Obama versus Israel: needlessly isolating a valued ally in the Middle East
Caroline Glick in the Jerusalem Post , “Obama’s war on Israel” and Joel Mowbray in the Washington Times,
, “Diplomatic storms spread fears of fallout: Assailing friends, ignoring adversaries”,have raised serious questions about why President Obama is needlessly punishing Israel, a valued ally in the Middle East. The Obama effort against Israel appears as a thoughtless attempt to score a pyrrhic foreign policy victory in the fractured Middle East. It comes just prior to AIPAC’s annual Washington Policy Conference where Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will meet Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu after scolding him for allegedly embarrassing Vice President Biden during the latter’s recent visit to Israel. It also comes after a fruitless journey to Moscow by Secretary Clinton seeking support from Russian President Medvedev for UN Security Council sanctions against the Iranian nuclear enrichment program. Instead the Russians announced the 1000 Megawatt nuclear power facility at Bushehr will shortly go on-line. It is doubtful that either Russia or China will support sanctions. This leaves Israel pondering what support it can expect from the Obama Administration against the annihilationist threat from a nuclear Iran. There is significant skepticism in Israel about Obama’s intentions. A recent Haaretz Dialog poll indicated that 27% of Israelis consider Obama as anti-Semitic.
Earlier this week Rabbi Jon Hausman and I did a two hour recorded interview, the first hour will air Saturday, March 20th, on a south Florida radio program, "The Joe Citizen Show". The radio program segment will deal with the specific issues that both Caroline Glick and Joel Mowbray have raised in their Jerusalem Post and Washington Times commentary.
Here are some facts we discussed during the recorded interview:
the disputed Ramat Shlomo project is already sited on a bare hill in north Jerusalem, so there is no displacement of Arab homes;
the alleged 'incendiary ' announcement concerned Interior Ministry l approval of the fourth stage of a seven stage approval process for the Ramat Shlomo project for poor orthodox Jews;
Israel has sovereignty over all of the unified city of Jerusalem ratified in July 1967;
Israel has also built housing for Arabs in Jerusalem;
In October 2009 Secretary of State Clinton congratulated PM Netanyahu on a freeze in West Bank construction, which did not apply to Jerusalem.
the re-dedication of the Hurva ("ruined" in Hebrew) synagogue last Monday triggered the "Days of Rage" called for by the Northern Branch of the Islamic Movement (an affiliate of Hamas inside Israel) that incited continuing Arab protests and attacks in East Jerusalem. They said the Hurva synagogue re-dedication was evidence of Israeli attempts to take control of the Al Aqsa Mosque. PA negotiator Abu Alaaa added more fuel to the fire by calling for a "Third Intifada". The Hurva Synagogue is not even close to the Al Aksa Mosque, but in the Cardo in the Jewish sector of the Old City;
Further, excavation of the Hurva synagogue site have uncovered artifacts going back to the 8th Century BCE;
The Hurva synagogue was destroyed by Arabs in an 18th century fire, rededicated in 1864, and blown up in 1948 when Jordanian legionnaires occupied the Old City of Jerusalem and the current rebuilding took over ten years to complete.
Was this diplomatic brouhaha between allies with an alleged ‘special relationship’ needless? We think it was. In our view, the tough language from both Secretary Clinton and David Axelrod, senior political advisor to President Obama, last weekend over the alleged 'insult' to Vice President Biden was unwarranted.
There is further evidence of possible changes in attitude by the Obama Administration reflected in the testimony of Gen. David Petraeus before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday. Petraeus, CENTCOM commander, conveyed the view that the lack of resolution of the Arab Israeli situation was a major cause for instability in the Middle East. Here is what Petraeus said:
The enduring hostilities between Israel and some of its neighbors present distinct challenges to our ability to advance our interests. Arab anger over the Palestinian question limits the strength and depth of US partnerships with governments and peoples in the [Middle East] and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world.
Achieving a two-state solution is obviously in America's strategic interest as well, because it would remove one of the major sources of anti-Americanism in the Arab and Muslim world. The vast majority of Muslims reject al Qaeda and its murderous methods, for example, but they share its harsh views about U.S. policy towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. A two-state solution won't solve all of our problems in the region, of course, but it would make a lot of them easier to address. It's clear that the U.S. military, which now has a lot of experience in the region, thinks so too. As CENTCOM commander General David Petraeus told the Armed Services Committee earlier today.
Moreover, the Obama Administration has yet to enact crippling sanctions against Iran's nuclear project given legislation passed by both Houses of Congress. Especially important are sanctions against foreign deliveries of refined petroleum products. Iran imports 2/5th of these crucial items from abroad.
Further, there are reports about alleged diversion of so-called bunker buster bombs from delivery to Israel, as requested and agreed to over two years ago, to US air bases on the British-leased island of Diego Rivera in the Indian Ocean. Moreover, after shutting down the F-22 Raptor production program that Israel, Australia and Japan had asked to be continued, the Pentagon has recently indicated delays in production of F-35 Joint Strike fighters. This may result in curtailing replacement deliveries to the IAF for aging F-15b aircraft in the Israeli air fleet.
Notwithstanding the current diplomatic kerfuffle spawned by the Obama Administration, PM Netanyahu will meet Netanyahu with Special Envoy former Sen. George Mitchell in Israel on Sunday. He is scheduled to meet with Secretary Clinton on Monday. He will be speaking that evening at the AIPAC Washington Policy conference. Secretary Clinton will also be speaking there on behalf of the Obama Administration. PM Netanyahu will meet President Obama on Tuesday, since the latter has deferred his scheduled trip to Asia until June as the press of passing Health Care Reform legislation mounts. We shall see what eventuates from these meetings.
Ironically, we have had contretemps of this type before in the special relationship between Israel and the US. Back in 1991, President George H.W. Bush and Secretary of State James Baker, III, tried to force Israeli PM Yitzhak Shamir to make concessions at the Madrid conference by withholding $10 Billion in loan guarantees to build much needed housing for the great bow wave of Russian immigration to Israel. The construction of such immigrant housing in settlements on the West Bank was the issue. Strange how things don’t seem to change.
Ask yourself when the 'special relationship' between Israel and the US began? Try July, 1967 under the late President Lyndon Johnson. Johnson, who came from a Christian Zionist background in Texas, as a young Congressman saved an estimated 400 to 500 Jews from the Holocaust. He was a natural friend of Israel. The all important UN Security Council Res. 242 (adopted with US support in November 1967) included language about 'territories' stipulating that Israel should have the right to “secure and defensible borders” in any negotiated agreements.
What prevents this latest impasse between the US and Israel from becoming a stalemate is the significant support for Israel by Americans. A recent Gallup poll indicated that American support for Israel was at an all time high- 63 percent. A new poll commissioned by The Israel Project further indicated that Americans would resoundingly take the side of Israel in a conflict with the Palestinians by an 8 to 1 margin.
President Obama and Secretary Clinton, who are purported to be master politicians, should take these figures to heart and stop isolating the only democratic ally in the Middle East that shares American Judeo Christian values. Lest they forget Israel is the literal canary in the mines of Jihadist Islam. The late President Johnson knew that. Obama and Clinton should. The question is do they?
Gen Petraeus' Thesis advisor, Professor Stephen M. Walt
Given the kerfuffle over CENTCOM Commander Gen. David Petraeus’ presentation before the Senate Armed services Committee , it is interesting to note that one of his Princeton thesis advisors was Professor Stephen M. Walt. Walt holds the endowed Belfer Chair at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government and is co-author with John J. Mearsheimer of the controversial book, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy.
The Jerusalem Post noted General Petraeus’ comment on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict:
US Gen. David Petraeus charged Tuesday that the Arab-Israeli conflict hurts America’s ability to advance its interests in the Middle East, fomenting anti-American sentiment and limiting America’s strategic partnerships with Arab governments.
Petraeus called the conflict one of the “root causes of instability” and “obstacles to security” in the region – which aids al-Qaida – and argued that serious progress in the peace process could weaken Iran’s reach, as it uses the conflict to fuel support for its terror group proxies.
Petraeus, commander of the US military’s Central Command, a zone that ranges from Egypt to Pakistan, but excludes Israel and the Palestinian Authority, offered the assessment in a prepared testimony for the Senate Armed Services Committee.
“The enduring hostilities between Israel and some of its neighbors present distinct challenges to our ability to advance our interests,” he said in the written testimony. “Arab anger over the Palestinian question limits the strength and depth of US partnerships with governments and peoples in the [Middle East] and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world.”
Achieving a two-state solution is obviously in America's strategic interest as well, because it would remove one of the major sources of anti-Americanism in the Arab and Muslim world. The vast majority of Muslims reject al Qaeda and its murderous methods, for example, but they share its harsh views about U.S. policy towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. A two-state solution won't solve all of our problems in the region, of course, but it would make a lot of them easier to address. It's clear that the U.S. military, which now has a lot of experience in the region, thinks so too. As CENTCOM commander General David Petraeus told the Armed Services Committee earlier today
Gen. Petraeus’ thesis is available on-line at the History News Network website –see here. It is entitled “The American military and the Lessons of Vietnam: A Study of Military Influence and the Use of Force in the Post-Vietnam Era.” My thanks to Andy Bostom who found the link to the Petraeus thesis after we had discussed the reference to Walt as Petraeus' thesis advisor I found in a comment on-line.
