This popular post was originally published on March 29, 2011

Once more residents of Southern Israel have come under fire from the Gaza strip. In the past few weeks, scores of mortars and rockets have been fired into Israel. Some longer-range rockets have even hit major population centers like Be’er Sheva and Ashkelon, causing schools to be closed.

The government has responded with limited air strikes and then once more moving into the fortress mentality by starting to deploy the Iron Dome anti-missile system. With that in mind a bit of moral clarity is needed. There had been relative quiet on the Gaza border since the end of the Cast Lead operation; while there have been a few minor incidents, both sides have been keeping an uneasy ceasefire.

Then a sudden wave of terror struck Israel. Starting with smaller rockets fired into the communities bordering the Strip, working up to larger Grad missiles hitting Ashkelon. After that was the barbaric attack that left five members of the Fogel family slaughtered in their home in Itamar. More missile attacks followed, culminating in two Grad rockets hitting Be’er Sheva, one falling in a residential district. Then the peace of Jerusalem was shattered with the explosive device set off near the Central Bus Station, killing one and sending scores to the hospital. Earlier that same day a man was killed outside the community of Revava. The day ended with another barrage of mortars fired from Gaza

Looking for some moral clarity, it showed up in the most surprising of places: Al-Jazeera television. About a year and a half ago, the head of the Arabic Communication Desk for the IDF, Capt. Avichai Edraee was interviewed on the Qatar news station by an obviously hostile host in reference to a recent Israeli retaliatory strike on Gaza. Capt. Edraee is absolutely unapologetic on who is to blame for Israel’s bombing, even those that result in the loss of civilian life. It comes down to this, calm is paid back with calm; attacks are paid back with counter-attacks. There is no middle ground, now it is not time for, as Margaret Thatcher once quipped, to go wobbly. The world should be informed and the Palestinians should be made aware that if they attack Israel then the response will be swift, violent and overwhelming.

Here’s the video, with subtitles. There will be plenty of blaming Israel—Matt Yglesias of ThinkProgress tweeted: “Guessing US won’t declare no-fly zone to help rebel forces in Gaza”—and there will be enough misinformation to go around—Hussein Ibish wrote at ForeignPolicy.com that rockets hadn’t fallen from Gaza in “many months.” So Edraee’s response is instructive (thanks to Act for Israel for pointing out the video):

I have finally lived long enough to see some dreams come true.

A Russian billionaire, Alexander Mashkevich, has just announced that he will fund a pro-Israel, pro-truth television news channel, a “Jewish Al-Jazeera.” God bless him! I have been calling for something like this for seven years. I hope that Mr. Mashkevich and his advisors understand that this new channel must be far better than Al-Jazeera, not only in terms of truth-telling but in other ways as well. Al-Jazeera broadcasts only in Arabic and English, and is only now preparing to broadcast in Turkish and Urdu. The “Jewish Al-Jazeera” must appear in many more languages simultaneously: Arabic, Turkish, Persian, Kurdish, Urdu, Punjabi, Sindhi, Bengali, Pashto, the Indonesian and Malaysian languages, as well as in all the European, East European, and former Soviet languages.

Why? Because all the Big Lies and blood libels about Israel and the Jews are being told 24/7 in every language on earth. I wrote about this in 2003, in my book The New Anti-Semitism.

Israel is surrounded by barbaric terrorist enemies; it faces not just one Hitler but at least 57 Muslim nation Hitlers (this includes the “State of Palestine,” which is one of the member “states” of the Organization of the Islamic Conference) and scores of more extremist non-state Islamist groups worldwide, e.g. Al-Qaeda, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, Hamas, al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, the Muslim Brotherhood, Gamaah Islamiyah, the Pakistani Jamaat-e-Islami,  the Pakistani Taliban, Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Afghan Taliban, Al-Qaeda in North Africa, Al Qaeda in Iraq, etc. In addition, these 57 Muslim countries and the terrorist groups are aided and abetted by a morally and politically failing and appeasement-minded West and by anti-Zionist, pro-Palestinian, pro-jihadist international human rights groups and by the United Nations.

For example, even as Hamas purposely targets Israeli school buses, the same UN which initially commissioned the Goldstone Report is now determined to implement it no matter what Goldstone-the-Jew now says. How President Obama behaves at the UN will be very important.

What the UN and their western running dogs will not do is accuse Hamas, Hezbollah, the Muslim Brotherhood, Iran, Libya, or Sudan of crimes against humanity. In fact, even as I write, the Left is busily trying to “spin” the half-hearted Goldstone recantation to their own advantage. They insist that Israel engaged in overkill, that it used disproportionate force, that it is “guilty” of something, of everything; mainly, it is guilty because it dares to exist and presumes it has the right to defend itself.

I am not going to name the articles, books, blogs, and press releases that such leftists have been wildly publishing ever since the Goldstone recantation. One such publisher really made me smile when they sent me an unsolicited copy of their pro-Goldstone work, no doubt in the hope that I would attack it and give their title traction, visibility, sales.

The Islamist groups disagree on everything; however, they agree on one thing and one thing only: That Israel must be destroyed.

But there is also good news.

The news reports that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the al-Qaeda terrorist mastermind behind the September 11th attacks, will be prosecuted by a U.S. military tribunal at Guantanamo Bay, come at a time like no other in Arab history. The dissent and rebellion in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Bahrain, and most recently in Syria has caused most of the mainstream media to speculate about a future Middle East where moderates have a greater influence.

Cooler heads have pointed out that there is still much to be concerned about in regard to the growth and strength of al-Qaeda. For example, Admiral James Stavridis, NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe, while testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Capitol Hill in late March reported that there was al-Qaeda activity among the rebel groups in Libya.

Dr. Judea Pearl is the father of slain American journalist Daniel Pearl. Daniel Pearl was the victim of another of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s vicious crimes. Dr. Pearl has chosen to speak out in recent weeks about his current concerns. And, again, the mainstream media has been uniformly silent. On February 23, 2011 Dr. Pearl shared with journalist Cliff Kincaid the reasons for his scrutiny of Al Jazeera.

Dr. Pearl’s remarks included the following statement:

In the past four years I have been watching Al Jazeera carefully, through direct translation from their Arabic station, and I am sorry to state that the network has been shifting steadily from a posture of moderation and coexistence to a total and open alignment with the most extreme elements of the Arab world, including Hamas and Hezbollah.

Dr. Pearl also said:

Their unconditional support of Hamas’s terror in Gaza, the Hezbollah takeover in Lebanon, and the Syrian and Iranian regimes betrays any illusion that democracy and human rights are on Al Jazeera’s agenda — weakening the West is their first priority. Al Jazeera is an anti-Western propaganda machine that also engages in news services for profit and status.

To read Dr. Pearl’s entire statement see: http://www.usasurvival.org/alj.ck30111-2.html.

Cliff Kincaid has done more than anyone else in recent months to expose the dangers of allowing Al Jazeera to broadcast across U.S. pay TV systems such as Comcast and others. Kincaid is the Director of the AIM (Accuracy In Media) Center for Investigative Journalism and the president of America’s Survival, Inc. (ASI). Visit both www.usasurvival.org and www.aim.org to catch up on Kincaid’s investigations.

On Friday, April 1, 2011 Kincaid organized a press briefing about Al Jazeera at the National Press Club. The program was called “Al-Jazeera, Global Jihad, and the Suicide of the West” and video coverage of the event is available online at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rR1XzY88ugo. It did not garner the attention it should have.

There should be no doubt that Cliff Kincaid, Dr. Pearl and others are providing warnings that are well worth giving full consideration. Tragically, on April Fool’s Day in Washington, D.C. too many members the mainstream media skipped this vital press conference and instead decided to continue to fool with America’s future security.

Once more residents of Southern Israel have come under fire from the Gaza strip. In the past few weeks, scores of mortars and rockets have been fired into Israel. Some longer-range rockets have even hit major population centers like Be’er Sheva and Ashkelon, causing schools to be closed.

The government has responded with limited air strikes and then once more moving into the fortress mentality by starting to deploy the Iron Dome anti-missile system. With that in mind a bit of moral clarity is needed. There had been relative quiet on the Gaza border since the end of the Cast Lead operation; while there have been a few minor incidents, both sides have been keeping an uneasy ceasefire.

