Peaceful religion isn't spelled Islam

[Soldier4Christ]

The Caliphate

by Daniel Pipes

In July 2005, I wrote an article titled "What Do the Terrorists Want? [A Caliphate]," pointing out how discussion of the goal of our Islamist enemy is almost non-existent. Today, Elisabeth Bumiller of the New York Times points out in "21st-Century Warnings of a Threat Rooted in the 7th" that the Bush administration has come around to my way of thinking – namely that the Islamist goal is a caliphate (a single, global state, ruled by the Shari‘a)..

    Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said it in a speech last Monday in Washington and again on Thursday on PBS. Eric S. Edelman, the under secretary of defense for policy, said it the week before in a round table at the Council on Foreign Relations. Stephen J. Hadley, the national security adviser, said it in October in speeches in New York and Los Angeles. Gen. John P. Abizaid, the top American commander in the Middle East, said it in September in hearings on Capitol Hill.

    Vice President Dick Cheney was one of the first members of the Bush administration to say it, at a campaign stop in Lake Elmo, Minn., in September 2004. … As Mr. Cheney put it in Lake Elmo, referring to Osama bin Laden and his followers: "They talk about wanting to re-establish what you could refer to as the seventh-century caliphate" to be "governed by Sharia law, the most rigid interpretation of the Koran."

    Or as Mr. Rumsfeld put it on Monday: "Iraq would serve as the base of a new Islamic caliphate to extend throughout the Middle East, and which would threaten legitimate governments in Europe, Africa and Asia."

    General Abizaid was dire, too. "They will try to re-establish a caliphate throughout the entire Muslim world," he told the House Armed Services Committee in September, adding that the caliphate's goals would include the destruction of Israel. "Just as we had the opportunity to learn what the Nazis were going to do, from Hitler's world in ‘Mein Kampf,'" General Abizaid said, "we need to learn what these people intend to do from their own words."

Of course, Bumiller goes on to quote such heavyweight analysts as Kenneth M. Pollack, John L. Esposito, and Shibley Telhami to explain why these top administration figures are wrong to refer to the caliphate. But, as I showed in my article, talking about the caliphate only reflects what the terrorists themselves are saying. (And here's an update: on about September 23, Al-Qaeda started a radio station called Sawt al-Khalifa, or "Voice of the Caliphate.") The Bush administration, in other words, is doing precisely the right thing in raising the specter of the caliphate. (December 12, 2005)

Dec. 17, 2005 update: Another heavyweight, this time investigative journalist Robert Dreyfuss, tells us what he thinks of the aspiration to a caliphate:

    Dreyfuss described as "idiotic" the notion that Islamist forces wished to establish a Caliphate from North Africa to Southeast Asia. This was utter nonsense, he said. What was happening was that those in the administration who made such declarations based them on what they read on Al Qaeda and other jihadi websites. He reminded his audience of the 1974 Patty Hearst case – the American newspaper heiress who joined a terrorist outfit – where the so-called Symbionese Liberation Army planned to overthrow the US government. Such threats, he added, were in the nature of fantasies and should be treated as such.

Comment: I believe in treating the enemy's goals with deadly seriousness, and not dismissing them as "fantasies." As Theodore Dalrymple explains, "impossible goals have had at least as great an effect on human existence as more limited and possible ones."

Jan. 4, 2006 update: Yet another deep thinker doth protest. James Reston Jr., with the coarseness that so often characterizes the Bush administration's critics, used his commentary on (taxpayer subsidized) National Public Radio to attack the "denseness" of American politicians' frequent misuse of the word caliphate. Reston assured his listeners that the prospect of a caliphate stretching across the Muslim world "is nonsense." (On which, see my response at the Dec. 17, 2005 update.)

He also ascribed "scary images of bloodthirsty Oriental despots in black turbans and silk caftans" to the word caliphate. Pointing to the fact that the historic caliphates represented "the height of Arab and Islamic achievement," he concluded that American officials using this term is "yet another slur on Arab history."

Comments: (1) The administration, in fact, is merely repeating a term that Islamists make common reference to; I quoted a number of instances of this in my initial article on this topic. (2) Reston is the one who raised "scary images" – no one in government did so. (3) One wonders what Reston wants Washington to do – avoid any term, no matter how often used by the enemy, if Reston supposes it conjures negative images in Americans' minds? (4) It's this kind of objection that makes one despair of the left ever understanding that the country is at war, for sensitivity is its watchword and highest priority, with security and victory relegated to low priority.

Jan. 14, 2006 update: The Washington Post's Karl Vick has an interesting piece today on the popularity of the caliphate, which he finds is "esteemed by many ordinary Muslims." He cites various pieces of evidence.

    Al Qaeda thrived in Afghanistan when the Taliban leader, Mohammad Omar, was called "Commander of the Faithful," a caliphic title. In his book published online shortly after Sept. 11, bin Laden's deputy, Ayman Zawahiri, declared that terror attacks would "be nothing more than disturbing acts, regardless of their magnitude" unless they led to a caliphate in the "heart of the Islamic world."

    The American-led invasion of Iraq provided an opportunity to do just that, Zawahiri apparently wrote last year to Abu Musab Zarqawi, the Jordanian who heads the insurgent group al Qaeda in Iraq. In the version of the letter posted on a U.S. government Web site, Zawahiri said only the presence of foreign occupiers had stirred "the Muslim masses" to action. He advised Zarqawi to use Iraq's Sunni areas as the base for "an Islamic authority or emirate, then develop it and support it until it achieves the level of a caliphate."

Vicks then focuses on Hizb ut-Tahrir, an organization founded in 1953 with what he calls "a bookish set of beliefs describing its utopian vision for a future caliphate," which will be revived "after national governments are subverted by Hizb ut-Tahrir members working in their highest levels." Vicks notes that Hizb ut-Tahrir members have been charged with planning to carry out coups d'état in Jordan and Egypt. The group also has a following in the West. If membership is up—and an imam in Copenhagen, Fatih Alev, and others say they keep seeing new faces—Hizb ut-Tahrir organizers say it is because more Muslims see events unfolding as the groups predicted.

    "Bush is saying they would establish a caliphate from Spain to Indonesia," said Abdullatif, the group's spokesman in Copenhagen. "The establishment of the caliphate will come by those who work hard." … As the Hizb ut-Tahrir meeting in Copenhagen broke for evening prayers, Muziz Abdullah, an affable native of Lebanon, surveyed a hall still with standing-room only. "Ten years ago, when I started, it was totally unrealistic to think there could be a caliphate," he said. "But now, people believe it could happen in a few years."

In Turkey, where the last gasp of the caliphate was extinguished in 1924, interest in the institution endures. Vicks mentions a Turkish plot in 1998 to fly a hijacked plane into the Atatürk mausoleum in Ankara: "the ill-prepared Turkish plotters told investigators they aimed to do was strike a dramatic blow toward reviving Islam's caliphate." But the caliphate's appeal goes far beyond such extremists. Vicks states that his interviews indicate that "the caliph is cherished both as memory and ideal."

