By William A. Mayer and Beila Rabinowitz - PipeLineNews.org
December 12, 2005 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - In the November 18th edition of the Washington Post, Mary Beth Sheridan reported - "U.S. Muslim Groups Cleared" - that Senator Charles Grassley's Finance Committee had concluded its two year investigation into the financial ties of some of America's most prominent - and in the case of the IAP, Kind Hearts and the Holy Land Foundation, notorious - Islamist groups and charities.
The author's editorialized treatment of the facts included the assertion that the investigation was "high profile."
That claim like the overall tone of the piece, is hard to justify.
Over the last two years there has been precious little media interest in the investigation, its existence being a poor reflection on prevailing multicultural assumptions. During that period of time we found it extremely difficult to obtain any information from the Committee or its members. Upon our repeated requests for clarification, the IRS even refused to acknowledge whether or not it had fully complied with the Committee's extensive document request.
This is hardly the type of atmosphere in which a rush to judgment is usually conducted.
Sheridan's take was mirrored in the Muslim press, which depicted Senator Grassley as conducting a witch-hunt or in the words of CAIR's spokesman Ibrahim Hooper, "really just a fishing expedition...[one that] didn't catch any fish."
It might have been that response by the Islamist media that prompted the Committee to announce a clarification on the status of the investigation on December 6, which is now being represented as a 180-degree change of direction by the groups who find themselves seemingly back in the Federal spotlight:
"At this time the Finance Committee has completed reviewing the information requested from the IRS in late 2003 regarding Muslim charities. Because of the confidential nature of the IRS documents the Committee reviewed, we are prohibited from disclosing any specific information...The fact that the Committee has taken no public action based on the review of these documents does not mean that these groups have been "cleared"...the Committee will continue to gather information and examine the operations of the charities that have been designated or listed by the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control and other similar charities that come to the committee's attention."
The original announcement "ending" the matter might have gone virtually unnoticed - despite its prominence in the Washington Post - had it not been for the subjects of the inquiry who immediately claimed that they were the innocent victims of U.S. government persecution. With no report being issued to clarify the matter, this left those involved free to characterize the investigation in any way they deemed beneficial.
In the ensuing weeks the investigation was framed as if it had been an ongoing star chamber proceeding. The initial claims of vindication now face the complication of being directly contradicted by the Committee's abrupt declaration.
On the heels of Sheridan's WP article, the Muslim Weekly summed the investigation up with the misleading headline, "Muslim Groups Found Innocent Of Terrorist Ties." More aggressively, the Internet portal alt.Muslim claimed the ending of the investigation resulted in "Undoing A Character Assassination."
To anyone conversant with the intricate relationships often found between groups claiming moderation and those who commit or fund terrorist acts, such bombast had to have appeared as disingenuous.
On December 22, 2003 as part of its oversight mandate, the Grassley Committee initiated a review of tax filings made by 25 Islamist groups and suspect charities whose names had been assembled by the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control. As the Chairman's Letter to IRS Commissioner, Mark Everson indicated, the purpose was to seek out sources and conduits of terror financing.
"The purpose of this letter is to inquire about and conduct oversight on the issue of organizations, particularly tax-exempt organizations such as charities and foundations, which finance terrorism and perpetuate violence...The Senate Finance Committee retains exclusive jurisdiction over tax matters in the Senate. We have a responsibility to carry out oversight to ensure charities, foundations and other groups are abiding by the laws and regulations, to examine their source of funds, and to ensure government agencies, including the IRS, are policing them and enforcing the law efficiently and effectively..."
The subjects of the probe:
The SAAR Foundation and all members and related entities
Global Relief Foundation (GRF)
Benevolence International Foundation (BIF)
Muslim Arab Youth Association (MAYA)
Muslim Student Association
Islamic Association for Palestine
Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF)
Muslim World League
International Islamic Relief Organization (IIRO) or Internal Relief Organization(IRO) Al Haramain Foundation
Institute of Islamic and Arabic Science in America (IIASA)
Islamic Assembly of North American
Help the Needy
Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA)
Islamic Foundation of America
United Association for Studies and Research (USAR)
Solidarity International and/or Solidarity USA
Islamic American Relief Agency and/or Islamic African Relief Agency
Islamic Society of North America
International Islamic Relief Organization
World Assembly of Muslim Youth
Human Appeal International
Outside the slim possibility that one of these IRS documents might show that a group had paid for something along the lines of Jose Padilla's travel expenses, no smoking gun should reasonably have been expected.
And indeed nothing so egregious was discovered, as Grassley's November 16 statement pointed out:
"We did not find anything alarming enough that required additional follow-up beyond what law enforcement is already doing."
But even assuming for the sake of argument, that the Committee investigation had ended at that point, the statement was in no way exculpatory.
Grassley's statement was reasonable, reflective of the relative paucity of resources available to a single Senate Committee with many responsibilities as well as the limited nature of this aspect of the overall investigation into terror funding. This is especially true as contrasted against the vast mandate of U.S. law enforcement - the investigation of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations - which consumes not only a significant amount of the Federal law enforcement budget but the majority of the assets of the FBI's nearly $6 billion dollar budget.
With the declaration that the investigation will go forward, PipeLineNews.org, once again strongly suggests that the Bush administration should cease all contact with these groups and/or their representatives.
We do this not merely because they are the subjects of an ongoing investigation but because these groups represent, the vanguard of the Islamist threat to America.
Over the last year the administration's track record on fraternizing with the Islamists has been poor:
We maintain that the danger that radical Islam represents extends beyond the terrorist potential that another 911, a dirty bomb or an anthrax attack poses. For that reason the outcome of any Congressional investigation into what is commonly thought of as terrorism is in large measure outside the dimensions of what might be the even greater long-term threat that radical or political Islam represents.
Islamism is a complex, virulent ideology that is organizationally sophisticated and compartmentalized. The actors that comprise it are not limited to those listed on the Grassley manifest. Although these entities are not necessarily one in the same with those specifically devoted to carrying out acts of terror, they do nonetheless serve a vital functionality in the integrated whole.
The non-violent, relentless pressure of the cultural/legal jihad thus complements the violent.
Cultural jihad - the politics of intimidation
Historically speaking, any study of the manner in which the Nazi party solidified its power in post Weimar Germany would have been remiss for not noting the violence of such seminal events as Kristalnacht. It would also have been similarly defective for not taking into account the activities of the legal institutions [such as the Freier Ausschuss für einen Deutschen Arbeiterfrieden - Free Committee for a German Workers' Peace] which served as a fifth column, preparing the society and establishing cultural receptivity for the eventual triumph of State Socialism in the early thirties.
Noting the similarities between other totalitarian ideologies and those of radical Islam, in a prescient article published in 1995 Dr. Daniel Pipes defined the challenge:
"Though anchored in religious creed, fundamentalist Islam is a radical utopian movement closer in spirit to other such movements (communism, fascism) than to traditional religion. By nature anti-democratic and aggressive, anti-Semitic and anti-Western, it has great plans. Indeed, spokesmen for fundamentalist Islam see their movement standing in direct competition to Western civilization and challenging it for global supremacy." "There Are No Moderates - Dealing With Fundamental Islam."
Imam Muzammil Siddiqui, the former president of the Islamic Society of North America and Imam of the Islamic Center of Orange County is considered to be one of the world's leading experts on Sharia - his philosophy epitomizes the Islamist mindset. His admonition on how Islam should interact with the rest of the world reveals the uncompromising nature of the Islamic perspective on potential dialogue - "Treat non-Muslims as potential Muslims."
When translated into action, Siddiqui demands a continuous effort to convert unbelievers [Da'wa] and an aggressive program of secular expansion by the leadership of American Islam. Such behavior is typified by Council of American Islamic Relations [CAIR] - a Saudi funded front group with ties to Hamas.
Modeling its activities upon those established by the left [not the least of which is the faith's near Trotskyite obsession with permanent religious revolution] CAIR wages an intense cultural assault. Hardly a day passes when multiple charges of discrimination, racism and anti-Muslim bias are not directed at American society.
CAIR is probably the most in-your-face proponent of this style of realpolitik - as ultimately threatening as the more graphic and murderous form now seemingly a part of everyday life, because its intent is a forced accommodation with Islam - on its terms - cloaked behind a lexicon of multiculturalism and diversity doublespeak.
Once or often twice a day, CAIR transmits via the Internet what it calls the IslamInfonet/CAIR media alert. These documents appear in countless inboxes across the globe and their common theme suggests that the senders wish to ultimately operate outside the confines of American society.
This direct action approach of fomenting against the strictures of civil government, its institutions and culture apparently will continue until they are numerous enough to bend the rest of society to their will. At that point [as CAIR spokesperson Ibrahim Hooper has stated] they will seek to impose a caliphate and operate under Sharia or Islamic law.
The Islamists claim that their religion is actively being persecuted but during the course of hammering that allegation their latent agenda is never far from the surface.
As of this writing, the most recent newsletter - December 8, 2005 - is typical.
The first item "NC: JUDGE DISMISSES LAWSUIT INVOLVING COURTROOM OATHS," personifies the attitude represented by Islam's leading edge, that U.S. customs, legal tradition and structure should be overturned, in this case to the extent of allowing anyone claiming to be a Muslim to be sworn in at court proceedings on a Quran instead of a Bible. Few examples demonstrate in such a black-and-white manner the fundamental way in which these groups reject this society. Taking a page from the ACLU their argument turns on a twisted interpretation of the Establishment Clause since, "only one book qualifies as 'Holy Scriptures."
The degree to which this society would have to reject its traditions in order to accept the absurdity of using a Quran during the swearing in process shows how thoroughly such groups reject the prevailing culture.
Following that demand CAIR then segues into Da'wa mode:
"CAIR will offer a free copy of the Quran to any judge in North Carolina or throughout the United States for use in oaths or for personal awareness ." CAIR 'EXPLORE THE QURAN' PROJECT - To obtain or sponsor a FREE Quran, go to: Free Quran."
Taking Siddiqui's suggestion to heart, non-Muslims - if not already serving in dhimmitude - are merely tomorrow's converts.
It must be noted that the above free Quran program is underwritten by the Saudi Wahhabis, as part of an official Da'wa grant, a fact nowhere in evidence anywhere in the IslamInfonet transmission.
This is the essence of the attitude that flows through the veins of radical Islam in America, it aggressively seeks to extend the religion using a combination of legal threats, actual lawsuits, press releases, print and Internet hectoring and the much ballyhooed and transparent technique of "cross cultural religious outreach" and "faith sharing."
All of these are avenues of deception; a never-ending push to either subjugate or convert the "kufir."
It is this manner that Fox Broadcasting [see Out Foxed] has been intimidated by the Islamists, first forcing them to alter the plot line of their once promising hit show "24" which had the temerity to depict - gasp - radical Muslims as terrorists and most recently with the revelation by Cliff Kincaid of Saudi Billionaire Forces Fox To Alter French Muslim Riot Coverage
The Islamist's bully-boy tactics are omnipresent, for just a few examples, check - law enforcement "Moderate Friends of Terror" Conducting Sacramento Police Training Sessions , the military Who Is Guarding The Guardians? and the electronic media Which Side Are You On?
In this manner the radicals cow the prevailing society.
The statements and activities of these groups combined with their overall Islamo-fascist weltanschauung precludes any claim that these self-appointed Muslim leaders want to be part of America or Western society, at least as they currently exist. What they are actually engaged in is the promotion of Islamization under the guise of multiculturalism and pluralism. Initially, they hope to gain acceptance, however the eventual goal is the implementation of Sharia.
The Islamic Society of Southern California, the Islamic Society of North America [ISNA], the Muslim American Society [MAS], the Council on Islamic American Relations [CAIR] and the remainder of the organizations under investigation by Senator Grassley's Committee each in their own way either overtly or covertly swear fealty to the goal of becoming the socially and demographically dominant force in whatever society they find themselves a part.
CAIR's former Chairman Omar Ahmad made this clear:
"Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth."
Dr. Daniel Pipes has chronicled how the Islamists are forcing their religious customs into previously secular domains like public schools, offices, sports stadiums and law enforcement.
An example of their relentless push into the social and political arena, can be seen in the report of a recent CAIR banquet in California which featured LA sheriffs, politicians and religious and civic leaders who in return for giving CAIR undeserved legitimacy - simply by attending the event - were themselves given awards and accolades by the group.
In furtherance of these officials' capitulation to the Islamists, local law enforcement has put together a "religious and culturally sensitive" training tape with which 1,500 deputy sheriffs have been indoctrinated. Compounding the affront, the videotape is to go out to other law enforcement agencies across the country - free of charge.
This apparent descent into dhimmitude by LA law enforcement has resulted in them being inculcated into the fold, acting as fifth columnists for this Saudi funded group - which has 4 members currently jailed, deported or awaiting sentencing on Federal terror related charges.
This is the point of disjunction; the mistaken belief that if these Islamist shock troops are not walking into America's classrooms, courts and media centers wearing bomb belts and brandishing AK 47s, then their ultimate goals are not the same as those who wage violent jihad.
Civilizations have crumbled upon less-mistaken assumptions.
©1999-2006 PipeLineNews, William A. Mayer & Beila Rabinowitz, all rights reserved.
Scenes of Slaughter - the Zawahiri-Zarqawi Communiqué
Scenes of Slaughter - the Zawahiri-Zarqawi Communiqué
October 14, 2005 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews - A strategic Islamic terror planning document has fallen into the hands of US intelligence and has now been translated.
Dating from July 9, 2005 it represents communication between two of the three [along with bin-Laden] key directors of al-Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahiri and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
News of this was most extensively covered by the cable networks, specifically Fox News, but it appears to have flatlined in most of the print media, including our own little leftist daily in San Francisco's East Bay, the Contra Costa Times.
On a day [October 12, 2005] when Dr. James Dobson's alleged collusion with the Bush administration on the Miers' nomination was the lead item - above the fold - the Times ran the Knight Ridder piece on the Zawahiri letter [the Times is a Knight Ridder product] and in deference to that item's great import, placed it on page twelve, nine back from a weepy-eyed article pleading for clemency in the case of "Tookie" Williams - former leader of the Crips gang and a convicted 4 time murderer - who has an imminent date to ride "old sparky."
The Times' coverage is significant for what it doesn't tell its readers about the Zawahiri-Zarqawi letter. It provides absolutely no background and uses a limited series of excerpts from the document forcing the argument that the foreign fighters in Iraq were created by the Bush administration's liberation efforts.
Ayman al-Zawahiri is a 54 year old Egyptian physician and the former head of Egyptian Islamic Jihad also known as al-Jihad [responsible for the assassination of Anwar Sadat in 1981 and for numerous terrorist incidents in Egypt since then including the massacre of over 60 civilians in Luxor in 1997 and the attempted assassination of Egyptian president Mubarak in 1995]. Zawahiri trained with bin-Laden in Afghanistan and helped him organize al-Qaeda. He was sentenced to death in absentia because of the Luxor atrocity. His present location is unknown.
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is a lifelong professional terrorist, born to Palestinian parents but raised in Jordan. He has been an active jihadist since an early age operating in his native Jordan then moving on to Afghanistan and Iraq post 9-11.
Zarqawi was living in Northern Iraq and running his terror network at the start of Operation Iraqi Freedom, a fact little-reported by the major media.
Zarqawi is the party who personally sawed off the head of Nicholas Berg in 2004. He is believed responsible for the plot which led to the assassination of American diplomat Lawrence Foley in Amman, Jordan in October of 2002, for which he too was sentenced to death in absentia.
Zarqawi is currently directing al-Qaeda's operations in Iraq. Though he is thought to have been seriously wounded by coalition forces earlier this year he has seemingly recovered.
Though primarily about the Zawahiri document, we must detail one critical aspect of Knight Ridder's coverage of this story.
Central to the Knight Ridder thesis is the argument that Operation Iraqi Freedom has resulted in an amplification of al-Qaeda's power - that it serves as jihad central, a recruiting ground for radical Islam.
The absurdity of this lies in the fact that both Zawahiri and Zarqawi have been active jihadists for over twenty years and many of these Iraqi jihadis are really members of the disaffected irregular army of Islamist thugs that have been plying their trade in such disparate locales as Bosnia and Kosovo, nearly every "secularist" nation in the Middle East, Chechnya and across the rest of Central and South East Asia for at least that long.
In his piece, Knight Ridder reporter John Walcott specifically states:
"While the Bush administration calls Iraq "the central front in the war on terrorism," the letter indicates that al-Qaeda believes that U.S. led invasion of Iraq has created an opportunity to rally Muslims behind "the greatest battle of Islam in the era."
Nowhere in the document is it claimed that the U.S. "invasion" - Knight Ridder is unfamiliar with the work "liberation" - created this "greatest battle," in the sense of the radical players now active in Iraq having been spurred on to jihad by this administration's actions.
The Zawahiri document, fully read gives a quite different meaning to this claim. It refers to ancient battles, indicating Iraq's central and historic role in Islam's many fissures, going back 1,500 years.
"...your historic battle against the greatest of criminals and apostates inthe heart of the Islamic world, the field where epic and major battles in the history ofIslam were fought...People of discernment and knowledge among Muslims know the extentof danger to Islam of the Twelve'er school of Shiism. It is a religious schoolbased on excess and falsehood whose function is to accuse the companions ofMuhammad of heresy in a campaign against Islam..."
Since Mr. Walcott seems unfamiliar with Islamic history, a short note - the "epic" battle referred to by Zawahiri is the battle of Karbala, Iraq [the massacre of Imam Husayn - grandson of Mohammed - and his family in October of 680]. This conflict remains the defining point in the blood feud which motivates the animosity between the Sunni and Shia sects and which grew out of the issue of succession after the death of Mohammed in 632.
The document makes clear the extreme intolerance of the Islamists, who don't even consider the Shias to be Muslims, but rather "apostates," as Zawahiri observes noting "the religious nature of this conflict."
Such myopia results from editorialists pretending to be reporters, something Knight Ridder's coverage of the war on terror constantly suffers from.
to his great credit, in his October 6th address President Bush warned that it was al-Qaeda's long-term goal was to build an empire that stretched from Spain to Indonesia.
On that subject Zawahiri minces no words.
"...our intended goal in this age is the establishment of a caliphate in the manner ofthe Prophet."
This communication indicates the parallel lines of argument employed by both the Islamists and the leftists, seeking to impose a Vietnam template of failure and disgrace. Ordinarily that might give a reporter pause for concern, though not so here.
"The aftermath of thecollapse of American power in Vietnam-and how they ran and left their agents-isnoteworthy. Because of that, we must be ready starting now, before events overtake us..."
