THIS IS A TAKE OFF OF A STATEMENT ISSUED BY THE ACJ (AMERICAN COUNCIL FOR JUDAISM). ONLY "GERMAN" IS SUBSTITUTED FOR "AMERICAN". IT COULD TRULY HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED BY THE DESTROYED GERMAN JEWISH COMMUNITY.
Founded in 1932, GCJ has long offered a distinctive vision of identity and commitment for the German Jewish community…
We affirm the uniqueness of the German Jewish experience, and the vital role Jews have played in the development of our nation and its democratic ideals. We cherish our rights and obligations as responsible citizens of the Germany.
We view Judaism as a universal religious faith, rather than an ethnic or nationalist identity. We further recognize the silent and often non-participating majority who define their Judaism in the context of their own perspectives. We remain committed to the ethical, intellectual, and prophetic values of Judaism. We cherish the spiritual ties that link us to our fellow Jews around the world, with whom we share our heritage and history.
The State of Israel has significance for the Jewish experience. As a refuge for many Jews who have suffered persecution and oppression in other places, Israel certainly has meaning for us. However, that relationship is a spiritual, historical, and humanitarian one - it is not a political tie. As German Jews, we share the hope for the security and well being of the State of Israel, living in peace and justice with its neighbors.
We celebrate the rich diversity of opinion within today's changing Jewish community. No one group or perspective reflects the broad range of positions among German Jews. We embrace the German tradition of open and respectful dialogue.
Our most fervent hopes are for a strong, creative and spiritually renewed German Jewish community, and for freedom and security for Jews everywhere; so that we might fulfill our historic mission of working together with all people to build a world of justice, freedom, and peace.
The centuries during the Biblical era in which Jews constituted a sovereign commonwealth in the land we now call Israel gave rise to the shared sense of identity, religious beliefs and values of Judaism. In the centuries that followed, Jews went forth from this land and went to live in other places around the world as Jews. We believe that although Israel is the birthplace of our faith, it is not the place of our national affiliation.
As German Jews, we believe that our nationality is German. We are tied both geographically and emotionally to Germany and to its values of democracy, freedom, liberty and justice. We believe we can be Jews and Germans.
Jews everywhere share common bonds of history, religious beliefs, values and traditions. As German Jews, our ties to the State of Israel are spiritual, emotional and historical, not, however, political. We are grateful that Israel has served as a refuge for many Jews who have suffered persecution and oppression in other places. We have a great desire to support the well-being of our fellow Jews. We pray for peace. Yet, we are German Jews: proud, responsible citizens of Germany.
When, at the end of the Passover Seder, we say “Next year in Jerusalem,” we are articulating a religious metaphor. What we mean is “Next year all Jews should live in freedom,” just as we do in the Germany.
ACJSLN@aol.com
© 1932 The German Council For Judaism.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
IS IT TIME TO FREEZE GOVERNMENT WAGES?
As states and localities continue to fight budget crises, they have an opportunity to close gaps by freezing employee wages. Because public employee compensation rose too fast over the last three years, they should be able to do this while retaining quality employees at least as well as they could back in 2006, says Josh Barro, a Senior Fellow with the Manhattan Institute.
In a recession when wages are stagnating, you would expect governments to capitalize on the loose labor market by holding the line on employee compensation. But public sector compensation (as measured by the Department of Labor) rose 42 percent faster than private sector compensation over the last three years, says Barro:
* Since the end of 2006, hourly total compensation (wages plus benefits) has risen 6.5 percent for private sector workers, essentially keeping pace with inflation; but state and local government workers saw their hourly compensation rise 9.2 percent.
* Federal civilian workers (about 10 percent of the public sector civilian workforce) are excluded from the above measure, but they did even better, receiving Congressionally-approved wage rises totaling 9.9 percent over the same period.
Why have public sector wages grown so fast, asks Barro?
* In some cases, it's because employees are receiving scheduled raises under contracts negotiated before the economic crisis; New York public employees will see a 4 percent pay increase in April, under a contract negotiated in the middle of the last decade.
* But in other cases, governments have agreed to pay increases during the recession, or been forced into them by arbitrators.
* Transit agencies in New York and Washington, D.C., have seen their budget crises exacerbated by arbitrator-mandated pay increases, leading to service cuts.
* And Congress just approved another 2 percent pay increase for federal workers, effective this month.
If states and localities had kept pace with private sector wage growth over the last three years, state budget gaps would be approximately $36 billion less than they are today. Or, put differently, the last three years' excess growth in public sector compensation necessitates an extra $36 billion in annual tax collections or program cuts, says Barro.
Source: Josh Barro, "It's Time to Freeze Government Wages," Real Clear Markets, January 19, 2010.
For text:
http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2010/01/19/its_time_to_freeze_government_wages_97595.html
For more on Economic Issues:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=17
In a recession when wages are stagnating, you would expect governments to capitalize on the loose labor market by holding the line on employee compensation. But public sector compensation (as measured by the Department of Labor) rose 42 percent faster than private sector compensation over the last three years, says Barro:
* Since the end of 2006, hourly total compensation (wages plus benefits) has risen 6.5 percent for private sector workers, essentially keeping pace with inflation; but state and local government workers saw their hourly compensation rise 9.2 percent.
* Federal civilian workers (about 10 percent of the public sector civilian workforce) are excluded from the above measure, but they did even better, receiving Congressionally-approved wage rises totaling 9.9 percent over the same period.
Why have public sector wages grown so fast, asks Barro?
* In some cases, it's because employees are receiving scheduled raises under contracts negotiated before the economic crisis; New York public employees will see a 4 percent pay increase in April, under a contract negotiated in the middle of the last decade.
* But in other cases, governments have agreed to pay increases during the recession, or been forced into them by arbitrators.
* Transit agencies in New York and Washington, D.C., have seen their budget crises exacerbated by arbitrator-mandated pay increases, leading to service cuts.
* And Congress just approved another 2 percent pay increase for federal workers, effective this month.
If states and localities had kept pace with private sector wage growth over the last three years, state budget gaps would be approximately $36 billion less than they are today. Or, put differently, the last three years' excess growth in public sector compensation necessitates an extra $36 billion in annual tax collections or program cuts, says Barro.
Source: Josh Barro, "It's Time to Freeze Government Wages," Real Clear Markets, January 19, 2010.
For text:
http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2010/01/19/its_time_to_freeze_government_wages_97595.html
For more on Economic Issues:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=17
AN OPEN LETTER
The following letter read on Glenn Beck's show, is rapidly circulating around the country. Americans everywhere identify with this 53-year-old woman. She has given us a voice. Once you read this, you will want to forward it to all of your friends...
GLENN BECK: I got a letter from a woman in Arizona . She writes an open letter to our nation's leadership:
"I am a home grown American citizen, 53, registered Democrat all my life. Before the last presidential election I registered as a Republican because I no longer felt the Democratic Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. Now I no longer feel the Republican Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. The fact is I no longer feel any political party or representative in Washington represents my views or works to pursue the issues important to me. Instead, we are burdened with Congressional Dukes and Duchesses who think they know better than the citizens they are supposed to represent.
There must be someone. Please tell me who you are. Please stand up and tell me that you are there and that you're willing to fight for our Constitution as it was written. Please stand up now.
You might ask yourself what my views and issues are that I would feel so horribly disenfranchised by both major political parties. What kind of nut-job am I? Well, these briefly are the views and issues for which I seek representation:
One, illegal immigration. I want you to stop coddling illegal immigrants and secure our borders. Close the underground tunnels.. Stop the violence and the trafficking in drugs and people. No amnesty, not again. Been there, done that, no resolution.
P.S., I'm not a racist. This is not to be confused with legal immigration.
Two, the STIMULUS bill. I want it repealed and I want no further funding supplied to it. We told you No, but you did it anyway. I want the remaining unfunded 95% repealed. Freeze, repeal.
Three: Czars. I want the circumvention of our constitutional checks and balances stopped immediately. Fire the czars. No more czars. Government officials answer to the process, not to the president. Stop trampling on our Constitution, and honor it.
Four, cap and trade. The debate on global warming is not over. There are many conflicting opinions and it is too soon for this radical legislation. Quit throwing our nation into politically-correct quicksand.
Five, universal healthcare. I will not be rushed into another expensive decision that will burden me, my children, and grandchildren. Don't you dare try to pass this in the middle of the night without even reading it. Slow down! Fix only what is broken -- we have the best health care system in the world -- and test any new program in one or two states first.
Six, growing government control. I want states rights and sovereignty fully restored. I want less government in my life, not more. More is not better! Shrink it down. Mind your own business. You have enough to take care of with your real [Constitutional] obligations. Why don't you start there.
Seven, ACORN. I do not want ACORN and its affiliates in charge of our 2010 census. I want them investigated. I also do not want mandatory escrow fees contributed to them every time on every real estate deal that closes -- how did they pull that one off? Stop the funding to ACORN and its affiliates pending impartial audits and investigations. I do not trust them with taking the census with our taxpayer money. I don't trust them with any of our taxpayer money. Face up to the allegations against them and get it resolved before taxpayers get any more involved with them. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, hello. Stop protecting your political buddies. You work for us, the people. Investigate.
Eight, redistribution of wealth. No, no, no. I work for my money. It is mine. I have always worked for people with more money than I have because they gave me jobs -- and that is the only redistribution of wealth that I will support. I never got a job from a poor person! Why do you want me to hate my employers? And what do you have against shareholders making a profit?
Nine, charitable contributions. Although I never got a job from a poor person, I have helped many in need. Charity belongs in our local communities, where we know our needs best and can use our local talent and our local resources. Butt out, please. We want to do it ourselves.
Ten, corporate bailouts. Knock it off. Every company must sink or swim like the rest of us. If there are hard times ahead, we'll be better off just getting into it and letting the strong survive. Quick and painful. (Have you ever ripped off a Band-Aid?) We will pull together. Great things happen in America under great hardship. Give us the chance to innovate. We cannot disappoint you more than you have disappointed us.
Eleven, transparency and accountability. How about it? No, really, how about it? Let's have it. Let's say we give the buzzwords a rest and have some straight honest talk.. Please stop trying to manipulate and appease me with clever wording.. I am not the idiot you obviously take me for. Stop sneaking around and meeting in back rooms making deals with your friends. It will only be a prelude to your criminal investigation. Stop hiding things from me.
Twelve, unprecedented quick spending. Stop it now.
Take a breath. Listen to the people. Slow down and get some input from nonpoliticians and experts on the subject. Stop making everything an emergency. Stop speed-reading our bills into law. I am not an activist.. I am not a community organizer. Nor am I a terrorist, a militant or a violent person. I am a parent and a grandparent.. I work. I'm busy. I am busy, and I am tired. I thought we elected competent people to take care of the business of government so that we could work, raise our families, pay our bills, have a little recreation, complain about taxes, endure our hardships, pursue our personal goals, cut our lawn, wash our cars on the weekends and be responsible contributing members of society and teach our children to be the same all while living in the home of the free and land of the brave.
I entrusted you with upholding the Constitution. I believed in the checks and balances to keep from getting far off course. What happened? You are very far off course. Do you really think I find humor in the hiring of a speed reader to unintelligently ramble all through a bill that you signed into law without knowing what it contained? I do not.
It is a mockery of the responsibility I have entrusted to you. It is a slap in the face. I am not laughing at your arrogance. Why is it that I feel as if you would not trust me to make a single decision about my own life and how I would live it but you should expect that I should trust you with the debt that you have laid on all of us and our children. We did not want the TARP bill. We said no. We would repeal it if we could. I am sure that we still cannot. There is needless urgency and recklessness in all of your recent spending of our tax dollars.
From my perspective, it seems that all of you have gone insane. I also know that I am far from alone in these feelings. Do you honestly feel that your current pursuits have merit to patriotic Americans? We want it to stop. We want to put the brakes on everything that is being rushed by us and forced upon us. We want our voice back. You have forced us to put our lives on hold to straighten out the mess that you are making. We will have to give up our vacations, our time spent with our children, any relaxation time we may have had and money we cannot afford to spend on bringing our concerns to Washington . Our president often knows all the right buzzwords like unsustainable. Well, no kidding. How many tens of thousands of dollars did the focus group cost to come up with that word? We don't want your overpriced words. Stop treating us like we're morons.
We want all of you to stop focusing on your reelection and do the job we want done, not the job you want done or the job your party wants done. You work for us and at this rate I guarantee you not for long because we are coming. We will be heard and we will be represented... You think we're so busy with our lives that we will never come for you? We are the formerly silent majority, all of us who quietly work, pay taxes, obey the law, vote, save money, keep our noses to the grindstone... and we are now looking at you.
You have awakened us, the patriotic freedom spirit so strong and so powerful that it had been sleeping too long. You have pushed us too far. Our numbers are great. They may surprise you. For every one of us who will be there, there will be hundreds more that could not come. Unlike you, we have their trust. We will represent them honestly, rest assured. They will be at the polls on voting day to usher you out of office.
We have cancelled vacations.. We will use our last few dollars saved. We will find the representation among us and a grassroots campaign will flourish. We didn't ask for this fight. But the gloves are coming off. We do not come in violence, but we are angry. You will represent us or you will be replaced with someone who will. There are candidates among us who will rise like a Phoenix from the ashes that you have made of our constitution.
Democrat, Republican, independent, libertarian. Understand this.. We don't care. Political parties are meaningless to us Patriotic Americans are willing to do right by us and our Constitution, and that is all that matters to us now.. We are going to fire all of you who abuse power and seek more. It is not your power. It is ours and we want it back. We entrusted you with it and you abused it. You are dishonorable. You are dishonest. As Americans we are ashamed of you. You have brought shame to us. If you are not representing the wants and needs of your constituency loudly and consistently, in spite of the objections of your party, you will be fired. Did you hear? We no longer care about your political parties. You need to be loyal to us, not to them.. Because we will get you fired and they will not save you.
If you do or can represent me, my issues, my views, please stand up. Make your identity known. You need to make some noise about it. Speak up. I need to know who you are. If you do not speak up, you will be herded out with the rest of the sheep and we will replace the whole damn congress if need be one by one.
We are coming. Are we coming for you? Who do you represent? What do you represent?
Listen. Because we are coming. We the people are coming."
GLENN BECK: I got a letter from a woman in Arizona . She writes an open letter to our nation's leadership:
"I am a home grown American citizen, 53, registered Democrat all my life. Before the last presidential election I registered as a Republican because I no longer felt the Democratic Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. Now I no longer feel the Republican Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. The fact is I no longer feel any political party or representative in Washington represents my views or works to pursue the issues important to me. Instead, we are burdened with Congressional Dukes and Duchesses who think they know better than the citizens they are supposed to represent.
There must be someone. Please tell me who you are. Please stand up and tell me that you are there and that you're willing to fight for our Constitution as it was written. Please stand up now.
You might ask yourself what my views and issues are that I would feel so horribly disenfranchised by both major political parties. What kind of nut-job am I? Well, these briefly are the views and issues for which I seek representation:
One, illegal immigration. I want you to stop coddling illegal immigrants and secure our borders. Close the underground tunnels.. Stop the violence and the trafficking in drugs and people. No amnesty, not again. Been there, done that, no resolution.
P.S., I'm not a racist. This is not to be confused with legal immigration.
Two, the STIMULUS bill. I want it repealed and I want no further funding supplied to it. We told you No, but you did it anyway. I want the remaining unfunded 95% repealed. Freeze, repeal.
Three: Czars. I want the circumvention of our constitutional checks and balances stopped immediately. Fire the czars. No more czars. Government officials answer to the process, not to the president. Stop trampling on our Constitution, and honor it.
Four, cap and trade. The debate on global warming is not over. There are many conflicting opinions and it is too soon for this radical legislation. Quit throwing our nation into politically-correct quicksand.
Five, universal healthcare. I will not be rushed into another expensive decision that will burden me, my children, and grandchildren. Don't you dare try to pass this in the middle of the night without even reading it. Slow down! Fix only what is broken -- we have the best health care system in the world -- and test any new program in one or two states first.
Six, growing government control. I want states rights and sovereignty fully restored. I want less government in my life, not more. More is not better! Shrink it down. Mind your own business. You have enough to take care of with your real [Constitutional] obligations. Why don't you start there.
Seven, ACORN. I do not want ACORN and its affiliates in charge of our 2010 census. I want them investigated. I also do not want mandatory escrow fees contributed to them every time on every real estate deal that closes -- how did they pull that one off? Stop the funding to ACORN and its affiliates pending impartial audits and investigations. I do not trust them with taking the census with our taxpayer money. I don't trust them with any of our taxpayer money. Face up to the allegations against them and get it resolved before taxpayers get any more involved with them. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, hello. Stop protecting your political buddies. You work for us, the people. Investigate.
Eight, redistribution of wealth. No, no, no. I work for my money. It is mine. I have always worked for people with more money than I have because they gave me jobs -- and that is the only redistribution of wealth that I will support. I never got a job from a poor person! Why do you want me to hate my employers? And what do you have against shareholders making a profit?
Nine, charitable contributions. Although I never got a job from a poor person, I have helped many in need. Charity belongs in our local communities, where we know our needs best and can use our local talent and our local resources. Butt out, please. We want to do it ourselves.
Ten, corporate bailouts. Knock it off. Every company must sink or swim like the rest of us. If there are hard times ahead, we'll be better off just getting into it and letting the strong survive. Quick and painful. (Have you ever ripped off a Band-Aid?) We will pull together. Great things happen in America under great hardship. Give us the chance to innovate. We cannot disappoint you more than you have disappointed us.
Eleven, transparency and accountability. How about it? No, really, how about it? Let's have it. Let's say we give the buzzwords a rest and have some straight honest talk.. Please stop trying to manipulate and appease me with clever wording.. I am not the idiot you obviously take me for. Stop sneaking around and meeting in back rooms making deals with your friends. It will only be a prelude to your criminal investigation. Stop hiding things from me.
Twelve, unprecedented quick spending. Stop it now.
Take a breath. Listen to the people. Slow down and get some input from nonpoliticians and experts on the subject. Stop making everything an emergency. Stop speed-reading our bills into law. I am not an activist.. I am not a community organizer. Nor am I a terrorist, a militant or a violent person. I am a parent and a grandparent.. I work. I'm busy. I am busy, and I am tired. I thought we elected competent people to take care of the business of government so that we could work, raise our families, pay our bills, have a little recreation, complain about taxes, endure our hardships, pursue our personal goals, cut our lawn, wash our cars on the weekends and be responsible contributing members of society and teach our children to be the same all while living in the home of the free and land of the brave.
I entrusted you with upholding the Constitution. I believed in the checks and balances to keep from getting far off course. What happened? You are very far off course. Do you really think I find humor in the hiring of a speed reader to unintelligently ramble all through a bill that you signed into law without knowing what it contained? I do not.
It is a mockery of the responsibility I have entrusted to you. It is a slap in the face. I am not laughing at your arrogance. Why is it that I feel as if you would not trust me to make a single decision about my own life and how I would live it but you should expect that I should trust you with the debt that you have laid on all of us and our children. We did not want the TARP bill. We said no. We would repeal it if we could. I am sure that we still cannot. There is needless urgency and recklessness in all of your recent spending of our tax dollars.
From my perspective, it seems that all of you have gone insane. I also know that I am far from alone in these feelings. Do you honestly feel that your current pursuits have merit to patriotic Americans? We want it to stop. We want to put the brakes on everything that is being rushed by us and forced upon us. We want our voice back. You have forced us to put our lives on hold to straighten out the mess that you are making. We will have to give up our vacations, our time spent with our children, any relaxation time we may have had and money we cannot afford to spend on bringing our concerns to Washington . Our president often knows all the right buzzwords like unsustainable. Well, no kidding. How many tens of thousands of dollars did the focus group cost to come up with that word? We don't want your overpriced words. Stop treating us like we're morons.
We want all of you to stop focusing on your reelection and do the job we want done, not the job you want done or the job your party wants done. You work for us and at this rate I guarantee you not for long because we are coming. We will be heard and we will be represented... You think we're so busy with our lives that we will never come for you? We are the formerly silent majority, all of us who quietly work, pay taxes, obey the law, vote, save money, keep our noses to the grindstone... and we are now looking at you.
You have awakened us, the patriotic freedom spirit so strong and so powerful that it had been sleeping too long. You have pushed us too far. Our numbers are great. They may surprise you. For every one of us who will be there, there will be hundreds more that could not come. Unlike you, we have their trust. We will represent them honestly, rest assured. They will be at the polls on voting day to usher you out of office.
We have cancelled vacations.. We will use our last few dollars saved. We will find the representation among us and a grassroots campaign will flourish. We didn't ask for this fight. But the gloves are coming off. We do not come in violence, but we are angry. You will represent us or you will be replaced with someone who will. There are candidates among us who will rise like a Phoenix from the ashes that you have made of our constitution.
Democrat, Republican, independent, libertarian. Understand this.. We don't care. Political parties are meaningless to us Patriotic Americans are willing to do right by us and our Constitution, and that is all that matters to us now.. We are going to fire all of you who abuse power and seek more. It is not your power. It is ours and we want it back. We entrusted you with it and you abused it. You are dishonorable. You are dishonest. As Americans we are ashamed of you. You have brought shame to us. If you are not representing the wants and needs of your constituency loudly and consistently, in spite of the objections of your party, you will be fired. Did you hear? We no longer care about your political parties. You need to be loyal to us, not to them.. Because we will get you fired and they will not save you.
If you do or can represent me, my issues, my views, please stand up. Make your identity known. You need to make some noise about it. Speak up. I need to know who you are. If you do not speak up, you will be herded out with the rest of the sheep and we will replace the whole damn congress if need be one by one.
We are coming. Are we coming for you? Who do you represent? What do you represent?
Listen. Because we are coming. We the people are coming."
LATEST IMPORTANT STUFF
*********************
1) The desecration, murder and persecution must end.
The War Against the Infidels
http://tinyurl.com/ye3kg62
*********************
2) Google vs. China: The Tip of the Cyberwar:
http://tinyurl.com/yer5zgd
Sample:
"So much worse things can happen," Sandhu says. A program designed to disrupt a financial institution or government department can sit undetected and dormant within a network for a decade. Then, when a conflict or war breaks out, the virus is triggered, disrupting communications and destroying an organization's infrastructure.
"We may call it espionage, but it's really warfare," Paller says. "They're planting logic bombs." He says much of what is being discussed now in classified national security briefings revolves around these sorts of stealth attacks. He declined to answer questions as to whether such secret programs had been detected in any major governmental or infrastructure networks, but he emphasized that a major vulnerability is the nation's power grid.
How to Win the Cyberwar
Taking counter measures against such cyber attacks is problematic. Microsoft issued an emergency patch for its Internet Explorer browser this week that it said addressed a vulnerability exploited in the Google hack. The previous week, Google beefed up its own Gmail security by automatically encrypting its e-mail sessions. The Electronic Frontier Foundation said the move was a "significant step to safeguard user's privacy and security."
But scientists, security experts, and researchers say this is no longer enough.
***********************
3) Charges Withdrawn in Military Commissions for Sept. 11 Suspects:
http://tinyurl.com/yhvkerg
Sample:
The Obama administration decided in November to remove the five suspects -- including self-professed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed -- from a military trial after $100 million was spent on their prosecution and on the construction of a state-of-the-art courthouse at Guantanamo Bay built specifically to facilitate their military commissions.
***********************
4) U.N. Climate Change Expert Cites More Errors in Report:
http://tinyurl.com/yfy2mba
***********************
5) Is an Electoral Bloodbath Coming?
http://tinyurl.com/yz8oukp
1) The desecration, murder and persecution must end.
The War Against the Infidels
http://tinyurl.com/ye3kg62
*********************
2) Google vs. China: The Tip of the Cyberwar:
http://tinyurl.com/yer5zgd
Sample:
"So much worse things can happen," Sandhu says. A program designed to disrupt a financial institution or government department can sit undetected and dormant within a network for a decade. Then, when a conflict or war breaks out, the virus is triggered, disrupting communications and destroying an organization's infrastructure.
"We may call it espionage, but it's really warfare," Paller says. "They're planting logic bombs." He says much of what is being discussed now in classified national security briefings revolves around these sorts of stealth attacks. He declined to answer questions as to whether such secret programs had been detected in any major governmental or infrastructure networks, but he emphasized that a major vulnerability is the nation's power grid.
How to Win the Cyberwar
Taking counter measures against such cyber attacks is problematic. Microsoft issued an emergency patch for its Internet Explorer browser this week that it said addressed a vulnerability exploited in the Google hack. The previous week, Google beefed up its own Gmail security by automatically encrypting its e-mail sessions. The Electronic Frontier Foundation said the move was a "significant step to safeguard user's privacy and security."
But scientists, security experts, and researchers say this is no longer enough.
***********************
3) Charges Withdrawn in Military Commissions for Sept. 11 Suspects:
http://tinyurl.com/yhvkerg
Sample:
The Obama administration decided in November to remove the five suspects -- including self-professed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed -- from a military trial after $100 million was spent on their prosecution and on the construction of a state-of-the-art courthouse at Guantanamo Bay built specifically to facilitate their military commissions.