    "Why do you keep invading Muslim countries?" asked Kerem Acar, a tailor in central Istanbul. "I won't live to see it, and my children won't, but one day maybe my children's children will see someone declare himself the caliph, like the pope, and have an impact." … "I wish there was a caliphate again, because if there was a caliphate all the Muslims would unite," said Ertuğul Orel, in a sweater and tie at the sidewalk cafe he owns outside Istanbul's vast Hagia Sophia, an iconic building to both Christians and Muslims. "There would be one voice. But I know neither the American nor the Europeans will ever allow it." From the next chair, gift shop owner Atacan Cinar added, "Before the end of the Ottoman Empire, there was no problem in the Islamic countries." …

    "The concept of the caliphate is very much alive in the collective memory of society," said Ali Bulaç, a columnist and author of several books on Islam and Turkey. "There is absolutely nothing to keep Muslim society together at the moment." Fatih Alev, imam of a moderate mosque in Copenhagen, said Hizb ut-Tahrir was "very unwise" to say that no other Muslim groups were working toward a caliphate. "As of now, the caliphate is totally irrelevant. As of tomorrow, it could be relevant. I would not exclude it."

cont'd

[Soldier4Christ]

Feb. 4, 2006 update: Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld in a speech today pointed to the global nature of the caliphate, saying that Islamists "seek to take over governments from North Africa to Southeast Asia and to re-establish a caliphate they hope, one day, will include every continent. They have designed and distributed a map where national borders are erased and replaced by a global extremist Islamic empire." Note the part about "every continent."

Feb. 28, 2006 update: John D. Negroponte testified today that the U.S. government knows "a great deal about al Qa'ida's vision. [Ayman al-]Zawahiri, al Qa'ida's number two, is candid in his July 2005 letter to [Abu Mus'ab al-]Zarqawi. He portrays the jihad in Iraq as a stepping-stone in the march toward a global caliphate, with the focus on Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states, and Israel."

Mar. 6, 2006 update: The Jan. 14, 2006 update above mentions Hizb ut-Tahrir members charged with planning to carry out coups d'état in Jordan and Egypt; today's Daily Star tells about Hizb ut-Tahrir activities in Lebanon.

    Posters with big, bright-red lettering calling for the establishment of an Islamic Caliphate in Lebanon can now be seen around many streets in Sidon, pasted up by members of Hizb ut-Tahrir, a party banned by Lebanese authorities. On Saturday, citizens in Sidon were surprised to see the posters - especially in areas such as Riad al-Solh street, Sit Nafisa street and Mufti Mohammed Salim Jalaleddine street. The posters call for "reviving an Islamic Caliphate state after the enemies in the malicious and colonial West underestimated our spiritual force. We will only come out strong with an Islamic state." The posters further called for all Muslims to "be loyal to God and His prophets," adding that "loyalty to the Western countries, their rulers or agents is a treason to God and His prophets." …

    Hizb ut-Tahrir's media spokesperson Ayman Kadri said: "The posters were stuck on the walls on the occasion of March 3, 1924, to commemorate the fall of the Islamic Caliphate [and decline of the Ottoman Empire]." He added that "the posters are to remind people of this date and to highlight the importance of reuniting the Islamic nation in one country."

April 6, 2005 update: MEMRI makes available today an interview in Norway's Dagbladet on Mar. 13, 2006 with Najm Al-Din Faraj Ahmad, the Iraqi Kurdish Islamist who goes by "Mullah Krekar,"

    Interviewer: "Is the goal to re-establish the Caliphate - the Islamic rule that was established by the Prophet?"

    Krekar: "Yes. Our Caliph is dead and we are orphans. Therefore we are fighting, like the Jews fought under David Ben-Gurion, for our own state, a state ruled by a true Islamic ruler."

    Interviewer: "What borders should the Caliphate have?"

    Krekar: "It doesn't matter. Things are born, and then they grow bigger. The essential thing is Islamic rule. That was why the West destroyed the Taliban's rule in Afghanistan. They feared the Islamic state."

    Interviewer: "Who should rule the new Caliphate?"

    Krekar: "It doesn't have to be a cleric. A good human being is enough."

    Interviewer: "Is bin Laden such a person?"

    Krekar: "Osama bin Laden and Ayman Al-Zawahiri are among several good people. Weren't Jewish leaders also terrorists before they had their own state?"

May 10, 2006 update: James Brandon provides a fine overview in the Christian Science Monitor today of Hizb ut-Tahrir's drive to re-establish the caliphate. Some excerpts:

    Hizb ut-Tahrir says that Muslims should abolish national boundaries within the Islamic world and return to a single Islamic state, known as "the Caliphate," that would stretch from Indonesia to Morocco and contain more than 1.5 billion people. It's a simple and seductive idea that analysts believe may someday allow the group to rival existing Islamic movements, topple the rulers of Middle Eastern nations, and undermine those seeking to reconcile democracy and Islam and build bridges between East and West.

    "A few years ago people laughed at them," says Zeyno Baran, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and the leading expert on Hizb ut-Tahrir. "But now that [Osama] bin Laden, [Abu Musab al-] Zarqawi, and other Islamic groups are saying they want to recreate the Caliphate, people are taking them seriously."

    Even more moderate Muslim groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt pay lip-service to the ideal of reestablishing the Caliphate, leaving less ideological space for Muslims who want to move toward Western models of democracy. "The Caliphate is a rallying point between the radicals and the more moderate Islamists," says Stephen Ulph, a senior fellow at the Jamestown Foundation. "The idea of a government based on the Caliphate has a historical pedigree and Islamic legitimacy that Western systems of government by their very nature do not have."

    But unlike Al Qaeda, Hizb ut-Tahrir believes it can recreate the Caliphate peacefully. Its activists aim to persuade Muslim political and military leaders that reestablishing the Caliphate is their Islamic duty. Once these leaders invite Hizb ut-Tahrir to take power - effectively staging a military coup - the party would then repeat the process in other countries before linking them up to form a revived Caliphate. …

    Hizb ut-Tahrir promises that a revived Caliphate will end corruption and bring prosperity - though the group doesn't say how. It will let Muslims challenge, and ultimately conquer, the West, its followers say. "The Muslim world has resources like oil but it lacks the leadership that will rule us by Islamic law and make this jihad that the whole world is afraid of," says [Abdullah] Shakr, a Jordanian member of the group, who says the success of the Caliphate will also encourage more converts to Islam - eventually making the whole world Islamic. …

    "Islam obliges Muslims to possess power so that they can intimidate - I would not say terrorize - the enemies of Islam," says Abu Mohammed, a Hizb ut-Tahrir activist. "In the beginning, the Caliphate would strengthen itself internally and it wouldn't initiate jihad."

    "But after that we would carry Islam as an intellectual call to all the world," says Abu Mohammed, a pseudonym. "And we will make people bordering the Caliphate believe in Islam. Or if they refuse then we'll ask them to be ruled by Islam." And after that? Abu Mohammed pauses and fiddles with his Pepsi before replying. "And if after all discussions and negotiations they still refuse, then the last resort will be a jihad to spread the spirit of Islam and the rule of Islam," he says, smiling. "This is done in the interests of all people to get them out of darkness and into light."

