would lead to execution in their own country. 'If this march goes ahead - and I hope to God it does not - the police will have an awful job on their hands. I for one will be there to protest.'
Wooton Bassett has a tradition of parading the coffins of local soldiers that died in combat through the town Shahid Murasaleen, from the moderate Muslim group Minhajul-Quran International UK, said: 'Extremists like these always claim to speak for Islam and British Muslims yet they are not qualified to do either. This march will achieve nothing other than to incite hate crime against innocent law-abiding Muslims.' The market town near Swindon has become a symbol of the public's respect for the troops who make the ultimate sacrifice. Hundreds of mourners line the High Street to pay silent tribute to service personnel repatriated through nearby RAF Lyneham. Former mayor Chris Wannell said: 'We are a traditional old English market town who honour very much our Queen and country. If this man has any decency about him he will not hold a march through Wootton Bassett.' Wiltshire Police confirmed that they were aware of the plan, although Choudary had not contacted them. Islam4UK will have to tell police the date, time and route of a proposed procession. A police spokesman said: 'If a march is believed to be likely to result in serious disorder, disruption or damage, then the police can impose conditions upon the organiser. In exceptional circumstances, police may apply to the local authority for an order prohibiting such a march.' Mail Online
 Swiss magazine Die Weltwoche reports on an a study of Swiss imams.
Switzerland has about 200 mosques, but nobody really knows what is preached in them.
Neither does the government, who investigated the issue. The study was presented to the parliamentary security committee. The media asked for it to be published, but the government classified it as confidential. The Federal Council says that it's not being published since it doesn't include anything which hasn't been dealt with in the media before.
The 17 page study "Islamist Imams", is dated from Jan. 29, 2008. It apparently contains several controversial findings.
The study begins by saying that most Muslims can practice their faith while following the constitution. Religion is rarely the main reason for integration problems.
A minority of imams, however, preach radically, in a way which prevents the integration of Muslims. At least 8 imams in a dozen mosques preach a radical interpretation of Islam. These mosques are located in the cantons of Geneva, Neuenburg (2), Vaud (2), Valais, Bern, Basel (2), Lucerne and Zurich (2). These mosques are mostly Arab mosques, and seven of the eight imams are North Africans. This corresponds to the known pattern that most of the Islamist activists in Switzerland are Arabs.
It's possible that these eight imams are just the tip of the iceberg, since there is a shortage of data and resources. The report says that it isn't possible to know how many imams carry on extremist and violent propaganda, or in how many mosques such an Islamist vision is being preached. The reason is legal barriers for intelligence gathering and lack of specific studies.
The report notes that the DAP, the Swiss Security Service, has no concrete information about preaching ongoing in the 200 Swiss mosques. There is only one exception: an imam in the Canton of Bern (apparently in Biel), who 'voluntarily' handed in to the authorities eight of his sermons made in 2000 to 2004.
The imam, who preaches a Wahhabi interpretation of Islam, supports suicide attacks in the occupied areas of the Muslim world. He also says regularly that Jihadists in these regions should be encouraged and asked his flock for financial support for Jihadists.
According to the report, the sermons were usually explosive. He preached about the eternal irreconcilability between the Christian 'crusaders' and the Muslims. The imam told his listeners that violent Jihad against non-Muslims could also be practiced in the West, once converts to Islam will achieve a critical mass.
Quoting the Koran, the imam taught that Muslims were called for violence against Christians and Jews to get them to submit to Islamic domination. The Muslims were urged not to submit to a non-Islamic secular order. It was necessary to champion violent Jihad in order to establish an Islamic state in the Arab world and to re-establish the Caliphate. The preacher called specifically for violent Jihad against the Crusaders in the Arab world, particularly in Iraq. The moderate Muslims were branded the 'worst enemies of Islam'.
This imam was also one of the organizers of the protest against the Danish Mohammed cartoons, which took place on Feb. 2006 in the Bundesplatz. About 600 people attended, almost all Arabs, and a few dozen Salafists, according to the report.
The hate preaching of the imams has an effect. A young Tunisian, who was radicalized under the influence of the imam, went to Syria in 2005 and then to Iraq to join the Jihad. In Iraq he joined the 'martyr's brigade', fighting for the local al-Qaeda. Apparently the Tunisian from the Bern mosque couldn't achieve his wish for an act of martyrdom, and he was killed by the coalition forces in April 2006.