Then a sudden wave of terror struck Israel. Starting with smaller rockets fired into the communities bordering the Strip, working up to larger Grad missiles hitting Ashkelon. After that was the barbaric attack that left five members of the Fogel family slaughtered in their home in Itamar. More missile attacks followed, culminating in two Grad rockets hitting Be’er Sheva, one falling in a residential district. Then the peace of Jerusalem was shattered with the explosive device set off near the Central Bus Station, killing one and sending scores to the hospital. Earlier that same day a man was killed outside the community of Revava. The day ended with another barrage of mortars fired from Gaza

Looking for some moral clarity, it showed up in the most surprising of places: Al-Jazeera television. About a year and a half ago, the head of the Arabic Communication Desk for the IDF, Capt. Avichai Edraee was interviewed on the Qatar news station by an obviously hostile host in reference to a recent Israeli retaliatory strike on Gaza. Capt. Edraee is absolutely unapologetic on who is to blame for Israel’s bombing, even those that result in the loss of civilian life. It comes down to this, calm is paid back with calm; attacks are paid back with counter-attacks. There is no middle ground, now it is not time for, as Margaret Thatcher once quipped, to go wobbly. The world should be informed and the Palestinians should be made aware that if they attack Israel then the response will be swift, violent and overwhelming.

Here’s the video, with subtitles. There will be plenty of blaming Israel—Matt Yglesias of ThinkProgress tweeted: “Guessing US won’t declare no-fly zone to help rebel forces in Gaza”—and there will be enough misinformation to go around—Hussein Ibish wrote at ForeignPolicy.com that rockets hadn’t fallen from Gaza in “many months.” So Edraee’s response is instructive (thanks to Act for Israel for pointing out the video):

This post first appeared at Wake Up America!

Video below is close-up footage of Mavi Marmara passengers attacking IDF soldiers, via IDF Spokesperson, because if there is one thing Israel has learned over the years, is to film everything and provide that footage quickly to counter the automatic Israel bashing that inevitably comes every time they need to defend themselves.

Yesterday we saw initial reactions to the so-called “peace activists” and their flotillas to bring aid to Gaza and today reactions are flying out faster than people can actually read them, but so is new information about just who funded and organized those flotillas.
The Weekly Standard explains who those organizers were:

The convoy of ships allegedly trying to bring aid to the Gaza Strip was organized by a group belonging to an officially designated terrorist organization.

As was pointed out yesterday by PMW, Al-Jazeera TV documented the pre-battle atmosphere created by men on board the flotilla, who chanted a well-known Islamic battle cry invoking the killing and defeat of Jews in battle:

“[Remember] Khaibar, Khaibar, oh Jews! The army of Muhammad will return!”

Video of that is also provided.

The Spectator provides more information that isn’t widely spread through the media:

Gaza’s markets are full of produce, thousands of tons of supplies are travelling into Gaza every week through the Israeli-controlled border crossings, and there is no starvation or humanitarian crisis. It was always obvious that the flotilla was not the humanitarian exercise it was said to be. Here is footage of the IDF offering to dock the Marmara — the main flotilla ship — at Ashdod and transfer its supplies and being told ‘Negative, negative, our destination is Gaza’.

And now we can see that the real purpose of this invasion — backed by the Turkish Humanitarian Relief Foundation (IHH), a radical Islamic organization outlawed by Israel in 2008 for allegedly serving as a major component in Hamas’s global fund-raising machine — was to incite a violent uprising in the Middle East and across the Islamic world. As I write, reports are coming in of Arab rioting in Jerusalem.

The notion – uncritically swallowed by the lazy, ignorant and bigoted BBC and other western media – that the flotilla organisers are ‘peace activists’ is simply ludicrous. This research by the Danish Institute for International Studies details the part played by the IHH in Islamist terror in Afghanistan, Bosnia and Chechnya. According to the French magistrate Jean-Louis Bruguiere testifying at the Seattle trial of would-be al Qaeda Millenium bomber Ahmed Ressamin, the IHH had played ‘[a]n important role’ in the al Qaeda Millenium bomb plot targeting Los Angeles airport. It was also involved in weapons trafficking, and played in addition a key role in galvanizing anti-Western sentiment among Turkish Muslims in the lead-up to the 2003 war in Iraq. ‘Peace activists’ these people most certainly are not.

And this flotilla was but the latest jihadi attack, deploying the Islamists’ signature strategy of violence and media manipulation.

Let us not forget why there is a blockade to begin with.

I keep seeing people talk about Gaza, yet I hear nothing but birds chirping when Sderot is mentioned.

Sderot:

Sderot, less than a mile from Gaza, has been the target of Palestinian rocket attacks that have killed 13 residents, wounded hundreds, caused millions of dollars in damage, disrupted daily life and wreaked havoc on the local economy. According to MSNBC, “nearly everyone [has been] traumatized by the frequent sound of air-raid sirens and explosions of incoming projectiles”. All local schools have been fortified. From mid-June 2007 to mid-February 2008, 771 rockets and 857 mortar bombs were fired at Sderot and the western Negev, an average of three or four each a day.

More

February 10, 2002 was the first time Palestinians launched rockets into Israel, rather than at Israeli settlements in the Gaza Strip. One of the rockets landed in Kibbutz Saad. A Qassam first hit an Israeli city on March 5, 2002 when two rockets struck the southern city of Sderot. Some rockets have hit as far as the edge of Ashkelon. The total number of Qassam rockets launched exceeded 1,000 by June 9, 2006. During the year 2006 alone, more than 1,000 rockets were launched. In 2008, 1750 rockets were launched.

Launched from Gaza, at Israel civilians, continuously for years.

The blockade is there for a damn good reason, to allow, food, medicine and needed supplies to Gazans without allowing weapons to kill and terrorize more Israelis.

Jennifer Rubin, Commentary Magazine, with “Does Israel Have a Right to Defend Itself?”

The rule set for Israel, which applies to no other nation in the world, is an intentionally impossible one to meet: the Jewish state can only defend itself without harming terrorists, who abide by no laws of war and exercise no concern for Israeli casualties. Words are twisted: Israel is transformed into ”the aggressor” in each instance, and the “peace” forces — in this case, populated by Turkish IHH forces with ties to Hamas and other terror groups — are those that attacks Israelis. This is a critical moment for Israel, for its supporters, for American Jewry, and for Obama. Who will defend Israel’s right to defend itself, and who will fall in with the venomous critics who will be satisfied only when Israel is a defenseless shell of its former self? We will see once again who is pro-Israel — and willing to defy partisan loyalty if need be — and who is so in name only

Last word goes to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu:

“Our policy was and will continue to be that Israel would let humanitarian aid, any kind of goods that are meant for peace, to the civilian population of Gaza.

We have no problems with the people of Gaza. We do have a conflict with the terrorist regime of Hamas, supported by Iran. We want to maintain a situation where we prevent weapons and war materials from coming into Gaza, and allowing humanitarian aid to go to the population of Gaza”

(ANSAmed) - SANA'A, JUNE 1 - Palestinian Islamic movement Hamas today defined as "disappointing" the statement of condemnation expressed by the UN Security Council against Israel's assault on the humanitarian flotilla sailing towards Gaza. During a press conference in Sanàa, the head of Hamas' political office in exile Khaled Meshaal stated that "the Security Council's decision is not up to the crime" that has been committed. Meshaal also accused the US administration of being "responsible for Israel's impunity". During the press conference, that was broadcast live by pan-Arabian TV network al Jazeera, the Hamas leader also thanked Egypt for having decided today to temporarily open the Rafah pass, south of the Gaza strip, to allow the transit of humanitarian supplies. Meshaal added that "However this is not enough, because the passage must be always open and without any conditions". (ANSAmed).

Yes.

"The Jihad Flotilla and the Media War Against Israel," by Pamela Geller for Big Journalism, May 31:

Today's incident on the Gaza jihad flotilla was an act of war - but not by Israel. The tsunami of Jew-hating propaganda from the jihad-loving media has already begun. The international media, predictably, is spinning the story as if it were all Israel's fault, saying that the IDF killed innocent civilian humanitarian workers on a flotilla headed to Gaza to bring aid to the starving people there.

In reality, none of that is true. This was an act of war against Israel. The people in Gaza aren't starving, and the "humanitarian aid workers" on the flotilla were actually Islamic jihadists who attacked the IDF first. It was a planned attack -- by Hamas and the hardline Muslim groups. Hamas supporters planned an armed assault, which included the murder of captured Israeli heroes. They almost succeeded.