[Soldier4Christ]

The Caliphate is Coming

To Mousa Abu Marzuk, Deputy Chief of Hamas’ Political Bureau in Damascus, HAMAS’ triumph is an important springboard towards the establishment of the Caliphate ­– a global Islamic state, where life would be dictated by the Shari’a.

In a statement Abu Marzuk made on January 26, following HAMAS’ sweeping victory of the Palestinian legislative elections, he said that HAMAS, the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), is reaping the fruits of its efforts over the last six decades. It was established in Palestine in 1936 - not in 1987, as most mistakenly think. Since then, the movement, according to Abu Marzuk, has carried out its political, social agenda, including Dawa (Prosetylization) and Jihad.

 

The international community’s calls to prevent HAMAS’ participation in the election, led HAMAS to run under the name of the "Change and Reform List." Yet, this blatant fraud was accepted by all. No one raised his voice to point out the obvious fact that HAMAS simply changed its name for the election. Now, that HAMAS won 74 seats of the 132 seat Palestinian parliament, the world is “shocked.” Yet, it is the West’s willful blindness that facilitated HAMAS participation and victory.

 

Unless the international community takes action to nullify the results of the Palestinian election, HAMAS will spread the MB’s malignant agenda, which is identical to their own, far beyond the Middle East.

 

Both the MB and Hamas are exploiting the U.S. call for democratization in the Middle East, using free elections to gain legitimate political power. Indeed, in December 2005, the MB won 88 seats in the 454-member Egyptian Parliament. This is while neither organization has changed its charter, or is likely to do so.

 

Among the many permanent, deleterious features of Shari’a is a system that subjugates and oppresses non-Muslims. It requires non-Muslims to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax, a form of extortion, creating a “contract” (dhimma) that “guarantees” the infidels' lives and possessions. In a recent essay Dr. Andrew Bostom quotes the Arabic lexicographer, E.W. Lane, who bluntly calls the tax on “free non-Muslim subjects …compensation for not being slain.”

 

The system's “obligations” institutionalize discrimination (dhimmitude) that targets Jews and Christians only. Others, such Hindus, and Buddhists have a choice to convert or to be slaughtered.  These regulations prohibit them from possessing arms, ringing church bells, testifying in courts, building and restoring houses of worship while restricting many other civil rights as well. Like Nazi regulations, the Shari’a also require non-Muslims to wear special, identifying clothes. These key features of the Shari’a and Islamic ideology as called for by the MB and HAMAS, are political, not merely religious.

 

The spiritual leader of Hamas, the late Ahmad Yassin said: "The 21st century is the century of Islam," and his successor Mahmoud Zahar says, "Israel will disappear and after it the US." With its recent victory, HAMAS seems to be closer to reaching this goal.

 

Compare Hamas statements and its charter to those of al-Qaeda, Hizbullah and other Islamist organizations. All strive to establish a caliphate encircling the globe. Al-Qaeda says: "We will turn the White House and the British parliament into mosques," as documented by Jonathan Dahoah Halevi, director of Orient Research Group in Toronto.

 

It comes as no surprise, therefore, that Iran, a major HAMAS benefactor, is celebrating the terrorist movement’s victory. Its Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Assefi, said that Iran "congratulates the great Palestinian people, the Hamas movement, all Palestinians combatants, and the great Islamic Ummah.” And to ensure the HAMAS agenda, Iran is now considering financial aid to the Palestinians, “if Europe and the US cease funding the Palestinian Authority.” Saudi Arabia, who funded HAMAS all along, also promised $100 million to the Palestinian Authority. Clearly, both totalitarian Islamist regimes are stepping up to support the first democratically elected Jihadist government.

 

HAMAS’ victory, therefore, should be seen as an important realization of the MB agenda, not merely as a localized development. In Jordan, the Muslim Brotherhood “is demanding "true democracy" from the Jordanian king in order to win in elections there,“  while the efforts to impose the Islamist agenda are making strides in Europe.

 

Denmark, for example, has in the last few years become a host country for various Muslim radical groups, mostly offshoots of the Muslim Brotherhood.  The most prominent of these is Hizb ut-Tahrir. Like HAMAS, members of Hizb ut-Tahrir have been connected with the recruitment of fighters for the Taliban, as well as membership in the al-Qaeda terrorist networks. Like HAMAS, they too, under the banner of democracy, are allowed to pursue their Islamofacist agenda

 

According to Jonathan Dahoah Halevi, director of Orient research Group in Toronto, who follows Islamist organizations, they view Denmark as an easy target for the spreading of Islam, a springboard from which to renew the Muslim occupation of Europe. As Sheikh Issam Amayra warned in a recent sermon: "Three percent of the Muslims in Denmark constitute a threat to the future of the kingdom of Denmark. …our Danish brothers will manage to bring Islam to all the homes of the Danish citizens. Allah will grant them the victory in their country in order to raise the Caliphate in Denmark. Afterwards the citizens of the Caliphate (which will be raised in Denmark) will wage war on Oslo, [and] they will fight their neighboring Scandinavian countries in order to join their lands to the territory of the Caliphate. Then they will wage a holy war and spread the teachings of Islam to the rest of Europe, until they reach the original city of Medina.”

Given the global aspirations of these MB splinter groups and the Islamist nature of their agenda, it seems that the West’s unwillingness to recognize their threat to our democracy  will enable them to exploit it until those who survive, will have to do so under the MB’s inspired Caliphate.

[Soldier4Christ]

The prior articles show what the goal of islam is today, through proselytizing or through force to re-establish the caliphate/khalifate. The caliphate are rising in various countries. There is a very large group in Russia that have gained a lot of ground in 2/3 rds of that nation. There is a movement in the EU to take over that government. CAIR Canada and CAIR U.S. has also stated that is their goal for the Americas.

The Iranian president has also voiced his desire for this throughout the ME and so has many other muslim leaders.

[Soldier4Christ]

The Caliphate: One nation, under Allah, with 1.5 billion Muslims

AMMAN, JORDAN – The three middle-aged men sitting in an Indian restaurant in Jordan's capital scarcely look like Islamic revolutionaries. They are smartly dressed in Western-style suits and sip thoughtfully from cans of Pepsi as they share their plan to reshape the Muslim world.

"[President] Bush says that we want to enslave people and oppress their freedom of speech," says Abu Abdullah, a senior member of Hizb ut-Tahrir, the Party of Liberation. "But we want to free all people from being slaves of men and make them slaves of Allah."

Hizb ut-Tahrir says that Muslims should abolish national boundaries within the Islamic world and return to a single Islamic state, known as "the Caliphate," that would stretch from Indonesia to Morocco and contain more than 1.5 billion people.

It's a simple and seductive idea that analysts believe may someday allow the group to rival existing Islamic movements, topple the rulers of Middle Eastern nations, and undermine those seeking to reconcile democracy and Islam and build bridges between East and West.

