Posted tagged ‘Islamist moral values’

« WarSclerotic home page
Newer Entries »

A Month of Islam in Britain: May 2016

June 13, 2016

A Month of Islam in Britain: May 2016, Gatestone Institute, Soeren Kern, June 13, 2016

♦ “A Muslim man with way too many extremist links to be entirely coincidental is now the Mayor of London. … In a couple more decades Britain may well have its first Muslim Prime Minister. … Reality cannot argue with demographics, so the realistic future for Britain is Islamic.” — Paul Weston, British politician.

♦ One-third of Muslim adults in Britain do not feel “part of British culture,” according to a new report on British multiculturalism. Nearly half (47%) of Muslims consider their Islamic faith to be the most important part of their identity.

♦ The government was accused of burying a report on prison extremism which warns that staff have been reluctant to tackle Islamist behavior for fear of being labelled “racist,” according to the Sunday Times. Belmarsh, a maximum-security prison in London, has become “like a jihadi training camp,” according to testimony from a former inmate. There are more than 12,000 Muslims in prisons across England and Wales.

♦ Former MP Ann Cryer suffered verbal abuse and was accused of “demonizing” the Asian community when she began a campaign more than a decade ago to get the authorities to tackle child sex grooming in Keighley.

♦ “At the end of the assault, when Mr. Zimmerman was lying motionless and defenseless on the floor of the ticket hall, the defendant crouched over him and quite deliberately began to cut Mr. Zimmerman’s throat with a knife blade.” — Prosecutor in the attempted murder trial of Somalia-born Muhiddin Mire, who attacked a random stranger in the London Underground.

May 1. Mubashir Jamil, a 21-year-old man from Luton, was arrested on suspicion of attempting to travel to Syria and engage in “violent jihad” with the Islamic State. He was charged with “engaging in conduct in preparation for committing acts of terrorism.”

May 2. A senior British jihadi who boasted of recruiting hundreds of Britons for the Islamic State was killed in a drone strike in Syria, according to the Independent. Raphael Hostey, also known as Abu Qaqa al-Britani, left Manchester to join the Islamic State in 2013. The 23-year-old graphic designer became a key recruiter of British fighters and jihadi brides for the terror group and was also heavily involved in its propaganda. At least 700 people from the UK have travelled to support or fight for jihadist groups in Iraq and Syria.

May 4. The “Department of Theology” of the Blackburn Muslim Association ruled that it is “not permissible” for a woman to travel more than 48 miles — deemed to be the equivalent of three days walk — without her husband or a close male relative. The group also ruled that men must grow beards and women must cover their faces. The rulings were accompanied by the catchphrase: “Allah knows best.”

May 7. Labour Party politician Sadiq Khan was sworn in as mayor of London. He is the first Muslim to lead a major European capital. During the election campaign, Khan faced a steady stream of allegations about his past dealings with Muslim extremists and anti-Semites.

British politician Paul Weston warned that Khan’s rise is a harbinger of things to come:

“The previously unthinkable has become the present reality. A Muslim man with way too many extremist links to be entirely coincidental is now the Mayor of London. … In a couple more decades Britain may well have its first Muslim Prime Minister. … Reality cannot argue with demographics, so the realistic future for Britain is Islamic.”

May 7. Mohammed Shaheen, a 43-year-old father of seven, was sentenced to 16 years in prison for raping underage schoolgirls. Shaheen, an immigrant from Pakistan, told the court he was a devout Muslim who had been framed by his victims. Judge Martin Steiger QC said: “He masqueraded as religious when all along he was behaving in this hypocritical way.”

May 8. The Times reported that Britain’s biggest Muslim charity will brand hundreds of buses around the country during Ramadan with a slogan proclaiming glory to Allah. The initiative by Islamic Relief, a government-backed organization, is an attempt to “break down barriers” and portray Islam in a positive light. Islamic Relief has paid for hundreds of buses in Birmingham, Bradford Leicester, London and Manchester to carry advertisements with the slogan “Subhan Allah,” which means “Glory be to Allah” in Arabic.

May 8. Six Algerian terror suspects with links to al-Qaeda were allowed to stay in Britain after winning a protracted legal battle. The Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) ruled that there was a “real risk” the men would be tortured by the Algerian security services if they were deported. This would have violated Article 3 of the Human Rights Act, which guards against “torture or degrading or inhuman treatment.”

May 9. A Muslim man who was found guilty of threatening to behead a candidate of the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) had his sentence overturned on appeal. Aftab Ahmed, 45, had been found guilty of making threats to kill David Robinson-Young, but a Newcastle Crown Court judge said he believed that Ahmed did not intend to act on his threat.

May 10. The Greater Manchester Police (GMP) apologized for a counter-terrorism exercise in which a mock suicide bomber shouted “Allahu Akbar” (Allah is the Greatest). Eight hundred volunteers took part in the overnight drill to make it as realistic as possible. Manchester peace activist Erinma Bell criticized the use of a “Muslim terrorist.” She said “a terrorist can be anyone” and “we need to move away from stereotypes.” A local Muslim leader, Syed Azhar Shah, said it was “shocking to portray Muslims as terrorists” and accused the GMP of “institutional racism.” A statement released by GMP said:

“The scenario for this exercise is based on an attack by an extremist Daesh-style organization and the scenario writers have centered the circumstances around previous similar attacks of this nature, mirroring details of past events to make the situation as real life as possible for all of those involved. However, on reflection we acknowledge that it was unacceptable to use this religious phrase immediately before the mock suicide bombing, which so vocally linked this exercise with Islam. We recognize and apologize for the offense that this has caused.”

May 10. The trial began of three Muslims who plotted to behead British citizens after being inspired by an Islamic State order “to kill civilians everywhere in the West.” The court heard that Haseeb Hamayoon, 29, Yousaf Syed, 20, and his cousin Nadir Syed, 22, planned to carry out a terrorist atrocity after a fatwa was issued by Islamic State spokesman Abu-Mohammad al-Adnani. Hamayoon, who has a Pakistani passport, had bought a “Rambo First Blood II” hunting knife online using his wife’s bank account. British born Nadir Syed had stored images of Lee Rigby’s killers, and the three men had allegedly shared images of beheadings.

May 11. Prime Minister David Cameron apologized to Suliman Gani, a Muslim extremist, for saying he is a supporter of the Islamic State. Gani said accusations that he backs the Islamic State are defamatory and must be retracted. In a statement, Cameron said he was referring to reports that Gani supports “an” Islamic state rather than “the” Islamic State. The Muslim Council of Britain called on Cameron to repeat his apology in Parliament, and for an “urgent review” of Islamophobia in the Conservative party.

May 15. The BBC’s religious output is too Christian, an internal review concluded. A report by Aaqil Ahmed, the BBC’s head of religion and ethics, argued that that Muslim, Hindu and Sikh faiths should get more airtime. One Muslim leader suggested the review could lead to Friday prayers from a mosque being broadcast in the same way that Christian church services currently feature in the BBC’s programming. Ahmed’s appointment to the BBC in 2009 was controversial because of allegations he had shown a pro-Islam bias in his previous role at Channel 4, according to the Telegraph.

May 16. The government confirmed that Sharia-compliant student loans will be offered for the first time in Britain as part of an effort to boost the number of young Muslims applying to university. The new halal (permitted or lawful) finance model complies with Sharia law, which forbids Muslims from taking out loans on which they would be charged interest. In a white paper, the government said:

“We will introduce an alternative finance system to support the participation of students who, for religious reasons, might feel unable to take on interest-bearing loans…. To ensure participation and choice are open to all, we plan to legislate for the creation of an alternative model of student finance.”

May 17. One-third of Muslim adults in Britain do not feel “part of British culture,” according to a new report on British multiculturalism. Nearly half (47%) of Muslims consider their Islamic faith to be the most important part of their identity. Only half (54%) of British adults believe there are a set of values that all nationalities and religions in Britain can agree upon in the future.

