Muslims Against Sharia praise the courage of Lars Vilks, Ulf Johansson, Thorbjorn Larsson and the staff of Nerikes Allehanda and Dagens Nyheter and condemn threats issued by Abu Omar Al Baghdadi and the Islamic State of Iraq. Muslims Against Sharia will provide a payment of 100,000kr (about $15,000) for the information leading to capture or neutralization of Abu Omar Al Baghdadi.
Muslimer mot Sharia berömmer Lars Vilks, Ulf Johansson, Torbjörn Larsson och övriga anställda på Nerikes Allehanda och Dagens Nyheter för deras tapperhet och fördömer hotet från Abu Omar Al Baghdadi och Islamistiska Iraq. Muslimer mot Sharia betalar 100 000 SEK (ca 15 000$) för information som leder till gripande eller oskadligörande av Abu Omar Al Baghdadi.
If someone wants to donate money for the bounty, please visit http://www.reformislam.org/support/. When making a donation, please make a note: for Al Baghdadi bounty. We will add the amount on top of 100,000kr. If the bounty is not paid for any reason, you will have an option of a refund.
Clarification: "capture or neutralization of Abu Omar Al Baghdadi" means "capture or neutralization of Abu Omar Al Baghdadi or whomever uses the pseudonym."
Muslims Against Sharia denounce the decision by the Indianapolis International Airport to install footbaths. The controversy will further alienate the non-Muslim population. Footbaths will be used as urinals, which will provoke tensions, and more importantly, installing religious ritualistic devices on public property clearly violates the separation of Church and State.
That's one small step for Islamists towards Islamization of the West, one giant leap for Americans towards Dhimmitude.
DEARBORN - Houssein Zorkot, a 26-year-old Dearborn resident, was arraigned Tuesday in 19th District Court on multiple felony charges, including carrying a dangerous weapon with unlawful intent — a five-year felony.
Zorkot, a third-year medical student at Wayne State University, was allegedly armed with an AK-47 assault rifle and dressed in black clothing with camouflage paint covering his face when he was arrested Saturday in Hemlock Park.
According to police, Zorkot was observed attempting to leave the park in a black SUV after officers had received reports of a man carrying a rifle in the area. He was placed under arrest and is scheduled to undergo a preliminary examination at 9 a.m. Sept. 21 in 19th District Court.
Zorkot has also been charged with one count of possession of a loaded firearm in a motor vehicle and one count of felony firearm. He remains in custody on a $1 million bond (cash, no 10 percent).
For more on this story, see Sunday’s edition of the Press & Guide.
Contact Staff Writer Sean Delaney at (313) 359-7820 or sdelaney@heritage.com.
to educate Muslims about dangers presented by Islamic religious texts and why Islam must be reformed
to educate non-Muslims about the differences between moderate Muslims and Islamists (a.k.a. Islamic Religious Fanatics, Radical Muslims, Muslim Fundamentalists, Islamic Extremists or Islamofascists)
to educate both Muslims and non-Muslims alike that Moderate Muslims are also targets of Islamic Terror
OUR MANIFESTO
Acknowledging mistakes The majority of the terrorist acts of the last three decades, including the 9/11 attacks, were perpetrated by Islamic fundamentalists in the name of Islam. We, as Muslims, find it abhorrent that Islam is used to murder millions of innocent people, Muslims and non-Muslims alike.
Inconsistencies in the Koran Unfortunately, Islamic religious texts, including the Koran and the Hadith contain many passages, which call for Islamic domination and incite violence against non-Muslims. It is time to change that. Muslim fundamentalists believe that the Koran is the literal word of Allah. But could Allah, the most Merciful, the most Compassionate, command mass slaughter of people whose only fault is being non-Muslim?
The Koran & the Bible Many Bible figures from Adam to Jesus (Isa) are considered to be prophets and are respected by Islam. Islamic scholars however believe that both the Old and the New Testament came from God, but that they were corrupted by the Jews and Christians over time. While neither Testament calls for mass murder of unbelievers, the Koran does. Could it be possible that the Koran itself was corrupted by Muslims over the last thirteen centuries?