"A few years ago people laughed at them," says Zeyno Baran, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and the leading expert on Hizb ut-Tahrir. "But now that [Osama] bin Laden, [Abu Musab al-] Zarqawi, and other Islamic groups are saying they want to recreate the Caliphate, people are taking them seriously."

Even more moderate Muslim groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt pay lip-service to the ideal of reestablishing the Caliphate, leaving less ideological space for Muslims who want to move toward Western models of democracy.

"The Caliphate is a rallying point between the radicals and the more moderate Islamists," says Stephen Ulph, a senior fellow at the Jamestown Foundation. "The idea of a government based on the Caliphate has a historical pedigree and Islamic legitimacy that Western systems of government by their very nature do not have."

But unlike Al Qaeda, Hizb ut-Tahrir believes it can recreate the Caliphate peacefully. Its activists aim to pursuade Muslim political and military leaders that reestablishing the Caliphate is their Islamic duty. Once these leaders invite Hizb ut-Tahrir to take power - effectively staging a military coup - the party would then repeat the process in other countries before linking them up to form a revived Caliphate.

"We spread our ideas by addressing people directly," says Abdullah Shakr, a fluent English-speaker, who, like all three men, spent time in Jordanian jails for membership in the party. "We don't care if the government knows about us, but ... we try not to catch their attention."

The party was founded in Jerusalem in 1953 by a Palestinian judge, Sheikh Taqiuddin Al-Nabhani. He taught that the Muslim world had grown poor and weak ever since the Caliphate was abolished by Turkish leader Kemal Ataturk in 1924.

The Caliphate was created after the death of Islam's founder Muhammad in 632 AD. During the following centuries the Caliphate expanded Islam's territories by conquest and treaty to cover most of the Middle East, Central Asia, and North Africa. As the Ottoman Turks lost ground to the West, they increasingly donned the cloak of the Caliphate. In the 1920s, Muslims throughout the British empire, particularly in India, used the restoration of the Caliphate as an anti-colonial rallying point. "People look back on the Caliphate and see its success as a poor reflection on the condition of the Muslim world today," says Mr. Ulph.

Hizb ut-Tahrir promises that a revived Caliphate will end corruption and bring prosperity - though the group doesn't say how. It will let Muslims challenge, and ultimately conquer, the West, its followers say.

"The Muslim world has resources like oil but it lacks the leadership that will rule us by Islamic law and make this jihad that the whole world is afraid of," says Shakr, a Jordanian member of the group, who says the success of the Caliphate will also encourage more converts to Islam - eventually making the whole world Islamic.

Hizb ut-Tahrir's modern leader is a Jordanian known as Emir Atta Abu Rashta. He lives in a secret location in the Middle East and communicates mainly through the Internet. The party is illegal in all Arab countries as well as Germany. Britain mooted banning the group after last year's London bombings. Ms. Baran wrote in the November issue of Foreign Affairs that the attacks were carried out by members of a Hizb ut-Tahrir splinter group. The British government has not formally accused Hizb ut-Tahrir or Hizb ut-Tahrir splinter groups of involvement. Hizb ut-Tahrir's British branch has condemned both the 7/7 and 9/11 attacks. [ Editor's note: Due to an editing error, the original version did not cite Baran or include Hizb ut-Tahrir's condemnation.]

Hizb ut-Tahrir's critics rarely see the organization as a direct threat, however.

"Many people see Hizb ut-Tahrir's aims as utterly unrealistic," says Nadim Shehadi, a Middle East analyst at Chatham House. "Even their understanding of the Caliphate as a strong, powerful state is questionable. Historically the Caliphate only worked because it was very loose and extremely decentralized."

Many analysts say that real danger is that the group radicalizes its followers who may subsequently graduate into militancy.

"People who join won't necessarily end up as violent jihadists," says Shiv Malik, a journalist. "But Hizb ut-Tahrir can provide [them with an] ideological backbone."

Hizb ut-Tahrir is not a mass movement yet, but analysts warn the group has a growing prominence among educated professionals in Europe and the Middle East.

"In Europe they tell Muslims that they have to create parallel societies and that they should not follow European laws," says Ms. Baran. "If this happens it will impossible for people like me to argue that Islam can be democratic."

Baran estimates the group has tens of thousands of followers in Central Asia. "They're stronger in places where people know less about Islam and can't read the Koran in Arabic," she says. "They're not as popular in the Middle East because they don't get involved in the Palestinian cause."

Hizb ut-Tahrir takes a more gradual, long-term strategy for spreading the territory under Muslim rule.

"Islam obliges Muslims to possess power so that they can intimidate - I would not say terrorize - the enemies of Islam," says Abu Mohammed, a Hizb ut-Tahrir activist. "In the beginning, the Caliphate would strengthen itself internally and it wouldn't initiate jihad."

"But after that we would carry Islam as an intellectual call to all the world," says Abu Mohammed, a pseudonym. "And we will make people bordering the Caliphate believe in Islam. Or if they refuse then we'll ask them to be ruled by Islam."

And after that? Abu Mohammed pauses and fiddles with his Pepsi before replying.

"And if after all discussions and negotiations they still refuse, then the last resort will be a jihad to spread the spirit of Islam and the rule of Islam," he says, smiling. "This is done in the interests of all people to get them out of darkness and into light."

[Soldier4Christ]

The Muslim Brotherhood "Project"

One might be led to think that if international law enforcement authorities and Western intelligence agencies had discovered a twenty-year old document revealing a top-secret plan developed by the oldest Islamist organization with one of the most extensive terror networks in the world to launch a program of “cultural invasion” and eventual conquest of the West that virtually mirrors the tactics used by Islamists for more than two decades, that such news would scream from headlines published on the front pages and above the fold of the New York Times, Washington Post, London Times, Le Monde, Bild, and La Repubblica.

If that’s what you might think, you would be wrong.

 

In fact, such a document was recovered in a raid by Swiss authorities in November 2001, two months after the horror of 9/11. Since that time information about this document, known in counterterrorism circles as “The Project”, and discussion regarding its content has been limited to the top-secret world of Western intelligence communities. Only through the work of an intrepid Swiss journalist, Sylvain Besson of Le Temps, and his book published in October 2005 in France, La conquête de l'Occident: Le projet secret des Islamistes (The Conquest of the West: The Islamists' Secret Project), has information regarding The Project finally been made public. One Western official cited by Besson has described The Project as “a totalitarian ideology of infiltration which represents, in the end, the greatest danger for European societies.”

 

Now FrontPage readers will be the first to be able to read the complete English translation of The Project.

 

What Western intelligence authorities know about The Project begins with the raid of a luxurious villa in Campione, Switzerland on November 7, 2001. The target of the raid was Youssef Nada, director of the Al-Taqwa Bank of Lugano, who has had active association with the Muslim Brotherhood for more than 50 years and who admitted to being one of the organization’s international leaders. The Muslim Brotherhood, regarded as the oldest and one of the most important Islamist movements in the world, was founded by Hasan al-Banna in 1928 and dedicated to the credo, “Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.”