***********************
4) U.N. Climate Change Expert Cites More Errors in Report:
http://tinyurl.com/yfy2mba
***********************
5) Is an Electoral Bloodbath Coming?
http://tinyurl.com/yz8oukp
Mel Gibson revisited
Mel Gibson has a new movie coming out within the next week. It is named The Edge Of Darkness.
If you recall Mel's father denies that the Holocaust ever happened.Mel supports his fathers beliefs.
On Ash Wednesday February 25th 2004.The movie Passion Of The Christ opened in thousands of theaters.
Mel Gibson co-wrote, directed,and co-produced the movie. Gibson also financed the $25 million it took to make the movie through his own company, Icon Productions. Hollywood's major studios all passed on offers to distribute the film. New market films agreed to distribute it for a fee.
The movie has`probably created more controversy than any other movie in recent years. Some commentators have charged that the movie is anti-Semitic because it blames the Jews for the death of Christ. The film portrays Jews who adhere to their Jewish faith as enemies of G-D and the locus of evil..
The above 2 paragraphs were taken from the web site of religioustolerance.org/chrgibson.htm
In July of 2006 Mel Gibson was stopped and arrested for drunk driving near his house in Malibu.by Deputy James Mee. In his initial report Deputy Mee described how Gibson bolted from custody and how he chased the actor back to his car where he handcuffed him.In addition, the report detailed repeated threats against Mee made by Gibson, who said that he" owned Malibu" and "would get even"with the deputy.The report also detailed Gibson's"barrage of anti-Semitic remarks"in which he said, "The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world" before asking the deputy,who is Jewish: Are you a Jew.
The article goes on to say that Gibson because of his celebrity status received a $1300.00 fine and other minor consequences. He never apologized to the deputy or to the Jewish people. Can we support an individual who hates us?
It is very important that you send this information to everybody and anybody. Doing nothing effectively helps Mel Gibson against the Jewish people. Please forward this email to every Jew and to all Zionists that you know. If you have any contacts with any media that can put this to print, it would reach even more people then we can imagine.
If you recall Mel's father denies that the Holocaust ever happened.Mel supports his fathers beliefs.
On Ash Wednesday February 25th 2004.The movie Passion Of The Christ opened in thousands of theaters.
Mel Gibson co-wrote, directed,and co-produced the movie. Gibson also financed the $25 million it took to make the movie through his own company, Icon Productions. Hollywood's major studios all passed on offers to distribute the film. New market films agreed to distribute it for a fee.
The movie has`probably created more controversy than any other movie in recent years. Some commentators have charged that the movie is anti-Semitic because it blames the Jews for the death of Christ. The film portrays Jews who adhere to their Jewish faith as enemies of G-D and the locus of evil..
The above 2 paragraphs were taken from the web site of religioustolerance.org/chrgibson.htm
In July of 2006 Mel Gibson was stopped and arrested for drunk driving near his house in Malibu.by Deputy James Mee. In his initial report Deputy Mee described how Gibson bolted from custody and how he chased the actor back to his car where he handcuffed him.In addition, the report detailed repeated threats against Mee made by Gibson, who said that he" owned Malibu" and "would get even"with the deputy.The report also detailed Gibson's"barrage of anti-Semitic remarks"in which he said, "The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world" before asking the deputy,who is Jewish: Are you a Jew.
The article goes on to say that Gibson because of his celebrity status received a $1300.00 fine and other minor consequences. He never apologized to the deputy or to the Jewish people. Can we support an individual who hates us?
It is very important that you send this information to everybody and anybody. Doing nothing effectively helps Mel Gibson against the Jewish people. Please forward this email to every Jew and to all Zionists that you know. If you have any contacts with any media that can put this to print, it would reach even more people then we can imagine.
PAKISTAN=SAUDI ARABIA
Aaron Klein - Jan 28, 2010
JewishPress.com
Quick Takes: News You May Have Missed - by Aaron Klein
Saudia Arabia Financed Pakistan's Nuclear Program
Pakistan's nuclear weapons project was partially financed by Saudi Arabia, with the two countries sharing nuclear technology, a senior Egyptian security official told this column.
"The Saudis are confident they have a nuclear option via Pakistan," said the security official. "The Pakistani nukes are also Saudi nukes."
The official said an agreement between the two countries was secretly inked seven years ago, although at the time such a pact was strongly denied by both Saudi and Pakistani officials.
Pakistan in the late 1990s became the seventh country to successfully develop and test nuclear weapons. The Pakistani arsenal is estimated at between 35 and 95 warheads, according to the U.S. Navy Center for Contemporary Conflict.
JewishPress.com
Quick Takes: News You May Have Missed - by Aaron Klein
Saudia Arabia Financed Pakistan's Nuclear Program
Pakistan's nuclear weapons project was partially financed by Saudi Arabia, with the two countries sharing nuclear technology, a senior Egyptian security official told this column.
"The Saudis are confident they have a nuclear option via Pakistan," said the security official. "The Pakistani nukes are also Saudi nukes."
The official said an agreement between the two countries was secretly inked seven years ago, although at the time such a pact was strongly denied by both Saudi and Pakistani officials.
Pakistan in the late 1990s became the seventh country to successfully develop and test nuclear weapons. The Pakistani arsenal is estimated at between 35 and 95 warheads, according to the U.S. Navy Center for Contemporary Conflict.
ARE PUBLIC SCHOOLS PASSE?
Education Issues
January 4, 2010
HIGH-FLYING HOME-SCHOOLERS
Home-schoolers in Michigan are not required to take standardized tests, as they do in other states, but Michigan home-schoolers sometimes take them voluntarily. The results from these tests are very impressive, says the Mackinac Center.
According to a report by the National Home Education Research Institute released this year:
* Home-schooled students score 34 to 39 percentage points above the average standardized test score.
* This puts the home-school national average score at about the 80th percentile in language arts, math, social studies and almost 90th percentile in reading.
More impressive than these test scores is the study's analysis of the variables that impact standardized test scores, such as parents' level of education and family income, says Mackinac:
* Like students in conventional schools, home-schoolers with parents who have college degrees and higher income perform better than homeschoolers whose parents have no college degrees and lower family income.
* But the difference between the two is much smaller than in conventional schools, and based on these two variables, the home-schooled students that would be predicted to perform the most poorly still outrank the national average.
* For example, home-schoolers whose parents do not have college degrees still tested in the 83rd percentile.
Compare these results with math scores released recently showing that Detroit students performed slightly better than if they had simply guessed, or with the fact that Michigan's cut scores for standardized tests are among the weakest in the nation, and it becomes a safe bet that the vast majority of home-schoolers in Michigan are outperforming their peers in conventional schools, says Mackinac.
Source: Michael D. Van Beek, "High-Flying Home-Schoolers," Mackinac, December 18, 2009.
For text:
http://www.mackinac.org/11559
For more on Education Issues:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=27
January 4, 2010
HIGH-FLYING HOME-SCHOOLERS
Home-schoolers in Michigan are not required to take standardized tests, as they do in other states, but Michigan home-schoolers sometimes take them voluntarily. The results from these tests are very impressive, says the Mackinac Center.
According to a report by the National Home Education Research Institute released this year:
* Home-schooled students score 34 to 39 percentage points above the average standardized test score.
* This puts the home-school national average score at about the 80th percentile in language arts, math, social studies and almost 90th percentile in reading.
More impressive than these test scores is the study's analysis of the variables that impact standardized test scores, such as parents' level of education and family income, says Mackinac:
* Like students in conventional schools, home-schoolers with parents who have college degrees and higher income perform better than homeschoolers whose parents have no college degrees and lower family income.
* But the difference between the two is much smaller than in conventional schools, and based on these two variables, the home-schooled students that would be predicted to perform the most poorly still outrank the national average.
* For example, home-schoolers whose parents do not have college degrees still tested in the 83rd percentile.
Compare these results with math scores released recently showing that Detroit students performed slightly better than if they had simply guessed, or with the fact that Michigan's cut scores for standardized tests are among the weakest in the nation, and it becomes a safe bet that the vast majority of home-schoolers in Michigan are outperforming their peers in conventional schools, says Mackinac.
Source: Michael D. Van Beek, "High-Flying Home-Schoolers," Mackinac, December 18, 2009.
For text:
http://www.mackinac.org/11559
For more on Education Issues:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=27
Netanyahu in Auschwitz: Remember Amalek and Trust in IDF
by Gil Ronen
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu gave a forceful speech interlaced with biblical quotations at the International Holocaust Remembrance Day at Auschwitz Wednesday afternoon, and sent a message to Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmedinejad as well.
After a short introduction in English Netanyahu switched over to Hebrew. He began his speech with the Aramaic words that open the Kaddish prayer – “yitgadal veyitkadash Shmeh Raba” – “may the name of G-d be grow great and be sanctified” - and said that the last words of many of the Jews who were murdered at Auschwitz were the call of “Shema Yisrael” – "Hear O Israel."
He then said that many of the slain must also have uttered another phrase before their death: “Remember what Amalek did to you – do not forget.”
"I came here from Jerusalem to tell you that we will never forget,” he said. “We will always remember what the Nazi Amalek did to us and we will not forget to be alert and ready when a new Amalek appears on the stage of history and threatens to destroy the Jews once again. And we will not make that mistake again, of taking the matter lightly and thinking that the threats are empty, or that the Holocaust denials are empty words. We will not forget and we will always remember to stand guard.”
Only the IDF guarantees survival
"The lesson of the Holocaust is that murderous evil must be stopped as early as possible when it is still in its early phases and cannot yet realize its intentions,” Netanyahu said, in a clear allusion to Iran's nuclear threats. “This lesson must be internalized by all the world's enlightened nations. We, the Jewish people, internalized it well, after losing one third of our nation on the blood-soaked earth of Europe. We learned that we must be prepared to defend ourselves. We have learned that the only guarantee for the survival of our nation is a strong Israel and its army – the Israel Defense Force. We learned that we must alert the nations of the world and be prepared to defend ourselves.”
“From this place I vow, as the head of the State of the Jews: never again will we let the machine of evil cut off the life of our nation. Never again.”
There was some clapping of hands after the more forceful parts of Netanyahu's speech. As the television calera panned across the dignitaries' seats, Netanyahu's wife Sarah could be seen, stern faced and nodding in emphatic agreement with the speech.
While never mentioning Iran, Netanyahu's speech was undoubtedly meant to be understood as a vow that Israel would use force if it had to, to prevent Iran from building a nuclear weapon.
Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free. Sign up now.
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu gave a forceful speech interlaced with biblical quotations at the International Holocaust Remembrance Day at Auschwitz Wednesday afternoon, and sent a message to Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmedinejad as well.
After a short introduction in English Netanyahu switched over to Hebrew. He began his speech with the Aramaic words that open the Kaddish prayer – “yitgadal veyitkadash Shmeh Raba” – “may the name of G-d be grow great and be sanctified” - and said that the last words of many of the Jews who were murdered at Auschwitz were the call of “Shema Yisrael” – "Hear O Israel."
He then said that many of the slain must also have uttered another phrase before their death: “Remember what Amalek did to you – do not forget.”
"I came here from Jerusalem to tell you that we will never forget,” he said. “We will always remember what the Nazi Amalek did to us and we will not forget to be alert and ready when a new Amalek appears on the stage of history and threatens to destroy the Jews once again. And we will not make that mistake again, of taking the matter lightly and thinking that the threats are empty, or that the Holocaust denials are empty words. We will not forget and we will always remember to stand guard.”
Only the IDF guarantees survival
"The lesson of the Holocaust is that murderous evil must be stopped as early as possible when it is still in its early phases and cannot yet realize its intentions,” Netanyahu said, in a clear allusion to Iran's nuclear threats. “This lesson must be internalized by all the world's enlightened nations. We, the Jewish people, internalized it well, after losing one third of our nation on the blood-soaked earth of Europe. We learned that we must be prepared to defend ourselves. We have learned that the only guarantee for the survival of our nation is a strong Israel and its army – the Israel Defense Force. We learned that we must alert the nations of the world and be prepared to defend ourselves.”
“From this place I vow, as the head of the State of the Jews: never again will we let the machine of evil cut off the life of our nation. Never again.”
There was some clapping of hands after the more forceful parts of Netanyahu's speech. As the television calera panned across the dignitaries' seats, Netanyahu's wife Sarah could be seen, stern faced and nodding in emphatic agreement with the speech.
While never mentioning Iran, Netanyahu's speech was undoubtedly meant to be understood as a vow that Israel would use force if it had to, to prevent Iran from building a nuclear weapon.
Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free. Sign up now.
THIS HATE EMANATES FROM CENTURIES OF CHURCH TEACHINGS
AJC Slams Polish Bishop's Holocaust Denial
January 25, 2010 – New York – AJC condemned Bishop Tadeusz Pieronek, one of the leading figures in the Polish Catholic Church, for describing the Holocaust as a “Jewish invention” in an interview with an Italian Catholic news website.
Pieronek also accused Israel of turning the Holocaust into “propaganda” and called for Palestinians to be commemorated through a day similar to International Holocaust Memorial Day, which falls on January 27.
“Bishop Pieronek’s shameful lies, broadcast in a week when the world reflects on the murder of six million Jews and millions of others by the Nazis, must be swiftly and unreservedly condemned by the Polish Catholic Church and the Vatican,” said AJC Executive Director David Harris. AJC also urged that Pieronek be disciplined by his superior, Cardinal Stanislaw Dziwisz, the Archbishop of Krakow.
“After the recent controversy involving Holocaust denier Bishop Richard Williamson, we expect the Vatican to act decisively against all manifestations of Holocaust denial and anti-Semitism within the Church,” said Harris. “Bishop Pieronek’s odious comments highlight why such action is sorely needed.”
/////////////////////////////////////
IS CATHOLICISM STILL SUPPORTING HATE OF THE JEWS?
Vatican Points Finger At The Wrong Party
A Vatican document released last week blamed the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Israel's "occupying" of lands for driving Christians out of Israel and making life difficult for those who remain.
However, Christians here who fled their homes in Palestinian-controlled territory largely blamed Muslim intimidation for their plight in interviews with this reporter.
Bethlehem's Christian population started to drastically decline in 1995, the very year the Palestinian Authority took over the city in line with the U.S.-backed Oslo Accords. Suddenly, after the Palestinians gained control of the territory, reports of Christian intimidation by Muslims began to surface.
Christian leaders and residents said they face an atmosphere of regular hostility. They said Palestinian armed groups stir tension by holding militant demonstrations and marches in the streets. They spoke of instances in which Christian shopkeepers' stores were ransacked and Christian homes attacked.
Some Christian leaders said one of the most significant problems facing Christians in Bethlehem is the rampant confiscation of land by Muslim gangs.
"There are many cases in which Christians have their land stolen by the [Muslim] mafia," Samir Qumsiyeh, a Bethlehem Christian leader and owner of the Beit Sahour-based private Al-Mahd (Nativity) TV station, told this column in a recent in-person interview in Bethlehem.
Aaron Klein is Jerusalem bureau chief for WorldNetDaily.com. He appears throughout the week on leading U.S. radio programs and is the author of the book "The Late Great State of Israel." Follow Klein on Twitter under the name "AaronKleinWND."
Copyright 2008 www.JewishPress.com
EDITORIAL****THE QUAGMIRE OF PURSUING PEACE BETWEEN THE MUSLIMS AND JEWS****
THE TARGET KEEPS ON MOVING. AFTER JORDAN AND EGYPT CONQUERED JUDEA, SAMARIA AND GAZA AND THEY OCCUPIED THOSE TERRITORIES NOT ONE WORD WAS SPOKEN ABOUT A PALESTINIAN STATE. THE JEWS HAD ALREADY MADE THEIR METAMORPHOSES FROM PALESTINIANS TO ISRAELIS. THE JEWISH LANDS EAST OF THE JORDAN HAD ALREADY BEEN GIVEN TO THE ARABS. NOW THE ARABS WANT MOST OF THE JEWISH LAND EAST OF THE JORDAN AND AFTER THAT THEY WANT ALL JEWISH LANDS!
ARABS IN ALL THEIR DOMICILES ARE TEACHING THE NEXT GENERATION THAT NO LAND IS JEWISH AND JEWISH PEOPLE ARE THE DREDGES OF HUMANITY. WHILE THEY ARE DOING THIS THEIR LEADERS ARE DOING LITTLE TO PRODUCE A NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE, BUT THEY ARE SPENDING VAST SUMS IN SUPPORT OF WAR. THE WEST IS POURING BILLIONS INTO ARAB LANDS IN BOTH ARMAMENTS AND BAKSHEESH. .IN FACT, THE WEST HAS SUSTAINED THE CAMPS IN WHICH ARABS HAVE SUBJECTED THEIR VERY OWN. WHY SHOULD THERE BE REFUGEES AFTER 60 YEARS? ON THAT BASIS JEWS SHOULD HAVE BEEN ON THE DOLE IN REFUGEE CAMPS FOR 2000 YEARS!
UNTIL SUCH TIME AS ARABS AND MUSLIMS CEASE TERROR AND INCITEMENT THE HATERS SHOULD NOT BE APPEASED BY ANYBODY.
ARABS IN ALL THEIR DOMICILES ARE TEACHING THE NEXT GENERATION THAT NO LAND IS JEWISH AND JEWISH PEOPLE ARE THE DREDGES OF HUMANITY. WHILE THEY ARE DOING THIS THEIR LEADERS ARE DOING LITTLE TO PRODUCE A NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE, BUT THEY ARE SPENDING VAST SUMS IN SUPPORT OF WAR. THE WEST IS POURING BILLIONS INTO ARAB LANDS IN BOTH ARMAMENTS AND BAKSHEESH. .IN FACT, THE WEST HAS SUSTAINED THE CAMPS IN WHICH ARABS HAVE SUBJECTED THEIR VERY OWN. WHY SHOULD THERE BE REFUGEES AFTER 60 YEARS? ON THAT BASIS JEWS SHOULD HAVE BEEN ON THE DOLE IN REFUGEE CAMPS FOR 2000 YEARS!
UNTIL SUCH TIME AS ARABS AND MUSLIMS CEASE TERROR AND INCITEMENT THE HATERS SHOULD NOT BE APPEASED BY ANYBODY.
THE LATEST CZAR LIST
A Different Look at the CZARS
Stunning.......There are very few of us who know just what all the CZAR's do up in D.C................. Here is their names and job descriptions.......should be educational to ALL AMERICANS............no matter what your political agenda.
"CZARS"-- Read who they are and and recognize their agendas.
CZAR
Czar Position
Summary
Richard Holbrooke
Afghanistan Czar
Ultra liberal anti gun former Gov. of New Mexico. Pro Abortion and legal drug use. Dissolve the 2nd Amendment
Ed Montgomery
Auto recovery Czar
Black radical anti business activist. Affirmative Action and Job Preference for blacks. Univ of Maryland Business School Dean teaches US business has caused world poverty. ACORN board member. Communist DuBois Club member.
Jeffrey Crowley
AIDS Czar
Radical Homosexual.. A Gay Rights activist. Believes in Gay Marriage and especially, a Special Status for homosexuals only, including complete free health care for gays.
Alan Bersin
Border Czar
The former failed superintendent of San Diego . Ultra Liberal friend of Hilary Clinton. Served as Border Czar under Janet Reno - to keep borders open to illegal's without interference from US
David J. Hayes
California Water Czar
Sr. Fellow of radical environmentalist group, "Progress Policy". No training or experience in water management whatsoever.
Ron Bloom
Car Czar
Auto Union worker. Anti business & anti nuclear. Has worked hard to force US auto makers out of business. Sits on the Board of Chrysler which is now Auto Union owned. How did this happen?
Dennis Ross
Central Region Czar
Believes US policy has caused Mid East wars. Obama apologist to the world. Anti gun and completely pro abortion.
Lynn Rosenthal
Domestic Violence Czar
Director of the National Network to End Domestic Violence. Vicious anti male feminist. Supported male castration.Imagine?
Gil Kerlikowske
Drug Czar
devoted lobbyist for every restrictive gun law proposal, Former Chief of Police in Liberal Seattle. Believes no American should own a firearm. Supports legalization of all drugs
Paul Volcker
Economic Czar
Head of Fed Reserve under Jimmy Carter when US economy nearly failed. Obama appointed head of the Economic Recovery Advisory Board which engineered the Obama economic disaster to US economy. Member of anti business "Progressive Policy" organization
Carol Brower
Energy and Environment Czar
Political Radical Former head of EPA - known for anti-business activism. Strong anti-gun ownership.
Joshua DuBois
Faith Based Czar
Political Black activist-Degree in Black Nationalism. Anti gun ownership lobbyist.
Cameron Davis
Great Lakes Czar
Chicago radical anti business environmentalist. Blames George Bush for "Poisoning the water that minorities have to drink." No experience or training in water management. Former ACORN Board member (what does that tell us?)
Van Jones
Green Jobs Czar
(since resigned).. Black activist Member of American communist Party and San Francisco Communist Party who said Geo Bush caused the 911 attack and wanted Bush investigated by the World Court for war crimes. Black activist with strong anti-white views.
Daniel Fried
Guantanamo Closure Czar
Human Rights activist for Foreign Terrorists. Believes America has caused the war on terrorism. Believes terrorists have rights above and beyond Americans.
Nancy-Ann DeParle.
Health Czar
Former head of Medicare / Medicaid. Strong Health Care Rationing proponent. She is married to a reporter for The New York Times.
Vivek Kundra
Information Czar
Born in New Delhi, India. Controls all public information, including labels and news releases. Monitors all private Internet emails. (hello?)
Todd Stern
International Climate Czar
Anti business former White House chief of Staff- Strong supportrer of the Kyoto Accord. Pushing hard for Cap and Trade. Blames US business for Global warming. Anti- US business prosperity.
Dennis Blair
Intelligence Czar
Ret Navy. Stopped US guided missile program as "provocative". Chair of ultra liberal "Council on Foreign Relations" which blames American organizations for regional wars.
George Mitchell
MideastPeace Czar
Fmr. Sen from Maine Left wing radical. Has said Israel should be split up into "2 or 3 " smaller more manageable plots". (God forbid) A true Anti-nuclear anti-gun & pro homosexual "special rights" advocate
Kenneth Feinberg
Pay Czar
Chief of Staff to TED KENNEDY. Lawyer who got rich off the 911 victims payoffs. (horribly true)
Cass Sunstein
Regulatory Czar
Liberal activist judge believes free speech needs to be limited for the "common good". Essentially against 1st amendment. Rules against personal freedoms many times -like private gun ownership and right to free speech.
John Holdren
Science Czar
Fierce ideological environmentalist, Sierra Club, Anti business activist. Claims US business has caused world poverty. No Science training.
Earl Devaney
Stimulus Accountability Czar
Spent career trying to take guns away from American citizens. Believes in Open Borders to Mexico . Author of statement blaming US gun stores for drug war in Mexico .
J. Scott Gration
Sudan Czar
Native of Democratic Republic of Congo. Believes US does little to help Third World countries. Council of foreign relations, asking for higher US taxes to support United Nations
Herb Allison
TARP Czar
Fannie May CEO responsible for the US recession by using real estate mortgages to back up the US stock market. Caused millions of people to lose their life savings.
John Brennan
Terrorism Czar
Anti CIA activist. No training in diplomatic or gov. affairs. Believes Open Borders to Mexico and a dialog with terrorists and has suggested Obama disband US military
Aneesh Chopra
Technology Czar
No Technology training. Worked for the Advisory Board Company, a health care think tank for hospitals. Anti doctor activist. Supports Obama Health care Rationing and salaried doctors working exclusively for the Gov.. health care plan
Adolfo Carrion Jr..
Urban Affairs Czar
Puerto Rican born Anti American activist and leftist group member in Latin America . Millionaire "slum lord" of the Bronx , NY. Owns many lavish homes and condos which he got from "sweetheart" deals with labor unions. Wants higher taxes on middle class to pay for minority housing and health care
Ashton Carter
Weapons Czar
Leftist. Wants all private weapons in US destroyed. Supports UN ban on firearms ownership in America .. No Other "policy"
Gary Samore
WMD Policy Czar
Former US Communist. Wants US to destroy all WMD unilaterally as a show of good faith. Has no other "policy".
How lucky are we that these are the people who are helping President Obama in the RUNNING of our country and the White House?
Please pass this on and EDUCATE your family, friends and neighbors!
Stunning.......There are very few of us who know just what all the CZAR's do up in D.C................. Here is their names and job descriptions.......should be educational to ALL AMERICANS............no matter what your political agenda.
"CZARS"-- Read who they are and and recognize their agendas.
CZAR
Czar Position
Summary
Richard Holbrooke
Afghanistan Czar
Ultra liberal anti gun former Gov. of New Mexico. Pro Abortion and legal drug use. Dissolve the 2nd Amendment
Ed Montgomery
Auto recovery Czar
Black radical anti business activist. Affirmative Action and Job Preference for blacks. Univ of Maryland Business School Dean teaches US business has caused world poverty. ACORN board member. Communist DuBois Club member.