May 17. Belmarsh, a maximum-security prison in London, has become “like a jihadi training camp,” according to testimony from a former inmate. Now a whistleblower, the former inmate said that a group of jihadists who call themselves “the Brothers,” or “the Akhi” (Arabic for brother), have gained control of the prison, where many convicted terrorists and terror-related offenders mix freely with ordinary prisoners. “The problem is that Belmarsh is also a holding prison and so young people who are brainwashed and indoctrinated then go out into the wider prison system and create wider Akhi networks.” In the five years to December 31, 2014, the number of Muslim inmates at Belmarsh has more than doubled to 265, or 30% of the total prisoners.

May 17. A Muslim convert who was arrested for a plot to behead a British soldier had his sentence reduced. Brusthom Ziamani, 20, was arrested in east London; he was carrying a 12-inch knife, a hammer and an Islamic flag. At his trial, the court was told that he had researched the location of Army bases in London and had shown his ex-girlfriend weapons, described Lee Rigby’s killer, Michael Adebolajo, as a “legend” and told her he would “kill soldiers.” The judges reviewing his sentence said: “Given his youth, we consider that the custodial part of the sentence, namely 22 years, was too long.” Instead they gave him 19 years.

May 18. Ofsted, the official government agency responsible for inspecting and regulating British schools, admitted that it failed properly to inspect a school run by the Deobandis, a conservative Muslim sect, because the inspector was “prohibited” from talking to pupils or staff. The inspector’s report into child safety at the private Zakaria Muslim Girls’ High School in Batley said that celebrations for the Islamic festival of Eid meant he could only speak to senior managers. After Sky News reported on the issue, Ofsted said it was taking “appropriate action” against the inspector concerned and has re-inspected the school, which teaches 149 girls aged 11 to 16. Deobandis, many of whom are said to shun non-Muslims, are thought to control around half of Britain’s private Islamic schools.

May 18. The Queen’s Speech, setting out the government’s program for the next session of parliament, unveiled a controversial new counter-extremism bill that includes powers to gag individuals and ban organizations deemed as extremist. The bill does not, however, include a definition of extremism. Until now the main focus of British policy has been to prevent violent extremism. Simon Cole, the police lead for the government’s Prevent anti-radicalization program, said that the proposals targeting alleged extremists are not enforceable and risk creating “thought police” in Britain by making police officers judges of “what people can and cannot say.”

May 18. A Muslim man who was arrested after giving police a false name filed a lawsuit against the City of London Police for discrimination. Akmal Afzal, 23, claims he was arrested at the 2012 Olympics because he was an “Asian man with a beard.” Afzal, a Briton of Pakistani descent, was released without charge but is suing for false imprisonment, assault and discrimination. His lawyer said: “His position is he did nothing wrong and he says the reason he was treated in the way he was relates to his ethnic origin and/or his religion.”

May 22. The government was accused of burying a report on prison extremism which warns that staff have been reluctant to tackle Islamist behavior for fear of being labelled “racist,” according to the Sunday Times. The independent review, commissioned by Secretary of State for Justice Michael Gove, says that Islamist inmates have exploited the “sensitivity to racism” among prison staff by making false complaints that they are victims of discrimination. The review recommended the creation of “specially designated units” in high-security prisons to house the most “dangerous, extreme and subversive” Islamists. There are more than 12,000 Muslims in prisons across England and Wales, according to the latest figures.

May 23. British and American intelligence services identified 27-year-old El Shafee Elsheikh as the fourth member of the Islamic State execution cell responsible for beheading 27 hostages. The four guards, led by “Jihadi John,” were nicknamed the “Beatles” because of their English accents. Elsheikh, who was granted asylum in Britain when he was seven, left for Syria in 2012 after being radicalized in just 17 days after attending mosques in London.

May 23. A British Muslim woman who wanted raise her children in the Islamic State in Syria was jailed for two and a half years. Lorna Moore, 34, who failed to tell authorities that her husband, Sajid Aslam, 34, had left for Syria, was planning to take her three young children, one of them 11 months old, to the war zone. During sentencing at the Old Bailey, Judge Charles Wide said Moore, a Muslim convert from Walsall, West Midlands, “knew perfectly well of [her] husband’s dedication to terrorism.”

May 23. A survey conducted by ComRes on behalf of Ahmadiyya Muslim Community UK found that 33% of British adults believe that Islam promotes violence in the UK. The study also found that 56% of Britons disagree with the view that Islam is compatible with British values.

May 24. The BBC reported that a National Health Service (NHS) doctor who spent seven years working in Britain left his wife and two children in Sheffield to join the Islamic State. Issam Abuanza, 37, a Palestinian doctor with British citizenship, is the first practicing NHS doctor known to have joined the Islamic State.

May 25. Police in West Yorkshire revealed that they are currently investigating 220 alleged cases of child sex grooming in Keighley and Bradford. The cases involve 261 suspects and 188 victims. The revelation came after Keighley’s former MP, Ann Cryer, called for the perpetrators of the crimes to be brought to justice. Cryer suffered verbal abuse and was accused of “demonizing” the Asian community when she began a campaign more than a decade ago to get the authorities to tackle child sex grooming in Keighley.

May 25. A Nigerian man launched an appeal against a decision by the Home Office to strip him of his British nationality. The man, known only as L2 for legal reasons, is directly associated with close friends of Michael Adebolajo, who murdered Lee Rigby in London in May 2013, and Mohammed Emwazi, or “Jihadi John.” L2 was deemed such a national security threat that Home Secretary Theresa May personally signed an order removing his British nationality in 2013.

May 26. Home Secretary Theresa May established an independent review into the “misuse” of Sharia law in Britain. The inquiry will examine if Sharia ideas are being “misused or exploited” to discriminate against women. The review will not, however, examine whether Sharia law itself is discriminatory against women. A Home Office statement said: “It will not be a review of the totality of Sharia law, which is a source of guidance for many Muslims in the UK.” According to May, many British people “benefit a great deal” from Sharia teaching.

Baroness Cox, who has spearheaded a parliamentary drive to rein in unofficial Sharia courts in Britain, said:

“My reservation is that it won’t get to the root of the problem. … a lot of Muslim women I know say that the men in their communities just laugh at this proposed investigation, that they will go underground so the investigation will have to be very robust.

“But the aspects which are causing such concerns — such as that a man can divorce his wife by saying ‘I divorce you’ three times — that is inherent; the right to ‘chastise’ women is inherent; polygamy is inherent. I don’t think those things are a distortion of Sharia law. These are aspects of Sharia law which are unacceptable.”

May 27. A British citizen who plotted to carry out a suicide bomb attack at Heathrow Airport was sentenced to 40 years in prison. Minh Quang Pham, 33, was sentenced in New York for travelling to Yemen to train with members of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). Pham pled guilty to three counts of terrorist-related activity based on his support for the group, but denied he intended to carry out his plot and no attack ever occurred. Pham, a Vietnamese born British convert to Islam, was first arrested in Britain in June 2012 and was extradited to the U.S. in February 2015.

May 29. Music festivals, big sports venues and nightclubs have been placed on “high alert” for potential jihadist attacks, according to a senior anti-terrorism officer interviewed by the Sunday Times. Neil Basu, the deputy assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, said that crowded places — including Glastonbury, billed as the world’s largest music festival, which will draw 135,000 people to Somerset from June 22 to 26 — are a major concern for police this summer. Basu warned: “These people are perfectly happy to target civilians with the maximum terror impact. Crowded places were always a concern for us, but now they are right at the top of the agenda.”

