UK Will Allow Syrian Jihadists to Return, Make Them Attend “Deradicalization” Classes

saudi_rehab_01-450x297Frontpage, by Daniel Greenfield:

So much for all the tough talk about not letting them back in.

To “deradicalize” a Muslim, you use Muslim clergy. So you can see where this is going. It’s like putting drug dealers in charge of Narcotics Anonymous and Jihadists back on the streets of London.

“Deradicalization” is a scam because the instructors are often every bit as “radical” as the students. There’s no way for current Western leaders to distinguish bad from good because their metrics involve things like democracy which leaves the Muslim Brotherhood in.

The Saudis began pushing the deradicalization scam even though their mosques and Imams were the ones pushing the hard Salafi lines.

British jihadists returning from Iraq and Syria will be forced to attend “deradicalisation” programmes to reverse their warped brainwashing, David Cameron announced.

Dangerous fanatics made subject to court controls will be ordered to engage in anti-extremism schemes as part of a raft of new measures to combat the risk of British Islamists returning to the UK.

At least 500 are feared to have travelled out and half are now back on the streets of the UK, potentially plotted attacks here.

Under the proposals, any terror suspect placed under a Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures (Tpims) will now be forced to engage in the Government’s Prevent programme, which tackles radicalisation.

The Al Furqan programme, which is run in prisons, uses Imams to challenge the views of extremist Islam through religious teaching.

The Healthy Identities Intervention is a more introspective approach where psychotherapists try to discover what triggered terrorists to become radicalised.

There are no words for how stupid this is. Instead of denationalizing foreign fighters, the UK is going to force them to attend lectures by equally Jihad supporting Imams and talk to shrinks to understand why they want to kill people.

Wouldn’t just surrendering to ISIS be simpler and easier?

Multiculturalism: What the Left Would Prefer You Didn’t Know…

Screen Shot 20140831 at 144923Breitbart, by JAMES DELINGPOLE, Sep. 1, 2014:

All right, so it was only a straw poll conducted among viewers of yesterday’s BBC Sunday Morning Live debate programme: 95 per cent of Britons think multiculturalism has been a failure.

But as majority verdicts go, it was a pretty resounding one – and it was delivered despite the BBC’s best efforts to muddy the waters, first by wheeling out two of the nation’s Multi Culti Apologist big guns Owen Jones and Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, and second by pretending that multiculturalism means something other than what it actually means.

Multiculturalism is a very specific political philosophy which could scarcely be further removed from the idea that we should live in one big, happy, multi-ethnic melting pot and all just get along. That’s because it means the exact opposite. It’s about separatism, not integration.

It was championed from at least the 1970s onwards by effete bien-pensants like Labour MP turned Social Democrat Roy Jenkins and is essentially a manifestation of the cultural guilt and self-hatred that afflicts the left-wing chattering classes. Rather than accept the truth which to most of us is glaringly obvious – that some cultures are manifestly superior to others – it urges us all to celebrate our differences and to accept values that we may personally find alien or even abhorrent in the name of creating a fairer, more tolerant and inclusive society.

So, for example, we in liberal Western culture generally take a dim view of marrying members of your own family, female genital mutilation, forced or arranged marriages, second-class status for women, voter fraud, systematic political corruption, honour killings, the organised grooming, trafficking and rape of underage girls, and so on.

In some of our immigrant communities, though, such practices are considered more or less acceptable. (And I’m only using that “more or less” modifier out of politeness).

We know, for example, that two thirds of Pakistani mothers in Bradford are related to the father of their child.

We know that every year about 20,000 girls in Briton are considered “at risk” of female genital mutilation (FGM). (Somalis, mainly)

We know that among certain cultures – Pakistan’s, for example – that corruption is endemic. As Rod Liddle noted, Pakistani is 139th on Transparency International’s list of most corrupt countries – the higher the number, the more corrupt. And as Rochdale MP Simon Danczuk has corroborated, these practices have been “imported” into some of our “northern towns and cities.”

We know that in Britain every year at least a dozen women are victims of “honour killings” – and that the justice process is often hampered by the refusal of family members or people in the local community to testify in court.

And we can, I think, take with a fairly hefty pinch of salt the notion that the rape gang phenomenon is something which the broader Pakistani-Kashmiri community in Britain finds unacceptable. If this is really the case, how come it has been allowed to persist, unchecked for up to fifteen years, across Britain on an epic scale, without the perpetrators being named and shamed by their friends, families, colleagues, their community elders or their imams?