On p. iii of his thesis under Acknowledgements, Petraeus lavishes praise on Walt. He notes:
Professor Stephen Walt also deserves my gratitude. As my second faculty adviser – replacing Professor Barry Posen during the writing of my dissertation – Professor Walt offered numerous sound suggestions and comments. Like Professor Ullman, he displayed tremendous competence not only as an academic, but as a teacher as well.
Gen. Petraeus appears to have adopted the American Arabists’ and Saudis’ line that the solution to Middle East conflicts with Iran and between Israelis and the Palestinians lies in Jerusalem. It would appear that he agrees with the comments of his former thesis advisor, Professor Walt of Harvard.
It will be interesting to see the relevance of Gen. Petraeus’ thesis comments about Post-Vietnam conflicts and counter-insurgency strategies applied to current Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts. That’s for a later post.
Tarek Mehanna: the dangerous campaign to free a home grown terrorist
Last October, the FBI arrested Tarek Mehanna, a 27 year old American born Muslim and a Doctoral graduate of the Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences (MCPHS) on charges of lying to authorities, planning terrorist attacks on malls and possible assassination attempts on US officials. Tarek was teaching religion and science at the Al Huda Academy in Worcester, Massachusetts. Tarek’s Egyptian-born father Ahmed Mehanna is a professor of pharmacology at the MCPHS. Ahmed said in a WCVB Channel 5 TV report from the family’s Sudbury, Massachusetts home :
We've been living in this country for 32 years. We are very peaceful people. We are very, very loyal citizens, including my son. The issue of killing, well, that is a surprise to me.
Here is what Steve Emerson of The Investigative Project wrote about Tarek and his Jihadi accomplice, Ahmad Abousamra:
In October, the U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts announced that [Tarek] Mehanna had been charged in a complaint with conspiring to provide material support to terrorists. A press release explained that from 2001 through May 2008, "Mehanna conspired with Ahmad Abousamra, and others to provide material support and resources for use in carrying out a conspiracy to kill, kidnap, maim or injure persons or damage property in a foreign country."
In addition, [Tarek] Mehanna and his co-conspirators "discussed their desire to participate in violent jihad against American interests and that they would talk about fighting jihad and their desire to die on the battlefield."
According to an affidavit in the case signed by FBI Special Agent Heidi Williams, [Tarek]Mehanna and Abousamra had discussions about assassinating members of the executive branch of the U.S. government. [Tarek] Mehanna and Abousamra, inspired by the snipers who terrorized the Washington, D.C. area in 2002, discussed obtaining automatic weapons, going to a shopping mall and randomly shooting people.
According to Williams' affidavit, [Tarek]Mehanna traveled to Pakistan and Yemen in unsuccessful attempts to find a terrorist training camp and engage in jihad. A search of his computer revealed that [Tarek] Mehanna translated and distributed Al Qaeda propaganda materials and numerous jihadist videos. These included videos of [Tarek] Mehanna joking about a remote-control bomb attack against U.S. soldiers and a picture of [Tarek] Mehanna and others posing at the former site of the World Trade Center.
The computer included a picture showing [Tarek] Mehanna and others at the Ground Zero construction site "with large grins and Mehanna has one finger pointed up in the air," the affidavit says.
Mehanna remains in jail awaiting trial. Abousamra disappeared in 2007 and is believed to be outside the United States, [having fled to Syria].
[Tarek] Mehanna’s arrest last fall came just a few weeks prior to Maj. Hasan’s lone Jihad attack at Fort Hood that killed 14 and injured 30. One disturbing element in the charges against [Tarek] Mehenna was his plan to indiscriminately attack shoppers with automatic weapons fire in a mall. This is eerily like a scenario that we warned about in a June 2009 NER article, “Foot Soldiers of Islam” concerning possible swarming attacks by home grown terrorists similar to the Mumbai attacks of November 2008.
[Swarming attacks] could be perpetrated by homegrown Jihadis . . . . They could orchestrate swarming attacks against public facilities in this country using so-called low tech means: cheap weapons and pickup trucks. These possible swarming attacks could be devastating ‘mini- 9/11events.’ Deadly scenarios might include simultaneous attacks against exposed queues of customers at so-called ‘big box stores’ especially on high sales days like Black Friday, the start of the Christmas holiday retailing season. The casualties from such orchestrated swarming attacks could be devastating and the economic impacts significant.
Charles Jacobs of Americans for Peace and Tolerance (APT) released a video on You Tube “From Sudbury to Mumbai –The Boston Terror Plot”- see here- that connects the dots between Tarek Mehanna’s, his accomplice Ahmad Abousamra, and the latter’s father, Abdul.
Acording to a report in the Boston Globe, Dr. Abdul Abousamra, a native of Syria, spent over two decades at Massachusetts General Hospital and was President of the Islamic Center of New England (ICNE) located in Sharon, Massachusetts. ICNE was where Tarek Mehanna and Ahmad Abousamra met as childhood friends. Dr. Abousmara now lives in the Detroit area. Dr. Abousamra was a former vice president of the Boston Chapter of the Muslim American Society (MAS), a Muslim Brotherhood front identified as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial. The Boston Chapter of the MAS controls the controversial Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center (ISBCC) that embroiled Jacobs and others in a law suit that was withdrawn in 2007. We wrote about Jacobs and the APT protest of the ISBCC dedication in an NER article, “Chelm on the Charles River.”
The APT video further connects the dots between Dr. Abousamra and Hafiz Mohammed Masood who was hired by Abousamra as Imam at the ICNE. Masood is a brother of Hafiz Mohammed Saeed a radical Cleric and founder of the Lashkar- e- Taibah terrorist group in Pakistan that planned and executed the Mumbai swarming attack which killed over 167 persons, including Jews gathered at a Chabad facility. Masood was deported from the US in 2008 for immigration fraud, and while in the US was accused of raising funds for Lashkar-e-Taibah.
What prompted the APT video was a fierce campaign to free Tarek Mehanna waged using the social network Facebook against the US prosecutor in the case. Note this from the APT news release:
Jacobs noted that Tarek's Internet support groups are rife with anti-American and anti-Semitic sloganeering (such as "Close Guantanamo Bay, Reopen Auschwitz") and support for violence in the name of Islam.
Jacobs said the decision to release the film now was precipitated by a campaign of intimidation launched by Tarek's supporters against Aloke Chakravarty, the assistant US attorney in Boston responsible for Tarek's prosecution.
As part of what they call a "Pressure Campaign to Free Tarek Mehanna," Islamic extremists in collaboration with the Boston branch of the International Socialist Organization have sought to clog the prosecutor's office phone and fax lines with bizarre messages demanding Mr. Chakravarty drop the case against Tarek or face charges of prosecutorial misconduct. Tarek's supporters claimed they were turned away from the prosecutor's office when they showed up there en masse in an attempt to harass Mr. Chakravarty in person.
The APT video graphically illustrates the extent of radical Imams preaching doctrinal Islamic Jihad in American Mosques. David Gaubatz, author of Muslim Mafia, has uncovered the extent of these Jihadi doctrinal underpinnings in investigations of more than 200 Mosques and infiltration of the Muslim Brotherhood front group, the Council of American Islamic Relations.
We hope that Jacobs and the APT team will get the message across about the dangers from home grown Jihadis to the obsessively ‘political correct’ Boston community and all Americans. Otherwise the dangerous campaign of the Boston ‘red-green’ alliance might free Tarek Mehanna.
Rev. Dr. Naim Ateek is an Anglican Canon who heads the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center in Jerusalem. Sabeel propounds the doctrine that Jews, especially Israelis, are “Christ killers.” When Ateek came to the venerable Old South Church in the fall of 2007, Dexter Van Zile, Christian Media Analyst at CAMERA – the Boston-based Middle East media watchdog group, wrote about Ateek and Sabeel in a Boston Globe, op-ed, “Hate at the Altar”:
For the past three decades, Sabeel has billed itself as the voice of the beleaguered community of Palestinian Christians in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and Israel. Over the years, Sabeel has been successful in convincing well-meaning, but largely ignorant Christians in the United States and Europe that the Palestinian people are innocent sufferers and the Israeli government their brutal oppressors.
Ateek has figuratively blamed Israel for the attempted murder of the infant Jesus, the crucifixion of Jesus the prophet, and for blocking the resurrection of Christ the Savior.
In the context of Christian-Jewish relations, language like this - which has preceded and justified the killing of Jews for nearly two millennia - is the equivalent of a noose hanging from a tree in the Old South. Its use during a time of violence can only serve to justify continued violence against Israeli civilians.
What is troubling is there are Jews standing up for Ateek and Sabeel’s dogma at events across North America.
Ellis himself sums up in his own words the "lesson" he draws from the Holocaust:
"To have the Holocaust part of Jewish success, to have the victims of the Holocaust become part of Jewish empowerment, is unsettling. To speak of the Holocaust without confessing our sins towards the Palestinian people and seeking a real justice with them is a hypocrisy that debases us as Jews”.
For Ellis, Israel is the embodiment of all that is evil and all that is wrong with Judaism today. His concept of Israel is of a bunch of "bullies" riding about in helicopters and firing senselessly at poor innocent Palestinian civilians for absolutely no reason at all (an image repeated ad nauseum in many of Ellis’ screeds).