May 31. The trial began of a Muslim man who tried to decapitate a random stranger in the London Underground. Somalia-born Muhiddin Mire, 30, attacked musician Lyle Zimmerman, 56, at Leytonstone Underground station on December 5 with a knife while yelling, “This is for my Syrian brothers; I am going to spill your blood.” The jury was told that after the attack, police found images of Islamic State hostages having their throats cut on Mire’s cellphone. The prosecutor said:

“At the end of the assault, when Mr. Zimmerman was lying motionless and defenseless on the floor of the ticket hall, the defendant crouched over him and quite deliberately began to cut Mr. Zimmerman’s throat with a knife blade. Mercifully, Mr. Zimmerman survived the ordeal because, although he suffered three jagged wounds to the front of his neck, none of them caused any damage to any of the major blood vessels in that area.”

1648Left: Muhiddin Mire, a Somalia-born Muslim, tried to behead musician Lyle Zimmerman at a London Underground station with a knife while yelling “this is for my Syrian brothers.” Right: Belmarsh maximum-security prison in London has become “like a jihadi training camp,” according to testimony from a former inmate.

 

Categories: Apologists for Islamism, Britain, Islam and human rights, Islam and sex, Islamic conquest of Britain, Islamic integration, Islamic invasion, Islamic jihad, Islamic perversions, Islamisation, Islamist moral values, Islamists, Islamophobia
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

German Court Applies Sharia to Child Marriage

June 11, 2016

German Court Applies Sharia to Child Marriage, Gates of Vienna, , June 11, 2016

childbride2

The following report from the German website Einwanderungskritik (Immigration Criticism) is all but unbelievable: a district court has cited sharia law to validate a Syrian immigrant’s marriage to a 14-year-old girl. An act that would land a native German man in prison for child molestation is being sanctioned by the court as a valid “marriage”, simply because it as recognized as such by Islamic law.

Many thanks to Nash Montana for the translation:

Scandalous judgment: Islamic pedophile-marriages are valid in Germany

“A marriage that has been performed according to Syrian law in Syria with a 14 year old bride and a man of legal age, has to be recognized as valid if the husband belongs to the Sunni religion and the marriage has already been executed.”

by Robin Classen

With mass immigration, not only terrorism in Paris and Brussels and the sex crimes on New Year’s eve came to Europe, but also very different social and moral values. For instance, Islam allows men to marry multiple women.

Extremely problematic: Mohammed married his “favorite woman” Aisha when she was just six years old. That is not an unusual Islamic opinion; this is widely uncontested knowledge in Sunni as well as in Shiite Islam. In Germany however, as part of sanctioned lying to advance the cause of Islam (taqiyya), those who ask critical questions are often told: Aisha was after all already 14 years old when she married the 50-year-old Mohammed. Even more common is the lie that around the year 700 children were a lot more sexually mature. That one cannot compare the nine-year-old Aisha therefore with a nine-year-old of today, that she was a complete woman. That all the focus on cleanliness and coddling in the modern world is what delays a girl’s menstruation more and more.

The opposite has been scientifically proven: In Germany in 1860 girls got their first period at the age of 16.6 years old. In 1920 they began to menstruate at 14.6 years old, in 1980 at 12.5 years old, and today even sooner yet. And all this of course completely independent of the fact that a first menstruation is only one step on the way to become an adult woman and it does not signify the ultimate end of childhood.

Forced marriage of children is completely okay in Islam

Since Mohammed was deemed to be an exemplary ideal and virtuous man, this moral assessment applies as well to his marriage with multiple women and the child Aisha, which is why forced marriages of children in Shiite as well as in Sunni Islam are entirely normal. Often children die on their wedding night due to fatal internal bleeding caused by their Muslim husbands. This behavior is now entering Germany.

Here’s the case of a 22-year-old Syrian man and his 14-year-old wife — probably a more benign example — a couple who came to Bavaria at the end of 2015. They are also cousins — since marriages among relatives, too, is a custom that is accepted in Islam, which has for centuries harmed the gene pool of the Islamic peoples. According to one BBC study 55 % of the Pakistanis living in Great Britain are married to relatives. And worldwide, half of all Muslims are living in incestuous marriages. The consequences are an average IQ that is 10 points lower, and a significantly higher risk for psychological and physical illnesses.

Youth welfare service unsuccessfully tried to protect the child from German justice

The two youths were separated immediately after their arrival in Germany: The Youth welfare office took the child into custody. The man then submitted a lawsuit — in all likelihood at taxpayer’s expense — and verified through a Syrian marriage certificate that he was effectively married to the child he according to Syrian law. The district court then reinterpreted the lawsuit which demanded that the child be handed over to the husband, and granted visitation rights to the “couple” so they could meet alone on the weekends. But the youth welfare office lodged an appeal, arguing that the “wife” is a child and acts like a child. That she is not in a position to lead an autonomous, self-determined life as a “wife”, and that there is the danger that the two have sexual intercourse on the weekends, which according to German law constitutes sexual abuse of a minor.

The subsequent decision of the OLG Bamberg (regional appeals court Bamberg) is simply mind-blowing: The OLG decided that international privacy rights have to be applied to the Syrian couple. During the trial the court had received a “crash course in Syrian marriage law” and had decided that the couple were effectively married. That even the German “Ordre Public”, the public policy doctrine, cannot stand in the way of this. If anyone would like to know what is possible concerning the Islamization of German law, they should read the resolution from May 5, 2015, file reference 2 UF 58/16 of the Regional Appeals Court of Bamberg.

OLG is exclusively applying Sharia law

One paragraph after another the judge cites openly and absent of all critique sharia law, which they then apply one-to-one. For the Bavarian judges, according to their own statements, it is therefore only important “whether the marriage of a Muslima with a non-Muslim is void”, since Islamic law prohibits such. In other words, if there were two refugees with a Syrian marriage certificate, and then it emerged that one of the two was a Christian, a German court would void the marriage, since a Muslim Herrenmensch (overlord) cannot be married to a Christian Untermensch (subhuman).

According to Syrian-Islamic marriage right there is a minimum marriage age of 13 years, but it is invalid if the wedding has already been performed. So therefore, there really is no law for a minimum age, but this seems to pose no problem for Bavarian judges. It seems more important to the court in Bamberg that the dowry was paid by the parents:

Apart from that, Article 51, section 2 of the PSG (strengthening of the care-giving act) on defective marriage contracts after cohabitation, decides, among other things, the obligation of paying the dowry, the obstacle of in-law relationship to marrying, and the obligation of observing the legal waiting period in cases of dissolution of marriage either by divorce or death. Therefore, Articles 47 to 52 PSG cannot be interpreted as a regulation to the effect that a defective marriage contract after cohabitation leads to a void marriage.

The child has to endure abuse so that “integration” is successful

After all this, the court came out with the real tear-jerker: The “husband and wife” had endured so much together already during their “flight”! Additionally, a recognition of their marriage for the purpose of integration is vital. The two had already rejected participation in integration courses long before their marriage was validated, the German judges seriously lamented.

The youth welfare office and parents do not play a role anymore for the court: The child is legally married and, according to Syrian law, parental responsibility has thereby lapsed. Punishability according to § 182 III StGB is swept under the rug by the OLG Bamberg: That counts as “a matter of interpretation”. The bottom line is that the higher regional court, as the second most highest civil rights entity, has applied sharia law, which thus with one swipe suspends German family law, and especially criminal law, and has therefore deprived a 14-year-old girl of all protection given to her by the youth welfare services, and instead has exposed her to her “husband” defenselessly.

