Andrew McCarthy: "Islam Is Islam, and That's It"

Interesting. McCarthy is convinced that Islam has something to do with Muslim behavior, especially when that behavior has been openly displayed for the past fourteen centuries and is grounded in Islam's most trusted sources.

FAMILY SECURITY MATTERS--The tumult indelibly dubbed “the Arab Spring” in the West, by the credulous and the calculating alike, is easier to understand once you grasp two basics. First, the most important fact in the Arab world — as well as in Iran, Turkey, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and other neighboring non-Arab territories — is Islam. It is not poverty, illiteracy, or the lack of modern democratic institutions. These, like anti-Semitism, anti-Americanism, and an insular propensity to buy into conspiracy theories featuring infidel villains, are effects of Islam’s regional hegemony and supremacist tendency, not causes of it. One need not be led to that which pervades the air one breathes.

The second fact is that Islam constitutes a distinct civilization. It is not merely an exotic splash on the gorgeous global mosaic with a few embarrassing cultural eccentricities; it is an entirely different way of looking at the world. We struggle with this truth, which defies our end-of-history smugness. Enthralled by diversity for its own sake, we have lost the capacity to comprehend a civilization whose idea of diversity is coercing diverse peoples into obedience to its evolution-resistant norms.

So we set about remaking Islam in our own progressive image: the noble, fundamentally tolerant Religion of Peace. We miniaturize the elements of the ummah (the notional global Muslim community) that refuse to go along with the program: They are assigned labels that scream “fringe!” — Islamist, fundamentalist, Salafist, Wahhabist, radical, jihadist, extremist, militant, or, of course, “conservative” Muslims adhering to “political Islam.”

We consequently pretend that Muslims who accurately invoke Islamic scripture in the course of forcibly imposing the dictates of classical sharia — the Islamic legal and political system — are engaged in “anti-Islamic activity,” as Britain’s former home secretary Jacqui Smith memorably put it. When the ongoing Islamization campaign is advanced by violence, as inevitably happens, we absurdly insist that this aggression cannot have been ideologically driven, that surely some American policy or Israeli act of self-defense is to blame, as if these could possibly provide rationales for the murderous jihad waged by Boko Haram Muslims against Nigerian Christians and by Egyptian Muslims against the Copts, the persecution of the Ahmadi sect by Indonesian and Pakistani Muslims, or the internecine killing in Iraq of Sunnis by Shiites and vice versa — a tradition nearly as old as Islam itself — which has been predictably renewed upon the recent departure of American troops.

The main lesson of the Arab Spring ought to be that this remaking of Islam has happened only in our own minds, for our own consumption. The Muslims of the Middle East take no note of our reimagining of Islam, being, in the main, either hostile toward or oblivious to Western overtures. Muslims do not measure themselves against Western perceptions, although the shrewdest among them take note of our eagerly accommodating attitude when determining what tactics will best advance the cause.

That cause is nothing less than Islamic dominance. (Read more.)

Thirteen-Year-Old Pakistani Girl's "Honor" Killing Covered Up by Family, Police

I'm sure Muslim groups like CAIR and ISNA would be upset about such "honor" crimes, if only there weren't so much "Islamophobia" to complain about here in America.

PAKISTAN--The body of a teenaged girl who was allegedly killed in the name of honour was exhumed by a medical team on Saturday after the divisional bench of the Peshawar High Court ordered a re-investigation into the case.

The inquiry team, which included two medical officers, was headed by judicial magistrate Rashid Rauf Swati.

Rehnaz Bibi, 13, was allegedly shot dead by one of her cousins in September 2010. According to reports, Bibi left home to convince the boy she liked to marry her without her family’s consent. However, she was sent back home by his family, who lived in the same village, with the promise to send a proposal for her later.

When her family found out about the incident, her father, who was in Karachi at that time, allegedly asked one of his nephews to kill her.

According to an application filed in Haripur district and sessions court by a local activist Qamar Hayat, Rehnaz was fired at with an AK-47 and received 30 bullets. Her family had termed her death as an accident.

The petitioner claims the police closed the case and allegedly concealed facts pertaining to her murder. (Read more.)

Iraq Becoming a Police State

And yet our leaders will continue to claim that the Muslim world simply needs democracy.

BAGHDAD—Iraq's Shiite-led government cracked down harshly on dissent during the past year of Arab Spring uprisings, turning the country into a "budding police state" as autocratic regimes crumbled elsewhere in the region, an international rights groups said Sunday.

Security forces abuse protesters, harass journalists, torture detainees and intimidate activists, Human Rights Watch said in the Iraq chapter of its annual report.

"Iraq is quickly slipping back into authoritarianism," said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director for the New York-based group. "Despite U.S. government assurances that it helped create a stable democracy (in Iraq), the reality is that it left behind a budding police state," she said. (Read more.)

Imam Charged with Raping Eight-Year-Old Student

Muslims assure us that the spread of Islam will put an end to rape, child molestation, etc. However, given that we regularly find cases of rape, child molestation, etc., being committed by Muslims, how can we believe that Islam is the solution Muslims claim it to be? Should we just take their word for it?

Pirojpur, Jan 21 (bdnews24.com) — Police have arrested an imam on charges that he violated an 8-year-old female madrasa student at Pirojpur district's Swarupkathi upazila.

Upzila's Qazi Bari Mosque's Imam Mohammar Nurul Islam was arrested after the girl's parents lodged a rape case on Saturday with the Swarupkathi Police Station, police said.

Station's inspector (investigation) Surendranath Adhikari told bdnews24.com that Nurul Islam, a Fazil grade student of the upazila's Sarsina Alia Madrasa, was also presented before the court following his arrest.

According to case details, Islam was appointed to tutor the victim in Arabic. Islam reportedly violated the girl when she was alone at the madrasa in the morning.

Her parents admitted her to upazila health complex after the girl arrived home and fell sick.

After lodging the case, the victim's mother told reporters, "I sent her to the imam to learn Arabic thinking he was a good person. But I did not know this would happen." (Source)

Bart Ehrman on the Qur'an

Here's some of the information Bart would share if he stopped valuing his life:

Muslim Group Boko Haram Kills More Than 120 People in Nigeria

Hmmm. Boko Haram is killing people in their efforts to establish Sharia. Here in America, when leaders attempt to make laws against establishing Sharia, Muslims assure us that they have no desire to establish Sharia, and that Sharia is simply a set of personal Islamic duties such as praying and visiting a mosque. Ever get the feeling someone's not being honest?

KANO, Nigeria--Coordinated attacks claimed by a radical Islamist sect killed at least 120 people in north Nigeria's largest city, hospital records seen Saturday show, as gunfire still echoed around some areas of the sprawling city.

Soldiers and police officers swarmed over streets Saturday in Kano, a city of more than 9 million people that remains an important political and religious hub in Nigeria's Muslim north. But their effectiveness remains in question, as the uniformed bodies of many of their colleagues lay in the overflowing mortuary of Murtala Muhammed Specialist Hospital, Kano's largest hospital.

Hospital records seen by an Associated Press reporter there showed at least 120 people died in the attacks that started Friday afternoon after Muslim prayers and as shops closed for the weekend in the sprawling, dusty city. A mortuary attendant, who spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity as he was not authorized to speak with journalists, said they had 126 bodies there. . . .

A Boko Haram spokesman using the nom de guerre Abul-Qaqa claimed responsibility for the attacks in a message to journalists. He said the attack came as the state government refused to release Boko Haram members held by the police.

Boko Haram has carried out increasingly sophisticated and bloody attacks in its campaign to implement strict Shariah law across Nigeria, a multiethnic nation of more than 160 million people.

Boko Haram, whose name means "Western education is sacrilege" in the local Hausa language, is responsible for at least 510 killings last year alone, according to an AP count. So far this year, the group has been blamed for at least 196 killings, according to an AP count. (Read more.)

Victim of Attempted "Honor" Killing Speaks Out

Indonesian Atheist Alexander An Beaten, Facing Jail for "Blaphemy"

I'm sure Muslims in the UK would jump at the chance to defend this atheist's rights, if only they weren't so busy complaining about cartoons.

INDONESIA--An Indonesian civil servant who declared himself an atheist on Facebook was arrested and is now facing jail for blasphemy after being attacked by an angry mob, police said today.

Alexander An, 30, who wrote "God doesn't exist" on his Facebook page, was beaten by a mob of dozens on Wednesday in his hometown in Pulau Punjung, West Sumatra province.

"He is suspected of having blasphemed against Islam," local police chief Chairul Aziz told AFP.

"The man told police investigators that if God really exists and has absolute power, why didn't he prevent bad things from happening in this world."

An said on his Facebook page that he was brought up as a Muslim, like the vast majority in Indonesia, where blasphemy is a punishable crime carrying a maximum five-year prison term.

Dozens of locals stormed into his office after a heated debate with them on Facebook over religion, police said.

An was also an administrator of a Facebook group promoting atheism with 1243 followers. His postings no longer appeared online following his arrest. (Source)

Al Qaeda Leader Aslam Awan (aka Abdullah Khorsani) Reportedly Killed in Drone Strike

It's interesting that so many of these terrorists keep popping up in friendly, moderate Pakistan.