The need for reform Islam, in its present form, is not compatible with principles of freedom and democracy. Twenty-first century Muslims have two options: we can continue the barbaric policies of the seventh century perpetuated by Hassan al-Banna, Abdullah Azzam, Yassir Arafat, Ruhollah Khomeini, Osama bin Laden, Muslim Brotherhood, al-Qaeda, Hizballah, Hamas, Hizb-ut-Tahrir, etc., leading to a global war between Dar al-Islam (Islamic World) and Dar al-Harb (non-Islamic World), or we can reform Islam to keep our rich cultural heritage and to cleanse our religion from the reviled relics of the past. We, as Muslims who desire to live in harmony with people of other religions, agnostics, and atheists choose the latter option. We can no longer allow Islamic extremists to use our religion as a weapon. We must protect future generations of Muslims from being brainwashed by the Islamic radicals. If we do not stop the spread of Islamic fundamentalism, our children will become homicidal zombies.
Accepting responsibilities To start the healing process, we must acknowledge evils done by Muslims in the name of Islam and accept responsibility for those evils. We must remove evil passages from Islamic religious texts, so that future generations of Muslims will not be confused by conflicting messages. Our religious message should be loud and clear: Islam is peace; Islam is love; Islam is light. War, murder, violence, divisiveness & discrimination are not Islamic values.
Religious privacy Religion is the private matter of every individual. Any person should be able to freely practice any religion as long as the practice does not interfere with the local laws, and no person must be forced to practice any religion. Just as people are created equal, there is no one religion that is superior to another. Any set of beliefs that is spread by force is fundamentally immoral; it is no longer a religion, but a political ideology.
Equality Islam is one of the many of the world's religions. There will be no Peace and Harmony in the World if Muslims and non-Muslims do not have equal rights. Islamic supremacy doctrine is just as repulsive as Aryan supremacy doctrine. History clearly shows what happens to the society whose members consider themselves above other peoples. All moderate Muslims must repudiate the mere notion of Islamic supremacy.
Sharia Sharia Law must be abolished, because it is incompatible with norms of modern society.
Outdated practices Any practices that might have been acceptable in the Seventh Century; i.e., stoning, cutting off body parts, marrying and/or having sex with children or animals, must be condemned by every Muslim.
Outdated verses The following verses promote divisiveness and religious hatred, bigotry and discrimination. They must be either removed from the Koran or declared outdated and invalid, and marked as such.
Outdated words & phrases Use of the following words and phrases or their variations must be prohibited during religious services: • Infidel / Unbeliever: these terms have negative connotation and promote divisiveness and animosity; Islam is not the only religion • Jihad: this word is often interpreted as Holy War against non-Muslims • Mujaheed/Holy Warrior: no more wars in the name of Islam • American (Christian / Crusader / Israeli / Zionist) occupation: these terms promote bigotry; at this point in time, Muslims living in non-Muslim lands have more freedoms than Muslims living in Muslim lands
Islam vs. violence Islam has no place for violence. Any person calling for an act of violence in the name of Islam must be promptly excommunicated. Any grievances must be addressed by lawful authorities. It is the religious and civic duty of every Muslim to unconditionally condemn any act of terrorism perpetrated in the name of Islam. Any Muslim group that has ties to terrorism in any way, shape, or form, must be universally condemned by both religious and secular Muslims.
Portrayal of Prophets While portrayal of Prophets is not an acceptable practice in Islam could be personally offensive to some Muslims, other religions do not have such restrictions. Therefore, the portrayal of the Prophets must be treated as a manifestation of free expression.
The Crusades vs. The Inquisition While the Inquisition was a repulsive practice by Christian Fundamentalists, the Crusades were not unprovoked acts of aggression, but rather attempts to recapture formerly Christian lands controlled by Muslims.
Brothers and Sisters! Do not make the next generation of Muslims clean up your mess! Fight Islamic Fascism now, so your children won't have to!
ABU DHABI — Qatar has banned the import and distribution of unauthorized Korans.
Officials said the Islamic Affairs Ministry has ordered mosques and clerics to use only Korans and other Islamic text approved by the government, Middle East Newsline reported. They said Al Qaida-aligned clerics have employed Korans revised to promote the doctrine of Islamic war against the West.
"This is one of several measures by the ministry to ensure that no copies of the Koran that contains mistakes would be circulated in the country," Mohammed Bin Hamad Ajlan Al Kuwari, director of inspections at the ministry, said.
Officials acknowledged that Korans revised by Al Qaida-aligned clerics have been distributed in Qatar. They said some of chapters in the Islamic text were removed.