The failure of multiculturalism is not, of course, a new thing. Some of us have been warning for years that it is a disastrous policy for various obvious reasons: it militates against social cohesion; it violates the principle that all should be equal before the law and no groups – as contra the parallel Sharia courts now operating in Britain – should be singled out for special treatment; it strains Britain’s culture of tolerance to breaking point, while simultaneously diluting the national character and rejecting those qualities which once made (and still do make, up to a point) Britain such a desirable place to live; it makes it that much more likely that FGM, honour killings, voter fraud, rape gangs and the rest can carry on unchecked.

But these sensible arguments against multiculturalism have often been drowned out by the liberal-left either with the cry of “racist” or through the more subtle, but no less effective methods of distraction and dissimulation.

We saw both the latter techniques being used on BBC Sunday Morning Live. Owen Jones – fluent political operator that he is – tried to claim the moral high ground by arguing that blaming the Rotherham gang rape phenomenon on “multiculturalism” not only lets the perpetrators off the hook but also ignores the plight of the victims. (Short answer: it does neither and if you believe it does Owen, you’re thick and if you’re only saying it for effect then you’re wicked. You choose).

Worse still, almost, was the way at one point during the multicultural debate, the show decided to canvas the opinions of two festival organisers at Mela 2014 (“Europe’s biggest outdoors South-Asian festival”), both of whom assured us that they thought “multiculturalism” was a jolly good thing without for one second grappling with the philosophical or cultural implications of the term. The impression given was that to be against multiculturalism is like being against chicken tikka masala, or bhangra, or arts festivals or smiley brown skinned people or fun generally.

But multiculturalism isn’t and never was a handy synonym for “multiethnic”.  And at last, it seems, the majority of British people have twigged.

Multiculturalism is the philosophy that says the grooming, trafficking and mass rape of underage white girls by Muslim gangs is not as bad as being thought Islamophobic.

Multiculturalism is the philosophy that says it’s better to let a little African girl get tortured to death by her relatives than it is to be thought culturally insensitive or judgemental.

Multiculturalism is the philosophy whereby when, say, a grant application is made to try to save for the nation an object of incalculable heritage value like the Fourteenth Century illuminated prayer book the Macclesfield Psalter, some politically correct gimp of a grants officer asks: “And how would this be relevant to the owner of the local Chinese takeaway?”

People have had enough of this nonsense. Finally.

British BBC Call In Poll Records 95% of Repondents Stating The Multiculturalism Experiment A Failure….

Originally posted on The Last Refuge:

To wit the hard-line moonbat liberal proclaims: If people won’t accept cultural assimilation on their own, the solution is to force the population to live in greater proximity to each other. Watch:

See the pontificating ooze of Marxism from the young moonbat?

Multiculturalism is stated by the audience to be a failed social experiment. Culturally, and carrying inherent contrasts in values, people are just different; and the little borg defender can’t stand the thought of it. So his solution: “force it upon them”.

Yet again proving that multiculturalism carried to its logical conclusion is antithetical to freedom.

It is no wonder why UKIP is on the rise and well positioned to destroy the professional political class in the UK.

Moonbat world looks like this:

View original

Daily Caller interview by Ginni Thomas

Originally posted on Refugee Resettlement Watch:

I was honored to be interviewed by Ginni Thomas for her “Leaders” series last week.  You can see the 22-minute interview by clicking here. (May take a few seconds to load video, or at least it does on my computer!).

More of Ginni Thomas’s interviews may be found by clicking here: http://dailycaller.com/author/ginni-thomas/

Here is some of the text introduction:

As Labor Day looms, President Obama’s immigration policy looks to become a war on American workers. Without prioritizing who’s allowed to come to America, former liberal Ann Corcoran says “the American worker loses. The numbers are too high. We can’t assimilate this many people.”

Marylander Ann Corcoran, who says she was “tea party” before the movement existed, has written a daily blog, as a volunteer activist, at Refugee Resettlement Watch for the last seven years to inform and engage citizens.