FOX NEWS--A senior Al Qaeda figure was reportedly killed in a U.S. drone strike in Pakistan last week, a U.S. official confirmed to Fox News.

Four militants in the town of Miranshah in the North Waziristan tribal region were also killed, according to eyewitness reports.

U.S. officials had confirmed to Fox News that the first drone strike was the first in the region since a November NATO cross-border air attack last year left 24 Pakistani troops dead.

U.S. and Pakistani sources told Fox News that the target of the most recent attack was Aslam Awan, who they describe as a significant figure in the remaining leadership of Al Qaeda.

"Aslam Awan also known as Abdullah Khorsani was a senior Al Qaeda external operations planner who was working on attacks against the West," the U.S. official said.

Pakistani officials did not confirm that Awan was killed in the attack.

"His death reduces Al Qaeda's thinning bench of another operative devoted to plotting the death of innocent civilians," the U.S. official said. (Read more.)

Newt Gingrich Responds to Media Bias

This is mostly off-topic, but one of the issues we regularly deal with at AM is media bias (in favor of Islam). It turns out that the media are biased in other areas as well!

I've never seen anyone lay a smack-down on CNN for their bias the way Gingrich does here.

Yes, It's Yet Another Cartoon Controversy (Care to Guess Which Religion's Followers Are Throwing a Tantrum?)

Muslims keep telling us that Muhammad was just a man. And yet Muslims have far more reverence for him than they have for God.

I (foolishly) thought the cartoon controversies would die out after "Everybody Draw Muhammad Day," but it seems there are still plenty of Muslims to get angry over silly cartoons. Interestingly, if Muslims hadn't complained, far less people would have seen the cartoon of Jesus and Muhammad having a drink. By bringing the media into the discussion, millions of people have now seen it:

Sunnis are blowing up Shias, and vice versa. Ahmadis are being slaughtered in Indonesia. Christians are being persecuted by Muslims in Egypt, Iraq, and Pakistan. Muslims from around the world are calling for the annihilation of Israel. Teenage girls are being butchered by their fathers and brothers over Muslim "honor." Wives are being beaten in the name of Surah 4:34. Terrorist groups are plotting their next attack. And Muslims in the UK are complaining about . . . a cartoon.

Islam: The Religion of Odd Priorities.

DAILY MAIL--A row has erupted over an atheist society at a top London University posting a cartoon sketch featuring the prophet Muhammad having a drink with Jesus on its Facebook page.

A student Muslim group is demanding the 'offensive' image of Jesus and Mo having a drink at the bar, taken from an online satirical sketch, be removed from the social networking site.

The president of the Atheist, Secularist and Humanist society at the prestigious University College London (UCL), Robbie Yellon, has stepped down over the controversy.

But the Society still refuses to take down the image - claiming its right to defend 'freedom of expression'.

Secretary for the National Federation of Atheist, Humanist and Secular Student Societies, Michael Paynter,said: 'Robbie stepped aside because he signed up as president to organise events and run a student society.

'He did not appreciate the stress he would be under when dealing with a controversy like this, so he wanted to make way for someone else.'

The Ahmadiyya Muslim Youth Association's protest against the photo has been backed by UCL's Union.
A UCL Union statement said: 'The atheist society has agreed they will take more consideration when drawing up publicity for future events.

'The society was asked to remove the image because UCLU aims to foster good relations between different groups of students and create a safe environment where all students can benefit from societies regardless of their religious or other beliefs.'

The image that started the controversy was taken from an online twice-weekly satirical comic strip, called Jesus and Mo, and has been running since 2005.

The Association aims to continue its protest until the image is taken down - claiming it is offensive and has wider implications.

The association's national spokesperson, Adam Walker, said the two student groups had worked well together in the past and said the offence was unnecessary.

He said: 'The principle is more important than who is being attacked - this time it is Muslims and Christians but in the future it could be atheists themselves.'

"This time it is Muslims and Christians but in the future it could be atheists themselves." Wow. This guy apparently thinks that atheists will be just as upset over a cartoon as Muslims are. (Read more.)

How about it, atheists? Are you quaking in your boots at the thought of the tables turning, when someone might ***GASP*** draw a cartoon making fun of your beliefs? Here's one:

Let's see if I get any death threats.

Jewish Students in France Pretending to Be Muslims to Avoid Being Attacked

I'm sure Western Muslims would love to do something about this, if only they weren't so busy complaining about Islamophobia.

THE JERUSALEM POST--From the mid-1930s to early 1940s, Jews who recognized that they were no longer safe in Europe anxiously sought refuge abroad. Sylvain Zenouda, the co-founder and current vice president of the Bureau National de Vigilance Contre l"Antisèmitism—an organization which monitors and documents anti-Semitism in France—told me that educated young Jews in France with the financial means to do so have either fled the country or are making plans to flee. Again?

80 years ago, our people were being verbally abused and brutally assaulted in public places. And now it seems to be happening all over again. Viviane Teitelbaum, a minister in the Brussels Regional Parliament, related an incident that occurred this past November involving a 13-year old Jewish girl in Brussels. The girl was brutally assaulted at her school, resulting in her hospitalization for multiple injuries including a concussion. The attackers were not members of the Third Reich’s SS, but a group of female Muslim students at the same school. The ringleader pronounced her to be a “filthy Jew!” Apparently, in the weeks prior to the attack, the girl’s father had approached the authorities and the school with complaints that there had been threats made by fellow classmates against his daughter. Upon hearing that his concerns were simply brushed aside, I immediately thought of Yogi Berra’s famous gaff: “This is like déjà vu all over again!”

2 generations ago, some Jews sought to protect themselves by masquerading as Aryans. In an interview conducted in November, a Parisian mother related how the fear of being physically attacked by Muslim extremist thugs means that it is “not rare at all today” for French Jewish students to attempt to pass themselves off as Muslim - with some even going as far as to fast on Ramadan. One case in point was a Jewish girl of North African descent who for years was successful in this deception, until finally she was “exposed” when Muslim girls caught her eating matzah in the bathroom during Pesah. After her classmates beat her viciously, they invited their male Muslim friends to their school to participate in a gang rape.

Wait…didn’t this happen to us already? (Read more.)

Moeed Abdul Salam Goes from U.S. Boarding School to Al Qaeda Suicide Bomber

What could have possibly changed him? What could have convinced a devout Muslim that violence is the way to move forward? It couldn't possibly be the Muslim sources, which proclaim nothing but peace and tolerance:

Qur’an 9:29—Fight those who believe not in Allah . . .

Qur’an 9:73—O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them.

Qur’an 9:111—Surely Allah has bought of the believers their persons and their property for this, that they shall have the garden; they fight in Allah's way, so they slay and are slain.

Qur’an 9:123—O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness.

Qur’an 48:29—Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and those who are with him are severe against disbelievers, and merciful among themselves.

Sahih Muslim 30—Muhammad said: “I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah.”

Let's face it. The world may never know what drove this man to violence.

ASSOCIATED PRESS--Moeed Abdul Salam didn't descend into radical Islam for lack of other options. He grew up in a well-off Texas household, attended a pricey boarding school and graduated from one of the state's most respected universities.

But the most unlikely thing about his recruitment was his family: Two generations had spent years promoting interfaith harmony and combating Muslim stereotypes in their hometown and even on national television.

Salam rejected his relatives' moderate faith and comfortable life, choosing instead a path that led him to work for Al Qaeda. His odyssey ended late last year in a middle-of-the-night explosion in Pakistan. The 37-year-old father of four was dead after paramilitary troops stormed his apartment.

His Nov. 19 death went largely unnoticed in the U.S. and rated only limited attention in Pakistan. But the circumstances threatened to overshadow the work of an American family devoted to religious understanding. And his mysterious evolution presented a reminder of the attraction Pakistan still holds for Islamic militants, especially well-educated Westerners whose Internet and language skills make them useful converts for jihad.

"There are things that we don't want to happen but we have to accept, things that we don't want to know but we have to learn, and a loved one we can't live without but have to let go," Salam's mother, Hasna Shaheen Salam, wrote last month on her Facebook page.

The violence didn't stop after Salam died. Weeks after his death, fellow militants killed three soldiers with a roadside bomb to avenge the raid.

It is not clear to what extent Salam's family knew of his radicalism, but on his Facebook page the month before he died, he posted an image of Anwar al-Awalki, the American Al Qaeda leader who was killed in a U.S. drone strike in Yemen, beside a burning American flag. He had also recently linked to a document praising al-Awalki's martyrdom and to a message urging Muslims to rejoice "in this time when you see the mujahideen all over the world victorious." (Read more.)

Raymond Ibrahim: How Circumstance Dictates Islamic Behavior

Raymond Ibrahim has written a short article discussing comments by Egyptian Sheikh Yassir al-Burhami, who says . . . GASP! . . . the same thing we keep telling people Islam teaches, namely, that Jihad proceeds in stages.

JIHAD WATCH--Has there ever been a time when one group of people openly exposes its animosity for another group of people—even as this second group not only ignores the animosity, but speaks well, enables, and legitimizes the first group?