Will you get the real story from the media? Not a chance. Before the Israeli self-defense raid even occurred, the BBC said that Israel was facing a lose-lose situation. And that is how it is playing out now. The Associated Press is reading like Al-Jazeera:

The violent takeover dealt yet another blow to Israel's international image, already tarnished by war crimes accusations in Gaza and its 3-year-old blockade of the impoverished Palestinian territory.

Of course AP doesn't mention that the day before the raid, the "humanitarians" on the jihad flotilla were chanting: "Khaibar, Khaibar, oh Jews! The army of Muhammad will return!"

Khaibar was an Arabian oasis populated by Jews. Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, stormed the oasis and massacred the Jews there and seized their land and possessions. Says Islamic scholar Robert Spencer:

Thus when modern-day jihadists invoke Khaybar, they are recalling an aggressive, surprise raid by Muhammad which resulted in the final eradication of the once considerable Jewish presence in Arabia. To the jihadists, Khaybar means the destruction of the Jews and the seizure of their property by the Muslims.

Today the jihadist forces want war again, and a chance to repeat the Khaibar massacre. Syrian President Bashar al Assad and Lebanese Premier Saad Hariri issued a joint statement condemning the "crime committed by Israel with this barbaric attack on defenceless civilians." They "invite the international community to take measures as soon as possible to end Israel's crimes, which could lead to war in the Middle East with repercussions far beyond the regional borders."

It is no accident that reality is being rewritten, and this brazen, bloody attack by Islamic jihadists is being called a humanitarian mission. The media is the front line in the impending war. It is interesting how this new war is being waged on two fronts, very much in tandem with one another. The battle has long been in the information battlespace. Guns, bombs, and bloodshed are the results of what happens in the war of ideas. Now we enter phase II. The West has been sufficiently subdued by years of relentless anti-Semitic propaganda. Now the anti-Semitic forces of jihad are going in for the kill with the tacit approval and sanction of their copywriters in the media. They're dressing up genocide in a flotilla bow and serving it up cold.

In the information battlespace, the jihadis can count on the complicity of the subdued, Islamophiliac press. They can physically attack Israeli troops and count on the corrupt media to package any act of Israeli self-defense as an aggression. Then this repackaging will lead to international condemnation, United Nations Security Council resolutions, and further delegitimization of Israel.

This Jew-hating, jihad flotilla was the opening salvo in the war....

Read it all.

In the early hours of May 31st, Israeli Defense Forces boarded ships claiming to bring humanitarian aid to Gaza. Since 2007, Israel has maintained a defensive naval blockade to prevent rocket supplies and terrorists from reaching Hamas and fortifying advanced offensive positions close to Israeli citizens.

Convoy captains ignored orders to divert to the nearby port so passengers and contents of the vessels could be inspected. Israel assured the volunteers that, after proper search, supplies of humanitarian nature would reach Gaza inhabitants, but the boats continued on their course.

Determination to force entry to Gaza justified Israeli commandos boarding the main vessel, where they were attacked by the “peaceful” pro-Palestinian representatives armed with knives and pipes. According to early reports, one of the Gaza-bound workers seized an Israeli gun and began firing. Several volunteers and Israeli soldiers were killed in the ensuing exchange. Eventually, the subdued “missionaries” and their ships were brought to Ashdod.

From start to finish, the Humanitarian flotilla was a textbook operation in the chief war against Israel, the war of global opinion. Those who organized the convoy were well aware that, arriving in proximity to Gaza, they would be stopped by Israeli Defense Forces. The purpose of the convey was to choreograph another drama in which Israel would be obliged to choose between being cast on the international stage as the evil starvers of innocent, trapped women and children, or avoiding the censure by allowing ships, possibly carrying weapons and warriors, into Gaza.

For Israel to survive, she needs the moral and physical support of the United States. The Leftist strategists trying to sever this support are using lessons learned about us during the last wars we have fought; wars are won or lost by the microphone and the camera. A still-shot of “heartless” Israelis denying food, clothing, and Kleenex to a camp population is Oscar Worthy and is more lethal than the rockets stowed under the bandage rolls. It is an image stolen from real occupation, an image intended to confuse the victims with the perpetrators and provoke universal outrage against innocent Isralis and extort pity for people who elected genocidal terrorists to run their government.

The Israel Haters Club will howl and get their poignant video footage from Al Jazeera, who, as always, just happened to be on hand. The knife-brandishing doves will have purchased at the cost of lives they hold so cheaply another opportunity to wail the Occupation Narrative.
The knives are already sharpened over at the Huffington Post:

“Israeli commandos on Monday stormed six ships carrying hundreds of pro-Palestinian activists on an aid mission to the blockaded Gaza Strip, killing at least 10 people and wounding dozens after encountering unexpected resistance as the forces boarded the vessels.”

The operation in international waters off the Gaza coast was a nightmare scenario for Israel that looked certain to further damage its international standing, strain already tense relations with Turkey and draw unwanted attention to Gaza’s plight.

“These savages are killing people here, please help,” a Turkish television reporter said. The broadcast ended with a voice shouting in Hebrew, “Everybody shut up!”

If the attempt to elicit sentimental universal condemnation of Israel is to be thwarted, the only real weapon is fact. Discover the Networks provides information crucial to dispelling the “founding myths,” of “Palestine.” Israel 101, Does Israel Have the Right to Exist? Does the United States?, and What Really Happened in the Middle East, give extensive and irrefutable documentation that the victims in the war are the citizens of Israel, and the aggressors are the terrorists who wish to annihilate them. As Joseph Klein reports in How Hamas Tortures Gaza, the chant of Hamas, upon its takeover of Gaza in 2006 was and remains:

“The earthquake in the Zionist towns will start again and the aggressors will have no choice but to prepare their coffins or their luggage.”

It is no surprise that examination of the “Relief Boats” exposed shipments of weapons, undoubtedly destined for use by Hamas to shake the earth.

The international political consensus, the media, and even “un-biased” UN NGO’s form their own blockade around the truth. We can win the battle for support for Israel here by running this blockade, by educating ourselves and those we know about the reality of the War on Israel.

Armed Navy ships escorted boats from the Gaza protest flotilla to Ashdod on Monday afternoon, hours after IDF soldiers and activists clashed in a fatal raid.

International activists aboard the ships opened fire on IDF soldiers who boarded the ships to prevent them from breaking the Israeli-imposed sea blockade, the IDF said Monday.

According to the IDF, the international activists "prepared a lynch" for the soldiers who boarded the ships at about 2 a.m. Monday morning after the soldiers called on them to stop, or follow them to the Ashdod Port several hours earlier.

According to IDF reports, at least 15 activists were killed during the ensuing clashes and dozens were wounded. Some of the wounded were evacuated to Israeli hospitals by Air Force helicopters.

Five Navy commandos were also wounded, some of them from gunfire. At least two soldiers were seriously wounded.

In international reactions, Turkey, Sweden and Greece summonsed their Israeli ambassadors for discussions on the violence.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas also responded to the clashes, which he called a "slaughter," according to an AFP report.

Upon boarding the ships, the soldiers encountered fierce resistance from the passengers who were armed with knives, bats and metal pipes. The soldiers used non-lethal measures to disperse the crowd. The activists, according to an IDF report, succeeded in stealing two handguns from soldiers and opened fire, leading to an escalation in violence.

Al Jazeera on Monday broadcasted footage from the Gaza flotilla's lead vessel, the Mavi Marmara, showing Israeli Navy commandos boarding the ship. Helicopters could also be seen flying overhead.

"It was like a well-planned lynch," one IDF officer said. "These people were anything but peace activists."...

View Newsreal

Seven years after its application, Al Jazeera English has been launched in Canada. The three largest cable providers  (Bell TV, Rogers and Videotron) are carrying the digital channel. Al Jazeera (AJ), a.k.a. the “CNN of the Arab World” was given its approval papers by the Canadian broadcast regulator—the CRTC (Canadian Television and Telecommunications Commission).

Not surprisingly, the Managing Director of Al Jazeera English is Tony Burman, former Editor in Chief of the CBC—the leftist network propped up by its infinite bank payroll—taxpayer dollars. Yet the publicly funded CRTC has blocked several applications by Fox News, which by the way is in demand in Canada, but not Liberal and politically correct enough for a country long dominated by leftist media ideologues.