Refugee Resettlement Watch is a small but growing daily blog…

View original 76 more words

State Dept: US Embassy in Libya Held by Jihadists is “Secure”

 

Frontpage, by Daniel Greenfield:

This seems to be some usage of the word “Secure” that I was not familiar with. Neither was Ambassador Stevens who was assured that the Benghazi facility was secure.

A senior State Department official said Sunday that the U.S. Embassy in Libya’s capital is believed to be secure after reports that an Islamist-allied militia group took over the compound.

“We’ve seen the reports and videos and are seeking additional details,” said the official. “At this point, we believe the Embassy compound itself remains secure but we continue to monitor the situation on the ground, which remains very fluid.”

Considering that the Libya Dawn, a coalition that includes Ansar al-Sharia, responsible for the Benghazi attack, and Feb 17, which was meant to be providing security, holds the residential compound, not to mention the Libyan government, what basis is there for believing it’s secure?

But then again admitting what is really going on would damage Obama’s image and so everyone immediately goes into cover up mode.

That’s what happened in Benghazi and with virtually every event in Libya. Considering that Obama implemented regime change and that the whole thing badly fell apart, the country is a black hole of media coverage.

Now Jihadists are swimming in the pool of the residential compound of the “secure” US Embassy.

Paul Weston:Where are the Politicians on Rotherham’s 1400 Child Rape Victims?

 

Published on Sep 1, 2014 by Liberty GB:

Where are UKIP, Labour, the Tories and Liberal Democrats on the Muslim grooming gang issue? Liberty GB is the only party talking about this atrocity, and why it happens – Islam, Muhammed and the Quran.

A Survivor of 9/11 Speaks: An Interview with Deborah Weiss, Esq.

world trade  center 9-11-01 (3)By Jerry Gordon:

The jihad attack that took the lives of 2,996 Americans and foreigners on 9/11 was perpetrated by 19 middle class Egyptians, Saudis and Yemenis. This dastardly act by Al Qaeda (AQ) Islamic terrorists destroyed an iconic landmark of American International economic prowess, the twin towers of the World Trade Center. Another plane took out one side of the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia and another crashed into a rural area near Shanksville, Pennsylvania. The last recorded voice heard from Flight 93 was “allahu akbar” – their god Allah was “the greatest.” This was the first act of Islamic terrorism perpetrated from afar on America.  9/11 was called the “Pearl Harbor of the 21st Century.”

9/11 was followed over the past 13 years by other AQ- inspired acts of jihad terrorism in the US, two of which killed American service personnel in Little Rock and Fort Hood. Dozens of AQ-inspired attempts were foiled in Detroit, Times Square and other locations across the country. As of early 2014, 6,802 American service personnel and an estimated 6,800 contractors died in both the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts fighting AQ and Taliban jihadists.

The West and the world were unprepared when 9/11 occurred, although many warnings had been given.

The 9/11 warnings still have not been heeded. On August 19, 2014, the Islamic State (IS), formerly ISIS, released a “Message to America” – a video of the gruesome barbaric beheading of intrepid American photo journalist Jim Foley of Rochester, New Hampshire. He was captured in November 2012 by radical elements of the Free Syrian Army who contributed their captive to the extremist Salafist jihadi group, ISIS. ISIS is rumored to hold several other Americans captive, among them, journalist Steven Joel Sotloff was featured in the same video.

IS threatens the Levant from the Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf, the West and even the US. The 13th commemoration of 9/11 finds us no safer, perhaps unprepared to deal with this supremacist jihadist threat.

Deborah Weiss 2On the occasion of this 13th Commemoration of 9/11, we interviewed a survivor of that attack in lower Manhattan; Deborah Weiss, Esq. Ms. Weiss heads Vigilancenow.org.  She formerly worked for the Committee on House Oversight in Congress; the Forbes for President Campaign in 1995-96; and served as an attorney in New York under the Giuliani administration. Her articles have also been published in FrontPage Magazine, American Thinker, American Security Council Foundation, the Weekly Standard, Washington Times, and National Review Online. She is a contributor to Saudi Arabia and the Global Islamist Terrorist Network (Sarah Stern, editor) (Palgrave Macmillan, 2011). She is the principal researcher and writer of Council on American-Islamic Relations: Its Use of Language and Intimidation.

Watch this You Tube video of Deborah Weiss presenting at the Westminster Institute in August 2013:

 

Jerry Gordon:  Deborah Weiss, thank you for consenting to this interview.