Ellis is not alone as an acolyte for Sabeel. Note this excerpt from a recent JTNews.net article illustrative of the misshapen views of another Sabeel Jew, Mark Braverman:
Rabbi Yohanna Kinberg associate rabbi and education director of Temple B’nai Torah in Bellevue, Washington appeared at the University of Washington Hillel recently with Mark Braverman, executive director of the Holy Land Peace Project and the author of the book Fatal Embrace, about the relationship between Christians and Jews in Israel in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The discussion was called “The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Jewish Spirituality, Tradition and Psychology,” and was hosted by the Kadima Reconstructionist Community.
Braverman said, he has come to think of the creation of the Jewish State as a mistake, claiming it can never be a truly democratic country if the basic tenets prize the rights of one group of people over another.
Braverman suggested that injustice in Israel is the result of . . . centuries of isolation and ghettoization that has led to Israel’s inability to find a place in its society for Palestinians.
“We see ourselves as a people apart. That’s the problem. And the evidence of that problem is the dark side of Israel,” he said.
During a question and answer session, Rob Jacobs, executive director of Israel advocacy group StandWithUs Northwest, asked Braverman to elaborate on the notion of Jews as “a people apart.” Jacobs referenced a statement he said Braverman had made the day before at a conference at St. Mark’s Cathedral in Seattle, hosted by Friends of Sabeel, intimating that the Jewish people’s alienation started almost 2,000 years ago when they refused to accept Jesus as the messiah.
“I haven’t converted to Christianity,” Braverman assured the audience. “But Jesus is a very powerful figure to me…. And I wonder what if Judaism had been able to make that shift? It would have put an end to our isolation and it might not have ended with us thinking we needed to go and create a Jewish homeland.”
Amid whispers from audience members in the back rows, Kinberg defended the decision of the world’s Jews not to become Christians.
“Hell yeah, it would have been a lot easier for us if we had all become followers of Jesus,” she said. “There might have been a lot less persecution. But we might also have ceased to exist.”
Van Zile had this comment about Braverman:
I also think it is dirty pool when Christians use Braverman to attack Israel. He is ultimately ambivalent about the continued existence of the Jewish people as ... Jews. But for some reason Christians love to invoke him as a credible Jewish voice concerning Israel.
Jews like Ellis and Braverman give aid and comfort to the enemies of Israel and the Jewish people.
Phyllis Chesler in a Pajamas Media post, “The Jihadi Feels Persecuted—His Aggression is Self-Defense” has more about the attacks on FrontPage Magazine investigative journalist Joe Kaufman and Florida Security Council videographer, J. Mark Campbell, that took place on Thursday inside the Florida State Capitol in Tallahassee. The perpetrator of both attacks was Florida Atlantic University (FAU) computer science professor, Bassem Alhalabi, a colleague of self-confessed convicted terrorist funder Sami al Arian, former University of South Florida professor and leader of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad in America. Alhalabi had been fined by the US Department of Commerce in 2003 for shipping to Syria thermal imaging cameras used in counterterrorism work. We have posted on this story here and here.
We noted this about the Alhalabi Al-Arian connection:
There were two attacks on FrontPageMagazine jounalist Joe Kaufman and video producer J. Mark Campbell who were accosted by Dr. Bassem Alhalabi, a professor at Florida Atlantic University (FAU). Kaufman had previouslywritten, “Prior to arriving at FAU, Alhalabi provided the school with a reference from PIJ leader and future convicted terrorist Sami Amin Al-Arian. Alhalabi had been a Research Assistant for Al-Arian at the University of South Florida (USF) from 1989 to 1990.”
Note what Chesler writes about the events surrounding the attacks based on interviews with Campbell:
Over the weekend, I spoke with J. Mark Campbell, a Florida Security Council videographer who was assaulted on March 11th (the day the nurse was beaten), a day which had been designated as Muslim Capitol Day in Tallahasee. Campbell was assaulted by Professor Bassem Alhalabi who stalked Campbell but who nevertheless claimed that he, Alhalabi, was “being harassed.” Many police were present and security tapes were running. Thus, Alhalabi was charged with “simple battery.” Twice—because he also assaulted another journalist too.
According to Joe Kaufman of Americans Against Hate, “Alhalabi is a professor at Florida Atlantic University, a director and co-founder of the Islamic Center of Boca Raton, and, in 2003, was found guilty of illegally shipping a $13,000 military-grade thermal imaging device to Syria. His associate, Ahmed Bedier, the former executive Director of CAIR-Tampa and a spokesman for Sami al-Arian, was present at the event. You can see them both in the video here.
Investigative journalist and chairman of Americans Against Hate, Joe Kaufman, was also separately assaulted by Alhalabi the same day. And why? Quietly, respectfully, Kaufman and Campbell were covering the event. They had done their “due diligence” and were not behaving in an intrusive or unpleasant fashion. But they were journalists and citizens exercising their First Amendment rights. Nevertheless, Alhalabi (who was also a supporter and associate of convicted terrorist Sami al-Arian, and who is, himself, a chemical engineer) felt “pestered” by their presence. Their very existence got on his nerves. Or was it the fact that Campbell and Kaufman were documenting what Muslims were doing on American public property that bothered him?
Surely, that’s provocation enough. Alhalabi kept finger pointing. He had people block Campbell’s camera. He kept advancing and “swatting at” Campbell’s camera. He had an associate take his camera and shove it up close into Campbell’s face. He “punched” at Campbell’s camera and face. According to Campbell, Alhalabi “physically pushed and shoved me.” He had previously done the same thing to Kaufman.
The police finally asked Campbell and Kaufman—not Alhalabi– to leave. Not because they’d “done anything wrong” but because, said the officer, “your presence is offensive to this group. We must tell you to leave to keep the peace.” And, the local media (WTXL-TV) which promised to cover what had happened, backed down. They interviewed Campbell and Kaufman but, according to Campbell, after promising to run the interview, never did so.
Let me understand this. Danish cartoonists can’t draw cartoons that “offend” some Muslims—please understand, these people have been “offended,” they feel as if they’ve been “attacked,” “provoked”; if they stage riots, kill people, even try to kill the cartoonist—well, the cartoonist started the fight. Salman Rushdie threw the first punch too when he published a novel which “offended” Khomeini and his followers. And, if two American journalists and bloggers want to cover a Muslim Day event in a public setting (in the State Capitol Building)—they deserve to be shoved, pushed, threatened, and thrown out.
Texas Congressman Cites Geert Wilders in Congressional Record
Texas Congressman Ted Poe (R-2nd District) cited Geert Wilders, Dutch leader of the Freedom Party and contender for Prime Minister in the June 9th Parliamentary elections. See his statement entered into the Congressional record, below. Poe has also suggested that three US Navy Seals who captured terrorist Ahmed Abed Hashem who had perpetrated the grisly murders of Blackwater security personnel in Fallujah in 2004 in Iraq should be given medals instead of a courts martial for allegedly roughing up the culprit.
As the leading voice in Washington, DC on border security, Congressman Poe travels regularly to the southern border to meet directly with local law enforcement and residents. Congressman Poe has been instrumental in the fight to free convicted border agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, as well as Texas Sheriff’s Deputy Gilmer Hernandez and many others in the law enforcement community that have been unjustly prosecuted for actions in the line of duty.
Poe certainly has his priorities straight when it comes to dealing with Islamic terrorism, defending those who protect our southern borders and defending those like Wilders who exercise free speech to warn Americans against the 'tsunami of Islamification" hitting our shores.
Here is Poe's statement on Wilders:
GEERT WILDERS IS PROSECUTED AND PERSECUTED
FOR FREE SPEECH
HON. TED POE
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday March 11, 2010
Mr. Speaker, freedom of speech continues to be shouted down by the politically correct police. In the Netherlands, it is against the law to say something that offends someone else’s religion. That is why Dutch lawmaker Geert Wilders is on trial for hurting people’s feelings.
He made a movie about terrorists and radical Islamic clerics encouraging violence in the name hate. Now he is on trial for insulting Islam. He is charged with discrimination and incitement to hatred. Because Dutch law is intolerant of intolerance.
The Dutch courts say even truthful insult speech is a crime. Sounds like the law has become the enemy of free speech and a protector of the radicals.
Geert Wilders boldly brings to the world’s attention the dangers of religious radicals who believe in hateful violence, and he gets in trouble for it. He ought to be commended rather than condemned and charged with a crime.
Freedom of speech is a universal human right, granted by God, especially if that speech is political, religious or truthful. A free people won’t tolerate intolerance for freedom for very long.
Ali Sina is a co-founder of Former Muslims United. Read this jeremiad by him exploding the myth of moderate Islam posted on his blog, Faith Freedom.org . It is, as he said in an email, "his homage to Dr. Wafa Sultan." It takes the form of a rebuttal to the editorial in the National Post written by self-described 'hardened secular Muslim, Tarek Fatah. Dr. Sina also takes Daniel Pipes to task for his espousal of the value of the 'moderate Muslim' construct, the subject of a debate between him and Wafa Sultan in a Toronto ynagogue on March 3rd.
I have always maintained that “moderate Muslim” is an oxymoron. We have two kinds of Muslims: Terrorist Muslims and ignorant Muslims. The former are those who know Islam well and live by its dictums. The latter have no clue about their religion and have an idealized image of Islam that has no bases in facts.