 

The raid was conducted by Swiss law enforcement at the request of the White House in the initial crackdown on terrorist finances in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. US and Swiss investigators had been looking at Al-Taqwa’s involvement in money laundering and funding a wide range of Islamic terrorist groups, including Al-Qaeda, HAMAS (the Palestinian affiliate of the Muslim Brotherhood), the Algerian GIA, and the Tunisian Ennahdah.

 

Included in the documents seized during the raid of Nada’s Swiss villa was a 14-page plan written in Arabic and dated December 1, 1982, which outlines a 12-point strategy to “establish an Islamic government on earth” – identified as The Project. According to testimony given to Swiss authorities by Nada, the unsigned document was prepared by “Islamic researchers” associated with the Muslim Brotherhood.

 

What makes The Project so different from the standard “Death of America! Death to Israel!” and “Establish the global caliphate!” Islamist rhetoric is that it represents a flexible, multi-phased, long-term approach to the “cultural invasion” of the West. Calling for the utilization of various tactics, ranging from immigration, infiltration, surveillance, propaganda, protest, deception, political legitimacy and terrorism, The Project has served for more than two decades as the Muslim Brotherhood “master plan”. As can be seen in a number of examples throughout Europe – including the political recognition of parallel Islamist government organizations in Sweden, the recent “cartoon” jihad in Denmark, the Parisian car-burning intifada last November, and the 7/7 terrorist attacks in London – the plan outlined in The Project has been overwhelmingly successful.

 

Rather than focusing on terrorism as the sole method of group action, as is the case with Al-Qaeda, in perfect postmodern fashion the use of terror falls into a multiplicity of options available to progressively infiltrate, confront, and eventually establish Islamic domination over the West. The following tactics and techniques are among the many recommendations made in The Project:

 

    * Networking and coordinating actions between likeminded Islamist organizations;
    * Avoiding open alliances with known terrorist organizations and individuals to maintain the appearance of “moderation”;
    * Infiltrating and taking over existing Muslim organizations to realign them towards the Muslim Brotherhood’s collective goals;
    * Using deception to mask the intended goals of Islamist actions, as long as it doesn’t conflict with shari’a law;
    * Avoiding social conflicts with Westerners locally, nationally or globally, that might damage the long-term ability to expand the Islamist powerbase in the West or provoke a lash back against Muslims;
    * Establishing financial networks to fund the work of conversion of the West, including the support of full-time administrators and workers;
    * Conducting surveillance, obtaining data, and establishing collection and data storage capabilities;
    * Putting into place a watchdog system for monitoring Western media to warn Muslims of “international plots fomented against them”;
    * Cultivating an Islamist intellectual community, including the establishment of think-tanks and advocacy groups, and publishing “academic” studies, to legitimize Islamist positions and to chronicle the history of Islamist movements;
    * Developing a comprehensive 100-year plan to advance Islamist ideology throughout the world;
    * Balancing international objectives with local flexibility;
    * Building extensive social networks of schools, hospitals and charitable organizations dedicated to Islamist ideals so that contact with the movement for Muslims in the West is constant;
    * Involving ideologically committed Muslims in democratically-elected institutions on all levels in the West, including government, NGOs, private organizations and labor unions;
    * Instrumentally using existing Western institutions until they can be converted and put into service of Islam;
    * Drafting Islamic constitutions, laws and policies for eventual implementation;
    * Avoiding conflict within the Islamist movements on all levels, including the development of processes for conflict resolution;
    * Instituting alliances with Western “progressive” organizations that share similar goals;
    * Creating autonomous “security forces” to protect Muslims in the West;
    * Inflaming violence and keeping Muslims living in the West “in a jihad frame of mind”;
    * Supporting jihad movements across the Muslim world through preaching, propaganda, personnel, funding, and technical and operational support;
    * Making the Palestinian cause a global wedge issue for Muslims;
    * Adopting the total liberation of Palestine from Israel and the creation of an Islamic state as a keystone in the plan for global Islamic domination;
    * Instigating a constant campaign to incite hatred by Muslims against Jews and rejecting any discussions of conciliation or coexistence with them;
    * Actively creating jihad terror cells within Palestine;
    * Linking the terrorist activities in Palestine with the global terror movement;
    * Collecting sufficient funds to indefinitely perpetuate and support jihad around the world;

cont'd

[Soldier4Christ]

In reading The Project, it should be kept in mind that it was drafted in 1982 when current tensions and terrorist activities in the Middle East were still very nascent. In many respects, The Project is extremely prescient for outlining the bulk of Islamist action, whether by “moderate” Islamist organizations or outright terror groups, over the past two decades.

 

At present, most of what is publicly known about The Project is the result of Sylvain Besson’s investigative work, including his book and a related article published last October in the Swiss daily, Le Temps, L'islamisme à la conquête du monde (Islamism and the Conquest of the World), profiling his book, which is only available in a French-language edition. At least one Egyptian newspaper, Al-Mussawar, published the entire Arabic text of The Project last November. 

 

In the English-language press, the attention paid to Besson’s revelation of The Project has been almost non-existent. The only mention found in a mainstream media publication in the US has been as a secondary item in an article in the Weekly Standard (February 20, 2006) by Olivier Guitta, The Cartoon Jihad. The most extensive commentary on The Project has been by an American researcher and journalist living in London, Scott Burgess, who has posted his analysis of the document on his blog, The Daily Ablution. Along with his commentary, an English translation of the French text of The Project was serialized in December (Parts I, II, III, IV, V, Conclusion). The complete English translation prepared by Mr. Burgess is presented in its entirety here with his permission.

 

The lack of public discussion about The Project notwithstanding, the document and the plan it outlines has been the subject of considerable discussion amongst the Western intelligence agencies. One US counterterrorism official who spoke with Besson about The Project, and who is cited in Guitta’s Weekly Standard article, is current White House terrorism czar, Juan Zarate. Calling The Project a Muslim Brotherhood master plan for “spreading their political ideology,” Zarate expressed concerns to Besson because “the Muslim Brotherhood is a group that worries us not because it deals with philosophical or ideological ideas but because it defends the use of violence against civilians.”

 

One renowned international scholar of Islamist movements who also spoke with Besson, Reuven Paz, talked about The Project in its historical context:

 

The Project was part of the charter of the international organization of the Muslim Brotherhood, which was official established on July 29, 1982. It reflects a vast plan which was revived in the 1960s, with the immigration of Brotherhood intellectuals, principally Syrian and Egyptians, into Europe.

 

As Paz notes, The Project was drafted by the Muslim Brotherhood as part of its rechartering process in 1982, a time that marks an upswing in its organizational expansion internationally, as well as a turning point in the alternating periods of repression and toleration by the Egyptian government. In 1952, the organization played a critical support role to the Free Officers Movement led by Gamal Abdul Nasser, which overthrew King Faruq, but quickly fell out of favor with the new revolutionary regime because of Nasser’s refusal to follow the Muslim Brotherhood’s call to institute an ideologically committed Islamic state. At various times since the July Revolution in 1952, the Brotherhood has regularly been banned and its leaders killed and imprisoned by Egyptian authorities.

