DEMOCRATIC REFORM IN EGYPT - AT WHAT PRICE?
BY: FERN SIDMAN
Seems like no one saw the genesis of a global Islamist insurrection on the political horizon. Not the talking heads on cable TV and certainly not those in the know at the State Department or the White House. If they did, they assumed a reticent posture concerning precisely what was percolating behind the scenes in Egypt.
Gaining inspiration from the most recent and highly successful grass roots revolution against the draconian regime in Tunisia, tens of thousands of Egyptians have taken to demonstrating in the streets of Cairo, Alexandria and Luxor over the last week to do the same. Fulminating over the abject poverty, rampant unemployment and thinly veiled government corruption that both permeates and cripples their lives, these young and tech savvy Egyptian activists have created an international stage in which to further their agenda of achieving democratic and political reforms in a country that has little familiarity of such lofty concepts.
Subsequent to the assassination of former Egyptian president Anwar Sadat in 1981, Hosni Mubarak was catapulted to power, and his imprimatur has been actualized by his autocratic and heavy handed governance of Egyptian society. Having ruled for 30 years without allowing for a change in national leadership through legitimate elections, it is little wonder that he is characterized as a despot and a cynical dictator. Further emboldening this megalomanical image are his feckless attempts at quelling the uprisings by terminating the use of the internet, cell phones and other modalities of transmitting news and data.
Having said that, let us also remember that Egypt is a key strategic player in US-Middle East relations and is being bankrolled to the tune of $1.5 billion annually in US military and economic aid. As such, Egypt, under the leadership of Mubarak has promulgated a pro-Western and pro-American stance and has maintained the long standing peace agreement with Israel, albeit a "cold" peace, made by his predecessor.
As complete anarchy and bedlam breaks loose in Egypt, as manifested in pervasive rioting, bellicose looting and indiscriminate acts of violence, we have learned that the burgeoning opposition has turned a deaf ear to any gestures by Mubarak to address the grievances of his people through radical changes in the composition of his government. Terrified of losing power, Mubarak is acting swiftly on US orders, but time is on the side of those who demand his complete ouster.
Let's make no mistake about it. What is happening here is a gargantuan development in the Middle East narrative and the perpetual imbroglio that has come to define this region of the world. Arguably, it can even be considered bigger than what occurred in 1979 when backers of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, with a push from Jimmy Carter, overthrew Iran's Shah Mohamed Reza Pahlavi in one of the most tragic and unfortunate international developments of the late 20th century. We, in the West, have been paying the price for it ever since. What is particularly outstanding in the midst of a revolution of this kind is the inevitable political vacuum that it creates, leaving a terrifying scenario in which radicalized Islamic elements are poised to seize power.
Leading the charge both in Iran in 1979 and in the Egypt of 2011 is the notorious Muslim Brotherhood which has been outlawed in Egypt. Yes, the very same organization that was responsible for assassinating Mubarak's predecessor, Anwar Sadat, charging him with the "ultimate sin" of making peace with Israel
It is they who have been subtlely orchestrating and fomenting unrest and managing the day-to-day particulars required for another radical Islamic victory. Working with the aid and encouragement of Teheran, the tentacles of this nihilistic theocratic movement stretch far and wide. As the leader of Jordan's powerful Muslim Brotherhood, Hammam Saeed, warned over the weekend, the unrest in Egypt will spread across the Mideast and Arabs will topple leaders allied with the United States.
The front man for the opposition in Egypt is none other than Mohammed ElBaradei; Nobel Laureate and former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Fragments of the opposition group including the Muslim Brotherhood have grouped behind ElBaradei, who has often been thought of as a potential Egyptian leader should Mubarak lose power.
Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice-president of the Conference of Presidents of American Jewish Organizations said in a recent interview with Yeshiva World News that, "A myth is being created that ElBaradei is a human rights activist – he is a stooge of Iran". He added that, "When he was the head of the nuclear watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency, for which he got a Nobel Prize, he distorted reports…and covered for Iran. After he left, his successors said earlier reports were not accurate.” That speak volumes about ElBaradei's true allegiances.
Egypt is the most populous and important Arab country in the Middle East. For decades now it has been at relative peace with its neighbor, Israel. How long will that last if Mubarak is replaced with a Muslim Brotherhood leader? It is time for President Obama and Secretary Clinton to wake up and smell the putrid stench of Islamic radicalism and the existential dangers that it represents to the free world and Western civilization as we know it. The United States can ill afford an explosion of violence, revolution and instability through the Middle East and the Islamic world, but that appears to be just what is coming.
 By Douglas Farah The Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Report broke the story that the U.S. State Department has lifted Tariq Ramadan's ban from entering the United States. Ramadan , an influential European leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, was long banned because of alleged ties to terrorist activity. The lifting of the ban, ordered by Secretary of State Clinton, is a significant victory for the Brotherhood, who has sought to frame the issue of Ramadan's exclusion as one of academic freedom rather one of national security. Ramadan was ecstatic, saying on his blog: Today’s decision reflects the Obama administration’s willingness to reopen the United States to the rest of the world, and to permit critical debate. Coming after nearly six years of inquiry and investigation, Secretary Clinton’s order confirms what I have affirmed and reaffirmed from day one: the first accusations of terrorist connections (subsequently dropped), then donations to Palestinian solidarity groups, were nothing more than a pretense to prohibit me from speaking critically about American government policy on American soil. The decision brings to an end a dark period in American politics that saw security considerations invoked to block critical debate through a policy of exclusion and baseless allegation. Today I am delighted at the decision. The truth of the grandson of Hassan al Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, is far more complex, and there is little doubt that, in the end, he is an agent of radicalization rather than peace. A rock star in the European Muslim scene, Ramadan, despite weak academic credentials, has been offered a teaching position at Notre Dame University. As noted in this extensive review of Brother Tarik: The Doublespeak of Tarik Ramadan by French journalist Caroline Fourest, the definitive look at Ramadan's cannon, he is intent on saying one thing to Western audiences while something else to his followers. They often do not match up. This is typical of the Muslim Brotherhood. It is eager to use the freedoms that would never exist under the caliphate is so desires to create, in order to promote its totalitarian vision.
It demands the right to be heard while being unequivocal in its unwillingness to view as equal anyone who does not embrace its view radical Islamism. While it is willing to use the democratic process to achieve its goals, often putting it at odds with militantly violent groups such as al Qaeda, in the end the Brotherhood and Osama bin Laden share an identical vision of what the world should look like under Allah's rule.