In addition to the imam from Biel, the report mentions other examples of hate preachers. In the mosque of Kriens, a Libyan with a permanent residence permit incites his followers to violence. The report says that it's said that he calls the Swiss apes and infidel pigs and supports their extermination. While the report was being written the man was still active in calling for violence in occupied Muslim areas, whether perceived or real.
The information about the Kriens imam is based on 'hearsay'. Which indicates a basic problem for Swiss intelligence: by law their work ends at the door to the mosque. The Muslim mosques are considered private areas, and the intelligence services have their hands tied. They cannot tape the sermons, neither video nor audio. In order to know what is being taught in the mosques, the intelligence services need a person who is continuously in the mosque, who knows the language and who memorizes the sermons.
Once an imam is identified as a hate preacher, there are means to confront him, which are described in the report as 'adequate'. These only apply if the imam is officially registered in Switzerland. For 'unofficial' imams, who come to Switzerland for a limited amount of time and then move on, the available resources to confront them are 'limited'.
The report suggests several ways to deal with the phenomenon of Islamist imams. The Federal Office for Migration was commissioned to check the possibility by the end of 2008 of a Swiss university project to study the number, original and theological bent of official Swiss imams. The Justice Ministry was asked to submit proposals by mid-2009, on how to better control the entry of hate preachers. And the Ministry of Internal Affairs was asked to develop imam training following the example of other European countries.
When Weltwoche tried to check on whether these proposals were followed, they got the run-around.
An attempt to change the law and allow for intelligence gathering in the private space did not pass parliament.
Source: Weltwoche (German), h/t PI Thanks to Islam in Europe
 JERUSALEM — Israeli authorities have arrested a Jewish-American extremist suspected of carrying out a series of high-profile hate crimes against Arabs, peace activists and a breakaway Jewish sect. Israel's Shin Bet security service says Jack Teitel, a 37-year-old ultra-Orthodox West Bank settler, is behind the attacks, spanning 12 years. Police and security forces said Sunday that Teitel's targets included the murder of two Arabs and bombing attacks against a prominent left-wing academic, a family of messianic Jews, a monastery and Israeli police, whom he accused of begin pro-gay. Authorities originally suspected a Jewish underground for some of the attacks. But acquaintances described the father of four as a lone wolf, and authorities say he acted alone. Source: FoxNews
 18.10.08
Psychologists in the Prison Service will try to ‘cure’ extremist Muslim inmates of their political beliefs with controversial therapies similar to those used to ‘de-programme’ members of religious cults.
The experimental treatments are being developed by a special Extremism Unit set up by the Ministry of Justice in January last year, The Mail on Sunday has discovered.
Sources say the therapy forms part of a wide-ranging strategy to combat Islamic extremism in Britain’s jails.
Experimental techniques: One of Whitemoor Prison's Muslim inmates.
There are 90 Muslim prisoners serving time for terrorist offences, and the Ministry fears that, if left unchallenged, their violent, jihadist interpretation of Islam will spread.
About 11 per cent of prisoners are Muslim - three-and-a-half times the proportion in the UK population.
In maximum security ‘Category A’ jails such as Whitemoor in Cambridgeshire - the subject today of an exclusive report in Live magazine based on unprecedented access to both prisoners and staff - they make up 35 per cent of the inmates, and have converted numerous other prisoners to Islam.
In Whitemoor the 150 Muslim inmates include 39 who have converted in the jail since early last year. In some cases, officers believe converts have been subjected to bullying and changed their faith because they felt vulnerable.
A Ministry source said that to be a Muslim in jail was now seen as ‘cool’, and while Muslim prisoners once felt isolated and vulnerable, they were now ‘flexing their muscles’. This made it all the more important to ensure that extremist views did not spread.
The source added: ‘The great fear is that kids from places such as Southall in West London, who feel pretty alienated anyway, could be vulnerable to recruitment. We don’t have evidence this is happening - but we don’t have evidence that it’s not. We need to be aware of the possibility and act on it.’