Deborah Weiss:  Thank you for inviting me.

Gordon:  You are a 9/11 Survivor. Where were you when the terrorist attack occurred?

Weiss:  I was running late for work or I would have been inside the WTC. Instead, because it was Election Day for the mayoral primary, I was still in my apartment at Gateway Plaza, the closest residence to the WTC. I was getting ready for work and all of a sudden, I heard a really loud noise, like nothing I’ve ever heard before. I couldn’t figure out what it was. It sounded like my upstairs neighbor’s furniture was falling down. I also heard people screaming outside, but I’m not a morning person and NYC can be noisy, so at first, I didn’t bother to look out the window. I turned on the radio and found out that a plane had hit the WTC, so I turned on the TV. A little while later, I heard another noise, even louder than the first one. I knew then that the first plane wasn’t an accident, but that these were terrorist attacks. The lights in my apartment flickered and then went out. The building started to shake and I fell to the floor. I knew I had to get out of there and it was pretty scary. I made the decision to take my cat. So I went inside the closet to get her box and when I came out, I couldn’t see anything outside my window except pitch black. I had a huge window facing away from the WTC. I remember it was a beautiful sunny Tuesday morning. Just a bit earlier I had looked out and saw the sun and the leaves of a tree pressing against my window. The window was very wide and covered the whole side of my living room. Yet, after I got up, I couldn’t see one ray of light. Part of what makes it so scary when you’re in the midst of it is you don’t know what’s happening. People in other parts of the world know more of what is going on than you do. I thought we were getting bombed. All you really know in that situation is someone is trying to kill everyone around you and something really, really bad is happening and that you might not get out alive.

I dug my nails into my cat, threw her into her box and ran down the stairs. In the lobby, a lot of people were entering our building from the WTC side. They were covered in white with red eyes. Smoke started coming in and it became increasingly difficult to breathe. Along with some others, I entered a back apartment on the ground level and sat down on the floor. I remember one woman there with tears in her eyes holding her newborn twins, one in each arm. We couldn’t exit the back door of the building because it was locked. Finally, they unlocked it and a lot of people fled. I had learned that all the dust I saw was from the collapse of the first tower. Because there was no plan and nowhere to run, a few of us decided to stay put. Then, all of a sudden, a police officer came to the apartment and started screaming hysterically for us all to leave NOW! I ran out the door and knew immediately that we were at war. Everything was covered in white: the trees, the streets and the benches. I ran along the water. Looking backwards, I saw the remaining tower burning and tilting in my direction. Suddenly, a Coast Guard rescue ferry appeared and approximately 15 of us jumped on. Moments later, when we were a yard or two out, the second building collapsed. We all said a prayer for those who had just died. We were taken to a triage center in NJ, where we sat all day listening to radio updates. All the phones were out because the transmitters were in the WTC. So it was awhile before you could reach anyone by phone. Once you could, all the hotels were quickly filled up.

Read more at New English Review

Egypt Strikes Jihadis After Decapitation Video

ansar-bayt-al-maqdis-israel-mossad-beheadingjpg (1)Breitbart, By KATIE GORKA, Sep. 1, 2014:

Within just days of a video surfacing showing the decapitation of four Egyptian nationals, the Cairo government took decisive military action and killed the leader of the Jihadist group alleged to have been responsible

Several sources have reported that on Sunday, August 30, Egyptian forces carried out two successful operations against Islamist militants in Sinai. In Al Arish, a city on the northern coast of Sinai, members of a joint police-military action killed Fayez Abdallah Hamdan Abu-Sheta, believed to be a leader of the terrorist group Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis (ABM), thought responsible for the May 2013 kidnapping of 7 police officers and a border guard.

In a separate operation 32 miles away, in the town of Rafah, which borders Gaza, Egyptian forces killed 6 and arrested 10 others, Daily News Egypt reported. It has not yet been revealed whether those killed or arrested are members of Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis, but this raid occurred three days after the Jihadi group released a very graphic video of the beheading of four Egyptians in Sinai for allegedly spying on behalf of Israel. The video is similar to that of U.S. journalist James Foley, whose beheading by ISIS on August 19, 2014, was also posted online.