Mr. Tarek Fatah’s editorial published in National Post on March 12, 2010 confirms my view. Fatah attended a debate between Dr. Wafa Sultan, the courageous ex-Muslim woman that shook the Arab world when in an Aljazeera televised debate she pointed out that the problem with the Muslim world is Islam, and Dr. Daniel Pipes, a scholar of Islamic history and the director of the Middle East Forum.
In this debate Pipes argued that Islam is not essentially an intolerant religion and that there have been instances when Jews who were persecuted in Christian countries had sought refuge in Muslim lands. Sultan disagreed and reminded her audience that Muhammad had raided several Jewish tribes who lived in Arabia, massacred their unarmed men and allowed his marauding band to rape their women, while always reserving the prettiest for himself.
Upon hearing these comments, Fatah was “traumatized”. “Even a hardened secular Muslim such as myself was deeply hurt by what I heard that evening,” wrote Fatah.
While acknowledging the validity of Sultan’s criticism of Islam, Fatah repined that “instead of using her newfound fame to challenge the established theocracies and corrupt kingdoms of the Middle East, Sultan veered off the deep end and could not resist the temptation of becoming the poster child of Islam haters, joining their ranks with the fervour of a convert.”
Why should Sultan challenge the established theocracies and corrupt kingdoms when these are the rotten fruits of the poisonous tree of Islam? The problem is Islam, these are the symptoms.
Fatah accused Sultan of fear mongering and telling to a predominantly Jewish audience, that Muhammad was a Jew killer. He wrote “Wafa Sultan delivered an astonishing account of how the Prophet had slaughtered Jews and then raped the wife of the defeated Jewish tribe.”
Astonishing account? These accounts were reported by early Muslim historians. If Fatah is astonished it is because he, like most Muslims, has not read the history of Islam. Few Muslims care to investigate their religion. The references to Muhammad’s raids, rapes and lootings can also be found in the Quran.
Muslims chant the Quran for thawab (reward), but they don’t study it and often don’t understand what they read.
The hatred of the Jews is in the Quran. The first sura of this book is a prayer where Muslims supplicate to Allah "Show us the straight path. The path of those whom Thou hast favored; not the (path) of those who earn Thine anger nor of those who go astray."
Muslims agree that "those whom Allah has favored," are Muslims, "those who earn Allah's anger," and "those who go astray" are Jews, and Christians, respectively.
Jews are stereotyped as greedy in all Muslim countries. This is due to quranic verse that says Jews “cling to life more eagerly than any other people. …every one of them would love to live a thousand years,” but they will burn I hell. (2:96)
Many verses of the Quran portray the Jews as evil doers, wicked, transgressors, prophet killers, and despised by God. Because Muhammad hated the Jews, Muslims will always hate the Jews. This hatred is inseparable from Islam.
Fatah continued, “I left the synagogue deeply disturbed. In the fight against Islamofascism, Wafa Sultan’s hatred of Islam was cultivating the very forces she claims to be exposing. When a questioner asked her ‘What is the solution?’ she just shrugged her shoulders. Perhaps the answer she had in mind was too outrageous even by her own standards: Force Muslims to convert or die.”
Sultan has all the reasons to hate Islam. Former Muslims hate Islam because we hate discrimination against women, violence against non-Muslims, dictatorship and imposition of faith that characterizes the true Islam, and because we know the damage that his overgrown cult has done to our people, our culture and our countries. We don’t shrug our shoulders when asked for the solution. Obviously this “hardened secular Muslim” was so traumatized that he could no longer hear what Wafa Sultan was saying.
Former Muslims propose telling the truth as the solution. We believe that truth can set us free. Former Muslims do not advocate violence and hate against our own kin, brothers, sisters, parents, and loved ones. We strive for their freedom and their right to know the truth. We oppose censorship and political correctness that have enslaved the truth. Truth can hurt our feelings, but lies will kill us.
I do not disagree with Dr. Pipes’ historic account that sometimes Jews who were persecuted by Christians sought refuge among Muslims. However, I respectfully disagree with him when he presents this as evidence of the tolerance of Islam.
Islam is not tolerant because Muhammad was not tolerant. This does not mean all Muslims are intolerant. There have been many Islamic rulers who were tolerant, but they went against the canons of Islam, as many do today. That is why the jihadists who follow the true Islam are attacking these Muslim rulers.
Unlike the crusaders who wanted to convert everyone to Christianity, the jihadists don’t want to convert everyone to Islam. They want to establish the Caliphate and dominate the world. In an Islamic state, ruled under the Sharia, non-Muslims, particularly the people of Book, (Jews and Christians) are protected, as long as “they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. (Q: 9:29). This is no different from Nazism. Hitler did not want to convert everyone to Arians, nor did he want to exterminate all mankind. He wanted to dominate the world.
By drawing a distinction between Islamic terrorists and “moderate” Muslims Dr. Pipes is threading a dangerous path. One is either a Muslim, therefore emulates Muhammad and is a terrorist, or he is not a Muslim. Moderate Muslim makes as much sense as moderate Nazi.
Lies always come back to haunt us. A Muslim who does not practice Islam or believes Islam means peace is not a moderate Muslim, but a wishy-washy Muslim or an ignorant Muslim.
It is this myth that allows Glenn Beck to malign Geert Wilders and call him a “fascist,” or Jacqui Smith and other British officials to bar him from entering the U.K. There are countless good people who are harassed, prosecuted and called racists because of this myth.
I respectfully urge Dr. Pipes to stop promoting the myth of moderate Islam. I also cordially invite him to a written debate on this topic. Getting to the bottom of this matter goes beyond academic interest. This myth is endangering the lives of the critics of Islam and is violating their right to free speech. Good people are called islamophobe, bigot, racist and fascist because the world prefers politically correct untruths to the inconvenient truth. It is thanks to this myth that telling the truth has become the new hate speech.
Mr. Tarek Fatah proves my point that there is no such thing as moderate Muslim. He calls himself hardened secular, but cannot stand to hear a historic truth about his prophet. When he says, “Wafa Sultan’s hatred of Islam was cultivating the very forces she claims to be exposing,” he is talking about himself. Many honest Muslims prefer not to hide their heads in the sand; they face the truth and deal with it in a rational way.
I would like to remind the readers that virtually all Muslim terrorists come from a secular background. At one point they were just as “liberal” as Mr. Fatah is today until something happened in their lives and they turned to their faith.
Every “moderate” Muslim is a potential terrorist. The belief in Islam is like a tank of gasoline. It looks innocuous, until it meets the fire. For a “moderate” Muslim to become a murderous jihadist, all it takes is a spark of faith.
It is time to put an end to the charade of “moderate Islam.” There is no such thing as moderate Muslim. Muslims are either jihadists or dormant jihadists - moderate, they are not.
P.S.
A copy of this article was sent to National Post. Since they published Mr. Fatah's attack on Dr. Sultan, I hope they would publish this response to him. However, if they refuse to publish it I won't be offended. Most westerners have no problem shadowboxing the non-existing "political Islam," as if dealing with a real entity different from Islam, but shun the real critics of Muhammad and Islam itself. This mighty task is left on the shoulders of former Muslims and a few heroic souls like Geert Wilders.
Wafa Sultan – victim of a hatchet job in National Post commentary
Today’s edition of the National Post published an unmitigated hatchet job by Tarek Fatah on the personal views on Islam expressed by Dr. Wafa Sultan during a debate March 3rd with Dr. Daniel Pipes on the subject of Moderate Muslims before a Jewish audience in Toronto.
Watch this PJTV interview by Bill Whittle with Dr. Wafa Sultan at the recent CPAC meetings in Washington, DC
The provocative title of Fatah’s piece, “From an ex-Muslim, true Islamophobia,”was filled with rampant hyperbole, ad hominen attacks and misquotes. And this from a person who. identifies himself as a “hardened secular Muslim”. To the credit of the National Post, Fatah’s editorial was quickly and accurately rebutted by Joanne Hill,“Counterpoint: In Defense of Dr. Sultan”.
Note how Fatah set the stage for his attack on Sultan:
Inside a Toronto synagogue last week, where she was debating with Prof. Daniel Pipes whether moderate Islam was a Western ally or a Western myth, Dr. Sultan wasted no time in lashing out at her former faith. Catering to the fears of her predominantly Jewish audience, she said, "Muhammad was a Jew killer." To further inflame the crowd, Wafa Sultan delivered an astonishing account of how the Prophet had slaughtered Jews and then raped the wife of the defeated Jewish tribe.
The vitriol was so severe, it was left to the two Jewish speakers at the debate, the moderator Avi Benlolo and Prof. Pipes to praise Muslims and mention the fact that moderate Muslims were rising up against extremism. Benlolo specifically mentioned the recent 600-page fatwa by the Pakistani cleric Tahir ul Qadri denouncing suicide bombing and terrorism.
However, Wafa Sultan would not have any of that. She chided both Benlolo and Pipes for their naivete. "There is no moderate Islam," she wagged her finger at Pipes. There was only one Islam, she claimed-- the Islam of rape, murder and hate.
To his credit -- and this will surprise many of his Muslim naysayers --Daniel Pipes reminded his Jewish audience that Islam was not the bogeyman it has been made out to be. "Remember, for over 1,000 years, whenever Jews needed a place for sanctuary, they got it in Muslim lands ... The problem is not Islam, it is Islamism," he told them.