____________________________

The legal court documents about the case:

OLG Bamberg, Beschluss v. 12.05.2016 — 2 UF 58/16 — Bügerservice

Categories: Child brides, Germany, Islam and child brides, Islamic integration, Islamic invasion, Islamic supremacy, Islamisation, Islamist moral values, Sharia law
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

An In-Depth Interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali on Islam and the Defense of Western Civilization

June 1, 2016

An In-Depth Interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali on Islam and the Defense of Western Civilization, The New Criterion via YouTube, June 1, 2016

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqXVdiT7pdY

The blurb beneath the video states,

For The New Criterion, Ben Weingarten, commentator and Founder & CEO of ChangeUp Media sits down with Ayaan Hirsi Ali, ardent defender of Western civilization and individual liberty against Islamic supremacism, New York Times bestselling author of ‘The Caged Virgin,’ ‘Infidel’ and ‘Nomad’ and ‘Heretic,’ former Dutch MP, fellow with the Future of Diplomacy Project at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at the Harvard Kennedy School, visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, founder of the AHA Foundation Ayaan Hirsi Ali and recipient of The New Criterion’s fourth annual Edmund Burke Award for Service to Culture & Society for an in-depth interview. During their discussion, Weingarten and Ali discuss America’s inability under both Presidents Obama and Bush to recognize and defend against Islamic supremacism as the totalitarian existential threat of our time, the clash of civilizations between Islam and the West and the ideology of the global jihadist movement, the Islamization of Europe, how the West can defend its freedoms from a subversive global jihadist movement seeking to use those freedoms against us, the war on free speech in the West being waged by Islamic supremacists with the help wittingly or unwittingly of many on the Left and more. For more from The New Criterion’s April 2016 ‘Edmund Burke Award’ gala and other compelling content, check out The New Criterion’s YouTube channel at http://www.youtube.com/user/TheNewCri….

Categories: Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Europe, Freedom of speech, Hijrah, Islam - submission, Islam - the religion of war, Islam and Christianity, Islam and human rights, Islam and Jews, Islamic immigration, Islamic indoctrination, Islamic integration, Islamic invasion, Islamic tolerance, Islamisation, Islamism, Islamist moral values, Islamophobia, Mecca Islam, Medina Islam, Obama and Islam, Saudi Arabia
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: 2 Comments

Muslim reformers vs. Islamists

May 26, 2016

Muslim reformers vs. Islamists, Dan Miller’s Blog, May 26, 2016

(The views expressed in this article are mine and do not necessarily reflect those of Warsclerotic or its other editors. — DM)

Whether Islam will eventually be reformed is an open question. The topic is much discussed by Muslims, a few of whom favor reformation and more of whom oppose it. The issue is important for America, and indeed the free world in general. There is little that non-Muslims can do to assist a reformation beyond recognizing the substantial differences between moderate and radical (mainstream) Muslims, supporting the former and purging the latter. Please don’t conflate the cops with the killers.

Reformation of Islam

Here’s are comments by an American Muslim reformer, Dr. Zuhdi Jasser

In the following December 2015 video, the Fox News host misrepresented Donald Trump’s position as banning “all” Muslims, apparently permanently. Trump’s proposal was to ban Muslims until we can vet them adequately. Dr. Jasser agreed that Muslims advocating Islamist political ideology should be banned and that we should temporarily ban them all until we can distinguish moderate Muslims from “radical” Muslims. His suggestions for vetting Muslims included cessation of reliance on the Council on American – Islamic Relations (CAIR), et al, which are on the side of the Islamists.

An article by Raymond Ibrahim delves into Muslim perceptions of moderate vs. “radical” (i.e., mainstream) Islam and posts these views, as articulated by Dr. Ahmed Ibrahim Khadr, an Islamist. Dr. Khadr stated,

“Islamic researchers are agreed that what the West and its followers call ‘moderate Islam’ and ‘moderate Muslims’ is simply a slur against Islam and Muslims, a distortion of Islam, a rift among Muslims, a spark to ignite war among them. They also see that the division of Islam into ‘moderate Islam’ and ‘radical Islam’ has no basis in Islam — neither in its doctrines and rulings, nor in its understandings or reality. [Emphasis added.]

. . . .

Among the major distinctions (translated verbatim) made in Khadr’s article are:

  • Radicals want the caliphate to return; moderates reject the caliphate.
  • Radicals want to apply Sharia (Islamic law); moderates reject the application of Sharia.
  • Radicals reject the idea of renewal and reform, seeing it as a way to conform Islam to Western culture; moderates accept it.
  • Radicals accept the duty of waging jihad in the path of Allah; moderates reject it.
  • Radicals reject any criticism whatsoever of Islam; moderates welcome it on the basis of freedom of speech.
  • Radicals accept those laws that punish whoever insults or leaves the religion [apostates]; moderates recoil from these laws.
  • Radicals respond to any insult against Islam or the prophet Muhammad — peace and blessing upon him — with great violence and anger; moderates respond calmly and peacefully on the basis of freedom of expression.
  • Radicals respect and revere every deed and every word of the prophet — peace be upon him — in the hadith; moderates do not.
  • Radicals oppose democracy; moderates accept it.
  • Radicals see the people of the book [Jews and Christians] as dhimmis[barely tolerated subjects]; moderates oppose this [view].
  • Radicals reject the idea that non-Muslim minorities should have equality or authority over Muslims; moderates accept it.
  • Radicals reject the idea that men and women are equal; moderates accept it, according to Western views.
  • Radicals oppose the idea of religious freedom and apostasy from Islam; moderates agree to it.
  • Radicals desire to see Islam reign supreme; moderates oppose this.
  • Radicals place the Koran over the constitution; moderates reject this [assumption].
  • Radicals reject the idea of religious equality because Allah’s true religion is Islam; moderates accept it.
  • Radicals embrace the wearing of hijabs and niqabs; moderates reject it.
  • Radicals accept killing young girls who commit adultery or otherwise besmirch their family’s honor; moderates reject this [response].
  • Radicals reject the status of women today and think that the status of women today should be like the status of women in the time of the prophet; moderates oppose that women should be as in the time of the prophet.
  • Radicals vehemently reject that women should have the freedom to choose partners; moderates accept that she can choose a boyfriend without marriage.
  • Radicals agree to clitorectomies; moderates reject them.
  • Radicals reject the so-called war on terror and see it as a war on Islam; moderates accept it.
  • Radicals support jihadi groups; moderates reject them.
  • Radicals reject the terms “Islamic terrorism” or “Islamic fascism”; moderates accept them.
  • Radicals reject universal human rights, including the right to be homosexual; moderates accept them.
  • Radicals reject the idea of allying with the West; moderates support it.
  • Radicals oppose secularism; moderates support it. [Emphasis added.]

Dr. Jasser’s views on what American Islam should be are remarkably similar to the perceptions of moderate Islam set forth by Dr. Khadr, albeit with contempt as “a slur against Islam and Muslims, a distortion of Islam, a rift among Muslims, a spark to ignite war among them.” Mr. Ibrahim concludes his article by suggesting that “the West may need to rethink one of its main means of countering radical Islam: moderate Muslims and moderate Islam.” I agree. What is being done now is actually furthering “radical” Islam.

The former president of Egypt’s Al-Azhar University called, rather amorphously, for reform in the Islamic religious discourse.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIQnQjcdsWw

Here’s an address to the Canadian Parliament by a moderate Muslim journalist. Please watch the whole thing, because it sets forth quite well the differences between Islamists who want to overpower us and moderate Muslims who support freedom and want to eliminate Islamism.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=condC3PQfIg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urCxNJpZoKM

Moderate Islam is not mainstream Islam

Germany’s largest Muslim organization recently had a moderate Muslim theologian fired from the University of Munster.

Islamic apologists routinely claim that violent Qur’an verses have no validity beyond Muhammad’s time, but this story illustrates that this is not the mainstream view in Islam. The persecution of Mouhanad Khorchide also shows the uphill battle that genuine Muslim reformers face: branded as heretics and/or apostates, they’re often shunned (or worse) by the very community that needs their ideas the most. [Emphasis added.]

The author, Robert Spencer, quotes a May 23rd article by Susanne Schröter in a German periodical:

When the theologian Mouhanad Khorchide, who teaches at the University of Münster, published “Islam Is Compassion” in 2012, he received a variety of diverse reactions. Many non-Muslims celebrated the work as the revelation of a humanistic Islam: an Islam that no one needs to fear. This feeling arose in part because the author created a picture of God that is not “interested in the labels of Muslim or Christian or Jewish, believer or nonbeliever.”