Oh, and there’s something else funded by Canadian taxpayers:   Harems! Hundreds of GTA (Greater Toronto Area) Muslim men in polygamous marriages are receiving welfare and social benefits for each of their spouses.

Mumtaz Ali, president of the Canadian Society of Muslims, said wives in polygamous marriages are recognized as spouses under the Ontario Family Law Act, providing they were legally married under Muslim laws abroad. – Toronto Sun

So here we “stand on guard” in Canada incorporating foreign Muslim laws into our provincial social benefits system. This is possible because, while polygamy is officially outlawed in Canada, there is a loophole in the law which is, it goes without saying, being capitalized upon by fundamentalist Muslims.

Canada is a very liberal-minded country, Ali said…way ahead of Britain in this respect. – Toronto Sun

It’s a troubling statement given that Canada shares its borders with the United States – the leader on the terrorist war front. And let’s not even mention the fact that Britain has actually gone so far as to sanction Sharia law to rule to replace common law in civil cases between Muslims.

That’s bad, but it becomes even worse. A Montreal man, Mohamed Omary, has been collecting welfare cheques for nearly two decades, crisscrossing ‘ Europe to meet with six other men who have since been killed, convicted or linked to global terrorism.

Lawyers for RCMP and CSIS have filed documents, alleging Omary has been living off taxpayers ever since he arrived from Morocco, yet finding cash to fund his escapades throughout Europe.

Some advice:  if Canadian taxpayers’ dollars aren’t lucrative enough, then go the Arar route, which means:  sue, big time.   Maher Arar originally had the audacity to demand $400-million, but settled for a meager 10.5 million.  He’s still on a U.S. terrorist list, yet received an apology from Prime Minister Stephen Harper and 10.5 million dollars in a legal settlement from the government (read: taxpayers) because of a s0-called injustice.  Arar– with dual Syrian and Canadian citizenship– was detained by American authorities in New York on terrorism suspicions, sent back to his country of origin (Syria), where he was imprisoned and tortured.  A judicial inquiry  subsequently found that the Canadian RCMP mislabeled him as an Islamic extremist with suspected ties to al Qaeda (al Qaida) (AQ) and  shared  that “misinformation” with U.S. authorities which led to his deportation to Syria.

Down the road, Omar Kadhr, the Canadian kid raising all kinds of controversy among naïve, bleeding hearts because he’s stuck in Guantanamo, said he saw Arar in safe houses and Al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan.  Well, 10.5 million dollars later, who cares?  Arar is happy with his new found wealth and personal apology from the Prime Minister’s Office. It takes little imagination to predict what he’ll do with these millions.

Conclusion:  with its lucrative potentials and its strategic location so close to the United States, dhimmi Canada has made itself the ideal place to live for extremist Muslims.

Seven years after its application, Al Jazeera English has been launched in Canada. The three largest cable providers  (Bell TV, Rogers and Videotron) are carrying the digital channel. Al Jazeera (AJ), a.k.a. the “CNN of the Arab World” was given its approval papers by the Canadian broadcast regulator—the CRTC (Canadian Television and Telecommunications Commission).

Not surprisingly, the Managing Director of Al Jazeera English is Tony Burman, former Editor in Chief of the CBC—the leftist network propped up by its infinite bank payroll—taxpayer dollars. Yet the publicly funded CRTC has blocked several applications by Fox News, which by the way is in demand in Canada, but not Liberal and politically correct enough for a country long dominated by leftist media ideologues.

Oh, and there’s something else funded by Canadian taxpayers:   Harems! Hundreds of GTA (Greater Toronto Area) Muslim men in polygamous marriages are receiving welfare and social benefits for each of their spouses.

Mumtaz Ali, president of the Canadian Society of Muslims, said wives in polygamous marriages are recognized as spouses under the Ontario Family Law Act, providing they were legally married under Muslim laws abroad. – Toronto Sun

So here we “stand on guard” in Canada incorporating foreign Muslim laws into our provincial social benefits system. This is possible because, while polygamy is officially outlawed in Canada, there is a loophole in the law which is, it goes without saying, being capitalized upon by fundamentalist Muslims.

Canada is a very liberal-minded country, Ali said…way ahead of Britain in this respect. – Toronto Sun

It’s a troubling statement given that Canada shares its borders with the United States – the leader on the terrorist war front. And let’s not even mention the fact that Britain has actually gone so far as to sanction Sharia law to rule to replace common law in civil cases between Muslims.

That’s bad, but it becomes even worse. A Montreal man, Mohamed Omary, has been collecting welfare cheques for nearly two decades,crisscrossing Europe to meet with six other men who have since been killed, convicted or linked to global terrorism.

Lawyers for RCMP and CSIS have filed documents, alleging Omary has been living off taxpayers ever since he arrived from Morocco, yet finding cash to fund his escapades throughout Europe.

Some advice:  if Canadian taxpayers dollars isn’t lucrative enough, then go the Arar route. Which means: Sue, big time.   Maher Arar originally had the audacity to demand $400-million, but settled for a meager 10.5 million.  He’s still on a U.S. terrorist list, yet got an apology from Prime Minister Stephen Harper and 10.5 million dollars in a legal settlement from the government (read: taxpayers) because of a s0-called injustice.  Arar– with dual Syrian and Canadian citizenship– was detained by American authorities in New York on terrorism suspicions, sent back to his country of origin (Syria), where he was imprisoned and tortured.  A judicial inquiry  subsequently found that the Canadian RCMP mislabeled him as an Islamic extremist with suspected ties to al Qaeda (al Qaida) (AQ) and  shared  that “misinformation” with U.S. authorities which led to his deportation to Syria.

Down the road, Omar Kadhr, the Canadian kid raising all kinds of controversy among naïve, bleeding hearts because he’s stuck in Guantanamo, said he saw Arar in safe houses and Al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan.  Well, 10.5 million dollars later, who cares?  Arar is happy with his new found wealth and personal apology from the Prime Minister’s Office. It takes little imagination to predict what he’ll do with these millions.

Conclusion, with its lucrative potentials and its strategic location so close to the United States, dhimmi Canada has made itself the ideal place to live for extremist Muslims. 

WASHINGTON -- The Pakistani-American man accused of trying to detonate a car bomb in Times Square has told investigators that he drew inspiration from Anwar al-Awlaki, a Yemeni-American cleric whose militant online lectures have been a catalyst for several recent attacks and plots, an American official said Thursday.

Curious NYT decorum:

The would-be bomber, Faisal Shahzad, said he was "inspired by" the violent rhetoric of Mr. Awlaki, said the official, who would speak of the investigation only on condition of anonymity.

"He listened to him, and he did it," the official said, referring to Saturday's attempted bombing on a busy street in Times Square.

Friends of Mr. Shahzad have said he became more religious and somber in the last year or so, and asked his father's permission in 2009 to join the fight in Afghanistan against American and NATO forces. Investigators believe he was trained by the Pakistani Taliban, a militant group that previously focused mainly on Pakistani government targets.

A senior military official said Thursday that Mr. Shahzad has told interrogators that he met with Pakistani Taliban operatives in North Waziristan in December and January. Later he received explosives training from the same operatives, said the official, who was not authorized to speak publicly about the case.

Counterterrorism officials want to know how Mr. Shahzad, a naturalized American citizen who had earned an M.B.A., married and had children and worked in several corporate jobs, came to embrace violence.

It is no surprise to counterterrorism officials to find that an accused terrorist had been influenced by Mr. Awlaki, 39, now hiding in Yemen, who has emerged as perhaps the most prominent English-speaking advocate of violent jihad against the United States.

Earlier this year, the Obama administration took the extraordinary step of authorizing the killing of Mr. Awlaki, making him the first American citizen on the Central Intelligence Agency's hit list.

Mr. Awlaki's English-language online lectures and writings have turned up in more than a dozen terrorism investigations in the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada, counterterrorism experts have said. And in two recent United States cases, Mr. Awlaki communicated directly with the accused perpetrator.

Nidal Malik Hasan, the Army psychiatrist accused of killing 13 people at Fort Hood, Tex., in November, exchanged about 18 e-mail messages with Mr. Awlaki in the year before the shootings, asking among other things whether it would be permissible under Islam to kill American soldiers preparing to fight in Afghanistan. After the shootings, Mr. Awlaki praised Major Hasan as "a hero" on his Web site, which was taken offline by the Internet host company shortly after the posting.