Note what Hill said about Fatah’s editorial:
Tarek Fatah has used the National Post to present a one-sided, inaccurate and potentially dangerous editorial about statements made by Dr. Wafa Sultan during her March 3rd debate in Toronto with Dr. Daniel Pipes.
Mr. Fatah's article is not an unbiased report: it is an opinion piece full of loaded terms such as slur, attack, hateful, anguish, Islam haters and vitriol. He misquotes Dr. Sultan and presents as fact a conclusion that is not supported by any of her statements: a conclusion that I believe puts her life in danger.
I am a freelance reporter; I covered the debate between Dr. Pipes and Dr. Sultan for the Jewish Tribune. I have an audio recording of the entire event, including the Question and Answer period, so I can state with complete accuracy what was and was not said by Dr. Sultan.
Hill lambasted Fatah’s over the top attack on Sultan:
Dr. Sultan said nothing that would lead the listener to come to this conclusion. When asked during the Q&A, "How do you get Muslims to reform? Do you expect them to convert to another religion?" Dr. Sultan replied:
"Give them the freedom to choose: that's all I'm asking for. Give them the freedom to search, to ask, to be exposed to different sides, different values, different lifestyles. I can tell you from my very own experience, what has helped me to reform myself is being exposed to Western values and being free to express my conclusion. I always compare between my life under Islamic Sharia and my life as a free woman in America and I write about that on my website in Arabic. So when you expose people to different [sic], and you give them the freedom to choose, that's all we need in the Islamic world. I'm not asking [them] to convert to a different religion; I'm asking to grant them the freedom to choose, the freedom to be, to follow whatever path they want to follow. That's all."
Second, this is what Dr. Sultan said at the conclusion of the Q & A:
"I'm not speaking up against Islam to please anyone but my conscience. We suffer a lot under Islamic Sharia. It is not fair. Enough is enough. We need to live our lives as human beings. I want you to know I'm not here to incite anyone against Muslims. Muslims are my family: my Mom, my brother, my sister. You know, I cannot peel off my own skin. I feel sorry for them because they are victims of a very hateful ideology. Really, if you take a look at any Islamic country, what do you see? Nothing but miserable situations, especially women who are living in this society. So I am speaking up to save them, looking for a better future for them. And believe it or not, when it comes to my readers in the Arab world, I feel it is easier for me to address my thoughts than to penetrate the Western mind. People in the West live by the Western ethical code which doesn't allow them to judge people based on their religion - and there's nothing wrong with that-but they need to know that Islam is not merely a religion: it is also a political ideology and that's what I am fighting. That's what I am speaking up against. And I hope one day, the future for our generation in the Muslim world will be much better than the life I lived under Islamic Sharia in Syria."
And third, the terrible, secret motivation which Mr. Fatah attributes to Dr. Sultan is in fact a commandment made by Mohammed to his followers regarding non-Muslims:
"Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war... When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them... If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them." (Source: Sahih Muslim Book 19, Hadith #4294.)
The imposing figure in this swirl of controversy arising from the debate with Dr. Sultan is the Lincolnesque figure of Dr. Daniel Pipes. Pipes who has cultivated and supported the myth of moderation within Islam and the neologism of “islamism”. A neologism that defies logic in the face of the core hatred towards all non-Muslims and former Muslims in the Quranic Canon and Sharia law. Pipes is a cogent ally in the fight on counter terrorism, however for whatever reason he champions the belief that moderation and Islam are conjoined. Dr. Sultan and her colleagues in Former Muslims United, chose to leave Islam for personal reasons, most notably the lack of moderation.
A Victory in Opposition to Muslim Day at the Florida State Capitol
March 11th was Muslim Day at Florida’s State Capitol in Tallahassee. Rain prevented a planned news conference and rallies by opponents from taking place outside, but some important developments occurred inside.
Muslim Day at the Florida State Capitol was sponsored by a group called United Voices for America (UVA). The founder and director of UVA is Ahmed Bedier.There is certainly nothing wrong with anyone petitioning their elected officials. The issue raised by the Florida Security Council (FSC), ACT! For America, Former Muslims United (FMU) and Americans against Hate (AAH) was the need for legislators to know who they were meeting with and understand the UVA’s agenda.
“The purpose of Muslim Day at the Capitol”, said Tom Trento founder of the FSC “was to deceive lawmakers into believing UVA is a benign civil rights organization, representing disenfranchised minorities and immigrants on such issues as healthcare and education. Since the Council of American Islamic relations (CAIR) was founded by HAMAS (Muslim Brotherhood of Palestine), and UVA was founded by a CAIR operative, this makes UVA the grandchild of a terrorist organization whose only reason for being is to wage a global Jihad against non-Muslims and former Muslims.”
On the prior day, a three hour information briefing was held in the IMAX Theater not far from the State Capitol building complex. A group of experts presented information on the background and alliances of the UVA founded by Mr. Bedier. Members of the Florida legislature, legislative staff, the media and the public were invited. ACT! For America chapter leaders, Tea Party Businessmen and 9/12 group activists were among those who attended the briefing.
Dr. Rich Swier of the FSC moderated the briefings. Dr. Swier is a retired US Army Lt. Col., who helped develop Counter-Terrorism policy for the Army during the Reagan Administration. Joe Kaufmann, who has investigated the CAIR Muslim Brotherhood connections since 2003 and who has successfully combated CAIR lawsuits in Texas, laid out the connections between CAIR, the Muslim Brotherhood and Ahmed Bedier, the UVA event organizer. Kaufman highlighted Bedier’s past associations with self confessed funder and national leader of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Sami al Arian. David Gaubatz, co-author of Muslim Mafia, described how the Muslim Brotherhood groups are financed, and how they infiltrate and influence Government. He indicated that the CAIR lawsuit against both him and his son had ironically confirmed the authenticity of more than 60,000 incriminating documents, 60 of which are included in Gaubatz’s book. Author and lecturer Nonie Darwish Executive Director and Jerry Gordon Director of FMUdiscussed the mission, values and goals of FMU. Darwish gave specific examples of apostate victims in her native Egypt and presented the results of Freedom Pledges sent to almost four dozen Florida Muslim leaders requesting that they abjure death threats against former Muslims. They didn’t respond. Sharheryar Gill, Associate counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), a non-profit organization working for the defense of religious liberties, addressed threats to former Muslims in his native Pakistan and elsewhere in the Muslim world. A young American former Muslim discussed her successful defense by the ACLJ in a case involving a fraudulent marriage arranged by her Pakistani-born father. Rabbi Jonathan Hausman of Boston discussed the folly and dangers of interfaith outreach efforts with the Muslim community.
Following, the panels David Beamer, father of 9/11 Flight 93 hero Todd Beamer, spoke eloquently and articulately of the courage shown by his son and fellow passengers. As he noted, this was the first victory in the war against Islamic terrorism. Unfortunately, all of the heroes on Flight 93 died valiantly in diverting the aircraft to crash in a field in southwestern, Pennsylvania. Beamer was followed by Israeli-American Tuly Wultz, a former IDF Special Forces officer whose teen age son, Daniel, was fatally injured in 2006 in a suicide bombing attack during a family vacation in Israel. Daniel Wultz lived for 27 days. Tuly was severely injured as well. Tuly told of the hatred of his son and Jews expressed by the Palestinian suicide bomber’s mother who considered her son a hero. Randy McDaniels, ACT! For America Jacksonville chapter leader, introduced the two final speakers, Michael Jackson, representing the Tea Party Businessmen’s Group and Jesse Johnson of the 9/12 organization.
Despite the rain, teams of activists fanned out to visit and ask Florida legislators to question Bedier and Muslim representatives about why they didn’t sign the FMU Freedom Pledge to abjure threats to the lives of former Muslims mandated under Sharia law.
There was a significant victory in this effort organized by the FSC. The Attorney General’s Office cancelled an appointment with Bedier and his UVA entourage. In its place a briefing was held on the issues raised in the IMAX theater session. Among those attending the meeting with the representatives of the Attorney General were Dr. Rich Swier, Joe Kaufman, David Gaubatz, Rabbi Jon Hausman and Jerry Gordon.
The UVA held a private invitation only session from which more than 35 opposition activists were excluded. There were two attacks on FrontPageMagazine jounalist Joe Kaufman and video producer J. Mark Campbell who were accosted by Dr. Bassem Alhalabi, a professor at Florida Atlantic University (FAU). Kaufman had previously written, “Prior to arriving at FAU, Alhalabi provided the school with a reference from PIJ leader and future convicted terrorist Sami Amin Al-Arian. Alhalabi had been a Research Assistant for Al-Arian at the University of South Florida (USF) from 1989 to 1990.”
Despite these confrontations, it appeared that the activists organized by the FSC achieved a victory in Tallahassee. As Rabbi Hausman said, “this was a lesson in how to conduct an effective counterinsurgency education campaign.”
Former Muslims United Florida Freedom Pledge Statement
The following statement by Senior editor Jerry Gordon, a Member of the Board of Former Muslims United (FMU), highlights the importance of the FMU Freedom Pledge sent to Florida Muslim leaders requesting them to abjure Sharia law death threats to those who leave Islam by personal choice. It became an important issue for human rights activists organized by the Florida Security Council opposing Muslim Capitol Day in Tallahassee, Florida on March 11th.