Welcome to the 21st century, where Western politicians empower those Muslims who are otherwise constantly and openly denouncing all non-Muslims as enemies to be fought and subjugated.

Consider this video of Sheikh Yassir al-Burhami, a top-ranked figure in Egypt’s Salafi movement which won some 25% of the votes in recent elections. He makes clear a point that, in a different era, would be thoroughly eye-opening—that all notions of peace with non-Muslims are based on circumstance: when Muslims are weak, they should be peaceful; when strong, they should go on the offensive.

Discussing “the analogy between Egypt’s Christians and the Jews of Medina,” Burhami pointed out that Muslims may make temporary peace with infidels, when circumstance calls for it:

The Jews of Medina represent a paradigm—laid by the prophet [Muhammad]—that shows how Muslims should deal with infidels. The prophet’s methods of dealing with infidels are available for Muslims to replicate depending on their situation and their capabilities. The Prophet in Mecca dealt with the infidels in a certain way, so whenever Muslims are vulnerable they should deal with the infidels in this same manner.

Burhami is referring to the famous Mecca/Medina division: when Muhammad was weak and outnumbered in his early Mecca period, he preached peace and made pacts with infidels; when he became strong in the Medina period, he preached war and went on the offensive. This dichotomy—preach peace when weak, wage war when strong—has been instructive to Muslim leaders for ages. (Read the rest of the article at Jihad Watch.)

If you missed my video on this topic, be sure to watch it:

Ann Marie Waters: Freedom of Expression under Threat by Violent Extremists

What happens when students want to learn about Sharia and human rights in the UK? A Muslim threatens everyone present, and the event is cancelled. I guess the students got the answer they were looking for.

NATIONAL SECULAR SOCIETY--This week I was due to give a talk to students at Queen Mary College, London on sharia law and human rights. Rather fittingly – and as if to prove my point - my human rights were quashed by a person demonstrating one of the effects of sharia law; the threat of violence for criticising religion.

Just before I was due to start, a young man entered the lecture theatre, stood at the front of the room with a camera and proceeded to film everyone in the audience. That done, he informed us that he knew who we were, where we lived and if he heard a single negative word about the Prophet, he would track us down. (I am told he made further threats as he left the building).

The organisers of the event, the National Federation of Atheist, Humanist and Secular Student Societies called the police and the event was unfortunately cancelled.

On reflection of the incident, I am left wondering what exactly we could have done. I would love to say that we stood up to him and carried on bravely in a valiant defence of free speech, but it was a frightening experience and I know that people felt genuinely threatened and upset. In any case, is it the role of speakers and students to face off against potentially violent Islamists in defence of our free speech, risking our safety in the process? Just whose job is it to defend freedom of speech and can we be expected to fight for it when the state and other powers refuse to back us up?

Question: can you remember the last time you heard the Government – or any political party – give a robust and dogged defence of free speech? No, neither can I. But there have been plenty of opportunities.

Take the Danish cartoon affair for example. Look at the pathetic response of the British Government at the time; "There is freedom of speech, we all respect that ... But there is not any obligation to insult or to be gratuitously inflammatory. I believe that the republication of these cartoons has been unnecessary. It has been insensitive. It has been disrespectful and it has been wrong." Even the UN said it would investigate whether the cartoonists were racists. How can we expect people in a university lecture hall to stand up to violent threats when this is the reaction of our leaders? The message is very clear – don't insult religion. And if you do, and you get in to trouble for it, you have only yourself to blame (or "don't come crying to us"?)

Freedom of speech needs to be defended from above. We need prosecution and punishment of those intent on frightening people into staying silent. Until the state speaks out and makes it clear to the likes of this guy that this behaviour is not acceptable – no excuses, no apologies – these things will continue to happen and more and more people will be frightened in to shutting up. We can then say goodbye to freedom for good." (Source)

Richard Butrick: The Golden Age of Islam - A Second Look

Richard Butrick has written an excellent article on the so-called "Golden Age of Islam," i.e. the mythical period in history when the Muslim world led humanity in science and mathematics, and Christians and Jews lived in an interfaith paradise under Muslim rule.

STONEGATE INSTITUTE--The period from the death of Muhammad through the 13th Century marks the glory days of the Islamic empire. It was a period of commerce, industry and intra-cultural synergies and a flourishing of the sciences, art, medicine and architecture. It was the epitome of what civilization should be. Just ask Obama. In his 2009 Cairo speech the president said that Islam "carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe's Renaissance and Enlightenment," and praised the "innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed."

While Central Europe languished in the Dark Ages of ignorance, fear and superstition following the collapse of the Roman Empire in the 5th century (so the story goes), it was the Islamic world that carried the torch of Classical civilization to a Europe finally stumbling out of the Dark Ages in the 15th century.

By contrast the Islamic world flourished during the Dark Ages: by the 13th century, both Africa and India had become great centers of Islamic civilization, and soon after, Muslim kingdoms were established in the Malay-Indonesian world while Chinese Muslims flourished throughout China.

Islam therefore is a religion for all people from whatever race or background they might be: Islamic civilization is based on a unity which stands completely against any racial or ethnic discrimination. Such major racial and ethnic groups as the Arabs, Persians, Turks, Africans, Indians, Chinese and Malays in addition to countless smaller units embraced Islam and contributed to the building of Islamic civilization.

Moreover, so the story goes, Islam was not opposed to learning from the earlier civilizations and incorporating their science, learning, and culture into its own world view. Each ethnic and racial group that embraced Islam made its contribution to the one Islamic civilization to which everyone belonged.

The global civilization created by Islam also succeeded in activating the minds and thoughts of the people who entered its fold. As a result of Islam, the nomadic Arabs became torch-bearers of science and learning. The Persians, who had created a great civilization before the rise of Islam, nevertheless produced even more science and learning in the Islamic period than before. The same can be said of the Turks and other peoples who embraced Islam. The religion of Islam was itself responsible not only for the creation of a world civilization in which people of many different ethnic backgrounds participated, but it also played a central role in developing intellectual and cultural life on a scale not seen before.

Quite a story. And it is a story being fed to US students from k-12 on through graduate schools. Quite a story? More like a fairy tale.

Click here to read Butrick's response to this "fairy tale."

"Pious" Pakistani Muslim Sells Christian Girls

If you're waiting for Western Muslims to show their outrage at the kidnapping, rape, and forced conversion of Christian girls in the Muslim world, you'll just have to wait. They're too busy showing their outrage at Lowe's Home Improvement, and people who criticize Islam, and Marines who urinate on dead terrorists.

PAKISTAN--“I saw two of my daughters being raped in front of me,” an old lady from Essa Nagri told The News. “It is considered that Chooras have no integrity.” She says that around midnight, men from other areas start gathering in their neighbourhood. “They are usually drunk. They choose which home they will plunder.”

She adds that one night they stormed into her home and raped two of her girls, while she “was locked in another room hearing their cries for help”. “I am a widow without any financial prospects, but I did go to the MPA representing us. What good is he if he can’t do anything to protect us?” The fear to report these cases is such that at first, no one even admits that an incident of rape or torture has taken place.

Within the past three months, nine women have been abducted and forcibly converted to Islam. MPA Javed adds that the purpose is not to gain good deeds, but to sell them. A majority of the Christian girls converted are married, he says.

According to reports he received from different areas of the city, the abducted women are later sold to feudal lords in Sindh and Punjab. Citing a recent example, Javed says that in Essa Nagri, a 23-year-old married girl was forcibly remarried to a 60-year-old Muslim man, who was notorious for selling girls.

Javed said that the man was known to be pious, but had a side business of selling Christian girls. He says many people apart from him knew the truth. The only information that the family received was by a phone call through which they were informed by somebody that their girl is in Punjab.

He points out that there is a judgment by the Lahore High Court which clearly states that a “married Christian woman cannot be remarried to a Muslim even if converted,” but these cases do not even go to the police to be challenged in the high courts. (Read more.)

Hassan Nisar: The Ummah vs. the West

CAIR: Muslim Mafia

Click here if you haven't read the book.

Three Muslims Found Guilty Terrorism-Related Charges in North Carolina

Of course, Muslims in the West would be in an uproar over these plots, if only there weren't so much Islamophobia to complain about.

North Carolina--In Federal Court in New Bern, NC today, three would-be Islamist terrorists were found guilty of a slew of terrorism-related charges in a planned attack on unsuspecting wives and children of Marine Corps personnel residing on the sprawling Marine base in Quantico, Virginia.

Ziyad Yaghi, 23; Hysen Sherifi, 27; and Mohammad Omar Aly Hassan, 24 all stood before Her Honor U.S. District Judge Louise Flanagan as they had their convictions and sentences publically read to them. (Read more.)

Muslim Terrorists Strapping Bombs to Muslim Children

I'm sure that Muslim organizations like CAIR and ISNA would be ready to do something about this, if they weren't so busy complaining about Lowe's. And the Mainstream Media would be calling far more attention to this, if they weren't so worried about Marines urinating on dead terrorists.

Priorities.