My full blog is here. Counterterrorism Blog
 People in America are often shocked to discover the extent to which the authorities in Britain have been taken in by the Islamists of the Muslim Brotherhood, to such an extent the UK government and police use them as advisers on combating Islamic extremism. Americans would be even more shocked to discover that exactly the same thing is going on in their own backyard. Pajamas TV features two interviews with former US security people, one described merely as having been given some kind of intel-gathering assignment by the ‘joint chiefs’ and the other described as a ‘former FBI special agent’.
The first describes how, when he discovered to his alarm that there was not only no evidence that Islamic radicals were wrong in Islamic law but that there were no counter-arguments to them in that law, the US intel/law enforcement community that had instructed him just didn’t want to know. The second, the ex-FBI man, is even more alarming. He states that the American counter-terrorist establishment has allowed itself to be infiltrated by radical Islamists -- to whom counter-terrorism officials are going for advice and training in countering Islamic radicalism.
Every major Muslim representative organisation in the US, he says, is a Muslim Brotherhood front. Hamas fronts such as CAIR are used by the US authorities for outreach to the Muslim community in America. They are invited to sit in on brainstorming sessions about investigative techniques, and are actually training the FBI. ‘The Muslim Brotherhood are telling us how to fight them’, he says. The PJTV interviewer seemed stunned by this unbelievable situation. But it’s exactly what’s happening in the UK, too, where the Brotherhood are used – incredible as this sounds – as an antidote to radicalisation and as interlocutors in good faith with the Muslim community.
In the US, this profound and wilful institutionalised ignorance of the religious war being waged against the free world revealed itself most catastrophically recently when seven CIA officers, amongst them some of the most experienced and valuable, were blown up by a Jordanian triple agent. Not only were they duped, but it seems their professional training went by the board in inviting such a man onto their base and with so many of them clustering around him. As the Washington Post reported: ‘The tradecraft that was developed over many years is passé,’ complained a recently retired senior intelligence official, also with decades of experience. ‘Now it’s a military tempo where you don't have time for validating and vetting sources. . . . All that seems to have gone by the board. It shows there are not a lot of people with a great deal of experience in this field. The agency people are supporting the war-fighter and providing information for targeting, but the espionage part has become almost quaint.’ Endemic ignorance, sloppiness, incompetence -- even now, even after 9/11, even after the restructuring which was supposed to remedy the dysfunctionality and turf wars between intelligence agencies but which – as was predicted at the time – has merely stuck another layer of bureaucracy on top. And if one thinks back to the systematic failure over decades to identify and analyse correctly the rise of Islamism and before that, the imminent collapse of Soviet communism, one has to ask oneself the terrifying question whether US intelligence really is fit for purpose at all. Melanie Phillips 
 - The Code Pink organization has placed ads on the Muslim Brotherhood’s website, including one that asks readers to “join us in cleansing our country.”
- An Al-Qaeda bodyguard killed by a U.S. drone attack in North Waziristan is the son of a leader in the Muslim Brotherhood’s branch in Jordan.
- The new Secretary-General of the Islamic Society of North America has a history of involvement with other Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated organizations.
- Seven senior members of the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan have been charged with corruption over their management of Islamic charities.
 Just when it looked like the war between the so-called "conservatives" and the "reformists" over the next phase of the Muslim Brotherhood was coming to a close, it heats up again. The Brotherhood was scheduled to announce the successor to Supreme Guide Mohammad Mahdi Akef, but that has been postponed until the weekend. The Cairo-based English-language weekly Al-Ahram explains: "Three members of the group's conservative wing -- Mohamed Badei, Rashad El-Bayoumi and Gomaa Amin -- competed for the post.
Sources say Badei is most likely to become the next supreme guide, having won 66 out of total 100 possible votes on the group's Shura Council. His seemingly clear cut victory has been undermined by the support El-Bayoumi, 75, secured from the group's international affiliates." According to the independent Egyptian daily Al Sharouk: "Objections raised by what is called the "Global Shura Council" to choosing Mohamed Badei as the 8th Supreme Guide (and the de facto Supreme Guide for Muslim Brotherhood Movement worldwide), forced the Movement to reschedule the press conference to announce the name of the new Guide to take place on Sunday instead of yesterday. … According to well-informed sources, Mohammad Mahdi Akef is trying to convince the members of 'Global Shura Council,' gathering in Beirut now, to accept the nomination of Badei for the sake of protecting the reputation of the Muslim Brotherhood and its cohesion." This leaves the Brotherhood in a potentially tricky spot. Akef technically is no longer the Supreme Guide. Mohammad Habib, a reformist and the former first deputy, has resigned and Kharait al Shater, the second deputy, is in jail due to one of the Egyptian government's frequent crackdowns on the Brotherhood. As we previously reported, reformists were routed a few weeks ago when the Brotherhood announced the new members of its guidance bureau – the group's main governing body. Through questionable gaming of the election process by outgoing Supreme Guide Mohammad Mahdi Akef, Mahmoud Ezzat and hardliner allies ensured the reformists were virtually squeezed out of the movement's leadership. Hence, Habib resigned, calling it "selection rather than election." One reformist Brotherhood member has been protesting the results on his blog. He states: "I can't accept Sayed Qutb's ideology in Muslim Brotherhood, and it's clear that the new office will adopt the Qutbic Ideology, most of the office members were arrested with Sayyed Qutb in 1965." Qutb was a highly influential Brotherhood intellectual executed by the Egyptian regime in 1966. His two most prominent works, Milestones and In the Shade of the Quran, inspired a new generation of jihadists, including Osama bin Laden, who was taught by Qutb's brother Mohammad at a university in Saudi Arabia. Qutb saw the Muslim world as having descended into jahilliyya, or pre-Islamic ignorance. Qutb called on Muslims to wage jihad to "liberate" the entire world from the servitude of man-made laws, which would be replaced by Shariah. If Akef is successful in his lobbying efforts and Mohammad Badei becomes Supreme Guide, the next phase of the Brotherhood's history will likely be defined by Qutb's ideas and deepening fundamentalism. Badei has held prominent positions in the past on the guidance bureau and in two Brotherhood-dominated professional associations. Some have tried to paint Badei as a consensus candidate who is widely liked in the movement. However, he makes it clear where his influences lie. An article posted on the Brotherhood's English-language website notes that Badei "has been said to follow the conservative ideals of the late Sayed Qutb" whom he defends as a reformer rather than a hardliner. Badei is