Ahmed Bedier and his United Voices for America (UVA) are here in Tallahassee today promoting the charade of civil rights for disadvantaged minorities and immigrants. Their agenda is more sinister. As Bedier said last April, following the first Muslim Day in Florida’s State Capitol, “they wanted to put fear in the minds of our elected state officials.” Fear that Islamic Sharia law might replace Judeo Christian values embedded in the US and Florida constitutions that guarantee liberty and religious freedom. Former Muslims in America know how important these US Constitutional guarantees are for Sharia law imposes death on those who leave Islam.
Last fall a group of apostates from Islam decided that enough was enough and founded Former Muslims United (FMU) to protect and defend the human and civil rights of apostates from Islam. The founders of Former Muslims United were motivated by the following values:
• A religion must be a personal choice.
• No religion should kill those who leave it.
• A religion must never order the killing and subjugation of those who do not choose to be its members.
• A religion must abide by basic human rights.
One of the first acts of FMU was to create and send Freedom Pledges to Muslim leaders both nationally and here in Florida, requesting that they abjure threats of violence to apostates under Islamic law. The results of those requests illustrate that tolerance of former Muslims by Muslims is very much in doubt.
The Freedom Pledge requested that Bedier and other Florida Muslim leaders agree to:
…..renounce, repudiate and oppose any physical intimidation, or worldly and corporal punishment, of apostates from Islam, in whatever way that punishment may be determined or carried out by any Muslim including the family of the apostate, community, Mosque leaders, Shariah court or judge, and Muslim government or regime.
We sent the Freedom Pledge to Bedier and 46 other Florida Muslim leaders. In return we received no response: “overwhelming silence” on a critical human rights issue. Nationally, we sent 111 letters to Muslim leaders representing 50 groups. We received only two responses: one from Dr. M. Zhudi Jasser of the American Forum for Islam and Democracy and another from Dr. Ali Ayami of the Washington-based, Center for Human Rights and Democracy in Saudi Arabia.
State legislators and the media who meet with Bedier and other Muslim visitors today, should ask them why they didn’t sign the Freedom Pledge. The answers to that question may expose the real agenda of Bedier and other Florida Muslim leaders, the ultimate goal being the imposition of Sharia law on all Floridians.
Last summer, Floridians and the national media were riveted by the story of Rifqa Bary, a teenage Christian convert who fled her Muslim parents’ home in Columbus, Ohio only to end up in a custody and dependency battle with the Muslim Brotherhood front, the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) in juvenile courts in two states. While the matter of her dependency in Ohio may finally be settled, there still remains the question of her status as an undocumented alien. She faces the prospect of the carrying out of death threats, should she be sent back to her native Sri Lanka. The Florida Security Council traced those threats to Rifqa Bary to an area in Colombo not far from the Mosque her family attended in Sri Lanka. We trust that her immigration status will be resolved in her favor and she will be able to remain in this country as an adult upon reaching her age of majority in August. That is the hope.
Bary’s plight is typical of former Muslims who for personal reasons have decided to leave Islam. Here in the United States, that right to change belief is guaranteed under our First Amendment, the bulwark of legal protection for religious freedom. Thus, it is disturbing to note that former Muslims are subject to extrajudicial punishment by Muslims who regard them as literal traitors to Islam. It is reflected in Bary’s predicament, and unfortunately and sorrowfully in the honor killings of young Muslim women in the United States by fathers, siblings and husbands. Thus the events over the past few years of a Pakistani father who murdered his daughter in Atlanta, the murders of two daughters by an Egyptian born taxi cab driver in Texas, an Iraqi-born father who ran down and killed his own daughter in Arizona and the husband and founder of the Muslim Bridges cable TV network in upstate New York who murdered his wife.
Yesterday, we heard witness testimony about the plight of former Muslims from FMU executive Nonie Darwish, author of They Call me Infidel and Cruel and Usual Punishment about death threats and denial of basic human rights to prominent apostates from Islam in her native Egypt. Shaheryar Gill, associate counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, a nonprofit group defending religious liberties, told of his defense in cases of Christians and apostates in his native Pakistan under Blasphemy laws. Laws that mete out mandatory death sentences for criticism of the Prophet Mohammed, life sentences for criticizing the Quran and several years imprisonment for criticizing other Muslim prophets. He spoke about extra judicial killings of apostates outside of Pakistani courtrooms and the dramatic flight of one such individual to asylum in Holland where the bullets he received from a raging Muslim mob were removed. A young American woman and former Muslim told about her successful defense by the ACLJ against a fraudulent arranged Islamic marriage by her Pakistani born father. Her story lent dramatic corroboration to Rifqa Bary’s accounts of her treatment as a daughter of a Muslim family here in America.
Mr. Bedier and Florida Muslim leaders need to demonstrate their credibility by signing the FMU Freedom Pledge to protect the lives of those who leave Islam by personal choice.
Trashing Wilders: Is FoxNews the best PR investment ever made by Saudi Prince Alaweed bin Talal?
Last night, FoxNews Special Report fielded both a 'hard news' segment and pundit panel commentary drawing attention to Geert Wilders' whose poll standing has soared in The Netherlands in the wake of the dissolution of the Fourth Balkenende coalition government and a snap election for a new parliament is scheduled for June 9th.
A call from Andy Bostom drew my attention to the fact that despite FoxNews Channel labeling itself as “fair and balanced,” according to Bostom, it was “out-doing the BBC” in castigating Wilders as a populist demagogue. A man, who according to Charles Krauthammer doesn’t know the difference between Islam and Islamism. We wonder if Krauthammer knows much about the former to enable him to distinguish it from the latter. But neither does Glen Beck, after all he said he read the Quran and considers Islam a religion of peace and calls Wilders a “fascist.”
Fox News’ Special Report with Bret Baier featured a segment tonight on Dutch politician Geert Wilders’ blasphemy trial in the Netherlands. (See some of NRB’s John L. Work’s posts on it here and here.)
The segment featured these descriptors of Wilders:
“A man who inspires fierce emotions.”
“Anger on the streets of London. The object of the demonstration was a recent visit by Far-Right Dutch politician Geert Wilders.”
“His Anti-Muslim rhetoric makes him a target of critics.”
“Wilders says Muslim head scarves should be banned, he’s branded the Muslim prophet Muhammed a pedophile and likened the Muslim Koran to Mein Kampf.”
Later on Special Report they featured a panel in response to the story in which host Jim Angle questioned Charles Krauthammer, Bill Kristol, and A.B. Stoddard. Krauthammer said that Wilders was wrong about Islam — that the Dutch politician did not see a difference between Islam and Islamism. *Rolls eyes.* So those who follow “Islam” ignore passages of the Koran and those who follow “Islamism” actually do what the book tells them to do? Is that right, Charles? Just want to make sure I’m up to speed on the preferred Orwellianisms on the Politically Correct Right.
Stoddard’s comments — she said that Wilders saw no difference between terrorist Muslims and non-violent Muslims — indicate that it’s likely that her first exposure to Wilders was the segment. And Kristol? He dismissed Wilders as a “demagogue.”
This is the latest evidence that makes Prince Alaweed bin Talal, the 22nd richest person in this world with wealth valued at over $16 billion in 2009 according to Forbes ,one savvy investor when it comes to influencing America’s opinion-makers and ultimately the American public about his version of Islam: Wahhabism. Bin Talal is the second largest stockholder of NewsCorp, Inc. that owns FoxNewsChannel. When he purchased 5.5 % of NewsCorp back in 2005, he immediately called his newfound friend, Rurpert Murdoch and asked him to pull those lurid filmed segments on French Muslims youths torching cars in Paris, and other major cities in France and instead talk about poverty and unemployment as the cause of these Jihadi-like outbursts. When that occurred, a lot us knew then that FoxNewsChannel was lost. So, when this Special Report segment aired last night, as night follows day, the pundits became an amen corner, to quote Pat Buchanan, not for Israeli, but rather for Saudi Arabian interests.
Diana West has been tracking Alaweed’s influence at FoxNews. In her “Death of a grown Up" blog post, Fox News: Best Investment Saudi Prince Talal Ever Made, she noted this about last night Special Report news and panel segment:
It was pile-on time at Fox News tonight as Glenn Beck, Charles Krauthammer, a gal whose name I missed and Bill Kristol all branded Geert Wilders beyond the pale tonight.
Beck classified Geert as a fascist.
Krauthammer said Geert didn't know the difference between Islam and Islamism -- never mind that according to Krauthammer's idea of Islamic scholarship, neither did Mohammed.
The gal is the middle said she agreed with Imam Krauthammer and added that if people like this (Geert) are elected to lead Holland it will suffer the consequences.
Kristol called Geert a demagogue.
In other words, a stomach-turning display -- or should I say halal?
Fact is, this anti-Geert pundit solidarity will only delight Newscorp stakeholder Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal. That's because it is Wilders in the Netherlands who stands as the unexpectedly strong spearhead of resistance to the Islamization of Europe and the wider West. As a scion of the most powerful sharia dictatorship in the world, Prince Talal doesn't like that. How fortunate for him that Fox News doesn't like it, either.