There is also delusional revisionism regarding the Taliban.
"...We don't want to repeat the mistake of the Taliban, who restricted participation ingovernance to the students and the people of Qandahar alone. They did not have anyrepresentation for the Afghan people in their ruling regime, so the result was that theAfghan people disengaged themselves from them..."
Not to mention skinning even your Muslim opponents alive along with a litany of more bureaucratic failures.
The Islamists are zealots of the first order, however for the time being Zawahiri counsels Zarqawi that they must hide their true feelings lest these heretics not participate in jihad.
"...From the standpoint of not highlighting the doctrinaldifferences which the masses do not understand, such as this one is Matridi or this oneis Ashari or this one is Salafi, and from the standpoint of doing justice to the people,for there may be in the world a heresy or an inadequacy in a side which may havesomething to give to jihad..."
Of course the "heretics" and "blasphemers" will eventually be dealt with when their services are no longer needed.
"...Indeed, questions will circulate among mujahedeen circles and their opinion makersabout the correctness of this conflict with the Shia at this time. Is it something that isunavoidable? Or, is it something can be put off until the force of the mujahed movementin Iraq gets stronger?..."
Above all, in their most elemental form the leaders of the Islamists are pragmatic, while ultimately intolerant of all but their own narrow - almost impossible to define to outsiders - religious interpretation, they realize the key role that short-term compromise means.
They are also most acutely aware of the overarching role the media plays in public perception of this conflict.
No mention of al-Qaeda's obvious media savvy was made in the above noted Knight Ridder piece.
"...However, despite all of this, I say to you: that we are in a battle, and that more thanhalf of this battle is taking place in the battlefield of the media. And that we are ina media battle in a race for the hearts and minds of our Umma. And that however far ourcapabilities reach, they will never be equal to one thousandth of the capabilities ofthe kingdom of Satan that is waging war on us. And we can kill the captives by bullet.That would achieve that which is sought after without exposing ourselves to thequestions and answering to doubts. We don't need this...."
On this point Zawahiri is entirely correct, the media indeed is where this war will be fought, actual battlefield developments spun to best, or worst effect.
For their part Knight Ridder, the New York Times, CBS, CNN, Al-Jazeera and the others will continue to intentionally create and cast an atmosphere of defeatism, dread and lies around the war on terror. They do this because the majority of their reporters are partisan Bush-haters, so blinded that their natural instinct towards self-preservation have been short-circuited.
We refuse to mince words any longer over the deportment of these people. They are largely uninformed, unpatriotic ideologues, governed by a herd mentality. While this document from Zawahiri should be seen as a near Rosetta Stone - offering a vital glimpse into the mind of an enemy that has repeatedly declared war on all of Western civilization - instead it is being used as cannon fodder by a journalistic army of boobs who are too deluded to realize that should the Islamic Caliphate ever seriously touch them, that they should pray for a fate as relatively painless as that suffered by their compatriot Daniel Pearl at jihadi hands.
©1999-2005 PipeLineNews.org, all rights reserved.
Bush Breaks With Convention, Identifies The Enemy - "Islamic radicalism" - Warns Of Islamic Caliphate
Bush Breaks With Convention, Identifies The Enemy - "Islamic radicalism" - Warns Of Islamic Caliphate
October 10, 2005 - Washington, DC - PipeLineNews.org - Disregarding trendy [not to mention scientifically questionable, historically inaccurate and remarkably volatile] polling data on allegedly falling support for the war on terror, George Bush's masterfully delivered and confrontational October 6 speech seems to signal a new toughness and resolve on the prosecution of that war.
In the address to the National Endowment for Democracy, Mr. Bush broke significant new semantic ground - for the first time showing a willingness to use the heretofore verboten phrases "Islamic radicalism" and "Islamo-fascism" in defining the enemy.
"Some call this evil Islamic radicalism. Others militant jihadism. Still, others Islamo-fascism."
Also for the first time Mr. Bush warned that one of Islamism's goals is a trans-national Muslim theocracy, technically a Caliphate - "a radical Islamic empire that spans from Spain to Indonesia."
Authorities on the dangers of radical Islam have long been suggesting that it's impossible to successfully prosecute the war unless the Commander in Chief is willing to clearly state exactly who the "evildoers" are.
As Tony Blankley observes in his excellent new book "The West's Last Chance."
"Naming the threat also expands the scope of our war effort to all the networks of radical Islam, including mosques, schools, and radical Islamic sites on the Internet. It is not only terrorist acts that we are confronting, but also the propaganda and organizations that make them possible."
Going so far as to use the un-genteel term "infidel" while intellectually linking Islamism with communism, the Bush speech represented a breaking-free from the multicultural constraints his administration had previously seemed bound by. It also demonstrated an understanding of and willingness to recognize the role that Islamist assassins such as Mohammed Bouyeri - the killer of Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh - have played in the anti-Western radical Islamic jihad, worldwide.
"Like the ideology of communism, our new enemy teaches that innocent individuals can be sacrificed to serve a political vision. And this explains their cold-blooded contempt for human life.
We've seen it in the murders of Daniel Pearl, Nicholas Berg and Margaret Hassan and many others.
In a courtroom in the Netherlands, the killer of Theo van Gogh turned to the victim's grieving mother and said, "I do not feel your pain because I believe you are an infidel."
The president's much needed candor on the subject of Islamic radicalism might be seen as a reaction against the increasing and sometimes blistering criticism from conservatives on issues ranging from government spending to border security, especially coming on the heels of the Miers' SCOTUS nomination but administration spokesmen claimed that the speech had been long planned.
In any regard Mr. Bush's new found forthrightness comes at a critical time given the machination taking place in Iran and the upcoming Iraqi vote on its constitution.
Below is the complete text of Mr. Bush's address.
The President: "I'm honored once again to be with the supporters of the National Endowment for Democracy.
Since the day President Ronald Reagan set out the vision for this endowment, the world has seen the swiftest advance of democratic institutions in history. And Americans are proud to have played our role in this great story.
Our nation stood guard on tense borders. We spoke for the rights of dissidents and the hopes of exiles. We aided the rise of new democracies on the ruins of tyranny.
And all the costs and sacrifice of that struggle has been worth it because from Latin America to Europe to Asia we've gained the peace that freedom brings.
In this new century, freedom is once again assaulted by enemies, determined to roll back generations of democratic progress. Once again, we're responding to a global campaign of fear with a global campaign of freedom. And once again, we will see freedom's victory.
Again, I want to thank you for inviting me back. Thank you for the short introduction.
I appreciate Carl Gershman.
I want to welcome former Congressman Dick Gephardt, who is a board member of the National Endowment for Democracy.
It's good to see you, Dick.
And I appreciate Chris Cox, who's the chairman of the U.S. Security and Exchange Commission and a board member for the National Endowment for Democracy, for being here as well.
And I want to thank all the other board members.
I appreciate the secretary of state, Condi Rice, who has joined us. Alongside her, our secretary of defense, Donald Rumsfeld.
Thank you all for being here.
I'm proud as well that the newly sworn-in chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the first Marine ever to hold that position, is with us today, Gen. Peter Pace.
And I thank members of the diplomatic corps who are here as well.
Recently, our country observed the fourth anniversary of a great evil and looked back on a great turning point in our history.
We still remember a proud city covered in smoke and ashes, a fire across the Potomac, and passengers who spent their final moments on Earth fighting the enemy. We still remember the men who rejoice in every death, and Americans in uniform rising to duty. And we remember the calling that came to us on that day and continues to this hour.
We will confront this mortal danger to all humanity. We will not tire or rest until the war on terror is won.
The images and experience of September 11 are unique for Americans.
Yet the evil of that morning has reappeared on other days in other places -- in Mombasa [Kenya] and Casablanca [Morocco] and Riyadh [Saudi Arabia] and Jakarta [Indonesia] and Istanbul [Turkey], in Madrid [Spain], in Beslan [Russia], in Taba [Egypt] and Netanya [Israel] and Baghdad [Iraq] and elsewhere.
In the past few months, we've seen a new terror offensive with attacks in London [England], Sharm el-Sheikh [Egypt] and a deadly bombing in Bali [Indonesia] once again.
All these separate images of destruction and suffering that we see on the news can seem like random and isolated acts of madness. Innocent men and women and children have died simply because they boarded the wrong train or worked in the wrong building or checked into the wrong hotel.
And while the killers choose their victims indiscriminately, their attacks serve a clear and focused ideology, a set of beliefs and goals that are evil but not insane.
Some call this evil Islamic radicalism. Others militant jihadism.
Still, others Islamo-fascism.
Whatever it's called, this ideology is very different from the religion of Islam. This form of radicalism exploits Islam to serve a violent political vision: the establishment, by terrorism and subversion and insurgency, of a totalitarian empire that denies all political and religious freedom.
These extremists distort the idea of jihad into a call for terrorist murder against Christians and Jews and Hindus and also against Muslims from other traditions that they regard as heretics.
Many militants are part of global borderless terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda, which spreads propaganda and provides financing and technical assistance to local extremists and conducts dramatic and brutal operations like September 11.
Other militants are found in regional groups often associated with al Qaeda; paramilitary insurgencies and separatist movements in places like Somalia and the Philippines and Pakistan and Chechnya and Kashmir and Algeria.
Still others spring up in local cells inspired by Islamic radicalism but not centrally directed.
Islamic radicalism is more like a loose network with many branches than an army under a single command. Yet these operatives fighting on scattered battlefields share a similar ideology and vision for our world.
We know the vision of the radicals because they've openly stated it in videos and audiotapes and letters and declarations and Web sites.
First, these extremists want to end American and Western influence in the broader Middle East, because we stand for democracy and peace and stand in the way of their ambitions.
Al Qaeda's leader, Osama bin Laden, has called on Muslims to dedicate, quote, "their resources, sons and money to driving infidels out of their lands."
Their tactic to meet this goal has been consistent for a quarter century: They hit us and expect us to run.
They want us to repeat the sad history of Beirut [Lebanon] in 1983 and Mogadishu [Somalia] in 1993, only this time on a larger scale with greater consequences.
Second, the militant network wants to use the vacuum created by an American retreat to gain control of a country, a base from which to launch attacks and conduct their war against nonradical Muslim governments.
Over the past few decades, radicals have specifically targeted Egypt and Saudi Arabia and Pakistan and Jordan for potential takeover.
They achieved their goal for a time in Afghanistan. Now they've set their sights on Iraq.
Bin Laden has stated the whole world is watching this war and the two adversaries: It's either victory and glory or misery and humiliation.
The terrorists regard Iraq as the central front in their war against humanity, and we must recognize Iraq as the central front in our war on terror.
Third, the militants believe that controlling one country will rally the Muslim masses, enabling them to overthrow all moderate governments in the region and establish a radical Islamic empire that spans from Spain to Indonesia.
With greater economic and military and political power, the terrorists would be able to advance their stated agenda: to develop weapons of mass destruction, to destroy Israel, to intimidate Europe, to assault the American people and to blackmail our government into isolation.
Some might be tempted to dismiss these goals as fanatical or extreme. Well, they are fanatical and extreme, and they should not be dismissed.
Our enemy is utterly committed. As [Abu Musab] al-Zarqawi has vowed, "We will either achieve victory over the human race or we will pass to the eternal life."
And the civilized world knows very well that other fanatics in history, from Hitler to Stalin to Pol Pot, consumed whole nations in war and genocide before leaving the stage of history.
Evil men obsessed with ambition and unburdened by conscience must be taken very seriously, and we must stop them before their crimes can multiply.
Defeating a militant network is difficult because it thrives like a parasite on the suffering and frustration of others.
The radicals exploit local conflicts to build a culture of victimization in which someone else is always to blame and violence is always the solution.
They exploit resentful and disillusioned young men and women, recruiting them through radical mosques as the pawns of terror.
And they exploit modern technology to multiply their destructive power. Instead of attending faraway training camps, recruits can now access online training libraries to learn how to build a roadside bomb or fire a rocket-propelled grenade.
And this further spreads the threat of violence, even within peaceful democratic societies.
The influence of Islamic radicalism is also magnified by helpers and enablers. They have been sheltered by authoritarian regimes: allies of convenience like Syria and Iran that share the goal of hurting America and moderate Muslim governments and use terrorist propaganda to blame their own failures on the West and America and on the Jews.
The radicals depend on front operations such as corrupted charities which direct money to terrorist activity. They are strengthened by those who aggressively fund the spread of radical, intolerant versions of Islam in unstable parts of the world.
The militants are aided as well by elements of the Arab news media that incite hatred and anti-Semitism, that feed conspiracy theories and speak of so-called "American war on Islam" with seldom a word about American actions to protect Muslims in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Somalia, Kosovo, Kuwait and Iraq.
Some have also argued that extremism has been strengthened by the actions of our coalition in Iraq, claiming that our presence in that country has somehow caused or triggered the rage of radicals.
I would remind them that we were not in Iraq on September 11, 2001, and al Qaeda attacked us anyway.
The hatred of the radicals existed before Iraq was an issue, and it will exist after Iraq is no longer an excuse.
The government of Russia did not support Operation Iraqi Freedom, and yet militants killed more than 180 Russian schoolchildren in Beslan.
Over the years, these extremists have used a litany of excuses for violence: Israeli presence on the West Bank or the U.S. military presence in Saudi Arabia or the defeat of the Taliban or the crusades of a thousand years ago.
In fact, we're not facing a set of grievances that can be soothed and addressed. We're facing a radical ideology with unalterable objectives: to enslave whole nations and intimidate the world.
No act of ours invited the rage of the killers, and no concession, bribe or act of appeasement would change or limit their plans for murder.
On the contrary, they target nations whose behavior they believe they can change through violence.
Against such an enemy there is only one effective response: We will never back down, never give in and never accept anything less than complete victory.
The murderous ideology of the Islamic radicals is the great challenge of our new century. Yet in many ways, this fight resembles the struggle against communism in the last century.
Like the ideology of communism, Islamic radicalism is elitist, led by a self-appointed vanguard that presumes to speak for the Muslim masses.
Osama bin Laden says his own role is to tell Muslims, quote, "what is good for them and what is not." And what this man who grew up in wealth and privilege considers good for poor Muslims is that they become killers and suicide bombers.
He assures them that this is the road to paradise, though he never offers to go along for the ride.
Like the ideology of communism, our new enemy teaches that innocent individuals can be sacrificed to serve a political vision. And this explains their cold-blooded contempt for human life.
We've seen it in the murders of Daniel Pearl, Nicholas Berg and Margaret Hassan and many others.
In a courtroom in the Netherlands, the killer of Theo van Gogh turned to the victim's grieving mother and said, "I do not feel your pain because I believe you are an infidel."
And in spite of this veneer of religious rhetoric, most of the victims claimed by the militants are fellow Muslims.
When 25 Iraqi children are killed in a bombing or Iraqi teachers are executed at their school or hospital workers are killed caring for the wounded, this is murder, pure and simple; the total rejection of justice and honor and moral and religion.
These militants are not just the enemies of America or the enemies of Iraq, they are the enemies of Islam and the enemies of humanity.
We have seen this kind of shameless cruelty before, in the heartless zealotry that led to the gulags and the Cultural Revolution and the killing fields.
Like the ideology of communism, our new enemy pursues totalitarian aims. Its leaders pretend to be in an aggrieved party, representing the powerless against imperial enemies.
In truth, they have endless ambitions of imperial domination, and they wish to make everyone powerless except themselves.
Under their rule, they have banned books and desecrated historical monuments and brutalized women.
They seek to end dissent in every form and to control every aspect of life and to rule the soul itself.
While promising a future of justice and holiness, the terrorists are preparing for a future of oppression and misery.
Like the ideology of communism, our new enemy is dismissive of free peoples, claiming that men and women who live in liberty are weak and decadent.
Zarqawi has said that Americans are, quote, "the most cowardly of God's creatures," but let's be clear: It is cowardice that seeks to kill children and the elderly with car bombs and cuts the throat of a bound captive and targets worshippers leaving a mosque.
It is courage that liberated more than 50 million people. It is courage that keeps an untiring vigil against the enemies of a rising democracy. And it is courage and the cause of freedom that once again will destroy the enemies of freedom.
And Islamic radicalism, like the ideology of communism, contains inherent contradictions that doom it to failure.
By fearing freedom, by distrusting human creativity and punishing change and limiting the contributions of half the population, this ideology undermines the very qualities that make human progress possible and human society successful.
The only thing modern about the militants' vision is the weapons they want to use against us. The rest of their grim vision is defined by a warped image of the past, a declaration of war on the idea of progress itself.
And whatever lies ahead in the war against this ideology, the outcome is not in doubt: Those who despise freedom and progress have condemned themselves to isolation decline and collapse.
Because free peoples believe in the future, free peoples will own the future.
We didn't ask for this global struggle, but we're answering history's call with confidence and a comprehensive strategy.
Defeating a broad and adaptive network requires patience, constant pressure, and strong partners in Europe, the Middle East, North Africa, Asia and beyond.
Working with these partners, we're disrupting militant conspiracies, destroying their ability to make war, and working to give millions in a troubled region of the world a hopeful alternative to resentment and violence.
First, we're determined to prevent the attacks of terrorist network before they occur. We're reorganizing our government to give this nation a broad and coordinated homeland defense. We're reforming our intelligence agency for the incredibly difficult task of tracking enemy activity, based on information that often comes in small fragments from widely scattered sources here and abroad.
We're acting, along with the governments from many countries, to destroy the terrorist networks and incapacitate their leaders.
Together, we've killed or captured nearly all of those directly responsible for the September 11 attacks, as well as some of bin Laden's most senior deputies, al Qaeda managers and operatives in more than 24 countries: the mastermind of the USS Cole bombing who was chief of al Qaeda operations in the Persian Gulf, the mastermind of the Jakarta and the first Bali bombings, a senior Zarqawi terrorist planner who was planning attacks in Turkey and many of al Qaeda's senior leaders in Saudi Arabia.
Overall, the United States and our partners have disrupted at least 10 serious al Qaeda terrorist plots since September 11, including three al Qaeda plots to attack inside the United States. We've stopped at least five more al Qaeda efforts to case targets in the United States or infiltrate operatives into our country.
Because of the steady progress, the enemy is wounded. But the enemy is still capable of global operations.
Our commitment is clear: We will not relent until the organized, international terror networks are exposed and broken and their leaders held to account for their acts of murder.
Second, we're determined to deny weapons of mass destruction to outlaw regimes and to their terrorist allies who would use them without hesitation.