AFGHANISTAN--The mission was as simple as touching two wires together, the little boy was promised. The resulting blast would obliterate the American infidels – but God would spare him from the flame and shrapnel. Abdul Samat would be unharmed and free to run back to the men who had fitted his bomb vest.

Blindfolded and rigged with his explosive payload, the boy, who was about 13, was driven to his target in the Afghan city of Kandahar, after being plucked from the streets of Quetta in neighbouring Pakistan. Minutes before he was due to execute the attack, however, Abdul realised the lies of his recruiters seeking to turn him into a human bomb.

"When I opened my eyes, I saw it was a very black thing they wanted me to do," he later recalled.

"I began to cry and shout. People came out of their houses and asked what was wrong. I showed them I had something in my vest. Then they were scared too and called the police who took the bombs off me."

Afghan security officials say that Abdul's story is not unusual. In the past year, insurgents have used a wave of child suicide bombers, some as young as 10, on the ruthless assumption that small boys can pass through checkpoints and security cordons more easily than men.

A senior Afghan intelligence official estimated that more than 100 had been intercepted in the past 12 months, including 20 from the Kandahar area in the south. The insurgents seek to exploit the innocence of their recruits and turn it into a weapon.

The largely illiterate boys are fed a diet of anti-Western and anti-Afghan government propaganda until they are prepared to kill, he said. But the boys are also assured that they will miraculously survive the devastation they cause.

"The worst part is that these children don't think that they are killing themselves," said the official. "They are often given an amulet containing Koranic verses. Mullahs tell them, 'When this explodes you will survive and God will help you survive the fire. Only the infidels will be killed, you will be saved and your parents will go to paradise'." (Read more.)

Kristin Butler: UN Resolution Threatens Freedom of Speech

I suspect GreekAsianPanda will find the U.N. resolution "mildly annoying."

CROSSWALK--A new resolution introduced at the United Nations Human Rights Council has free speech advocates concerned about a potential backlash against religious minority groups. Previously introduced as Resolution 62/154, “Combating defamation of religion,” the piece was originally written to criminalize the criticism of religion. Advocates worried that the resolution would, at best, limit freedom of speech, and at worst, jeopardize religious minorities in countries carrying heavy punishments for blasphemy and apostasy.

Recently the piece has morphed into Resolution 16/18, the goal of which is “Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping, and stigmatization of, and discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against, persons based upon religion or belief.”

But in spite of the seemingly benign language, free speech advocates say there is still cause for concern. According to Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice, in some Islamic countries, particularly those with harsh penalties for apostasy and blasphemy, it often doesn't take much for religious minorities to incite extremist rage. "Just the building of churches ... having a cross outside your door can be inciting violence," Sekulow says. "So if you let them define these definitions when there is no problem coming from the minority faiths, this is somehow going to 'green-light' their suppression," he explains.

Advocates point to the case of Asia Bibi, a wife and mother who awaits death by hanging in Pakistan after being charged with blasphemy. During a dispute over drinking water, Bibi's Muslim co-workers accused the Christian woman of insulting the Prophet Mohammed – charges that led to her conviction of blasphemy in a Pakistani court. Religious freedom advocates say that religious minorities often bear the brunt of persecution under blasphemy codes in Islamic countries. In Pakistan, Christians, Hindus and other religious minorities comprise only 3 percent of the population of 180 million.

Those opposing the resolution say that the countries most heavily lobbying for its passage are those with less than ideal track records for freedom of speech or religious diversity. Jordan Sekulow, Director of Policy and International Operations for the American Center for Law and Justice, says that the countries pushing this resolution are countries whose “populations are 90 to 99 percent one single religious group.” He is concerned that religious minorities in these predominately Muslim countries already face some forms of persecution, and that the passage of this resolution might serve to increase persecution against minority groups. "What is the problem here with the 1 percent speaking out and why is that such an issue that needs to be handled at the international level?" he asks.

The Organization of the Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is backing the resolution. Frank Gaffney, president of the American Center for Security Policy, questions the group's goals for the resolution, accusing the group of attempting to promote Sharia, Islamic law, through the passage of the resolution. "It is 57 states and Palestine that have come together to promote what is fundamentally the agenda that is known as Sharia," he says. (Read more.)

Robert Muise and David Yerushalmi Form the American Freedom Law Center

I can debate, make videos, and write articles all day long. But when police throw me in jail and seize my camera, my hands are tied. That's where lawyers come in.

Whether you know it or not, if you live in the U.S., Robert Muise and David Yerushalmi have been defending your rights for years. They're the lawyers representing us (pro bono) against the City of Dearborn. They've also represented Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller. As various government officials do their best to take away the rights our forefathers fought and died to give us, Muise and Yerushalmi stand on the front lines on behalf of freedom, America, and the Constitution.

This is why the following news is so exciting.

AFLC--Having collaborated for over four years on many high-profile cases, attorneys David Yerushalmi and Robert J. Muise have decided to formalize their working relationship by together launching the American Freedom Law Center (AFLC). Yerushalmi, an orthodox Jew, and Muise, an orthodox Catholic, describe AFLC as the Nation’s first truly authentic Judeo-Christian, public interest law firm.

According to Yerushalmi and Muise, they formed AFLC because they share the firm conviction that the strength of our Nation lies in its commitment to a Judeo-Christian heritage and moral foundation and to an enduring faith and trust in God and His Providence. This intersection between our Judeo-Christian values and the preservation and security of our Nation has garnered the interest and support from several prominent leaders, including former CIA Director R. James Woolsey; former Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Ronald Reagan and current President of the Center for Security Policy Frank Gaffney; Notre Dame law professor Charles Rice; former Inspector General for the Department of Defense Joseph Schmitz; and former Assistant U.S. Attorney and current contributing editor to National Review Andy McCarthy, all of whom will be serving on the AFLC advisory board.

Through AFLC, Yerushalmi and Muise seek a return to what they describe as “America’s founding commitment to receive God’s continued blessing for America.” Yerushalmi commented, “AFLC will fight for faith and freedom by advancing and defending America’s Judeo-Christian heritage and moral foundation through litigation, education, and public policy programs. Fighting for our Judeo-Christian values is more than simply defending religious liberty; it is fighting for the very survival of our Nation.” He added, “Throughout history, great nations have fallen from within. Make no mistake, America is a blessed Nation, but only so long as it remains faithful to the Judeo-Christian values upon which it was founded.”

Yerushalmi and Muise have pledged to aggressively fight those who seek to undermine and destroy our Nation’s founding principles. They view secular progressives and organizations such as the ACLU and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as domestic enemies to the Judeo-Christian values reflected in our Constitution and Declaration of Independence. They vow to fight the “civilization jihad” being waged by the Muslim Brotherhood and other sharia-driven Muslims operating within the United States, including CAIR.

What is AFLC? It is first and foremost a public interest litigation firm. Muise explained the pressing need for an organization like AFLC: “To great effect, elite secular progressives are systematically assailing and destroying our Nation’s moral foundation. Driven by a transnational world view that is hostile to our Nation’s Judeo-Christian values, progressives are zealously sweeping religion from the public square, foisting sharia law and other harmful international precedents into our courts and Constitution, assaulting the traditional family, and weakening our national defense by — among other things — undermining the strength of our military through social engineering and political correctness. Our traditional liberties hang in balance. And for good or ill, this battle for America’s soul is being waged in the courtrooms across America.” (Read more.)

Pat Condell: Human Rights Travesty

This video is from 2010, but it's even more relevant now.

Nine out of Top Ten Most Dangerous Countries for Christians are Muslim Countries

I'm sure that Muslim organizations like CAIR and ISNA would like to do something about the brutal treatment of Christians and other minorities in Muslim countries; however, they're too busy complaining (still) about Lowe's and condemning U.S. Marines who peed on dead terrorists.

U.N. WATCH--Concerns about an Islamic-sponsored “combating intolerance” initiative at the United Nations are brought into sharp relief by results of a new world survey on religious persecution.

Muslim nations make up nine out of the top ten countries where Christians face the “most severe” persecution, and 38 of the top 50, reports U.S.-based Open Doors in its 2012 World Watch List.

Topping the list is North Korea, where the Stalinist regime enforces cult worship of its leaders.

The results lay bare the sheer incongruity of the idea that the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), whose 56 member states control more than a quarter of the votes in the UN General Assembly, can be serious about promoting religious tolerance.

Yet that is what it claimed by successfully pushing for an assembly resolution titled “Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping, stigmatization, discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against persons, based on religion or belief.” The measure, which passed last month, mirrored an almost identical resolution in the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) in Geneva last March.

The assembly resolution, which the United Arab Emirates tabled on behalf of the OIC, repeats the prior HRC measure’s call for governments to “take effective measures to ensure that public functionaries, in the conduct of their public duties, do not discriminate against an individual on the basis of religion or belief.”

OIC member states want us to believe they are promoting that and the many other praiseworthy precepts of both resolutions even though a majority of them oppose the measures through their actions.

What’s more, a decade’s worth of Open Doors surveys shows that “the persecution of Christians in these Muslim countries continues to increase,” the group’s Dr. Carl Moeller reports.

And so the question begs: If most OIC member states practice the opposite of each resolution’s stated intent, why did the organization launch the initiative? (Read more.)