In addition, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian man accused of trying to blow up a trans-Atlantic airliner on Christmas Day, is believed to have met Mr. Awlaki during his training by Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.

It is unclear whether Mr. Shahzad ever directly communicated with Mr. Awlaki.

A video broadcast on April 26 on Al Jazeera showed Mr. Awlaki speaking in Arabic and accusing the United States of participating with Yemeni forces in two air strikes in December, one of which was directed at a house where Mr. Awlaki was believed to be meeting with leaders of the Al Qaeda branch. The video carried the logo of the media arm of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.

Mr. Awlakiwas questioned by the F.B.I. late in 2001 about contacts with three of the Sept. 11 hijackers who had attended his mosques in San Diego and Virginia. He denied any radical ties and denounced the 9/11 attacks in public statements.

He was imprisoned in Yemen in 2006 and 2007, and after his release he was more overtly approving of violence. Last year, he published a tract entitled "44 Ways of Supporting Jihad" that was widely circulated on the Internet.

There are 50 ways to leave your lover, but only 44 ways to support jihad. Now you know.

Mr. Awlaki's Web site became a favorite for English-speaking Muslims who were curious about jihad, and hundreds of people sent e-mail messages to his site. It is not known whether Mr. Shahzad was among them, and there is no evidence that Mr. Shahzad visited the cleric in Yemen where he was believed to be hiding in a harsh region of desert and mountains.

When developing this article I really couldn’t decide if I was going to write it in a satirical manner or in a concerned manner. The concept was just so ridiculous to me, I wasn’t sure how to convey it to the world.

The military wing of the terrorist organization Hamas, the Al Qassam Brigades –which murders, pillages, persecutes, fires rockets, stones, lynches, blows themselves up, etc. — has a Twitter account. No folks, I am not joking. The days when the world is spooked by an unmarked video or cassette tape which arrives at the Al Jazeera offices are over. You can simply “Follow” them with your personal Twitter account.

I was stunned to see the user name @AlqassamBrigade pop up amongst the average 100 tweets an hour mentioning Gaza. I had been to the terrorists’ website (which has the fun option to choose your favorite color scheme for the menus) to see their propagandized use of images from Operation Cast Lead, and this was their matching Twitter account.

Sitting at my laptop using our Sderot Media Center Twitter account, @SderotMedia, most likely only a couple of miles away from the terrorists managing the Hamas Twitter account, I thought to engage them in dialogue on one of the base debates in this conflict:

@AlqassamBrigade As you know, you terrorize thousands just over the border from Gaza here in Sderot. Or do you call it Najd?

Never receiving an answer and following protocol, I filed a complaint with Twitter and this is the automated response I received: Twitter provides a communication service. As a policy, we do not mediate content or intervene in disputes between users. Users are allowed to post content, including potentially inflammatory content, provided that they do not violate the Twitter Terms of Service and Rules (name calling is not a violation.)

Essentially, this gives the terrorist organization the most popular worldwide platform to preach whatever propaganda or hate speech they like because, as you see above, “name calling is not a violation.”

The automated Twitter response continues, “If a violent threat is posted in the future, please let us know, and send the status link.” So, only if Hamas tweets about the imminent launch of a missile attack will Twitter take action?

In the worldwide blockbuster jaw-dropping movie Bruno, created by comic mastermind Sasha Baron Cohen, the main character Bruno is attempting to make peace in the Arab-Israeli conflict and while hosting a dialogue session he continually misuses the word “Hamas” for “Hummus;” it exemplifies the great light humor for which Baron Cohen is famous. The mainstream legitimization of the terrorist organization Hamas is so widespread that, these days, it is almost a household term and this is how the caricaturist can comically draw that connection on screen.

However, it is more than a joke when the entire world has turned its back on Hamas’ actions for nearly a decade thereby accepting it into the public domain. Rocket and suicide attacks on Jewish civilians are clearly not enough, but why won’t the world delegitimize Hamas for human rights abuses such as “honor killings?” Instead, the United Nations and Judge Goldstone chose to give Hamas and radical Islam around the world an over 500 page report to continue their terrorism.

Let’s be clear: This is not an issue of freedom of speech as Hamas is a terrorist organization even to the United Nations. I encourage everyone with a Twitter account to file a complaint against Hamas’ account @AlqassamBrigade to get Hamas out of our households and stop the tweeting of terror.

Jacob Shrybman is the Assistant Director of the Sderot Media Center, www.SderotMedia.org.il. He hosts elected officials from around the world and international media visiting the Sderot/Gaza region. He has been published in The Jerusalem Post, Israel National News, YNet News, and has appeared on several international television and radio stations.

The following excerpts are from a rally in which Kuwaiti students show solidarity with the Palestinian cause. The rally aired on Al-Jazeera TV on March 29, 2010.

Kuwait poet Ahmad Al-Kandari: We call upon the Arab rulers to stop being naïve, to stop submitting [peace] initiatives, to stop tormenting the Palestinian people, to stop being so feeble and weak, and to support the mujahideen of Hamas, not [Mahmoud] Abbas, the traitor.

[...]

I call upon everybody to repeat after me:

The fortresses will never fall as long as our blood flows.

The fortresses will never fall...

Crowds: As long as our blood flows.

Ahmad Al-Kandari: The fortresses will never fall...

Crowds: ...As long as our blood flows.

Ahmad Al-Kandari: We are the soldiers of Hamas, and Jihad is our path.

We are the soldiers of Hamas, and Jihad is our path.

Generation after generation - we will never recognize Israel.

Generation after generation - we will never...

Crowds: ...Recognize Israel.

Ahmad Al-Kandari: We will never ever...

Crowd: ...Recognize Israel.

Ahmad Al-Kandari: Oh generation, strive for victory, and accept nothing less than victory. Tell the night about the men on the battlefront, who felled heresy with a deadly blow. We lay in wait, watching them advance, with a well-planned ambush ready for them. A voice arose: "Kill them, inflict endless wounds upon them."

[...]

This is a message to the Zionists, the murderous, treacherous, and occupying Zionists, the Zionists who rob our history and steal our antiquities. Say to Zion: We have brought slaughter upon you, and we shall watch you dying. You will encounter our army of Al-Qassam, for whom death serves as a cloak.

[...]

Say to Zion: "We have brought slaughter upon you, and we shall watch you dying. You will encounter our army of Al-Qassam, for whom death serves as a cloak. We have turned your trickery back against you with soldiers who do not hesitate to slaughter you." A voice arose: "Kill them, inflict endless wounds upon them."

[...]

Kuwait MP Jama'an Al-Harbash: Allah willing, a war will be waged between us and them - the war foretold by the Prophet Muhammad: "Judgment Day will not come before you fight the Jews - with them on the west bank of the river, and you on the east bank - and the trees and the stones will say: Oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me. Come and kill him." This war is drawing near, Allah willing.

That is a famous hadith. You can find several iterations of it in this hadith collection, which is recognized by Muslims as one of the most reliable of such collections.

Crowds: Khaybar, Khaybar, oh Jews! The army of Muhammad has begun its return. The army of Muhammad has begun its return.

Jama'an Al-Harbash: That day draws near, my dear ones. As for the [Arab] regimes, the obstacles, the countries of surrender and appeasement, and those who have forsaken the holy places and the land, in their efforts to cling to their seats and pass them on [to their sons] - they will be trampled underfoot by the mujahideen.

The promise of Allah is more true than theirs. The word of Allah is more true than theirs. The blood of the mujahideen is more true than their lies and deceit. This is a war of religion, not just a war between Arabs and Israelis, or a war between liberators and occupiers. This is an ideological war, an Islamic war, which will end in victory only under the banner of Jihad. The glory of this war will not be earned by Abu Mazen and the collaborators. It will be earned by the mujahideen.

[...]

Kuwait student leader 'Abd Al-'Aziz Dahi Al-Fadhli: History has proven, ever since 1948, that peace with the sons of Zion is to no avail, and that the only option is the Islamic resistance and support for the Islamic resistance.

We say to our Arab regimes: Today is the day of support for the resistance. Today is the day for declaring Jihad. There is no path of reconciliation and negotiations. Jihad, and Jihad alone.