Jeffrey Crowley
AIDS Czar
Radical Homosexual.. A Gay Rights activist. Believes in Gay Marriage and especially, a Special Status for homosexuals only, including complete free health care for gays.
Alan Bersin
Border Czar
The former failed superintendent of San Diego . Ultra Liberal friend of Hilary Clinton. Served as Border Czar under Janet Reno - to keep borders open to illegal's without interference from US
David J. Hayes
California Water Czar
Sr. Fellow of radical environmentalist group, "Progress Policy". No training or experience in water management whatsoever.
Ron Bloom
Car Czar
Auto Union worker. Anti business & anti nuclear. Has worked hard to force US auto makers out of business. Sits on the Board of Chrysler which is now Auto Union owned. How did this happen?
Dennis Ross
Central Region Czar
Believes US policy has caused Mid East wars. Obama apologist to the world. Anti gun and completely pro abortion.
Lynn Rosenthal
Domestic Violence Czar
Director of the National Network to End Domestic Violence. Vicious anti male feminist. Supported male castration.Imagine?
Gil Kerlikowske
Drug Czar
devoted lobbyist for every restrictive gun law proposal, Former Chief of Police in Liberal Seattle. Believes no American should own a firearm. Supports legalization of all drugs
Paul Volcker
Economic Czar
Head of Fed Reserve under Jimmy Carter when US economy nearly failed. Obama appointed head of the Economic Recovery Advisory Board which engineered the Obama economic disaster to US economy. Member of anti business "Progressive Policy" organization
Carol Brower
Energy and Environment Czar
Political Radical Former head of EPA - known for anti-business activism. Strong anti-gun ownership.
Joshua DuBois
Faith Based Czar
Political Black activist-Degree in Black Nationalism. Anti gun ownership lobbyist.
Cameron Davis
Great Lakes Czar
Chicago radical anti business environmentalist. Blames George Bush for "Poisoning the water that minorities have to drink." No experience or training in water management. Former ACORN Board member (what does that tell us?)
Van Jones
Green Jobs Czar
(since resigned).. Black activist Member of American communist Party and San Francisco Communist Party who said Geo Bush caused the 911 attack and wanted Bush investigated by the World Court for war crimes. Black activist with strong anti-white views.
Daniel Fried
Guantanamo Closure Czar
Human Rights activist for Foreign Terrorists. Believes America has caused the war on terrorism. Believes terrorists have rights above and beyond Americans.
Nancy-Ann DeParle.
Health Czar
Former head of Medicare / Medicaid. Strong Health Care Rationing proponent. She is married to a reporter for The New York Times.
Vivek Kundra
Information Czar
Born in New Delhi, India. Controls all public information, including labels and news releases. Monitors all private Internet emails. (hello?)
Todd Stern
International Climate Czar
Anti business former White House chief of Staff- Strong supportrer of the Kyoto Accord. Pushing hard for Cap and Trade. Blames US business for Global warming. Anti- US business prosperity.
Dennis Blair
Intelligence Czar
Ret Navy. Stopped US guided missile program as "provocative". Chair of ultra liberal "Council on Foreign Relations" which blames American organizations for regional wars.
George Mitchell
MideastPeace Czar
Fmr. Sen from Maine Left wing radical. Has said Israel should be split up into "2 or 3 " smaller more manageable plots". (God forbid) A true Anti-nuclear anti-gun & pro homosexual "special rights" advocate
Kenneth Feinberg
Pay Czar
Chief of Staff to TED KENNEDY. Lawyer who got rich off the 911 victims payoffs. (horribly true)
Cass Sunstein
Regulatory Czar
Liberal activist judge believes free speech needs to be limited for the "common good". Essentially against 1st amendment. Rules against personal freedoms many times -like private gun ownership and right to free speech.
John Holdren
Science Czar
Fierce ideological environmentalist, Sierra Club, Anti business activist. Claims US business has caused world poverty. No Science training.
Earl Devaney
Stimulus Accountability Czar
Spent career trying to take guns away from American citizens. Believes in Open Borders to Mexico . Author of statement blaming US gun stores for drug war in Mexico .
J. Scott Gration
Sudan Czar
Native of Democratic Republic of Congo. Believes US does little to help Third World countries. Council of foreign relations, asking for higher US taxes to support United Nations
Herb Allison
TARP Czar
Fannie May CEO responsible for the US recession by using real estate mortgages to back up the US stock market. Caused millions of people to lose their life savings.
John Brennan
Terrorism Czar
Anti CIA activist. No training in diplomatic or gov. affairs. Believes Open Borders to Mexico and a dialog with terrorists and has suggested Obama disband US military
Aneesh Chopra
Technology Czar
No Technology training. Worked for the Advisory Board Company, a health care think tank for hospitals. Anti doctor activist. Supports Obama Health care Rationing and salaried doctors working exclusively for the Gov.. health care plan
Adolfo Carrion Jr..
Urban Affairs Czar
Puerto Rican born Anti American activist and leftist group member in Latin America . Millionaire "slum lord" of the Bronx , NY. Owns many lavish homes and condos which he got from "sweetheart" deals with labor unions. Wants higher taxes on middle class to pay for minority housing and health care
Ashton Carter
Weapons Czar
Leftist. Wants all private weapons in US destroyed. Supports UN ban on firearms ownership in America .. No Other "policy"
Gary Samore
WMD Policy Czar
Former US Communist. Wants US to destroy all WMD unilaterally as a show of good faith. Has no other "policy".
How lucky are we that these are the people who are helping President Obama in the RUNNING of our country and the White House?
Please pass this on and EDUCATE your family, friends and neighbors!
POLITICAL CORRECTNESS GONE AMOK
How bad is the cancer of political correctness in the Defense Department?
So bad that the 86 page report on the Ft. Hood jihadist massacre mentions "Islam" or any of its derivatives only once—in a footnote.
So bad that CNN commentator Jack Cafferty called it a "joke."
Unfortunately, the only ones laughing are the Islamists.
They must be looking at our military and political leadership and thanking Allah for their good fortune. It's easy to envision discussions among Islamists where they tell each other "surely Allah is with us; the infidel leaders are so blind and stupid they won't even acknowledge who is fighting them!"
Ralph Peters' column below is RIGHT ON POINT!
We believe American outrage at this suicidal level of political correctness is only going to grow. Let us resolve together to make 2010 the year that "main street America" shouted back at Washington that we've had enough!!
Hood Massacre Report Gutless and Shameful
By RALPH PETERS
January 16, 2010
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/
hood_massacre_report_gutless_and_yaUphSPCoMs8ux4lQdtyGM
There are two basic problems with the grotesque non-report on the Islamist- terror massacre at Fort Hood (released by the Defense Department yesterday):
* It's not about what happened at Fort Hood.
* It avoids entirely the issue of why it happened.
Rarely in the course of human events has a report issued by any government agency been so cowardly and delusional. It's so inept, it doesn't even rise to cover-up level.
"Protecting the Force: Lessons From Fort Hood" never mentions Islamist terror. Its 86 mind-numbing pages treat "the alleged perpetrator," Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, as just another workplace shooter (guess they're still looking for the pickup truck with the gun rack).
The report is so politically correct that its authors don't even realize the extent of their political correctness -- they're body-and-soul creatures of the PC culture that murdered 12 soldiers and one Army civilian.
Reading the report, you get the feeling that, jeepers, things actually went pretty darned well down at Fort Hood. Commanders, first responders and everybody but the latest "American Idol" contestants come in for high praise.
The teensy bit of specific criticism is reserved for the "military medical officer supervisors" in Maj. Hasan's chain of command at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center. As if the problem started and ended there.
Unquestionably, the officers who let Hasan slide, despite his well-known wackiness and hatred of America, bear plenty of blame. But this disgraceful pretense of a report never asks why they didn't stop Hasan's career in its tracks.
The answer is straightforward: Hasan's superiors feared -- correctly -- that any attempt to call attention to his radicalism or to prevent his promotion would backfire on them, destroying their careers, not his.
Hasan was a protected-species minority. Under the PC tyranny of today's armed services, no non-minority officer was going to take him on.
This is a military that imposes rules of engagement that protect our enemies and kill our own troops and that court-martials heroic SEALs to appease a terrorist. Ain't many colonels willing to hammer the Army's sole Palestinian-American psychiatrist.
Of course, there's no mention of political correctness by the panel. Instead, the report settles for blinding flashes of the obvious, such as "We believe a gap exists in providing information to the right people." Gee, really? Well, that explains everything. Money well spent!
Or "Department of Defense force protection policies are not optimized for countering internal threats." Of course not: You can't stop an internal threat you refuse to recognize.
The panel's recommendations? Wow. "Develop a risk-assessment tool for commanders." Now that's going to stop Islamist terrorists in their tracks.
The Fort Hood massacre didn't reflect an intelligence failure. The intelligence was there, in gigabytes. This was a leadership failure and an ethical failure, at every level. Nobody wanted to know what Hasan was up to. But you won't learn that from this play-pretend report.
The sole interesting finding flashes by quickly: Behind some timid wording on pages 13 and 14, a daring soul managed to insert the observation that we aren't currently able to keep violence-oriented religious extremists from becoming chaplains. (Of course, they're probably referring to those darned Baptists . . .)
To be fair, there's a separate, classified report on Maj. Hasan himself. But it's too sensitive for the American people to see. Does it even hint he was a self-appointed Islamist terrorist committing jihad? I'll bet it focuses on his "personal problems."
In the end, the report contents itself with pretending that the accountability problem was isolated within the military medical community at Walter Reed. It wasn't, and it isn't. Murderous political correctness is pervasive in our military. The medical staff at Walter Reed is just where the results began to manifest themselves in Hasan's case.
Once again, the higher-ups blame the worker bees who were victims of the policy the higher-ups inflicted on them. This report's spinelessness is itself an indictment of our military's failed moral and ethical leadership.
We agonize over civilian casualties in a war zone but rush to whitewash the slaughter of our own troops on our own soil. Conduct unbecoming.
------------------------------------------------
Make sure you receive all of your messages from ACT for America. Add actforamerica@donationnet.net to your address book as an approved email sender. If you found this message in your "Bulk" or "Spam" folder, please click the "Not Spam" button to notify your provider that these are emails you want to receive.
------------------------------------------------
ACT for America
P.O. Box 12765
Pensacola, FL 32591
www.actforamerica.org
So bad that the 86 page report on the Ft. Hood jihadist massacre mentions "Islam" or any of its derivatives only once—in a footnote.
So bad that CNN commentator Jack Cafferty called it a "joke."
Unfortunately, the only ones laughing are the Islamists.
They must be looking at our military and political leadership and thanking Allah for their good fortune. It's easy to envision discussions among Islamists where they tell each other "surely Allah is with us; the infidel leaders are so blind and stupid they won't even acknowledge who is fighting them!"
Ralph Peters' column below is RIGHT ON POINT!
We believe American outrage at this suicidal level of political correctness is only going to grow. Let us resolve together to make 2010 the year that "main street America" shouted back at Washington that we've had enough!!
Hood Massacre Report Gutless and Shameful
By RALPH PETERS
January 16, 2010
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/
hood_massacre_report_gutless_and_yaUphSPCoMs8ux4lQdtyGM
There are two basic problems with the grotesque non-report on the Islamist- terror massacre at Fort Hood (released by the Defense Department yesterday):
* It's not about what happened at Fort Hood.
* It avoids entirely the issue of why it happened.
Rarely in the course of human events has a report issued by any government agency been so cowardly and delusional. It's so inept, it doesn't even rise to cover-up level.
"Protecting the Force: Lessons From Fort Hood" never mentions Islamist terror. Its 86 mind-numbing pages treat "the alleged perpetrator," Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, as just another workplace shooter (guess they're still looking for the pickup truck with the gun rack).
The report is so politically correct that its authors don't even realize the extent of their political correctness -- they're body-and-soul creatures of the PC culture that murdered 12 soldiers and one Army civilian.
Reading the report, you get the feeling that, jeepers, things actually went pretty darned well down at Fort Hood. Commanders, first responders and everybody but the latest "American Idol" contestants come in for high praise.
The teensy bit of specific criticism is reserved for the "military medical officer supervisors" in Maj. Hasan's chain of command at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center. As if the problem started and ended there.
Unquestionably, the officers who let Hasan slide, despite his well-known wackiness and hatred of America, bear plenty of blame. But this disgraceful pretense of a report never asks why they didn't stop Hasan's career in its tracks.
The answer is straightforward: Hasan's superiors feared -- correctly -- that any attempt to call attention to his radicalism or to prevent his promotion would backfire on them, destroying their careers, not his.
Hasan was a protected-species minority. Under the PC tyranny of today's armed services, no non-minority officer was going to take him on.
This is a military that imposes rules of engagement that protect our enemies and kill our own troops and that court-martials heroic SEALs to appease a terrorist. Ain't many colonels willing to hammer the Army's sole Palestinian-American psychiatrist.
Of course, there's no mention of political correctness by the panel. Instead, the report settles for blinding flashes of the obvious, such as "We believe a gap exists in providing information to the right people." Gee, really? Well, that explains everything. Money well spent!
Or "Department of Defense force protection policies are not optimized for countering internal threats." Of course not: You can't stop an internal threat you refuse to recognize.
The panel's recommendations? Wow. "Develop a risk-assessment tool for commanders." Now that's going to stop Islamist terrorists in their tracks.
The Fort Hood massacre didn't reflect an intelligence failure. The intelligence was there, in gigabytes. This was a leadership failure and an ethical failure, at every level. Nobody wanted to know what Hasan was up to. But you won't learn that from this play-pretend report.
The sole interesting finding flashes by quickly: Behind some timid wording on pages 13 and 14, a daring soul managed to insert the observation that we aren't currently able to keep violence-oriented religious extremists from becoming chaplains. (Of course, they're probably referring to those darned Baptists . . .)
To be fair, there's a separate, classified report on Maj. Hasan himself. But it's too sensitive for the American people to see. Does it even hint he was a self-appointed Islamist terrorist committing jihad? I'll bet it focuses on his "personal problems."
In the end, the report contents itself with pretending that the accountability problem was isolated within the military medical community at Walter Reed. It wasn't, and it isn't. Murderous political correctness is pervasive in our military. The medical staff at Walter Reed is just where the results began to manifest themselves in Hasan's case.
Once again, the higher-ups blame the worker bees who were victims of the policy the higher-ups inflicted on them. This report's spinelessness is itself an indictment of our military's failed moral and ethical leadership.
We agonize over civilian casualties in a war zone but rush to whitewash the slaughter of our own troops on our own soil. Conduct unbecoming.
------------------------------------------------
Make sure you receive all of your messages from ACT for America. Add actforamerica@donationnet.net to your address book as an approved email sender. If you found this message in your "Bulk" or "Spam" folder, please click the "Not Spam" button to notify your provider that these are emails you want to receive.
------------------------------------------------
ACT for America
P.O. Box 12765
Pensacola, FL 32591
www.actforamerica.org
DOES HILLEL HOUSE NEED A PSYCHIATRIST?
Does Hillel's Hosting of J Street Subvert Their Mission?
Esther Levens - Jan 28, 2010
UC4I.org
I am gravely concerned regarding a forthcoming event by Hillel and J Street on the Pennsylvania University campus. On Feb. 4, J Street will broadcast live from the university to 24 U.S. colleges across the country, as well as synagogues and Jewish community centers.
It is a travesty that such a strong anti-Israel message should be received by a vulnerable group of Hillel Jewish youth who may be uninformed about Middle East issues. This could not happen if national Jewish organizations were providing a strong factually accurate educational hasbara program. It is past time for them to begin. And B'nai B'rith should be the first to accomplish this mission.
I am often asked, "Where are the Jewish voices that are expected to be heard loud and clear explaining and supporting Israel's positions?" How disheartening to learn that instead of supporting Israel the venerable B'nai-B'rith-sponsored Hillel has actually agreed to provide a platform for the new controversial J Street organization to "launch a new grassroots campaign in the Philadelphia area" on February 4.
The Unity Coalition for Israel (UCI) joins forces with the American Israel Action Coalition (AIAC) an issue-oriented organization based in Israel where 250,000 Americans live. UCI joins AIAC in calling for Hillel's "Foundation for Jewish Campus Life" to rescind their invitation extended to Jeremy Ben Ami, Executive Director of J Street, to speak at and broadcast from the University of Pennsylvania campus next week.
The event is to take place in Steinhardt Hall, the Hillel building at the University of Pennsylvania, thereby subtly lending a Hillel stamp of approval on their policies. The J Street announcement is promoting the event as a "call to action" for their agenda. This showcase will turn around B'nai B'rith's pro-Israel Zionist history and defy common sense by encouraging Jewish students to hear and absorb the J Street doctrine that mirrors Palestinian propaganda.
J Street backs negotiations with the Hamas terrorist organization and endorses the Goldstone Report accusing Israel of war crimes in the war against Hamas terror last year. It has supported the PA's demand for a total, unlimited building freeze in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria and supports dividing Jerusalem between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, including the neighborhoods containing Judaism's holiest sites, the Western Wall (Kotel) and the Temple Mount. On its website It openly refers to the 300,000 Israeli residents of Judea and Samaria as "an obstacle to peace" and refers to the "disputed" territories as the "occupied territories." During the defensive Operation Cast Lead which Israel finally waged as a response to the 10,000 Hamas rocket attacks launched from Gaza on Israeli civilians, J Street called for an immediate end to Israel's defensive action.
Ambassador to the US from Israel, Michael Oren, the brilliant historian, refused to speak at the lobby group's convention late last year. He explained that "J Street constantly opposes the Israeli government and calls for strong American pressure on Israel… without the real attention to the terrorist policies of both Hamas and Fatah that we all need to more squarely confront if there is ever to be any real progress made in the Middle East."
Hillel will be doing a great disservice to the Jewish community as a whole, which is trying desperately to promote the positive cause of Israel against an array of 22 well-financed Arab states. Jewish university students should not become "the enemy within" and should not be encouraged to spread anti-Israel propaganda by aligning themselves with J Street.
It will be a perversion of the message that should be received by young Jewish students, who represent both Israel's and America's best hopes for the future survival of Israel, and indeed all of western civilization.
Esther Levens is Founder and CEO of the Unity Coalition for Israel.
///////////////////////////////////
Aaron Klein - Jan 28, 2010
JewishPress.com
Quick Takes: News You May Have Missed - by Aaron Klein
[Editor's Note: Aaron Klein will host a live call-in show this Sunday on 77-WABC in New York from 7- 9 p.m. E.S.T. Click here during those hours to listen live - http://www.wabcradio.com/article.asp?id=531472]
Hillel Hosts J Street
J Street, the controversial left-wing lobbying group, will be hosted by a Jewish organization at the University of Pennsylvania as part of an initiative to make the group known in local venues across the U.S.
J Street's inaugural university event Feb. 4 will be broadcast live from the university to 24 U.S. college campuses.
J Street brands itself as pro-Israel. But the group supports talks with Hamas, a terrorist group whose charter seeks the destruction of Israel, opposes sanctions against Iran, and is harshly critical of Israel's anti-terror military offensives.
Next week, J Street is renting space from the Hillel Jewish student organization at the University of Pennsylvania. J Street Executive Director Jeremy Ben-Ami will broadcast a speech during the event, which will be simultaneously broadcast at other U.S. universities and at local sites throughout the country, including synagogues and Jewish community centers.
J Street's event at Penn will include speeches from a host of characters with controversial views on Israel, including:
* Rebecca Alpert, chair of the Department of Religion at Temple University in Philadelphia. In a sermon on the Jewish high holiday of Yom Kippur, Alpert compared Israel's anti-terror activities in the Gaza Strip to genocide in Darfur. Alpert also announced she personally undertook a month-long fast for the Gaza population as part of a protest movement that calls for Israel to talk with Hamas and lift a blockade in Gaza.
* Elliot Ratzman, a visiting professor of religion at Swarthmore University. In an article in the student-run magazine American Foreign Policy, Ratzman accused Israel of "ethnic cleansing." He particularly took issue with Israel's demolishing of Palestinian homes. He did not mention that the demolished homes were mostly built illegally on Jewish-owned land.
* Arthur Waskow, an author and far-left political activist who is highly critical of Israeli policies in the Gaza Strip and West Bank. In a recent posting on the website of the leftist Shalom Center, Waskow strongly defended a UN report penned by South African judge Richard Goldstone that claimed both Hamas and Israel were guilty of war crimes.
/////////////////////////////////////
Hillel Organization Responds to INN: J Street Should be Heard
by INN Staff
Follow Israel news on Twitter and Facebook.
(IsraelNN.com) The Hillel Jewish student organization has responded to an Israel National News report that it will host J Street lobby's director, Jeremy Ben Ami. at its University of Pennsylvania premises, and insists that it does not necessarily agree with the agenda of the pro-Palestinian Authority lobby. Hillel explained that J Street's voice has a right to be heard.
J Street, funded by leftist philanthropist George Soros supported the PA's demand for a total, unlimited building freeze in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria, opposing Israel's government policy on the issue. During Operation Cast Lead against Hamas rockets, the organization called for an immediate end to Israel's actions, writing that the time had come for "shedding a narrow us versus them approach to Hamas."
Michael Oren, Isralei Ambassador to the United States, refused to speak at the lobby group's convention late last year, stating that J Street constantly opposes the Israeli government. J Street calls for strong American pressure on Israel.
On February 4, J Street plans to launch a new grassroots campaign in the Philadelphia area from Steinhardt Hall, the Hillel building at the University of Pennsylvania. The J Street announcement is promoting the event as a “call to action” to move forward its “pro-peace agenda.” Vehemently opposed by counter-protest groups such as 'Z-Street', the announcement has sparked a number of angry responses from those who wonder why such a venerable student group as Hillel, The Foundation for Jewish Campus Life, would make its building available for such an activity.
In a written response to a query from Israel National News, Rabbi Howard Alpert, executive director of Hillel of Greater Philadelphia, explained Monday that the student group had “considered J Street's request and applied to it the same criteria we would apply to other Jewish communal organizations.”
Those criteria, he said, included a commitment to accept and subscribe to the Hillel mission statement of support of Israel 'as the Jewish state with secure and recognized borders and as a member of the family of free nations'; that they do not (sic) advocate actions that will materially harm Israel or its representatives such as boycotts, sanctions or judicial action; and that they present their views with civility.”
J Street strongly criticized Israel for last year's counterterrorism Operation Cast Lead in Gaza, and supports dividing Jerusalem between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, including the neighborhoods containing Judaism's holiest sites, the Western Wall (Kotel) and the Temple Mount.
On its website, J Street openly refers to the hundreds of thousands of residents living in Judea and Samaria, which the organization refers to as “the occupied territories” – the same language used by the Arab world – as “an obstacle to peace.... Continued settlement growth undermines the prospects for peace by making Palestinians doubt Israeli motives and commitment, and by complicating the territorial compromises that will be necessary in final status talks,” the J Street policy statement reads.
Rabbi Alpert made an effort to dissociate Hillel from any activities of the group, saying the organization's event “does not constitute an endorsement by Hillel of the policies of the group of of the opinions expressed during its meeting.”
Nevertheless, he reiterated, “we believe it is important that all voices that abide by our principles regarding Israel's right to exist as the nation-state of the Jewish-People have an opportunity to express their opinions in our building as long as they commit to maintaining civility in their presentations.”
Readers can express their opinions to the Hillel organization by calling 215-898-8265 or by faxing a letter to 215-898-8259.
Esther Levens - Jan 28, 2010
UC4I.org
I am gravely concerned regarding a forthcoming event by Hillel and J Street on the Pennsylvania University campus. On Feb. 4, J Street will broadcast live from the university to 24 U.S. colleges across the country, as well as synagogues and Jewish community centers.
It is a travesty that such a strong anti-Israel message should be received by a vulnerable group of Hillel Jewish youth who may be uninformed about Middle East issues. This could not happen if national Jewish organizations were providing a strong factually accurate educational hasbara program. It is past time for them to begin. And B'nai B'rith should be the first to accomplish this mission.
I am often asked, "Where are the Jewish voices that are expected to be heard loud and clear explaining and supporting Israel's positions?" How disheartening to learn that instead of supporting Israel the venerable B'nai-B'rith-sponsored Hillel has actually agreed to provide a platform for the new controversial J Street organization to "launch a new grassroots campaign in the Philadelphia area" on February 4.
The Unity Coalition for Israel (UCI) joins forces with the American Israel Action Coalition (AIAC) an issue-oriented organization based in Israel where 250,000 Americans live. UCI joins AIAC in calling for Hillel's "Foundation for Jewish Campus Life" to rescind their invitation extended to Jeremy Ben Ami, Executive Director of J Street, to speak at and broadcast from the University of Pennsylvania campus next week.
The event is to take place in Steinhardt Hall, the Hillel building at the University of Pennsylvania, thereby subtly lending a Hillel stamp of approval on their policies. The J Street announcement is promoting the event as a "call to action" for their agenda. This showcase will turn around B'nai B'rith's pro-Israel Zionist history and defy common sense by encouraging Jewish students to hear and absorb the J Street doctrine that mirrors Palestinian propaganda.