While the world’s attention has been focused on the Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) and their aggressive sweep across Iraq and Syria, Egypt has been waging its own battle against violent jihadists, particularly in the Sinai.  This is a conflict kindled under the Muslim Brotherhood leadership of Mohamed Morsi and which exploded with his ouster in July 2013. When the Muslim Brotherhood announced at a rally on May 1, 2012 that their candidate for president would be Mohammed Morsi, Egyptian Cleric Safwat Higazi declared the following in his impassioned speech to the crowd of thousands (broadcast on Al-Nas television and translated by MEMRI TV):

We can see how the dream of the Islamic Caliphate is being realized, Allah willing, by Dr. Muhammad Mursi, and his brothers, his supporters, and his political party.  We can see how the great dream—shared by us all—that of the United States of the Arabs…the United States of the Arabs will be restored, Allah willing.  The United States of the Arabs will be restored by this man and his supporters. The capital of the Caliphate—the capital of the United States of the Arabs—will be Jerusalem, Allah willing.  Mursi will liberate Gaza tomorrow….Our capital shall not be Cairo, Mecca or Medina.  It shall be Jerusalem, Allah willing. Our cry shall be: ‘Millions of martyrs march toward Jerusalem.’  Banish the sleep from the eyes of all Jews. Come on, you lovers of martyrdom, you are all Hamas. Forget about the whole world, forget about all the conferences. Brandish your weapons…Say your prayers….And pray to the Lord.

 

 

As Thomas Joscelyn, senior editor of the Long War Journal, testified before Congress in February 2014, with the Muslim Brotherhood’s rise to power in Egypt in January 2011, Al Qaeda and other violent jihadist groups saw an opportunity for proselytizing and rebuilding the ummah, or Muslim community of believers. Not only was the new government of Mohamed Morsi not going to crack down on jihadists, but he greatly aided their cause by releasing many of them from prison, including members of Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) and Gamaa Islamiyya (IG). Egypt became fertile ground for their activities, and the Sinai took on a particular importance because it was the perfect launching ground for renewed attacks on Israel. This suggests that there is also a strong correlation between the terrorism in the Sinai and the fighting in Gaza. The Muslim Brotherhood promised to free Gaza and to rebuild the Caliphate with Jerusalem as its capital.

Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis, which translates to “Champions of Jerusalem,” began operations in January 2011 with the uprisings that led to the overthrow of the Egyptian government. Initially, they targeted Israel. In July 2012, they blew up a pipeline that served Israel, calling it treason to send Egyptian resources to Israel, according to an article in Egypt News Daily. But following the ouster of the Muslim Brotherhood-led government on July 3, 2013, Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis stepped up their attacks and directed the majority of them against the Egyptian police and military. Their near-daily attacks included the execution of 24 unarmed policemen on August 19, 2013, the attempted assassination of Interior Minister Muhammad Ibrahim in September 2013, an attack on South Sinai’s Security Directorate, and an attack on the military intelligence building in the Suez Canal city of Ismailiya in October 2013.

The attacks by Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis as well as other terrorist groups operating in the Sinai are explicitly carried out in retaliation for the Egyptian military’s role in helping to oust Mohammed Morsi and for their subsequent crackdown by military and police on groups engaging in violence. Indeed, the relationship between groups such as the violent Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis and the “non-violent” Muslim Brotherhood may be more than ancillary. According to the BBC, some have identified Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis as the military wing of the Muslim Brotherhood. Several different sources, including Nabil Naeem, founder of the Islamic Jihad, allege that Khairat al-Shater, the deputy supreme guide of the Brotherhood, directly supports Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis.

Katie Gorka is the president of the Council on Global Security. Follow her on Twitter@katharinegorka.

 

David Cameron outlines new anti-terror measures to MPs

David Cameron terror laws statement 9/1/2014 – FULL SPEECH

Published on Sep 1, 2014 by YouSkyNews

BBC:

New powers are needed to seize terrorist suspects’ passports and stop British-born extremists from returning to the UK, David Cameron has said.

It was “abhorrent” British citizens had “declared their allegiance” to groups like Islamic State, he told MPs.

He said the inability to stop UK terrorists returning home from overseas was “a gap in the armoury” but only pledged cross-party talks on the issue.

Powers to monitor suspects in the UK will also be strengthened.

In a statement to Parliament, Mr Cameron restated the UK’s backing for US airstrikes against Islamic State militants in Iraq and said he would not rule out participation in similar action in the future.