The United States, working with Great Britain, Pakistan and other nations, has exposed and disrupted a major black market operation in nuclear technology led by A.Q. Khan.
Libya has abandoned its chemical and nuclear programs as well as long-range ballistic missiles.
In this last year, America and our partners in the Proliferation Security Initiative have stopped more than a dozen shipments of suspected weapons technology, including equipment for Iran's ballistic missile program.
This progress has reduced the danger to free nations, but it has not removed it.
Evil men who want to use horrendous weapons against us are working in deadly earnest to gain them. And we're working urgently to keep weapons of mass destruction out of their hands.
Third, we're determined to deny radical groups the support and sanctuary of outlaw regimes. State sponsors like Syria and Iran have a long history of collaboration with terrorists, and they deserve no patience from the victims of terror.
The United States makes no distinction between those who commit acts of terror and those who support and harbor them, because they're equally as guilty of murder.
Any government that chooses to be an ally of terror has also chosen to be an enemy of civilization. And the civilized world must hold those regimes to account.
Fourth, we're determined to deny the militant's control of any nation which they would use as a home base and a launching pad for terror.
For this reason, we're fighting beside our Afghan partners against remnants of the Taliban and their al Qaeda allies. For this reason, we're working with President [Pervez] Musharraf to oppose and isolate the militants in Pakistan. And for this reason, we're fighting the regime remnants and terrorists in Iraq.
The terrorists' goal is to overthrow a rising democracy, claim a strategic country as a haven for terror, destabilize the Middle East and strike America and other free nations with ever-increasing violence.
Wars are not won without sacrifice, and this war will require more sacrifice, more time and more resolve.
The terrorists are as brutal an enemy as we've ever faced. They're unconstrained by any notion of our common humanity or by the rules of warfare.
No one should underestimate the difficulties ahead, nor should they overlook the advantages we bring to this fight.
Some observers look at the job ahead and adopt a self-defeating pessimism. It is not justified.
With every random bombing and with every funeral of a child it becomes more clear that the extremists are not patriots or resistance fighters. They are murderers at war with the Iraqi people themselves.
In contrast, the elected leaders of Iraq are proving to be strong and steadfast. By any standard or precedent of history, Iraq has made incredible political progress: from tyranny, to liberation, to national elections, to the writing of a constitution in the space of 2 1/2 years.
With our help, the Iraqi military is gaining new capabilities and new confidence with every passing month.
At the time of our Falluja operations 11 months ago, there were only a few Iraqi army battalions in combat. Today there are more than 80 Iraqi army battalions fighting the insurgency alongside our forces.
Progress isn't easy, but it is steady.
And no fair-minded person should ignore, deny or dismiss the achievements of the Iraqi people.
Some observers question the durability of democracy in Iraq. They underestimate the power and appeal of freedom.
We've heard it suggested that Iraq's democracy must be on shaky ground because Iraqis are arguing with each other. But that's the essence of democracy: making your case, debating with those who disagree, building consensus by persuasion and answering to the will of the people.
We've heard it said that the Shias, Sunnis and Kurds of Iraq are too divided to form a lasting democracy.
In fact, democratic federalism is the best hope for unifying a diverse population, because a federal constitutional system respects the rights and religious traditions of all citizens while giving all minorities, including the Sunnis, a stake and a voice in the future of their country.
It is true that the seeds of freedom have only recently been planted in Iraq but democracy, when it grows, is not a fragile flower. It is a healthy, sturdy tree.
As Americans, we believe that people everywhere -- everywhere prefer freedom to slavery and that liberty, once chosen, improves the lives of all.
And so we're confident, as our coalition and the Iraqi people each do their part, Iraqi democracy will succeed.
Some observers also claim that America would be better off by cutting our losses and leaving Iraq now. It's a dangerous illusion refuted with a simple question: Would the United States and other free nations be more safe or less safe with Zarqawi and bin Laden in control of Iraq, its people and its resources?
Having removed a dictator and aided free peoples, we will not stand by as a new set of killers dedicated to the destruction of our own country seizes control of Iraq by violence.
There's always a temptation in the middle of a long struggle to seek the quiet life, to escape the duties and problems of the world, and to hope the enemy grows weary of fanaticism and tired of murder.
This would be a pleasant world, but it's not the world we live in. The enemy is never tired, never sated, never content with yesterday's brutality.
The enemy considers every retreat of the civilized world as an invitation to greater violence.
In Iraq, there is no peace without victory.
We will keep our nerve and we will win that victory.
The fifth element of our strategy in the war on terror is to deny the militants future recruits by replacing hatred and resentment with democracy and hope across the broader Middle East.
This is a difficult, long-term project, yet there's no alternative to it. Our future and the future of that region are linked.
If the broader Middle East is left to grow in bitterness, if countries remain in misery, while radicals stir the resentments of millions, then that part of the world will be a source of endless conflict and mounting danger for our generation and the next.
If the peoples in that region are permitted to chose their own destiny and advance by their own energy and by their participation as free men and women, then the extremists will be marginalized and the flow of violent radicalism to the rest of the world will slow and eventually end.
By standing for the hope and freedom of others we make our own freedom more secure.
America is making this stand in practical ways. We're encouraging our friends in the Middle East, including Egypt and Saudi Arabia, to take the path of reform, to strengthen their own societies in the fight against terror by respecting the rights and choices of their own people.
We're standing with dissidents and exiles against oppressive regimes, because we know that the dissidents of today will be the democratic leaders of tomorrow.
We're making our case through public diplomacy, stating clearly and confidently our belief in self-determination and the rule of law and religious freedom and equal rights for women; beliefs that are right and true in every land and in every culture.
As we do our part to confront radicalism, we know that the most vital work will be done within the Islamic world itself.
And this work has begun.
Many Muslim scholars have already publicly condemned terrorism, often citing Chapter 5, Verse 32 of the Koran, which states that killing an innocent human being is like killing all humanity, and saving the life of one person is like saving all of humanity.
After the attacks in London on July 7, an imam in the United Arab Emirates declared, "Whoever does such a thing is not a Muslim, nor a religious person."
The time has come for all responsible Islamic leaders to join in denouncing an ideology that exploits Islam for political ends and defiles a noble faith.
Many people of the Muslim faith are proving their commitment at great personal risk. Everywhere we have engaged the fight against extremism, Muslim allies have stood up and joined the fight, becoming partners in a vital cause.
Afghan troops are in combat against Taliban remnants. Iraqi soldiers are sacrificing to defeat al Qaeda in their own country.
These brave citizens know the stakes: the survival of their own liberty, the future of their own region, the justice and humanity of their own tradition. And the United States of America is proud to stand beside them.
With the rise of a deadly enemy and the unfolding of a global ideological struggle, our time in history will be remembered for new challenges and unprecedented dangers. And yet the fight we have joined is also the current expression of an ancient struggle between those who put their faith in dictators and those who put their faith in the people.
Throughout history, tyrants and would-be tyrants have always claimed that murder is justified to serve their grand vision. And they end up alienating decent people across the globe.
Tyrants and would-be tyrants have always claimed that regimented societies are strong and pure until those societies collapse in corruption and decay.
Tyrants and would-be tyrants have always claimed that free men and women are weak and decadent until the day that free men and women defeat them.
We don't know the course of our own struggle, the course our own struggle will take, or the sacrifices that might lie ahead.
We do know, however, that the defense of freedom is worth our sacrifice. We do know the love of freedom is the mightiest force of history. And we do know the cause of freedom will once again prevail.
May God bless you.
©1999-2005 PipeLineNews.org, all rights reserved
Not Home Freeh - Clinton And The Khobar Towers Investigation
By William A. Mayer, E&P PipeLineNews.org
October 12, 2005 - Washington, DC - PipeLineNews.org - In June of 2001 a Federal Grand Jury in Alexandria Virginia returned a 46 count indictment against fourteen individuals thought responsible for the June 25, 1996 bombing of the US Air Force housing complex, Building 131 at Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia.
Five years earlier, on the day of the Khobar bombing, never missing an opportunity to role-play as the sensitive but tough Chief Executive, Clinton proved once again that the most dangerous place to be in DC during his presidency - aside from Ft. Marcy Park - was between himself and a television camera, in this instance tersely making this statement, feigning rage while studiously biting his lower lip:"The cowards who committed this murderous act must not go unpunished. Let me say again: We will pursue this. America takes care of our own. Those who did it must not go unpunished."
On the following day June 26, 1996, grandstanding as he prepared to fly to Lyon France for the G7 Summit, Clinton committed the following gaffe - a revealing Freudian slip."Let me be very clear: We will not resist" - the president then correcting his misstatement - "we will not rest in our efforts to find who is responsible for this outrage, to pursue them and to punish them. Anyone who attacks one American attacks every American, and we protect and defend our own."
He went on to claim, "...Last night, I directed an FBI team of 40 experts, investigators and forensic experts to go there to work with the Saudi Arabian authorities."
In fact it was FBI Director Freeh who immediately dispatched the team to Saudi Arabia and the size of the contingent was 125, not 40."Louis Freeh, the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, was visiting relatives in New Jersey when he was told about the bombing, and he immediately dispatched a hundred and twenty-five agents and employees to Saudi Arabia." - Elsa Walsh, "Louis Freeh's Last Case," New Yorker Magazine, April 14, 2001
At the end of his statement he refused to answer a reporter's question, "Mr. President, will the FBI be able to conduct an independent investigation?"
The juxtaposition of Clinton's misstatement along with his refusal to even promise an "independent investigation" looms mightily in retrospect.
What is clear is that the Clinton's Justice Department's interest in the matter was in preventing the issuance of an indictment in the case for 5 years, a period of time in which leads went cold while the president obstructed justice in the matter, doing everything in his power to frustrate and curtail his long suffering FBI Director's investigation.
Clinton's obstruction took place because it quickly became obvious that the Khobar Tower bombing plot was orchestrated by the terrorist state of Iran - coordinated by its Revolutionary Guard.
Mr. Clinton's actions in shielding Iran show such an amazing degree of deference that its Mullahs might just as well have been his personal clients.
Fortunately, Mr. Freeh is in the news again, as is Mr. Clinton - the former pushing his new book, "My FBI," the latter as the seeming butt of that work.
The bad news for Bill and Hillary Clinton is that Mr. Freeh is apparently unskilled in the Kerry-esque art of nuanced language and is savaging his former boss:"Bill Clinton raised the subject [Khobar] only to tell the crown prince that he understood the Saudis' reluctance to cooperate and then he hit Abdullah up for a contribution to the Clinton Presidential Library...That's a fact that I am reporting." - Louis B. Freeh
In a time when sham indictments by partisan Texas Democrats serve as daily gruel for the haters of the left and their media supporters, a factual re-examination of Clinton's obstruction of the Khobar Tower's investigation might well draw the proper contrast between real and imagined wrongdoing.
If this saga's blowback also serves to hinder a Hillary Clinton candidacy in '08 - deracinating whatever good will still accrues to the co-presidency of William Jefferson Clinton, so much the better.
As outlined in our previous piece 10 Years And Counting - Still No Exit Plan From Clinton Created, European Al-Qaeda Base the Clinton Administration had a curious hands off regard for the terrorist state of Iran and the Khobar Towers case treads upon that same ground, but in a different way.
From the outset we see the same cast of foreign policy amateur players - Clinton, NSC Director Anthony Lake and Lake's Deputy Sandy Berger. Augmenting this cadre was the Don Knotts of diplomacy, Secretary of State Warren Christopher.
From Freeh's vantage point he saw the unprecedented scandals fall, one upon another: Whitewater/Madison Guarantee, corrupt aides such as Web Hubble and Bernie Nussbaum, Jennifer Flowers, the Paula Jones sexual harassment case, Hillary's attempted health care putsch and "cattle futures" speculation, the curious death of Vincent Foster, Travelgate, Clinton/Gore's massive Chinagate campaign funding abuses, Janet Reno's refusal to appoint a special prosecutor to deal with it and a dozen other scandals including Clinton's pardoning of the FALN Puerto Rican terrorists and Filegate.
About the latter Freeh opined:"The prior system of providing files to the White House relied on good faith and honor. Unfortunately, the FBI and I were victimized."
Clinton was not held in high regard by the professionals at the FBI. Regarding a briefing demanded by Secretary of State Madeline Albright on the Chinese angle to the campaign contribution investigation, Robert "Bear" Bryant [Freeh's National Security Deputy] knowing that the information would eventually filter back to Bill Clinton, exclaimed incredulously to Freeh in a telephone conversation:"Why should we brief him?...He's a crook. He's no better than a bank robber. Would we tell a bank robber about our investigation?" - Elsa Walsh, "Louis Freeh's Last Case," New Yorker Magazine, April 14, 2001
Clinton's motivation to hinder the Khobar investigation, which now prompts the unusually harsh criticism of a former FBI Director, bled throughout his administration. While the FBI necessarily took the lead role delving into the Saudi bombing, Congress was also pursuing it independently, though it also found itself being stonewalled at the highest levels.
On July 7, 1998 Arlen Specter charged Defense Dept. Secretary William Perry with obstructing the Senate's investigation into Khobar."...This letter constitutes a formal complaint on the obstruction by you, others and the Department of Defense on the inquiry by the Intelligence Committee to determine whether there was an intelligence failure relating to the terrorist attack in Dhahran on June 25, 1996 on the following...Prohibiting key witnesses from being interviewed by this Committee...the concerns we had on prohibiting General Downing from testifying...Refusing to give this committee access to an Air Force report which, was reported in the Washington Post on October 10..." - Congressional Record, July 7, 1997
From the outset Freeh sensed that while the Clinton team publicly feigned interest in getting to the bottom of Khobar, in private they sabotaged it:"Freeh also heard from his Saudi counterparts that there had been little followup to the Administration's statements; as a result, a mixed signal was being sent about the seriousness of United States resolve. Freeh came to believe that the Clinton Administration feared jeopardizing its strategic relationships in the Middle East by pressing too hard; in fact, by the end of the Clinton era, Freeh had become so mistrustful of Clinton that, although he believed that he had developed enough evidence to seek indictments against the masterminds behind the attack, not just the front-line suspects, he decided to wait for a new Administration." - Elsa Walsh, "Louis Freeh's Last Case," New Yorker Magazine, April 14, 2001
The simple fact is that the key evidence that the FBI developed and which led to the 2001 indictment [containing a total of 38 references to the Iranian government] came only as a result of the sudden cooperation by the Saudis - orchestrated by George Herbert Walker Bush, who had serious clout with the Royal Family after the first Gulf War - and who had been asked by Freeh to intervene in the matter."...he approached former President George Bush and asked him to intervene with the Saudi royal family...On November 9, 1998, Freeh finally got what he had been seeking for two and a half years. From behind a one-way mirror, F.B.I. agents watched and listened as Saudi law-enforcement officers posed the Bureau's two hundred and twelve questions to eight suspects. The suspects confirmed their involvement in the bombing and described how the Iranians had ordered, supported, and financed the attack." - Elsa Walsh, "Louis Freeh's Last Case," New Yorker Magazine, April 14, 2001
From the Clinton administration's ill-reasoned intervention in Bosnia to its refusal to confront the obvious in the Khobar Towers case, the only constant seems to be a policy of tilting towards Tehran.
Why was that?
One reason is Mr. Clinton's understanding of Iranian history, a subject which he expounded upon in an interview he did with Charlie Rose in Davos, Switzerland in January of 2005:"Iran's a whole different kettle of fish, but it's a sad story that really began in the 1950s when the United States deposed Mr. Mossadegh, who was an elected parliamentary democrat, and brought the Shah back in [Rose says "CIA" in the background] and then he was overturned by the Ayatollah Khomeini, driving us into the arms of one Saddam Hussein. Most of the terrible things Saddam Hussein did in the 1980s he did with the full, knowing support of the United States government, because he was in Iran, and Iran was what it was because we got rid of the parliamentary democracy back in the '50s; at least, that is my belief."
So great were the "crimes" the United States committed against Iran that Clinton felt it - unbelievably - necessary to apologize."I apologized when President Khatami was elected. I publicly acknowledged that the United States had actively overthrown Mossadegh and I apologized for it..."
This is a shocking thing to see in print, an American ex-president apologizing to the Mullahs and evidently swallowing the standard hard-left/Marxist line on Iran - one indistinguishable from that put forth by Noam Chomsky and Gar Alperovitz - and goes a long way to explaining where the leader of the Clinton team was coming from ideologically.
But as the interview progressed it got even stranger; Clinton seemingly having an Al Gore moment:"It [Iran] is the only one with elections, including the United States, including Israel, including you name it, where the liberals, or the progressives, have won two-thirds to 70 percent of the vote in six elections...In every single election, the guys I identify with got two-thirds to 70% of the vote. There is no other country in the world I can say that about, certainly not my own..."
This country that the ex-president so admires is the same one which held 66 American hostages for 444 days [until freed by the mere presence of Ronald Reagan], killed 19 American servicemen in at Khobar and continues to underwrite the terrorist organizations Hizbullah, Hamas, Al Gama'at al-Islamiya, al-Jihad, PKK [Kurdish Worker's Party], Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the PFLP [Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine].
Iran is exporting Islamic terror all over the world - even funding Hizbullah bases in South America. To the surprise of few, Clinton's "progressives" are building nuclear weapons, already having medium range ballistic missiles thoroughly capable of delivering them.
At some point determining the motives of people like Bill Clinton is a wasteful and futile exercise, the fact is that he has consistently - for reasons which are obvious, and not so obvious - demonstrated a willingness to betray America to an ideology indistinguishable from the threat represented by the Third Reich.
Taken as a whole, the Clinton administration's promoting of Iranian influence in Europe during the war in the Balkans combined with his obstruction of justice in the Khobar Towers bombing investigation - acting as an agent for Tehran - should force us to realize the national security threat that the Clintonista regime represented in the past and might again in the near future.
A conservative led national discussion of this matter might possibly be the best opportunity to stop a Hillary candidacy dead-cold before '08 - already discredited Clinton hacks like document thief Sandy "The Burglar" Berger and hatchet man Lanny Davis are mounting the counter-attack.
In our opinion, if the Republican party flinches on this one, it may very well cease to be a relevant political force.
©1999-2005 PipeLineNews.org, all rights reserved.
10 Years And Counting - Still No Exit Plan From Clinton Created, European Al-Qaeda Base
By William A. Mayer, E&P PipeLineNews.org
October 3, 2005 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - In what must serve as a bit of ironic perspective, something entirely absent from the anti-Iraq war protests held nationwide on September 23 were references to Bosnia Herzegovina, the Clinton administration's tattered monument to nation-building.