seen as "one of the most loyal leaders to the organization of Sayyid Qutb," according to the London-based pan-Arab daily Al-Hayah. In an interview last November with Al Youm Al Sabi'e, Badei was stalwart in his opposition to the idea of a woman or a Copt assuming the presidency of Egypt, basing his decisions strictly and solely on Islamic law. When asked about a woman becoming president, he replies, "[O]ur Fiqh [jurisprudence] choice is that women are not suited to lead the state." On Copts, Badei cites "a Prophetic Hadith which forbids a man from outside the faith from assuming the leadership of the state." When asked if such logic results in a religious state, Baddee explains: "We are a Muslim state, not a religious one. The leader undertakes a religious burden alongside his leadership like the Messenger (may God bless him and grant him peace) did in the first Muslim state, being the leader of the state and the executer of legal rules; and he led the army." The interviewer then asks if the people have the right to choose what they want. Badei's answer is chilling to those of us who believe in freedoms of speech, religion, association and other central tenets of democracy: "If the people choose something against the Sharia, it is not proper to implement it. If there is a conflict with the Sharia, it must not be put into force." But what else can we expect from someone who was imprisoned with Sayyid Qutb? According to Al-Hayah: "The new general guide was sentenced in a number of cases, the most famous of which was a 15-year imprisonment in 1965 in the military case that included among the sentenced the fundamentalist leader Sayyid Qutb; Badi spent 9 years in prison on the basis of that sentence…" The now-overwhelming influence of hardliners among the leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood will ensure the movement will remain – at its core – strictly committed to establishing an Islamic state with Shariah as the law of the land. Past advocates for the Brotherhood who view it as a "moderate" organization that can serve as a bridge between the West and the Muslim world and a counterbalance to al Qaeda may want to rethink their views. IPT
 Absolute intellectual/informational dominance is the strategic goal. In case you ever wondered why you never got the straight story on Islam directly after 911, and why the media seemed to be in the tank for jihad, here's a clue. The Society of Professional Journalists issued this directive a couple of weeks after 911. And they have followed it in goose step ever since. Just how long has the Muslim Brotherhood been strategizing the take down and take over of the US and the west? Decades. And while we have no strategy for fighting the enemy -- hell, we can't even name them -- they have a war plan that is so detailed and exact that every t is crossed and every i dotted. Take a look at the "diversity" guidelines as set forth by the Society of Professional Journalists not two weeks after 911. The enemy that attacked our country in an attempt to bring it down was writing the narrative. Diversity Guidelines On Oct. 6, 2001 at its National Convention in Seattle, the Society of Professional Journalists passed a resolution urging members and fellow journalists to take steps against racial profiling in their coverage of the war on terrorism and to reaffirm their commitment to: — Use language that is informative and not inflammatory; Even if the horror, murder and bloodshed of jihad is inflammatory, don't tell the people. — Portray Muslims, Arabs and Middle Eastern and South Asian Americans in the richness of their diverse experiences; Portray the axe wielding murderers, the homicide bombers, the infiltrators of our most senior levels, in the "richness of their diverse experience" (you know, stonings, amputations, shariah law, clitorectomies, Jew hatred, Islamic colonialism, the caliphate..........) — Seek truth through a variety of voices and perspectives that help audiences understand the complexities of the events in Pennsylvania, New York City and Washington, D.C. What voices? Hamas front CAIR picked voices?
Guidelines
Visual images
— Seek out people from a variety of ethnic and religious backgrounds when photographing Americans mourning those lost in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. Seek out Muslims ................ — Seek out people from a variety of ethnic and religious backgrounds when photographing rescue and other public service workers and military personnel. Seek out Muslims.................. — Do not represent Arab Americans and Muslims as monolithic groups. Avoid conveying the impression that all Arab Americans and Muslims wear traditional clothing. Scam the folks on Muslims ........ — Use photos and features to demystify veils, turbans and other cultural articles and customs. "Demystify veils and turbans" Stories — Seek out and include Arabs and Arab Americans, Muslims, South Asians and men and women of Middle Eastern descent in all stories about the war, not just those about Arab and Muslim communities or racial profiling.
— Cover the victims of harassment, murder and other hate crimes as thoroughly as you cover the victims of overt terrorist attacks.
Cover the bogus tales of "harassment" just days after 3,000 Americans were brutally murdered by Muslims on our own soil. The Press is being told to throw Americans under the bus and kiss the adherents to the Islamic ideology that murdered our people and want to take over this country. — Make an extra effort to include olive-complexioned and darker men and women, Sikhs, Muslims and devout religious people of all types in arts, business, society columns and all other news and feature coverage, not just stories about the crisis.
Try to show Muslims out of jihad. And don't talk about the Islamic attacks especially, right after they happen. — Seek out experts on military strategies, public safety, diplomacy, economics and other pertinent topics who run the spectrum of race, class, gender and geography.
— When writing about terrorism, remember to include white supremacist, radical anti-abortionists and other groups with a history of such activity.
There aren't any (except the three under some rock in Appalachia). But not to worry, make it up, or pull the Unabomber out of your ass, and Timothy McVeigh too (just don't mention the third Muslim man).
— Do not imply that kneeling on the floor praying, listening to Arabic music or reciting from the Quran are peculiar activities. — When describing Islam, keep in mind there are large populations of Muslims around the world, including in Africa, Asia, Canada, Europe, India and the United States. Distinguish between various Muslim states; do not lump them together as in constructions such as "the fury of the Muslim world."
But Obama does. The Islamic world does. The ummah is the worldwide global community. — Avoid using word combinations such as "Islamic terrorist" or "Muslim extremist" that are misleading because they link whole religions to criminal activity. Be specific: Alternate choices, depending on context, include "Al Qaeda terrorists" or, to describe the broad range of groups involved in Islamic politics, "political Islamists." Do not use religious characterizations as shorthand when geographic, political, socioeconomic or other distinctions might be more accurate.
— Avoid using terms such as "jihad" unless you are certain of their precise meaning and include the context when they are used in quotations. The basic meaning of "jihad" is to exert oneself for the good of Islam and to better oneself.
— Consult the Library of Congress guide for transliteration of Arabic names and Muslim or Arab words to the Roman alphabet. Use spellings preferred by the American Muslim Council, including "Muhammad," "Quran," and "Makkah ," not "Mecca."