 

Since it was rechartered in 1982, the Muslim Brotherhood has spread its network across the Middle East, Europe, and even America. At home in Egypt, parliamentary elections in 2005 saw the Muslim Brotherhood winning 20 percent of the available legislative seats, comprising the largest opposition party block. Its Palestinian affiliate, known to the world as HAMAS, recently gained control of the Palestinian Authority after elections secured for them 74 of 132 seats in the Palestinian Legislative Council. Its Syrian branch has historically been the largest organized group opposing the Assad regime, and the organization also has affiliates in Jordan, Sudan, and Iraq. In the US, the Muslim Brotherhood is primarily represented by the Muslim American Society (MAS).

 

Since its formation, the Muslim Brotherhood has advocated the use of terrorism as a means of advancing its agenda of global Islamic domination. But as the largest popular radical movement in the Islamic world, it has attracted many leading Islamist intellectuals. Included among this group of Muslim Brotherhood intellectuals is Youssef Qaradawi, an Egyptian-born, Qatar-based Islamist cleric.

 

As one of the leading Muslim Brotherhood spiritual figures and radical Islamic preachers (who has his own weekly program on Al-Jazeera), Qaradawi has been one of the leading apologists of suicide bombings in Israel and terrorism against Western interests in the Middle East. Both Sylvain Besson and Scott Burgess provide extensive comparisons between Qaradawi’s publication, Priorities of the Islamic Movement in the Coming Phase, published in 1990, and The Project, which predates Qaradawi’s Priorities by eight years. They note the striking similarities in the language used and the plans and methods both documents advocate. It is speculated that The Project was either used by Qaradawi as a template for his own work, or that he had a hand in its drafting in 1982. Perhaps coincidentally, Qaradawi was the fourth largest shareholder in the Al-Taqwa Bank of Lugano, the director of which, Youssef Nada, was the individual in whose possession The Project was found. Since 1999, Qaradawi has been banned from entering the US as a result of his connections to terrorist organizations and his outspoken advocacy of terrorism.

 

For those who have read The Project, what is most troubling is not that Islamists have developed a plan for global dominance; it has been assumed by experts that Islamist organizations and terrorist groups have been operating off an agreed-upon set of general principles, networks and methodology. What is startling is how effectively the Islamist plan for conquest outlined in The Project has been implemented by Muslims in the West for more than two decades. Equally troubling is the ideology that lies behind the plan: inciting hatred and violence against Jewish populations around the world; the deliberate co-opting and subversion of Western public and private institutions; its recommendation of a policy of deliberate escalating confrontation by Muslims living in the West against their neighbors and fellow-citizens; the acceptance of terrorism as a legitimate option for achieving their ends and the inevitable reality of jihad against non-Muslims; and its ultimate goal of forcibly instituting the Islamic rule of the caliphate by shari’a in the West, and eventually the whole world.

 

If the experience over the past quarter of a century seen in Europe and the US is any indication, the “Islamic researchers” who drafted The Project more than two decades ago must be pleased to see their long-term plan to conquer the West and to see the Green flag of Islam raised over its citizens realized so rapidly, efficiently and completely. If Islamists are equally successful in the years to come, Westerners ought to enjoy their personal and political freedoms while they last.

______________________

As I have said before islam is attempting to take over the world one way or another.

[Shammu]

The day Rashida was called to family court, she found herself in a scene that nearly stopped her heart. There, before the judge, was her husband of 10 years, father of her two children, the man she thought so enlightened when they first met at the university. That same man was seeking the court's consent to marry a second wife.

It took just minutes for the judge to approve. He ruled that the petitioner, who was a senior government official, earned enough to maintain two families. Rashida's unexplained summons to court was the first she had heard of the matter.

Since her husband's second wedding, two years ago, Rashida has begged him in vain for a divorce and child support. She dares not think of remarrying. If she did, under Morocco's Islamic law, she would be likely to lose her children. That is also why she did not want her full name used.

"This case is cruel, but it's mild compared to many others."

Before Rashida, two women went to the center who had been repudiated by their husbands, effectively relieving the husbands of any further responsibility toward them, and left in the street with their children.

A 14-year-old girl had been raped, which left her pregnant and with nowhere to go. She could not return home. Her oldest brother said he would kill her for dishonoring the family.

Such cases are common, and not just in Morocco, which likes to see itself as one of the more cultured and humane Muslim nations. They occur throughout the Islamic world, where texts of the Koran and a range of appendages attached in the Middle Ages are invoked to deny equal rights to women.

Protests against the humiliation of women in Islamic societies are hardly new. But more Islamic women's groups are speaking out against what they call the Muslim system of apartheid.

The status of Muslim women varies widely. While some have gained rights, others have recently lost them. But like a deep fault line, the issue of how women are viewed socially and legally runs through most of the Islamic world.

Women and what they are forbidden to do or wear are at the heart of the fundamentalist policies in Afghanistan and Iran and even of the divisions that have led to the political violence in Algeria. Whether women should wear head scarves as a sign of religious modesty has been revived as an issue in Turkey. And demands to abolish discrimination in Muslim family laws are testing official promises for greater democracy in Morocco, Tunisia and Malaysia.

But even if these issues are ubiquitous, there has been little motion.

"Islamic countries have modernized many laws in the economy, education, commerce, politics, you name it,"  an Algerian lawyer and a specialist in Muslim women's rights at UNESCO. "But there is practically no movement in the status of women. When it comes to women's rights, religion and theology are invoked.

Change is so difficult because in Islam, women symbolize tradition and cultural identity. It is as if the whole burden of the Islamic tradition rests on their shoulders.

But a public, if relatively quiet, rebellion is under way. The activists do not get much limelight: They usually do not march in protest, either because it is forbidden or because they fear a backlash. But as International Women's Day, on March 8, approached this year, there was a multitude of debates, conferences and television programs about the issues across North Africa, from Morocco to Egypt.

Because the movement is informal and ad hoc, statistics about participation or impact are hard to come by. Almost by definition, it revolves around educated women.

In Morocco, Tunisia and Algeria, where women rank among the more emancipated of the Islamic world, activists say the U.N. international women's conference in Beijing in 1995 was an important catalyst for defining the issues and planning action.

But most important, they say, support has grown because women are caught in the growing contradictions and shifts within Islamic societies.

One such shift, in the countries around the Mediterranean, has been the enormous migration from the countryside to the cities in recent years. As a result, more women now go to universities and work as doctors and lawyers as well as in factories and offices. But the archaic laws linger.

Legally they are still as helpless as the illiterate girls on the farms, a Casablanca pharmacist, "We are all legal minors, and we depend on permission of our fathers, brothers or husbands."

Educated or not, a Moroccan women needs the permission of a male relative to marry, name her children or work. She inherits half as much as her male siblings. She can be forced into marriage or polygamy and can be beaten or repudiated without recourse.  

Muslim feminists have long argued that it is not the religion but the male interpretation of the Koran that keeps women oppressed, along with the texts that were added on in the Middle Ages. So the way to reform had seemed to be to re-examine and reinterpret the religious texts. But efforts to reform Islam from within keep failing.