Korchide threw out the idea that Koran verses that appear violent or hostile toward women or non-Muslims may be valid for all eternity. He wanted them to be viewed as the words of a bygone era.

It seemed that the professor, with the swoop of his pen, managed to brush aside all those reservations that made people wonder whether Islam really “belonged to Germany,” as former President Christian Wulff said famously in a 2010. One might even have thought that Muslims would offer Khorchide a pat on the back.

On the website for DITIB, Germany’s Turkish Islamic union and the country’s largest Muslim organization, one can read that Khorchide’s statements were a “rejection of the teachings of classical Islam” and an “insult to Muslim identity.” For this reason, the professor was removed from his post at the university.

Canadian journalist Tarek Fatah, the moderate Muslim in a video provided above, wrote

In November 2014, while testifying before the Senate Committee on National Security and Defence, I raised the issue of Islamic clerics using mosque sermons to attack the foundational principles of Western civilization and liberal secular democracy.

The Senate Committee session referred to is the one presented in the video referenced above.

Liberal Senator Grant Mitchell was outraged by my testimony that at most Canadian mosques, the Friday congregation includes a ritual prayer asking, “Allah to give victory to Muslims over the ‘Kufaar’ (non-Muslims).” In a heated exchange with me, the senator suggested I wasn’t telling the truth, implying I was motivated by Islamophobia. Sadly, Sen. Mitchell is not alone in such views.

But neither is there any let-up in the attacks on Canadian values emanating from many mosque pulpits and Islamic conferences hosted by radical Islamist groups.

For example, in a sermon on Friday, May 6, delivered at a mosque in Edmonton, an imam invoked the memory of Prophet Muhammad to whip up hatred against Israel. He declared peace accords with Israel are “useless garbage” and vowed that Jerusalem will be conquered “through blood.”

In February, the same cleric predicted Islam would soon conquer Rome, “the heart of the Christian state.”

The Edmonton mosque diatribe was not isolated.

On May 13, just north of Toronto, an Islamic society hosted a celebration of Iranian mass murderer, Ayatollah Khomeini. The poster promoting the event described Khomeini as a, “Liberator and Reformer of the Masses.”

On Saturday, the Islamist group Hizb-ut-Tahrir, banned in some countries, hosted a conference to discuss the re-establishment of a global Islamic caliphate.

Here are excerpts from an article about the Hizb-ut-Tahrir meeting referenced by Mr. Fatah.

1616

The first speaker was Brother Mostafa, of Arabic roots. Mostafa started by calling nationalism and sectarian conflict the main reasons for division in the Ummah (Islamic nation). He reminded Muslims that they are obligated to implement Allah’s demands that fulfill the Islamic State. It is “not permissible for us to choose, ” he said. He cited the verse: [Emphasis added]

“It is not for a believing man or a believing woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter, that they should [thereafter] have any choice about their affair. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger has certainly strayed into clear error.” — Surat-Al-Ahzab (33), verse 36. ]Emphasis added.]

. . . .

As the event started late, Naeema [a woman in the audience] began a conversation. We talked about our origins and how long we had been in Canada. She said she had been here 40 years, so I asked about the disconnect between enjoying 40 years of democracy, yet trying to end it. I mentioned a book published by Hizb-ut-Tahrir:

“Democracy is Infidelity: its use, application and promotion are prohibited.”

“الديمقراطية نظام كفر، يحرم أخذها أو تطبيقها أو الدعوة إليها”

Naeema said she was not qualified to debate the topic, but that democracy had done nothing good for people, so she and other believers would follow the rule of Allah. [Emphasis added]

The meeting participants are comparable to the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Muslim Brotherhood – Hamas affiliated organization which, along with similar groups, provides Obama and His “fighting violent extremism” cohorts their marching orders on fighting, not Islamist jihad or Islamisation , but “Islamophobia.”

Conclusions

America would fare better in fighting “violent extremism” if the principal enemy were named: it is political Islam — Islamism. Presently, naming it is forbidden and those engaged in “fighting” it — supposedly on our behalf — are Islamists dedicated to the Islamisation of America.

Suppose that, instead of relying on CAIR, et al, as representative of “peaceful” Islam, our government rejected CAIR and its Islamist colleagues favored by Obama and instead supported and relied upon Dr. Jasser’s moderate group, American Islamic Forum for Democracy.

A devout Muslim, Dr. Jasser founded AIFD in the wake of the 9/11 attacks on the United States as an effort to provide an American Muslim voice advocating for the preservation of the founding principles of the United States Constitution, liberty and freedom, through the separation of mosque and state. Dr. Jasser is a first generation American Muslim whose parents fled the oppressive Baath regime of Syria in the mid-1960’s for American freedom. He is leading the fight to shake the hold that the Muslim Brotherhood and their network of American Islamist organizations and mosques seek to exert on organized Islam in America. [Emphasis added.]

Perhaps, if our next president is neither Hillary Clinton nor Bernie Sanders, we will do that. If we don’t, the Islamists will continue to win, the Islamisation of America will continue and American principles will go down the toilet. We cannot permit that to happen.

In an 1886 Fourth of July address to the citizens of the Dickinson Dakota Territory, Theodore Roosevelt said,

We only have the right to live on as free men, so long as we show ourselves worthy of the privileges we enjoy. We must remember that the republic can only be kept pure by the individual purity of its members, and that if it once becomes thoroughly corrupt it will surely cease to exist.

. . . .

All American citizens whether born here or elsewhere, whether of one creed or another, stand on the same footing; we welcome every honest immigrant, no matter from what country he comes, provided only that he leaves behind him his former nationality and remains neither Celt nor Saxon, neither Frenchman nor German, but becomes an American, desirous of fulfilling in good faith the duties of American citizenship. [Emphasis added]

When we thus rule ourselves we have the responsibilities of sovereigns not of subjects. We must never exercise our rights either wickedly or thoughtlessly; we can continue to preserve them in but one possible way – by making the proper use of them.

It has been my observation (and to a substantial extent that of the Canadian journalist and moderate Muslim in a video embedded above) that the principal loyalty of many Islamists is not geographical or to a state. Rather, it is to their version of Islam, be it Shiite, Sunni or some variation thereof. For example, Hezbollah members fight, not to help Lebanon or Syria, but to support the Iranian version of Shiite Islam — an apocalyptic vision in which the hidden iman will return and bring the world to an end. It is reasonable to assume that the principal loyalty of mainstream Muslims (Islamists) in America is, and will continue to be, to Islam, not to America.

American origins and views are very different and perhaps uniquely so.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArgMK2kAjzw

This land was made, not for Islamists but for immigrants who leave behind their former nationalities and remain “neither Celt nor Saxon, neither Frenchman nor German, but become an American, desirous of fulfilling in good faith the duties of American citizenship.” How many of America’s current crop of immigrants do that?

We have had little of this thus far. How much do we want? It’s pretty much up to us.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRlHcnHM6C4df

Categories: CAIR, Canada, Free world, Islam - the religion of war, Islam and Christianity, Islam and human rights, Islam and Jews, Islam in America, Islamic immigration, Islamic indoctrination, Islamic integration, Islamic jihad, Islamic reformation, Islamic supremacy, Islamisation, Islamism, Islamist moral values, Islamists in America, Islamists in Canada, Islamophobia, Obama and Islam, Obama's America
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

“Radical” vs. “Moderate” Islam: A Muslim View

May 25, 2016

“Radical” vs. “Moderate” Islam: A Muslim View, Gatestone Institute, Raymond Ibrahim, May 25, 2016

(Please watch this video in which a moderate Muslim defines moderate Islam:

— DM)

[T]he West may need to rethink one of its main means of countering radical Islam: moderate Muslims and moderate Islam.