For those with short memories or who have gotten the majority of their information regarding Yugoslavian politics from the main stream media, please consider this a primer, albeit ten-years late.
The escalation of tensions in London over the role of Islam have shifted global focus away from the presence of an al-Qaeda haven in Eastern Europe - Bosnia Herzegovina - but it remains a grave threat nonetheless.
Moreover, parties' sanctimoniously raising questions about the way in which the Bush Administration went to war against Islamic terror - especially regarding the Iraqi campaign - have studiously avoided mentioning the conduct of foreign policy in the Balkans during the Clinton years.
Ignored by the leftist participants in rage-filled street demonstrations is the fact that the Clinton team's Balkan policies were viewed by establishment politicians as so outside the normal confines of American diplomacy that the actions of the US Ambassador to Croatia Peter Galbraith and then NSC Director Anthony Lake were referred to the Justice Department by the House of Representative for possible criminal action."...The Iranian presence and influence [in Bosnia] jumped radically in the months following the [Clinton] green light. Iranian elements infiltrated the Bosnian government and established close ties with the current leadership in Bosnia and the next generation of leaders. Iranian Revolutionary Guards accompanied Iranian weapons into Bosnia and soon were integrated in the Bosnian military structure from top to bottom as well as operating in independent units throughout Bosnia. The Iranian intelligence service [VEVAK] ran wild through the area developing intelligence networks, setting up terrorist support systems, recruiting terrorist 'sleeper' agents and agents of influence, and insinuating itself with the Bosnian political leadership to a remarkable degree. The Iranians effectively annexed large portions of the Bosnian security apparatus [known as the Agency for Information and Documentation (AID)] to act as their intelligence and terrorist surrogates. This extended to the point of jointly planning terrorist activities. The Iranian embassy became the largest in Bosnia and its officers were given unparalleled privileges and access at every level of the Bosnian government." - Final Report, House Select Subcommittee to Investigate the United States Role in Iranian Arms Transfers to Croatia and Bosnia, page 201.
As viewed by the partisan and incompetent Janet Reno Justice Department, nothing ever rose to the level of criminality, unless you were a church-going family, friendly to David Koresh or a hapless Hispanic child being shielded against a return to Castro's police state.
In order to fully comprehend the nature of what Clinton did in Bosnia a bit of history is in order.
The Balkans over at least the last five centuries, have been shaped by Muslim on Christian violence. However, of more direct import in explaining the crisis created by the imposition of a "free" Bosnian state on Europe, one only has to travel back to the pre-World War II era.
During that time the Kingdom of Yugoslavia was shattered by a Croat based but Hungarian-Italian engineered assassination of its king, Alexander I which led to a succession of weak leaders.
Yugoslavia's last pre-war leader, Cvetkovic declared allegiance to the Nazis, but was immediately overthrown by the anti-Nazi military. This prompted Hitler to invade Yugoslavia, which fell immediately.
Quickly in control, the Nazis' used their master race ideology to inflame pre-existing ethno/religious differences. This classic divide-and-conquer strategy further de-stabilized the remaining resistance, as did the recognition of an independent Croatia under the now infamous Ustashi party.
Almost immediately, the Croats allied themselves with the Muslims [sometimes referred to as Bosniaks] in a Nazi encouraged, genocidal campaign against various minorities - primarily Serbs, Jews and Gypsies. The campaign was so brutal [Croatian leader Ante Pavelic is said to have once been gifted by his soldiers with a 40-pound basket of Serb eyeballs] that the Nazis and the Italian Fascists actually were forced to caution a modicum of "restraint," not that it had much effect.
Many of these atrocities [an estimated 750,000 to 860,000 were killed in this demi-holocaust] were carried out by the 20,000 member Muslim Nazi SS Hanjar ["sword"] Division, a force originally proposed by the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, al-Husseini in talks between him and Hitler and later blessed by Husseini as they ripped across the Balkan landscape.
On a per-capita basis, the Croat/Muslim led extermination ranks as the worst case of genocide in modern European history, yet it was these very same forces with which the Clinton administration ultimately allied itself, invoking a new policy which it called "humanitarian intervention," first employed - with disastrous results - in Mogadishu in 1992.
It was argued that this expansion of authority gave the United States greater flexibility to act unilaterally [and in contravention of UN Article 2(sec 4) - "threat or use of force against" another state] using military force to halt massive abuses of human rights in nations which otherwise presented no strategic threat to the United States.
Clearly such a methodology, consistent with the concept of nation-building is in a rather belated manner being challenged by the left, vis-à-vis Iraq, but that critique as mentioned above is extremely narrow.
Removed from ideological considerations, assertions of an essentially unchallenged right for the United States to intervene wherever it thought exigent, were apparently viewed as such non-controversial and logical extensions of extant US foreign policy that they needed little in the way of defense.
That such foreign misadventure was met without a single street protest in a span of 8 years is in itself rather telling.
Operating within the context of this new directive, Clinton joined with NATO in doing an end-run around the UN in 1999, aiding the Muslims and bombing Serbian strongholds in the Balkans while committing US troops to support the Croat/Muslim forces who had previously refused [upon guidance of the Clinton administration] to participate in a brokered peace.
Our main objection lies not in process or in any supposed unethical expansion of US foreign policy authority, but as a matter of inexplicably poor judgment which found the administration actively conspiring with nations of the ilk of Iran and personages as ugly as Alija Izetbegovic to support a radical Muslim agenda in a region that has been an historical flash point.
Facing a fully disintegrated Yugoslavia, on March 18, 1992 the Serbian [Radovan Karadzic] Croat [Mate Boban] and Muslim [Alija Izetbegovic] leaders signed an accord which came to be known as the Lisbon Agreement which would have prevented a Bosnian civil war.
Izetbegovic, a long-time radical Islamist who had spent considerable time in jail because of his insurrectionist activities, apparently had "second thoughts" about the agreement. He met with US Ambassador Warren Zimmerman ten days after the signing of the Lisbon Agreement whereupon Zimmerman informed him that if he withdrew that the United States would back him and officially recognize Bosnia as an independent Muslim state.
Izetbegovic had written extensively about his dedication to the trans-national Islamist cause."...the implementation of Islam in all fields of individuals' personal lives, in family and in society, by renewal of the Islamic religious thought and creating a uniform Muslim community from Morocco to Indonesia. ..." - First President of Bosnia-Herzegovina Alija Ali Izetbegovic
Viewed against Izetbegovic's ideology and clearly stated goals, the Clinton team's actions must be seen as indefensible, a breaching American national security. The imposition of Izetbegovic's Muslim state on the rest of Europe became such a priority that it became our official policy to allow Iran to arm the Bosnian Muslims, along the way imposing Muslim minority rule on a Christian majority."Two years ago the Bosnian government asked the Croatian government to permit the transit through Croatia of weapons for its beleaguered army. A principal supplier of these arms would be Iran. The Croatian government asked for our reaction, the administration decided we would not answer, and I told the Croatians I had no instructions. The Croatians understood this response and a subsequent colloquy described to you by Ambassador Redman to mean that we would not object to their role in helping the Bosnians. I believed then, and even more strongly now, that the administration made the right decision." - Statement, Peter Galbraith, U.S. Ambassador to Croatia, House International Relations Committee, May 30, 1996
Later in the same statement, Galbraith admits that Iran is a terrorist nation, having just defended the decision to go ahead and allow them to arm the Bosnian Muslim radicals."The Iranians and their terrorist allies were present on the Bosnia-Croatia scene two years before the April 1994 conversations that are the subject of your inquiry - Peter Galbraith, U.S. Ambassador to Croatia, House International Relations Committee, May 30, 1996
During the same hearings an apparently far more circumspect Ambassador Redman shows his uneasiness with the decision and reveals that the final go-ahead had come from Washington, one must assume at the highest level - Anthony Lake and Clinton himself [Lake had intentionally concealed the Iran to Bosnian military/intelligence transfer to Congress, adding to an extensive list of reasons - among which was his involvement with an obscene level of campaign funding abuses which flowed from his office - which led to his rejection as director of the CIA, in itself an almost unthinkable nomination in the first place]."When I arrived in Zagreb, Ambassador Galbraith asked that I come to his residence before going on to the meeting with the Croatian officials. He briefed me on the question that had been posed by the Croatian government officials concerning the transshipment of arms for the Bosnian government and then placed a call to Washington to ascertain the response to that question. The responsible Washington official provided the no-instructions guidance - Statement, Charles Redman, U.S. Ambassador to Germany, House International Relations Committee, May 30, 1996
Six weeks before Redman and Galbraith had to admit to the House investigation that it was the administration that had decided to look the other way, allowing Iran to arm and infiltrate intelligence agents into Bosnia, a clearly upset Robert Dole noted that the United States Senate was being forced to rely upon newspaper reports as to what has transpired in Bosnia on this matter."...since the report surfaced in the Los Angeles Times that President Clinton decided to allow Iran to provide arms to the Bosnians, there has been little, if any, response from the other side of the aisle. Had there been a Republican in the White House, no doubt, the Democrats would have been all over the President."
The usually diplomatic Dole did not mince words over the damage to national security such a policy represented."In short, this duplicitous policy has seriously damaged our credibility with our allies. It has also produced one of the most serious threats to our military forces in Bosnia and, according to the administration, the main obstacle to the arm and train program for the Bosnians - I am talking about the presence of Iranian military forces and intelligence officials in Bosnia. - Statement Senator Robert Dole, Senate Intelligence Oversight Committee Hearings on Bosnia, April 17, 1996
But this was only the start of the long-term damage that the Clinton administration's Machiavellianism in Bosnia would produce.
Probably the most infamous and well-known of the al-Qaeda jihadis to cycle through Bosnia were Nawaf Alhazmi [on the left in the accompanying image] and Khalid al-Mihdhar, two of the hijackers on the September 11 American Airlines flight 77 that crashed into the Pentagon.
Both of these individuals though young, were hardened radical Muslim soldiers, CIA Director George Tenet called them "al-Qaeda veterans."
Born in Saudi Arabia, they traveled to Afghanistan and fought alongside bin-Laden, to Bosnia in the mid-1990s where they participated in the genocide against the Christian Serbs and then transitioned to another important Islamist armed struggle, in Chechnya.
Of tremendous concern to Western society, one might think, would be the creation of a large, fully modern Islamist Army organized with the blessing of William Jefferson Clinton.
Darko Trifunivic, a respected authority on the modern war for the Balkans, describes the organization and structure of the Bosnian Muslim Army and its sub-units in a 123 page document which he kindly made available to us Islamic Fundamentalist's Global Network - Modus Operandi - Bosnia Model.
That research is confirmed by the existence of a mujahadeen video - El Mojaheed - produced only in Arabic, which documents not only the Muslim Army's composition but many of its atrocities; rapes, tortures, beheadings and the like. Shot in Bosnia and produced in Switzerland this video is now used as a jihadi recruiting tool throughout the Arab speaking world.
Bosnia's Muslim military leader at the time - a man declared by the Clinton regime as a moderate - Alija Izetbegovic, is seen inspecting these terror troops and approving them, in much the same manner as Grand Mufti Husseini did the Nazi SS Hanjar terror Division 60 years previously, [in 1993 the Hanjar Division was resurrected in Sarajevo, this time as a "presidential guard" and composed primarily of Albanians with a core leadership of Iranian mujahadeen].
Such massive non-contradictory evidence conclusively proves that the radicalized Bosnian Muslim Army's Mojaheed was organized by jihadis coming from other Muslim countries, primarily Iran.
The London Institute for International Strategic Studies placed the total number of these Bosnian Islamic terrorists at 40,000. Many of the foreign contingents of this force were merely granted Bosnian citizenship as a method of cloaking their presence when the Dayton Accords loomed as a complicating factor."Then just between 1992 and the end of 1995, aid flowed into to help "fellow Muslim brothers" in Bosnia which originated from Iran which sent the 7th Revolutionary Guards (Pasdaran Brigade) some 2000 men, incorporating into the Bosnian Muslim Army. Based in Zenica, the Iranian brigade trained local cadres, as well as participated infierce fighting on all fronts. In addition to this force, Iran also sent some 400 officers of thePasdaran intelligence and the VEVAK secret service work with the nascent BosnianMuslim intelligence and other terrorist groups." - Darko Trifunivic, Islamic Fundamentalist's Global Network - Modus Operandi - Bosnia Mode, page 53
Thus, in a short period of time United States foreign policy, under the dictates of the Clinton regime, granted a terrorist nation, Iran almost complete access to central Europe, and beyond."Yet maybe most important of all is that this wide ranging Bosnian terroristinfrastructural network that was created during the Bosnian Civil War, now spans all theway from New York, Sarajevo, Islamabad, London, Milan, Tirana, Sofia, Skopje intoPristina." - Darko Trifunivic, Islamic Fundamentalist's Global Network - Modus Operandi - Bosnia Mode, page 75
That network is under the control of al-Qaeda and remains active:
In London, on September 23, 2005 Justice Fulford expressing dismay over his limited sentencing powers sent British Muslim convert Yusef Abdullah [aka Andrew Rowe] to jail for 15 years in a case that centered on Abdullah participating in planning terrorist bombings. Abdullah was described by police as "an international warrior." He went to Bosnia in 1995 where he received shrapnel wounds. In September of 1996, he again left for the Balkans, returning in January 1997 with documentation showing he had been in Slovenia, Bosnia and Croatia. When arrested his personal belongings had traces of explosives on them and one of the passports that Abdullah had in his possession was obtained at the same Amsterdam Embassy used by "shoe bombing" suspect Richard Reid. In addition Abdullah had documents that contained elaborate codes thought useful in concealing his activities and was in possession of bin-Laden propaganda tapes and material. In 2003 long time al-Qaeda operative Imam Abu Omar, who received his training in Bosnia and Afghanistan was "shuttled" out of Italy by US intelligence operatives and delivered to Egypt for "questioning." Omar, well known for his fiery speeches urging jihad, was believed to have been forming a terror cell to be used in attacking European targets. US intelligence became aware of a plot against the American Embassy in Sarajevo, Bosnia in October, 2001 and moved to have six individuals [all Algerians] - Bensayah Belkacem, Mustafa Adir, Sabir Lamar, Muhamed Nehle, Lakdar Bumedien and Budelah Hadz - deported, eventually ending up at GTMO, where they continue to be held. At the onset of the Balkan civil war, Bosnian strongman Izetbegovic sought out former associate Sudanese Islamist Dr. Elfatih Hassanein-omal-Fatih. Sudan has obvious ties to radical Islam and bin-Laden. Fatih also ran an NGO, the Third World Relief Agency (TWRA). Bin-Laden, Sheikh Abdul Rahman [the "Blind Sheikh, responsible for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing] and many prominent Bosnian Muslims including Stranka Demokratske Akcije, the father of Bosnia's ruling Muslim party, the SDA, are all linked to it. Bin-Laden was issued a passport by the Bosnian Embassy in Viennain 1993, unfortunately this was not a one-time oversight as terrorists routinely received official Bosnian documents. Mehrez Aodouni a close associate of bin-Laden also was in possession of a Bosnian passport and citizenship papers when he was arrested in Turkey, on his way to making mischief in Chechnya On June 25, 1996 the Khobar Tower's apartment building - which housed US servicemen in Dharan, Saudi Arabia - was attacked with a truck bomb resulting in the deaths of 19 American servicemen and the wounding of many more. Those arrested for the attack confessed, according to press reports, to having learned their trade in Bosnia. In 1997 Italian authorities arrested 14 members of an al-Qaeda plot to assassinate Pope John Paul II on his trip to Bologna. All of those arrested carried Bosnian passports and were reportedly working with Italian domestic elements of the Algerian Armed Islamic Group [GIA].
The quest continues to attempt to understand why an American administration, even one headed by someone as foolish and undisciplined as Bill Clinton, would intentionally "tip" its Balkan policy in the direction of radical Islamists.
One reason certainly is naiveté, the belief by administration officials that efforts to aid Muslims in Bosnia would result in a dampening of Islamic rage then being directed against the United States. In this theory, the Muslim world would perceive the help that the Americans were lending to the Bosnians as being indicative of a "new even-handedness," thus signaling an opportunity for accommodation and a moderation of jihad.
As shortsighted and cowardly as this might seem in retrospect, it must be noted that this was exactly the type of thinking that the Blair administration in London had been counseling until the London bombings proved it a suicidal policy [unfortunately Blair's response to the Islamist London bombing, especially his appointment of a "terror advisory commission" comprised essentially of Islamists leaves considerable doubt as to whether any liberal British politician has the mental faculties necessary to deal with the problem].
American naiveté was greatly augmented by an intense lobbying effort, led by people like Khaled Saffuri and Grover Norquist [who has been allowed to masquerade for years as a conservative and deserves investigation in his own right].
Saffuri is now the director of the Islamic Institute an Islamist think tank. Previously he directed the American Task Force for Bosnia [AFFB], which he established in1992 with the expressed purpose of influencing American foreign policy to support the Muslim minority in Bosnia during the Balkan wars. During the mid 1990s Saffuri seemed to be constantly in Bosnia, at a time when Iranian and other Islamic terrorists wandered the landscape unchecked and with Washington's blessing.
Saffuri is an associate of Abdurahman Alamoudi, a Hamas and Hezbollah supporter, now serving a sentence for taking illegal bribes from Libya to lobby the Bush White House. Mr. Saffuri was also responsible to bringing terror funder and founder of Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Sami al-Arian to the White House in 2001.
Saffuri is also an associate of Barzinji's Marjac, an Iraqi financier, whose organizations have been raided by the Treasury Department's anti-terror-funding Operation Greenquest. Marjac and Almoudi contributed $20,000 to Saffuri and Norquist to initially fund their Islamic Institute.
Nearly a dozen individuals who have been connected with Saffuri's PACs have been targets of Operation Greenquest.
And so it goes...Islamists urging the empowerment of Islamists.
It should be clear by this point that both European and American foreign policy regarding Bosnia has been a disaster, the area remains an unstable artificial creation - seething with the same ethnic/religious hatred seen during World War II - and a training ground for Muslim terror.
As recently as October 1 the commander of Nato forces in Bosnia, General Louise Weber complained of the existence of "Islamic terrorist cells" that could be put into action at any time and local newspapers increasingly carry headlines such as - "Bosnia: A Decade After Dayton, Crisis Deepens."
The United Nation's "Lord High Commissioner" Paddy Ashton administers the area in a high-handed manner, tilting all the while towards the Muslims - as would befit a representative from the notoriously pro-Islamist UN. Ashton is currently engaged in a vengeful campaign of economic sanctions against the Serbs.