Clifford May: Free Speech Ends Where Islam Begins

The Dickinson Press--It’s funny in an Orwellian way that in Europe there are now militant groups with such cutesy names as Sharia4Belgium and Sharia4Holland. Less funny, but perhaps more Orwellian: Last month, the European Foundation for Democracy held an event in Amsterdam featuring two speakers who favor liberalizing Islam. More than 20 members of the pro-Sharia groups pushed their way in shouting “Allahu Akhbar!” They demanded the event be stopped, called the speakers apostates, spat on them, threw eggs at them and threatened to kill them.

Now here’s the least funny and most Orwellian part: Few Europeans — few journalists, politicians, members of the self-proclaimed Human Rights community, Muslim organizations claiming to be moderate — have expressed outrage over this boot-stomping suppression of free speech in a city, country and continent that claim to value freedom and tolerance.

Roberta Bonazzi, EFD’s executive director, vowed not to be silenced. “We are united and will continue to support inspirational Muslim reformers across Europe,” she said. Her speakers also kept a stiff upper lip. Canadian author Irshad Manji said that she and Dutch Parliamentarian Tofik Dibi had “refused to leave, even when police asked. We wouldn’t play on jihadi terms.” Dibi, of the Green-Left party, said “the disruption shows that even in the Netherlands it is necessary to continue the debate on reforming Islam.”

Necessary, yes; safe, no. In Europe, increasingly, free speech ends where Islam, Islamism and even Islamic terrorism begin. Two months ago, the Paris offices of the French satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo were firebombed and its staff targeted with death threats after publication of an issue “edited” by the Prophet Mohammad.

In 2005, the Danish newspaper Jyllands Posten published a dozen cartoons satirizing terrorism in the name of Islam. That led to protests, riots, death threats, an assassination plot and the bombing of the Danish embassy in Pakistan.

All this continues a trend begun in 1989, when Iranian revolutionary leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini ordered any Muslim willing and able to murder British author Salman Rushdie whose novel, “The Satanic Verses,” Khomeini deemed blasphemous. Rushdie has required bodyguards ever since.

In any of the more than 50 states that hold membership in the Saudi-based Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC — formerly the Organization of the Islamic Conference) that probably would not have saved him. Last year, Salmaan Taseer, the governor of Pakistan’s Punjab province, defended a Christian woman sentenced to death for having said something some Muslims found offensive. One of Taseer’s bodyguards shot him 27 times.

There is not a single OIC member state that seriously guarantees freedom of speech. Nevertheless, in association with the OIC, the U.S. State Department last month hosted, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton attended, a three-day, closed-door international conference in Washington on combating religious “intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization.” The conference reinforced the OIC tenet that all religions are equal — though one is more equal than others. OIC members are concerned only about the “defamation” of Islam and, evidently, they do not view militant Muslims attacking reformist Muslims as defaming their faith.

Nina Shea, who serves on the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, attended part of the conference and reported that it “immediately reignited OIC demands for the West to punish anti-Islamic speech.” The audience was reassured that “the Obama administration is working diligently to prosecute American Islamophobes and is transforming the U.S. Justice Department into the conscience of the nation, though it could no doubt learn a thing or two from the assembled delegates ...”

From which delegates exactly? The Saudis whose school textbooks describe Jews as apes and Christians as swine? Or those of the European Union which, in response to the violence incited over the Danish cartoons, has mandated religious hate-speech codes that shield Islamic militants but, as the attack against EFD’s speakers illustrates, do little to protect the rights of liberal Muslims, much less of non-Muslims?

Will the day come when Europeans and Americans again stand up on their hind legs and defend their freedoms, values and traditions? Or have we effectively given up the fight in an attempt to appease such groups as the OIC and Sharia4Belgium? If only Orwell were still with us: I bet he’d have some pungent answers to these questions. (Source)

"All-American Muslim" Stars Busted for Marijuana Possession at Canadian Border

Yes, two cast members of TLC's "All-American Muslim" were busted while crossing the Canadian border. The border officer caught the pair with nine grams of "the chronic" (a.k.a. "cannabis," "giggle weed," "ganja," "dope," "wacky tobacky," "grass," "indo," "the herb," "Mary Jane," etc.).

Wow. If this was another desperate attempt to show us that Muslims really are "just like everyone else" . . . Genius!

Apparently, it is notoriously easy to get a "medical marijuana" card in Michigan. However, can anyone who watched "All-American Muslim" point to anyone on the show who displayed any symptoms that would require a sack of pot for a short trip to Canada?

Kind of boring to even report this. But it's more interesting than anything that ever happened on the show.

DETROIT FREE PRESS--Two reality TV stars from TLC’s “All-American Muslim” show found some real life drama at the Ambassador Bridge recently: Authorities said they were caught with pot at the border.

It happened on New Year’s Day, according to Ron Smith, spokesman for Customs and Border Protection in Detroit.

Smith told the Free Press today that two cast members of the TLC reality show were caught with 9 grams of marijuana in the trunk while trying to cross into the U.S. from Windsor. The cast members – a man and a woman -- were not named by authorities. One of them, Smith said, had a medical marijuana card, although federal law does not recognize the card.

TLC declined to comment.

According to Smith, the two travelers had to pay a $500 civil fine for failing to declare the bag of weed to border agents.

He explained how it all went down:

At the first checkpoint after crossing the bridge, an officer decided to pull the two passengers over for inspection after asking them a series of routine questions. The officer, Smith noted, did not recognize the travelers from the TV show.

“Some officers will look in a lot of trunks. This officer picked their trunk to look in,” Smith said.

But inside the inspection area, Smith said, some officers and bystanders recognized the pair from the show. During the inspection, an officer checked the trunk and found a weed-like substance in a small bag – enough to roll about 10 joints.

The travelers were released because, as Smith explained, nine grams of marijuana doesn’t warrant prosecution.

“This wasn’t a criminal matter, it was a civil matter,” Smith said, adding. “It’s very hard to get someone to prosecute for something that small.” (Source)

This just in: TLC may be changing the station's name to THC. But isn't that "The History Channel"?

BTW, can anyone imagine a Muslim version of Cheech and Chong?

Apartheid in the Middle East

Muslims around the world pretend to care about Palestinian refugees. However, Muslim countries refuse to grant citizenship to the refugees, preferring to keep them segregated. Why? Because the refugees are simply a tool in the war against Israel.

Christian Convert Sofia Osman Tortured by Muslims in Somalia

I'm glad they didn't kill her. Does this make them "moderates"?

SOMALIA--A Somali convert from Islam was paraded before a cheering crowd last month and publicly flogged as a punishment for embracing a “foreign religion,” sources said.

Sofia Osman, a 28-year-old Christian from Janale city in Somalia's Lower Shabelle region, had been taken into custody by Islamic extremist al Shabaab militants in November; the public whipping was meant to mark her release. She received 40 lashes on Dec. 22 while jeered by spectators.

“Osman was whipped 40 lashes at 3 p.m., but she didn’t tell what other humiliations she had suffered while in the hands of the militants,” an eyewitness, told Compass, adding that whipping left her bleeding. “I saw her faint. I thought she had died, but soon she regained consciousness and her family took her away.”

The whipping was administered in front of hundreds of spectators after Osman was released from her month-long custody in al Shabaab camps. Nursing her injuries at her family’s home, in the days after the punishment she would not talk to anyone and looked dazed, a source close in touch with the family said. She has since been relocated.

“Please pray for her quick recovery,” the source said.

Janale, one Somalia’s major cities, is about 200 kilometers (124 miles) from Mogadishu.

Osman became a Christian four years ago and was a member of the underground church in the war-torn Horn of Africa country largely controlled by the al Qaeda-linked militants from al Shabaab. (Source)

Muslim Convert and Military Veteran Craig Benedict Baxam Arrested on Terrorism Charges

Apparently, Baxam doesn't have cable television. If only he'd seen TLC's "All-American Muslim," he would have realized that real Muslims throw footballs, not bombs.

GREENBELT, Md.–A former U.S. Army soldier has been charged with attempting to provide material support to terror group al Shabaab, the Department of Justice announced Monday.

Craig Benedict Baxam was arrested Friday upon return to his home state of Maryland after he was captured in Africa during an alleged attempt to reach Somalia, where the terror group is based.

Baxam, 24, joined the Army in 2007 and served in Baghdad and Korea. During his enlistment, he completed eight months of advanced intelligence and cryptology training, the Justice Department said in a press release.

According to court papers, Baxam secretly converted to Islam days before leaving the Army, one month ahead of completing his deployment in Korea. He returned to Maryland in July 2011 and reportedly sought to move to Somalia to join al Shabaab.

Baxam allegedly flew to Kenya using money from his retirement savings account, and carried several hundred dollars in cash to give al Shabaab as an offering after crossing the border into Somalia, the Justice Department said.

"The complaint alleges that Craig Baxam intended to travel to Somalia and join the terrorist organization Al-Shabaab," U.S. Attorney Rod J. Rosenstein said in a statement. "Mr. Baxam was caught in Kenya before he reached Somalia, and there is no allegation that anyone assisted him." (Read more.)