[...]

Khaybar, Khaybar, oh Jews, the army of Muhammad will return! [...]

Khaybar. As I explain in my book The Truth About Muhammad, Muhammad led a Muslim force against the Khaybar oasis, which was inhabited by Jews -- many of whom he had previously exiled from Medina. When he did so, he was not responding to any provocation. One of the Muslims later remembered: "When the apostle raided a people he waited until the morning. If he heard a call to prayer he held back; if he did not hear it he attacked. We came to Khaybar by night, and the apostle passed the night there; and when morning came he did not hear the call to prayer, so he rode and we rode with him....We met the workers of Khaybar coming out in the morning with their spades and baskets. When they saw the apostle and the army they cried, 'Muhammad with his force,' and turned tail and fled. The apostle said, 'Allah Akbar! Khaybar is destroyed. When we arrive in a people's square it is a bad morning for those who have been warned.'"

The Muslim advance was inexorable. "The apostle," according to Muhammad's earliest biographer, Ibn Ishaq, "seized the property piece by piece and conquered the forts one by one as he came to them." Another biographer of Muhammad, Ibn Sa'd, reports that the battle was fierce: the "polytheists...killed a large number of [Muhammad's] Companions and he also put to death a very large number of them....He killed ninety-three men of the Jews..." Muhammad and his men offered the fajr prayer, the Islamic dawn prayer, before it was light, and then entered Khaybar itself. The Muslims immediately set out to locate the inhabitants' wealth. A Jewish leader of Khaybar, Kinana bin al-Rabi, was brought before Muhammad; Kinana was supposed to have been entrusted with the treasure of on of the Jewish tribes of Arabia, the Banu Nadir. Kinana denied knowing where this treasure was, but Muhammad pressed him: "Do you know that if we find you have it I shall kill you?" Kinana said yes, that he did know that.

Some of the treasure was found. To find the rest, Muhammad gave orders concerning Kinana: "Torture him until you extract what he has." One of the Muslims built a fire on Kinana's chest, but Kinana would not give up his secret. When he was at the point of death, one of the Muslims beheaded him. Kinana's wife was taken as a war prize; Muhammad claimed her for himself and hastily arranged a wedding ceremony that night. He halted the Muslims' caravan out of Khaybar later that night in order to consummate the marriage.

Muhammad agreed to let the people of Khaybar to go into exile, allowing them to keep as much of their property as they could carry. The Prophet of Islam, however, commanded them to leave behind all their gold and silver. He had intended to expel all of them, but some, who were farmers, begged him to allow them to let them stay if they gave him half their yield annually. Muhammad agreed: "I will allow you to continue here, so long as we would desire." He warned them: "If we wish to expel you we will expel you." They no longer had any rights that did not depend upon the good will and sufferance of Muhammad and the Muslims. And indeed, when the Muslims discovered some treasure that some of the Khaybar Jews had hidden, he ordered the women of the tribe enslaved and seized the perpetrators' land. A hadith notes that "the Prophet had their warriors killed, their offspring and woman taken as captives."

Thus when modern-day jihadists invoke Khaybar, they are recalling an aggressive, surprise raid by Muhammad which resulted in the final eradication of the once considerable Jewish presence in Arabia. To the jihadists, Khaybar means the destruction of the Jews and the seizure of their property by the Muslims.

Young boy: There is no god but Allah. Allah loves the martyrs. You have taught us what it means to be a man. All the money in the world will not make us forget.

All the money in the world? You mean, American aid won't win over your heart and mind?

Read it all.

On March 27, 2010, Harvard University Islamic Finance Project hosted the Ninth Harvard University Forum on Islamic Finance. Islamic Finance, or “Sharia Compliant Finance” (SCF) is the fastest growing sector of international financial industry and was presented at Harvard as “ethical banking,” or a possible responsible Islamic alternative to failed, Capitalist banking. It claims to modify financial practices for Muslims so they can obtain non-interest loans and engage in market investments that don’t violate Sharia Law by assuming risk or investing in products and services opposed to Islamic morals.

Frank Gaffney, founder of the of the Center for Security Policy, and Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch, formed the “Coalition to Stop Sharia Finance,” and have provided extensive research this topic. When the Treasury Department organized “Islamic Finance 101 Forum,” the Coalition held a press conference to detail its concerns.

Frank Gaffney responded to a question from Al Jazeera about why the Coalition is opposed to a “government initiative originally requested by the Bush Administration that would bring trillions of dollars into strapped Western investment banks:”

“The reasons that Sharia Finance is not the innocuous and desirable industry that you described, are fourfold; at its core, it is about promoting Sharia. Everyone who talks about it as you have…does so as though it has nothing to do with Sharia. This is misleading the public and certainly, misleading investors, many of whom, post 9-11, would not want to have anything to do with an industry that is promoting the violent over-throw of the United States Government.”

“Second, Sharia advisors, integral to this industry, are, without exception, proponents of Sharia, a seditious program…Some are very explicit that Sharia finance is, “Financial Jihad…Jihad with our money.” Third, Sharia advisors have at their discretion the ability to move funds to charities…organizations that have connections…with terror. The biggest problem is that today, the Treasury Department OWNS a substantial portion of the investment companies and would be investing in Sharia.”

Robert Spencer added that, although mainstream Sharia scholars insist that “Sharia is one,” no one at the Treasury Department will bring up Sharia treatment of women, the institutionalized inequality of non-Muslims, or the expansionist and supremacist philosophy underlying Sharia.

Champions of SCF, eager to impugn the West and promote the idea of an Islamic superiority, are using the financial crisis to encourage the idea of Sharia Law as a necessary and sure protection of good people from Capitalism.

Behind all the veils, there is nothing substantially different between Sharia Finance and Interest Banking, except the dissimulation and mind-bending self-delusion needed to convince Muslims that they can borrow money without paying anyone for its use (interest disguised as rent payments to a co-owning bank) and that, by simply renaming “risk” and agreeing to donate a portion of profits to a charity, Sharia-compliant Muslims can invest in a market that functions uniquely on uncertain speculation.

As Gaffney and Spencer indicated, the primary problem with promoting Sharia Finance is that this legitimizes Sharia Law, a law that is fundamentally opposed to our American way of life.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

As Spencer pointed out, Sharia Law is not just about banking. It is a total way of life, based on the belief, not that Sharia is a personal option one might choose, but rather, the obligatory code of behavior for all human beings. Sharia obliges its followers to wage Jiahd, to bring every non-Muslim to submission to Sharia Law.

The rights to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness that form the very core of our right to exist are violated by Sharia Law that governs virtaully every aspect of daily life. This is particularly true for women. The Sharia that our law-makers and academics are legitimizing in order to profit financially, requires the stoning of women caught in adultery, the murdering of those who refuse to convert, the beating of women who become westernized and wear make-up. Under Sharia Law, it is unlawful for women to travel without a related male chaperone, or speak to non-relative males. Women can be sold for “marriage” (sex) to relatives at the age of nine, the age at which the legislator of “Ethical Finance” consummated his marriage to his cousin, the second of his many wives.

According to Islam, women are functions of male lust. They are considered sources of temptation and impurity for men whom Sharia recognizes as being perpetually consumed with indiscriminate lust, the containment of which is the primary duty of women, their chief obligation under Sharia Law.

These prescriptions and spirit are implemented in full in countries that have succumbed to Sharia Law. They are whitewashed and sanitized in countries like America, in which the advancement of Islam benefits from an attenuated view of the Muslim faith. This duplicity lulls non-Islamic citizens and governments into a fatal complacence about Islam’s true nature and ultimate determination to dominate the world.

It is likely that Muslims may avoid violent attacks that could rouse Americans from slumber, but continue instead to engage in the tactics of what Spencer has called Stealth Jihad. While many causes vie for our attention, none is more pressing than defending our core values, our very way of life, those values that Islamic and traitorous financial geniuses are willing to trade for their own enrichment and our betrayal.

As we have apparently abdicated out moral authority as global peace-keeper — being that the subtext of the Obama administration’s foreign policy is to cleanse distasteful “American arrogance” from the delicate palettes of world dictators — it is no surprise that Iran’s theocratic figurehead, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad ratcheted up his bellicose rhetoric at the country’s annual “Army Day” this Sunday.