— Regularly seek out a variety of perspectives for your opinion pieces. Check your coverage against the five Maynard Institute for Journalism Education fault lines of race and ethnicity, class, geography, gender and generation. The Maynard Institute for Journalism is "pure diversity" -- check out the front page. It's all Arab Muslims or African Americans. — Ask men and women from within targeted communities to review your coverage and make suggestions. In other words, ask Muslims for the taqiya and the right spin before you publish. Read it all here, and thanks to Atlas
 How moderate of them. The Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood is demanding that Jordan remove any soldiers it has from Afghanistan and end all cooperation with the CIA and the “Zionist” intelligence services: The opposition statement came after the death in a January 30 suicide bombing in Afghanistan of senior intelligence officer Captain Ali bin Zeid, a member of the royal family, along with seven CIA agents spotlighted Jordan’s role in the international coalition there. The opposition leaders said the “real fascist terrorism is the Zionist terrorism that threatens world peace and Jordan’s future.” “Jordan should not be dragged into wars of others and should not turn into a battlefield,” they added. And to think that we in the U.S. actually give credibility to organizations in our country that affiliate with the Muslim Brotherhood. Unbelievable. World Threats
 AMMAN: A roadside bomb has exploded near an Israeli embassy convoy headed to the Jewish state from the Jordanian capital. "The Israeli embassy convoy left Amman and was headed for the Hussein bridge when the blast occurred. Nobody was hurt," an Israeli diplomat said yesterday, referring to the crossing between Jordan and the Israeli-occupied West Bank. Israeli media said the bomb detonated near the convoy taking the Israeli ambassador to Jordan, Dani Nevo, to the bridge, also known as the Allenby bridge, 50km west of Amman. But sources in Jordan said former Israeli ambassador Yakov Rosen was in the convoy, not Mr Nevo, while Israel's Foreign Ministry said it was unclear whether Mr Nevo was in the convoy headed to Israel via the West Bank. Israel's Ynetnews said four embassy staff members and two security guards were in the convoy, while the newspaper Haaretz said two remotely detonated bombs exploded, causing one car to flip over. The embassy's consular officer and her husband arrived back in Israel, reports said. "The cars were not damaged by the blast," Nabil Sharif said, adding an investigation was under way into the attack and to determine the type of explosives used. A source close to the investigation said: "The blast left a crater . . . 10cm deep and 80cm wide." Israeli diplomats often travel home on Thursdays, the start of the Muslim weekend in Jordan, and return on Sundays to Jordan, which in 1994 became only the second Arab state to sign a peace treaty with Israel, after Egypt. Israeli diplomats in Jordan usually use rental cars. Several attacks or attempted attacks against Israelis have occurred in Jordan since the signing of the treaty but such incidents have been rare in recent years. In 2003, a Jordanian driver crossed the southern border with Israel and opened fire at a group of foreigners in the transit zone. He was shot by Israeli soldiers. A non-Israeli tourist was killed and five others were wounded. Israeli analysts said security co-ordination between Jordan and Israel was excellent, andAmman had foiled several attempts to attack Israeli targets in the past. "I'm sure this was a surprise for the Jordanians. These people are probably Islamic or al-Qa'ida that pose a danger to the Hashemite kingdom, too," Ephraim Inbar, director of the Begin-Sadat Centre for Strategic Studies said. Jordan's Muslim Brotherhood said "such incidents should be expected". "As long as Israel is in the region, carrying out its non-stop aggression against the Palestinian people, we should expect these things to happen," said Brotherhood spokesman Jamil Abu Baker. "Israel is the source of violence in the Middle East." The influential Muslim Brotherhood and its political arm, the Islamic Action Front, have repeatedly called for the scrapping of the peace treaty, expulsion of Israel's ambassador and a cut in relations with Israel. The Australian
  Code Pink is running banner advertisements on the English language version of the official Web site of a terrorist sympathizing group, the Muslim Brotherhood, one of which invites the Muslim Brotherhood to “join us in cleansing our country". In years gone by this would have been called "Treason".
 [Note: This is the latest segment in an ongoing series about Code Pink and its co-founder Jodie Evans. Click here to read earlier articles.] Fresh on the heels of their Hamas-protected trip to Gaza, the so-called feminist, American antiwar group Code Pink, co-founded by top Obama funder Jodie Evans, is running banner advertisements on the English language version of the official Web site of a terrorist sympathizing group, the Muslim Brotherhood, one of which invites the Muslim Brotherhood to “join us in cleansing our country.” The ad, titled “Arrest the War Criminals” with a subhead that contains the invitation to “join us in cleansing our country” links back to a Code Pink site that calls for the kidnapping of former President George W. Bush, his wife Laura and other former members of his administration through ‘citizens arrests’ for defending America against terrorists in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks by Al Qaeda. The Jawa Report first reported the advertising in a post this morning (January 11, 2010). A check by Big Government of the front page of www.ikhwanweb.com. on Janaury 11, 2010 showed three Code Pink banner ads. One near the top, one in the middle and one at the bottom of the Muslim Brotherhood’s official English language Web site. The top one is pink-colored and promotes Code Pink’s “Women Say NO to War!” campaign and features a subhead of “Gaza Peace Delegations & More!” The middle ad features pink handcuffs to promote Code Pink’s “Arrest the War Criminals” campaign. The bottom ad promotes Code Pink’s “Gaza Freedom March” and features a sepia-toned photograph of a forlorn-looking child with a message about the march that concludes with the phrase, “Lift the Siege of Gaza!” The middle ad links directly back to Code Pink’s official Web site, codepinkalert.org, while the other two link back to Code Pink created Web sites that bear the names of the respective campaigns, womensaynotowar.org and gazafreedommarch.org. The Muslim Brotherhood published a statement by Code Pink issued in May to promote Code Pink’s trip to Gaza that month. In December, the Muslim Brotherhood published an open letter to Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak by Code Pink and the Gaza Freedom March decrying the Egyptian government’s refusal to allow the group passage into Gaza. Discover the Networks provides background on the current status of the Muslim Brotherhood: In recent years, the Brotherhood has attempted to forge a reputation as a moderate and reformist Islamic group that has renounced its violent past. Lending plausibility to this reputation has been criticism of the organization by radical Islamist groups, who have condemned the Brotherhood’s willingness to participate in the political process as heretical. These groups have also criticized the Brotherhood for supposedly abandoning violent struggle as a means of establishing an Islamic empire. However, numerous statements by the Brotherhood’s leadership belie its moderate posture. Ali Sadreddine Bayanouni, the leader of the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood, has repeatedly disavowed violence while concurrently pledging his support for the terrorism of Hamas and Hezbollah. Muhammad Mahdi Othman Akef, a prominent leader of the Brotherhood, has expressed his support for suicide bombings in Israel and Iraq “in order to expel the Zionists and the Americans.” He has also denounced the United States as a “Satan,” saying: “I have complete faith that Islam will invade Europe and America, because Islam has logic and a mission.”