Devout Muslim Sami Osmakac Arrested in Plot to Attack Crowded Areas . . . in Florida

Hmmm. Another attempted terrorist attack by someone who believes in following the example set by Muhammad and his companions. And here I thought that TLC's show "All-American Muslim" would convince Muslims that they should focus on football and tattoos instead of carrying out Allah's will. I'm totally shocked.

Man charged with Tampa car bomb plot: MyFoxTAMPABAY.com

FOX NEWS--A 25-year-old man described as an Islamic extremist was arrested in an alleged plot to attack crowded areas in the Tampa, Fla., area with a car bomb, assault rifle and other explosives, authorities said Monday.

The U.S. Department of Justice said Sami Osmakac, a naturalized U.S. citizen who was born in the former Yugoslavia, was arrested Saturday night.

Osmakac, from Pinellas County, allegedly told an undercover agent that "We all have to die, so why not die the Islamic way?'" according to a federal complaint.

FBI agents arrested Osmakac on Saturday after he allegedly bought explosive devices and firearms from an undercover agent. The firearms and explosives were rendered inoperable by law enforcement. The federal complaint says that shortly before his arrest, Osmakac made a video of himself explaining his motives for carrying out the planned violent attack.

He has been charged with one count of attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction. His first appearance in federal court is scheduled for Monday at 2 p.m. ET.

Sources close to the investigation told Fox News that Osmakac was being "closely monitored by law enforcement" for months in what authorities have described as a "sting operation."

Federal officials said a confidential source told them in Sept. 2011 that Osmakac wanted Al Qaeda flags. Two months later, the federal complaint said, Osmakac and the confidential source "discussed and identified potential targets in Tampa" that Osmakac wanted to attack.

Osmakac allegedly asked the source for help getting the firearms and explosives for the attacks, and the source put him in touch with an undercover FBI employee.

On Dec. 21, Osmakac met with the undercover agent and allegedly told the agent that he wanted to buy an AK-47-style machine gun, Uzi submachine guns, high capacity magazines, grenades and explosive belt. During a later meeting, Osmakac gave the agent a $500 down payment for the items.

"According to the complaint, Osmakac also asked the undercover employee whether he/she could build bombs that could be placed in three different vehicles and detonated remotely, near where Osmakac would conduct a follow-up attack using the other weapons he requested," a press release from the Department of Justice said. "The undercover employee said he/she could possibly provide explosives for one vehicle. Osmakac also allegedly said that he wanted an explosive belt constructed to kill people."

On Jan. 1, Osmakac told the agent that he wanted to bomb night clubs, the Operations Center of the Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office and a business in Tampa, Florida.

Osmakac told the undercover FBI agent that he wanted to detonate a car bomb and use the explosive belt to "get in somewhere where there's a lot of people" and take hostages.

He also allegedly told the agent that "Once I have this…they can take me in five million pieces," in an apparent reference to a suicide blast. During that meeting, the agent told Osmakac he could always change his mind about his plot.

Osmakac had created a "martyrdom video" and tried on a bomb belt before being arrested Saturday, law enforcement officials told Fox News. (Source)

Is the Qur'an Miraculous?

A debate between Abdullah Kunde and Samuel Green. December 2011.

Nigerian Christians Gunned Down as They Mourned for other Christians Who Had Been Gunned Down

Muslims in the West, however, are too busy complaining about imaginary persecution here to do anything about actual persecution there.

NIGERIA--Gunmen in Nigeria on Friday opened fire on friends and relatives gathered to mourn the deaths of three Christians killed on Thursday, leaving up to 20 more people dead.

It was the latest in a series of attacks blamed on radical Islamists who have vowed to wage a religious war on Nigeria's Christians and drive them from the country's majority-Muslim north.

Several dozen Christians had come together for a meeting in a town hall in Mubi, in Adamawa state, to mark the deaths the day before of several people killed in the town.

Up to four gunmen surrounded the building and opened fire with Kalashnikov rifles, killing up to 20 people and leaving another 15 badly injured.

"We started hearing many gunshots through the windows," said Okey Raymond, 48, who was at the meeting.

"Everyone scampered for safety, but the gunmen chanted: 'God is great God is great' while shooting at us." (Read more.)

Michael Coren & Family Threatened by Muslim

Michael Coren is host of "The Arena" on the Sun News Network. Unlike most other talk show hosts, Coren discusses Islam in a critical manner. Not surprisingly, Muslims are upset, offering the standard "Don't say Islam is violent or we'll kill you" irony so familiar to those of us who dare speak about Islam, the Qur'an, and Muhammad.

Sexual Abuse Rampant at Muslim-Run Orphanage in India

Muslims keep telling us that Islam is the solution to immorality. However, when we look at the Muslim world to see if there's evidence supporting this claim, we find Muslims blowing up other Muslims, Muslims burning down churches, Muslim men brutally beating women, and rampant sexual abuse. It seems we'll have to rank the claim that "Islam will make the West a more moral place" alongside other nonsensical Muslim claims, e.g. "the Qur'an is a scientific masterpiece," "Muhammad was the greatest man ever," "Islam supports women's rights," and "Islam is a religion of peace."

BANGLAGORE, INDIA--Junior girls in Muslim Orphanage, the state’s biggest orphanage run by the Waqf Board, have been found to be sexually abused by their seniors under the patronage of some of the orphanage staffers. This shocking revelation has been made following visit by a team, led by State Minority Commission (SMC) chairman Anwar Manippady and members of the commission and Women & Child Welfare Department (WCWD), which inspected the orphanage located near Commercial Street on December 31.

“Several junior inmates of the orphanage confirmed that they were not only sexually harassed by their seniors but were also forced to witness homosexual acts. Instances of senior girls torturing and beating their juniors if their demands were not met, too, came to light,” Manippady has stated in a report submitted to chief secretary SV Ranganath.

“It’s a gross violation of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2001, and the shocking part is that some members of the institution (the orphanage) are also involved in the immoral activities,” Manippady has said. “Upon verification we found that the manager, identified as Ashraf, is a habitual offender and has also been harassing an ex-inmate of the orphanage regularly.”

The commission’s report seeks action against the guilty.it has recommended the termination of service of the entire existing staff of the orphanage, and the filing of criminal charges against them for allowing the junior girls to be sexually exploited. (Read more.)

Indian Court Orders Google, Yahoo, and Facebook to Remove all Anti-Islamic Material

Muslims assure us that Islam is compatible with Western values. Meanwhile, they keep trying to destroy Western values.

DAILY MAIL--Social websites including Google and Facebook have been ordered by an Indian court to remove all 'anti-religious' and 'anti-social' content within six weeks.

On Saturday a Delhi Court ordered 22 social networking sites, including Yahoo and Microsoft, to wipe the objectionable and defamatory contents and file compliance reports by February 6, 2012.

Additional Civil Judge Mukesh Kumar passed the order on a suit filed by Mufti Aijaz Arshad Qasmi seeking to restrain the websites from circulating objectionable and defamatory contents.

Qasmi had objected to a number of images on the websites which he complained would cause 'irreparable loss and injury to the people who are offended by them'.

He argued that some of the images defamed Hindu gods, Prophet Mohammed and other religious figures, India Today website reported.

The order will raise serious questions about how users' posts and opinions will be edited, censorship and freedom of expression.

On December 22 Judge Kumar had issued summonses to the social networking sites, demanding they remove photographs, videos or texts that might offend religious sentiments, the Hindustan Times website reported.

The order comes a day after a criminal court issued summonses to the sites for facing trial for allegedly webcasting objectionable contents.

Santosh Pandey, appearing for complainant Mufti Aijaz Arshad Qasmi, told The Hindu Times after the court hearing that the websites have to submit a report to the court by February 6 describing the action they had taken to remove the contents from the websites.

Representatives of Yahoo India Pvt Ltd and Microsoft told the court that they had not got copies of the order and complaint against them, but Qasmi's counsel told the court that he would supply the relevant documents to them, according to the Hindustan Times.

The order comes at a controversial time as IT minister Kapil Sibal had recently discussed with representatives of some of the companies ways to guarantee the offensive contents are not posted. (Read more.)

But this shouldn't be surprising:

New Blog to Follow: Liberated

Muslims in the West like to portray themselves as victims, even though they have the same opportunities and Constitutional protections as any other American. Indeed, Muslims have a privileged status here in the West. If you criticize Christianity or atheism, no one cares. If you criticize Islam, prepare to be labeled a "racist," a "bigot," and an Islamophobe.

Compare Islam's place of honor in America with the plight of non-Muslims living in the Muslim world. We routinely learn about Christian and Hindu girls being raped, kidnapped, and forced to convert to Islam. Churches are being destroyed in Egypt, Nigeria, and Ethiopia. Over the past fourteen centuries, more than 270 million non-Muslims have been slaughtered by Muslims.

There's far more going on that we never hear about. News is often filtered through a pro-Muslim media network, so we don't get to see life behind the veil.

A former Muslim named Shakila, who lives in a Muslim country, has started a blog called "Liberated" (with the help of Robert Spencer). Be sure to visit her blog regularly for a glimpse of life in the Muslim world.