The Qatari daily Al Sharq reported that an unidentified Qatari national has financed the publication and distribution of the revised Korans. The newspaper quoted Qatari sources as saying that many such Korans had been sent to the Gulf emirate.
Officials, who cited similar initiatives from other Gulf Cooperation Council states, said the Islamic Affairs Ministry has warned mosques and clerics not to accept donations of Korans without official permission. They said the ministry has established a panel to examine Korans to ensure that they had not been revised.
Al Kuwari said Qatar would ban the import of Korans unless they had been examined and approved by his ministry. He said Doha has already blocked shipments of Korans from unidentified countries.
Continuing in its efforts to help sanitize radical Muslims and present them as mainstream voices, the Washington Post and Newsweek, in their “On Faith” blog, published a piece from long-time Imam of the Islamic Society of Orange County, Muzammil Siddiqi.
“On Faith” describes Siddiqi as involved in “inter-faith initiatives, including participation in an inter-faith prayer service with President George W. Bush” and as the “Chairman of the Fiqh Council of North America, a body tasked with interpreting religious law throughout the continent.” (For more information on the pro-terrorism background of the Fiqh Council, read, “The American Islamic Leaders' 'Fatwa' is Bogus").
And speaking of that Fatwa, Siddiqi writes in his post:
Terrorism, suicide bombings or any other kind of bombings, shootings or violence that target civilians are totally forbidden in Islam and there is no justification for these acts. A body of Muslim jurists known as the Fiqh Council of North America has issued a strong Fatwa (religious ruling) against terrorism and suicide bombing. This Fatwa has been endorsed by hundreds of Islamic centers and mosques throughout North America.
If we are to trust that Siddiqi really believes what he writes, one would expect to find a string of denunciations by Siddiqi against terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, who have specifically targeted civilians for murder. Yet not only has that never happened (nor does the Fiqh Council’s “anti-terrorism” fatwa name Hamas, Hezbollah or any Islamic terrorist group), but when Siddiqi was President of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) in 1997, his organization received special thanks from Hamas leader Mousa Abu Marzook, who wrote that ISNA supported him through his jailing and extradition process, writing that such efforts “consoled” him. (That fact is likely one of the many reasons why federal prosecutors named ISNA an un-indicted co-conspirator in the current trial against the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development.)
And Siddiqi has made numerous pro-jihad statements in the past and has denied that 9/11 was carried about by Muslims.
In a video recording, made roughly 15 years ago, obtained by the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT), Siddiqi exhorted the successes of violent jihad, proclaiming:
When people really carry on Jihad, they carry on the Islam in its peak in its totality. And that’s why in the hadith the Prophet (SAS) said (Arabic), ‘No people have ever neglected Jihad except they became humiliated.’ And people leave, renounce Jihad, they became humiliated. That means in order to gain the honor, Jihad is the path, Jihad is the way to receive the honor.
The most first and foremost the most important effect of Jihad on Afghanistan on the Muslim Ummah at large because I do not see that Jihad of Afghanistan, only the victory of the Afghan people. Certainly it is the victory of the Afghan people, but I see it as the victory of the Muslim Ummah at large. I see it as the victory of Islam and in that sense it brings, aychsa, dignity and honor to the whole Muslim Ummah.
I can see that there is already some impact after Jihad in Afghanistan in the Intifada movement in Palestine. With this, more courage, more strength, more confidence and shall I even say that in a few years we will be celebrating with each other the victory of Islam in Palestine. Insh’allah, we shall be celebrating the coming of the Masjid al-Aqsa under the Islamic rule. We shall be celebrating insh’allah the coming of Jerusalem and the whole land of Palestine insh’allah and the establishment of the Islamic State throughout that area.
And as I first reported in American Jihad, at the Jerusalem Day Rally in Washington DC, October 28, 2000, Siddiqi said:
The people of Palestine, they were not given the right to return to their homes and to their land, like any refugees. Any people that you find that have occupied land, they have the right to return to their own land, they are not given that right. They are not given that right to go back. Jerusalem, which is the heart of the whole issue, Jerusalem has not been solved. There have been all types of accuses (sic) have been made. The land of Aqsa, the land of Jerusalem, is the land that belongs to Muslims.