While petty bureaucrats concern themselves with vindictive measures Bosnia remains an al-Qaeda haven, its borders transparent, allowing mujahadeen generals such as Abu el-Maali - whom a State Dept. official describes as a "junior bin-Laden" - recent political sanctuary."An Algerian terrorist commander once thought to head a transnational sleeper cell network that included would-be Al-Qaida Millenium bomber Ahmed Ressam has resurfaced in Bosnia-Herzegovina, vehemently denying allegations recently presented to the Bosnian Supreme Court in Sarajevo that his foreign mujahideen unit committed war crimes during the Bosnian civil conflict of the 1990s."August 29, 2005, Global Terror Alert
Events are thus drawn full-circle. The Clinton policy of rewarding the allies of the Nazis and Axis powers while abusing those who supported Western democracy during its darkest days has resulted in the establishment of a radical Islamist safe house located in the heart of Europe.
As Yossef Bodansky, director of the Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare has stated:"There is a terrorist network in Bosnia, composed of several well-trained and connected groups, which are directly or indirectly responsible to Osama Bin Laden."
©1999-2005 PipeLineNews.org, all rights reserved.
"Virginia Jihad" - Suspects Face Arraignment For Aiding A Foreign Terrorist Organization
September 19, 2005 - Washington, DC - PipeLineNews.org - A Maryland man has been arrested on charges of providing material support to Lashkar-e-Taiba, a designated foreign terrorist organization, according to Assistant Attorney General Alice S. Fisher of the Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney Paul McNulty of the Eastern District of Virginia.
Ali Asad Chandia was arrested on the evening of Sept. 15, 2005, at his home in College Park, Maryland. Chandia is scheduled to make an initial appearance today at U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Virgnia, and his arraignment is scheduled for Sept. 23, 2005.
Chandia and another defendant, Mohammed Ajmal Khan of Great Britain, were charged in a four-count indictment returned by a federal grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia on Sept. 14, 2005. The indictment was unsealed upon Chandia's arrest.
Chandia's arrest and the indictment are a continuation of the ``Virginia Jihad'' investigations in Northern Virginia. Those investigations have led to 10 convictions to date, including the conviction of the spiritual leader of the Virginia Jihad network, Ali Al-Timimi.
The indictment charges both defendants with conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists, in violation of 18 U.S.C. Section 2339A; providing material support to terrorists, in violation of 18 U.S.C. Section 2339A; conspiracy to provide material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization, in violation of 18 U.S.C. Section 2339B; and providing material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization, in violation of 18 U.S.C. Section 2339B.
The maximum sentence for each of the charges contained in the indictment is 15 years in prison.
The indictment alleges that Chandia and Khan conspired to provide - and provided - material support to Lashkar-e-Taiba, both before and after it was designated as a foreign terrorist organization in December 2001. It is alleged that Chandia met Khan at an office of Lashkar-e-Taiba in Pakistan in late 2001. Khan was allegedly a senior official with Lashkar-e-Taiba who acted as a procurement officer for the group.
Khan allegedly traveled to the United States in 2002 and 2003 to acquire equipment for Lashkar-e-Taiba, with assistance both times from Chandia. Khan is currently in custody in Great Britain on terrorism charges.
This case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney David Laufman from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Virginia and Trial Attorney John Gibbs of the Counterterrorism Section of the Criminal Division at the Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. The investigation was conducted by agents of the Washington and Baltimore field offices of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
An indictment is merely a formal way of bringing charges against an individual. All persons charged with a crime are presumed innocent until proven guilty.
©1999-2005 PipeLineNews.org, all rights reserved.
"Muslim Only" Day At Six Flags Denounced As Racist Event
By Beila Rabinowitz
September 14, 2005 - Philadelphia, PA - PipeLineNews.org - The Islamic Circle of North America, a group with ties to international terrorism is planning to hold a Muslims Only Day on September 16th at the Six Flags amusement Park in New Jersey. Link
Last year the Muslims Only Day provoked a media storm due to the exclusionary nature of the event , and that the Muslim group behind it linked to international terrorism. Link
A New Jersey based member of the Islamic Circle of North America , Imam Mazen Mokhtar, of Masjid al- Huda of New Brunswick, New Jersey , is under investigation for ties to to a plot to blow up NY landmarks and accused of operating an Al Qaeda website. Link
Mokhtar was a speaker at ICNA's Muslim Youth camp which is one of the main organizers of the Muslims only event.
Last year ICNA helped to finance the families of two girls who were accused of plotting a suicide bombings in New York City. Link
The ICNA campaign to help the terrorist suspects was also joined by a group called the Islamic Thinkers Society, which recently burned an American flag in New York, and is connected to Al Muhajiroun, a group whose members were involved in suicide attacks, including the recent London bombings. Link
ICNA is the subject of a Senate investigation into groups "which finance terrorism and perpetuate violence".Link
The Islamic Circle of North America is part of the international terrorism network and receives funding from Saudi Arabia and other countries to promote the Islamisation of the United States.Link
The money paid to Six Flags by a group under Senate scrutiny for terrorism funding is tainted . In addition to profiting from suspect funds, Six Flags will be helping ICNA to raise more money and recruits for their activities by giving vendors and promoters of ICNA's Islamist ideology the chance to reach thousands of Muslims. Link
Beila Rabinowitz, the director of Militant Islam Monitor, is calling upon the management of Six Flags to cancel the use of it's premises to a group which has documented ties to terrorism, in the interests of national security, in order to any funding or promotion of ISNA's radical Islamist agenda at the theme park.
Commenting on the upcoming Muslims Only Day at Six Flags Dr. Daniel Pipes wrote:
Here we go again. The Islamic Circle of North America's New Jersey branch announces :
"In sha Allah on September 16 2005, the New Jersey theme park, Six Flags Great Adventure, is set to be transformed as 'The Great Muslim Adventure Day', an event organisted by ICNA. The event is designed to provide entertainment for the entire family!"Alhamdullilah, the entire park is reserved for Muslims! Link
Comment: When this formulation was first exposed a year ago, ICNA cancelled the "Muslims only" restriction and it's spokesman reassuringly stated that the event was never intended to exclude others. So why is it again "reserved for Muslims" and what does Six Flags, Inc. have to say about this illegal restriction? Link
Those who want an answer to this question are urged to contact Kristin Steiebeneicher 732-928-2000 extension 2832 at Six Flags.
©1999-2005 PipeLineNews.org, all rights reserved.
"Moderate Friends of Terror" Conducting Sacramento Police Training Sessions
July 11, 2005 - Sacramento, CA - PipeLineNews - According to their newsletter, the Council on American Islamic Relations [CAIR] is providing multicultural training material and instruction services for the Sacramento - and other area - Police Departments.
"The Sacramento Valley office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-SV) recently conducted diversity training for 46 graduates at the Sacramento Police Training Academy.
The CAIR-SV representative offered a presentation designed to make the graduates aware of issues that they might face when dealing with the diverse Muslim community in Sacramento.
"From speaking to the staff and recruits, the training was well received "The recruits appreciated the information," said Academy Commander Sergeant Floyd Harvey. "Diversity training is important for our staff so that they can learn about other cultures and religions. Muslims form a big part of the Sacramento Community and the Police Department represents and works for all."
Topics addressed in the presentation included the basic tenets of the Islamic faith, the status of women in Islam, the diversity of the American Muslim community, and ways in which area Muslims can have better relations with law enforcement authorities. A question-and-answer session followed the presentation." - CAIR-IslamInfonet, 7/7/05
In the wake of the London al-Qaeda bombings we thought that the Sacramento authorities might want to be made aware of the controversial reputation of CAIR.
This was not the case however, as the information that we provided - that three members of CAIR had been convicted on terror related charges and that one of the three would be sentenced on 21 Federal terror-related counts in Texas on August 1, was rejected as being irrelevant.
The following is a synopsis of the information that we provided to Sacramento Police information officer, Michelle Lasark on July 8, 2005.
On August 1, Ghassan Elashi - a founding member of the Texas chapter of the Council on American Islamic Relations [CAIR] Texas chapter and who convicted of terrorism-related charges on April 14, 2005 - will be sentenced in Dallas, Texas. Elashi was found guilty on every one of the 21 federal counts that he faced, which included - conspiracy, money laundering and dealing in the property of a terrorist. Government prosecutors said each count carries a possible 10-year prison sentence."In December 2002, a federal grand jury in Dallas returned an indictment against a senior leader of Hamas, Mousa Abu Marzouk, for conspiring to violate US laws that prohibit dealing in terrorist funds. Also charged and arrested by the FBI were Ghassan Elashi the chairman of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, a charitable organization designated as a terrorist organization by the US Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Asset Control because of its fundraising activities on behalf of Hamas." - Testimony of Gary M. Bald, Acting Assistant Director, Counter terrorism Division, FBI, before the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control - 3/4/04
"CAIR actively raised money for [Holy Land Foundation] HLF via their mailing list. In 2001, HLF's assets were frozen by the Treasury Department, which found the organization to be a Hamas conduit. The Texas chapter of CAIR and HLF share a common founder in Ghassan Elashi. As stated above, Elashi himself was present at the 1993 Philadelphia meeting that planned Hamas fundraising in the United States. This meeting shows that future leadership of CAIR participated in meetings with senior Hamas leaders and discussed Hamas fundraising in the United States." - Testimony of Matthew Epstein, Assistant Director, The Investigative Project, before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Terrorism - 9/10/03
Two other former members of CAIR have been convicted on terror related charges and one of their advisory board members is an unindicted co-conspirator in the first World Trade Center bombing.
Bassem Khafagi - former director of Community Relation for CAIR, plead guilty to bank and visa and has been deported to Egypt. According to Fox News, "The FBI said Khafagi is a founding member of the Islamic Assembly of North America, a charity that purports to promote Islam...Federal investigators said Islamic Assembly has funneled money to activities supporting terrorism and has published material advocating suicide attacks on the United States.
Randall Todd "Ismail" Royer - a former communications & civil rights specialist for CAIR, according to AP "Royer...admitted helping members of the conspiracy join the militant Pakistani group Lashkar-e-Taiba in the days after the Sept. 11 attacks. He pleaded guilty to the use of a firearm in a crime of violence and aiding and abetting the carrying of an explosive during commission of a felony. He was sentenced to 20 years in prison."
Siraj Wahhaj - CAIR advisory board member named as an "unindicted co-conspirator" in the "Blind Sheik" Omar Abdel Rahman 1993 World Trade Center bomb plots by US Prosecutor Mary Jo White. Rahman is serving a life sentence.
In regard to our inquiry, Ms. Lasark returned our call, her statement is as follows:"I called the academy staff and our intelligence section and a bunch of people...we have been using these guys for quite some time...they teach both the Sheriff's department, and our police department, Davis and West Sac...and the thought process that we use...we can't isolate just, because there's a few bad seeds in the organization that it doesn't mean that the whole organization is bad...we have to stand by the fact that its not the whole organization that's bad...just because some members of the Texas branch were arrested...it goes with any organization...these people aren't terrorists."
No these CAIR trainers personally, aren't terrorists; however people within the CAIR organization have been convicted as terrorists.
Apparently, at least in Sacramento and surrounding area law-enforcement communities, the multicultural acceptance bar been raised so high that unless police department trainers actually walk into the classrooms wearing bomb belts and brandishing full-auto AK 47s that any transgression by the parent organization is of no consequence.
This is a remarkable explanation, one that borders on the ridiculous.
Are Nazis to be given access to Sacramento police training establishment on the basis that just because Hitler and Goering were bad seeds that's no reason to paint all Nazis with the same broad brush?
What the Sacramento - and surrounding area - police departments have done, allowing a terror-friendly organization to conduct multicultural training sessions, is to not only permit CAIR's instructors to spread misleading information regarding Islam, they have helped to legitimize exactly the type of people that should be under increased scrutiny in the heightened state of concern over national security. which stems from the Islamist threat.
For further fleshing out of just where CAIR stands with regard to terror, we have included the following information from the noted and respected expert on Islamic terrorism, Dr. Daniel Pipes.
From CAIR - What is the Council on American-Islamic Relations?"CAIR's record includes the following unpleasantries:And the following from "CAIR - 'Moderate' Friends Of Terror"
"Apologizing for killers such as Hamas (a group associated with the murder of 7 Americans) and Usama bin Ladin (charged with the devastation of September 11, 2001).
Helping promote terrorism: In the words of Steve Pomerantz., a former Chief of Counterterrorism for the FBI, "CAIR, its leaders, and its activities, effectively give aid to international terrorist groups."
Intimidation of patriotic Muslims who disagree with CAIR's militant agenda: In one case (Sheikh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani), the FBI has looked into charges that he received death threats after renouncing the chauvinists. In another (Khalid Durán), CAIR's attack on a writer led to a death edict against him - which CAIR has never denounced. (For details on this latter case, see http://www.danielpipes.org/article/384.)
Associating with terrorism: Siraj Wahaj, a potential unindicted co-conspirator in the World Trade Center bombing of 1993, sits on its advisory board.
Bias against women: When a prosecutor in Cleveland argued that two Muslim men had engaged in the "honor killing" of their female cousin, CAIR accused him of "ethnic and religious stereotyping" and demanded he be investigated.
Sponsorship of blatant antisemitism: At a May 1998 rally at Brooklyn College co-sponsored by CAIR, one speaker referred to Jews as "descendants of the apes." - CAIR - What is the Council on American-Islamic Relations? - Daniel Pipes, 7/11/05
"The Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations presents itself as just another civil-rights group. "We are similar to a Muslim NAACP," says spokesman Ibrahim Hooper. Its public language - about promoting "interest and understanding among the general public with regards to Islam and Muslims in North America" - certainly boosts an image of moderation.
That reputation has permitted CAIR to prosper since its founding in 1994, garnering sizeable donations, invitations to the White House, respectful media citations and a serious hearing by corporations.
In reality, CAIR is something quite different. For starters, it's on the wrong side in the war on terrorism. One indication came in October 1998, when the group demanded the removal of a Los Angeles billboard describing Osama bin Laden as "the sworn enemy," finding this depiction "offensive to Muslims." - CAIR - "Moderate" Friends Of Terror - Daniel Pipes, 4/22/02
© 1999-2005 PipeLineNews, all rights reserved.
Now Is The Time To Move Against The Islamists!
By Beila Rabinowitz, Special to PipeLineNews
July 7, 2005 - Osceola County, FLA - PipeLineNews - The terror attacks which the British government had stated were inevitable have finally taken place; as the authorities have pointed out, there may be more to come.
What commentators have so far failed to take note of, was that viable threats were already there before the attack.
They have been there, in some cases for years.
As recently as two months ago, Omar Bakri Mohammed, the head of the al-Qaeda support group Al Muhajiroun, exhorted his followers to wage jihad against the UK."...Muslims living in Britain are facing two choices; either to migrate or to join the jihad?And I declare we should ourselves join the global Islamic camp against the global crusade camp?the response from the Muslims will be horrendous if the British government continues in the way it treats Muslims," he said, adding that suicide bombings were a possibility.
Bakri is still a free man in the UK, and though he "officially disbanded" his group at the same time he urged them to go "freelance."
It is highly probable to speculate that members of Al Muhajiroun will have heeded Bakri's call to engage in jihad and be found to have been involved in today's terrorist attacks.
Bakri called on Muslims to form a new coalition united behind al-Qaeda with Osama Bin Laden as their leader. This jihadi group would replace Al-Muhajiroun, which is no longer needed, he said. By dissolving such parties the Muslim community will have to come together, and as the judge of the Sharia court in Britain, he is the one to unite them, he added.
Though these developments were reported in the media neither Bakri nor his followers are in prison.
To make matters worse, supporters of groups such as Al Qaeda, Hamas, and Al Muhajiroun have been afforded a quasi-diplomatic status in Britain.
One of those groups, the Muslim Council of Britain is a carbon copy of the American Islamist lobby, Council on American Islamic Relations [CAIR].
The Muslim Council of Britain is al-Qaeda. Yet the Muslim Council?s Iqbal Sacranie, was knighted by the Queen last week.
In 1996 Iqbal Sacranie - who was then a spokesman for the U.K. Committee on Islamic Affairs - pushed for the entry of Bin Laden and other terrorists into the UK on the grounds that "they were Muslim scholars." He also threatened leaders of the UK Jewish Community who were attempting to get Al Muhajiroun's Rally for Revival cancelled."The Board of Deputies of British Jews should seriously consider what action they take on this matter because of the detrimental effect on community relations which could result. Taking a hostile view towards scholars who wish to come to this country to present their points of view at a conference will not serve good community relations..." - The Jewish Chronicle (30.08.96)
Taking advantage of the UK?s multicultural idiocy, the terror supporters in the UK are in fact, being regarded as 'mainstream' and respected representatives of the Muslim community.
The only way in which future attacks can be thwarted is if the public and law enforcement will face the fact that in reality, there are fewer moderate Muslims than one might hope for and that many Muslim organizations have proven ties to terror related entities.
In short, a readiness to identify the enemy and call it by its name is the conditione sine qua non for fighting terrorism.
The people who are behind these organizations do not make a secret of where their loyalties lie and their true agendas.
Terrorists rightly saw Britain as a safe haven more then a decade ago. It has been speculated that the British did not take action against them in the hope that Muslims would regard themselves as "having a covenant of peace" with the UK and not attack their "host" country. The UK government's failure to realize that the covenant of peace was contingent on total submission has resulted in the carnage we have seen today.
The question remains of how many more lives will be lost until the UK takes preemptive action to give credibility to the words of Prime Minister Tony Blair - who stated that "freedom from terrorism is the greatest civil liberty." Neither civilization nor liberty can coexist with radical Islam. There can be no civil rights for people who aid and abet terrorists.
Islamists have taken the Clausewitz maxim of "diplomacy is a continuation of war by another means" and turned it into "diplomacy is the Trojan Horse of jihad"
In his book "Infiltration" Paul Sperry stated that we can only defeat terrorism if we stop hacking at the branches and start striking at the roots. This means shutting down offending mosques and Islamic Centers and arresting those who openly declare their intent to perpetrate attacks, or who have undergone training abroad.
Today?s attacks stem from a failure to identify and move against the enemy and by rewarding the terror-supporting fifth columnists.
The fight against radical Islam is a life and death struggle, unless it is waged with at least as much determination as the jihadists have shown, the West will commit politically correct suicide by surrendering to their deception.
© 1999-2005 Beila Rabinowitz, all rights reserved.