Here's Shakila's first post. (There are already several more on her blog.)

I was born in a very typical Sunni Muslim household, not very conservative like the Arabs, but nevertheless religious enough. I was born in Karachi, Pakistan to a very respectable Mohajjir family (mohajjirs are immigrants from India from the time of the partition in 1947). I moved to another Muslim country with my parents when I was just 10 years old and still live there.

I really wish there were a way I could freely live in a free society where I could follow the religion that I want without any compulsion. So far, I am not really sure what I am. I just know that I am not an atheist, because I do believe in a God, but that God cannot be the Allah of Mohammed. God is kind and merciful, not evil, cruel, mean and sadistic, as is Allah.

Have you ever read the Quran in English? I never did, I mean all my life I just recited the Quran in Arabic without understanding a single word until August of this year, when I purchased a copy of the English Quran and read the translation for the first time. Previously I had read some parts of it in English, but never the whole thing. But this year in August I read it from cover to cover, and then also read other references on the internet. Then I finally reached the conclusion that this book is the most evil thing on the face of this earth. It teaches nothing else except hatred and violence. I can no longer be a part of a cult which subjugates its followers, making them mere blind puppets with no mind of their own.

During the course of last four months, I have done nothing else but read, read and read. I spend hours a day reading Ali Sina and watching videos of David Wood and others who are trying their best to expose Islam to the world. I read 23 Years by Ali Dashti. The best among them all is Ali Sina's Understanding Muhammad and of course Robert Spencer’s The Truth About Muhammad. These kind of books are banned here, but I managed to find Robert’s book on Ibook, so I purchased it and just finished reading it yesterday.

I don't know how to go about it. I mean, I want to remain anonymous, but at the same time I need help. I don't want to be killed just because I am brave enough to tell the truth. I am really in a terrible jam. I do not want to lose my life just because I do not believe in that evil religion anymore.

Last Sunday I went to the church here and attended the mass. Then I went to see the priest and asked him for help. He said that his hands were tied and he really could not do anything to help me, because when they had first gotten permission to built a church in this country, they had to agree to a few terms and conditions with the government here. One of them was not to convert anyone from Islam. He said if anyone finds out, the church would be closed and he would probably end up in jail.

The priest said he could not help me personally, but that I was more than welcome to attend the mass and sit quietly at the back. He said, “Do not talk to anyone or reveal who you are.” It is a good idea, but frankly, I am not sure if I want to do that every week, because last Sunday I saw quite a few police cars circling the church premises, and I am really scared. What if someone checks my ID or something? They would probably close down the church and put me in jail, and maybe even execute me. My life will be in danger if anyone finds out that I have left Islam.

I have a friend, a pretty young girl from Morocco who also lives here and works with me. She too has given up Islam recently but she is also very afraid of her life. This is what Islam does to you. When you are in it, your life is nothing but living in the fear of hell, and once you leave it, it is not less than hell because you are constantly scared to lose your life.

Daniel Greenfield: All-American Muslim’s Very Special Tribute to 9/11

Who were the real victims of 9-11? Muslims, of course. Who else? Muslims are always the victims, even when they are crashing planes into buildings.

The Freedom Center's Daniel Greenfield draws attention to the All-American Muslim pity party:

Empathy is the essence of tragedy. To be able to mourn for others we have to feel their loss and make it our own. Most Americans never lost anyone on September 11. Most never knew anyone who died that day in the planes above or the buildings below. And yet we as a nation felt that blow. Their pain was our pain. And that response was not limited to the United States as millions of people beyond these shores reached out and took in the full weight of that tragedy and grief.

All-American Muslim: The Day the World Changed, an episode of the reality series that has the cast interacting emotionally with the attacks of September 11, is less about those who were murdered on that day than about the cast’s feelings and exploitation of that day. It may be unfair to criticize the cast of a reality television show for being self-centered. An obsessive focus on one’s own feelings and needs to the exclusion of all else seems to be a standard prerequisite for appearing on one of these shows. The perfect reality show performer must be a sociopath or capable of playing one on television. And yet this self-centered reaction to the attacks of September 11 is disturbingly common among Muslim leaders and activists in the United States.

Perhaps the most odious aspect of this is the incorporation of the Islamophobia theme into a day of remembrance for the dead, until the very act of remembrance becomes tarred with accusations of bigotry. Every commemoration of the day by Muslim leaders seems determined to not only foist the Islamophobia myth on us, but to also associate it with some national overreaction to that day. Like the family of a cop killer arriving at a memorial determined to make their own sense of victimization the center of attention, the need by some Muslims to turn their own sense of victimization into the focus of September 11 is inappropriate and flies on the face of what should be basic decency.

That sense of grievance is rarely if ever directed at Al-Qaeda and those Muslims who carry out terrorist attacks against Americans; instead it is directed at Americans who woke up to a day of fire and terror, and tried to understand what was going on. The All-American Muslim cast follows the political line of groups like CAIR by indicting Americans for their reaction to a terrorist attack carried out by Muslims, rather than engaging in some soul-searching about the violent roots of their own religion.

When cast members insist that the terrorists were not Muslims, or not truly Muslims, their denial echoes the collective denial of Muslim communities and leaders in America who have never come to terms with the problem because they are too busy misrepresenting themselves as the victims. They are too busy feeling sorry for themselves to understand the pain of so many Americans on the anniversary of that awful day.

But All-American Muslim’s denial that the September 11 hijackers were Muslims acting in the name of Islam, because Muslims are incapable of terrorism is blatantly dishonest. Especially when the series featured two Imams who support terrorists, Imam Abdul Latif Berry, who is quite a fan of the Ayatollah Khomeini, and Husham Al-Husainy, who supports Hezbollah. The appearance of these two men on a series which pretends to show us the peaceful nature of the real All-American Muslim demonstrates how difficult it is to detach the religious violence in Islam from the Muslim community.

When Al-Husainy signed a document which read in part, “We remind our sons to get ready to carry out their duty in Holy Jihad and continue the path which our young valiant men in Hezbollah began in Southern Lebanon” and which invoked a “Islamic nation which extends to all parts of the world”; how was this any different than a bulletin from Osama bin Laden?

The “All-American Muslims” of All-American Muslim may be entirely sincere when they claim that Bin Laden is not a Muslim. After all they are Shiites and he’s a Sunni. Al-Qaeda has targeted Shiites in its massacres. The Shiite view of Sunnis and the Wahhabi view of Shiites tend to be equally ugly. And Shiites and Sunnis often persecute each other in Muslim countries.

The problem is that while the All-American Shiites may reject Bin Laden, they don’t reject the Ayatollah Khomeini and Hassan Nasrallah of Hezbollah. If they did then Abdul Latif Berry and Husham Al-Husainy wouldn’t have a place to promote themselves on All-American Muslim.

Most Muslims reject some form of terrorism, but not that many Muslims reject all forms of terrorism. There are always exceptions and exemptions. Whether it’s Shiites who want to give Hezbollah a pass or Sunnis who think that Al-Qaeda goes too far but that Hamas is just right, what is lacking in the Muslim community is a wholesale rejection of all forms of violent Jihad.

It’s not enough to reject Bin Laden in order to participate in commemorating September 11. Not when a Shiite Bin Laden like Hassan Nasrallah or the Ayatollah Khomeini are still okay. And even those Muslims who do reject terrorism in all its forms must still address the widespread affinity for terrorism in the Muslim community. An affinity so widespread that even a television series like All-American Muslim whose entire reason for being is to present a positive non-terrorist image of Islam is still unwilling or unable to keep Imams like Husainy and Berry off the stage.

An honest admission that their community has a problem combined with sincere mourning for the dead without any of the self-serving victimization that characterizes episodes like The Day the World Changed would go a long way toward easing the minds of Americans. It would also change the dialogue from dishonest platitudes and denial to a meaningful exchange of feelings and ideas.

September 11 is first and foremost a day to remember the horrors inflicted on this country and the grief of those who were lost amidst the flames. Truly All-American Muslims would use that day to join the national grieving, rather than bringing to it their own victimization agendas. Above all else it is unseemly for a community where a man like Husham Al-Hussainy remains a respected figure to present itself as the real victims of an ignorant backlash when it has clearly not even come to terms with the conflicting demands of American values and its own religion. (Source)

As we all know by now, one of the key features of "Stealth Jihad" is claiming victim status:

Samatar Mohamed Still Desperately Attacking the Qur'an

Here's Samatar's latest:

And what I meant by the fight used in 9:29, was that fight is not ONLY used for the physical violence, but rather any fight against disbelievers whether through violence or not violence. When a muslim debates a non muslim to defend his way of life, he is fighting a Jihad. When a muslim decides not to drink alcohol while some schoolmates try to convince him otherwise, he is fighting a Jihad. When a muslim prays in a public school even though they do not allow him to, he is fighting a Jihad for Allah (swt). And when a muslim goes to war against disbelievers to defend his people from oppression, that is also a Jihad. My point is that Jihad is a term that applies in many different circumstances, and the same goes with 9:29 of the Noble Quran. Back to surah 9, sami goes over the historical context of the surah to show how it was used. Because, if Surah 9:29 applied in every case, then the prophet would surely have used 9:29 when he returned in the conquest of Mecca. He could have fought and killed all unbelievers if that was what the verse meant, but when you dive into the historical context as Sami has done, you see quite otherwise.