The United States of America is directly and indirectly responsible for the plight of the Palestinian people. Our government is responsible for plenty of the injustice that is going on there. The United States is the greatest supporter of Israel – economically, militarily, and politically. We give billions of dollars to the State of Israel.
Our Congress and our media is blaming the victims, not the oppressors. The Palestinian demonstrators are not violent people. The violent people are those who are oppressing them day and night and for many years. We want to say to our government to respect the right of the Palestinian people. Do not be the blind supporters of oppressors. And al-Aqsa, my brothers and sisters, is our sacred mosque. It belongs to Islam. It belongs to all the Muslims of the world, 1.5 billion Muslims of the world, it belongs to them. We cannot accept any type to the al-Aqsa mosque. We cannot give up Jerusalem. Jerusalem belongs to Islam. We want justice and peace. We want justice for ourselves and as for everyone else. We do not want anyone mistreated. We want respect for all holy places and for all people.
We want our government to be on the side of justice and not on the side of oppression. We want our government not to be a blind supporter of Israel. We want our government to stop feeding the Israeli war machinery. We want to awaken the conscience of America. America has to learn that because if you remain on the side of injustice, the wrath of God will come. Please! Please all Americans, do you remember that, that Allah is watching everyone. God is watching everyone. If you continue doing injustice, and tolerating injustice, the wrath of God will come.
In the comments to Siddiqi’s post, he is asked whether he said the above (in particular, “America has to learn ... if you remain on the side of injustice, the wrath of God will come. Please, all Americans. Do you remember that? ... If you continue doing injustice, and tolerate injustice, the wrath of God will come.” By “injustice,” he meant U.S. support for Israel.”) and Siddiqi replied that the “statement is mutilated and distorted.”
Rather than being “mutilated and distorted,” Siddiqi said exactly that and more, calling for the destruction of Israel by “peaceful” means (the right of return), as well as violent means, supporting the violent jihad of the Palestinian terrorist groups and their suicide bombings, that Siddiqi euphemistically calls an “uprising,” and further stated that Jerusalem belongs to Muslims and Muslims alone, justifying violence to acquire it, which is all in contrast to his message of brotherly love and inter-faith relations that the Post and Newsweek uncritically published.
In a September 2002 speech at an ISNA convention, Siddiqi stated of 9/11, well after Osama Bin Laden took credit for the attacks:
It is, the point is that we said, whosoever did it, we condemn it. We did not say it is Muslims who did it. We did not say this and that. But the point is that whosoever did it, it was wrong. And this is a basic point … We cannot say in surety whoever did it or not. But the point is that if the name of Islam is taken, we have to clarify the name of Islam.
Yet Siddiqi’s radicalism is not limited to his own statements, but also to the company he keeps. In January of this year, the New Yorker published an article profiling a famous former congregant at Siddiqi’s mosque, Adam Gadahn (a.k.a. Azzam the American), which included the fact that Siddiqi had hosted the notorious Blind Sheikh to speak about jihad:
In December, 1992, Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, a prominent Egyptian cleric and Islamic radical also known as the Blind Sheikh, visited the Islamic Society to lecture about jihad, and Siddiqi sat beside him to translate. Abdel Rahman dismissed nonviolent definitions of jihad as weak. He stressed that a number of unspecified enemies had “united themselves against Muslims” and that fighting them was obligatory. “If you are not going to the jihad, then you are neglecting the rules of Allah,” he said. The opportunities for jihad were virtually everywhere, ranging from apostate Middle Eastern regimes to “those who are taking the wealth of Muslims from petrol or from oil.” As he spoke, a red toolbox, with a slit cut into its lid for donations, was passed around the room. Videotapes of the lecture were later offered for sale at the society’s bookstore. (emphasis added)
Several months afterward, Abdel Rahman was indicted for helping to plot the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. One of his fatwas, issued from prison in 1998, became central to Al Qaeda’s justification of mass violence. (When I asked J. Stephen Tidwell, the assistant director of the F.B.I.’s Los Angeles division, about Siddiqi’s association with Abdel Rahman, he said, “We have a very strong relationship with Dr. Siddiqi. You do have to put it into the context of back then.” Siddiqi told me that Abdel Rahman “was touring, and some people insisted that he should be there.”
Also of note is the FBI’s insistence, despite copious evidence of his radicalism, of partnering with Siddiqi. This problem of legitimizing radical Muslims goes far beyond the media's involvement: it extends right up through the highest levels of our top law enforcement agency.