In an earlier TownHall.com column, West raised the question of FoxNews Channel ‘s pro-Muslim influence on its ‘fair and balanced’ new and commentary presentations might cause it to be registered as Foreign agent:
First off, is that a farfetched question? Not when a leading member of the ruling family of the Sharia-totalitarian "kingdom" of Saudi Arabia, Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, has made himself the second-largest shareholder of Rupert Murdoch's News Corp., Fox News' parent company.
There have been other eye-catching displays of Alwaleed's largesse -- $500,000 in 2002 to the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Hamas- and Muslim-Brotherhood-linked entity, and a whopping $27 million, also in 2002, to the families of Palestinian "martyrs," aka suicide bombers. These, along with Alwaleed's self-described "very close relationship" with Murdoch son and apparent heir-apparent James, a left-wing global-warmist with virulently anti-Israel views, should only deepen Americans' concerns about Fox's ties to "the prince." Recently, Murdoch and Alwaleed have discussed expanding their business relationship through the Murdoch purchase of a substantial stake in Rotana, Alwaleed's huge Arab media company.
Before entering his Murdoch association, Alwaleed gave a remarkably candid interview in 2002 about what Arab News described as his belief that "Arabs should focus more on penetrating U.S. public opinion as a means to influencing decision-making" rather than boycotting U.S. products, an idea of the moment.
The Arab News reported: "Arab countries can influence U.S. decision-making 'if they unite through economic interests, not political,' (Alwaleed) stressed. 'We have to be logical and understand that the U.S. administration is subject to U.S. public opinion. We (Arabs) are not so active in this sphere (public opinion). And to bring the decision-maker on your side, you not only have to be active inside the U.S. Congress or the administration but also inside U.S. society.'"
When I commiserated with Bostom last night, we wondered what FoxNews would say, should Wilders be asked by Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands to form a ruling coalition as his Freedom party could emerge as the strongest party in the upcoming June 9th parliamentary election. Then, we’ll see whether FoxNews changes its line from trashing Wilders to consider him the equivalent of a wartime Churchillian figure rolling up his sleeves to stop “the tsunami of Islamification” of his native Holland and Europe.
Taliban leader arrested in Pakistan May not be Adam Gadahn
The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reports that tha Taliban leader arrested in Pakistan may not be the quixotic American Al Qaeda media maven, Adam Gadahn. The WSJ reports cites Pakistani officials as saying now that the Taliban leader maybe someone by the name of Abu Yahya. The article,"Taliban Leader Arrested in Pakistan", notes :
Earlier, media reports quoted officials in Pakistan as saying the man was an American-born spokesman for al Qaeda, Adam Gadahn. But the senior Pakistani official said he didn't believe Mr. Gadahn had been arrested.
A second senior Pakistani official also denied that any American national has been seized. "Adam Gadahn has not been captured," he said.
The arrest of another al Qaeda leader would mark a victory in the U.S.-led battle against the extremist Islamic group, continuing what appears to be increased cooperation by Pakistan in the U.S. effort. The Pakistanis have recently detained several Afghan Taliban commanders in Karachi, including the movement's second in command.
However, it wasn't clear late Sunday who Abu Yahya was, or what role he might have played in the extremist group.
Mr. Gadahn also is suspected of helping al Qaeda leaders improve English-language graphics in their Internet video messages.
The arrest of a U.S. citizen such as Mr. Gadahn could also expose the legal complexities that Washington faces in dealing with homegrown terrorists—if the suspect were to wind up in U.S. hands.
Mr. Gadahn was indicted during the Bush administration on charges of treason and material support for terrorism, civilian crimes that must be tried in a federal district court under full constitutional protections. As a U.S. national, he couldn't be tried by military commission.
Boston activist and J street Jive blogger extraordinaire, Hillel Stavis went to Harvard the other night and was ‘shocked, shocked” about what he discovered. Middle East Studies "expert" Stephen P. Cohen, leftist scholar at the J Street ally, Israel Policy Forum and habitué at the Aspen Institute with its wealthy Jewish liberal backers, wrote Obama’s Cairo speech. See Stavis’s post Revelation at Harvard, Who wrote Obama’s Cairo speech?
Not to be confused - there are two policy wonks by the name of Stephen P. Cohen. The other is a south Asian expert at the Brookings Institution and another dhimmi, given the latter’s sponsorship of his role as co-organizer of the Brookings "Islamic World and US Policy" forum that meets in Doha, Qatar every year.
Why did Cohen, who was tapped by Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s Chief of Staff to write a speech for the President, convey such a blatant demonization of his own people and Israel before the audience at the Vatican of the Sunni world, al Azhar University, in Cairo last June? For answers read these excerpts from Stavis’ piece on Cohen, the Cairo speech writer, whom he closely questioned at the Harvard Center for Middle East Studies presentation (listen to the audio links in the Stavis post):
The much ballyhooed speech, originally scheduled for Morocco, was changed to Cairo to have the greatest impact in "correcting" the perceived Muslim hostility to the U.S.engendered by George.W. Bush. The Wall St. Journal and Politico guessed it was the product of Ben Rhodes, Obama's only foreign policy speechwriter (and erstwhile novelist: "The Oasis of Love") who traveled with him for his first major European speech, often dubbed the "Blame America First" speech.
Well, speculate no more. The writer wasn't Ben Rhodes or Chris Brose, former foreign policy speechwriter for Condoleeza Rice. If we can believe him - and there is no reason to doubt his word - it was Stephen P. Cohen. Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel called Cohen a week before the trip and asked him to prepare a first draft for the speech, "A New Beginning."
That's right! BHO chose a Jew to write the most important address by an American President -in the middle of a war against Islamic terrorists - to the Muslim world.
Steve Cohen, founder of the Institute for Middle East Peace and Development, Harvard PhD, visiting professor at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, Princeton and other high powered institutions, recently spoke at Harvard's Center for Middle East Studies beneath the smiling portraits of Harvard's stellar contributors to the landscape of failed foreign policy initiatives, notably, Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski. We all remember "Zbig", the guy who helped weaponize the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan along with someone called Osama Bin Laden. Now that was a brilliant move.
To trace the history of the Jewish People in Israel from a point 70 or so years ago is grossly and historically inaccurate - and a slander. Speechwriter Cohen quickly followed up the slap with another: Imputing the seemingly endless Middle East conflict to Israel's creation by visiting "the pain of dislocation" upon the Palestinian Arabs. That one, needles to say, went over big in Cairo and around the Muslim world.
To further woo and wow his Cairo audience, Cohen decided to recount the Isra, or The Prophet's miraculous "night journey" to heaven on the back of his noble, flying steed, Buraq, during which he hangs with Moses and Jesus. Cohen reads ecumenicism into what most of the Muslim world sees as triumphalism. Jerusalem is never mentioned in the Koran; only the term, al-Masgidu l'-Aqsa, the "farthest mosque." Considering the fact that Palestine had not yet been conquered and colonized by Muslim armies (621 CE), many scholars dismiss as ridiculous the notion that that "mosque" indicates Jerusalem. At any rate, Cohen not only buys into the story, but glorifies it.
For at least the past 75 years, Palestinian Arabs (and much of the Muslim world) have attempted to deny the abundant historical data and physical evidence that substantiate Jewish presence as the sovereign people in their own land for at least a thousand years before the birth of Mohammed and the Islamic conquest of Palestine. Official after official of both Hamas and the PA have denied Jewish existence there and have refused to acknowledge the historicity of Har ha Bayit, The Temple Mount, built by Herod the Great over 2000 years ago. The Islamic Waqf, or Holy Trust for the Haram al Sharif, has even attempted to destroy priceless Jewish (and other) artifacts uncovered on the Temple Mount during expansions of the Al Aqsa mosque.
Having erased the nettlesome matter of Jewish patrimony, Cohen then goes beyond mere dhimmitude and starts writing like a true believer. His rhapsodic rendering of Prophet's miraculous night journey to heaven could have come from the pen of a ninth century compiler of the hadiths.
When asked during the Q&A why he had traced Jewish "aspirations" for their land only as far as the end of World War II, he did show a measure of remorse - but only to extend that connection back to 1920! He still refused to acknowledge the historicity of thousands of years of Jewish presence on the land.
Yes, "upsetting to Israelis", but apparently not so for Mr. Cohen.
Yet in spite of his regrets over making Israelis uncomfortable, he concluded by again warning Israelis to hew to the Administration line by heeding Joe Biden's upcoming admonitions in Israel, no doubt reiterating Obama's demands for a settlement freeze.
Again, the Academy has marched the world ever closer to the abyss in its insatiable desire to become the perfect dhimmi.
Here is a succinct piece on the Iran threat by Amb. (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, consultant on US affairs and Former Minister for Congressional Affairs at the Israeli embassy in Washington DC published by Israel National News. Perhaps it should be given to Vice President Biden and his minders at the State Departrment and the Oval Office as 'cliff notes' in preparation for his major policy speech to distrustful Israelis at Tel Aviv university when he visits there this week.
The former ambassador says it all in this short and succinct article: Take heed, world, Israel's destruction is not Iran's only goal.
1. Iran's super-goal: Domination of the Persian Gulf and its natural resources.
2. Iran's super-enemies: Those who undermine Iran's super-goal.
3. Iran's super-capabilities: Nuclear capabilities are developed in order to advance Iran's super-goal and defeat
Iran's super-enemies: Those who undermine Iran's super-goal. Iran's super-enemies.