J Street backs negotiations with the Hamas terrorist organization and endorses the Goldstone Report accusing Israel of war crimes in the war against Hamas terror last year. It has supported the PA's demand for a total, unlimited building freeze in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria and supports dividing Jerusalem between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, including the neighborhoods containing Judaism's holiest sites, the Western Wall (Kotel) and the Temple Mount. On its website It openly refers to the 300,000 Israeli residents of Judea and Samaria as "an obstacle to peace" and refers to the "disputed" territories as the "occupied territories." During the defensive Operation Cast Lead which Israel finally waged as a response to the 10,000 Hamas rocket attacks launched from Gaza on Israeli civilians, J Street called for an immediate end to Israel's defensive action.
Ambassador to the US from Israel, Michael Oren, the brilliant historian, refused to speak at the lobby group's convention late last year. He explained that "J Street constantly opposes the Israeli government and calls for strong American pressure on Israel… without the real attention to the terrorist policies of both Hamas and Fatah that we all need to more squarely confront if there is ever to be any real progress made in the Middle East."
Hillel will be doing a great disservice to the Jewish community as a whole, which is trying desperately to promote the positive cause of Israel against an array of 22 well-financed Arab states. Jewish university students should not become "the enemy within" and should not be encouraged to spread anti-Israel propaganda by aligning themselves with J Street.
It will be a perversion of the message that should be received by young Jewish students, who represent both Israel's and America's best hopes for the future survival of Israel, and indeed all of western civilization.
Esther Levens is Founder and CEO of the Unity Coalition for Israel.
///////////////////////////////////
Aaron Klein - Jan 28, 2010
JewishPress.com
Quick Takes: News You May Have Missed - by Aaron Klein
[Editor's Note: Aaron Klein will host a live call-in show this Sunday on 77-WABC in New York from 7- 9 p.m. E.S.T. Click here during those hours to listen live - http://www.wabcradio.com/article.asp?id=531472]
Hillel Hosts J Street
J Street, the controversial left-wing lobbying group, will be hosted by a Jewish organization at the University of Pennsylvania as part of an initiative to make the group known in local venues across the U.S.
J Street's inaugural university event Feb. 4 will be broadcast live from the university to 24 U.S. college campuses.
J Street brands itself as pro-Israel. But the group supports talks with Hamas, a terrorist group whose charter seeks the destruction of Israel, opposes sanctions against Iran, and is harshly critical of Israel's anti-terror military offensives.
Next week, J Street is renting space from the Hillel Jewish student organization at the University of Pennsylvania. J Street Executive Director Jeremy Ben-Ami will broadcast a speech during the event, which will be simultaneously broadcast at other U.S. universities and at local sites throughout the country, including synagogues and Jewish community centers.
J Street's event at Penn will include speeches from a host of characters with controversial views on Israel, including:
* Rebecca Alpert, chair of the Department of Religion at Temple University in Philadelphia. In a sermon on the Jewish high holiday of Yom Kippur, Alpert compared Israel's anti-terror activities in the Gaza Strip to genocide in Darfur. Alpert also announced she personally undertook a month-long fast for the Gaza population as part of a protest movement that calls for Israel to talk with Hamas and lift a blockade in Gaza.
* Elliot Ratzman, a visiting professor of religion at Swarthmore University. In an article in the student-run magazine American Foreign Policy, Ratzman accused Israel of "ethnic cleansing." He particularly took issue with Israel's demolishing of Palestinian homes. He did not mention that the demolished homes were mostly built illegally on Jewish-owned land.
* Arthur Waskow, an author and far-left political activist who is highly critical of Israeli policies in the Gaza Strip and West Bank. In a recent posting on the website of the leftist Shalom Center, Waskow strongly defended a UN report penned by South African judge Richard Goldstone that claimed both Hamas and Israel were guilty of war crimes.
/////////////////////////////////////
Hillel Organization Responds to INN: J Street Should be Heard
by INN Staff
Follow Israel news on Twitter and Facebook.
(IsraelNN.com) The Hillel Jewish student organization has responded to an Israel National News report that it will host J Street lobby's director, Jeremy Ben Ami. at its University of Pennsylvania premises, and insists that it does not necessarily agree with the agenda of the pro-Palestinian Authority lobby. Hillel explained that J Street's voice has a right to be heard.
J Street, funded by leftist philanthropist George Soros supported the PA's demand for a total, unlimited building freeze in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria, opposing Israel's government policy on the issue. During Operation Cast Lead against Hamas rockets, the organization called for an immediate end to Israel's actions, writing that the time had come for "shedding a narrow us versus them approach to Hamas."
Michael Oren, Isralei Ambassador to the United States, refused to speak at the lobby group's convention late last year, stating that J Street constantly opposes the Israeli government. J Street calls for strong American pressure on Israel.
On February 4, J Street plans to launch a new grassroots campaign in the Philadelphia area from Steinhardt Hall, the Hillel building at the University of Pennsylvania. The J Street announcement is promoting the event as a “call to action” to move forward its “pro-peace agenda.” Vehemently opposed by counter-protest groups such as 'Z-Street', the announcement has sparked a number of angry responses from those who wonder why such a venerable student group as Hillel, The Foundation for Jewish Campus Life, would make its building available for such an activity.
In a written response to a query from Israel National News, Rabbi Howard Alpert, executive director of Hillel of Greater Philadelphia, explained Monday that the student group had “considered J Street's request and applied to it the same criteria we would apply to other Jewish communal organizations.”
Those criteria, he said, included a commitment to accept and subscribe to the Hillel mission statement of support of Israel 'as the Jewish state with secure and recognized borders and as a member of the family of free nations'; that they do not (sic) advocate actions that will materially harm Israel or its representatives such as boycotts, sanctions or judicial action; and that they present their views with civility.”
J Street strongly criticized Israel for last year's counterterrorism Operation Cast Lead in Gaza, and supports dividing Jerusalem between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, including the neighborhoods containing Judaism's holiest sites, the Western Wall (Kotel) and the Temple Mount.
On its website, J Street openly refers to the hundreds of thousands of residents living in Judea and Samaria, which the organization refers to as “the occupied territories” – the same language used by the Arab world – as “an obstacle to peace.... Continued settlement growth undermines the prospects for peace by making Palestinians doubt Israeli motives and commitment, and by complicating the territorial compromises that will be necessary in final status talks,” the J Street policy statement reads.
Rabbi Alpert made an effort to dissociate Hillel from any activities of the group, saying the organization's event “does not constitute an endorsement by Hillel of the policies of the group of of the opinions expressed during its meeting.”
Nevertheless, he reiterated, “we believe it is important that all voices that abide by our principles regarding Israel's right to exist as the nation-state of the Jewish-People have an opportunity to express their opinions in our building as long as they commit to maintaining civility in their presentations.”
Readers can express their opinions to the Hillel organization by calling 215-898-8265 or by faxing a letter to 215-898-8259.
ISRAEL: A GIGANTIC ECONOMIC POWERHOUSE IN A TINY COUNTRY
Israel's Economy Exceeds OECD Countries
Yoram Ettinger - Jan 25, 2010
Straight from the Jerusalem Boardroom #140
1. London Economist (January 2010): Israel's 2009 economic performance, in face of global meltdown, suggests impressive growth in 2010. Israel's GDP grew in 2009 by 0.5%, compared to an average 3.5% decline in OECD countries (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development): US - 2.5% decline, Japan - 6.5% decline, Germany - 4.9% decline, Britain - 4.7% decline, Italy - 4.8% decline, Ireland - 7.5% decline, etc. The Economist projects a 3.7% growth for Israel's 2010 economy and less than 7% unemployment (7.7% in 2009), compared with a 2.4% OECD growth and 8.8% OECD unemployment. Israel's inflation is projected to be 1.7%, compared to 3% in 2009 and OECD's inflation of 1.2% (1.3% in 2009).
Morgan Stanley raises growth forecast for Israel to 3.7%, beyond Bank of Israel's forecast of 3.5% (Globes, Jan. 18, 2010).
Israel's Central Bureau of Statistics (ICBS) reported (Israel Hayom daily, Jan. 1, 2010) a 2.9% budget deficit (% of GDP), which is higher than the 0.8% of 2008, but dramatically lower than most Western economies, some of which exceeded 10%. The ICBS also reported a 6.5BN trade balance surplus, a 75% increase in the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange and a 1.3% decline of GDP per capita, compared with a 2.2% increase in 2008.
2. Israel's high-tech holding its own. The number of Israeli high-tech companies, which enticed investment, remained high (447 compared with 483 in 2008), attesting to the attraction of Israel to venture capitalists. The volume of dollar invested decreased significantly, as a result of drying investment resources and lower market valuations: $1.1BN in 2009, in comparison with $2BN - 2008, $1.8BN - 2007, $1.6BN - 2006, $1.3BN - 2005, $1.5BN - 2004 and $1BN in 2003 (Ma'ariv, Jan. 19).
3. Microsoft expands R&D operations in Israel, adding a few scores of employees to the 600 currently employed (Globes, Jan. 6).
4. Merger & Acquisition of Israeli companies persist. DVTel acquired Israel's Ioimage for $80MN in stock (Globes, Jan. 13). DotHill acquired Israel's Cloverleaf for $113MN (Globes, Jan. 6).
5. Overseas VC investment in Israel. China's $1BN Zhejiang Sanhua invested $9.5MN in Israel's Heliofocus (Globes, Jan. 6). Europe's FilVest, which specializes in bio-med investment, led a $12MN round of private placement by Israel's Endogen - FilVest's first investment in Israel (Globes, Jan. 11). Oracle, Pennsylvania's Susquehanna Growth Equity, Silicon Valley's Hyperion, Boston's Battery Ventures and Briatain's Stage One Ventures co-led a $10MN round of private placement by Israel's cVidia (Globes, Jan. 15). invested $9MN in Israel's Wisair (Globes, Jan. 12). Sequoia Capital participated in a $3MN fourth round by Israel's SunRad (Globes, Jan. 19). Virginia Life Sciences Investments led a $3MN seoncd round of private placement by Israel's Cupron n(Globes, Jan. 20).
Yoram Ettinger - Jan 25, 2010
Straight from the Jerusalem Boardroom #140
1. London Economist (January 2010): Israel's 2009 economic performance, in face of global meltdown, suggests impressive growth in 2010. Israel's GDP grew in 2009 by 0.5%, compared to an average 3.5% decline in OECD countries (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development): US - 2.5% decline, Japan - 6.5% decline, Germany - 4.9% decline, Britain - 4.7% decline, Italy - 4.8% decline, Ireland - 7.5% decline, etc. The Economist projects a 3.7% growth for Israel's 2010 economy and less than 7% unemployment (7.7% in 2009), compared with a 2.4% OECD growth and 8.8% OECD unemployment. Israel's inflation is projected to be 1.7%, compared to 3% in 2009 and OECD's inflation of 1.2% (1.3% in 2009).
Morgan Stanley raises growth forecast for Israel to 3.7%, beyond Bank of Israel's forecast of 3.5% (Globes, Jan. 18, 2010).
Israel's Central Bureau of Statistics (ICBS) reported (Israel Hayom daily, Jan. 1, 2010) a 2.9% budget deficit (% of GDP), which is higher than the 0.8% of 2008, but dramatically lower than most Western economies, some of which exceeded 10%. The ICBS also reported a 6.5BN trade balance surplus, a 75% increase in the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange and a 1.3% decline of GDP per capita, compared with a 2.2% increase in 2008.
2. Israel's high-tech holding its own. The number of Israeli high-tech companies, which enticed investment, remained high (447 compared with 483 in 2008), attesting to the attraction of Israel to venture capitalists. The volume of dollar invested decreased significantly, as a result of drying investment resources and lower market valuations: $1.1BN in 2009, in comparison with $2BN - 2008, $1.8BN - 2007, $1.6BN - 2006, $1.3BN - 2005, $1.5BN - 2004 and $1BN in 2003 (Ma'ariv, Jan. 19).
3. Microsoft expands R&D operations in Israel, adding a few scores of employees to the 600 currently employed (Globes, Jan. 6).
4. Merger & Acquisition of Israeli companies persist. DVTel acquired Israel's Ioimage for $80MN in stock (Globes, Jan. 13). DotHill acquired Israel's Cloverleaf for $113MN (Globes, Jan. 6).
5. Overseas VC investment in Israel. China's $1BN Zhejiang Sanhua invested $9.5MN in Israel's Heliofocus (Globes, Jan. 6). Europe's FilVest, which specializes in bio-med investment, led a $12MN round of private placement by Israel's Endogen - FilVest's first investment in Israel (Globes, Jan. 11). Oracle, Pennsylvania's Susquehanna Growth Equity, Silicon Valley's Hyperion, Boston's Battery Ventures and Briatain's Stage One Ventures co-led a $10MN round of private placement by Israel's cVidia (Globes, Jan. 15). invested $9MN in Israel's Wisair (Globes, Jan. 12). Sequoia Capital participated in a $3MN fourth round by Israel's SunRad (Globes, Jan. 19). Virginia Life Sciences Investments led a $3MN seoncd round of private placement by Israel's Cupron n(Globes, Jan. 20).
SHOULD GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES BE UNIONIZED?
January 28, 2010
WHEN GOVERNMENT WORKERS UNIONIZE, TAXPAYERS LOSE
There are now more unionized government workers than unionized private-sector employees in America, says Investor's Business Daily (IBD).
Time was, unionization meant blue-collar workers laboring on production lines, at construction sites and in mine shafts. While those industries are still unionized, organized labor is losing ground in the private sector. And the fall has been steep says IBD:
* In 2009, only 7.5 million private-sector workers were unionized, down from 8.3 million in 2008 and far off the mid-1950s glory days when more than 35 percent of the work force was unionized.
* Meanwhile, 7.9 million public-sector workers belonged to organized labor in 2009, up from 7.8 million the year before.
* Rather than represent 17 percent of the unionized work force as they did in 1973, union workers make up 52 percent of the union rolls.
This may be good for union members and bosses, but not for taxpayers, says IBD:
* Leo Troy, a Rutgers economics professor who has studied unions for years, notes "the collaboration between the nominal public employer -- elected officials -- and unionism suggests that taxpayer comes out on the short end."
* "Collective bargaining," adds James Sherk of the Heritage Foundation, "gives government employees the power to tell voters how to spend their tax dollars instead of the other way around; that is why early labor leaders rejected it as undemocratic."
As did policymakers. Until the laws began to be changed in the 1960s, Sherk says, federal, state and local governments did not allow public employees to collectively bargain with taxpayers.
The wise move would be to return to those restrictive policies. But the unions aren't about to let that happen. Nor would lawmakers, with whom the unions have developed what Troy calls an "incestuous" relationship.
After all, unionized public employees are a natural voting bloc for lawmakers who keep handing them raises. It is the kind of relationship that is crushing California and will eventually devour Oregon and other governments, says IBD.
Source: Editorial, "Gov't Unions 2, Oregon Taxpayers 0," Investor's Business Daily, January 28, 2010.
For text:
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=519312
WHEN GOVERNMENT WORKERS UNIONIZE, TAXPAYERS LOSE
There are now more unionized government workers than unionized private-sector employees in America, says Investor's Business Daily (IBD).
Time was, unionization meant blue-collar workers laboring on production lines, at construction sites and in mine shafts. While those industries are still unionized, organized labor is losing ground in the private sector. And the fall has been steep says IBD:
* In 2009, only 7.5 million private-sector workers were unionized, down from 8.3 million in 2008 and far off the mid-1950s glory days when more than 35 percent of the work force was unionized.
* Meanwhile, 7.9 million public-sector workers belonged to organized labor in 2009, up from 7.8 million the year before.
* Rather than represent 17 percent of the unionized work force as they did in 1973, union workers make up 52 percent of the union rolls.
This may be good for union members and bosses, but not for taxpayers, says IBD:
* Leo Troy, a Rutgers economics professor who has studied unions for years, notes "the collaboration between the nominal public employer -- elected officials -- and unionism suggests that taxpayer comes out on the short end."
* "Collective bargaining," adds James Sherk of the Heritage Foundation, "gives government employees the power to tell voters how to spend their tax dollars instead of the other way around; that is why early labor leaders rejected it as undemocratic."
As did policymakers. Until the laws began to be changed in the 1960s, Sherk says, federal, state and local governments did not allow public employees to collectively bargain with taxpayers.
The wise move would be to return to those restrictive policies. But the unions aren't about to let that happen. Nor would lawmakers, with whom the unions have developed what Troy calls an "incestuous" relationship.
After all, unionized public employees are a natural voting bloc for lawmakers who keep handing them raises. It is the kind of relationship that is crushing California and will eventually devour Oregon and other governments, says IBD.
Source: Editorial, "Gov't Unions 2, Oregon Taxpayers 0," Investor's Business Daily, January 28, 2010.
For text:
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=519312
ISRAEL' DISPROPORTIONATE RESPONSE
//////////////////////////////
Who knew
ISRAEL' DISPROPORTIONATE RESPONSE
Many countries and world leaders have accused Israel of responding disproportionately to aggression from Hizballah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza.
However, it is time that the world press and media speak of another disproportionate response from Israel.
The terrible disastrous earthquake in Haiti has generated responses from many nations. The US has sent supplies and personnel, Britain sent 64 firemen and 8 volunteers, France sent troops for Search and Rescue. Many large and wealthy nations of the world sent money. The Arab and Moslem world nothing.
Israel, a nation of 7.5 million people has sent a team of 220 people that include Medical personnel and will establish the largest field hospital in Haiti, treating up to 5000 people a day, an experienced Search and Rescue team and medical supplies. As in previous earthquake disasters, such as in Gujarat India in 2001 and in Turkey, in the bombings in Kenya, Israel has been one of the most generous givers of aid and assistance.
Turkey seems to have forgotten this help as its extreme Moslem Government is cozying up to Iran.
Judge Goldstone, where are you now? Eating your heart out and hanging your head down in shame I hope.
The favorite occupation in the UN is Israel bashing. More resolutions have been passed condemning Israel than all the so called democratic nations such as Sudan, China, Russia and others for their crimes against their minorities.
I think it is time that the world should know about Israel's disproportionate response.
Please forward this to as many people as you can.
David Yehezkel
************************************
January 17, 2010
Arlene Kushner
"With Great Pride"
I call it positive. Incredibly so. Not happy -- in fact, unspeakably painful. But a Kiddush HaShem: a blessing on G-d's name.
In the midst of the overwhelming death and destruction that is Haiti right now, there are Israelis who have come to save lives and offer succor.
On Friday, El Al and IDF planes came into Haiti, carrying 250 medical personnel -- doctors, nurses, lab and x-ray technicians and even a psychiatrist -- and supplies for a mobile hospital, including a pharmacy, a surgical unit, and a maternity ward. A young Haitian mother who was the first to deliver in this ward, early this morning, named her baby Israel.
You can see footage of an IDF rescue team at work in Haiti here:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/Page/VideoPlayer&cid=1194419829128&videoId=1263147905094
~~~~~~~~~~
Members of ZAKA, the Israeli ultra-Orthodox volunteer rescue organization, were on the scene as well. Yesterday, on Shabbat, they labored, digging in the rubble of a collapsed multi-story university building, where cries were heard. After hours of effort, they succeeded in pulling eight students from that rubble, alive.
These ZAKA members then took time, in the midst of the chaos, to wrap themselves in their tallitot (prayer shawls) and recite their Shabbat prayers. Undoubtedly most if not all of the Haitians on the scene had never seen such a sight.
When the men had finished praying, a crowd of people gathered around them and kissed their tallitot.
~~~~~~~~~~
According to one report, head of the ZAKA mission, Mati Goldstein said:
"With all the hell going on outside, even when things get bad Judaism says we must take a deep breath and go on to save more people.
"We did everything to save lives, despite Shabbat. People asked, 'Why are you here? There are no Jews here', but we are here because the Torah orders us to save lives."
At one point, when things were very grim, Goldstein reported that one mission member started to sing, Heveinu Shalom Aleichem (We bring peace to you.) "I had tears in my eyes," he said.
The ZAKA mission will be staying in Haiti a couple more days, even though beyond a certain point it is highly unlikely that anyone else will be found alive under the rubble.
What is exceedingly important to the mission is making their Israeli identity very clear. And so, in this regard, you can help Israel by sharing this broadly and letting the world know what we are all about.
I leave off writing here (and save other news for another day), so this can be circulated, sharing simply this important news.
//////////////////
http://israelunitycoalition.org/video/vtemplate.php?id=98
Please forward this to as many people as you can.
INFILTRATION
http://www.pjtv.com/v/2930
The commentary below by Daniel Pipes illustrates the daunting challenge we in the West face in dealing with the threat of Islamist infiltration of our government and intelligence agencies.
If government officials are deemed as too aggressive in doing background checks of Muslims who seek such positions, they are met with the predictable cry of “discrimination” and “Islamophobia.”
If they are not aggressive or thorough enough in their background checks, radical Islamists slip through and gain access to classified intelligence information that could compromise critical anti-terrorism investigations – putting us at greater risk.
But the blame for this situation does not lie with Americans who are concerned about national security and demand exhaustive background checks of Muslims, and the “victims” are not Muslims who claim they are being discriminated against or treated unfairly.
The blame lies first with those millions of Muslims who are intent on waging jihad against us, whether through violent means or cultural subversion. The blame lies secondly with those Muslims who reflexively cry “discrimination” but do nothing to isolate or stop the Muslims intent on waging jihad.
And the victims are the American people, who, every time they have to take off their shoes to go through airport security…who every time they have to pay more for goods and services because of the increased costs due to the threat of terrorism…who every time they fear for the safety of loved ones who are traveling…are starkly reminded of the cost we are paying for this jihadist assault on our safety, security and values.
So let us never forget. We are in this war against Islamic terrorism, in all its manifestations, because Islamists have declared jihad against us. They are the aggressors, and we have every right to do what we must to protect and defend ourselves, and to do so without apology. And that includes keeping a keen and watchful eye on Muslims who seek positions in our government and intelligence agencies.
The West's Islamist Infiltrators
By Daniel Pipes
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com
Aafia Siddiqui, 36, is a Pakistani mother of three, an alumna of MIT, and a Ph.D. in neuroscience from Brandeis University. She is also accused of working for Al-Qaeda and was charged last week in New York City with attempting to kill American soldiers.
Her arrest serves to remind how invisibly most Islamist infiltration proceeds. In particular, an estimated forty Al-Qaeda sympathizers or operatives have sought to penetrate U.S. intelligence agencies.
Such a well-placed infiltrator can wreck great damage explains a former CIA chief of counterintelligence, Michael Sulick: "In the war on terrorism, intelligence has replaced the Cold War's tanks and fighter planes as the primary weapon against an unseen enemy." Islamist moles, he argues, "could inflict far more damage to national security than Soviet spies," for the U.S. and Soviet Union never actually fought each other, whereas now, "our nation is at war."
Here are some American cases of attempted infiltration since 2001 that have been made public:
* The Air Force discharged Sadeq Naji Ahmed, a Yemeni immigrant, when his superiors learned of his pro-Al-Qaeda statements. Ahmed subsequently became a baggage screener at Detroit's Metro Airport, which terminated him for hiding his earlier discharge from the Air Force. He was convicted of making false statements and sentenced to eighteen months in jail.
* The Chicago Police Department fired Patricia Eng-Hussain just three days into her training on learning that her husband, Mohammad Azam Hussain, was arrested for being an active member of Mohajir Qaumi Movement-Haqiqi (MQM-H), a Pakistani terrorist group.
* The Chicago Police Department also fired Arif Sulejmanovski, a supervising janitor at its 25th District station after it learned his name was on a federal terrorist watch list of international terrorism suspects.
* Mohammad Alavi, an engineer at the Palo Verde nuclear power plant, was arrested as he arrived on a flight from Iran, accused of taking computer access codes and software to Iran that provide details on the plant's control rooms and plant layout. He subsequently pleaded guilty to transporting stolen property.
* Nada Nadim Prouty, a Lebanese immigrant who worked for both the FBI and CIA, pleaded guilty to charges of: fraudulently obtaining U.S. citizenship; accessing a federal computer system to unlawfully query information about her relatives and the terrorist organization Hizballah; and engaging in conspiracy to defraud the United States.
* Waheeda Tehseen, a Pakistani immigrant who filled a sensitive toxicologist position with the Environmental Protection Agency, pleaded guilty to fraud and was deported. World Net Daily explains that "investigators suspect espionage is probable, as she produced highly sensitive health-hazard documents for toxic compounds and chemical pesticides. Tehseen also was an expert in parasitology as it relates to public water systems."
* Weiss Rasool, 31, a Fairfax County police sergeant and Afghan immigrant, pleaded guilty for checking police databases without authorization, thereby jeopardizing at least one federal terrorism investigation.
* Nadire P. Zenelaj, 32, a 911 emergency operator of Albanian origins, was charged with 232 felony counts of computer trespass for illegally searching New York State databases, including at least one person on the FBI's terrorist watch list.