***********************

♦ According to Dr. Ahmed Ibrahim Khadr, the first loyalty of radicals is to Islam while the first loyalty for moderates, regardless of their religion, is to the state. Radicals reject the idea of religious equality because Allah’s true religion is Islam; moderates accept it.

♦ Radicals, Khadr charges, also marvel that the moderate “finds hatred for non-Muslims unacceptable.”

♦ If true — and disturbing polls certainly indicate that Khadr’s findings are prevalent — the West may need to rethink one of its main means of countering radical Islam: moderate Muslims and moderate Islam.

After his recent electoral victory, it emerged that Sadiq Khan, London’s first Muslim mayor, had described moderate Muslim groups as “Uncle Toms” — a racial slur used against blacks perceived to be subservient to whites, or, in this context, Muslims who embrace “moderate Islam” as, in his view, a way of being subservient to the West.

One of Iran’s highest clerics apparently shares the same convictions. After asserting that “revolutionary Islam is the same as pure Muhammadan Islam,” Ayatollah Tabatabaeinejad recently said:

“Some say our Islam is not revolutionary Islam, but we must say to them that non-revolutionary Islam is the same as American Islam. Islam commands us to be firm against the enemies and be kind and compassionate toward each other and not be afraid of anything…”

According to the AB News Agency,

“Ayatollah Tabatabaeinejad stated that revolutionary Islam is this same Islam. It is the Islam that is within us that can create changes. The warriors realized that Islam is not just prayers and fasting, but rather they stood against the enemies in support of Islam.”

How many Muslims share these convictions, one from a Sunni living (and now governing) in London, the other from a Shia living and governing in the Middle East?

According to an Arabic language article, (in translation) “The Truth about the Moderate Muslim as Seen by the West and its Muslim Followers,” by Dr. Ahmed Ibrahim Khadr in 2011:

“Islamic researchers are agreed that what the West and its followers call ‘moderate Islam’ and ‘moderate Muslims’ is simply a slur against Islam and Muslims, a distortion of Islam, a rift among Muslims, a spark to ignite war among them. They also see that the division of Islam into ‘moderate Islam’ and ‘radical Islam’ has no basis in Islam — neither in its doctrines and rulings, nor in its understandings or reality.

Khadr goes on to note the many ways that moderates and radicals differ. For instance, radicals (“true Muslims”) aid and support fellow Muslims, especially those committed to jihad, whereas moderates (“false Muslims”) ally with and help Western nations.

This sounds similar to Ayatollah Tabatabaeinejad’s assertion that “non-revolutionary Islam is the same as American Islam. Islam commands us to be firm against the enemies [“infidels”] and be kind and compassionate toward each other.”

Among the major distinctions (translated verbatim) made in Khadr’s article are:

  • Radicals want the caliphate to return; moderates reject the caliphate.
  • Radicals want to apply Sharia (Islamic law); moderates reject the application of Sharia.
  • Radicals reject the idea of renewal and reform, seeing it as a way to conform Islam to Western culture; moderates accept it.
  • Radicals accept the duty of waging jihad in the path of Allah; moderates reject it.
  • Radicals reject any criticism whatsoever of Islam; moderates welcome it on the basis of freedom of speech.
  • Radicals accept those laws that punish whoever insults or leaves the religion [apostates]; moderates recoil from these laws.
  • Radicals respond to any insult against Islam or the prophet Muhammad — peace and blessing upon him — with great violence and anger; moderates respond calmly and peacefully on the basis of freedom of expression.
  • Radicals respect and revere every deed and every word of the prophet — peace be upon him — in the hadith; moderates do not.
  • Radicals oppose democracy; moderates accept it.
  • Radicals see the people of the book [Jews and Christians] as dhimmis [barely tolerated subjects]; moderates oppose this [view].
  • Radicals reject the idea that non-Muslim minorities should have equality or authority over Muslims; moderates accept it.
  • Radicals reject the idea that men and women are equal; moderates accept it, according to Western views.
  • Radicals oppose the idea of religious freedom and apostasy from Islam; moderates agree to it.
  • Radicals desire to see Islam reign supreme; moderates oppose this.
  • Radicals place the Koran over the constitution; moderates reject this [assumption].
  • Radicals reject the idea of religious equality because Allah’s true religion is Islam; moderates accept it.
  • Radicals embrace the wearing of hijabs and niqabs; moderates reject it.
  • Radicals accept killing young girls who commit adultery or otherwise besmirch their family’s honor; moderates reject this [response].
  • Radicals reject the status of women today and think that the status of women today should be like the status of women in the time of the prophet; moderates oppose that women should be as in the time of the prophet.
  • Radicals vehemently reject that women should have the freedom to choose partners; moderates accept that she can choose a boyfriend without marriage.
  • Radicals agree to clitorectomies; moderates reject them.
  • Radicals reject the so-called war on terror and see it as a war on Islam; moderates accept it.
  • Radicals support jihadi groups; moderates reject them.
  • Radicals reject the terms “Islamic terrorism” or “Islamic fascism”; moderates accept them.
  • Radicals reject universal human rights, including the right to be homosexual; moderates accept them.
  • Radicals reject the idea of allying with the West; moderates support it.
  • Radicals oppose secularism; moderates support it.
1568 (1)According to Dr. Ahmed Ibrahim Khadr, the first loyalty of radicals is to Islam while the first loyalty for moderates, regardless of their religion, is to the state. Radicals reject the idea of religious equality because Allah’s true religion is Islam; moderates accept it.

Khadr makes other charges outside his chart, including that radicals want religion to govern society, while moderates believe religion has no role in public life, that it must be practiced in private; that radicals take the text of the Koran and hadith literally, while moderates rely on rationalism, and that the first loyalty of radicals is to Islam — a reference to the Islamic doctrine of “Loyalty and Enmity” — while the first loyalty for moderates, regardless of their religion, is to the state. Radicals, he charges, also marvel that the moderate “finds hatred for non-Muslims unacceptable.”

Khadr’s conclusion is that, to most Muslims, “moderate Muslims” are those Muslims who do not oppose — and who actually aid — the West and its way of life, whereas everything “radicals” accept is based on traditional Islamic views.

If true — and disturbing polls certainly indicate that Khadr’s findings are prevalent — the West may need to rethink one of its main means of countering radical Islam: moderate Muslims and moderate Islam.

Categories: Islam in America, Islamic indoctrination, Islamic integration, Islamic reformation, Islamisation, Islamism, Islamist moral values, Moderate Muslims
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Germany’s largest Muslim organization gets Muslim prof fired for saying violent Qur’an verses not valid for all time

May 24, 2016

Germany’s largest Muslim organization gets Muslim prof fired for saying violent Qur’an verses not valid for all time, Jihad Watch, , May 23, 2016

Islamic apologists routinely claim that violent Qur’an verses have no validity beyond Muhammad’s time, but this story illustrates that this is not the mainstream view in Islam. The persecution of Mouhanad Khorchide also shows the uphill battle that genuine Muslim reformers face: branded as heretics and/or apostates, they’re often shunned (or worse) by the very community that needs their ideas the most.

Mouhanad-Khorchide

“Opinion: A German Islam must be liberal, self-critical,” by Susanne Schröter, DW, May 23, 2016:

When the theologian Mouhanad Khorchide, who teaches at the University of Münster, published “Islam Is Compassion” in 2012, he received a variety of diverse reactions. Many non-Muslims celebrated the work as the revelation of a humanistic Islam: an Islam that no one needs to fear. This feeling arose in part because the author created a picture of God that is not “interested in the labels of Muslim or Christian or Jewish, believer or nonbeliever.”

Korchide threw out the idea that Koran verses that appear violent or hostile toward women or non-Muslims may be valid for all eternity. He wanted them to be viewed as the words of a bygone era.