The UK’s terror threat level was raised to “severe” from “substantial” on Friday.

‘Forensic focus’

The prime minister told MPs that developments in the Middle East over recent months had major implications for the UK’s security, with 500 British nationals estimated to have travelled to Iraq and Syria to fight on behalf of Islamic State and other militant groups.

He said the whole world had been “sickened and shocked” by the killing of US journalist James Foley and other atrocities in Iraq.

While rejecting calls for “sweeping and blanket” new laws in response, he said a “forensic focus” was needed to prevent people from travelling abroad in the first place and to deal with British jihadists returning to the UK from conflict zones.

Among measures announced:

  • Legislation will be drawn up to give the police statutory powers to confiscate the passports of suspect terrorists at UK borders
  • The UK will challenge any attempt by the courts to water down these powers
  • Plans to block suspected British terrorists from returning to the UK will be drawn up on a “cross-party basis”
  • Terrorism prevention and investigation measures (Tpims) will be extended, to include the power to relocate suspects
  • Terrorists will be required to undergo de-radicalisation programmes
  • Airlines will be forced to hand over more information about passengers travelling to and from conflict zones.

The home secretary already has executive powers to seize the passports of those travelling abroad in certain cases but Mr Cameron said the police needed greater discretion to act where needed.

“We will introduce specific and targeted legislation… providing the police with a temporary power to seize a passport at the border during which time they will be able to investigate the individual concerned,” he said.

Mr Cameron said the UK was able to block foreign nationals and those with dual citizenship from re-entering the UK but did not have the same power for UK nationals deemed to pose a threat to the country.

Under his proposals, UK nationals suspected of being involved in terror acts would be allowed to keep their British citizenship, but they would be prevented from re-entering the UK for a period of time.

He added: “Adhering to British values is not an option or a choice. It is a duty for all those who live in these islands so we will stand up for our values, we will in the end defeat this extremism and we will secure our way of life for generations to come.”

Read more

UK special forces move into London as government fears “Mumbai-style” attack

Mumbai2611APBreitbart, by DONNA RACHEL EDMUNDS:

London could be the scene of a Mumbai-style terrorist “spectacular” if Islamist jihadists get their way, British security chiefs have warned. There is growing concern that a list of “soft” targets is being drawn up, and that weapons and explosives have already been smuggled into the country.

The Sun is reporting that the SAS has moved part of its anti-terror team to a forward base near London, amid concerns that a prolonged attack may be staged in that city. MI5 also referred to the Mumbai atrocity of 2008 as a comparison, in which coordinated bombings and shootings took place over four consecutive days, killing 174 and wounding a further 300.

Speaking to The Sun, a source said: “The nightmare scenario is they mount a spectacular attack at a high profile location. They may try to storm a building, take hostages, rig it with explosives or kill at will.”

The threat has caused the official ‘threat level’ to be raised to severe, increasing tensions in the city and prompting people to share warnings of an imminent bomb attack on the London Underground on social media and via text last night. The threat was dismissed as a hoax after the head of the British Transport Police took to Twitter, posting: “Social media contains lots of rumours regarding threats to tube network tomorrow. There is no specific threat so keep calm & carry on.”

However, Twitter user David O’Neill pointed out: “Must say though. If you raise the threat level to severe you can’t be shocked when people believe stupid rumours about attacks on the tube.”

Up to 500 British-born men are understood to have gone abroad in order to fight for the Islamic State (IS). Scotland Yard believes that up to 200 may have already returned, and are concerned that they will have been taught to carry out similar violent attacks on the streets of Britain.

Prime Minister David Cameron has indicated that he is considering granting the border patrol new powers to seize passports from suspected jihadists, and introducing of a ban on travelling abroad to fight with IS. A government source has told the media: “We are considering measures to keep the country safe in the face of an increased threat level from Islamist extremism.

“The areas include making it harder for potential foreign fighters to travel abroad by making it easier to remove their passports through additional temporary seizure powers at the border.

“We are also looking at stopping British citizens from re-entering the country if they are suspected of terrorist activity abroad.

“Previously, our range of powers to prevent return to the UK applied only to foreign nationals, dual nationals or naturalised citizens.”

Cameron is expected to deliver details of a package designed to inhibit terrorist activity to the Commons later today. However, it is not clear whether the package will have the support of Cameron’s coalition partners, the Liberal Democrat Party.