Three other cases are less clear. The Transportation Security Administration fired Bassam Khalaf, 21, a Texan of Christian Palestinian origins, as an airport baggage screener because lyrics on his music CD, Terror Alert, applaud the 9/11 attacks. FBI Special Agent Gamal Abdel-Hafiz "showed a pattern of pro-Islamist behavior," according to author Paul Sperry, that may have helped acquit Sami Al-Arian of terrorism charges. The Pentagon cleared Hesham Islam, an Egyptian immigrant, former U.S. Navy commander, and special assistant to the deputy secretary of defense, but major questions remain about his biography and his outlook.
Other Western countries too - Australia, Canada, Israel, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom - have been subject to infiltration efforts. (For details, see my weblog entry, "Islamists Penetrate Western Security.")
This record prompts one to wonder what catastrophe must occur before government agencies, some of which have banished the words "Islam" and "jihad," seriously confront their internal threat?
Westerners are indebted to Muslim agents like Fred Ghussin and "Kamil Pasha" who have been critical to fighting terrorism. That said, I stand by my 2003 statement that "There is no escaping the unfortunate fact that Muslim government employees in law enforcement, the military and the diplomatic corps need to be watched for connections to terrorism."
/////////////////////////////
What will it take for government agencies and elected officials who hold up CAIR (the Council on American-Islamic Relations) as a “mainstream” Islamic organization to admit they have been wrong?
How many CAIR and former CAIR officials have to be arrested or indicted?
How many times must links between CAIR and terrorist organizations be uncovered?
How many times must CAIR be on the wrong side of common sense anti-terrorism policies?
Here’s the latest…
CAIR Attempts to Sabotage Law Enforcement Terrorism Training
The Conservative Voice, NC September 09 2008
By Jim Kouri
(The following is based on material obtained by the National Association of Chiefs of Police.)
http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/34361.html
The Council for American Islamic Relations has been trying in vain to stop a counter- terrorism program in Sarasota Florida, aimed at providing first responders with information on subjects such as building safety, suicide terrorism, technologies against terrorism and more. [emphasis added]
This is part of CAIR's program to stop Security Solutions International (SSI) -- an organization that has trained more than 500 Federal, State and Local agencies since 2004.
SSI officials, CAIR attempted to stop a training program for cops and security personnel in Seattle last Memorial Day. Fortunately, they failed.
"As Americans, we can not allow the civil liberties of our great country to be exploited by groups that are intent on creating a fundamentalist Islamic regime here in the USA", says Sol Bradman, CEO of Security Solutions International, the organizers of the Sarasota Sheriffs 3rd Annual Gulf Coast Terrorism conference being held in Sarasota from the 15th to the 19th of September for the benefit of Homeland Security professionals -- coming from as far as Australia to attend what is being called the most innovative terrorism prevention conference in the USA.
"This is not about incitement against Muslims, as CAIR wants us to believe. Our mission is to protect all Americans against terrorism but also against the abuse of our laws." This is Lawfare against US First Responders and therefore against the USA by the pseudo legal wing of the Global Jihad in America," says Bradman.
"The modus operandi is simple; use the freedoms and loopholes of the most liberal nation on earth to help finance and direct the world's most violent international terrorism cells," he added.
Daniel Pipes, the Harvard Professor, publisher and head of the Middle East Forum, has consistently pointed out that CAIR is riddled with extremists and has been closely linked to organizations that have been convicted or individuals convicted of terrorism. The group, that claims to represent US Muslims but is cited by many US Muslims as being a thinly veiled cover group for extremists, is losing membership. Nonetheless, they mount campaigns to get training and other valuable help to US First Responders stopped, canceled, delegitimized and several jurisdictions have folded attempts to hold counter terror training.
On September 3rd, a Sarasota blog published an article claiming that sources have produced solid information that Morris Days, the Manager for Civil Rights at the CAIR MD/VA chapter, who was widely publicized by CAIR as one of its civil rights attorneys, was in fact not an attorney, and failed to provide services for Muslim American clients who came to CAIR for assistance and who paid for Days' services. Not only has CAIR not revealed the facts about Days and his fraudulent, criminal behavior, but as of yesterday, September 2, 2008, the CAIR National office in Washington, D.C. continued to post articles at its website naming Days as an attorney.
The Florida representative of CAIR has been sending everyone in Sarasota pleas to stop the program under the argument that it represents an attempt to stereotype all Muslims as Terrorists. SSI is well known for fair and balanced training at a highly professional level and actively discourages racial and ethnic profiling because this bad counter terrorism practice.
Not only was CAIR Florida actively touting the innocence of convicted Terrorist, Sami Al-Arian but CAIR Florida also claimed that two students at South Florida University in Tampa were carrying 4th of July firecrackers in the trunk of their car but later the two admitted to carrying explosives for the purposes of committing terrorist acts. Tampa has often suffered from the effects of Radical Islam.
To counter this, SSI is offering a special day: "Allah in America". Speakers such as Andrew Whitehead, the founder of Anti-Cair will attend and speak as a result of his ceaseless dedication in fighting radical extremism in the US, channeled through the Anti-CAIR organization including frequent posts based on investigative reporting that exemplify the very essence of Islamic radicalism, including repeated attempts to threaten our constitutional freedoms.
SSI's program, the Threat of Radical Jihadist to the World, prepared by a Muslim counter terror law enforcement officer from California will also be presented with an emphasis on CAIR and other extremist groups that operate under the guise of civil rights.
So-called anti-terrorist organizations, aligned with Islamic extremism, blatantly abuse the laws, freedoms and loopholes of the most liberal nation on earth to help finance and direct the world's most violent international terrorism cells.
The "Protecting the Homeland" organization charter embodies two main objectives: ceaseless dedication in counter-acting Islamic radicals who repeatedly attempt to threaten our constitutional freedoms, and channeling funds to educate US First Responders through sponsorship of training programs in the USA and Israel.
---------------------------------------------------------
Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and he's a staff writer for the New Media Alliance (thenma.org). In addition, he's the new editor for the House Conservatives Fund's weblog. Kouri also serves as political advisor for Emmy and Golden Globe winning actor Michael Moriarty.
He's former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed "Crack City" by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university and director of security for several major organizations. He's also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country. Kouri writes for many police and security magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer and others. He's a news writer for TheConservativeVoice.Com and PHXnews.com. He's also a columnist for AmericanDaily.Com, MensNewsDaily.Com, MichNews.Com, and he's syndicated by AXcessNews.Com. He's appeared as on-air commentator for over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Oprah, McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, Fox News, etc. His book Assume The Position is available at Amazon.Com. Kouri's own website is located at http://jimkouri.us.
----------------------------------------------------------------
ACT for America
The commentary below by Daniel Pipes illustrates the daunting challenge we in the West face in dealing with the threat of Islamist infiltration of our government and intelligence agencies.
If government officials are deemed as too aggressive in doing background checks of Muslims who seek such positions, they are met with the predictable cry of “discrimination” and “Islamophobia.”
If they are not aggressive or thorough enough in their background checks, radical Islamists slip through and gain access to classified intelligence information that could compromise critical anti-terrorism investigations – putting us at greater risk.
But the blame for this situation does not lie with Americans who are concerned about national security and demand exhaustive background checks of Muslims, and the “victims” are not Muslims who claim they are being discriminated against or treated unfairly.
The blame lies first with those millions of Muslims who are intent on waging jihad against us, whether through violent means or cultural subversion. The blame lies secondly with those Muslims who reflexively cry “discrimination” but do nothing to isolate or stop the Muslims intent on waging jihad.
And the victims are the American people, who, every time they have to take off their shoes to go through airport security…who every time they have to pay more for goods and services because of the increased costs due to the threat of terrorism…who every time they fear for the safety of loved ones who are traveling…are starkly reminded of the cost we are paying for this jihadist assault on our safety, security and values.
So let us never forget. We are in this war against Islamic terrorism, in all its manifestations, because Islamists have declared jihad against us. They are the aggressors, and we have every right to do what we must to protect and defend ourselves, and to do so without apology. And that includes keeping a keen and watchful eye on Muslims who seek positions in our government and intelligence agencies.
The West's Islamist Infiltrators
By Daniel Pipes
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com
Aafia Siddiqui, 36, is a Pakistani mother of three, an alumna of MIT, and a Ph.D. in neuroscience from Brandeis University. She is also accused of working for Al-Qaeda and was charged last week in New York City with attempting to kill American soldiers.
Her arrest serves to remind how invisibly most Islamist infiltration proceeds. In particular, an estimated forty Al-Qaeda sympathizers or operatives have sought to penetrate U.S. intelligence agencies.
Such a well-placed infiltrator can wreck great damage explains a former CIA chief of counterintelligence, Michael Sulick: "In the war on terrorism, intelligence has replaced the Cold War's tanks and fighter planes as the primary weapon against an unseen enemy." Islamist moles, he argues, "could inflict far more damage to national security than Soviet spies," for the U.S. and Soviet Union never actually fought each other, whereas now, "our nation is at war."
Here are some American cases of attempted infiltration since 2001 that have been made public:
* The Air Force discharged Sadeq Naji Ahmed, a Yemeni immigrant, when his superiors learned of his pro-Al-Qaeda statements. Ahmed subsequently became a baggage screener at Detroit's Metro Airport, which terminated him for hiding his earlier discharge from the Air Force. He was convicted of making false statements and sentenced to eighteen months in jail.
* The Chicago Police Department fired Patricia Eng-Hussain just three days into her training on learning that her husband, Mohammad Azam Hussain, was arrested for being an active member of Mohajir Qaumi Movement-Haqiqi (MQM-H), a Pakistani terrorist group.
* The Chicago Police Department also fired Arif Sulejmanovski, a supervising janitor at its 25th District station after it learned his name was on a federal terrorist watch list of international terrorism suspects.
* Mohammad Alavi, an engineer at the Palo Verde nuclear power plant, was arrested as he arrived on a flight from Iran, accused of taking computer access codes and software to Iran that provide details on the plant's control rooms and plant layout. He subsequently pleaded guilty to transporting stolen property.
* Nada Nadim Prouty, a Lebanese immigrant who worked for both the FBI and CIA, pleaded guilty to charges of: fraudulently obtaining U.S. citizenship; accessing a federal computer system to unlawfully query information about her relatives and the terrorist organization Hizballah; and engaging in conspiracy to defraud the United States.
* Waheeda Tehseen, a Pakistani immigrant who filled a sensitive toxicologist position with the Environmental Protection Agency, pleaded guilty to fraud and was deported. World Net Daily explains that "investigators suspect espionage is probable, as she produced highly sensitive health-hazard documents for toxic compounds and chemical pesticides. Tehseen also was an expert in parasitology as it relates to public water systems."
* Weiss Rasool, 31, a Fairfax County police sergeant and Afghan immigrant, pleaded guilty for checking police databases without authorization, thereby jeopardizing at least one federal terrorism investigation.
* Nadire P. Zenelaj, 32, a 911 emergency operator of Albanian origins, was charged with 232 felony counts of computer trespass for illegally searching New York State databases, including at least one person on the FBI's terrorist watch list.
Three other cases are less clear. The Transportation Security Administration fired Bassam Khalaf, 21, a Texan of Christian Palestinian origins, as an airport baggage screener because lyrics on his music CD, Terror Alert, applaud the 9/11 attacks. FBI Special Agent Gamal Abdel-Hafiz "showed a pattern of pro-Islamist behavior," according to author Paul Sperry, that may have helped acquit Sami Al-Arian of terrorism charges. The Pentagon cleared Hesham Islam, an Egyptian immigrant, former U.S. Navy commander, and special assistant to the deputy secretary of defense, but major questions remain about his biography and his outlook.
Other Western countries too - Australia, Canada, Israel, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom - have been subject to infiltration efforts. (For details, see my weblog entry, "Islamists Penetrate Western Security.")
This record prompts one to wonder what catastrophe must occur before government agencies, some of which have banished the words "Islam" and "jihad," seriously confront their internal threat?
Westerners are indebted to Muslim agents like Fred Ghussin and "Kamil Pasha" who have been critical to fighting terrorism. That said, I stand by my 2003 statement that "There is no escaping the unfortunate fact that Muslim government employees in law enforcement, the military and the diplomatic corps need to be watched for connections to terrorism."
/////////////////////////////
What will it take for government agencies and elected officials who hold up CAIR (the Council on American-Islamic Relations) as a “mainstream” Islamic organization to admit they have been wrong?
How many CAIR and former CAIR officials have to be arrested or indicted?
How many times must links between CAIR and terrorist organizations be uncovered?
How many times must CAIR be on the wrong side of common sense anti-terrorism policies?
Here’s the latest…
CAIR Attempts to Sabotage Law Enforcement Terrorism Training
The Conservative Voice, NC September 09 2008
By Jim Kouri
(The following is based on material obtained by the National Association of Chiefs of Police.)
http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/34361.html
The Council for American Islamic Relations has been trying in vain to stop a counter- terrorism program in Sarasota Florida, aimed at providing first responders with information on subjects such as building safety, suicide terrorism, technologies against terrorism and more. [emphasis added]
This is part of CAIR's program to stop Security Solutions International (SSI) -- an organization that has trained more than 500 Federal, State and Local agencies since 2004.
SSI officials, CAIR attempted to stop a training program for cops and security personnel in Seattle last Memorial Day. Fortunately, they failed.
"As Americans, we can not allow the civil liberties of our great country to be exploited by groups that are intent on creating a fundamentalist Islamic regime here in the USA", says Sol Bradman, CEO of Security Solutions International, the organizers of the Sarasota Sheriffs 3rd Annual Gulf Coast Terrorism conference being held in Sarasota from the 15th to the 19th of September for the benefit of Homeland Security professionals -- coming from as far as Australia to attend what is being called the most innovative terrorism prevention conference in the USA.
"This is not about incitement against Muslims, as CAIR wants us to believe. Our mission is to protect all Americans against terrorism but also against the abuse of our laws." This is Lawfare against US First Responders and therefore against the USA by the pseudo legal wing of the Global Jihad in America," says Bradman.
"The modus operandi is simple; use the freedoms and loopholes of the most liberal nation on earth to help finance and direct the world's most violent international terrorism cells," he added.
Daniel Pipes, the Harvard Professor, publisher and head of the Middle East Forum, has consistently pointed out that CAIR is riddled with extremists and has been closely linked to organizations that have been convicted or individuals convicted of terrorism. The group, that claims to represent US Muslims but is cited by many US Muslims as being a thinly veiled cover group for extremists, is losing membership. Nonetheless, they mount campaigns to get training and other valuable help to US First Responders stopped, canceled, delegitimized and several jurisdictions have folded attempts to hold counter terror training.
On September 3rd, a Sarasota blog published an article claiming that sources have produced solid information that Morris Days, the Manager for Civil Rights at the CAIR MD/VA chapter, who was widely publicized by CAIR as one of its civil rights attorneys, was in fact not an attorney, and failed to provide services for Muslim American clients who came to CAIR for assistance and who paid for Days' services. Not only has CAIR not revealed the facts about Days and his fraudulent, criminal behavior, but as of yesterday, September 2, 2008, the CAIR National office in Washington, D.C. continued to post articles at its website naming Days as an attorney.
The Florida representative of CAIR has been sending everyone in Sarasota pleas to stop the program under the argument that it represents an attempt to stereotype all Muslims as Terrorists. SSI is well known for fair and balanced training at a highly professional level and actively discourages racial and ethnic profiling because this bad counter terrorism practice.
Not only was CAIR Florida actively touting the innocence of convicted Terrorist, Sami Al-Arian but CAIR Florida also claimed that two students at South Florida University in Tampa were carrying 4th of July firecrackers in the trunk of their car but later the two admitted to carrying explosives for the purposes of committing terrorist acts. Tampa has often suffered from the effects of Radical Islam.
To counter this, SSI is offering a special day: "Allah in America". Speakers such as Andrew Whitehead, the founder of Anti-Cair will attend and speak as a result of his ceaseless dedication in fighting radical extremism in the US, channeled through the Anti-CAIR organization including frequent posts based on investigative reporting that exemplify the very essence of Islamic radicalism, including repeated attempts to threaten our constitutional freedoms.
SSI's program, the Threat of Radical Jihadist to the World, prepared by a Muslim counter terror law enforcement officer from California will also be presented with an emphasis on CAIR and other extremist groups that operate under the guise of civil rights.
So-called anti-terrorist organizations, aligned with Islamic extremism, blatantly abuse the laws, freedoms and loopholes of the most liberal nation on earth to help finance and direct the world's most violent international terrorism cells.
The "Protecting the Homeland" organization charter embodies two main objectives: ceaseless dedication in counter-acting Islamic radicals who repeatedly attempt to threaten our constitutional freedoms, and channeling funds to educate US First Responders through sponsorship of training programs in the USA and Israel.
---------------------------------------------------------
Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and he's a staff writer for the New Media Alliance (thenma.org). In addition, he's the new editor for the House Conservatives Fund's weblog. Kouri also serves as political advisor for Emmy and Golden Globe winning actor Michael Moriarty.
He's former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed "Crack City" by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university and director of security for several major organizations. He's also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country. Kouri writes for many police and security magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer and others. He's a news writer for TheConservativeVoice.Com and PHXnews.com. He's also a columnist for AmericanDaily.Com, MensNewsDaily.Com, MichNews.Com, and he's syndicated by AXcessNews.Com. He's appeared as on-air commentator for over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Oprah, McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, Fox News, etc. His book Assume The Position is available at Amazon.Com. Kouri's own website is located at http://jimkouri.us.
----------------------------------------------------------------
ACT for America
Fact Check: How State of Union Compares With Reality
A look at some of Obama's claims in the State of the Union and how they compare with the facts
WASHINGTON -- President Obama, who once considered government spending freezes a hatchet job, told Americans on Wednesday it's now part of his solution to the exploding deficit. He didn't explain what had changed.
His State of the Union speech skipped over a variety of complex realities in laying out a "common-sense" call to action.
A look at some of his claims and how they compare with the facts:
OBAMA: "Starting in 2011, we are prepared to freeze government spending for three years. Spending related to our national security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will not be affected. But all other discretionary government programs will. Like any cash-strapped family, we will work within a budget to invest in what we need and sacrifice what we don't."
THE FACTS: The anticipated savings from this proposal would amount to less than one percent of the deficit -- and that's if the president can persuade Congress to go along.
Obama is a convert to the cause of broad spending freezes. In the presidential campaign, he criticized Republican opponent John McCain for suggesting one. "The problem with a spending freeze is you're using a hatchet where you need a scalpel," he said a month before the election. Now, Obama wants domestic spending held steady in most areas where the government can control year to year costs. The proposal is similar to McCain's.
------
OBAMA: "I've called for a bipartisan fiscal commission, modeled on a proposal by Republican Judd Gregg and Democrat Kent Conrad. This can't be one of those Washington gimmicks that lets us pretend we solved a problem. The commission will have to provide a specific set of solutions by a certain deadline. Yesterday, the Senate blocked a bill that would have created this commission. So I will issue an executive order that will allow us to go forward, because I refuse to pass this problem on to another generation of Americans."
THE FACTS: Any commission that Obama creates would be a weak substitute for what he really wanted -- a commission created by Congress that could force lawmakers to consider unpopular remedies to reduce the debt, including curbing politically sensitive entitlements like Social Security and Medicare. That idea crashed in the Senate this week, defeated by equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans. Any commission set up by Obama alone would lack authority to force its recommendations before Congress, and would stand almost no chance of success.
------
OBAMA: Discussing his health care initiative, he said: "Our approach would preserve the right of Americans who have insurance to keep their doctor and their plan."
THE FACTS: The Democratic legislation now hanging in limbo on Capitol Hill aims to keep people with employer-sponsored coverage -- the majority of Americans under age 65 -- in the plans they already have. But Obama can't guarantee g point of contention for the president. In December, the administration reported that recipients of direct assistance from the government created or saved about 650,000 jobs. The number was based on self-reporting by recipients and some of the calculations were shown to be in error.
The Congressional Budget Office has been much more guarded than Obama in characterizing the success of the stimulus plan. In November, it reported that the stimulus increased the number of people employed by between 600,000 and 1.6 million "compared with what those values would have been otherwise." It said the ranges "reflect the uncertainty of such estimates." And it added: "It is impossible to determine how many of the reported jobs would have existed in the absence of the stimulus package."
------
OBAMA: He called for action by the White House and Congress "to do our work openly, and to give our people the government they deserve."
THE FACTS: Obama skipped past a broken promise from his campaign -- to have the negotiations for health care legislation broadcast on C-SPAN "so that people can see who is making arguments on behalf of their constituents, and who are making arguments on behalf of the drug companies or the insurance companies." Instead, Democrats in the White House and Congress have conducted the usual private negotiations, making multibillion-dollar deals with hospitals, pharmaceutical companies and other stakeholders behind closed doors. Nor has Obama lived up consistently to his pledge to ensure that legislation is posted online for five days before it's acted upon.
------
OBAMA: "We will continue to go through the budget line by line to eliminate programs that we can't afford and don't work. We've already identified $20 billion in savings for next year."
THE FACTS: Identifying savings is far from achieving them. If the past is any guide, little will result from this exercise because Congress routinely rejects the White House's suggested spending cuts.
------
OBAMA: "The United States and Russia are completing negotiations on the farthest-reaching arms control treaty in nearly two decades."
THE FACTS: Despite insisting early last year that they would complete the negotiations in time to avoid expiration of the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty in early December, the U.S. and Russia failed to do so. And while officials say they think a deal on a new treaty is within reach, there has been no breakthrough. A new round of talks is set to start Monday. One important sticking point: disagreement over including missile defense issues in a new accord. If completed, the new deal may arguably be the farthest-reaching arms control treaty since the original 1991 agreement. An interim deal reached in 2002 did not include its own rules on verifying nuclear reductions.
------
OBAMA: Drawing on classified information, he claimed more success than his predecessor at killing terrorists: "And in the last year, hundreds of al-Qaida's fighters and affiliates, including many senior leaders, have been captured or killed -- far more than in 2008."
THE FACTS: It is an impossible claim to verify. Neither the Bush nor the Obama administration has published enemy body counts, particularly those targeted by armed drones in the Pakistan-Afghan border region. The pace of drone attacks has increased dramatically in the last 18 months, according to congressional officials briefed on the secret program.
WASHINGTON -- President Obama, who once considered government spending freezes a hatchet job, told Americans on Wednesday it's now part of his solution to the exploding deficit. He didn't explain what had changed.
His State of the Union speech skipped over a variety of complex realities in laying out a "common-sense" call to action.
A look at some of his claims and how they compare with the facts:
OBAMA: "Starting in 2011, we are prepared to freeze government spending for three years. Spending related to our national security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will not be affected. But all other discretionary government programs will. Like any cash-strapped family, we will work within a budget to invest in what we need and sacrifice what we don't."
THE FACTS: The anticipated savings from this proposal would amount to less than one percent of the deficit -- and that's if the president can persuade Congress to go along.
Obama is a convert to the cause of broad spending freezes. In the presidential campaign, he criticized Republican opponent John McCain for suggesting one. "The problem with a spending freeze is you're using a hatchet where you need a scalpel," he said a month before the election. Now, Obama wants domestic spending held steady in most areas where the government can control year to year costs. The proposal is similar to McCain's.
------
OBAMA: "I've called for a bipartisan fiscal commission, modeled on a proposal by Republican Judd Gregg and Democrat Kent Conrad. This can't be one of those Washington gimmicks that lets us pretend we solved a problem. The commission will have to provide a specific set of solutions by a certain deadline. Yesterday, the Senate blocked a bill that would have created this commission. So I will issue an executive order that will allow us to go forward, because I refuse to pass this problem on to another generation of Americans."
THE FACTS: Any commission that Obama creates would be a weak substitute for what he really wanted -- a commission created by Congress that could force lawmakers to consider unpopular remedies to reduce the debt, including curbing politically sensitive entitlements like Social Security and Medicare. That idea crashed in the Senate this week, defeated by equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans. Any commission set up by Obama alone would lack authority to force its recommendations before Congress, and would stand almost no chance of success.
------
OBAMA: Discussing his health care initiative, he said: "Our approach would preserve the right of Americans who have insurance to keep their doctor and their plan."
THE FACTS: The Democratic legislation now hanging in limbo on Capitol Hill aims to keep people with employer-sponsored coverage -- the majority of Americans under age 65 -- in the plans they already have. But Obama can't guarantee g point of contention for the president. In December, the administration reported that recipients of direct assistance from the government created or saved about 650,000 jobs. The number was based on self-reporting by recipients and some of the calculations were shown to be in error.
The Congressional Budget Office has been much more guarded than Obama in characterizing the success of the stimulus plan. In November, it reported that the stimulus increased the number of people employed by between 600,000 and 1.6 million "compared with what those values would have been otherwise." It said the ranges "reflect the uncertainty of such estimates." And it added: "It is impossible to determine how many of the reported jobs would have existed in the absence of the stimulus package."