Multiculturalism And The Phenomenon Of Forced Conversion To Islam
June 1, 2005 - by William A. Mayer - Editor & Publisher, PipeLineNews
Judging from frequency of notice alone, according to the Council on Islamic American Relations [CAIR] America is an intolerant place and its subjugation of Islam is a major problem.
The following, culled from just the last few of the organization's newsletters received by PipeLineNews.Radio station drops ad from Muslim group - Prayer time for [Muslim] Somali cabbie leads to police ticketing - Muslim woman sues over refusal to allow headscarf on prison visit - Rank stupidity, the US made a huge mistake in abandoning the moral high ground to set up its outside the law Guantanimo Bay interrogation centre - NC church stands by sign saying Quran "should be flushed" - Amnesty International takes aim at Gulag in Guantanimo - CAIR anti-torture campaign - State [Muslim] employee claims he was harassed - [Muslim] group calls on FBI to investigate alleged [anti-Muslim] bias at Christian school.
Applying the standards used by CAIR, American Muslims should consider themselves lucky just to arrive home every evening, having escaped lynching by cross waving, bigoted Christian mobs.
In one of the above excerpted newsletters, the supposed accommodative nature of Islam is touted:Behold! The angels said: 'O Mary! God giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from Him. His name will be Jesus Christ, the son of Mary, held in honor in this world and the Hereafter and in (the company of) those nearest to God.'" - The Holy Quran, 3:45
"We gave (Jesus) the Gospel (Injeel) and put compassion and mercy into the hearts of his followers." - The Holy Quran, 57:27
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "Both in this world and in the Hereafter, I am the nearest of all people to Jesus, the son of Mary. The prophets are paternal brothers; their mothers are different, but their religion is one." - Hadith of the day
Isn't this amazing? That a religion so discriminated against by the Christian majority would be so loving towards its oppressor's faith?
Along the same lines, throughout the Western world, especially since 9-11, Islam has made a mighty effort at what can loosely be called "interfaith outreach."
We here have written about it extensively.
Hardly a day goes on without some major Christian, Jewish or secular group announcing that it is forming an alliance with a Muslim organization to find common ground.
On the surface this is all well and good; we believe that diplomacy is never out of place unless it represents the sole response to a problem that may require stronger action.
But lest these words lull us into a state of complacence, let us consider the largest case study by which the current degree of Muslim tolerance can be judged.
Our living laboratory is Egypt, a nation of 70 million of which approximately 7 million or 10% are Christians, primarily of the Coptic Sect.
Christianity came to that country in the first century, brought there by St. Mark sometime during the reign of the Roman Emperor Claudius, probably around the year 40. It spread rapidly for many reasons but primarily because the Egyptians saw many philosophical similarities between their native beliefs and Christian ideas such as resurrection and the concept of a final judgment, among others.
After five centuries of Christianity having existed as a major force in Egypt, the country was conquered by an Islamic jihad army led by the Arab Amr Ibn al'As in 640.
It has been a Muslim nation ever since, albeit with a significant Christian minority.
To most this is ancient history, but it does establish a certain perspective as we look at relations between Islam and Christianity today in Egypt and especially the phenomenon of forced religious conversion of Christian women, using kidnapping as its primary means.
To people in the West the entire idea of forcing someone to convert to another religion might seem so outlandish that it might be dismissed out of hand but the notions represented by America's secularists are by no means held by even a sizable minority by the rest of the world.
On this phenomenon, US Copts leader Michael Meunier minces no words:
"The Egyptian government continues to tacitly endorse coerced conversion to Islam...Young Coptic women represent the group most vulnerable to abduction and forced conversion. Police further contribute to alleged declarations of conversion through pressure and other coercion tactics."
Evidence of such practices abound, in 2004 the Coptic Christian Pope Shenouda III warned:"I have received so many letters about what's happening to the Christian girls who go to supermarket stores to shop. At the store they tell them that they have won and have to go upstairs to receive their award or prize. After that we don't know what's happening to these girls...I'm urging the police to take a serious action against what's happening."
Many within the Coptic community have revealed that "certain supermarkets in Egypt" are working with what are apparently organized gangs of Muslims intent on luring young women into the process of forced conversion.
These women are specifically targeted; their buying patterns are tracked and they are followed to shopping areas. When all is ready, they are informed that they have won a prize but have to go somewhere else to fill out some paperwork.
At that location they are presented with a document that they are told must be signed to claim the prize, unbeknownst to them the document is the official Egyptian form that declares their conversion to Islam.
If the women refuse to sign they are threatened with charges of shoplifting, if they further resist, they are often strip-searched and raped.
Because of the lack of religious freedom in Egypt - where Christian college students are routinely arrested on charges of "disturbing the national peace" for merely possessing Bibles and non-Muslim religious study materials - people are understandably reticent to speak publicly about these developments. Even in America, ties to the "old country" and threats of retribution keep lips tightly sealed.
It does seem however that these examples of Islamic religious intolerance are becoming more prevalent, possibly a byproduct of Muslim rage against the West over the war on terror which is then focused on defenseless minority institutions and peoples.
Despite assurances to the contrary by the Mubarak government, it is obvious that Egyptian law enforcement is complicit in shielding the perpetrators from prosecution and in some instances seems to be actually working hand in glove with those committing these outrages.
While spinners for the Egyptian government are suggesting that if this problem even exists that it occurs rarely and is localized, others are claiming that the problem is widespread and - like the spread of Wahhabism throughout US Mosques - is being funded by Saudi oil princes.
These sources, some of whom claim to have been personally involved with the conversions, have outlined a mechanism that is designed to prey upon young Christian females, taking specific advantage of the "special" status that women have in the Muslim world.
Special in this regard should be understood as meaning that women have been second-class citizens throughout the fourteen hundred year Islamic tradition and though somewhat moderated today, this inequality remains a fact of life - culturally - in every nation with a Muslim majority as well as continuing to be codified into Sharia [religious] law.
There is a duality however; in Islamic countries though women are deemed inferior to men, often a man's honor is inextricably bound to the women around him, his wife, mother, sisters and daughters. Because of this, having a woman relative exposed as sexually unchaste or an adulterer results in a huge loss of face for the male relative.
The groups who established these tactics against Christian women found their roots in the re-Islamization of Egypt, which took place as a result of the wreckage caused by Egyptian president Nasser's defeat in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.
Acknowledging the growing political feeling that Egypt's failure to defeat the Jewish state was caused by a lack of national piety, Anwar Sadat allowed the heretofore suppressed Islamists [the Muslim Brotherhood and the Jamaat al Islamiyah, or Muslim Associations] essentially free rein in Egypt's universities. These religious radicals quickly extended their reach beyond the universities, eventually members of one of these groups, al-Jihad, which had infiltrated the military for this expressed purpose, was responsible for assassinating Sadat in 1981.
It was these forces who established the "conversion" infrastructure.
The conversion process itself can take many forms, though kidnapping and threats of physical violence seem a common element. Whatever the specific method used, the actors involved seek to gain the upper hand psychologically over the young female victims.
Young Muslim fanatics [who reportedly receive substantial financial incentives from Wahhabists] will seek out specific young women, with preference shown to those of higher social standing. Once removed from their families and familiar surroundings they will be subjected to - lies, beatings, forced drugging and videotaping of rape offered then as evidence of consensual sex - all to blackmail the girls into converting to Islam.
Sometimes Christian women are merely seduced, converted, married and then abandoned.
In the Muslim world such women occupy the lowest rung in society - alongside prostitutes.
The depravity of the process should send shock waves throughout the Western world except for the fact that the Western media self censors itself with regard to the numerous excesses of Islam.
For example in Amnesty International's just issued 2005 global report, forced conversion and Muslim on Christian violence in Egypt isn't even mentioned, the word Christian doesn't appear anywhere in the report.
The doctrinaire leftists at AI do however manage to slam government action against jihadi groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood, which were complicit in the assassination of Mubarak's predecesso, Sadatr:"Scores of members of the banned Muslim Brothers organization were arrested; several of them remained held awaiting trial at the end of the year. Thousands of suspected supporters of banned Islamist groups, including possible prisoners of conscience, remained in detention without charge or trial; some had been held for years."
American groups representing Coptic Christians have demanded that the Mubarak regime in Egypt put a final halt to these goings-on, to little avail. Similarly the United States Congress has been briefed regarding what is happening to Egypt's Christian minority, again to little apparent effect.
What the existence of this now thirty-year plus reign of Islamist terror against Egypt's Christian minority does serve to underline however, is what many serious researchers have been pointing out - especially here in the United States - that strident Islamist front groups like CAIR, MAS and ICNA are simply lying with regard to Islam and Christianity coexisting to any great degree anywhere in the world.
When the apologist's sophistry is put aside, we are left with the concrete example of Egypt which paints a far more sinister reality.
© 1999-2005 PipeLineNews, all rights reserved.
Deconstructing Imam Ibrahim Dremali
May, 1, 2005 - by William A. Mayer, E & P - PipeLineNews.org and Beila Rabinowitz , E & P - MilitantIslamMonitor.org.
It is with a rising sense of alarm that we observe the domino effect currently taking place in America with regard to radical Islam.
On many fronts - in the media, Fox Broadcasting and National Review and in high tech manufacturing, Dell Computer - we are witnessing a caving process taking place that is granting undeserved legitimacy, and with it increased power, to Islamist organizations which are inimical to secular Western institutions.
Groups like CAIR1 and other Saudi funded Wahabi terror friendly pressure groups are following a pattern established over a thousand years ago, one which is quite familiar to scholars of Muslim history.
In the West many people are familiar, in a general sense, with Mohammed, the founder of Islam. Similarly they are familiar with city of Mecca, Saudi Arabia, which is considered Islam's most sacred city.
Most however are not conversant with the manner in which Islam, with Mohammed as its military leader, conquered the city in the first place.
Why is this story important?
It is relevant in helping to understand a facet of Islam which helps place its current feigning of moderation in perspective.
A brief primer.
In the early 600s Mohammed resided in the city of Mecca. Though his power was on the rise, it was not yet sufficient to defy the Quraysh tribe which controlled the city. Biding his time, he fled the city in 622, taking refuge in Medina. By 628 Mohammed realized that his strength had increased to the point where the Quraysh might be challenged, but instead he opted for a tactic which would become from that time on, associated with Muslim military strategy. He declared a truce with the Quraysh and a treaty was signed - the Treaty of Hudaybiya - in the town of the same name, but it was a one-sided truce.
Over the next two years Mohammed built alliances and added tremendously to his fighting forces and in 630 succeeded in conquering the city of Mecca, the Quraysh being so awed by Mohammed's formidable army that they surrendered without a struggle.
Since that time the concepts associated with the Quraysh and Hudaybiya treaty, have become inextricably incorporated into Muslim thought and practice. For example in 1994 after having successfully cowed the Israelis with talk of a bloody jihad into a series of concessions, Yassir Arafat defended his actions to even more radical hardliners as follows:"[we] see this agreement as being no more than the agreement signed between our Prophet Muhammad and the Quraysh in Mecca."
For more on this subject see, Lessons from the Prophet Muhammad's Diplomacy - Daniel Pipes - Middle East Quarterly, September 1999
Fortunately Arafat is no longer with us, but the method that he referred to lives on, now funded by Saudi money and embodied in the Wahabbist sympathies of most of the so-called mainstream American Muslim organizations such as CAIR.1
At its most extreme we see the lessons of Hudaybiya and the Quraysh embodied in the Takfir Wal Hijra group.
Takfir ideology is such that its members may ignore normal Islamic proscriptions. They may lead riotous lives, attending lap-dance clubs, having indiscriminate sex, eating prohibited foods such as pork and drinking to excess in order to better blend into the Kufir [infidel] society, from whence at an appointed time they spring into murderous action."[They appear to be] regular, fun-loving guys, but they'd slit your throat or bomb your building in a second..." - Time Magazine
This was the very MO of the 9/11 plotters; ignoring it will certainly not make it go away.
Imam Ibrahim Dremali has led a busy life since he came to the United States after fleeing Egypt as a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, apparently to spread the message of jihad in America under the guise of seeking religious freedom.
In February he suddenly left his position as Imam of the 7-acre Boca Raton Islamic Center to take over the tiny and reportedly cash strapped Islamic Center of Des Moines, Iowa.
In recent newspaper coverage Dremali casts himself as a hapless 'refugee' who was hounded out of Boca Raton, because he was a Muslim, feigning tears of relief at finding peace and quiet in Iowa.
Born in Gaza when it was still controlled by Egypt [Gaza, the Sinai Peninsula, the Eastern sector of Jerusalem and the Golan heights were all liberated by Israel during the 1967 Arab-Israeli war]. Dremali later moved to Egypt where he was educated in Islamic religious theology and geology at Al Azhar University.
While there Dremali started his religious training. Dr. Ibrahim Dremali -Sheikh Ibrahim - has a degree in Shariah from Al-Azhar University and a PhD in Geology. Al Azhar University was also the alma mater of Bin Laden's mentor Abdullah Azzam as well as being a center of Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic Jihad activities which included the assassination of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat.
Dremali fled to the US where he continued his education in geology. In 1998 Dremali co-founded the Islamic Center of Boca Raton, together with FAU professors Bassem Al Halabi and Khalid Hamza, and becoming its Imam.
It didn't take Dremali long to become a political activist in the United States. He participated in a series of pro-Palestinian demonstrations that were held across from the Israeli Embassy in Miami in 2000. At these events vitriolic speeches were made while Israeli flags were burned.
In October at one of these events - as demonstrators shouted "Haya al Jihad" [Long live Jihad] and "With jihad we'll claim our land, Zionist blood will wet the sand" - Dremali shouted to the crowd:"...[don't] be sad for those who were martyred and to not be afraid to die for what they believe in."
So Dremali brings along considerable baggage as we attempt to understand one of the seminal events in his life; an "anti-Muslim attack" which allegedly occurred in 2001 and which is being bandied about by Dremali now in his new digs in America's heartland.
Two Weeks Post 9-11
Ibrahim Dremali has claimed for over three years now, that he was the victim of an aggravated assault which took place just a few weeks after the 9-11 terrorist attacks.
Dremali claims that at about 9:50 PM on the night of Wednesday, September 25, he left the Islamic Center of Boca Raton - where he served as Imam. He says that he was followed home by a white Ford F -150 type truck that flashed its lights at him once along the way. As Dremali pulled into his driveway and collected his briefcase and cell phone, the driver of the truck parked it in a lane of traffic immediately behind Dremali's vehicle.
Two white males, the driver carrying a shotgun, the passenger a handgun, exited the vehicle and confronted Dremali in the driveway of his home. There the shotgun-wielding driver warned Dremali not to appear at an interfaith religious meeting scheduled to take place on the following afternoon or he was "dead meat." The two assailants then got back into the truck, the subject with the shotgun got into the passenger's side and the subject with the handgun into the driver's side, and they drove off.
There were no eyewitnesses aside from Dremali.
Dremali's tale has been used to gin up sympathy and cast him as an aggrieved party who has been subjected to Christian intolerance. More specifically, this incident has been used by Mr. Dremali to explain his hasty departure from South Florida, to supposedly more hospitable climes in Iowa.
Sources close to the case - which is now inactive - have provided PipeLineNews with evidence that casts grave doubts as to whether the alleged attack ever took place.
The story is suspicious from many angles, but possibly the most obvious is that the entire account of the incident reads like a bad script for a "B" grade movie. The story conforms to what might be the worst preconceptions about Christian America by Muslims.
Not only that but Dremali continues to embellish the story
In an article entitled Imam, His Family Find Refuge in Des Moines which appeared in the Des Moines Register April 18, 2005 edition, Dremali stated that:"...someone jammed a double-barrel shotgun into his chest. A second man was waving a pistol so he would be sure to see it."
However in the police report Dremali - "said that the driver of the truck had the shotgun, the gun had a single barrel." He said that the passenger was holding the pistol, not brandishing it or waving it so that is was more evident.
The Register article continues:"After the men left, the police were called. "I showed them the bruises on my chest," Dremali said. "I canceled the lecture." Dremali, the dynamic leader of a growing mosque in Boca Raton, was given police protection."
The police report states that - "a round red mark on his upper left pectoral where Dremali claimed the shotgun was placed." The physical evidence consisted of a single small red mark, no "bruises" as Dremali stated. This is certainly not the type of injury one would expect from having the sharp steel 28 or 30 inch long muzzle of a shotgun rammed into one's chest by a powerful, 6 foot tall 200 pound male in a bad mood.
Dremali's reference in the Des Moines Register article, of canceling the speaking engagement makes it appear that he did so to avoid the threatened physical injury by his assailants, but the police report states:"...no one knew that he had changed his plans and had cancelled his engagement. He said that he was not going to speak at that church. Dremali said that there had been some controversy regarding some of the things that have appeared at the Center's website. He said he is not responsible for the content of the website."
Yes there was "controversy" regarding Dremali's website because it contained an openly anti-Semitic essay that referred to Jews as being "known for their treachery and corruption" and quoted from a Muslim text that read, "O Muslim! There is Jew behind me, kill him!"
Not surprisingly, the hate-speech had become the focus of media scrutiny.
Dan McBride, spokesman for the Boca Raton mosque, said the essay, titled, "Why can't the Jews and Muslims live together in peace?" generated three e-mail complaints, so they took it down.
He went on to say, "as fellow Americans, we're all a little sensitive right now and we don't want to increase any tensions, so we're trying to be a little politically correct right now."
Which is not to say McBride, or Dremali for that matter disagreed with anything in the essay.
In furtherance of Dremali's ruse of victimization, he claimed that he was under police protection, but there was no provision of police protection, nor was any really indicated because aside from two pieces of questionable mail, nothing additional happened.
On the day of the event an officer was dispatched to the church:- "0315 Hrs., I responded to the area of the Ascension Lutheran Church located at 2929 Seacrest Blvd, Boynton Beach. While there the Multi Congregational Church meeting took place without incident. A Muslim leader from Fr. Lauderdale spoke at the meeting without incident."
It seems that whoever was trying to "intimidate" Dremali from speaking at the event had absolutely no problem with another Muslim speaking at the convocation.
Dremali stated that the Mosque had received two pieces of hate type mail. One - a letter written on the margins of a newspaper article dated October 5, 2001 stated:"As long as there are Muslims there will be terrorism as the barbarians practice their barbaric religion as taught in the used toilet paper Koran. Islam is a barbaric religion!!! Go back to camel dung land, Muslim countries."
It's hard to believe that the above passage was authored by a native-born English speaker. Representing it as a statement of hate is ludicrous. Using the word "barbaric" three times in a mere 17 word rage-filled excoriation strains credulity to the point of breaking.