Via Al-Jazeera:

“The region has no need for alien troops and they should return home and let the regional states take care of their own affairs,” Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said in a speech marking the country’s annual Army Day on Sunday.

“They must leave the region and this is not a request but an order, and the will of the regional nations,” he said.

He said the deployment of US and Nato troops in Iraq and Afghanistan under the pretext of fighting terrorism had not only failed, but also increased insecurity in both countries.

Ah, yes. America’s so-called “War on Terror.” Which isn’t remotely related to a certain infamous attack by 19 so-called “Islamic terrorists.” It’s really America’s meddlesome, imperialistic arrogance infesting the region that’s the trouble. Just imagine the blooming cultural advancement and elevation of human rights places like Afghanistan have been denied for lack of being left to “their own affairs.” 

The living, breathing symbol of our arrogance is, of course, Israel, or the “Zionist regieme” as the Iranians refer to it. Which is why, on a day meant to showcase Iran’s military might, Ahmadinejad also took the time to pontificate on the need to wipe Israel off the map — er, I mean — “uproot” it:

The president also said that Israel, the “main instigator of conflict” in the Middle East, was on its way to collapse and that regional powers wanted it uprooted.

“This is the will of the regional nations that after 60 odd years, the root of this corrupt microbe and the main reason for insecurity in the region be pulled out,” Ahmadinejad said.

He said that except the “Zionist regime (Israel),” Iran considered all other countries as “friend and brother” with whom the Islamic state wanted peaceful co-existence.

On the day that Iran was exhibiting its latest military hardware, Ahmadinejad vowed that the country would use all its military potential in case of any armed aggression.

But remember: There’s nothing really to worry about with Iran. At least not according to our President, anyway:

I mean, the history of the Iranian regime, like the North Korean regime, is that, you know, you apply international pressure on these countries, sometimes they choose to change behavior, sometimes they don’t.

In other words, Iran’s belligerence is just part of the negotiation game. It’s just another step in the elaborate Terror-Tango which will eventually seduce the brutal regieme into giving itself over to lasting regional accord. Yet the reciprocity never seems to manifest — and the talking points on behalf of Iranians only seem to become more bold. 

So, the question I have in light of all this is clear: Can we finally dispense with liberal extend-a-hand-to-a-clenched-fist foreign policy? Can we finally divest the political discourse of such fantasy diplomacy before the Jews are finally “uprooted” and an aggressive, nuclear-armed Iranian state establishes a sphere of influence over the rest of the fanatical Middle East? I’m just wondering.

The sheer pro-forma aspect of such disclaimers, and their frequent employ, ought to give some people pause. But it doesn't. In any case, it is here once again disingenuous. James Larry murdered his family, according to this Chicago Tribune report, after complaining that his wife was not behaving according to Islamic standards, and saying that the Qur'an was telling him to kill (which it certainly does do -- see 2:191, 4:89, 9:5, 9:29, 47:4, etc.). Now, honor killing, which is also the subject of a blizzard of Islamic disclaimers whenever it appears in the news, is nonetheless relatively common in many Muslim countries, and is effectively encouraged by the fact that honor murderers often are given lighter sentences than other murderers.

Syria recently scrapped a law limiting the length of sentences for honor killings, but "the new law says a man can still benefit from extenuating circumstances in crimes of passion or honour 'provided he serves a prison term of no less than two years in the case of killing.'"

That's right: two years for murder!

In 2003 the Jordanian Parliament voted down on Islamic grounds a provision designed to stiffen penalties for honor killings. Al-Jazeera reported that "Islamists and conservatives said the laws violated religious traditions and would destroy families and values."

And a manual of Islamic law certified as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy by Al-Azhar University, the most respected authority in Sunni Islam, says that "retaliation is obligatory against anyone who kills a human being purely intentionally and without right." However, "not subject to retaliation" is "a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring's offspring." ('Umdat al-Salik o1.1-2).

In other words, someone who kills his child incurs no legal penalty under Islamic law.

That's why these honor killings keep happening -- because they are broadly tolerated, even encouraged, by Islamic teachings and attitudes. Yet no authorities are calling Islamic leaders to account for this. But in light of all this, James Larry ought not to be dismissed as a simple madman, and the Islamic community let off with the standard "Islam condemns, Islam forbids" disclaimer. Instead, there ought to be a serious public discussion about how the texts and teachings of Islam are used by Islamic jihadists to justify violence, and how they can be and are used even by violent creepy lunatics like James Larry to justify wanton slaughter. Only then can any effective steps be taken to try to prevent future murders like these.

But nothing like that is going to be done. Even to suggest that it should be done is "Islamophobic." And so instead, more people will be murdered in the future the way James Larry's family was murdered.

"Murder suspect 'suffering greatly,' his lawyer says: Bail denied Wisconsin man accused of killing 4 in his family," by Rummana Hussain for the Chicago Sun-Times, April 17:

The Wisconsin man charged with killing four family members and seriously injuring two other relatives in a hail of bullets as they slept at his sister's Marquette Park home suffers from a "multitude" of mental health illnesses, his attorney said Friday.

James Larry, a 32-year-old Muslim convert who allegedly told authorities he was ordered by "Allah" to carry out the carnage, has been under doctors' care since 2002 and recently received psychiatric treatment in Janesville, Wis., said Julie Koehler, an assistant Cook County public defender.

Koehler said Larry was crying, his head bowed, when prosecutors detailed how he allegedly killed his pregnant wife, Twanda Thompson, 19; son, Jihad, 7 months, pregnant niece Keyshai Fields, 16, and 3-year-old Keleasha Larry, another niece.

"He is suffering greatly," Koehler said, after Judge Peggy Chiampas ordered Larry held without bond.

Larry also shot his 57-year-old mother, Leona Larry, and a nephew Demond Larry, 13, before dawn Wednesday. Both remain in critical condition, Assistant State's Attorney Jamie Santini said.

The body count could have been worse, Santini added. He said Torino Hill, a 35-year-old man living in the home's basement, was spared when James Larry's gun jammed and another niece, 12, escaped injury when she ran down the street and called police....

James Larry, who has a lengthy criminal record, admitted his role in the shooting spree, told detectives he knew his wife and 16-year-old niece were pregnant and even led police to the 9mm handgun he allegedly used in the shooting, Santini said.

"That's not the lot, turn left. It's the first vacant lot off the alley on the left," Larry directed officers, according to a police report.

James Larry also allegedly told officers he wished he "had more bullets."

"I wish I had more bullets. Kill me. I threw the gun in a vacant lot by the police station. I'll show you," James Larry said, according to the report.

A relative said that when James Larry looked to the sky and didn't see the moon or the sun before dawn Wednesday, "that meant Allah told him to take his family."

On Friday, several local Muslim leaders and organizations denounced the murders and stressed that the Islamic faith should not be associated with the tragedy.

James Larry's sister Keshai -- the mother of three victims, including the two dead girls -- joined Inner-City Muslim Action Network members and Jewish and Christian leaders later in the afternoon to show solidarity with the religious groups, IMAN's executive director Rami Nashashibi said.

For years, the Marquette Park-based IMAN has been involved in many anti-violence efforts in the neighborhood and is taking an active role in assisting the victims, Nashashibi said.

"We find this type of horrific violence absolutely incompatible with any understanding or any expression of Islam," he said.

DUBAI (Reuters) - Yemen said on Sunday it is trying to detain a Muslim cleric wanted dead or alive by Washington, but has yet to receive intelligence from the United States on the U.S.-born militant's activities.

U.S. officials said on Tuesday that the administration of President Barack Obama had authorized operations to capture or kill U.S.-born Anwar al-Awlaki -- a leading figure linked to al Qaeda's Yemen-based regional wing which claimed responsibility for a failed bombing of a U.S.-bound plane in December.

"He (Awlaki) is wanted by Yemeni justice for questioning, so that he can clear his name ... or face trial," Yemeni Foreign Minister Abubakr al-Qirbi told Al Jazeera television.

Qirbi did not give details of any manhunt by Yemeni security forces to arrest Awalaki, but referred to an air raid on a suspected al Qaeda gathering last December which the cleric reportedly had attended.

Qirbi said Yemen had not received U.S. intelligence on Awlaki's contacts with a Nigerian suspect in the attempted bombing of the transatlantic passenger plane and with a U.S. Army psychiatrist accused of shooting dead 13 people at a military base in Texas in November.