In Algeria, Islamic fundamentalists have been conducting a violent campaign against the government for five years. In Afghanistan, they have captured most of the country and have barred women from virtually all public activities. In both countries they have shown how easy it is to turn back the clock by invoking religion.

Many women now feel that they must fight to expand and change secular law, rather than reform the Sharia, the Islamic legal code.

It is a subject that means little to Zoubida Mhider, 48, who lives in poverty in Rabat. She is illiterate, like almost 70 percent of Moroccan women. In the waiting room of Annajda, a legal-aid office in Rabat, she whispered that she had been beaten by her husband for so long that she finally left with her 11 children.

For almost four years, Mrs. Mhider said, she has been going to court to beg for help with getting a divorce and seeking child support. Her husband usually fails to show up for court appointments, and the court has not pressed him.

Two of the children have married, and she and the younger children have been getting by on money her married daughter sometimes sends from the Netherlands.

Fumbling with her veil, she said she was very religious but did not care if Moroccan law was Islamic or secular. "I just want this settled," she said, sighing.

Fatima Zahra Tamouh, a professor of African history at the University of Rabat, said that in Morocco and a number of countries, migration to the cities had brought more education for women but also more violence, repudiation and divorce.

"In the countryside, couples rarely lived alone," she said. "A husband was accountable to the woman's family -- to her father, her brothers. But there is more abuse and more divorce and repudiation now that couples live alone. The problem is we got a society more based on individuals without the laws to go with it."

In Rabat, Morocco's spacious and sunlit capital, women's groups are mobilizing to get divorce and child-custody rules moved from the Mudawana, the Muslim family law, into the civil code. In 1993 women collected a million signatures in this nation of 28 million people to support such reform. King Hassan II agreed.

But the reforms, made by men, have made little difference. This time, women say, they want a role in drafting the changes.

Equal rights in divorce and abolishing the one-sided act of repudiation are only one aspect of Muslim women's concerns, but in the big cities they affect almost 50 percent of couples, said Mrs. Skali, the pharmacist, who also is chairman of the Association of Democratic Women.

"We want to ring the alarm bell, because divorce is affecting our whole society," she said. "The women are left on their own, with no support. It's one reason why we are seeing more and more street children."

[Shammu]

Mohammed’s ethnic cleansing of Medina is rarely mentioned in current books on Islam. During Mohammed’s rule of Medina two Jewish tribes were banished and the remaining tribe slaughtered, a day long process in which all the men were systematically executed by the sword. There was a time that reputable authors felt duty bound to include at least a summary reference to these facts. Here is an excerpt from one book originally published in 1914:

    “At Medina he expected the Jews to recognize the agreement between his teaching and theirs, and to own him as a prophet in the true succession, perhaps as the Messiah for whom they were waiting. The Moslems, when they prayed, turned their faces toward Jerusalem; the Day of Atonement was made a solemn fast for Moslems, the one great fast in the year. Mohammed did not see why if he acknowledged Moses and his Torah, the Jews should not acknowledge him and his Koran.

    The Jews proved obdurate; their doctrine had no place in it for Arab prophets or messiahs. They took a malicious pleasure in exposing the ignorance of biblical history which Mohammed displayed in his stories about biblical persons, thus impugning his claim to have his stories by revelation. He retorted that his was the true and original version; if it was told otherwise in the books of the Jews it was because they had falsified their Scriptures. The attitude of the Jews was not only vexatious, but had in it a visible element of danger. In conjunction with the ‘hypocrites,’ as Mohammed calls the numerous class who outwardly professed Islam but had no real faith in it, they might at more than one crisis have made his position in Medina untenable. In the interludes in the conflict with the Meccans, Mohammed, on one pretext or another, fell upon the Jews, and did not stop till he had driven out all their tribes from Medina, and conquered their strongholds in the oasis of Khaibar.”

Today, it is rare to find such a presentation. Most people are shocked when at mention that Mohammad ethnically cleansed Medina of Jews. “Surely, I would have read of such a horrendous event in my history book,” I’m told by skeptical critics. After reading several books, each with a part of the picture, the whole becomes clear to any open-minded person.

Today’s authors lie by omission in order to present a narrative that isn’t embarrassing to Muslims in light of contemporary standards. The worse offender is John Esposito of Georgetown University. In a recent introductory book he describes Mohammad’s exemption from the 4-wife limit as a result of Mohammad’s kindness. Esposito explains that he married widows to provide them with protection and security. He conveniently leaves out that fact that many, if not most of these women became widows when Mohammad slaughtered the men of the tribe and took first pick of the wives for a trophy.

Understanding the inherent nature of the Islamic supremacist ideology makes it clear: Islam sees the West (and all non-Muslims for that matter) as an inferior realm to be brought under Islamic rule and subjugated. Islam originated as a supremacist ideology that believes it deserves to rule over others.

Muhammad was succeeded by the four “rightly guided caliphs” (632-661 A.D.). During this time Muslims conquered Persia and a major part of the Eastern Roman Empire: Syria, Palestine and Egypt. These military victories had profound religious significance: it validated Islam as the true religion. Following Muhammad’s example, Muslims derived their livelihood from conquest and exploitation, not production and trade.

Muslim apologists scoff at the notion that Islam was spread by the sword since Islam holds that before waging war, non-Muslims must be given the chance to submit. In essence, Muslim warriors were saying “we’ll make you an offer you can’t refuse.” Massacres were common in Syria (634), Mesopotamia (635-642), and soon after in Egypt, Cyprus, Armenia, Tripoli, Carthage, etc. However, in many instances populations choose to accept the change from Byzantine rule to Islamic rule with initially minor change in daily routine.

Islam was initially a racial supremacist ideology that became a religious supremacist ideology. In the first hundred years non-Arab Muslims were excluded from power. Muslims believed Allah spoke Arabic and favored the Arabs. Only Arabs were exempt from slavery, for example. In Islam’s second century, after 750 AD, under the Abbasid caliphs, who ruled from Baghdad, Persians were included in the governing ranks. “To compensate for this, and to replace the wakening bond of Arab ethnic cohesion, the caliphs laid increasing stress on Islamic identity and conformity trying to impose on their vast and diverse empire the unity of a common faith and culture.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Okay, now someone tell me to shut up.

[Soldier4Christ]

Okay, now someone tell me to shut up.

Shut up DW. (Glad to oblige.)   

[Shammu]

A ex-muslim tells it like it is, the mind though of islam.

I was born and raised as Muslim. My whole family is still Muslim. I know every genetic code of Muslim. I know Islamic brain. I live and breath with them. I am an insider. I left Islam when I understood that Islam is a sick and evil religion. Following are the Islamic message to the West.

To the infidels of the West:

Constitution for the new Islamic Republic of EU and USA is under construction.

We will fight the infidel to death.

Meanwhile American laws will protect us.
Democrats and Leftist will support us.
UNO will legitimize us.
CAIR will incubate us.
ACLU will empower us.
Western Universities will educate us.
Mosques will shelter us
OPEC will finance us
Hollywood will love us.
Koffi Annan will pass politically correct sympathetic statement for Jihadists.