It seemed that the professor, with the swoop of his pen, managed to brush aside all those reservations that made people wonder whether Islam really “belonged to Germany,” as former President Christian Wulff said famously in a 2010. One might even have thought that Muslims would offer Khorchide a pat on the back.

On the website for DITIB, Germany’s Turkish Islamic union and the country’s largest Muslim organization, one can read that Khorchide’s statements were a “rejection of the teachings of classical Islam” and an “insult to Muslim identity.” For this reason, the professor was removed from his post at the university. As if that weren’t enough, the coordinating body of Germany’s Central Council of Muslims (ZMD), a cooperative made up of a number of large organizations, produced a nearly 100-page assessment document to discredit him further, but luckily was not able to get far with it….

“Jihad,” when used in the sense of a real war, is a term that is used in the Koran and in Islamic heritage. There are clerics who claim jihad is an appropriate instrument for avenging insults to the Prophet Muhammad – such as an act of revenge for a nation’s foreign policy. These clerics are even lent the pulpit at some mosques, though the official leaders of the houses of worship issue apologies to the community if religious youths clamor after extremists. But Salafism is a youth movement, and it draws in so many teenagers and young adults that the psychologist Ahmad Mansour speaks of a “Generation Allah.”

Mansour isn’t only referring to those youths who join radical groups and potentially fight in such places as Syria, but also those whose beliefs vacillate between extremism and orthodoxy. “Generation Allah” refers to youths who find meaning in life by subjecting themselves unquestioningly to God and his rules, who ask constantly what is halal (allowed) or haram (forbidden) because their perspective is that they can be winners in paradise. I have spoken to such young men. Living in contemporary German society is dangerous for these young men, full of sin, and as a result they reject any relationships with so-called unbelievers. They go beyond what is normally required of their faith.

Some Muslim organizations encourage such segregation. Nearly every mosque has soccer teams that play against other sides from other mosques. Islamic day care and cultural centers are being founded; Islamic NGOs are working with underprivilileged [sic] people and youth. Parallel structures are being developed that would allow Muslims to avoid contact with non-Muslims from the cradle to the grave….

Categories: Islam - causes of terrorism, Islamic integration, Islamic radicalization, Islamic reformation, Islamisation, Islamism, Islamist moral values
Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Exclusive: ‘I was Raised by an Islamist Terror Cult in America’

May 15, 2016

Exclusive: ‘I was Raised by an Islamist Terror Cult in America’ Clarion Project, Ryan Mauro, May 15, 2016

Silhouette-Man-Woman-Pixabay-IPIllustrative picture: Pixabay)

The Clarion Project has been in contact with a woman who grew up within Jamaat ul-Fuqra, a cultish Sufi Islamist terrorist group that now goes by the name of Muslims of the Americas.

The group is best known for establishing “Islamic villages” on U.S. soil, for example, its “Islamberg” headquarters in New York state.

She has agreed to anonymously come forward with her heartbreaking story. We have removed details for her safety. She provided photographs and specific facts that are unavailable in the public sphere that we subsequently confirmed.

The following is her testimony provided to Clarion Project national security analyst Ryan Mauro. It is one of the very few first-hand testimonies from someone who was inside Jamaat ul-Fuqra when it committed terrorism under that name:

I still know many Muslims and I know that Jamaat ul-Fuqra is nothing like them, but there are violent ones who will take issue with what I say and do. They believe you should be killed if you decide not to be Muslim or practice Islam the way they do because, to them, it’s “apostasy,” and that’s a capital offense under Islam. I do believe some of those violent Muslims may attempt to kill me.

From my point of view as a kid in Michigan, everything was great even though my mom and dad got a divorce and I was living with my mom. My first introduction to X [a Fuqra member] was when he hit me for breaking rules I knew nothing about. My name was also changed to be Islamic.

We lived at 52 Ferris Street in Highland Park, Michigan, a three-story building with six apartments on each floor. The entire building was occupied by black Muslims, some who came from Detroit. Non-Muslims were not allowed to move in. Armed guards were at the front entrance.

Living in the building was like living in a Muslim country. We didn’t go outside much because they didn’t want us to be influenced by non-Muslims. Us kids didn’t have any friends outside of the building. We were very poor and slept on the bare floor with no beds. Sometimes we didn’t have heat or hot water. We didn’t have any furniture whatsoever. We ate on the floor out of large platters with our fingers. Food was also sometimes scarce.

Once my mother was making the only food we had in the house: Beans and rice. As she was seasoning, she mistakenly poured the entire bottle of salt in it. I watched her break down crying because this was the only food she had to feed her children. Someone told her to use a potato to suck the salt out of the food so we could eat it.

The building was like a house of horrors. Some of the kids were tortured by their parents or beaten by the “brothers” in the building. There was one kid in particular I remember who was treated really badly. He would be beaten severely for little things like taking food from the refrigerator for himself. He and some others would sometimes not be allowed to stand up and forced to hop around like a bunny for days on end. They’d make him run errands throughout the building, hopping up three flights of stairs.

He was also starving and I remember him coming to our door begging for food. There was a fire set by one girl who was also known to be beaten badly and kept separate from the rest of the kids. Years later, I met the boy again and he just broke down crying. It was heart-wrenching. He wanted to know why no one helped him.

There were exercise classes in the basement. The brothers were training for whatever Muslim war they continuously told us was coming. Our schooling was irregular and not formal. There were no science classes and math was deficient. Mostly we learned to read and write English and Arabic. I learned later about the gaping holes in our education. Sometimes there was class once a week, sometimes not at all.

We were not allowed to listen to music or watch commercials. They didn’t want us to be influenced by them. There were some odd rules like the children couldn’t have cabbage patch dolls. They were called “evil.” The Smurfs were considered demonic.

This was true of my entire time with Fuqra. There was a tape recorder that I’d use to secretly record kids shows on the TV like Kids Incorporated. I only learned the pop songs from that time by hearing them sung on that show. I didn’t even hear Michael Jackson’s “Beat It” until much later in life. I’d try to memorize the songs in a closet because I couldn’t be caught listening to them.

Growing up, I thought all Muslims were like us. Later, I realized these were just the odd rules of our Muslim cult and that most Muslims did not follow most of the same rules as we did. Just like most Muslims are not terrorists and some Muslims don’t wear full coverings, every sect is different.

We would hear all kinds of fearful messages. I was told that in my lifetime the Muslims would have to fight the kafiroons (non-believers) and I would have to make sure I was on the right side of the war.

The females, including myself, wore what we called jilabias; a head-to-ankle length traditional Muslim garment. We usually made them ourselves. We sewed our own clothes when I was a kid, which was fun. We had different colored jilabias.

It was also common for men to have several wives. I was molested by one man, who I know also molested another girl. It causes feelings of shame that can affect you the rest of your life. It changes your brain chemistry.

The leader of our community was a man known as “Imam Musa.” It’s important to note that we were not Nation of Islam Muslims. In fact, we were taught that the Nation of Islam members aren’t really Muslims.

One day, there was a lot of commotion and we were told that a sheikh from Pakistan was coming to visit our little community inside the building. His name was Sheikh Mubarik Ali Gilani. They said he was a direct descendant of the Prophet Mohammed. It was all anyone talked about and some said he was coming to the U.S. seeking recruits for jihad in Afghanistan.

Everyone in the building was about the sheikh. Every disagreement was deferred to the Sheikh. The Sheikh and his wife would even name his followers’ babies.

When the sheikh arrived, I met him very briefly because I had a weird dream about the Prophet Mohammed. I couldn’t really remember the details. It was supposed to be a big honor to meet the sheikh. The leaders of our community met with him and some changes were made.

One of the first things that happened is that the sheikh married one of the girls who was around 14 years old and he was probably in his 40s. The marriage was supposed to combine our community with the sheikh’s community in Pakistan. It was the kind of marriage that reminds me of ancient times where a father would marry his daughter off to someone important in order to have a treaty with that community. She left to live with him in Pakistan and her father became the new leader of the community.