------
OBAMA: He called for action by the White House and Congress "to do our work openly, and to give our people the government they deserve."
THE FACTS: Obama skipped past a broken promise from his campaign -- to have the negotiations for health care legislation broadcast on C-SPAN "so that people can see who is making arguments on behalf of their constituents, and who are making arguments on behalf of the drug companies or the insurance companies." Instead, Democrats in the White House and Congress have conducted the usual private negotiations, making multibillion-dollar deals with hospitals, pharmaceutical companies and other stakeholders behind closed doors. Nor has Obama lived up consistently to his pledge to ensure that legislation is posted online for five days before it's acted upon.
------
OBAMA: "We will continue to go through the budget line by line to eliminate programs that we can't afford and don't work. We've already identified $20 billion in savings for next year."
THE FACTS: Identifying savings is far from achieving them. If the past is any guide, little will result from this exercise because Congress routinely rejects the White House's suggested spending cuts.
------
OBAMA: "The United States and Russia are completing negotiations on the farthest-reaching arms control treaty in nearly two decades."
THE FACTS: Despite insisting early last year that they would complete the negotiations in time to avoid expiration of the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty in early December, the U.S. and Russia failed to do so. And while officials say they think a deal on a new treaty is within reach, there has been no breakthrough. A new round of talks is set to start Monday. One important sticking point: disagreement over including missile defense issues in a new accord. If completed, the new deal may arguably be the farthest-reaching arms control treaty since the original 1991 agreement. An interim deal reached in 2002 did not include its own rules on verifying nuclear reductions.
------
OBAMA: Drawing on classified information, he claimed more success than his predecessor at killing terrorists: "And in the last year, hundreds of al-Qaida's fighters and affiliates, including many senior leaders, have been captured or killed -- far more than in 2008."
THE FACTS: It is an impossible claim to verify. Neither the Bush nor the Obama administration has published enemy body counts, particularly those targeted by armed drones in the Pakistan-Afghan border region. The pace of drone attacks has increased dramatically in the last 18 months, according to congressional officials briefed on the secret program.
Arab League is keeping Australia out of the Security Council
The Arab League is blocking Australia's attempt to gain one of the non-permanent seats on the UN Security Council because - you guessed it - the Aussies are deemed too supportive of Israel.
Hashem Yousseff, chief of cabinet for Arab League secretary-general Amr Moussa, told The Australian Canberra kept "bad company" at the UN, where it often opposes anti-Israel resolutions in alliance with the US, Canada and small Pacific island states.
Australia's support for Israel, he said, was "one of the elements that will be taken into consideration" by the 22-member Arab League in deciding whether to support Australia's bid for a seat on the UN Security Council for the 2013-14 term.
Mr Yousseff said the Arab nations would consider how different candidates affected their interests. "For us, the Arab-Israeli issue is an important part of the consideration."
Canberra has invested huge political, diplomatic and financial resources in its bid for one of 10 non-permanent Security Council seats.
But Mr Yousseff's comments indicate it will be difficult for Australia to out-poll the European nations, which are regularly more critical of Israel.
Australia has not held a seat on the Security Council for more than 20 years.
Read the whole thing. For what it's worth, we've never had a seat on the Security Council either, and we are unlikely to ever get one. Given the realities, unless Australia is willing to become as anti-Israel as the Europeans (I hope they're not!), there's not much they can do about this.
posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 2:55 PM
COMING ATTRACTIONS
!! Shariah Comes to Vanderbilt !!
Muslim Chaplain Asserts Homosexuality
Is “punishable by death”
Contact Vanderbilt University
to Express Your Concern
Dear Art,
Last week, a Vanderbilt University Muslim chaplain publicly acknowledged what those of us who study shariah Islamic law know.
Awadh Binhazim, when pressed on whether or not shariah Islamic law requires the death penalty for homosexuals, asserted that yes, it does.
Furthermore, he stated: “I don’t have a choice as a Muslim to accept or reject teachings.”
According to a January 29th WorldNetDaily article, Awadh Binhazim is listed on the Vanderbilt website as “Adjunct Professor of Islam at the Divinity School” and is described by Vanderbilt University officials as “the university’s Muslim chaplain.”
To see the 3 minute video of the exchange between Binhazim and Devin Saucier, president of Vanderbilt’s chapter of Youth for Western Civilization, click here or the image below.
We encourage you to contact Vanderbilt University—especially if you are an alumnus and/or a donor (and forward this email to others).
Respectfully but firmly ask that the university publicly and unequivocally condemn Binhazim’s statement as repugnant and incompatible with the laws of American society.
You can call or email the Vanderbilt Office of Public Affairs:
Phone: 615.343.1790
Email: beth.fortune@vanderbilt.edu
We must make it crystal clear to those like Awadh Binhazim, and all those who agree with his belief in oppressive, intolerant and extremist shariah Islamic law:
* That this belief is repugnant to us and we will tirelessly speak out against it and those who advocate it.
* That shariah Islamic law is incompatible with American civil society and constitutional law.
* And that we will oppose any and every effort to advance shariah law here in America, in whatever form it takes.
www.actforamerica.org
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Make sure you receive all of your messages from ACT for America. Add actforamerica@donationnet.net to your address book as an approved email sender. If you found this message in your "Bulk" or "Spam" folder, please click the "Not Spam" button to notify your provider that these are emails you want to receive.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACT for America
P.O. Box 12765
Pensacola, FL 32591
www.actforamerica.org
ACT for America is an issues advocacy organization dedicated to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots citizen action network in America, a grassroots network committed to informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies that promote America’s national security and the defense of American democratic values against the assault of radical Islam. We are only as strong as our supporters, and your volunteer and financial support is essential to our success. Thank you for helping us make America safer and more secure.
The news items, blogs, educational materials and other information in our emails and on our website are only intended to provide information, news and commentary on events and issues related to the threat of radical Islam. Much of this information is based upon media sources, such as the AP wire services, newspapers, magazines, books, online news blog and news services, and radio and television, which we deem to be reliable. However, we have undertaken no independent investigation to verify the accuracy of the information reported by these media sources. We therefore disclaim all liability for false or inaccurate information from these media sources. We also disclaim all liability for the third-party information that may be accessed through the material referenced in our emails or posted on our website.
Do not respond to this e-mail for any reason. To discontinue your membership automatically please, follow the link below. You are registered to receive email as Art Friedman at the following e-mail address: bx1935@sbcglobal.net. You must use the correct e-mail address to discontinue your membership.
Muslim Chaplain Asserts Homosexuality
Is “punishable by death”
Contact Vanderbilt University
to Express Your Concern
Dear Art,
Last week, a Vanderbilt University Muslim chaplain publicly acknowledged what those of us who study shariah Islamic law know.
Awadh Binhazim, when pressed on whether or not shariah Islamic law requires the death penalty for homosexuals, asserted that yes, it does.
Furthermore, he stated: “I don’t have a choice as a Muslim to accept or reject teachings.”
According to a January 29th WorldNetDaily article, Awadh Binhazim is listed on the Vanderbilt website as “Adjunct Professor of Islam at the Divinity School” and is described by Vanderbilt University officials as “the university’s Muslim chaplain.”
To see the 3 minute video of the exchange between Binhazim and Devin Saucier, president of Vanderbilt’s chapter of Youth for Western Civilization, click here or the image below.
We encourage you to contact Vanderbilt University—especially if you are an alumnus and/or a donor (and forward this email to others).
Respectfully but firmly ask that the university publicly and unequivocally condemn Binhazim’s statement as repugnant and incompatible with the laws of American society.
You can call or email the Vanderbilt Office of Public Affairs:
Phone: 615.343.1790
Email: beth.fortune@vanderbilt.edu
We must make it crystal clear to those like Awadh Binhazim, and all those who agree with his belief in oppressive, intolerant and extremist shariah Islamic law:
* That this belief is repugnant to us and we will tirelessly speak out against it and those who advocate it.
* That shariah Islamic law is incompatible with American civil society and constitutional law.
* And that we will oppose any and every effort to advance shariah law here in America, in whatever form it takes.
www.actforamerica.org
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Make sure you receive all of your messages from ACT for America. Add actforamerica@donationnet.net to your address book as an approved email sender. If you found this message in your "Bulk" or "Spam" folder, please click the "Not Spam" button to notify your provider that these are emails you want to receive.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACT for America
P.O. Box 12765
Pensacola, FL 32591
www.actforamerica.org
ACT for America is an issues advocacy organization dedicated to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots citizen action network in America, a grassroots network committed to informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies that promote America’s national security and the defense of American democratic values against the assault of radical Islam. We are only as strong as our supporters, and your volunteer and financial support is essential to our success. Thank you for helping us make America safer and more secure.
The news items, blogs, educational materials and other information in our emails and on our website are only intended to provide information, news and commentary on events and issues related to the threat of radical Islam. Much of this information is based upon media sources, such as the AP wire services, newspapers, magazines, books, online news blog and news services, and radio and television, which we deem to be reliable. However, we have undertaken no independent investigation to verify the accuracy of the information reported by these media sources. We therefore disclaim all liability for false or inaccurate information from these media sources. We also disclaim all liability for the third-party information that may be accessed through the material referenced in our emails or posted on our website.
Do not respond to this e-mail for any reason. To discontinue your membership automatically please, follow the link below. You are registered to receive email as Art Friedman at the following e-mail address: bx1935@sbcglobal.net. You must use the correct e-mail address to discontinue your membership.
How Taqiyya Alters Islam's Rules of War
by Raymond Ibrahim
Middle East Quarterly
Winter 2010
http://www.meforum.org/2538/taqiyya-islam-rules-of-war
Islam must seem a paradoxical religion to non-Muslims. On the one hand, it is constantly being portrayed as the religion of peace; on the other, its adherents are responsible for the majority of terror attacks around the world. Apologists for Islam emphasize that it is a faith built upon high ethical standards; others stress that it is a religion of the law. Islam's dual notions of truth and falsehood further reveal its paradoxical nature: While the Qur'an is against believers deceiving other believers—for "surely God guides not him who is prodigal and a liar"[1]—deception directed at non-Muslims, generally known in Arabic as taqiyya, also has Qur'anic support and falls within the legal category of things that are permissible for Muslims.
Muslim deception can be viewed as a slightly less than noble means to the glorious end of Islamic hegemony under Shari'a, which is seen as good for both Muslims and non-Muslims. In this sense, lying in the service of altruism is permissible. In a recent example, Muslim cleric Mahmoud al-Masri publicly recounted a story where a Muslim lied and misled a Jew into converting to Islam, calling it a "beautiful trick."
Taqiyya offers two basic uses. The better known revolves around dissembling over one's religious identity when in fear of persecution. Such has been the historical usage of taqiyya among Shi'i communities whenever and wherever their Sunni rivals have outnumbered and thus threatened them. Conversely, Sunni Muslims, far from suffering persecution have, whenever capability allowed, waged jihad against the realm of unbelief; and it is here that they have deployed taqiyya—not as dissimulation but as active deceit. In fact, deceit, which is doctrinally grounded in Islam, is often depicted as being equal—sometimes superior—to other universal military virtues, such as courage, fortitude, or self-sacrifice.
Yet if Muslims are exhorted to be truthful, how can deceit not only be prevalent but have divine sanction? What exactly is taqiyya? How is it justified by scholars and those who make use of it? How does it fit into a broader conception of Islam's code of ethics, especially in relation to the non-Muslim? More to the point, what ramifications does the doctrine of taqiyya have for all interaction between Muslims and non-Muslims?
The Doctrine of Taqiyya
According to Shari'a—the body of legal rulings that defines how a Muslim should behave in all circumstances—deception is not only permitted in certain situations but may be deemed obligatory in others. Contrary to early Christian tradition, for instance, Muslims who were forced to choose between recanting Islam or suffering persecution were permitted to lie and feign apostasy. Other jurists have decreed that Muslims are obligated to lie in order to preserve themselves,[2] based on Qur'anic verses forbidding Muslims from being instrumental in their own deaths.[3]
This is the classic definition of the doctrine of taqiyya. Based on an Arabic word denoting fear, taqiyya has long been understood, especially by Western academics, as something to resort to in times of religious persecution and, for the most part, used in this sense by minority Shi'i groups living among hostile Sunni majorities.[4] Taqiyya allowed the Shi'a to dissemble their religious affiliation in front of the Sunnis on a regular basis, not merely by keeping clandestine about their own beliefs but by actively praying and behaving as if they were Sunnis.
However, one of the few books devoted to the subject, At-Taqiyya fi'l-Islam (Dissimulation in Islam) makes it clear that taqiyya is not limited to Shi'a dissimulating in fear of persecution. Written by Sami Mukaram, a former Islamic studies professor at the American University of Beirut and author of some twenty-five books on Islam, the book clearly demonstrates the ubiquity and broad applicability of taqiyya:
Taqiyya is of fundamental importance in Islam. Practically every Islamic sect agrees to it and practices it … We can go so far as to say that the practice of taqiyya is mainstream in Islam, and that those few sects not practicing it diverge from the mainstream … Taqiyya is very prevalent in Islamic politics, especially in the modern era.[5]
Taqiyya is, therefore, not, as is often supposed, an exclusively Shi'i phenomenon. Of course, as a minority group interspersed among their Sunni enemies, the Shi'a have historically had more reason to dissemble. Conversely, Sunni Islam rapidly dominated vast empires from Spain to China. As a result, its followers were beholden to no one, had nothing to apologize for, and had no need to hide from the infidel nonbeliever (rare exceptions include Spain and Portugal during the Reconquista when Sunnis did dissimulate over their religious identity[6]). Ironically, however, Sunnis living in the West today find themselves in the place of the Shi'a: Now they are the minority surrounded by their traditional enemies—Christian infidels—even if the latter, as opposed to their Reconquista predecessors, rarely act on, let alone acknowledge, this historic enmity. In short, Sunnis are currently experiencing the general circumstances that made taqiyya integral to Shi'ism although without the physical threat that had so necessitated it.
The Articulation of Taqiyya
Qur'anic verse 3:28 is often seen as the primary verse that sanctions deception towards non-Muslims: "Let believers [Muslims] not take infidels [non-Muslims] for friends and allies instead of believers. Whoever does this shall have no relationship left with God—unless you but guard yourselves against them, taking precautions."[7]
Muhammad ibn Jarir at-Tabari (d. 923), author of a standard and authoritative Qur'an commentary, explains verse 3:28 as follows:
If you [Muslims] are under their [non-Muslims'] authority, fearing for yourselves, behave loyally to them with your tongue while harboring inner animosity for them … [know that] God has forbidden believers from being friendly or on intimate terms with the infidels rather than other believers—except when infidels are above them [in authority]. Should that be the case, let them act friendly towards them while preserving their religion.[8]
Regarding Qur'an 3:28, Ibn Kathir (d. 1373), another prime authority on the Qur'an, writes, "Whoever at any time or place fears … evil [from non-Muslims] may protect himself through outward show." As proof of this, he quotes Muhammad's close companion Abu Darda, who said, "Let us grin in the face of some people while our hearts curse them." Another companion, simply known as Al-Hasan, said, "Doing taqiyya is acceptable till the Day of Judgment [i.e., in perpetuity]."[9]
Other prominent scholars, such as Abu 'Abdullah al-Qurtubi (1214-73) and Muhyi 'd-Din ibn al-Arabi (1165-1240), have extended taqiyya to cover deeds. In other words, Muslims can behave like infidels and worse—for example, by bowing down and worshiping idols and crosses, offering false testimony, and even exposing the weaknesses of their fellow Muslims to the infidel enemy—anything short of actually killing a Muslim: "Taqiyya, even if committed without duress, does not lead to a state of infidelity—even if it leads to sin deserving of hellfire."[10]
Deceit in Muhammad's Military Exploits
Muhammad—whose example as the "most perfect human" is to be followed in every detail—took an expedient view on lying. It is well known, for instance, that he permitted lying in three situations: to reconcile two or more quarreling parties, to placate one's wife, and in war.[11] According to one Arabic legal manual devoted to jihad as defined by the four schools of law, "The ulema agree that deception during warfare is legitimate … deception is a form of art in war."[12] Moreover, according to Mukaram, this deception is classified as taqiyya: "Taqiyya in order to dupe the enemy is permissible."[13]
Several ulema believe deceit is integral to the waging of war: Ibn al-'Arabi declares that "in the Hadith [sayings and actions of Muhammad], practicing deceit in war is well demonstrated. Indeed, its need is more stressed than the need for courage." Ibn al-Munir (d. 1333) writes, "War is deceit, i.e., the most complete and perfect war waged by a holy warrior is a war of deception, not confrontation, due to the latter's inherent danger, and the fact that one can attain victory through treachery without harm [to oneself]." And Ibn Hajar (d. 1448) counsels Muslims "to take great caution in war, while [publicly] lamenting and mourning in order to dupe the infidels."[14]
This Muslim notion that war is deceit goes back to the Battle of the Trench (627), which pitted Muhammad and his followers against several non-Muslim tribes known as Al-Ahzab. One of the Ahzab, Na'im ibn Mas'ud, went to the Muslim camp and converted to Islam. When Muhammad discovered that the Ahzab were unaware of their co-tribalist's conversion, he counseled Mas'ud to return and try to get the pagan forces to abandon the siege. It was then that Muhammad memorably declared, "For war is deceit." Mas'ud returned to the Ahzab without their knowing that he had switched sides and intentionally began to give his former kin and allies bad advice. He also went to great lengths to instigate quarrels between the various tribes until, thoroughly distrusting each other, they disbanded, lifted the siege from the Muslims, and saved Islam from destruction in an embryonic period.[15] Most recently, 9/11 accomplices, such as Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, rationalized their conspiratorial role in their defendant response by evoking their prophet's assertion that "war is deceit."
A more compelling expression of the legitimacy of deceiving infidels is the following anecdote. A poet, Ka'b ibn Ashraf, offended Muhammad, prompting the latter to exclaim, "Who will kill this man who has hurt God and his prophet?" A young Muslim named Muhammad ibn Maslama volunteered on condition that in order to get close enough to Ka'b to assassinate him, he be allowed to lie to the poet. Muhammad agreed. Ibn Maslama traveled to Ka'b and began to denigrate Islam and Muhammad. He carried on in this way till his disaffection became so convincing that Ka'b took him into his confidence. Soon thereafter, Ibn Maslama appeared with another Muslim and, while Ka'b's guard was down, killed him.[16]
Muhammad said other things that cast deception in a positive light, such as "God has commanded me to equivocate among the people just as he has commanded me to establish [religious] obligations"; and "I have been sent with obfuscation"; and "whoever lives his life in dissimulation dies a martyr."[17]
In short, the earliest historical records of Islam clearly attest to the prevalence of taqiyya as a form of Islamic warfare. Furthermore, early Muslims are often depicted as lying their way out of binds—usually by denying or insulting Islam or Muhammad—often to the approval of the latter, his only criterion being that their intentions (niya) be pure.[18] During wars with Christians, whenever the latter were in authority, the practice of taqiyya became even more integral. Mukaram states, "Taqiyya was used as a way to fend off danger from the Muslims, especially in critical times and when their borders were exposed to wars with the Byzantines and, afterwards, to the raids [crusades] of the Franks and others."[19]
Taqiyya in Qur'anic Revelation
The Qur'an itself is further testimony to taqiyya. Since God is believed to be the revealer of these verses, he is by default seen as the ultimate perpetrator of deceit—which is not surprising since he is described in the Qur'an as the best makar, that is, the best deceiver or schemer (e.g., 3:54, 8:30, 10:21).
While other scriptures contain contradictions, the Qur'an is the only holy book whose commentators have evolved a doctrine to account for the very visible shifts which occur from one injunction to another. No careful reader will remain unaware of the many contradictory verses in the Qur'an, most specifically the way in which peaceful and tolerant verses lie almost side by side with violent and intolerant ones. The ulema were initially baffled as to which verses to codify into the Shari'a worldview—the one that states there is no coercion in religion (2:256), or the ones that command believers to fight all non-Muslims till they either convert, or at least submit, to Islam (8:39, 9:5, 9:29). To get out of this quandary, the commentators developed the doctrine of abrogation, which essentially maintains that verses revealed later in Muhammad's career take precedence over earlier ones whenever there is a discrepancy. In order to document which verses abrogated which, a religious science devoted to the chronology of the Qur'an's verses evolved (known as an-Nasikh wa'l Mansukh, the abrogater and the abrogated).
But why the contradiction in the first place? The standard view is that in the early years of Islam, since Muhammad and his community were far outnumbered by their infidel competitors while living next to them in Mecca, a message of peace and coexistence was in order. However, after the Muslims migrated to Medina in 622 and grew in military strength, verses inciting them to go on the offensive were slowly "revealed"—in principle, sent down from God—always commensurate with Islam's growing capabilities. In juridical texts, these are categorized in stages: passivity vis-á-vis aggression; permission to fight back against aggressors; commands to fight aggressors; commands to fight all non-Muslims, whether the latter begin aggressions or not.[20] Growing Muslim might is the only variable that explains this progressive change in policy.
Other scholars put a gloss on this by arguing that over a twenty-two year period, the Qur'an was revealed piecemeal, from passive and spiritual verses to legal prescriptions and injunctions to spread the faith through jihad and conquest, simply to acclimate early Muslim converts to the duties of Islam, lest they be discouraged at the outset by the dramatic obligations that would appear in later verses.[21] Verses revealed towards the end of Muhammad's career—such as, "Warfare is prescribed for you though you hate it"[22]—would have been out of place when warfare was actually out of the question.
However interpreted, the standard view on Qur'anic abrogation concerning war and peace verses is that when Muslims are weak and in a minority position, they should preach and behave according to the ethos of the Meccan verses (peace and tolerance); when strong, however, they should go on the offensive on the basis of what is commanded in the Medinan verses (war and conquest). The vicissitudes of Islamic history are a testimony to this dichotomy, best captured by the popular Muslim notion, based on a hadith, that, if possible, jihad should be performed by the hand (force), if not, then by the tongue (through preaching); and, if that is not possible, then with the heart or one's intentions.[23]
War Is Eternal
That Islam legitimizes deceit during war is, of course, not all that astonishing; after all, as the Elizabethan writer John Lyly put it, "All's fair in love and war."[24] Other non-Muslim philosophers and strategists—such as Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, and Thomas Hobbes—justified deceit in warfare. Deception of the enemy during war is only common sense. The crucial difference in Islam, however, is that war against the infidel is a perpetual affair—until, in the words of the Qur'an, "all chaos ceases, and all religion belongs to God."[25] In his entry on jihad from the Encyclopaedia of Islam, Emile Tyan states: "The duty of the jihad exists as long as the universal domination of Islam has not been attained. Peace with non-Muslim nations is, therefore, a provisional state of affairs only; the chance of circumstances alone can justify it temporarily."[26]
Moreover, going back to the doctrine of abrogation, Muslim scholars such as Ibn Salama (d. 1020) agree that Qur'an 9:5, known as ayat as-sayf or the sword verse, has abrogated some 124 of the more peaceful Meccan verses, including "every other verse in the Qur'an, which commands or implies anything less than a total offensive against the nonbelievers."[27] In fact, all four schools of Sunni jurisprudence agree that "jihad is when Muslims wage war on infidels, after having called on them to embrace Islam or at least pay tribute [jizya] and live in submission, and the infidels refuse."[28]
Obligatory jihad is best expressed by Islam's dichotomized worldview that pits the realm of Islam against the realm of war. The first, dar al-Islam, is the "realm of submission," the world where Shari'a governs; the second, dar al-Harb (the realm of war), is the non-Islamic world. A struggle continues until the realm of Islam subsumes the non-Islamic world—a perpetual affair that continues to the present day. The renowned Muslim historian and philosopher Ibn Khaldun (d. 1406) clearly articulates this division:
In the Muslim community, jihad is a religious duty because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force. The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the jihad was not a religious duty for them, save only for purposes of defense. But Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations.[29]
Finally and all evidence aside, lest it still appear unreasonable for a faith with over one billion adherents to obligate unprovoked warfare in its name, it is worth noting that the expansionist jihad is seen as an altruistic endeavor, not unlike the nineteenth century ideology of "the white man's burden." The logic is that the world, whether under democracy, socialism, communism, or any other system of governance, is inevitably living in bondage—a great sin, since the good of all humanity is found in living in accordance to God's law. In this context, Muslim deception can be viewed as a slightly less than noble means to a glorious end—Islamic hegemony under Shari'a rule, which is seen as good for both Muslims and non-Muslims.