Once again, sadly, we are left to come to the same conclusion: one must be very suspicious when the media and the FBI tell you they have found, or are dealing with, mainstream Muslim leaders, involved in “inter-faith” activities. They are often suckers for polite smiles and Western business suits, but pull back the covers, and the truth is, all too often, much more sinister.
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 ...
In the years that followed 9/11, two phenomena characterized the Western public's understanding of the terrorists' ideology. The first characteristic stemmed from the statements made by the Jihadists themselves. More than ever, Islamist militants and Jihadi cadres didn't waste any opportunity to declare, clarify, explain, and detail the meaning of their aqida (doctrine) and their intentions to apply Jihadism by all means possible. Unfortunately for them, though, those extremely violent means changed international public opinion: the public now was convinced that there was an ideology of Jihadism, and that its adherents meant business worldwide.
From Ayman al Zawahiri in Arabic to Azzam al Amriki in American English, via all of the videotapes made by "martyrs" in Britain, Iraq, and Afghanistan, the public obtained all the evidence necessary. Against all the faulty academic literature of the 1990's, the statements by the Jihadists themselves were very convincing.
The second phenomenon of help to the public was the surfacing of a new literature produced by alternative scholars, analysts, journalists, experts, and researchers who, from different backgrounds and countries, filled in some of the gaps is "Jihadi studies." Producing books, articles, and blogs from Europe, India, the Middle East, and North America, a combination of Third World-born and Western-issued scholarship began to provide the "missing link" as to what Jihadism is all about. These factors came together to shift the debate from "Jihad is spiritual yoga" to "Why didn't we know it was something else as well?" And this movement triggered, in response, one of the last attempts to prevent Jihad from being fully understood.
In the 1990's, apologist literature attempted to convince readers and audiences in the West that Jihad was a "spiritual experience only, and not a menace." [1] That explanation has now been shattered by Bin Laden and Ahmedinijad. So in the post-9/11 age, a second strategy to delay public understanding of Jihadism and thereby gain time for its adherents to achieve their goals has evolved. It might be called the "good cop, bad cop" strategy. Over the past few years, a new story began to make inroads in Washington and the rest of the national defense apparatus. A group of academics and interest groups are circulating the idea that in reality Jihad can develop in two forms: good Jihad and bad Jihad.
The practice of not using "Jihad" and "Jihadism" was lately defended by two academics at the National Defense University [2] who based their arguments on a study published by a Washington lobbyist, Jim Guirard.[3] On June 22, 2006, Jim Garamone, writing for the American Forces Press Service, published the study of Douglas Streusand and Harry Tunnel under the title "Loosely Interpreted Arabic terms can promote enemy ideology." Streusand told CNN that "Jihad is a term of great and positive import in Islam. It is commonly defined as striving or struggle, and can mean an internal or external struggle for faith." [4]
The article was posted under the title "Cultural Ignorance Leads to Misuse of Islamic Terms" by the US-based Islamist organization CAIR. [5] Since then the concept of deflecting attention away from the study of Jihadism has penetrated large segments of defense newsletters and is omnipresent in Academia. More troubling though, is the fact that scholars who have seen the strategic threat of al Qaeda and Hezbollah have unfortunately fallen for the fallacy of the Hiraba. Professor Michael Waller of the Institute of World Politics in Washington wrote recently that "Jihad has been hijacked" as he bases his argument on Jim Guirard's lobbying pieces.[6] Satisfied with this trend taking root in the Defense intelligentsia of America, Islamist intellectuals and activists are hurrying to support this new tactic.