"The detailed information ... and evidence gathered by U.S. agencies has not been given to Yemen," Qirbi said.

Qirbi had been quoted by media reports as saying that Yemen saw Awlaki as a preacher and not a terrorist, but he told Al Jazeera that those remarks referred to the period just after Awlaki's return to Yemen when he was not suspected of wrongdoing by the United States.

Great. How about now?

Born in New Mexico, Awlaki led prayers at U.S. mosques. He returned to Yemen in 2004 where he taught at a university before he was arrested and imprisoned in 2006 for suspected links to al Qaeda and involvement in attacks. Awlaki was released in December 2007 after he was said to have repented....

MARDIN, TURKEY - A conference of notable Islamic scholars to discuss the contemporary relevance of Ibn Taymiyah's famous 14th century "Mardin Fatwa" ended with a declaration saying that "anyone who seeks support from this fatwa for killing Muslims or non-Muslims has erred in his interpretation and has misapplied the revealed texts."

That sounds great. It is unequivocal. But what it is unequivocal about is the use of Ibn Taymiyah's fatwa to justify killing Muslims or non-Muslims. It unequivocally declares that illegitimate. It does not declare illegitimate the killing of Muslims or non-Muslims itself.

Now, I am not saying that these scholars did not mean to condemn the killing of Muslims and non-Muslims in the name of Islam. Maybe they did. But they did not do so by condemning the use of Ibn Taymiyya's fatwa, for, as I showed here, there are plenty of other Islamic sources that justify the killing of unbelievers.

"There are those who have used the fatwa to justify acts of violence committed in the name of Islam," said Abdullah Bin Bayyah, head of the London-based International Centre for Renewal and Guidance which organized the event in collaboration with Canopus Consulting from Bristol in the UK and the University of Artuklu in Mardin.

Entitled "Mardin: Abode of Peace", and broadcast live on the Al-Jazeera network, the conference sought a review of the classical classification of abodes due to "a real need for a sound Islamic and legal vision that does not violate Islamic religious texts, is in harmony with the higher objectives of the Shari'ah, and is suited to our contemporary context."

The conference studied five main aspects surrounding the fatwa: Understanding the Mardin fatwa in context: The era and its ambiguities; The historical significance of the fatwa; The categorization of an abode from an historical viewpoint and in light of globalization and modern communication; Understanding Jihad: The conditions of armed combat and its rules of engagement - as defined by Ibn Taymiyya and the UN Charter, and concepts of peace and coexistence in Islamic thought.

The "New Mardin Declaration" resulting from the two-day gathering described the issue of fatwas in Islam as "a serious one", and ruled that "Ibn Taymiyya's fatwa concerning Mardin can under no circumstances be appropriated and used as evidence for leveling the charge of kufr (unbelief) against fellow Muslims, waging revolt against rulers, deeming their lives and property freely accessible to Muslims, terrorizing those who enjoy safety and security, acting treacherously towards those who live (in harmony) with fellow Muslims or with whom fellow Muslims live (in harmony) via the bond of citizenship and peace".

Here again, the focus is very narrow: the New Mardin Declaration seems to discuss only Ibn Taymiyya's fatwa, not the larger question of the Islamic justification for these things outside of that fatwa. But in any case, the part of the Declaration quoted above offers no comfort to unbelievers concerned about being targeted by jihadists. It is only concerned that Muslims do not declare other Muslims to be unbelievers -- which is indeed a favorite practice of Salafis in general -- and that they do not revolt against rulers (which is probably a slap to Al-Qaeda for waging jihad against the House of Saud, etc.).

It does also rule out "acting treacherously towards those who live (in harmony) with fellow Muslims or with whom fellow Muslims live (in harmony) via the bond of citizenship and peace," but leaves unclear what exactly might constitute this treachery. This may forbid Muslims in West to commit violent jihad attacks against non-Muslims in their adoptive countries, but it remains unclear whether Muslims in Western countries would be "acting treacherously" by working in non-violent ways to impose elements of Sharia. Would CAIR's efforts to smear and defame anti-jihadists, and intimidate Americans into being afraid to report suspicious activity by Muslims, constitute "acting treacherously"? Would efforts to secure special privileges for Muslims in workplaces, schools, and public places like airports constitute "acting treacherously"?

It described the classification of abodes (nation, states) as "based on ijtihad (juristic reasoning) that was necessitated by the circumstances of the Muslim world, then and the nature of the international relations prevalent at that time", adding that circumstances "had changed with international treaties and nation states."

That's reasonable, but it raises another question: if circumstances change again, might all this "reform" be out the window? Is the New Mardin Declaration a matter of an evolved understanding of core principles -- i.e., a genuine reform -- or is it simply a temporary expedient?

"Amongst the priorities of Muslim scholars and Islamic academic institutions should be the analysis and assessment of ideas that breed extremism, takfir (labeling fellow Muslims as unbelievers) and violence in the name of Islam.

Security measures, no matter how fair and just they may happen to be, cannot take the place of an enlightened elucidation supported by proof and evidence.

Therefore, it is the responsibility of the Ummah's religious scholars to condemn all forms of violent attempts-to-change or violent protest, within, or outside, Muslim societies. Such condemnation must be clear, explicit, and be a true manifestation of real courage in speaking the truth, so as to eliminate any confusion or ambiguity," the New Declaration said.

Great. But again, what about non-violent attempts to bring Sharia Westward?

On jihad, the New Declaration stated: "Muslim scholars, throughout the ages, have always stressed and emphasized that the jihad that is considered the pinnacle of the religion of Islam, is not of one type, but of many, and actually fighting in the Path of God is only one type. The validation, authorization, and implementation of this particular type of Jihad is sanctioned by the Shariah to only those who lead the community (actual heads of states).

Great. There are many types of jihad. But there is no rejection of the supremacist character of jihad -- i.e., its goal to impose Sharia upon non-Muslims polities. All this is saying is that there are many ways to do that. And that "this particular type of Jihad" -- i.e., not all types -- is the province of the state to sanction. Thus Osama bin Laden, who couches his jihad as defensive, which he must do since he recognizes that the office of caliph, the only person authorized in Sunni Islam to declare offensive jihad, is vacant, would find nothing in the New Mardin Declaration that would stop him. Defensive jihad in traditional Islamic theology does not need the sanction of the state, but becomes the obligation of every individual Muslim as soon as an Islamic land is attacked.

And the New Mardin Declaration goes on to say just that:

This is because such a decision of war is a political decision with major repercussions and consequences. Hence, it is not for a Muslim individual or Muslim group to announce and declare war, or engage in combative jihad, whimsically and on their own. This restriction is vital for preventing much evil from occurring, and for truly upholding Islamic religious texts relevant to this matter."

"The basis of the legitimacy of jihad is that it is either to repel/resist aggression: "Fight in the Way of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah likes not the transgressors." (Qur'an, 2:190), or to aid those who are weak and oppressed: "And why should you not fight in the cause of Allah and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)?" (Qur'an, 4:75), or in defense of the freedom of worshiping: "To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged; - and verily, Allah is most powerful for their aid." (Qur'an, 22:39). It is not legitimate to declare war because of differences in religion, or in search of spoils of war."

Osama has quoted Qur'an 22:39 in his communiques. He is waging defensive jihad, not "war because of differences in religion, or in search of spoils of war." The problem is that with unbelief itself constituting aggression for some Islamic authorities, and given the Qur'anic command to fight unbelievers until "religion is all for Allah" (8:39), it is cold comfort to unbelievers, and no restraint for jihadists, to remind them that they should only be fighting aggression. There is here no simple and straightforward declaration that Muslims should not fight non-Muslims and attempt to subjugate them under Sharia.

The rest has to do again with takfir, the practice of declaring a fellow Muslim outside the fold of Islam. Whatever degree of genuine reform this may constitute, it does nothing about the jihad against unbelievers:

"The concept of loyalty and enmity (Al-Wala wa Al-Bara) must never be used to declare anyone out of the fold of Islam, unless an actual article of unbelief is held by the person.

In all other cases, it actually involves several types of judgment ranging according to the juridical five-fold scale: (permissible, recommended, not recommended, non-permissible, and required). Therefore, it is not permissible to narrow the application of this concept and use it for declaring a Muslim outside the fold of Islam," the New Declaration said....