Former Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell told BBC Radio 4: “I think it’s rather difficult and it might well constitute illegality. To render citizens stateless is regarded as illegal in international law. To render them stateless temporarily, which seems to me the purpose of what’s being proposed, can also I think be described as illegal. At the very least it’s the kind of question that will be tested here in our own courts and perhaps also in the European Court of Human Rights.”

Israel and the Obama-Qatari Axis

US-Turkeyby Joseph Puder:

When considering the geo-political map of the current Middle East, not everything is negative or alarming, at least from an Israeli point of view. Although the Middle East is more splintered today than ever before, Israel’s political and diplomatic isolation in the region has faded. The Middle East is now composed of three main blocs and Israel is a partner with one major bloc, which also happens to be its immediate neighbors, or the inner circle of moderate-Sunni and hitherto pro-American Arab states: Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the Emirates.  However, what is counter-intuitive is the Obama administration’s choice of partners in the region. It is not the moderate Sunni-Muslim states and Israel that Washington sought out as mediators for a Hamas-Israel cease-fire, but the Muslim Brotherhood bloc of Turkey and Qatar.

David Ben Gurion, Israel’s first Prime Minister and one of the founding fathers of the Jewish State recognized early on that the State of Israel had no chance to develop friendly relations with its neighboring Arab states. Pan-Arab leaders such as Egypt’s president Gamal Abdul Nasser fanned the flames of hatred and revenge against the Jewish state, as did fellow Arab dictators in Syria and elsewhere. As a result, Israel’s leadership sought to develop friendly relations with its outer-circle non-Arab states such as Iran, Ethiopia, and Turkey.

The rise of the Islamic Republic in Iran under Khomeini following the Iranian revolution in 1979, and the departure of the Israel-friendly Shah of Iran ended Israeli-Iranian relations. Iran became the arms supplier of Israel’s Palestinian enemies and Hezbollah in Lebanon, and with its nuclear ambition, it constitutes an existential threat to the Jewish State.

Turkey was the only Muslim state to have a steady and rather friendly relationship with the Jewish state. Until the electoral triumph of the AK Party (Justice and Development Party) in 2002, Israel’s trade and military cooperation with Turkey was significant to both countries. The AK Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan changed all of that. His hostility to Israel intensified with each successive electoral victory. Following his second parliamentary victory in 2007, he began tangling with Israel. In late May 2010, Erdogan gave the green light to a Gaza flotilla headed by the Mavi Marmara. It was a deliberate provocation by Erdogan to break through the Israeli blocade. The subsequent AK victory in the 2011 parliamentary elections increased Erdogan’s arrogance and simultaneously his anti-Israel and anti-Semitic outbursts. His latest 2014 presidential victory and his unmitigated support for Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood severed the special relations Israel has had with Turkey.

Turkey is, in fact, part of the radical Sunni, pro-Muslim Brotherhood bloc, that includes Qatar and Hamas.

The radical Shia bloc led by Iran, which includes Shiite Iraq, the Assad regime in Syria, and the Hezbollah in Lebanon, comprise the third bloc.

The puzzling question is why Washington chose to align itself with the Sunni radical Muslim Brotherhood bloc (Qatar and Turkey), and not with the more moderate bloc led by Egypt and Saudi Arabia? Both the Egyptian regime under President Abdel Abdel Fattah el-Sisi and the Saudi royals are upset with the Obama administration. Cairo resents Washington’s support for the deposed Muslim Brotherhood President Mohammad Morsi. Washington withheld arms delivery to Egypt because it considered Morsi’s removal illegitimate, albeit, over 30 million Egyptians demanded Morsi’s removal because of his gross mismanagement of the economy, his authoritarian style, his promotion of sectorial Brotherhood ideals and the erosion of civil liberties.

Read more at Front Page

Iraq’s Jihad: Past as Prologue

plus ça change…

American Thinker, By Andrew G. Bostom, June 8, 2005: 

We are now in the middle of a full—blown Jihad, that is to say we have against us the fiercest prejudices of a people in a primeval state of civilization.