Our children will immigrate from Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Indonesia and even from India to the US and to the other Western countries. They will go to the West for education in full scholarship. America is paying and will continue to pay for our children’s educations and their upbringing in state funded Islamic schools.

We will use your welfare system. Our children will also send money home while they are preparing for Jihad.

We will take the advantage of American kindness, gullibility, and compassion. When time comes, we will stab them in the back. We will say one thing on the camera and teach another thing to our children at home. We will give subliminal messages to our children to uphold Islam at any cost. Our children in America will always care more about Islamic Country’s interest than US interest.

We will teach our children Islamic supremacy from the very childhood. We will teach them not to compromise with Infidel. Once we do that from the very early age our children won’t hesitate to be martyr. We will take over the Europe first and then US will be the next. We already have a solid ground in the UK, Holland, Sweden, Spain, Italy, Germany, and now in the US.

Our children will marry Caucasian in Europe and in America. We will mixed with intricate fabric of the Western society but still will remember to Jihad when time comes. Who are we?
We are the “sleeper cells”.
We will raise our children to be loyal to Islam and Mohammad only. Everything else is secondary.

At the time of the real fight we will hold our own children as our armor. When American or Israeli troops shoot at us the world will be watching. Imagine,… Imagine the news in the world “Death of Muslim babies by infidels”.

We know CNN, ABC, CBS are broadcasting live. Al-Jazeera will pour gasoline on the fire. The news will spread like wildfire. “Americans killed 6 babies, 10 babies”. “Jews killed two women”,

Keep your Nukes in your curio cabinets. Keep your aircraft carrier or hightech weaponery in the showcase. You can't use them against us because of your own higher moral standard. We will take the advantage of your higher moral standard and use it against you. We won’t hesitate to use our children as suicide bomber against you.

Visualize the news flash all over the world, …Moslem mother is sobbing, ….crying. ….Her babies are killed by Jews and Americans, the whole world is watching live. Hundreds of millions of Muslims all around the world are boiling. They will march through Europe. We will use our women to produce more babies who will in turn be used as armor/shield. Our babies are the gift from Allah for Jihad.

West manufactures their tanks in the factory. We will manufacture our military force by natural means, by producing more babies. That is the way it is cheaper.

You infidels at this site cannot defeat us. We are 1.2 billion. We will double again. Do you have enough bullets to kill us?

On the camera:
We will always say, “Islam is the religion of Peace.”
We will say, “Jihad is actually inner Jihad.”
Moderate Muslim will say there is no link between Islam and Terrorism and the West will believe it because the West is so gullible.
Moderate Muslim all over the world will incubate Jihadist by their talk by defending Islam.
Using Western Legal system we will assert our Sharia Laws, slowly but surely.
We will increase in number. We will double again.

You will be impressed when you meet a moderate Muslim personally. As your next-door neighbor, coworker, student, teacher, engineer, professionals you may even like us. You will find us well mannered, polite, humble that will make you say, “wow, Muslims are good and peaceful people”, But, we will stab you in your back when you are sleeping as we did on 911.
There will be more 911 in Europe and in America. We will say, “We do not support terrorism but America got what it deserved.”

Muslims, CAIR, ISNA, MPAC and other international Islamic Organization will unite. We will partner with Leftist, ACLU, with Koffi Annan, and the UN, and if we have to then even with France. Fasten your seatbelt. The war of civilizations has just begun.

We will recite Quran and say Allah-Hu-Akbar before beheading infidels, as we have been doing it. We will video tape those and send it to all infidels to watch. They will surrender - ISLAM means surrender.

We will use your own values of kindness against you.

You are destined to loose.

Must be very depressing for you. Isn’t it?

Allah-Hu-Akbar as we say just before beheading.
21^st Century Islamic Warfare
Let's see the effectiveness of Islamic warfare.
Muslims Vs. the West.

THE RULE HAS CHANGED. There is new game in town.

Bill Clinton ordered 50 Tomahawks Cruise missiles costing $100,000,000 each to destroy $50 mud houses that belonged to Osama's family. What a stupidity? What a poor ROI (Return On Investment)

In return Osama's attack on the US.
Cost: 19 martyrs and less than $500,000.
Cost to the West:  over 3,000 dead.

At least $1,000,000,000,000 (one trillion) dollars economical loss in one year. This includes the ripple effect.

Osama's ROI with respect to: life = 3,000/19 = 158 fold.
Dollar = $1 tr./500K = 2,000,000 fold

That is modern warfare. The West will loose.

Allah-Hu-Akbar.
Islam will rule the world. There is nothing you can do. Even if the per capita GDP of the world drops to half of its present level as a consequence of Islamic laws in place all over the world but still Islam will rule the word.

From your point of view we bring to the world to the dark ages, so be it. But still Islam wins, West looses.

Are you sure you want to play this game?

Jihad, ..Jihad...Jeeehaaad...
You are destined to loose.
Allah-hu-Akbar

Saudi Arabia's $100 billion investment over the last 3 decades on over 60 thousands Madrassas and school all over the Islamic world is finally paying off. While the West was busy inventing medicine, increasing life expectancy, elevating human suffering, decoding human gene to find cure for Cancer, heart disease etc, launching space shuttle, inventing internet, working on new laws/theory for human rights, developing better economical models for a more prosperous world, while ACLU was gaining control over common sense, while American ingenuity was benefiting the rest of the world, we Muslims were busy producing over 200 million out of 1.4 billion, Walking, Talking, Non-Thinking, West-Hating, Pre-Programmed, Suicidal, Parasitic, Terrorist Robots. You can't win. The Genie is out of the bottle.

We will use American’s kindness, fairness, compassion, freedom of speech and non-discriminatory policy against them. We will stab them in the back.

What are you going to do? You are doomed.

Tim--ex-Muslim

[Shammu]

Mother axes daughter to death in Jordan 'honor killing'
July 31, 2006

AMMAN --  A Jordanian woman hacked her 26-year-old daughter to death in her sleep with an axe for giving birth out of wedlock, the Jordan Times reported Sunday.

The 69-year-old mother and another daughter turned themselves in to police after Saturday's killing, claiming they had acted to cleanse the "family honor," the paper said, quoting official sources.

They were charged with premeditated murder, the sources said.

The victim had been divorced for the past seven years and had given birth to a boy on the day she was murdered.

Hours later "her enraged mother decided to kill her to cleanse the family honor," one official told the newspaper.

"The mother and daughter waited until the victim went to sleep, took an axe and hacked her repeatedly until they made sure she was dead," the official said.

More than 10 women have been killed in similar "honor crimes" since January in the conservative Muslim kingdom.

Mother axes daughter to death in Jordan 'honor killing'

[nChrist]

UM??  Me thinks that those telling us that Islam is a religion of peace and love were either TRUTH challenged or VOID of the TRUTH. I'm sure that most of recorded history is a real nuisance to them, but liberals will tell us that everything is our fault, regardless of the facts.

WHEW??

[Shammu]

Brother, how about VOID of BRAIN??

[ibTina]

Brother, how about VOID of BRAIN??

Amen... I think the hot desert has fried their brain cells.