Psychologists working with the Extremism Unit have for months been investigating ways of de-programming jihadists. Ministry sources said they planned to use ‘cognitive- behaviour’ methods, based on the notion that it is possible to change people’s behaviour by altering their perceptions and attitudes.
One source said: ‘It’s pretty clear it wouldn’t work with everyone. But our view of extremism is that, at the centre, the views of the hardcore, high-profile leaders will not be subject to change. But for those further out, it may be quite effective.’
Another source said: ‘Our focus is on protecting the public and on reducing the risk of offenders hurting others. It’s about stopping violence.’
Therapists would work with such prisoners individually, while the treatments would help the Prison Service determine whether prisoners would still be dangerous if released.
On the front line are approximately 150 prison imams, who are expected to challenge extremist beliefs on the basis of their own religious knowledge.
One source said: ‘We’re looking to them to shoot down the religious justification for violence. They have to be able to stand up to those who support terrorist killers and say they are wrong.’
At the same time, the Ministry had to accept that many Muslims felt a deep sense of grievance about British policy in Afghanistan and Iraq. Imams ‘have to become a valve for the venting of prisoners’ anger without lending support to extremism themselves’.
The unit will train staff to recognise the signs of extremism, such as a charismatic prisoner openly challenging the authority of the imam.
But one source said: ‘The great majority of Muslims want nothing to do with terrorism. Striking the balance is extremely delicate.’ Source: This Is London
The terminology we use to describe our enemy in the war on terror matters a lot. A spirited debate is underway among specialists and in the press. An op-ed published Monday in the New York Times entitled "What do you call a Terror(Jihad)ist?", by P.W. Singer and Elina Noor, attempts to defend the recent State Department memo advising government personal to refrain from using theologically-laden terms-"jihadi," "mujahidin," "caliphate," "Islamo-fascism," "salafi," "wahhabi," "ummah"-when describing Islamic radicals and their motives. Instead, generics-"terrorists," "extremists"-should suffice. Read more ...Source: American Thinker
 Another U.S. threat assessment has been issued that refuses to identify the enemy threatening us, and instead defines the enemy only as "extremists." Today's annual threat assessment from the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) fails to use the terms "Jihad", "Jihadist", "Islamism," or "Islamist" in identifying the enemy. The question must be asked how the U.S. can meaningfully assess threats, if it can't even identify the enemy. The term "radical Islamic" (used twice) and "militant Islamic" (used once) is the only term close to "Islamist", and such terms as "radical" and "militant" have very different meanings to different people. Predominantly, when describing the enemy, the DNI annual assessment today uses the term "extremist(s)" (used 18 times) or "extremism" (used twice). In effect, the DNI views that America is fighting a war against "extremism." This follows last week's State of the Union message where the term "extremist" was the primary definition of the enemy, with the term extremism, extremist(s) used nine times in defining the enemy (see recent columns on this by Counterterrorism Blog's Andrew Cochran and by Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, the founder and Chairman of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy). Our national leadership continues to ignore political "Islamism" as defined in the 9/11 Commission report, and refuses to make the distinction, as per Dr. Jasser, between "personal spiritual Islam from political Islam," but instead addresses threats from ambiguously defined "extremists" as its primary concern. Read more ...Source: Family Security Matters
By Stephen C. Coughlin, Esq. In comments made at the National Defense University on 1 December 2005, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Peter Pace explained to his audience the importance of “understand[ing] the nature of the enemy” if we hope to defeat jihadi extremists. Comparing our situation today, with that faced by an earlier generation who had to deal with the reality of the Nazi threat, General Pace suggested a simple solution to complying with his injunction: “read what our enemies have said. Remember Hitler…. He said in writing exactly what his plan was that we collectively ignored to our great detriment (emphasis added).” Just as we ignored Hitler’s articulation of his strategic doctrine in Mein Kampf, so too are we on the verge of suffering a similar fate today, if we fail to seriously assess the extremist threat based on jihadi strategic doctrine. Read more ...Source: Strategy Center
 |
|
|
Copyright Muslims Against Sharia 2008. All rights reserved.
E-mail: info AT ReformIslam.org
|
|
|
The liberal milieu and mainstream media are baffled: What could have possibly led the 23-year-old Nigerian boy Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to attempt jihadi suicide on a passenger plane? 
Posts