Many other leaders of the Brotherhood have likewise justified terrorism against Israel and the United States, with many defending the September 11 terrorist attacks against America.
Jews are another common object of the Brotherhood’s hatred. Of the Jewish people, Sheik Yousef Al-Qaradhawi, the spiritual leader of the Brotherhood, has written: “There is no dialogue between them and us other than in one language — the language of the sword and force.” Even as it is deemed insufficiently militant by some Islamist groups, the Brotherhood has had a discernible influence on contemporary jihadist terrorism.
Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the architect of 9/11, was a member of Muslim Brotherhood. More prominently still, Abdullah Azzam, a Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood preacher, was a mentor to al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. A recent sympathetic article on the Muslim Brotherhood was published by the Christian Science Monitor. Jodie Evans and Code Pink attempted to destabilize the Egyptian government by provoking a crisis last month over the government’s refusal to allow all 1362 ‘Gaza Freedom’ marchers to enter Gaza through Egypt. It would appear that Jodie Evans and Code Pink found an ally in Egypt in their opposition to the Mubarak government. This is how Jodie Evans repays the kindness showed by First Lady Suzanne Mubarak who came to Code Pink’s aid after Jodie Evans sent her a letter asking for help delivering the ‘humanitarian aid’ to Hamas-controlled Gaza. Code Pink’s involvement with radical Islamic terrorists and terrorist sympathizers in the Middle East would be troubling enough without Jodie Evans’ close ties to President Barack Obama and his administration. Does CIA Director Leon Panetta know that a close ally of the president he serves is asking a radical Muslim group with terrorist sympathies to join them in “cleansing our country”? Big Government H/T: WeaselZippers
 by Daniel Atzori Islamic finance and Islamic banking, which are among the fastest growing financial industries in the world, are best understood in their political and cultural contexts, and by what formed their theoretical origins. To begin with, Islamic banks are based on a corpus of doctrines called “Islamic economics,” which claims to be based on the Quran, but is actually the creation of the Islamist thinker Abu’l-A’la Mawdudi (1903-1979). Mawdudi is both the father of Islamic economics and (together with Hassan al-Banna, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood) the father of modern political Islam. His crucial contribution to the development of Islamism has been highlighted by Seyyed Vali Reza Nasr in “Mawdudi and the Making of Islamic Revivalism,” while his role in the birth of Islamic economics has been studied by Timur Kuran in “The Genesis of Islamic Economics.” Mawdudi, the founder in 1941 of the Islamist party, Jamaat-e-Islami, in Pakistan, was persuaded that it was necessary for Muslims to bring all aspects of life into the practice of “Islam” and submission to the will of Allah. Therefore, both the spheres of politics and economics could not be autonomous from the Quranic revelation and the Islamic tradition (sunna). In the political field, Mawdudi asserted the need for the establishment of an Islam in which all sovereignty belongs only to Allah; thus, popular sovereignty would a usurpation of his rights. According to Mawdudi, the proclamation of faith, in which the Muslim believer affirms that “there is no God but Allah,” implies that “one should recognise no sovereign, nor accept any government, nor yet obey any law, or that one should refuse to accept the jurisdiction of any court and to carry out the command of anyone” except from Allah. For Mawdudi, the duty of his party, the Jamaat-e-Islami, was to form an army of “Allah’s troopers,” with the goal of establishing an Islamic state where shari’a (Islamic law) could be enforced. The creation of an Islamic state was, however, just the first step: he writes, “Islam does not want to bring about this revolution in one country or a few countries. It wants to spread it to the entire world. Although it is the duty of the ‘Muslim party’ to bring this revolution first to its own nation, its ultimate goal is world revolution.” Mawdudi, studying the French, Russian and National Socialist revolutions, was of the opinion that Islamic revolutions should have learned from them. Like Lenin, Mawdudi affirms the need for a vanguard of Allah’s army; like Trotsky, he calls for exporting the revolution worldwide. The spread of the Islamic revolution also had to follow the example set by the Prophet Muhammad. Mawdudi affirms that: “When every method of persuasion had failed, the Prophet took to the sword. That sword removed evil mischief, the impurities of evil and the filth of the soul. The sword did something more – it removed their blindness so that they could see the light of truth, and also cured them of their arrogance; arrogance which prevents people from accepting the truth, stiff necks and proud heads bowed with humility. As in Arabia and other countries, Islam’s expansion was so fast that within a century a quarter of the world accepted it. This conversion took place because the sword of Islam tore away the veils which had covered men’s hearts.” To purify society from non Islamic influences (“the veils which cover our hearts”), Mawdudi also advocated the restoration of a classic tenet of Islam: the death penalty for apostasy (ridda). Mawdudi further states that such a punishment should not just be reserved for those who consciously refuse Islam, but also for all the non-practising Muslims: “Whenever the death penalty for apostasy is enforced in a new Islamic state, then Muslims are kept within Islam’s fold. But there is a danger that a large number of hypocrites will live alongside them. They will always pose a danger of treason. My solution to the problem is this. That whenever an Islamic revolution takes place, all non-practising Muslims should, within one year, declare their turning away from Islam and get out of Muslim society. After one year all born Muslims will be considered Muslim. All Islamic laws will be enforced upon them. They will be forced to practice all the fara’id and wajibat [duties and obligations] of their religion and, if anyone then wishes to leave Islam, he will be executed.” Advocating the necessity of emancipating knowledge from the influence of the West to give birth to a true Islamic polity, Mawdudi goes on to state: “Islam is the very antithesis of secular Western democracy.” Not only does society have to be purged from non- Islamic contaminations, but also science and knowledge. Islamic society and Islamic culture have to be pure: More at Hudson New York
 CAIR is at war with the authors of Muslim Mafia, because they tell the truth about the organization. "Judge rules against CAIR: D.C.-based Islamic group trying to quash book exposing terror ties," by Art Moore for WorldNetDaily, January 9 A federal judge ruled against the Council on American-Islamic Relations today in its lawsuit against a father and son who carried out a six-month undercover investigation of the D.C.-based Muslim group, denying a request to conduct discovery - an examination of its opponent's witnesses, facts and documents - prior to hearing a motion to dismiss the case. CAIR is suing P. David Gaubatz and his son, Chris Gaubatz, for allegedly stealing sensitive internal documents and making recordings of officials without consent. Chris Gaubatz, who posed as a Muslim in an internship with CAIR's national office in Washington, took some 12,000 pages of documents destined for a shredder in an attempt, he said, to expose the group's ties to Islamic jihad and terrorism. His father is a former Air Force special agent with extensive Middle East experience who researches the spread of radical Islam in the U.S. and its threat to national security. In her ruling today, Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly of the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., canceled a court hearing scheduled for Tuesday and gave CAIR until Jan. 15 to reply to the Gaubatz's motion to dismiss the case. The motion filed last month by Gaubatz lawyer Daniel Horowitz asserts CAIR has no claim because it does not legally exist. Horowitz explains that just two weeks after CAIR was named by the Justice Department in May 2007 as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorist finance case in U.S. history, the organization changed its name to the Council on American-Islamic Relations Action Network. "CAIR is not a valid entity and even if it were, the exposure of its inner workings is part of the price it pays for being a controversial group in a hotly contested arena," Horowitz declares in his reply to CAIR's lawsuit. The FBI produced evidence at the trial of the Texas-based Holy Land Foundation in 2008 that CAIR was established as a front for the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas. The material obtained by the Gaubatzes is featured in the book "Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That's Conspiring to Islamize America," published by WND Books, an affiliate of WorldNetDaily.com.