Absolutely hilarious. I've already shown that Allah himself defines the "fighting" in Surah 9 as involving "slaying" and "being slain," yet Samatar wants to interpret this as "debating"? How many people have a debate where one side gets up and starts killing until they get killed?

But there are even bigger problems for Samatar. Like Sami Zaatari, Samatar tries to convince us that the "fighting" of Surah 9:29 may refer to peaceful "fighting," i.e. praying in a public school, debating, or not drinking. Here are a two irrefutable difficulties:

(1) The Qur'an claims to be perfectly clear in its commands. If Allah had meant something other than actual fighting, couldn't he have used those words? If he had meant "debate the unbelievers," couldn't he have said that? He might have saved hundreds of millions of lives! By telling us that Allah meant something other than what he actually said, Samatar is telling us that Allah isn't clear! So the Qur'an claims to be perfectly clear in its commands, but it isn't clear at all. Hence, the Qur'an is false.

(2) Notice what the verse actually says. Muslims are to "fight" those who don't believe in Allah, "until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission and feel themselves subdued." Now for a reality check. Are people ever going to pay the Jizyah because a Muslim is praying in a public school? No. Are people ever going to pay the Jizyah because a Muslim refuses to drink alcohol? Absolutely not. Has anyone in history ever paid the Jizyah because of a debate? Not a single person. People pay the Jizyah to avoid being killed. So if the verse commands Muslims to fight people until they pay the Jizyah, it's obviously referring to fighting them until they pay to avoid being killed.

Samatar adds the absurd notion that "if Surah 9:29 applied in every case, then the prophet would surely have used 9:29 when he returned in the conquest of Mecca." Utter ignorance. When Muhammad conquered Mecca, 9:29 hadn't even been "revealed" yet! So how would Muhammad have applied a verse that hadn't yet been revealed? This is just getting silly!

So here's where we are. (1) The Qur'an claims to be perfectly clear in its commands. (2) The Qur'an commands Muslims to fight unbelievers. (3) Allah defines the "fighting" of Surah 9 as something that involves "slaying" and "being slain." (4) The "fighting" of Surah 9:29 is something that would compel non-Muslims to pay tribute to Muslims in order to avoid it. (5) Muhammad himself believed that this was a command to fight unbelievers simply for being unbelievers. (6) After receiving this "revelation," Muhammad launched a military campaign against the Romans (rather than, say, calling for public debate). (7) Samatar is so embarrassed by what his religion teaches, he's willing to ignore all of this and say, again and again, that when Allah commands Muslims to fight the unbelievers, he may have something peaceful in mind (though Allah apparently lacked the ability to communicate these peaceful intentions).

This is the great dilemma faced by Westernized Muslims. They believe their religion comes from God, yet they are utterly repulsed by what their religion teaches. So they cling to ridiculous reinterpretations in an effort to rescue their god and their prophet. Welcome to Islam.

Our response is simple. If Muslims like Samatar want to reinterpret the clearest teachings of the Qur'an, then we get to do the same. If Allah said "fight" when he really meant "debate," then Allah is the worst communicator in history, and his words are practically meaningless. Hence, when Allah says that Jesus didn't die on the cross, and didn't claim to be divine, and isn't part of the Trinity, I'm going to reinterpret Allah's words. The Qur'an actually teaches that Jesus died on the cross, that he rose from the dead, and that he is the second person of the Trinity. Muhammad was a Bible-carrying, Gospel-preaching Christian. Samatar can't prove me wrong, because his quotations from the Qur'an are worthless, for his god has a speech disorder.

Samatar Mohamed Again Condemns the Qur'an, Muhammad, and Allah

Samatar has been posting comments today, and virtually everything he's said so far is sheer nonsense. I'm actually surprised that someone can write so much without getting something right. Rather than posting responses in the comments section, let's go through Samatar's claims a bit more carefully. I'll take a single paragraph to start. Samatar wrote:

But the problem with your assumption David is that you assume that when the prophet (pbuh) said fight, that he meant to go to war. This is a gross misinterpretation to the word like Jihad and martyrdom. Most non muslims assume that Jihad means to wage holy war, but it is a strive or struggle in the way of Allah (swt)in many matters such as a muslim like me defending the faith by discussing issues in Islam. You shouldn't take a verse from the Quran that applied to a certain scenario, and then apply that verse to every scenario. That is the reason that historical context is important. When you quote a verse such as 9:29, you should also apply the historical context of how the verse was used by the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

Now we'll zero in on individual claims.

"But the problem with your assumption David is that you assume that when the prophet (pbuh) said fight, that he meant to go to war."

Did I assume that when Allah commands Muslims to fight (in 9:29), he meant Muslims should go to war? Not at all. Samatar's god explained things for me quite well. In Surah 9:111, Allah explained what "fight" means in the context of this Surah:

Qur’an 9:111—Surely Allah has bought of the believers their persons and their property for this, that they shall have the garden; they fight in Allah's way, so they slay and are slain.

So according to Allah, the "fighting" in Surah 9 involves "slaying" and "getting slain." But apparently Samatar knows more than Allah, because Samatar doesn't believe that "fighting" actually involves "fighting." I confess, I like Samatar's Qur'an better than Allah's.

"This is a gross misinterpretation to the word like Jihad and martyrdom. Most non muslims assume that Jihad means to wage holy war, but it is a strive or struggle in the way of Allah (swt)in many matters such as a muslim like me defending the faith by discussing issues in Islam."

As usual, Samatar is inventing his religion as he goes along. If I am guilty of a "gross misinterpretation" for claiming that Jihad involves fighting, then Muhammad was guilty of the same gross misinterpretation. For Muhammad claimed that the best kind of Jihad is the kind that involves shedding blood:

Sunan Ibn Majah 2794—It was narrated that Amr bin Abasah said: “I came to the Prophet and said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, which Jihad is best?’ He said: ‘(That of a man) whose blood is shed and his horse is wounded.’”

But Samatar likes peaceful Jihad best, which is why Samatar is a much better man than his prophet. I find it strange, however, that Samatar asks us to believe in Muhammad, and then tries to convince us that Muhammad was totally ignorant of Islam.

"That is the reason that historical context is important. When you quote a verse such as 9:29, you should also apply the historical context of how the verse was used by the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)."

Okay. Here's the historical context of Surah 9:29:

Ibn Kathir, The Battles of the Prophet, pp. 183-4—Allah, Most High, ordered the believers to prohibit the disbelievers from entering or coming near the sacred Mosque. On that, Quraish thought that this would reduce their profits from trade. Therefore, Allah, Most High, compensated them and ordered them to fight the people of the Book until they embrace Islam or pay the Jizyah. Allah says, “O ye who believe! Truly the pagans are unclean; so let them not, after this year of theirs, approach the sacred Mosque. And if ye fear poverty, soon will Allah enrich you, if He wills, out of His bounty, for Allah is All-knowing, All-Wise. Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” Therefore, the Messenger of Allah decided to fight the Romans in order to call them to Islam.

So what's the context? Muslims were wondering where they were going to get money, and Allah revealed that they would get money by subjugating the unbelievers and forcing them to pay the Jizyah. Muhammad then put together and army and set out to fight the Romans.

According to Samatar, however, the command to "fight" in 9:29 doesn't involve actual fighting. Poor Muhammad! He didn't know about Samatar's special understanding of the Qur'an! When Allah commanded Muhammad to fight, Muhammad fought. When Allah commands Samatar to fight, Samatar reinterprets the command, insults his god, reviles his prophet, and then tells us to become Muslims! I love Westernized Muslims!

I'll wait for Samatar to respond before I go on to his other absurd claims. (Wait till you see how he massacres the Qur'an in an effort to attack the Old Testament! Classic!)

Three Stages of Jihad

For more on the stages of Jihad, see:

Sam Shamoun, "Is Islam a Religion of Peace?"
Rev. Richard P. Bailey, "Jihad: The Teaching of Islam from Its Primary Sources"
Shaykh Ibn Humaid, "Jihad in the Qur'an and Sunnah"

If the Lord Wills

On December 31st, Paul Williams of MDI posted something on his blog about the expression "Insh'allah," an oft repeated phrase uttered by Muslims that means "If God wills." He suggested that Christians might be surprised to find that a similar sentiment is expressed in the Bible, particularly in the book of James.

Ironically, an article I wrote for Answering Islam went up on this very subject just a week prior to Paul's post. In it I argued that the shoe is actually on the other foot, i.e. that Muslims themselves ought to be surprised by what a comparative analysis of the Bible and the Qur'an reveal about this matter.

See for yourself and let me know what you think. And Paul, if you are listening, and if the Lord JESUS wills, of course, perhaps you wouldn't mind telling us what you think after you learn what God's word says on the subject.

(Speaking of Paul Williams and the recent AI update, Sam contributed fourteen replies to Paul, which can all be found in the newly created rebuttal section dedicated just to him: Rebuttals to Paul Bilal Williams.)