This view has an ancient pedigree: Soon after the death of Muhammad (634), as the jihad fighters burst out of the Arabian peninsula, a soon-to-be conquered Persian commander asked the invading Muslims what they wanted. They memorably replied as follows:
God has sent us and brought us here so that we may free those who desire from servitude to earthly rulers and make them servants of God, that we may change their poverty into wealth and free them from the tyranny and chaos of [false] religions and bring them to the justice of Islam. He has sent us to bring his religion to all his creatures and call them to Islam. Whoever accepts it from us will be safe, and we shall leave him alone; but whoever refuses, we shall fight until we fulfill the promise of God.[30]
Fourteen hundred years later— in March 2009—Saudi legal expert Basem Alem publicly echoed this view:
As a member of the true religion, I have a greater right to invade [others] in order to impose a certain way of life [according to Shari'a], which history has proven to be the best and most just of all civilizations. This is the true meaning of offensive jihad. When we wage jihad, it is not in order to convert people to Islam, but in order to liberate them from the dark slavery in which they live.[31]
And it should go without saying that taqiyya in the service of altruism is permissible. For example, only recently, after publicly recounting a story where a Muslim tricked a Jew into converting to Islam—warning him that if he tried to abandon Islam, Muslims would kill him as an apostate—Muslim cleric Mahmoud al-Masri called it a "beautiful trick."[32] After all, from an Islamic point of view, it was the Jew who, in the end, benefitted from the deception, which brought him to Islam.
Treaties and Truces
The perpetual nature of jihad is highlighted by the fact that, based on the 10-year treaty of Hudaybiya (628), ratified between Muhammad and his Quraysh opponents in Mecca, most jurists are agreed that ten years is the maximum amount of time Muslims can be at peace with infidels; once the treaty has expired, the situation needs to be reappraised. Based on Muhammad's example of breaking the treaty after two years (by claiming a Quraysh infraction), the sole function of the truce is to buy weakened Muslims time to regroup before renewing the offensive:[33] "By their very nature, treaties must be of temporary duration, for in Muslim legal theory, the normal relations between Muslim and non-Muslim territories are not peaceful, but warlike."[34] Hence "the fuqaha [jurists] are agreed that open-ended truces are illegitimate if Muslims have the strength to renew the war against them [non-Muslims]."[35]
Even though Shari'a mandates Muslims to abide by treaties, they have a way out, one open to abuse: If Muslims believe—even without solid evidence—that their opponents are about to break the treaty, they can preempt by breaking it first. Moreover, some Islamic schools of law, such as the Hanafi, assert that Muslim leaders may abrogate treaties merely if it seems advantageous for Islam.[36] This is reminiscent of the following canonical hadith: "If you ever take an oath to do something and later on you find that something else is better, then you should expiate your oath and do what is better."[37] And what is better, what is more altruistic, than to make God's word supreme by launching the jihad anew whenever possible? Traditionally, Muslim rulers held to a commitment to launch a jihad at least once every year. This ritual is most noted with the Ottoman sultans, who spent half their lives in the field.[38] So important was the duty of jihad that the sultans were not permitted to perform the pilgrimage to Mecca, an individual duty for each Muslim. Their leadership of the jihad allowed this communal duty to continue; without them, it would have fallen into desuetude.[39]
In short, the prerequisite for peace or reconciliation is Muslim advantage. This is made clear in an authoritative Sunni legal text, Umdat as-Salik, written by a fourteenth-century Egyptian scholar, Ahmad Ibn Naqib al-Misri: "There must be some benefit [maslaha] served in making a truce other than the status quo: 'So do not be fainthearted and call for peace when it is you who are uppermost [Qur'an 47:35].'"[40]
More recently, and of great significance for Western leaders advocating cooperation with Islamists, Yasser Arafat, soon after negotiating a peace treaty criticized as conceding too much to Israel, addressed an assembly of Muslims in a mosque in Johannesburg where he justified his actions: "I see this agreement as being no more than the agreement signed between our Prophet Muhammad and the Quraysh in Mecca."[41] In other words, like Muhammad, Arafat gave his word only to annul it once "something better" came along—that is, once the Palestinians became strong enough to renew the offensive and continue on the road to Jerusalem. Elsewhere, Hudaybiya has appeared as a keyword for radical Islamists. The Moro Islamic Liberation Front had three training camps within the Camp Abu Bakar complex in the Philippines, one of which was named Camp Hudaybiya.[42]
Hostility Disguised As Grievance
In their statements directed at European or American audiences, Islamists maintain that the terrorism they direct against the West is merely reciprocal treatment for decades of Western and Israeli oppression. Yet in writings directed to their fellow Muslims, this animus is presented, not as a reaction to military or political provocation but as a product of religious obligation.
For instance, when addressing Western audiences, Osama bin Laden lists any number of grievances as motivating his war on the West—from the oppression of the Palestinians to the Western exploitation of women, and even U.S. failure to sign the environmental Kyoto protocol—all things intelligible from a Western perspective. Never once, however, does he justify Al-Qaeda's attacks on Western targets simply because non-Muslim countries are infidel entities that must be subjugated. Indeed, he often initiates his messages to the West by saying, "Reciprocal treatment is part of justice" or "Peace to whoever follows guidance"[43]—though he means something entirely different than what his Western listeners understand by words such as "peace," "justice," or "guidance."
It is when bin Laden speaks to fellow Muslims that the truth comes out. When a group of prominent Muslims wrote an open letter to the American people soon after the strikes of 9/11, saying that Islam seeks to peacefully coexist,[44] bin Laden wrote to castigate them:
As to the relationship between Muslims and infidels, this is summarized by the Most High's Word: "We [Muslims] renounce you [non-Muslims]. Enmity and hate shall forever reign between us—till you believe in God alone" [Qur'an 60:4]. So there is an enmity, evidenced by fierce hostility from the heart. And this fierce hostility—that is, battle—ceases only if the infidel submits to the authority of Islam, or if his blood is forbidden from being shed [i.e., a dhimmi, or protected minority], or if Muslims are at that point in time weak and incapable. But if the hate at any time extinguishes from the heart, this is great apostasy! ... Such then is the basis and foundation of the relationship between the infidel and the Muslim. Battle, animosity, and hatred—directed from the Muslim to the infidel—is the foundation of our religion. And we consider this a justice and kindness to them.[45]
Mainstream Islam's four schools of jurisprudence lend their support to this hostile Weltanschauung by speaking of the infidel in similar terms. Bin Laden's addresses to the West with his talk of justice and peace are clear instances of taqiyya. He is not only waging a physical jihad but a propaganda war, that is, a war of deceit. If he can convince the West that the current conflict is entirely its fault, he garners greater sympathy for his cause. At the same time, he knows that if Americans were to realize that nothing short of their submission can ever bring peace, his propaganda campaign would be quickly compromised. Hence the constant need to dissemble and to cite grievances, for, as bin Laden's prophet asserted, "War is deceit."
Implications
Taqiyya presents a range of ethical dilemmas. Anyone who truly believes that God justifies and, through his prophet's example, even encourages deception will not experience any ethical qualms over lying. Consider the case of 'Ali Mohammad, bin Laden's first "trainer" and long-time Al-Qaeda operative. An Egyptian, he was initially a member of Islamic Jihad and had served in the Egyptian army's military intelligence unit. After 1984, he worked for a time with the CIA in Germany. Though considered untrustworthy, he managed to get to California where he enlisted in the U.S. Army. It seems likely that he continued to work in some capacity for the CIA. He later trained jihadists in the United States and Afghanistan and was behind several terror attacks in Africa. People who knew him regarded him with "fear and awe for his incredible self-confidence, his inability to be intimidated, absolute ruthless determination to destroy the enemies of Islam, and his zealous belief in the tenets of militant Islamic fundamentalism."[46] Indeed, this sentence sums it all up: For a zealous belief in Islam's tenets, which legitimize deception in order to make God's word supreme, will certainly go a long way in creating "incredible self-confidence" when lying.[47]
Yet most Westerners continue to think that Muslim mores, laws, and ethical constraints are near identical to those of the Judeo-Christian tradition. Naively or arrogantly, today's multiculturalist leaders project their own worldview onto Islamists, thinking a handshake and smiles across a cup of coffee, as well as numerous concessions, are enough to dismantle the power of God's word and centuries of unchanging tradition. The fact remains: Right and wrong in Islam have little to do with universal standards but only with what Islam itself teaches—much of which is antithetical to Western norms.
It must, therefore, be accepted that, contrary to long-held academic assumptions, the doctrine of taqiyya goes far beyond Muslims engaging in religious dissimulation in the interest of self-preservation and encompasses deception of the infidel enemy in general. This phenomenon should provide a context for Shi'i Iran's zeal—taqiyya being especially second nature to Shi'ism—to acquire nuclear power while insisting that its motives are entirely peaceful.
Nor is taqiyya confined to overseas affairs. Walid Phares of the National Defense University has lamented that homegrown Islamists are operating unfettered on American soil due to their use of taqiyya: "Does our government know what this doctrine is all about and, more importantly, are authorities educating the body of our defense apparatus regarding this stealthy threat dormant among us?"[48] After the Fort Hood massacre, when Nidal Malik Hasan, an American-Muslim who exhibited numerous Islamist signs which were ignored, killed thirteen fellow servicemen and women, one is compelled to respond in the negative.
This, then, is the dilemma: Islamic law unambiguously splits the world into two perpetually warring halves—the Islamic world versus the non-Islamic—and holds it to be God's will for the former to subsume the latter. Yet if war with the infidel is a perpetual affair, if war is deceit, and if deeds are justified by intentions—any number of Muslims will naturally conclude that they have a divinely sanctioned right to deceive, so long as they believe their deception serves to aid Islam "until all chaos ceases, and all religion belongs to God."[49] Such deception will further be seen as a means to an altruistic end. Muslim overtures for peace, dialogue, or even temporary truces must be seen in this light, evoking the practical observations of philosopher James Lorimer, uttered over a century ago: "So long as Islam endures, the reconciliation of its adherents, even with Jews and Christians, and still more with the rest of mankind, must continue to be an insoluble problem."[50]
In closing, whereas it may be more appropriate to talk of "war and peace" as natural corollaries in a Western context, when discussing Islam, it is more accurate to talk of "war and deceit." For, from an Islamic point of view, times of peace—that is, whenever Islam is significantly weaker than its infidel rivals—are times of feigned peace and pretense, in a word, taqiyya.
Raymond Ibrahim is associate director of the Middle East Forum.
[1] Qur'an 40:28.
[2] Fakhr ad-Din ar-Razi, At-Tafsir al-Kabir (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiya, 2000), vol. 10, p. 98.
[3] Qur'an 2:195, 4:29.
[4] Paul E. Walker, The Oxford Encyclopedia of Islam in the Modern World, John Esposito, ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), vol. 4, s.v. "Taqiyah," pp. 186-7; Ibn Babuyah, A Shi'ite Creed, A. A. A. Fyzee, trans. (London: n.p., 1942), pp. 110-2; Etan Kohlberg, "Some Imami-Shi'i Views on Taqiyya," Journal of the American Oriental Society, 95 (1975): 395-402.
[5] Sami Mukaram, At-Taqiyya fi 'l-Islam (London: Mu'assisat at-Turath ad-Druzi, 2004), p. 7, author's translation.
[6] Devin Stewart, "Islam in Spain after the Reconquista," Emory University, p. 2, accessed Nov. 27, 2009.
[7] See also Quran 2:173, 2:185, 4:29, 16:106, 22:78, 40:28, verses cited by Muslim jurisprudents as legitimating taqiyya.
[8] Abu Ja'far Muhammad at-Tabari, Jami' al-Bayan 'an ta'wil ayi'l-Qur'an al-Ma'ruf: Tafsir at-Tabari (Beirut: Dar Ihya' at-Turath al-'Arabi, 2001), vol. 3, p. 267, author's translation.
[9] 'Imad ad-Din Isma'il Ibn Kathir, Tafsir al-Qur'an al-Karim (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiya, 2001), vol. 1, p. 350, author's translation.
[10] Mukaram, At-Taqiyya fi 'l-Islam, pp. 30-7.
[11] Imam Muslim, "Kitab al-Birr wa's-Salat, Bab Tahrim al-Kidhb wa Bayan al-Mubih Minhu," Sahih Muslim, rev. ed., Abdul Hamid Siddiqi, trans. (New Delhi: Kitab Bhavan, 2000).
[12] Ahmad Mahmud Karima, Al-Jihad fi'l Islam: Dirasa Fiqhiya Muqarina (Cairo: Al-Azhar, 2003), p. 304, author's translation.
[13] Mukaram, At-Taqiyya fi 'l-Islam, p. 32.
[14] Raymond Ibrahim, The Al Qaeda Reader (New York: Doubleday, 2007), pp. 142-3.
[15] Mukaram, At-Taqiyya fi 'l-Islam, pp. 32-3.
[16] Ibn Ishaq, The Life of Muhammad (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1997), pp. 367-8.
[17] Shihab ad-Din Muhammad al-Alusi al-Baghdadi, Ruh al-Ma'ani fi Tafsir al-Qur'an al-'Azim wa' l-Saba' al-Mithani (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiya, 2001), vol. 2, p. 118, author's translation.
[18] Mukaram, At-Taqiyya fi 'l-Islam, pp. 11-2.
[19] Ibid., pp. 41-2.
[20] Ibn Qayyim, Tafsir, in Abd al-'Aziz bin Nasir al-Jalil, At-Tarbiya al-Jihadiya fi Daw' al-Kitab wa 's-Sunna (Riyahd: n.p., 2003), pp. 36-43.
[21] Mukaram, At-Taqiyya fi 'l-Islam, p. 20.
[22] Qur'an 2: 216.
[23] Yahya bin Sharaf ad-Din an-Nawawi, An-Nawawi's Forty Hadiths, p. 16, accessed Aug. 1, 2009.
[24] John Lyly, Euphues: The Anatomy of Wit (London, 1578), p. 236.
[25] Qur'an 8:39.
[26] Emile Tyan, The Encyclopedia of Islam (Leiden: Brill, 1960), vol. 2, s.v. "Djihad," pp. 538-40.
[27] David Bukay, "Peace or Jihad? Abrogation in Islam," Middle East Quarterly, Fall 2007, pp. 3-11, f.n. 58; David S. Powers, "The Exegetical Genre nasikh al-Qur'an wa-mansukhuhu," in Approaches to the History of the Interpretation of the Qur'an, Andrew Rippin, ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988), pp. 130-1.
[28] Jalil, At-Tarbiya al-Jihadiya fi Daw' al-Kitab wa ' s-Sunna, p. 7.
[29] Ibn Khaldun, The Muqadimmah. An Introduction to History, Franz Rosenthal, trans. (New York: Pantheon, 1958), vol. 1, p. 473.
[30] Hugh Kennedy, The Great Arab Conquests (Philadelphia: Da Capo, 2007), p. 112.
[31] "Saudi Legal Expert Basem Alem: We Have the Right to Wage Offensive Jihad to Impose Our Way of Life," TV Monitor, clip 2108, Middle East Media Research Institute, trans., Mar. 26, 2009.
[32] "Egyptian Cleric Mahmoud Al-Masri Recommends Tricking Jews into Becoming Muslims," TV Monitor, clip 2268, Middle East Media Research Institute, trans., Aug. 10, 2009.
[33] Denis MacEoin, "Tactical Hudna and Islamist Intolerance," Middle East Quarterly, Summer 2008, pp. 39-48.
[34] Majid Khadduri, War and Peace in the Law of Islam (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1955), p. 220.
[35] Ahmad Mahmud Karima, Al-Jihad fi'l Islam: Dirasa Fiqhiya Muqarina, p. 461, author's translation.
[36] Ibid., p. 469.
[37] Muhammad al-Bukhari, "Judgements (Ahkaam)," Sahih al-Bukhari, book 89, M. Muhsin Khan, trans., accessed July 22, 2009.
[38] Michael Bonner, Jihad in Islamic History: Doctrines and Practice (Princeton: Woodstock Publishers, 2006), p. 148.
[39] Ahmed Akgündüz, "Why Did the Ottoman Sultans Not Make Hajj (Pilgrimage)?" accessed Nov. 9, 2009.
[40] Ahmad Ibn Naqib al-Misri, Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law (Beltsville: Amana Publications, 1994), p. 605.
[41] Daniel Pipes, "Lessons from the Prophet Muhammad's Diplomacy," Middle East Quarterly, Sept. 1999, pp. 65-72.
[42] Arabinda Acharya, "Training in Terror," IDSS Commentaries, Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, May 2, 2003.
[43] "Does hypocrite have a past tense?" for clip of Osama bin Laden, accessed Aug. 1, 2009.
[44] Ibrahim b. Muhammad al-Shahwan, et al, "Correspondence with Saudis: How We Can Coexist," AmericanValues.org, accessed July 28, 2009.
[45] Ibrahim, The Al Qaeda Reader, p. 43.
[46] Steven Emerson, "Osama bin Laden's Special Operations Man," Journal of Counterterrorism and Security International, Sept. 1, 1998.
[47] For lists of other infiltrators of U. S. organizations, see Daniel Pipes, "Islamists Penetrate Western Security," Mar. 9, 2008.
[48] Walid Phares, "North Carolina: Meet Taqiyya Jihad," International Analyst Network, July 30, 2009.
[49] Qur'an 8:39.
[50] James Lorimer, The Institutes of the Law of Nations: A Treatise of the Jural Relations of Separate Political Communities (Clark, N.J.: The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd., 2005), p. 124.
Related Topics: Islam | Raymond Ibrahim | Winter 2010 MEQ To receive the full, printed version of the Middle East Quarterly, please see details about an affordable subscription. This text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL.
To subscribe to the MEF mailing lists, go to http://www.meforum.org/list_subscribe.php
The Middle East Forum
Middle East Quarterly
Winter 2010
http://www.meforum.org/2538/taqiyya-islam-rules-of-war
Islam must seem a paradoxical religion to non-Muslims. On the one hand, it is constantly being portrayed as the religion of peace; on the other, its adherents are responsible for the majority of terror attacks around the world. Apologists for Islam emphasize that it is a faith built upon high ethical standards; others stress that it is a religion of the law. Islam's dual notions of truth and falsehood further reveal its paradoxical nature: While the Qur'an is against believers deceiving other believers—for "surely God guides not him who is prodigal and a liar"[1]—deception directed at non-Muslims, generally known in Arabic as taqiyya, also has Qur'anic support and falls within the legal category of things that are permissible for Muslims.
Muslim deception can be viewed as a slightly less than noble means to the glorious end of Islamic hegemony under Shari'a, which is seen as good for both Muslims and non-Muslims. In this sense, lying in the service of altruism is permissible. In a recent example, Muslim cleric Mahmoud al-Masri publicly recounted a story where a Muslim lied and misled a Jew into converting to Islam, calling it a "beautiful trick."
Taqiyya offers two basic uses. The better known revolves around dissembling over one's religious identity when in fear of persecution. Such has been the historical usage of taqiyya among Shi'i communities whenever and wherever their Sunni rivals have outnumbered and thus threatened them. Conversely, Sunni Muslims, far from suffering persecution have, whenever capability allowed, waged jihad against the realm of unbelief; and it is here that they have deployed taqiyya—not as dissimulation but as active deceit. In fact, deceit, which is doctrinally grounded in Islam, is often depicted as being equal—sometimes superior—to other universal military virtues, such as courage, fortitude, or self-sacrifice.
Yet if Muslims are exhorted to be truthful, how can deceit not only be prevalent but have divine sanction? What exactly is taqiyya? How is it justified by scholars and those who make use of it? How does it fit into a broader conception of Islam's code of ethics, especially in relation to the non-Muslim? More to the point, what ramifications does the doctrine of taqiyya have for all interaction between Muslims and non-Muslims?
The Doctrine of Taqiyya
According to Shari'a—the body of legal rulings that defines how a Muslim should behave in all circumstances—deception is not only permitted in certain situations but may be deemed obligatory in others. Contrary to early Christian tradition, for instance, Muslims who were forced to choose between recanting Islam or suffering persecution were permitted to lie and feign apostasy. Other jurists have decreed that Muslims are obligated to lie in order to preserve themselves,[2] based on Qur'anic verses forbidding Muslims from being instrumental in their own deaths.[3]
This is the classic definition of the doctrine of taqiyya. Based on an Arabic word denoting fear, taqiyya has long been understood, especially by Western academics, as something to resort to in times of religious persecution and, for the most part, used in this sense by minority Shi'i groups living among hostile Sunni majorities.[4] Taqiyya allowed the Shi'a to dissemble their religious affiliation in front of the Sunnis on a regular basis, not merely by keeping clandestine about their own beliefs but by actively praying and behaving as if they were Sunnis.
However, one of the few books devoted to the subject, At-Taqiyya fi'l-Islam (Dissimulation in Islam) makes it clear that taqiyya is not limited to Shi'a dissimulating in fear of persecution. Written by Sami Mukaram, a former Islamic studies professor at the American University of Beirut and author of some twenty-five books on Islam, the book clearly demonstrates the ubiquity and broad applicability of taqiyya:
Taqiyya is of fundamental importance in Islam. Practically every Islamic sect agrees to it and practices it … We can go so far as to say that the practice of taqiyya is mainstream in Islam, and that those few sects not practicing it diverge from the mainstream … Taqiyya is very prevalent in Islamic politics, especially in the modern era.[5]
Taqiyya is, therefore, not, as is often supposed, an exclusively Shi'i phenomenon. Of course, as a minority group interspersed among their Sunni enemies, the Shi'a have historically had more reason to dissemble. Conversely, Sunni Islam rapidly dominated vast empires from Spain to China. As a result, its followers were beholden to no one, had nothing to apologize for, and had no need to hide from the infidel nonbeliever (rare exceptions include Spain and Portugal during the Reconquista when Sunnis did dissimulate over their religious identity[6]). Ironically, however, Sunnis living in the West today find themselves in the place of the Shi'a: Now they are the minority surrounded by their traditional enemies—Christian infidels—even if the latter, as opposed to their Reconquista predecessors, rarely act on, let alone acknowledge, this historic enmity. In short, Sunnis are currently experiencing the general circumstances that made taqiyya integral to Shi'ism although without the physical threat that had so necessitated it.
The Articulation of Taqiyya
Qur'anic verse 3:28 is often seen as the primary verse that sanctions deception towards non-Muslims: "Let believers [Muslims] not take infidels [non-Muslims] for friends and allies instead of believers. Whoever does this shall have no relationship left with God—unless you but guard yourselves against them, taking precautions."[7]
Muhammad ibn Jarir at-Tabari (d. 923), author of a standard and authoritative Qur'an commentary, explains verse 3:28 as follows:
If you [Muslims] are under their [non-Muslims'] authority, fearing for yourselves, behave loyally to them with your tongue while harboring inner animosity for them … [know that] God has forbidden believers from being friendly or on intimate terms with the infidels rather than other believers—except when infidels are above them [in authority]. Should that be the case, let them act friendly towards them while preserving their religion.[8]
Regarding Qur'an 3:28, Ibn Kathir (d. 1373), another prime authority on the Qur'an, writes, "Whoever at any time or place fears … evil [from non-Muslims] may protect himself through outward show." As proof of this, he quotes Muhammad's close companion Abu Darda, who said, "Let us grin in the face of some people while our hearts curse them." Another companion, simply known as Al-Hasan, said, "Doing taqiyya is acceptable till the Day of Judgment [i.e., in perpetuity]."[9]
Other prominent scholars, such as Abu 'Abdullah al-Qurtubi (1214-73) and Muhyi 'd-Din ibn al-Arabi (1165-1240), have extended taqiyya to cover deeds. In other words, Muslims can behave like infidels and worse—for example, by bowing down and worshiping idols and crosses, offering false testimony, and even exposing the weaknesses of their fellow Muslims to the infidel enemy—anything short of actually killing a Muslim: "Taqiyya, even if committed without duress, does not lead to a state of infidelity—even if it leads to sin deserving of hellfire."[10]
Deceit in Muhammad's Military Exploits
Muhammad—whose example as the "most perfect human" is to be followed in every detail—took an expedient view on lying. It is well known, for instance, that he permitted lying in three situations: to reconcile two or more quarreling parties, to placate one's wife, and in war.[11] According to one Arabic legal manual devoted to jihad as defined by the four schools of law, "The ulema agree that deception during warfare is legitimate … deception is a form of art in war."[12] Moreover, according to Mukaram, this deception is classified as taqiyya: "Taqiyya in order to dupe the enemy is permissible."[13]
Several ulema believe deceit is integral to the waging of war: Ibn al-'Arabi declares that "in the Hadith [sayings and actions of Muhammad], practicing deceit in war is well demonstrated. Indeed, its need is more stressed than the need for courage." Ibn al-Munir (d. 1333) writes, "War is deceit, i.e., the most complete and perfect war waged by a holy warrior is a war of deception, not confrontation, due to the latter's inherent danger, and the fact that one can attain victory through treachery without harm [to oneself]." And Ibn Hajar (d. 1448) counsels Muslims "to take great caution in war, while [publicly] lamenting and mourning in order to dupe the infidels."[14]
This Muslim notion that war is deceit goes back to the Battle of the Trench (627), which pitted Muhammad and his followers against several non-Muslim tribes known as Al-Ahzab. One of the Ahzab, Na'im ibn Mas'ud, went to the Muslim camp and converted to Islam. When Muhammad discovered that the Ahzab were unaware of their co-tribalist's conversion, he counseled Mas'ud to return and try to get the pagan forces to abandon the siege. It was then that Muhammad memorably declared, "For war is deceit." Mas'ud returned to the Ahzab without their knowing that he had switched sides and intentionally began to give his former kin and allies bad advice. He also went to great lengths to instigate quarrels between the various tribes until, thoroughly distrusting each other, they disbanded, lifted the siege from the Muslims, and saved Islam from destruction in an embryonic period.[15] Most recently, 9/11 accomplices, such as Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, rationalized their conspiratorial role in their defendant response by evoking their prophet's assertion that "war is deceit."