The book asserts CAIR is acting as a front for a conspiracy of the Muslim Brotherhood - the parent of al-Qaida and Hamas - to infiltrate the U.S. and help pave the way for Saudi-style Islamic law to rule the nation. Horowitz said CAIR had hoped to draw WND Books into the legal battle so it could pull the book off the shelves. But the federal judge's ruling today prevents the group from any legal investigation of the Gabautzes or WND Books under the court's authority before the motion to dismiss the case is heard.... Read it all. With thanks to JihadWatch
 For almost a decade, American Muslims have seen a growing debate in their communities about the radicalization of Muslims in America and how to combat it. Since its inception in 2003, the American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) has been one of the lone voices publicly waging a contest of ideas with Islamist organizations in the U.S. The crux of our mission is that the ideology of political Islam (Islamism) is the root cause of extremism that threatens Americans' security as well as the faith of American Muslims.
Most major American-Muslim organizations hatched from the Muslim Brotherhood are advocates of political Islam and will always refuse to acknowledge the need to separate mosque and state. The recent Christmas Day airliner attack, the earlier December arrests of American Muslims in Pakistan, and the Fort Hood massacre moved that debate into a new phase. The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) and the Muslim American Society (MAS) have begun to acknowledge for the first time that Muslim communities are facing a "radicalization" problem. These organizations recently announced they are pursuing "anti-radicalization" programs. This is certainly an important change in their rhetoric, but sadly, window-dressing. These Islamist groups have simply recognized that their post-9/11 apologetic messaging is not resonating with the general public. To solve the problem, they co-opted the rhetoric of curbing radicalization. But absent real, honest reform against political Islam, their rhetoric is vacuous. The question that begs to be asked of any Muslim group touting these programs is: What will be the structure and substance of your campaign, and will you confront, renounce and reform the ideology of political Islam? CAIR and MPAC have typically renounced the use of terror and violence, but they have never taken a position against the ideology of political Islam. They have also been constant antagonists to efforts by law enforcement to understand and mitigate the real stages of radicalization of Muslims in America. Just recently these groups called for government to naively "decouple religion from terror." If the root cause of Muslim radicalization is Islamism, what good is any counterterrorism effort that decouples religion from terror?
How can law enforcement effectively counter terrorism in our country without recognizing the slippery slope of political Islam and its separatist narrative is the core ideology that drives the mindset of the extremists as they radicalize? Pragmatically, and I say this with tough love for my co-religionists, many American Muslims need a 12-step program to recognize the driving separatism of political Islam. So many American Muslims have gone down that slippery slope of political Islam to radicalization that the connection cannot be denied. Until the majority of American Muslims can reform their theo-political ideas against the growing global power of the Islamist movement, home-grown terror will only increase as it has. There must be a public war of ideas within the Islamic consciousness promoting liberty over Islamism, freedom over theocracy and secular law over Sharia law. M. Zudhi Jasser
 Unsurprisingly, the new European Muslim Human Rights group announced on the IslamOnline site, is the brainchild of the FIOE (Federation of Islamic Organizations in Europe), the umbrella group for the Muslim Brotherhood in Europe. The FIOE say they invited many experts in law and Muslim activists, but only 26 showed up. European media didn't pay much attention either.
From the FIOE site:
Muslims of Europe Organize the Inauguration Conference of the European Authority for the Defense of Muslim Rights in Brussels
On the initiative of the Federation of Islamic Organizations in Europe the Inauguration Conference for the European Authority for the Defense of Muslims Rights was held in Brussels on December 19th 2009.
Many experts in law and many Muslim activists were invited to join this event from all European regions.
This initiative comes in response to the rising wave of Islamophobia, which has become a challenge to the Islamic presence in Europe and a dangerous threat to the rights of Muslims in the region. This step was expedited by the murder of Dr.Marwa El Sherbiny, on the grounds of her being a Muslim, which was made clear by the villain in court, and the recent referendum results in Switzerland. What is despicable in both cases is that the European standpoint did not blanch at wasting a human life or subjecting a civil right to the voting process, which indicates a dangerous decline in the level of Muslim rights in Europe and beyond.
In a telephone conversation with the Federation of Islamic Organizations, Dr.Fouad Elawy the Head of the Federation of Islamic Organizations in France mentioned that the aim of this initiative is to take the responsibility of defending the rights of Muslims from the level of public organizations to the level of a specialized organization run by lawyers capable of protecting these rights, and to warn European communities of the danger of ignoring the rights of minorities.
It is expected that the conference will attract European and international media presence, due to the importance of the topic, and its relation to the Islamic status in Europe, and the interest taken by Europe and the world in the hardships facing the Muslims of Europe with regards to their rights.