The good holy war is when the right religious and political authorities declare it against the correct enemy and at the right time. The bad Jihad, called also Hiraba, is the wrong war, declared by bad (and irresponsible) people against the wrong enemy (for the moment), and without an appropriate authorization by the "real" Muslim leadership. According to this thesis, those Muslims who wage a Hiraba, a wrong war, are called Mufsidoon, from the Arabic word for "spoilers." The advocates of this ruse recommend that the United States and its allies stop calling the Jihadists by that name and identifying the concept of Jihadism as the problem. In short, they argue that "Jihad is good, but the Mufsidoon, the bad guys and the terrorists, spoiled the original legitimate sense."[7]
When researched, it turns out that this theory was produced by clerics of the Wahhabi regime in Saudi Arabia and the Muslim Brotherhood, as a plan to prevent Jihad and Jihadism from being depicted by the West and the international community as an illegal and therefore sanctioned activity. It was then forwarded to American- and Western-based interest groups to be spread within the Untied States, particularly within the defense and security apparatus. Such a deception further confuses U.S. national security perception of the enemy and plunges democracies back into the "black hole" of the 1990's. This last attempt to blur the vision of democracies can be exposed with knowledge of the Jihadi terror strategies and tactics, one of which is known as Taqiya, the doctrine on deception and deflection. [8]
First, the argument of "good Jihad" raises the question of how there can be a legitimate concept of religious war in the twenty-first century to start with. Jihad historically was as "good" as any other religious war over the last 2,000 years. If a "good Jihad" is the one authorized by a caliph and directed under his auspices, then other world leaders also can wage a "good crusade" at will, as long as it is licensed by the proper authority. But in fact, all religious wars are proscribed by international law, period.
Second, the authors of this lobbyist-concocted theory claim that a wrong Jihad is called a Hiraba. But in Arab Muslim history, a Hiraba (unauthorized warring) was when a group of warriors launched itself against the enemy without orders from the real commander. Obviously, this implies that a "genuine" war against a real enemy does exist and that these hotheaded soldiers have simply acted without orders. Hence this cunning explanation puts "spin" on Jihad but leaves the core idea of Jihadism completely intact. The "spoilers" depart from the plan, attack prematurely, and cause damage to the caliphate's long-terms plans. These Mufsidoon "fail" their commanders by unleashing a war of their own, instead of waiting for orders.
This scenario fits the relations of the global Jihadists, who are the regimes and international groups slowly planning to gain power against the infidels and the "hotheaded" Osama bin Laden. Thus the promoters of this theory of Hiraba and Mufsidoon are representing the views of classical Wahhabis and the Muslim Brotherhood in their criticism of the "great leap forward" made by bin Laden. But by convincing Westerners that al Qaeda and its allies are not the real Jihadists but some renegades, the advocates of this school would be causing the vision of Western defense to become blurred again so that more time could be gained by a larger, more powerful wave of Jihadism that is biding its time to strike when it chooses, under a coherent international leadership.
[1] See John Esposito, The Islamic Threat: Myth or Reality? 3rd edition. (New York: Oxford University Press) 1999.
[2] May 23, 2006
[3] "Hiraba Versus Jihad," the American Muslim. August 2003.
[4] See Henry Shuster, "Words in War," CNN, October 19, 2006.
[5] Quoting the American Forces Press Service on June 29, 2006.
[6] Michael Waller. "Making Jihad Work for America." The Journal for International Security Affairs. Spring 2006
[7] See James Fallows, "Declaring Victory," Atlantic Monthly (September 2006).
[8] According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, Taqiya: "spelled Taqiyah, Arabic Taqiyah ("self-protection"), in Islam, [is] the practice of concealing one's belief and foregoing ordinary religious duties when under threat of death or injury to oneself or one's fellow Muslims. The Qu'ran allows Muslims to profess friendship with the unbelievers (3:28) and even outwardly to deny their faith (16:106), if doing so would save them from imminent danger," on the condition that their hearts remain attached to faith. Also see Larry Stirling, "On Taqiya' and ‘Fatwas,'" San Diego Source, September 25, 2006; also Walid Phares, "al-Taqiyah: The Muslim Method of Conquest," Freeman Center for Strategic Studies, December 1997.
Upon entering the FBI building in Omaha, Nebraska, a visitor is greeted by a plaque on the wall to the left, containing the following inscription:
MUSLIM PUBLIC AFFAIRS COUNCIL (MPAC) AND AMERICAN MUSLIM ASSOCIATION (AMA) HONOR AND PAY TRIBUTE TO OUR FALLEN HEROES OF THE SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 ATTACKS
For someone unfamiliar with MPAC, the memorial may very well appear innocuous. But once one understands the true nature of this group and its leaders' storied history of defending terrorists, including Osama bin Laden, the harmful implications of its embrace by some in our government will be made immediately apparent. Read more ...
Note: majority of users who have posting privileges on MASH blog are not MASH members.
Comments are slightly moderated. MASH does not necessarily endorse every opinion posted on this blog.
Posts