Americans don't talk that way.
And "camel dung land?"
Possibly "your shitty country," but "dung" and "land" really seem more like the type of usage one might expect from a non-native English speaker.
Possibly someone from the Middle East?
The type of cardboard figures Dremali has described as his attackers are stereotypes. They are the worst of the kind that one might imagine, taking the law into their own hands - red-neck bigots responding to the events of only a few weeks previous, 9-11.
These are not the words of some Southern-type "crackers." The term "camel dung land" and "barbaric" are alien to that type of speech pattern, when more colorful colloquialisms might be more in character.
The other, earlier, piece of "hate" mail that arrived at the Mosque was an envelope which included a letter and an article written by Hal Lindsey entitled "The Rapture." The letter read - "I will bless those who bless Israel and I will curse those who curse Israel."
The quotation is derived from the first book of the Old Testament, Genesis, in which God was speaking to Abram, soon to become Abraham.
We say the quote was derived because the actual [extended] Biblical passage is - "I will bless those who bless you, and I will curse him who curses you; and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed." (Genesis 12: 3).
Since the Israelites are commonly understood to be the children of Abraham the passage is often used - substituting the word "Israel" in the appropriate places - by evangelicals to show the degree to which God supports the nation of Israeli - and hence, Zionism.
Hal Lindsey is a Christian Zionist. He is also widely regarded as a person well versed in Biblical prophecy especially with regards to the final book of the New Testament, Revelation.
Lindsey is renown for using such passages to argue in support of Israel.
While it is not common knowledge among many Christians, it is a common theme in Islam that they also consider themselves children of Abraham, so many of them might be familiar with this passage.
Using this type of Biblical passage and a noted, fervently pro-Israel evangelical writer, injects the issue of Zionism into this equation in a big and rather insidious way. Ultimately it's transparent, building on an important element of Islamist bigotry to eventually yield a not so cleverly assembled straw man.
So what can we glean from all of this, the alleged assault followed in close order by threatening "hate" mail?
It seems to be a not-so-subtle ruse, concocted by Dremali to take attention away from the hate-speech on his Mosque's website language which made it necessary for him to cancel his address at the 9/27 multi-congregational event not because as he claimed he was threatened and fearing for his life, but because he is an Islamist and a bigot and was asked not to attend.
Taken as a whole the "assault" makes no sense - Dremali leaves the Mosque, someone follows him apparently, blinking their lights and yet he ignores them. They follow him to his home, inexplicably drawing attention to a criminal action underway, parking in the middle of traffic right behind Dremali's vehicle, but he still doesn't see them.
The driver of this truck is carrying a single barrel shotgun [Dremali later claiming it was a double barrel shotgun] but he states that he never even saw the car so how could he possibly know who the driver was?
The subject with the shotgun accosts Dremali roughly pushing the shotgun into his left pectoral chest area, yet only a small red mark is left.
Further muddying the account, Dremali claims to have at some time attained a 3rd degree black belt in a martial arts discipline. Those familiar with self-defense know that if someone physically touches you with a rifle or a shotgun - instead of just aiming it at you from a reasonable distance - they are making a huge mistake since disarming techniques and counter-moves are then more easily employed.
On the other hand most "bad guys" instinctively know that the whole reason why guns, especially long guns like rifles and shotguns, are so effective is that they project power from a position where the user can't be harmed, i.e., you stand a certain distance away from someone you want to intimidate so they can't harm you. You certainly don't give up your advantage by actually poking someone with the barrel of the gun when it might possibly and rapidly be brushed aside and then taken away, with movements that require little strength and little training - let alone the skills that someone with a 3rd degree black-belt presumably might have.
The only possible reason that the use of shotgun in this manner was essential to include in Dremali's fable was because he thought it was necessary to leave at least one piece of physical evidence, because without that little "red mark" there is no physical evidence except for the equally absurd hate mail.
The "attack" is a stereotypical concoction featuring just about every anti-Christian cliché imaginable - a white, gas guzzling Ford truck adorned with American flags containing a shotgun wielding Caucasian with close cropped hair wearing a white shirt and blue jeans. His Caucasian buddy is a similarly concocted yahoo armed with a pistol.
The lead attacker, the "driver" with the shotgun, spouting the idiomatic line "you're dead meat" sounds oddly restrained when isn't it more likely to include much profanity? Wouldn't something on the order of "Look you little raghead &%$#hole, if you show up at church tomorrow we'll blow your &$#%ing brains out," be more apropos?
Now THAT is a red-blooded-white-trash-American-with-a-shotgun, type threat.
When you factor in the "Zionist" content of the "hate" mail the assemblage becomes parody, a completely pre-planned but ham-fisted attempt to direct the community's attention away from Dremali himself.
In the days after the incident - which none of Dremali's neighbors witnessed - the surrounding area was abuzz with the assertion that the whole thing was invented.
We agree, this entire affair is nothing so much as a totally self-serving bad cartoon.
Hudaybiya In Iowa
Dremali's actions in this matter must be understood in a larger context, as part of a pattern which he has used over the years in an attempt to turn criticism and outrage against him to his advantage and one which he is currently employing to explain to gullible journalists to explain why he fled Boca Raton.
About Dremali's above referenced pro-jihad Miami speech "[don't] be sad for those who were martyred or to be afraid to die for what they believed in"] he told the Des Moines Plains that "they put words in my mouth".
The "they" Dremali refers to is Lamyaa Hashim - aka Um Ahmad - alleged to be none other than Dremali's co wife [Islam permits multiple wives, in obvious conflict with American law].
Dremali has been linked with Hashim for over a decade. Hashim was a congregant at the Islamic Center of Boca Raton and was - more importantly - the president of The Health Resource Center Palestine.
The HRCP was closed down after it was exposed as a terrorist funding front, HRCP included Dremali and his brother Ishaq among its administrators.
Even more damning is the fact that the spokesman of his own Mosque - Hassan Shareef - stated to the Boca Raton News that:"...He [Dremali] had made those comments in the heat of the moment..." Shareef statement
For further clarification regarding this incident see Militant Islam Monitor: New Jihadi on the block: Ibrahim Dremali leaves Boca Raton to become Imam of the Islamic Center of Des Moines.
In the same Boca News article Dremali lied when asked about his connection to Adham Hassoun, at whose immigration violation trial he had already testified as a witness for the defense.
When asked about his relationship with Hassoun Dremali, stated "I don't know the guy."
Dremali's statement was refuted by Hassoun's own attorney, Akhter Hussain who said that, "Dremali has known [Hassoun] for more then a couple of years...I know that."
Adham Amin Hassoun, who ran the Benevolence International Foundation, an Al Qaeda fundraising operation in South Florida, is now the defendant in a March 7, 2004 10 count indictment.
Hassoun is being charged with, "trying to obstruct a federal investigation and hiding his role in recruiting fighters and raising money to support a global holy war."
The government is alleging that Adham Hassoun had been hand-picked by Bin Laden emissary Arnaam Ernaout to run BIF.
Another example of Dremali's mendacity can be found in the way he played upon the obvious preconceptions of Ms. Ragsdale, the author of the Des Moines Register article which painted a sympathetic treatment of his story - Imam, His Family Find Refuge in Des Moines.
In that piece he denies allegations that his links to terrorists have followed him from Florida stating, "...he and his wife began talking about leaving South Florida."
This supposedly occurred after a 3-hour questioning at the Miami airport when he returned with his son from a visit to Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
"...Three hours was like 300 years in my life," Dremali says. "The way that guy looked at me and my son, it's like we were terrorists." When he asked what he was being charged with, Dremali says, he was told to "sit down, or you'll go to jail."
True to form, in other accounts of the interrogation - easily available to skeptical journalists via an internet search - Dremali claims when he finally got home, he and his wife decided it was time to leave the country, not just Florida. All that was stopping them was that they just didn't know where to go.
To a St. Petersburg Times reporter, Dremali further played upon the persecuted Muslim angle:"Our Constitution says justice for all," Dremali says. "I'm going to send a letter telling Bush that he should add 'except Muslims.'" Dremali letter
Dremali thus has a long history of dramatizing such events to journalists, portraying himself as the victim.
There might have been a very good reason why Dremali, if he really had considered leaving the country, might refrain because he had "nowhere to go."
Perhaps that might be the result of the not-so-small matter of his previous association with the Muslim Brotherhood, and Egyptian Islamic Jihad. When one ads in his - along with his brother's - involvement in an "Islamic charity" which was shut down by law enforcement for funneling money to terrorists in his hometown of Gaza, there might have been more than ample reason for him to question ever returning to his native Middle East.
The irony of Dremali's seeking sanctuary in the US due to his involvement with groups trying to overthrow the Egyptian government, degenerates into an obscene travesty when Dremali complains about being victimized by US government officials who questioned him when he returned from what was a suspicious "business trip"to the Middle East.
Contrast his indignation - holding the US government responsible for investigating the terrorist ties of the Al-Qaeda funding front, Benevolence International Foundation, an Al Qaeda funding front & run by Dremali's long time friend, Adham Hassoun - against his belligerent defense of his former Islamic Center of Boca Raton's $17,000 contribution to that very group, making the unbelievable statement that it was none of his business that the money might have been going to Al-Qaeda, that was the purview of the Federal government.
"When people come to your mosque for money, you cannot say, 'No,'" explained Dremali, referring to the importance the Muslim faith places on the worshipers to help those in need. "It's not our job to investigate [charities]. That's the job of the government." Dremali blasts US government.
The Dremali family seems to have an affinity for aggravated assault, since Mr. Dremali's 13 year old son was charged in a stabbing incident involving a schoolmate - Joshua Reynoso - in the Boca Middle School.
Apparently basing its assessment on what Dremali told them, The Des Moines Register sanitized the event as follows:"...In 2003, after being taunted and spit on by a schoolmate, his oldest son was in a locker-room fight, involving scissors, with another boy..."
The article stated that Dremali's son pleaded guilty to aggravated assault, but noted that the plea was not an admission of guilt.
The lack of admission of guilt [technically "guilty in his best interest"] is similar to a no-contest plea - a distinction without a difference.
The police report stated:"Reynoso told police that Dremali spit on him and, after the two briefly argued, Dremali stabbed him in the back, neck and arm with scissors, leaving puncture wounds, according to a police report.
In light of the fact that Dremali's son was ordered to pay $1500 in damages, do 50 hours of community service as well as receive a psychological evaluation, it's pretty clear who was guilty and who did the stabbing.
Dremali's son was transferred to an Islamic School in Broward - it will probably not strain the credulity of our readers to point out that the school has been personally endorsed by the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Ikrima Sabri, in 2003, and that Sabri is notorious for having praised child suicide bombers.
As we draw this down, one thing is obvious; trouble follows the Dremali family and all of it appears to be of their own making. The sheer audacity of Dremali's verbal -sleight-of-hand in which he and his family become victims instead of perpetrators is brazen.
While Dremali whined to the press that "Our goal here is to raise our kids in a safe environment, it's the No. 1 reason we came here," it was really the consequences of his family's actions that made life difficult in Boca Raton.
According to our sources, Dremali's children are now in public school, which raises the question as how safe those environments will remain.
We believe that Ibrahim Dremali has proven by his actions and statements to be someone who is unfamiliar with the concept of truth.
On numerous occasions he has contradicted himself in various public forums and concocted flawed denials of numerous associations with Islamist groups and individuals both domestic and foreign.
His outlandish, totally unsubstantiated, story of a 2001 "anti-Muslim assault" when seen in this context is laughable. We feel that it is a complete fabrication.
One final point need be made.
It revolves around the concept of complicity.
Dremali has obviously brought his campaign of fabrication and deception along with him to Des Moines, however this would not be possible if people like the religion writer for the The Des Moines Plains Register, Shirley Ragsdale, was in the least bit skeptical of Dremali's Swiss-cheese explanations.
Generally skepticism is a hallowed journalistic attribute, but in matters such as this another, even more powerful tradition takes over - the politically correct, liberal invocation not to speak ill of the disciples of Islam.
This subject is far beyond the scope of this piece, we have extensively written about it in our series on multiculturalism and diversity however.
Tarred in this same sentiment is the head of Des Moines local Reform Temple, David Kaufman.
Kaufman gushed, nonsensically that "...Dremali knows his stuff on Islam," at the same time dismissing Dremalis' presence at a Miami jihad rally, where radical Muslims shouted "With Jihad we'll redeem the land - with Zionist blood we'll wet the sand."
Des Moines Plains' reporter, Ms. Ragsdale - who called the Council on American Islamic Relations [CAIR] for comments - uncritically accepts the group's own self-characterization as being a group that simply monitor's "anti-Muslim" activity in America. She is either unaware or unconcerned about the fact that the group is underwritten by the Wahhabi sect in Saudi Arabia - a country which just this week arrested 40 Christians, accusing them of spreading the "poison" of Christianity Saudis Arrest 40 Christians For "Spreading The Poison" Of Christianity. Furthermore, Ragsdale ignores the fact that CAIR is anti-American, advocating the imposition of an Islamic theocracy in place of the United States' secular constitutional government and that the group is currently a defendant in a 9-11 terrorism case.
Ragsdale, Rabbi Kaufman and other people acting as agents of the public trust thus do a terrible disservice to their fellow citizens when they allow liars with possibly evil intent like Dremali to not only go unchallenged but to essentially vouch for their character, thus granting them increased stature, not increased scrutiny.
And unrelenting scrutiny is all that people of Dremali's ilk deserve.
1. CAIR's terrorist connections : Ghassan Elashi, founding board member of CAIR's Texas chapter and businessman convicted of terrorism-related charges on April 14, 2005. According to AP "Ghassan and Bayan Elashi and their company were found guilty of all 21 federal counts they faced: conspiracy, money laundering and dealing in property of a terrorist...The brothers, all born in the Middle East, were convicted the same day jurors began deliberating, after nearly two weeks of testimony, and are to be sentenced Aug. 1. Prosecutors said each count carries a maximum 10-year prison sentence."
Of course AP failed to mention Ghassan's leadership role in CAIR.
Bassem Khafagi former director of Community Relation for CAIR, plead guilty to bank and visa and has been deported to Egypt. According to Fox News, "The FBI said Khafagi is a founding member of the Islamic Assembly of North America, a charity that purports to promote Islam...Federal investigators said Islamic Assembly has funneled money to activities supporting terrorism and has published material advocating suicide attacks on the United States."
Randall Todd "Ismail" Royer, a former communications & civil rights specialist for CAIR, according to AP "Royer...admitted helping members of the conspiracy join the militant Pakistani group Lashkar-e-Taiba in the days after the Sept. 11 attacks.He pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting use of a firearm in a crime of violence and aiding and abetting the carrying of an explosive during commission of a felony. He was sentenced to 20 years in prison."
Siraj Wahhaj CAIR advisory board member named as an "unindicted co-conspirator" in the "Blind Sheik" Omar Abdel Rahman bomb plots by US Prosecutor Mary Jo White; Rahman is serving a life sentence.
© 1999-2005 William A. Mayer, E & P - PipeLineNews.org, Beila Rabinowitz, E & P MilitantIslamMonitor.org, all rights reserved.
Rahma, Rahma - What's Next At Bernardin - Kama Sutra?
April 27, 2005 - by William A. Mayer, E & P PipeLineNews.org
Rahma is the Arabic word for compassion, something we have very little of for Chicago's Bernardin Center, an affiliate of the ultra-liberal Catholic Theological Union.
On May 6-7 CTU's Bernardin Center will sponsor another of its interminable inter-faith dialogues featuring Islamists masquerading as moderate Muslims alongside their apostate Christian apologists. Entitled - "RAHMA: Spiritual Companionship with Muslims in a Hospital Setting," the program is supposed to highlight areas in which all faiths can work together, ministering to the ill.
We have written numerous articles about Bernardin's sham outreach programs - presided over by Dr. Scott Alexander. Alexander is a thoroughly reprehensible dhimmi* toad, who is so extreme as to have compared American Christian evangelism with the terrorist group Hamas.
Our last article about Bernardin's programs - The Catholic Theological Union And The Limits Of Understanding was published June 1, 2004. It drew considerable comment and saw wide circulation, having been reprinted in such publications as Daniel Pipes Campus Watch.
Unfortunately, Bernardin's "interfaith" programs are not aging well, they are becoming more, not less controversial.
For starters the upcoming May event is being underwritten by something called the Sophia Foundation.
The Sophia Foundation is a cult organization which advocates goddess worship, the following from the Sophia Foundation's website"The Sophia Foundation of North America is an educational and cultural foundation dedicated to awakening a new consciousness of Sophia, Divine Wisdom. It was founded on New Year's Eve 1994, amidst the great redwood trees of Northern California..."
"Let it be known: today the Eternal Feminine
In an incorruptible body is descending to Earth.
In the unfading light of the new Goddess
Heaven has become one with the depths."
In a post-modernist world, denuded of orthodoxy, groups like the Sophia Foundation abound, however the Bernardin Center in choosing to partner with such crackpot organizations sullies itself to a degree we heretofore thought impossible.
Let's look a little more deeply at the speakers for this conference - Dr. G.H. Aasi, Refat Abukhdeir [who is listed as a "chaplain, Christ Advocate Hospital, and Christian colleague"], Pisamai Vogelaar, Harold Vogelaar, PhD., Shakeela Hassan, M.D. and Cheryl Damiani, M.A.P.S.
G.H. Aasi is a Muslim trainer working with the Institute of Islamic Information & Education [III&E]. This group offer what they refer to as a Da'wah [Da'Wah is the Muslim effort to convert "unbelievers"] Intensive Course which is being used to present Islam as a moderate religion to those not familiar with it.
This group has a rather skewed view of American society:"Anti-Islam forces are extremely active in North America and are doing everything money can buy to stop the spread of Islam and, if possible, remove Islam from the West."
According to experts on militant Islam such as Beila Rabinowitz, Militant Islam Monitor."III&Ecounts WAMY and ISNA among its sponsors and cooperation groups. The World Assembly of Muslim Youth, is a Saudi organisation which is on the Senate list of Muslim organisations involved in terrorism funding."
Mr. Aasi is also on the advisory board [along with a panoply of Islamists] of an Iranian based "interfaith" program called "A Dialogue of Civilizations"
From a 2004 program:
"In the year 2000, President Mohammad Khatami of Iran called for a global Dialogue of Civilizations..."
So it appears that Mr. Aasi is engaged in evangelical efforts to spread the Islamic faith with groups who are in league with known radicals, and doing the bidding of the President of the world's most dangerous terrorist nation, Iran.