For other FIOE initiatives see:
* Muslims to sign 'historic code of conduct'
* Federation of Islamic Organisation in Europe - Assembly of Imams With thanks to Islam in Europe
 While the Obama administration and congressional leaders may justify renewed engagement with Syria with their desire to jumpstart the Middle East peace process, they ignore the very issue that lies at the heart of the Syrian threat to U.S. national security: Syrian support for radical Islamist terror. This may seem both illogical and counterfactual given past antagonism between the 'Alawite-led regime and the Muslim Brotherhood, but there is overwhelming evidence that President Bashir al-Asad has changed Syrian strategic calculations and that underpinning terror is crucial to the foreign policy of the country. Background On February 14, 2005, a huge bomb killed former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri as his motorcade drove through Beirut. All eyes fell on Damascus.[1] Syria's leaders had motive: Hariri was a prominent Lebanese nationalist who opposed their attempts to grant Lebanon's pro-Syrian president Émile Lahoud an unconstitutional third term. The Syrians had the means to carry out such an attack: Their army had occupied Lebanon for more than fifteen years. Syrian military intelligence (Shu'bat al-Mukhabarat al-'Askariya) operated freely throughout the tiny republic and maintained operational networks there.[2] Asad had actually threatened Hariri: Druze leader Walid Jumblatt reported that at a meeting with Asad and Hariri a few months before the latter's murder, Asad told him, "Lahoud is me … If you and [French president Jacques] Chirac want me out of Lebanon, I will break Lebanon," a remark Jumblatt interpreted as a death threat to Hariri.[3] Following the assassination, Syria became an international pariah. U.N. secretary-general Kofi Annan dispatched a fact-finding mission. This mission resulted in the establishment of an international, independent investigating commission headed initially by German judge Detlev Mehlis.[4] U.S. president George W. Bush and French president Jacques Chirac, two leaders whose views of the Middle East seldom coincided, agreed to isolate Syria diplomatically.[5]
The State Department withdrew its ambassador, Margaret Scobey, and maintained only a lower-level diplomatic presence in Damascus. Under immense pressure, the Syrian army finally withdrew from Lebanon. But, over subsequent months and years, as Asad detected chinks in the West's diplomatic solidarity—and as U.S. members of Congress began to defy the White House and re-engage with Asad—the Syrian regime began to put cooperation with the U.N. investigators on the back burner. Today, Syrian cooperation with the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, the successor to the more ambitious Investigation Commission, is negligible. Obama's Approach to Syria Barack Obama campaigned on a platform which made engagement central to his foreign policy. "Not talking [to adversaries] doesn't make us look tough—it makes us look arrogant," he declared during his campaign.[6] In his inaugural address, he declared, "To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist."[7] The Syrian regime signaled that it would accept Obama's offer, so long as the White House's hand preceded the unclenching of the Syrian fist. In a congratulatory telegram to Obama, the Syrian leader expressed "hope that dialogue would prevail to overcome the difficulties that have hindered real progress toward peace, stability, and prosperity in the Middle East."[8] While the Syrian regime had yet to cooperate with the Hariri investigation, cease its sponsorship of and support for terrorism, stop interfering in Lebanon, or stop helping Hezbollah build up its rocket force, the Obama administration wasted little time in easing pressure on Damascus. This rush to dialogue was undertaken in order to create a more conducive atmosphere for engagement. On March 7, 2009, the State Department dispatched Jeffrey D. Feltman, assistant secretary of state and the highest-ranking U.S. official to visit Syria in more than four years, to Damascus for talks with Syria's foreign minister.[9] The Obama administration called an abrupt end to the moratorium initiated during the Bush administration forbidding U.S. officials' attendance at Syrian embassy functions in Washington when it sent Feltman and senior National Security Council aides to Syrian National Day festivities.[10] Feltman's participation in the renewed engagement was particularly symbolic given his previous posting as ambassador to Lebanon during the Cedar Revolution of 2005 when he led the diplomatic charge to rid Lebanon of Syrian influence and troops. On June 24, 2009, the State Department announced that it would once again nominate an ambassador for the U.S. embassy in Damascus.[11] Just over a month later, the Obama administration announced that it would ease sanctions on Syria. State Department spokesman Ian Kelly explained that "Senator [George] Mitchell [the president's Middle East envoy] told President Assad that the U.S. would process all eligible applications for export licenses as quickly as possible."[12] While the easement did not include those sanctions imposed by Congress in the wake of Hariri's assassination, they, nonetheless, reflect the White House's desire to bring Syria in from the cold. Nor will Congress necessarily act as a check on this enthusiasm to roll back even those sanctions. Less than two years after Hariri's assassination, senators Arlen Specter (Democrat of Pennsylvania), Bill Nelson (Democrat of Florida), John Kerry (Democrat of Massachusetts), and Christopher Dodd (Democrat of Connecticut)[13] traveled to Syria to promote engagement. Four months later, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi also visited Asad for the same purpose, declaring, "The road to Damascus is a road to peace."[14] More at MEF
 By Aaron Klein TEL AVIV – Intelligence officials from Israel, Egypt, Jordan and the U.S. held a meeting last week to discuss specific responses to Iranian retaliatory attacks during a potential war with Tehran, WND has learned. A senior Egyptian intelligence official told WND the main talks, which took place in Amman, revolved around the possibility of Iranian-directed Palestinian and Islamic attacks against Israel, Egypt and Jordan during a possible future war with Iran. The official said scenarios discussed revolved only around Iranian retaliatory attacks and did not take into account how any future war with Iran would be initiated or the timing of such a war. The official said the concern was that Iran would use proxies such as Hamas in the Gaza Strip to attack both Egypt and Israel, while Hezbollah in Lebanon would launch missiles at Israeli population centers, including Tel Aviv. Also, there is fear militants inside Jordan allied with the Muslim Brotherhood could attack Jordanian interests. Hamas in Gaza is said to have rockets capable of reaching just outside Tel Aviv, while Hezbollah possesses Iranian-supplied missiles and rockets that can reach most Israeli population centers. Egypt granted Israel permission several months ago to conduct naval exercises off Egyptian coastal waters. The military drills clearly were aimed at Iran. Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan, are influenced by Sunni Islam. The Arab countries are threatened by the growing influence of Iran, dominated by Shiite Islam. In September, Saudi Arabia denied it offered the Israel Air Force permission to fly over its territory to attack Iranian nuclear facilities. The Arab country was responding to a report in London's Sunday Express claiming the Saudis had agreed to turn a blind eye and not interfere should Israel and the U.S. attack Iranian nuclear facilities through Saudi air space. The Saudi government called the Express report baseless. Just before the Express report, WND quoted an Egyptian intelligence official stating Saudi Arabia is cooperating with Israel on the Iranian nuclear issue. The official said Saudi Arabia is passing intelligence information to Israel related to Iran. He affirmed a report from the Arab media, strongly denied by the Israeli government, that Saudi Arabia has granted Israel overflight permission during any attack against Iran's nuclear facilities. The official previously told WND that Prince Saud Al-Faisal, the Saudi foreign minister, has been involved in an intense, behind-the-scenes lobbying effort urging the U.S. and other Western countries to do everything necessary to ensure Iran does not obtain nuclear weapons. Such weapons would threaten Saudi Arabia's position of influence in the Middle East. The Egyptian official said his country believes it is not likely Obama will grant Israel permission to attack Iran. He previously spoke about the efforts of other Arab countries to oppose an Iranian nuclear umbrella but did not comment on Egypt's own position on the matter. WND
 Editor’s Note: See David Horowitz’s previous blogs on the Islamist war on Freedom at America’s colleges here, here, here, and here. Tomorrow I am scheduled to speak at the University of Southern California. The focus of my speech will be the genocidal incitement of the prophet Mohammed that calls on Muslims to exterminate the Jews as the condition of their redemption: “The hour of judgment will only come when Muslims fight the Jews and kill them, when the Jews hide behind the rocks and the trees, and the rocks and the trees cry out, ‘O Muslim, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him.’” The sayings of the prophet Mohammed — hadith — were complied 200 years after his death. A reasonable Muslim, a modern Muslim, could easily conclude that this hateful incitement is apocryphal and should be removed from the sacred canon. In fact there is a Turkish commission that has taken up the task of sorting out authentic sayings of the prophet from the inauthentic.