4. Iran's nuclear would be leveraged, mostly, to force US and NATO out of the Gulf and the Indian Ocean. It would be leveraged against Iraq – its arch rival since the seventh century – and against Saudi Arabia, which Iran considers an apostate regime. All Gulf States are perceived by Iran as a key prize, required to control the flow and the price of oil and to bankroll Teheran's megalomaniac regional and global aspirations.
5. US national security and US standard of living would be severely undermined by Iran's domination of the Persian Gulf. The prevention of a nuclear Iran constitutes a top US national security priority.
6. The Sanction Delusion plays into Teheran's hands: Russia and China consider the US their major long-term rival. Their assessment of Iran is dramatically different than the US assessment. Therefore, they (as well as some European countries) will not implement effective sanctions against Iran.
7. Preemption/prevention – and not deterrence or retaliation – is the only effective means to prevent the nuclearization of Iran and to spare the US and the globe devastating cost.
Is Geert Wilders the odds on favorite for the next Dutch PM?
Der Spiegel published an article yesterday, in the wake of Wednesday's local elections in The Netherlands - see here- suggesting that Geert Wilders represented a minority of "disgruntled Dutch voters". Further, the Der Spiegel article opined and that he would ultimately be unable to form a ruling coalition after the upcoming June parliamentary elections in the Netherlands. That is message nattering EU elitists are conveying in the wake of Wednesday's local election victories for the Dutch Freedom Party in both Almere and The Hague.
Apparently, those same naysayers in the EU haven't checked with the bookmakers on the real odds of a possible Wilders national victory in Holland.
Here in the US, the virtual on-line bookmakers are giving Wilders favorable odds in the early June parliamentary elections. Take a look at this latest Inkling, Inc. question:
Who will become the Dutch prime minister after the elections of June 9th 2010?
If you believe these odds, then Geert is running neck and neck with caretaker PM Jan Peter Balkenende of the Christian Democrats for the top PM position. We wonder what the odds are on the Dutch PM race over at Ladbrokes. PLC, the UK bookmaker?
There is a quote from the fabled Afro American baseball pitching great, Satchel Paige that applies here: "don't look back, [someone] maybe gaining on you." The Dutch parliamentary elections are getting very interesting in large measure we believe because Wilders is listening to the concerns of Dutch "groundlings' on more than just the "tsunami of Islamification" issue. Meanwhile the parties on the left are arrogantly dismissive of the intelligent ordinary Dutch voters. The left in Holland is behaving like fawning Dhimmi to defend Muslim interests.
Radio Nederland reported that Geert Wilders’ Freedom Party made solid gains in its first local election contests in the new town of Almere northeast of Amsterdam and the Hague. Under the headline of Radio Nederland noted:
The anti-Islam Freedom Party of far-right politician Geert Wilders has made major gains in local elections held in the Netherlands. Taking part in two cities it has become the largest party in Almere and the second largest in The Hague.
Mr. Wilders was visibly buoyed by the results and was characteristically combative saying this was the first step in the upcoming campaign for parliamentary elections.
"The national campaign begins today in Almere and The Hague, tomorrow in all of the Netherlands… On 9 June, we'll conquer the Netherlands," said Mr. Wilders.
And, of course, Geert Wilders now has his eye on the larger prize. The Freedom Party has profited more than any other from the fall of the Dutch cabinet ten days ago. The party currently has 9 seats in parliament (out of 150).
If voters had elected a new parliament on Wednesday, the Freedom Party would have won between 24 and 27 seats. In one poll, it would be the largest single party. If his party does that well come June, Geert Wilders could become the next prime minister.
The national opinion polls also indicate that forming the next coalition will be more difficult than ever. Dutch coalition governments are usually made up of two or three parties. The next coalition will likely need four or more parties to reach a majority in parliament.
Meanwhile, the Times On-line highlighted Wilders arrival in the UK on Friday to show his anti-Islam Film, Fitna, in the House of Lords at the invitation of Lord Pearson, Chairman of the UK Independent Party and Baroness Caroline Cox. But there could be a bit of a punch up near Westminster, as the English Defense League could be squaring off at radical Muslim groups protesting Wilders. In a piece headlined: “Geert Wilders returns to Britain, looking for a fight”,Times-on-line noted:
Nicknamed “Mozart” on account of a platinum hairdo that looks strikingly like an 18th-century wig, Mr. Wilders has played on the discords in Dutch society with virtuoso skill. As in Britain, many Dutch voters are alarmed by the scale of immigration, battered by the global economic crisis, culturally anxious and increasingly receptive to his grim warnings about a “tsunami of Islamification”.
The political heir to Pim Fortuyn, the Dutch populist politician who called for a halt to Muslim immigration and who was murdered in the 2002 election campaign, Mr. Wilders has portrayed himself as the only politician in his country brave enough to stand up to militant Islam, a threat that he has compared to Nazism. “A century ago there were approximately 50 Muslims in the Netherlands. Today there are about one million. Where will it end? We are heading for the end of European civilisation,” he predicts.
In January a Dutch court ordered the public prosecutor to try Mr. Wilders on charges of fomenting hatred and discrimination. Mr. Wilders indicated that he would call witnesses in order to prove Koran-inspired violence, including Mohammed Bouyeri, the man convicted of murdering the Dutch film-maker Theo van Gogh in 2004.
Although he faces 16 months in prison if convicted, the trial represents a political goldmine for Mr. Wilders and helps to explain his recent rise in opinion polls. If he is convicted he will paint himself as martyr to political correctness; if he is acquitted he will claim vindication. The trial has been suspended until after the election.
Inadvertently, Britain also did much to boost his standing in February last year by banning him from entering the country as an “undesirable person”, citing EU laws enabling member states to exclude someone whose presence could threaten public security. Mr. Wilders loudly condemned Gordon Brown as “the biggest coward in Europe” and some 84 per cent of Dutch voters objected to the way that Mr. Wilders had been ejected by Britain.
The ban was later overturned by an asylum and immigration tribunal. On Friday, at the invitation of the UKIP leader Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Baroness Cox of Queensbury, he will show Fitna to MPs, peers and guests before giving a press conference at Westminster.
A comment posted on the Times on-line piece had a suggestion as to whom Wilders might invite in his defense, the “Green Prince”, Mosab Hassan Youssef, the son of a Hamas Sheik who converted to Christianity and became an effective spy for Israel’s Shin Bet foiling many suicide bombing attempts. The comment cited Youssef’s characterization of Islam from a recent interview in terms that appear as if they came from a Wilders’ script:
During his 50-minute interview, for which he arrived with armed security, Youssef took shots at Hamas leaders including political chief Khaled Meshaal. He lashed out at Hamas, saying the organization lives in the Middle Ages.
And he hurled his most inflammatory comments at Islam, which he called a religion that teaches people to kill.
"It is not a religion of peace," said Youssef, who converted to Christianity. "The biggest terrorist is the God of the Quran. I know this is very dangerous and this will offend many people. The more you follow the steps of the prophet of Islam and the God of Islam, the more you get close to being a terrorist."
We had suggested in a prior post that should Wilders’ Freedom Party do well in the March 3rd Dutch local elections Wilders could end up being elected and asked by Queen Beatrix to help form the next ruling coalition in the Netherlands as its Prime Minister. This despite his Amsterdam criminal trial on trumped up ‘hate speech’ and ‘racism’ charges.
Mosab Hassan Yousef: “A man of rare courage” , Apostate from Islam and A Hamas Prince spy for Israel
Read this New York Daily Newsarticle on the exploits of apostate Mosab Hassan Yousef, son a Hamas leader, who became a Christian convert and spy for Israel. His efforts saved countless lives from sucide bombings by misguided Palestinian Muslim martyrs.
Note this excerpt from the Daily News piece:
He was Israel's most valuable spy inside Hamas - and certainly the most unlikely.
For more than a decade, Mosab Hassan Yousef disrupted dozens of suicide bombings and assassination attempts by the militant group, saving hundreds of lives.
Infiltrating the upper echelons of Hamas came relatively easy for Yousef: He is the son of Hamas founder Sheikh Hassan Yousef.
"So many people owe him their life and don't even know it," an Israeli security agent told the Israeli daily Haaretz on Wednesday.
"People who did a lot less were awarded the Israel Security Prize. He certainly deserves it."
Melanie Philips echoes these sentiments in The Spectator, today in an article about Yousef entitled, “A Man of Rare Courage. ” Note what Philips says:
Caroline Glick in the Jerusalem Post , 
Given the kerfuffle over CENTCOM Commander Gen. David Petraeus’ presentation before the Senate Armed services Committee , it is interesting to note that one of his Princeton thesis advisors was Professor Stephen M. Walt. Walt holds the endowed Belfer Chair at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government and is co-author with John J. Mearsheimer of the controversial book, 
Last October, the FBI arrested Tarek Mehanna, a 27 year old American born Muslim and a Doctoral graduate of the Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences (MCPHS) on charges of lying to authorities, planning terrorist attacks on malls and possible assassination attempts on US officials. Tarek was teaching religion and science at the Al Huda Academy in Worcester, Massachusetts. Tarek’s Egyptian-born father 
Texas Congressman Ted Poe 
Boston activist and J street Jive blogger extraordinaire, Hillel Stavis went to Harvard the other night and was ‘shocked, shocked” about what he discovered. Middle East Studies "expert" 
Read this New York Daily News