A more compelling expression of the legitimacy of deceiving infidels is the following anecdote. A poet, Ka'b ibn Ashraf, offended Muhammad, prompting the latter to exclaim, "Who will kill this man who has hurt God and his prophet?" A young Muslim named Muhammad ibn Maslama volunteered on condition that in order to get close enough to Ka'b to assassinate him, he be allowed to lie to the poet. Muhammad agreed. Ibn Maslama traveled to Ka'b and began to denigrate Islam and Muhammad. He carried on in this way till his disaffection became so convincing that Ka'b took him into his confidence. Soon thereafter, Ibn Maslama appeared with another Muslim and, while Ka'b's guard was down, killed him.[16]
Muhammad said other things that cast deception in a positive light, such as "God has commanded me to equivocate among the people just as he has commanded me to establish [religious] obligations"; and "I have been sent with obfuscation"; and "whoever lives his life in dissimulation dies a martyr."[17]
In short, the earliest historical records of Islam clearly attest to the prevalence of taqiyya as a form of Islamic warfare. Furthermore, early Muslims are often depicted as lying their way out of binds—usually by denying or insulting Islam or Muhammad—often to the approval of the latter, his only criterion being that their intentions (niya) be pure.[18] During wars with Christians, whenever the latter were in authority, the practice of taqiyya became even more integral. Mukaram states, "Taqiyya was used as a way to fend off danger from the Muslims, especially in critical times and when their borders were exposed to wars with the Byzantines and, afterwards, to the raids [crusades] of the Franks and others."[19]
Taqiyya in Qur'anic Revelation
The Qur'an itself is further testimony to taqiyya. Since God is believed to be the revealer of these verses, he is by default seen as the ultimate perpetrator of deceit—which is not surprising since he is described in the Qur'an as the best makar, that is, the best deceiver or schemer (e.g., 3:54, 8:30, 10:21).
While other scriptures contain contradictions, the Qur'an is the only holy book whose commentators have evolved a doctrine to account for the very visible shifts which occur from one injunction to another. No careful reader will remain unaware of the many contradictory verses in the Qur'an, most specifically the way in which peaceful and tolerant verses lie almost side by side with violent and intolerant ones. The ulema were initially baffled as to which verses to codify into the Shari'a worldview—the one that states there is no coercion in religion (2:256), or the ones that command believers to fight all non-Muslims till they either convert, or at least submit, to Islam (8:39, 9:5, 9:29). To get out of this quandary, the commentators developed the doctrine of abrogation, which essentially maintains that verses revealed later in Muhammad's career take precedence over earlier ones whenever there is a discrepancy. In order to document which verses abrogated which, a religious science devoted to the chronology of the Qur'an's verses evolved (known as an-Nasikh wa'l Mansukh, the abrogater and the abrogated).
But why the contradiction in the first place? The standard view is that in the early years of Islam, since Muhammad and his community were far outnumbered by their infidel competitors while living next to them in Mecca, a message of peace and coexistence was in order. However, after the Muslims migrated to Medina in 622 and grew in military strength, verses inciting them to go on the offensive were slowly "revealed"—in principle, sent down from God—always commensurate with Islam's growing capabilities. In juridical texts, these are categorized in stages: passivity vis-á-vis aggression; permission to fight back against aggressors; commands to fight aggressors; commands to fight all non-Muslims, whether the latter begin aggressions or not.[20] Growing Muslim might is the only variable that explains this progressive change in policy.
Other scholars put a gloss on this by arguing that over a twenty-two year period, the Qur'an was revealed piecemeal, from passive and spiritual verses to legal prescriptions and injunctions to spread the faith through jihad and conquest, simply to acclimate early Muslim converts to the duties of Islam, lest they be discouraged at the outset by the dramatic obligations that would appear in later verses.[21] Verses revealed towards the end of Muhammad's career—such as, "Warfare is prescribed for you though you hate it"[22]—would have been out of place when warfare was actually out of the question.
However interpreted, the standard view on Qur'anic abrogation concerning war and peace verses is that when Muslims are weak and in a minority position, they should preach and behave according to the ethos of the Meccan verses (peace and tolerance); when strong, however, they should go on the offensive on the basis of what is commanded in the Medinan verses (war and conquest). The vicissitudes of Islamic history are a testimony to this dichotomy, best captured by the popular Muslim notion, based on a hadith, that, if possible, jihad should be performed by the hand (force), if not, then by the tongue (through preaching); and, if that is not possible, then with the heart or one's intentions.[23]
War Is Eternal
That Islam legitimizes deceit during war is, of course, not all that astonishing; after all, as the Elizabethan writer John Lyly put it, "All's fair in love and war."[24] Other non-Muslim philosophers and strategists—such as Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, and Thomas Hobbes—justified deceit in warfare. Deception of the enemy during war is only common sense. The crucial difference in Islam, however, is that war against the infidel is a perpetual affair—until, in the words of the Qur'an, "all chaos ceases, and all religion belongs to God."[25] In his entry on jihad from the Encyclopaedia of Islam, Emile Tyan states: "The duty of the jihad exists as long as the universal domination of Islam has not been attained. Peace with non-Muslim nations is, therefore, a provisional state of affairs only; the chance of circumstances alone can justify it temporarily."[26]
Moreover, going back to the doctrine of abrogation, Muslim scholars such as Ibn Salama (d. 1020) agree that Qur'an 9:5, known as ayat as-sayf or the sword verse, has abrogated some 124 of the more peaceful Meccan verses, including "every other verse in the Qur'an, which commands or implies anything less than a total offensive against the nonbelievers."[27] In fact, all four schools of Sunni jurisprudence agree that "jihad is when Muslims wage war on infidels, after having called on them to embrace Islam or at least pay tribute [jizya] and live in submission, and the infidels refuse."[28]
Obligatory jihad is best expressed by Islam's dichotomized worldview that pits the realm of Islam against the realm of war. The first, dar al-Islam, is the "realm of submission," the world where Shari'a governs; the second, dar al-Harb (the realm of war), is the non-Islamic world. A struggle continues until the realm of Islam subsumes the non-Islamic world—a perpetual affair that continues to the present day. The renowned Muslim historian and philosopher Ibn Khaldun (d. 1406) clearly articulates this division:
In the Muslim community, jihad is a religious duty because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force. The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the jihad was not a religious duty for them, save only for purposes of defense. But Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations.[29]
Finally and all evidence aside, lest it still appear unreasonable for a faith with over one billion adherents to obligate unprovoked warfare in its name, it is worth noting that the expansionist jihad is seen as an altruistic endeavor, not unlike the nineteenth century ideology of "the white man's burden." The logic is that the world, whether under democracy, socialism, communism, or any other system of governance, is inevitably living in bondage—a great sin, since the good of all humanity is found in living in accordance to God's law. In this context, Muslim deception can be viewed as a slightly less than noble means to a glorious end—Islamic hegemony under Shari'a rule, which is seen as good for both Muslims and non-Muslims.
This view has an ancient pedigree: Soon after the death of Muhammad (634), as the jihad fighters burst out of the Arabian peninsula, a soon-to-be conquered Persian commander asked the invading Muslims what they wanted. They memorably replied as follows:
God has sent us and brought us here so that we may free those who desire from servitude to earthly rulers and make them servants of God, that we may change their poverty into wealth and free them from the tyranny and chaos of [false] religions and bring them to the justice of Islam. He has sent us to bring his religion to all his creatures and call them to Islam. Whoever accepts it from us will be safe, and we shall leave him alone; but whoever refuses, we shall fight until we fulfill the promise of God.[30]
Fourteen hundred years later— in March 2009—Saudi legal expert Basem Alem publicly echoed this view:
As a member of the true religion, I have a greater right to invade [others] in order to impose a certain way of life [according to Shari'a], which history has proven to be the best and most just of all civilizations. This is the true meaning of offensive jihad. When we wage jihad, it is not in order to convert people to Islam, but in order to liberate them from the dark slavery in which they live.[31]
And it should go without saying that taqiyya in the service of altruism is permissible. For example, only recently, after publicly recounting a story where a Muslim tricked a Jew into converting to Islam—warning him that if he tried to abandon Islam, Muslims would kill him as an apostate—Muslim cleric Mahmoud al-Masri called it a "beautiful trick."[32] After all, from an Islamic point of view, it was the Jew who, in the end, benefitted from the deception, which brought him to Islam.
Treaties and Truces
The perpetual nature of jihad is highlighted by the fact that, based on the 10-year treaty of Hudaybiya (628), ratified between Muhammad and his Quraysh opponents in Mecca, most jurists are agreed that ten years is the maximum amount of time Muslims can be at peace with infidels; once the treaty has expired, the situation needs to be reappraised. Based on Muhammad's example of breaking the treaty after two years (by claiming a Quraysh infraction), the sole function of the truce is to buy weakened Muslims time to regroup before renewing the offensive:[33] "By their very nature, treaties must be of temporary duration, for in Muslim legal theory, the normal relations between Muslim and non-Muslim territories are not peaceful, but warlike."[34] Hence "the fuqaha [jurists] are agreed that open-ended truces are illegitimate if Muslims have the strength to renew the war against them [non-Muslims]."[35]
Even though Shari'a mandates Muslims to abide by treaties, they have a way out, one open to abuse: If Muslims believe—even without solid evidence—that their opponents are about to break the treaty, they can preempt by breaking it first. Moreover, some Islamic schools of law, such as the Hanafi, assert that Muslim leaders may abrogate treaties merely if it seems advantageous for Islam.[36] This is reminiscent of the following canonical hadith: "If you ever take an oath to do something and later on you find that something else is better, then you should expiate your oath and do what is better."[37] And what is better, what is more altruistic, than to make God's word supreme by launching the jihad anew whenever possible? Traditionally, Muslim rulers held to a commitment to launch a jihad at least once every year. This ritual is most noted with the Ottoman sultans, who spent half their lives in the field.[38] So important was the duty of jihad that the sultans were not permitted to perform the pilgrimage to Mecca, an individual duty for each Muslim. Their leadership of the jihad allowed this communal duty to continue; without them, it would have fallen into desuetude.[39]
In short, the prerequisite for peace or reconciliation is Muslim advantage. This is made clear in an authoritative Sunni legal text, Umdat as-Salik, written by a fourteenth-century Egyptian scholar, Ahmad Ibn Naqib al-Misri: "There must be some benefit [maslaha] served in making a truce other than the status quo: 'So do not be fainthearted and call for peace when it is you who are uppermost [Qur'an 47:35].'"[40]
More recently, and of great significance for Western leaders advocating cooperation with Islamists, Yasser Arafat, soon after negotiating a peace treaty criticized as conceding too much to Israel, addressed an assembly of Muslims in a mosque in Johannesburg where he justified his actions: "I see this agreement as being no more than the agreement signed between our Prophet Muhammad and the Quraysh in Mecca."[41] In other words, like Muhammad, Arafat gave his word only to annul it once "something better" came along—that is, once the Palestinians became strong enough to renew the offensive and continue on the road to Jerusalem. Elsewhere, Hudaybiya has appeared as a keyword for radical Islamists. The Moro Islamic Liberation Front had three training camps within the Camp Abu Bakar complex in the Philippines, one of which was named Camp Hudaybiya.[42]
Hostility Disguised As Grievance
In their statements directed at European or American audiences, Islamists maintain that the terrorism they direct against the West is merely reciprocal treatment for decades of Western and Israeli oppression. Yet in writings directed to their fellow Muslims, this animus is presented, not as a reaction to military or political provocation but as a product of religious obligation.
For instance, when addressing Western audiences, Osama bin Laden lists any number of grievances as motivating his war on the West—from the oppression of the Palestinians to the Western exploitation of women, and even U.S. failure to sign the environmental Kyoto protocol—all things intelligible from a Western perspective. Never once, however, does he justify Al-Qaeda's attacks on Western targets simply because non-Muslim countries are infidel entities that must be subjugated. Indeed, he often initiates his messages to the West by saying, "Reciprocal treatment is part of justice" or "Peace to whoever follows guidance"[43]—though he means something entirely different than what his Western listeners understand by words such as "peace," "justice," or "guidance."
It is when bin Laden speaks to fellow Muslims that the truth comes out. When a group of prominent Muslims wrote an open letter to the American people soon after the strikes of 9/11, saying that Islam seeks to peacefully coexist,[44] bin Laden wrote to castigate them:
As to the relationship between Muslims and infidels, this is summarized by the Most High's Word: "We [Muslims] renounce you [non-Muslims]. Enmity and hate shall forever reign between us—till you believe in God alone" [Qur'an 60:4]. So there is an enmity, evidenced by fierce hostility from the heart. And this fierce hostility—that is, battle—ceases only if the infidel submits to the authority of Islam, or if his blood is forbidden from being shed [i.e., a dhimmi, or protected minority], or if Muslims are at that point in time weak and incapable. But if the hate at any time extinguishes from the heart, this is great apostasy! ... Such then is the basis and foundation of the relationship between the infidel and the Muslim. Battle, animosity, and hatred—directed from the Muslim to the infidel—is the foundation of our religion. And we consider this a justice and kindness to them.[45]
Mainstream Islam's four schools of jurisprudence lend their support to this hostile Weltanschauung by speaking of the infidel in similar terms. Bin Laden's addresses to the West with his talk of justice and peace are clear instances of taqiyya. He is not only waging a physical jihad but a propaganda war, that is, a war of deceit. If he can convince the West that the current conflict is entirely its fault, he garners greater sympathy for his cause. At the same time, he knows that if Americans were to realize that nothing short of their submission can ever bring peace, his propaganda campaign would be quickly compromised. Hence the constant need to dissemble and to cite grievances, for, as bin Laden's prophet asserted, "War is deceit."
Implications
Taqiyya presents a range of ethical dilemmas. Anyone who truly believes that God justifies and, through his prophet's example, even encourages deception will not experience any ethical qualms over lying. Consider the case of 'Ali Mohammad, bin Laden's first "trainer" and long-time Al-Qaeda operative. An Egyptian, he was initially a member of Islamic Jihad and had served in the Egyptian army's military intelligence unit. After 1984, he worked for a time with the CIA in Germany. Though considered untrustworthy, he managed to get to California where he enlisted in the U.S. Army. It seems likely that he continued to work in some capacity for the CIA. He later trained jihadists in the United States and Afghanistan and was behind several terror attacks in Africa. People who knew him regarded him with "fear and awe for his incredible self-confidence, his inability to be intimidated, absolute ruthless determination to destroy the enemies of Islam, and his zealous belief in the tenets of militant Islamic fundamentalism."[46] Indeed, this sentence sums it all up: For a zealous belief in Islam's tenets, which legitimize deception in order to make God's word supreme, will certainly go a long way in creating "incredible self-confidence" when lying.[47]
Yet most Westerners continue to think that Muslim mores, laws, and ethical constraints are near identical to those of the Judeo-Christian tradition. Naively or arrogantly, today's multiculturalist leaders project their own worldview onto Islamists, thinking a handshake and smiles across a cup of coffee, as well as numerous concessions, are enough to dismantle the power of God's word and centuries of unchanging tradition. The fact remains: Right and wrong in Islam have little to do with universal standards but only with what Islam itself teaches—much of which is antithetical to Western norms.
It must, therefore, be accepted that, contrary to long-held academic assumptions, the doctrine of taqiyya goes far beyond Muslims engaging in religious dissimulation in the interest of self-preservation and encompasses deception of the infidel enemy in general. This phenomenon should provide a context for Shi'i Iran's zeal—taqiyya being especially second nature to Shi'ism—to acquire nuclear power while insisting that its motives are entirely peaceful.
Nor is taqiyya confined to overseas affairs. Walid Phares of the National Defense University has lamented that homegrown Islamists are operating unfettered on American soil due to their use of taqiyya: "Does our government know what this doctrine is all about and, more importantly, are authorities educating the body of our defense apparatus regarding this stealthy threat dormant among us?"[48] After the Fort Hood massacre, when Nidal Malik Hasan, an American-Muslim who exhibited numerous Islamist signs which were ignored, killed thirteen fellow servicemen and women, one is compelled to respond in the negative.
This, then, is the dilemma: Islamic law unambiguously splits the world into two perpetually warring halves—the Islamic world versus the non-Islamic—and holds it to be God's will for the former to subsume the latter. Yet if war with the infidel is a perpetual affair, if war is deceit, and if deeds are justified by intentions—any number of Muslims will naturally conclude that they have a divinely sanctioned right to deceive, so long as they believe their deception serves to aid Islam "until all chaos ceases, and all religion belongs to God."[49] Such deception will further be seen as a means to an altruistic end. Muslim overtures for peace, dialogue, or even temporary truces must be seen in this light, evoking the practical observations of philosopher James Lorimer, uttered over a century ago: "So long as Islam endures, the reconciliation of its adherents, even with Jews and Christians, and still more with the rest of mankind, must continue to be an insoluble problem."[50]
In closing, whereas it may be more appropriate to talk of "war and peace" as natural corollaries in a Western context, when discussing Islam, it is more accurate to talk of "war and deceit." For, from an Islamic point of view, times of peace—that is, whenever Islam is significantly weaker than its infidel rivals—are times of feigned peace and pretense, in a word, taqiyya.
Raymond Ibrahim is associate director of the Middle East Forum.
[1] Qur'an 40:28.
[2] Fakhr ad-Din ar-Razi, At-Tafsir al-Kabir (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiya, 2000), vol. 10, p. 98.
[3] Qur'an 2:195, 4:29.
[4] Paul E. Walker, The Oxford Encyclopedia of Islam in the Modern World, John Esposito, ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), vol. 4, s.v. "Taqiyah," pp. 186-7; Ibn Babuyah, A Shi'ite Creed, A. A. A. Fyzee, trans. (London: n.p., 1942), pp. 110-2; Etan Kohlberg, "Some Imami-Shi'i Views on Taqiyya," Journal of the American Oriental Society, 95 (1975): 395-402.
[5] Sami Mukaram, At-Taqiyya fi 'l-Islam (London: Mu'assisat at-Turath ad-Druzi, 2004), p. 7, author's translation.
[6] Devin Stewart, "Islam in Spain after the Reconquista," Emory University, p. 2, accessed Nov. 27, 2009.
[7] See also Quran 2:173, 2:185, 4:29, 16:106, 22:78, 40:28, verses cited by Muslim jurisprudents as legitimating taqiyya.
[8] Abu Ja'far Muhammad at-Tabari, Jami' al-Bayan 'an ta'wil ayi'l-Qur'an al-Ma'ruf: Tafsir at-Tabari (Beirut: Dar Ihya' at-Turath al-'Arabi, 2001), vol. 3, p. 267, author's translation.
[9] 'Imad ad-Din Isma'il Ibn Kathir, Tafsir al-Qur'an al-Karim (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiya, 2001), vol. 1, p. 350, author's translation.
[10] Mukaram, At-Taqiyya fi 'l-Islam, pp. 30-7.
[11] Imam Muslim, "Kitab al-Birr wa's-Salat, Bab Tahrim al-Kidhb wa Bayan al-Mubih Minhu," Sahih Muslim, rev. ed., Abdul Hamid Siddiqi, trans. (New Delhi: Kitab Bhavan, 2000).
[12] Ahmad Mahmud Karima, Al-Jihad fi'l Islam: Dirasa Fiqhiya Muqarina (Cairo: Al-Azhar, 2003), p. 304, author's translation.
[13] Mukaram, At-Taqiyya fi 'l-Islam, p. 32.
[14] Raymond Ibrahim, The Al Qaeda Reader (New York: Doubleday, 2007), pp. 142-3.
[15] Mukaram, At-Taqiyya fi 'l-Islam, pp. 32-3.
[16] Ibn Ishaq, The Life of Muhammad (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1997), pp. 367-8.
[17] Shihab ad-Din Muhammad al-Alusi al-Baghdadi, Ruh al-Ma'ani fi Tafsir al-Qur'an al-'Azim wa' l-Saba' al-Mithani (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiya, 2001), vol. 2, p. 118, author's translation.
[18] Mukaram, At-Taqiyya fi 'l-Islam, pp. 11-2.
[19] Ibid., pp. 41-2.
[20] Ibn Qayyim, Tafsir, in Abd al-'Aziz bin Nasir al-Jalil, At-Tarbiya al-Jihadiya fi Daw' al-Kitab wa 's-Sunna (Riyahd: n.p., 2003), pp. 36-43.
[21] Mukaram, At-Taqiyya fi 'l-Islam, p. 20.
[22] Qur'an 2: 216.
[23] Yahya bin Sharaf ad-Din an-Nawawi, An-Nawawi's Forty Hadiths, p. 16, accessed Aug. 1, 2009.
[24] John Lyly, Euphues: The Anatomy of Wit (London, 1578), p. 236.
[25] Qur'an 8:39.
[26] Emile Tyan, The Encyclopedia of Islam (Leiden: Brill, 1960), vol. 2, s.v. "Djihad," pp. 538-40.
[27] David Bukay, "Peace or Jihad? Abrogation in Islam," Middle East Quarterly, Fall 2007, pp. 3-11, f.n. 58; David S. Powers, "The Exegetical Genre nasikh al-Qur'an wa-mansukhuhu," in Approaches to the History of the Interpretation of the Qur'an, Andrew Rippin, ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988), pp. 130-1.
[28] Jalil, At-Tarbiya al-Jihadiya fi Daw' al-Kitab wa ' s-Sunna, p. 7.
[29] Ibn Khaldun, The Muqadimmah. An Introduction to History, Franz Rosenthal, trans. (New York: Pantheon, 1958), vol. 1, p. 473.
[30] Hugh Kennedy, The Great Arab Conquests (Philadelphia: Da Capo, 2007), p. 112.
[31] "Saudi Legal Expert Basem Alem: We Have the Right to Wage Offensive Jihad to Impose Our Way of Life," TV Monitor, clip 2108, Middle East Media Research Institute, trans., Mar. 26, 2009.
[32] "Egyptian Cleric Mahmoud Al-Masri Recommends Tricking Jews into Becoming Muslims," TV Monitor, clip 2268, Middle East Media Research Institute, trans., Aug. 10, 2009.
[33] Denis MacEoin, "Tactical Hudna and Islamist Intolerance," Middle East Quarterly, Summer 2008, pp. 39-48.
[34] Majid Khadduri, War and Peace in the Law of Islam (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1955), p. 220.
[35] Ahmad Mahmud Karima, Al-Jihad fi'l Islam: Dirasa Fiqhiya Muqarina, p. 461, author's translation.
[36] Ibid., p. 469.
[37] Muhammad al-Bukhari, "Judgements (Ahkaam)," Sahih al-Bukhari, book 89, M. Muhsin Khan, trans., accessed July 22, 2009.
[38] Michael Bonner, Jihad in Islamic History: Doctrines and Practice (Princeton: Woodstock Publishers, 2006), p. 148.
[39] Ahmed Akgündüz, "Why Did the Ottoman Sultans Not Make Hajj (Pilgrimage)?" accessed Nov. 9, 2009.
[40] Ahmad Ibn Naqib al-Misri, Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law (Beltsville: Amana Publications, 1994), p. 605.
[41] Daniel Pipes, "Lessons from the Prophet Muhammad's Diplomacy," Middle East Quarterly, Sept. 1999, pp. 65-72.
[42] Arabinda Acharya, "Training in Terror," IDSS Commentaries, Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, May 2, 2003.
[43] "Does hypocrite have a past tense?" for clip of Osama bin Laden, accessed Aug. 1, 2009.
[44] Ibrahim b. Muhammad al-Shahwan, et al, "Correspondence with Saudis: How We Can Coexist," AmericanValues.org, accessed July 28, 2009.
[45] Ibrahim, The Al Qaeda Reader, p. 43.
[46] Steven Emerson, "Osama bin Laden's Special Operations Man," Journal of Counterterrorism and Security International, Sept. 1, 1998.
[47] For lists of other infiltrators of U. S. organizations, see Daniel Pipes, "Islamists Penetrate Western Security," Mar. 9, 2008.
[48] Walid Phares, "North Carolina: Meet Taqiyya Jihad," International Analyst Network, July 30, 2009.
[49] Qur'an 8:39.
[50] James Lorimer, The Institutes of the Law of Nations: A Treatise of the Jural Relations of Separate Political Communities (Clark, N.J.: The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd., 2005), p. 124.
Related Topics: Islam | Raymond Ibrahim | Winter 2010 MEQ To receive the full, printed version of the Middle East Quarterly, please see details about an affordable subscription. This text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL.
To subscribe to the MEF mailing lists, go to http://www.meforum.org/list_subscribe.php
The Middle East Forum
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)