Unfortunately, Turkey has become an Islamofascist state in full-throated support of the war against the Jews and it is too much to expect that the Islamic authorities in Turkey will do anything about this hadith. Worse, this hateful incitement is posted on the official USC website. It was originally put there by the USC Muslim Student Union which, like other organizations affiliated with the Muslim Student Association (MSA) is an arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, a supporter of the Islamic jihad against the infidels and specifically of its war against the Jews. When we became aware of the offensive posting of this saying of the prophet Mohammed we took steps that led to its removal by the USC provost who called it “disgusting.” The removal was met by a protest from the MSA and other organizations that are part of the terrorist network including the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) who called its removal religious discrimination.
But the USC administration held its ground. Recently, however, the hadith of hate reappeared on the USC website, this time put there by an organization called the Center for Muslim-Jewish Engagement (CMJE).  USC College Republicans have petitioned the USC administration to remove the hadith. Meanwhile, the supporters of Islamic terror at USC — Students for Justice in Palestine and the USC Progressive Alliance (fascist alliance would be more accurate) — have put out hate propaganda against me and are attempting to shut down my speech, thus repeating the war against free speech that the Muslim Brotherhood network conducted two weeks ago at Temple when we presented the film Fitna and Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders. The Progressive Alliance flier consists of a quote attributed to me which is entirely invented. It’s even written in Osama Bin Laden speak (”while having the body of the human being, a Moslem who unquestioningly follows the Quran behaves like a soulless beast.”) and in style alone represents nothing that I have ever written, said or believed. Students for Justice in Palestine put out a similar smear sheet last week which was somewhat more (or is it less?) creative in presenting my alleged positions as the opposite of what I actually believe. I wrote a response to that attack and submitted it to the USC Daily Trojan, which has yet to print it: To USC College Republicans, USC Hillel, USC Students for Justice in Palestine, and anyone concerned: A campus activist by the name of Alex Sham, whose organization is a supporter of genocide against the Jewish state and of the Hamas terrorists and of the general terrorist jihad against Israel and the United States, has sent a malicious slander to Facebook, and apparently intends to conduct a campaign to demonize me in advance of my speech at USC. Sham’s disgraceful post makes a series of ugly charges against me — not a single one of which has any basis in anything I have ever actually said. For example: I have never said that blacks have benefited from slavery or that they should express gratitude for being enslaved. There is no such statement of mine to that effect anywhere which is why Sham does not quote an actual statement of mine but merely makes up what he thinks I said. I have never said that "Muslim student groups are designed to bring jihad to America.” I have made statements about one such group and only one – the Muslim Students Association – which supports annual protests against the very existence of the Jewish state (an act in itself of genocide by any reasonable definition of the term,) and which regularly hosts speakers who support the terrorist jihad against Israel and the West, call for the execution of gays, and support regimes such as the Islamic Republic of Iran which executes gays. I have never made a statement that “blacks slit throats.” I have made one remark about one black — O.J. Simpson — who did slit his wife’s throat. And so on. I am not a racist and I am not an Islamophobe. I have organized protests on more than 100 college campuses against the oppression of Muslim women. I have published booklets against the oppression of Muslim women and I have sponsored panels with Muslim speakers against the oppression of Muslim women.
There are numerous videos of my campus speeches on the web where I can be seen saying that my efforts are not directed against all Muslims but are in fact conducted in behalf of most Muslims against the hijacking of their religion by totalitarian radicals (who are supported by Students for Justice in Palestine.)
It is evil to pretend to speak in the name of all Muslims when you are conducting a campaign of hatred against Jews and gays and other minority groups. In his email, Sham threatens to attack my speech by any means necessary. Presumably this is also a threat by Students for Justice in Palestine whose members at Berkeley and other places have been arrested on campus in the past for breaking the law. This kind of threat is an expression of the fascist mentality for which Students for Justice in Palestine is rightly famous. I hope members of the USC community will appeal to university officials to see that civility and order are maintained around this event, and that Students for Justice in Palestine are put on notice that this kind of anti-intellectual and uncivil behavior is unacceptable. David Horowitz What is taking place on our campuses is a jihad against our First Amendment freedom.
It is an attempt to silence anyone critical of the Islamic war against the Jews. Responsible Muslims will condemn the unholy alliance of Muslim fascists and their left-wing collaborators which is conducting this war and which is led by the Muslim Brotherhood, CAIR, the Muslim Students Assocation, Students for Justice in Paletine and the Progressive Alliance. NewsReal Blog
 |
|
|
Copyright Muslims Against Sharia 2008. All rights reserved.
E-mail: info AT ReformIslam.org
|
|
|
Posts