The sheikh renamed our community at this point to be “Jamaat ul-Fuqra,” which means “community of the impoverished.”

His followers in America are primarily African-American converts to Islam, but I believe our community was the first, or one of the first, he visited in the United States. Several of the “brothers” from the building went to Pakistan to meet with the sheikh, and when they returned, they were even more militant and religious than before. It was as if they had been hypnotized.

We were told that they prayed a lot and had mysticism circles. I vaguely remember something about them praying and going up to see Prophet Mohammed. They carried out small “missions.” Various sources on the Internet said that Fuqra carried out various terrorist attacks in the 1980s and early 1990s across the U.S. I heard about one of them.

There are press reports about Fuqra members bombing a building that housed a cleric. I knew one of them and that he had gone to visit the sheikh in Pakistan. Somehow, during the attack, the door to the basement got locked behind them and they died in the ensuing fire. The rumor in our community was that the CIA locked the door and trapped them inside. The men who died were considered “martyrs for the cause of Allah” in our community.

When we were there, one day I overheard people saying something about the FBI watching the building in navy blue cars outside. I looked out the window and, sure enough, there was a navy blue four-door sedan sitting out there. After that day, I noticed it was out there all the time.

In the 1990s, I heard several rumors. I heard that Sheikh Gilani was barred from entering the U.S. because he was suspected of being involved in a terrorist attack involving an airplane. I heard that Sheikh Gilani lives in a luxurious compound in Pakistan and that his family is extremely wealthy. His wives have expensive jewelry and servants and even their own seamstress.

I don’t know if these rumors are true first-hand, but supposedly there is a big dichotomy between how luxurious the sheikh and his family live and how poor his followers in the United States live.

Not long after the sedan was noticed, the sheikh sent an order from Pakistan that all Muslims in the building had to disperse across the country. This was devastating for me because I couldn’t see my friends anymore. I was very lonely. The community members went to California, Washington D.C., South Carolina, Georgia, New York and maybe other places.

I knew that Fuqra had bought land in rural areas of New York and Georgia for followers to settle at where they could follow strict religious codes. A group of us went to New Orleans in Louisiana and we didn’t have to wear our jalabias because we had to be incognito.

We lived in a two room shack behind someone’s house. The leader drove a cab. We moved frequently. I suspect that when they couldn’t pay the rent, they’d get evicted and move. In between moves, we’d live with other families and that was fun because we could play with other kids. I remember seeing scary and loud fights between the women married to the leader. A knife was pulled one time and another time a pregnant woman was kicked.

We drove to Brooklyn to hear the sheikh speak in a large mosque during one of his trips to America. His wife was there in a private room and she was revered in the community. I’ll always remember the shoes she wore. They looked like shoes that a genie would wear; gold and curled at the tip.

During that visit, I saw something that left a lasting impression on me. All the females were called to the basement of the mosque. There had to be 30-40 of us in a circle on the floor. They brought a chair out and put it in the middle of us. Then they brought out Y [a Fuqra member] and she had to sit backwards in the chair with her back facing the crowd. A woman came out with a big stick and gave her 10 lashes while the crowd of women said “shame on you!” with each lash.

At first, she just winced in agony. Eventually she was crying pretty hard. The entire scene was traumatizing for me and I felt bad for the children seeing it. She didn’t immediately go back to New Orleans, but did after some time.

The leader of the New Orleans community continued to be abusive and beat kids. I remember him beating one boy for peeing standing up. I guess Muslim men are supposed to sit down when they used the restroom. It really upset me.

One time I walked into the living room and saw one of the boys getting beaten. He looked at me with pain and fear in his eyes. I immediately screamed for the leader to stop hitting him and then I started shaking with fear. No one talked back to him. He told me to leave a room and continued the beating with a belt as the boy hunched and crawled into a corner. I felt helpless. It was the catalyst for me deciding to leave.

I took some pocket change and ran away. I didn’t know where to go, so I just walked up and down random neighborhoods and ended up at an outdoor mall. Eventually, I was falling asleep and had to go back home. My mom was crying when I walked in and I told her I wanted to go live with my dad.

I ran away again only days later and was hit with a belt when I came home. This time, I fought back and began screaming for someone to call the police. It made him give up and walk away in a huff. I later ran away again and got to a pay phone where I called my dad in Michigan. He had tried to take me away when I was growing up but was stopped by guys with guns. I knew he’d rescue me.

He called a cab to bring me to the airport and I sat there and waited for hours. Then I saw my grandpa come out of the airport and he paid the taxi that had been waiting forever. We flew back to Michigan.

After I left, most of the Muslims left the New Orleans site and went to other Fuqra places. I know some did not move to other Fuqra communities and I suspect that some of them stopped being a part of Jamaat ul-Fuqra.

It was time to start my life over in Michigan but I still suffer a lot from all I experienced to this day.

Categories: Islam - submission, Islam and girls, Islam and women, Islam in America, Islamic indoctrination, Islamic indoctrination of children, Islamic integration, Islamic jihad, Islamic radicalization, Islamic training camps, Islamism, Islamist moral values, Islamists in America
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

What Is More “Annoying” Than A Suicide Bomber?

April 26, 2016

What Is More “Annoying” Than A Suicide Bomber? CounterJihad, April 25, 2016

(Dear me! Trump lacks Islamist moral values. Tsk tsk. — DM)

According to the International Union of Muslim Scholars, the answer is Donald Trump.

Secretary-General of the International Union of Muslim Scholars (IUMS) Ali Qara Daghi told the AFP that his organization finds it annoying that so many Americans support business magnate Donald Trump in the 2016 election.  “This is really annoying us so much that he has these levels of support,” he told reporters.  “His remarks are not consistent with common sense or moral values because he is not honest and exploits attacks on Islam in order to gain access to power.”

It is good to hear that Daghi thinks that remarks by important people should be consistent with common sense and moral values.  The IUMS and its leadership have issued a number of statements we should revisit in light of this new standard.

[T]he International Union of Muslim Scholars [is] run by Muslim Brotherhood chief jurist Yusuf Al Qaradawi. Under Qaradawi the IUMS issued fatwas in support of Hamas suicide bombings, and the targeting of Americans in Iraq during the Iraq War, and on called for jihad against secular leaders in Syria, Egypt and Libya. IUMS is considered a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates.

Is it consistent with common sense and moral values to endorse suicide bombings?  Should Americans have been “annoyed” when someone called for their sons and daughters to be targeted in Iraq?  What should we think of the common sense or moral values of people who have endorsed these practices?

Qaradawi and the IUMS also took a hand in the attacks on Danish embassies in the wake of the publication of Mohammed cartoons.  Qaradawi says this in his own words.

[I]n the matter of the cartoons of the Prophet  Muhammad in Denmark, that wronged the Prophet. We called on [da’awna] the Islamic umma, the International Union of Muslim Scholars, and the umma rose up, from one end to the next, in the Easts and the Wests, in the North and the South, hundreds of millions rose up. The Islamic umma, if it found who to awaken it, would rise up and responded [to the call]. The umma has not died.

Qaradawi is facing a demand for extradition by Egypt for his role in the Muslim Brotherhood’s attempt to overthrow the constitution in that country in 2013.  In the wake of the Egyptian army’s move to prevent the destruction of their constitution, Qaradawi issued a formal call for jihad against Egypt.

Yet somehow Qaradawi has managed to pass as a “moderate” in the Western press even while he was expressing support for Hamas’ suicide attacks.  No one should be fooled.  Neither Qaradawi or the IUMS is moderate.  However annoying Donald Trump may be, the reason his rhetoric garners such widespread support is because of people like them.

Categories: Donald Trump, Islamist moral values
Tags: ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Newer Entries »