Mr. Aasi isn't very moderate.
Refat Abukhdeir is listed as a "chaplain and a Christian colleague," however when he participated at the Islamic Society of North American [ISNA a radical Islamist pressure group] in the ISNA Summer Leadership Institute program in 2004, Abukhdeir is listed as a Muslim Chaplain SLI 2004
In the above document, Abukdeir is identified as being connected with Chicago's Bridgeview Mosque Foundation, a Saudi funded Mosque noted for its ties to terrorism, including the Holy Land Foundation. It has been the subject of ongoing Federal investigation.
Mr. Abukdeir isn't very moderate
Harold Vogelaar, PhD is ex of the Reformed Church of America [RCA]The RCA preaches an odd - heterodox - version of Christianity, denying the considerable Biblical evidence that the Israelites were a chosen people:"Hubers notes that Christian Zionists like Robertson and Falwell have failed to address the injustice meted out to Palestinian Arabs who were driven off their land to make way for the Jewish state. Worse still, they call on Israel to take even more land through their insistence that the Jewish state be expanded to the fullest extent of its biblical borders...Christian Zionist support for an exclusivistic Jewish state with apartheid-like tendencies."
Vogelaar is just another doctrinaire anti-American Palestinian sympathizer - another dhimi*.
The following from a speech he made which was published online at Epistle Spring 2002"Simultaneously, the United States armed Afghan rebels to fight Russia, recruiting people from the Arab world and calling them "mujahidin," or fighters for God. bin Laden was among those trained by the CIA.
Then in the 1991 Gulf war, we broke the stick used to beat the dog. And now we are at war with the bin Ladens of this world, people we helped train in the art of terror, a skill now turned against us...grievances that seem to drive some in the Arab/Muslim world to such hatred of the West. The prolonged occupation of Palestinian territory by Israel; the death of so many Iraqis, mostly women and children, as a result of sanctions; the West's policy of putting its interest in oil above the people's cry for freedom and democracy in the Middle East..."
Mr. Vogelaar isn't very moderate, and that is the continuing problem with the Bernardin Center's and Dr. Alexander's phony interfaith programs. They are not about understanding, or responsible dialogue. They have nothing to do with moderate Islam.
The Bernardin Center seems to be carrying on the tradition of its namesake, the late Cardinal Joseph Bernardin. While Cardinal Bernardin was deeply involved in the internecine warfare between radical homosexual activists and Catholic orthodoxy - siding with the former - the center named after him remains steeped in controversy, underwriting duplicitous programs which are essentially anti-Christian, anti-American, pro-Jihadi love-ins, each one seemingly more outlandish than the last.
CTU, Bernardin's parent remains aloof, unresponsive and unapologetic, while Dr. Alexander is making a career out of speaking on the Islamist rubber chicken circuit - in that sense they deserve each other. The tragedy here is that traditional Catholicism - and the spirit of true interfaith dialogue - deserve far better.
*dhimmi - Dhimmitude is the Islamic system of governing populations conquered by wars of Jihad. A dhimmi is a Christian who would be content living under the yoke of an Islamist caliphate, a Muslim theocratic government.
©1999-2005 PipeLineNews, all rights reserved.
The "Free Muslims Against Terrorism" Movement - Nothing But Muslim Sophistry?
By Beila Rabinowitz
Press and political pundits who are touting the Free Muslims Against Terrorism [FMAT] planned anti-terrorism rally as a sign of the emergence of a moderate voice of Islam in America, be forewarned.
The FMAT anti-terrorism message is a public relations exercise intended to score founder Kamal Nawash much needed political points. It's a cynical publicity stunt which will give the FMAT a platform for their message - that the existence of the State of Israel is the root cause of Arab/Muslim terrorism.
While claiming moderation:"...The Free Muslims Against Terrorism are proud to announce that on May 14th 2005, Muslims and Middle Easterners of all backgrounds will converge on our nation's Capital for a rally against terrorism and to support freedom and democracy in the Middle East and the Muslim world. This will be the first rally of its kind in Washington DC that is led by Muslims and Middle Easterners. Join us in sending a message to radical Muslims and supporters of terrorism that we reject them and that we will do all we can to defeat them..."
FMAT's message is disingenuous, underscored by quite different rhetoric which appears on their website. That language seeks to morally equates Israel's defensive actions with the terrorism of Hamas, explaining that in the case of Arab terrorism, "one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist."
More specifically, Kamal Nawash, the group's founder, has defended convicted terrorist Abdulrahman Alamoudi - who was behind a plot to destabilize Saudi Arabia by killing Prince Abdullah. Nawash declared that Alamoudi was a "liberal" and "moderate" Muslim who "supports the United States war on terror", and claimed that his trial was "politically motivated".
On the FMAT website, under the heading, "Our Positions," Nawash writes that Muslims cannot be expected to do anything against Arab terrorism as long as Israel exists since - "...The clever adoption of the Palestinian cause has made it difficult for peaceful Muslims to attack terrorist organizations such as Islamic Jihad and HAMAS." http://www.freemuslims.org/issues/terrorism.php
According the FMAT's line of reasoning , Germans could not have been expected to oppose the Nazis, since their ideology was an expression of German patriotic sentiment and represented the people's national aspirations, which included long felt cultural feelings of anti-Semitism.
FMAT advisory board member Ray Hanania - a non Muslim Islamist - carries this Weltanshaaung one step further. At a 2003 Arab journalist event Hanania referred to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon as "a blood-thirsty Nazi," claiming that "The Likud Party of Israel is the first terrorist organization of the Middle East." Hanania then proclaimed that "Resistance is not terrorism, it is a right to stand up to injustice."
In an essay on the FMAT website entitled : "Failure to Denounce Terrorism Undermines Arab/Muslim Groups" FMATHanania further reiterates the group's position that Israelis are the main cause of the terrorism which the FMAT is speaking out against:"Targeting victims of Israel's brutality, Hamas easily encourages young Palestinians to strap themselves with bombs and become suicide bombers".
"...Hamas was founded by a religious fanatic who advocated an Islamic State in Palestine that by its nature would discriminate against Christians and Jews in much the same way that Israel, a Jewish State, discriminates against Christians and Muslims...."
"...The founder, Sheik Yassin, was murdered in March in an immoral act typifying Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's terrorism...".
"....Suicide bombings are the most reprehensible form of violence in the Middle East. They have overshadowed Sharon's terrorism..."
Besides attacking Israel for causing Arab's deaths by giving them "no choice but to become suicide bombers," Hanania concludes his article with the FMAT's apparent party line, morally equating Israeli self-defense with the actions of Hamas. He ends by blaming American Jews for making it "difficult for Muslim- Americans to speak out against the terrorism in their own communities."
Hanania has repeatedly written that he only objects to suicide bombings as a tactical mistake because "...Suicide bombings are standing in the way of Palestinian justice, and we must open our eyes, be honest and recognize that fact," and that:"...My Arab community doesn't understand the threat the suicide attack and future suicide bombings pose to Palestinian rights..." Ariga.com
In a 2005 article entitled "Media bias undermines truth and peace," Hanania has defended Saudi payments to what he considers to be the "innocent members of suicide bombers families.""... Saudi Arabia gave $150 million, and we calculate that there were about 75 suicide bombings in the past four years of the Intifada, that means $750,000 went to families of suicide bombers, but $149,250,000 went to families of civilians killed by Israeli soldiers and settlers..."
He then further justified this amount, on the grounds that funds were given to a girl "who wasn't a suicide bomber".
Not surprisingly Hanania's essays are widely reprinted on radical Islamist websites such as Radio Islam - dubbed the mother of all anti-Semitic websites - and the Palestine Times, where his article refers to the ZOA president as "a pig" appeared between the writings of Hamas members Azzam Tamami, Ahmed Yousef - whose UASR organization was raided in a terrorism crackdown last year - Ramzy Baroud, and Hamas cleric Jamil Tamimi. Palestine Times link
It is not only Hanania's anti-Semitism and defense of suicide bombings which gained him acceptance by radical Islamists . His bio on the FMAT website informs us that:"...He provided basic media training also to the Ministry of Information in the Palestine National Authority, working with Yasser Abed Rabbo who surfaced as one of the country's leading moderates speaking out against violence and in support of compromise with Israel. Hanania has been a longtime outspoken critic of violence and advocate of peaceful relations between Palestinians and Israelis. He has been tapped by the U.S. State Department and the US Information Agency to provide media training sessions, meetings and presentations during the past decade to foreign media and government officials. He participated in meeting with President Clinton and Israelis and Palestinian officials towards strengthening the Oslo Peace Accords..." Free Muslims
Besides justifying terrorism, Hanania, who sees himself as a 'stand up comic' also jokes about it. In 1996 Hanania wrote a book entitled "I'm Glad I Look Like a Terrorist" and produced an FBI 'Wanted' poster of himself and several members of Al Qaeda, including Bin Laden ,with the caption, "Ray Hanania, a Conspiracy of Comedy". Militant Islam Monitor
Free Muslims Against Terrorism founder Kamal Nawash, a lawyer from Virginia, and former employee of the radical Islamist American Arab Anti-Defamation Committee [ADC] is also no stranger to advocating the rights of terrorists.
A year before he founded FMAT, Nawash had this to say about Abdulrahman Alamoudi; "He is just a liberal Muslim, who wants more Muslims to be involved in the U.S. military and politics to be part of America".
In an article in Frontpage Magazine, counter-terrorism expert Ewan McCormick wrote that:"...Even a look at Alamoudi's legal team turns up familiar faces in the domestic Wahhabi network. One of Alamoudi's lawyers, Kamal Nawash, an outspoken apologist for Hamas and Palestinian terrorists, who has previously served as the legal advisor at the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), a group that has worked alongside Alamoudi in opposing to the Bush Administration's War on Terror.
Though he was not present in the courtroom, Nawash sprung to Alamoudi's defense in an Islam Online article in which the lawyer states, "[Alamoudi] has no links whatsoever to violence or terrorism. On the contrary, he supported the US war on terrorism."
Nawash was equally quick to politically distance himself from Alamoudi in preparation for his upcoming Virginia state senate election campaign. The Washington Post reported that in August, Nawash returned two campaign donation checks of $5,000 to Abdurahman Alamoudi and his wife, Shifa. While taking up Alamoudi's defense in court, it seems that the political danger of associating with a lawbreaking supporter of terrorist causes was too much.
Kamal Nawash has his own set of political connections that would be devastated if US attorneys sufficiently connect the dots during Alamoudi's criminal trial. Grover Norquist, a Republican lobbyist well connected to the Bush administration through Policy Advisor Karl Rove, has been instrumental in Nawash's campaign, personally hosting a fundraiser at his residence on August 6th. Norquist also served as the Founding Chairman of the Islamic Institute, which received its initial funding from none other than Abdurahman Alamoudi..." Canadian Grassroots
Further holes in Nawash's moderate façade were apparent when the FMAT allied with the [wahhabist] Council of American Islamic Relations in a publicity stunt disguised a campaign against textbooks in a Saudi Wahhabist school in Virginia. Among the detractors of Nawash's efforts was Saudi Embassy spokesman Al Jubeir, who appears to have made an aberrant foray into truth, when he commented that, "Mr. Nawash is criticizing the school for political gain" Washington Times
CAIR's alignment with FMAT, only appeared to be a case of spitting into the Wahabbist well from which it drinks. It was merely a strategic attempt to bolster their façade as moderates, and meant to gain the trust of non Muslims.
The FMAT web page "Don't blame the Jews" is another exercise in morally equating the actions of Israel with those of Arab terrorism, though it starts out with some reasonable language - "...Another disturbing trend that is heavily propagated by extremists and accepted by many naive Arabs and Muslims is the blaming of all Muslim problems on the Jews".
The section of the site is obviously intended for consumption by non-Muslims and claims that Arab anti-Semitism is actually caused by - "Our research shows that the modern origins of this trend is the mutual demonization by Israelis and Arabs of each other to gain global support for each other's causes."
Not only does FMAT not document the source of "our research," but the 3 paragraph exercise in Muslim ethnocentric anti-Semitism ends with attempting to create the impression that real problem is that Jews are attacking Arabs who peaceably advocate "Palestinian rights," when that is manifestly not the case.
"The Coalition also urges Israelis to stop demonizing Arabs and Muslims who peacefully advocate for the rights of Palestinians."
In March, the Free Muslims Against Terrorism has announced will be holding a "rally against terrorism and to support freedom and democracy in the Middle East and the Muslim world...Muslims and Middle Easterners of all backgrounds" were urged to participate - "This will be the first rally of its kind."
True to form the FMAT has falsely claimed that theirs is the first Muslim rally against terrorism.
Last year in Arizona, Zuhdi Jasser organized a similar rally. Out of a Muslim population of 50,000 the estimated Muslim participation in the event was 100 people, with non Muslims comprising the bulk of what was estimated to be between 250 and 400 people. Daniel Pipes
The upcoming FMAT Washington rally appears to be just another media opportunity for the group's spinmeisters to propagate the veneer of moderation. Regardless of FMAT's press releases claim, the simple fact is that they have not really clarified what their understanding of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is. They refuse to clearly state that Israel has the right - morally and according to international law - to defend itself against the Intifada [which might reasonably include the "assasination" of people like Shayk Yassin, the founder of HAMAS].
To that point, the FMAT website contains the above troubling language including morally equating the Sharon government with HAMAS. Furthermore, constant references to the Palestinian cause are not really illustrative, since the PLO's rejection of the Barrak/Clinton/Camp David concessions, recognizing a free self-governing state, with few restrictions, seems to imply the continued Arab stance that Israel is illegitimate by definintion - despite claims to the contrary. If by "resolution" of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the PLO or whatever group ultimately is recognized as the official voice of "the people," maintains that the resultant Palestinian state might very well be simply a larger, more organized and far more lethal threat to the existence of Israel, then what is being engaged in by FMAT is nothing but sophistry.The Palestinian-Israeli conflict is so important to Arabs and Muslims that every terrorist group from Morocco to Indonesia that seeks legitimacy and a following, places the "liberation" of Palestine at the forefront of their agenda. For example, recall that Saddam Hussein responded to the world's request that he leave Kuwait by insisting that Israel first evacuate the West Bank and Gaza. Osama Bin Laden also invoked the Palestinian issue to justify 9-11. Iran has made the Palestinian issue its most important foreign policy priority since the Islamic Revolution of 1979. HAMAS, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad justify the murder of innocent Jews by adopting the Palestinian cause. Excerpted from FMAT Mission Statement
Free Muslims Against Terrorism ultimately regards terrorism as acts of violence which have as their root sins committed by the state of Israel.
Both FMAT founder Nawash and board member Hanania claim that Israel gives Arabs "no choice" than to die killing themselves and others, and that the Jewish State is the reason for all international terrorism.
Which begs the obvious question; With Free Muslims Against Terrorism as friends - who needs the terrorists?
© 1999-2005 Beila Rabinowitz, all rights reserved.
Freud & Islam - The Lack Of The Erotic
By Daniel Teeboom, translated by Wahabi Watch director, Beila Rabinowitz
Why is everything permitted in the Islamic heaven which is forbidden on earth?
An acquaintance of mine once wrote a science fiction story.
He thought about a world, in the far distant future, where no women existed. All of the babies who were born were boys, due to a genetic sickness. In any case it struck me as a terrifying story and that was his intention.
I revisisted that story when I saw pictures of a Muslim fundamentalist demonstration in Iraq .
The men were dressed as men in Iraq are and somewhat dusty. There were girls and women present, put you couldn't see that. There was nothing human about them which could be seen. No head, no arms, legs or torso, only grey figures. The were covered with sheets from head to toe.
There were no women to all but a studious observer.
Muslim fundamentalists live in a womenless public world and seeing as that fundamentalists are also human, I can well imagine why martyrdom would seem attractive.
When men are forced to interact with women by throwing a big sheet over them, the result can only be on frusturation.
One of the hallmarks of Western society is that we are no longer afraid of sex. It sells well simply because we enjoy it. I suspect that the frusturation in the Islamic world has much more to do with sex than is thought. I see the act of a martyr who blows himself up in expectation of 72 virgins as a filling up of emptiness. Whoever blows themselves up in a bus can experience an eternal orgy in the afterlife. Think of it as Islamist pornography.
Suicide cult as porno.
For one or another bizarre reasons, the picture of paradise in Islam is hedonistic and is a polar opposite what the religion requires on earth. It's a sort of free brothel where all (male) desires, wine, women,and song, are not only permitted, but encouraged.
The Islamic ideal is therefore fixated on sex.
Is it then so incorrect to see the martyrdom cult as the Islamic equivalent of pornography and instant gratification?
A strange situation...why should that which is considered to be bad on earth be permitted in heaven?
In the philosophy guiding Jews and Christians, the heavens are not filled with the things which God has forbidden or discouraged on earth.
On the contrary, heaven is distinctly not filled with sex slaves and pork, but is a paradise where spiritual satisfaction is promised. Of course our Jewish/Christian culture has as it were, tamed sexuality - to some degree - but not by any means as strongly as has literal Islam, where it is throughly repressed.
Islam loves death.
The entire Muslim fundamentalist system is based upon rejection (for the west) and desire (for the afterlife). That is why is is so easy to spur fundamentalist Muslims to perpetrate attacks, those who - at the same time - might love nothing more then a chance to study in the United States.
They are taught to hate the things they really love, eroticism, self realization, and success. ?You love life, " said an Al Qaeda spokesman, "We love death."
This is inhuman and unnatural. It is the result of intensive manipulation, brainwashing.
Everyone loves life (unless one is severely depressed). Via western television channels these men see pictures of stunning beauties . In their own societies women have to be hidden and covered. This suppression of feelings has to express itself by other means. I am not a psychologist but I see a certain link between priests who have to remain celibate and sexual abuse of children. So too, do I see a connection between the woman hating Islam and the gluttony with which Islamic martyrs commit mass murder. They are continually promised that in paradise they will get free access to the unveiled free relationships which were denied them in life.
The biggest problem is not the difference between rich and poor. There are countries in Eastern Europe where people are just as poor as those in Islamic countries. The problem is most likely not a lack of democracy: As long as the people are brainwashed from youth onward elections will not offer a solution.
No, the problem in the Islamic world and the cause of fanaticism is primarily to be found in the suppression of that which is the most important aspects of one's existence. Women and eroticism in daily life .
© 1999-2005 Beila Rabinowitz, all rights reserved
Wahabi Watch Archives
© 1999-2005 Beila Rabinowitz, all rights reserved.