Gertrude Bell, Baghdad, Iraq, September 5, 1920

Gertrude Bell (Wikipedia)

Gertrude Bell (Wikipedia)

 

The carnage in Iraq continues——much as Bell described 85 years ago——despite Saddam Hussein’s removal, and capture, along with many of his former high ranking administrators.  And this bloody contemporary “insurgency” is also a jihad—waged by jihadists of two ilks: Al Qaeda types (like Zarqawi) united with so—called “secular” Baathist jihadists. This is hardly surprising as Baathist Arabism is deeply rooted in Islam, and bears no resemblance to Western conceptions of secularism. (Other than perhaps Saddam Hussein’s expensive ‘secular’ wardrobe—as Fouad Ajami once uttered on live television, doing his best Saddam impersonation, to a stunned Dan Rather: ‘You wear pants…I wear pants!’).

Indeed, the very founder of the Baath Party, Michel Aflaq, was a Greek Orthodox Christian who converted to Islam, and declared emphatically, ‘Islam is to Arabism what bones are to the flesh.’ (For an enlightening discussion of the Baathism is secularism canard, see this blog by Professor Frank Salameh  , Monday May, 9, 2005, ‘The Myth of Arab Nationalism’). The Baathists just added another incendiary element to Iraq’s long brewing cauldron of sectarian strife, which was so apparent during the British attempt at statecraft during the 1920s, through early 1930s.

It is edifying to review that experience through the writings, and unfulfilled hopes of the British diplomat, Gertrude Bell. One wishes that a careful reading and thoughtful discussion of Bell’s detailed analyses were a required exercise for all our policymaking elites and chattering classes. Regardless, Bell’s narrative sounds eerily familiar as the cast of characters—from the 1920s, versus the present—seems quite literally frozen in time: Shi’ites led by the very same Sadr family; irredentist Sunnis educated in the Wahhabi tradition; Kurdish ‘separatists'; and the indigenous, pre—Islamic community of Assyrian Christians, soon to be preyed upon, primarily by their traditional Kurdish Muslim enemies, joined by the other Muslim communities.

Fond Foolishness Redux — Iraq Through Gertrude Bell’s Prism

Gertrude Bell (1868—1926) was a brilliant archaeologist and explorer, who traveled extensively in the Middle East, later becoming a British intelligence officer and diplomat in Egypt and Mesopotamia. Due to her unparalleled knowledge of the Middle East, Bell was made part of the delegation to the Paris Conference of 1919, and worked subsequently with British officials attempting to create the modern state of Iraq from three disparate ethnic and religious vilayets (i.e., Mosul, Baghdad, and Basra) of the collapsed Ottoman Empire.

Bell, perhaps the most important female Civil Servant in the entire British Empire during this period, also persuaded Winston Churchill to appoint Faisal, the recently deposed King of Syria, as the first King of Iraq. Her letters written from Baghdad, excerpted below, were originally published in a compilation, ‘The Letters of Gertrude Bell’, [Volume II, New York, 1927]. Bell’s brief, worried comments about the Assyrians foreshadowed their terrible plight, within seven years of her death.

In the last years of her life, Gertrude Bell created, and was the first Director of the Baghdad Archaeological Museum; she died in 1926, and may have committed suicide. Bell’s utopian dreams for Iraq, what the historian Elie Kedourie termed her ‘…fond foolishness…thinking to stand godmother to a new Abbasid Empire…’,  went unfulfilled. Indeed, one of her worst fears was realized: Muslim violence directed against the Assyrian Christian minority.

Read more at American Thinker

The Two Faces of Islam

 

American Thinker, By Richard Butrick, August 31, 2014:

One face is for Islam’s useful idiots the other is for Islam’s faithful.

The Koran is not arranged in chronological order. When it is arranged in chronological order it is clear that the Koran undergoes a serious transition after Muhammad’s first real triumph on the battlefield at Badr in 624. The period following that battle is called the Medina period of the prophet’s life. Conceptually this transition can be seen as a transition from the Old Koran to the New Koran. Unlike the transition from the Old to the New Testament, the transition from the “Old” Koran (pre-Medina) to the “New” Koran (Medina) is a transition to a more vengeful, demanding, supremacist God.

He who at Mecca is the admonisher and persuader, at Medina is the legislator and the warrior, who dictates obedience, and uses other weapons than the pen of the Poet and the Scribe. [link]

In practice, Quranic abrogation results in a known doctrinal footprint that subordinates the milder, more moderate verses of the Quran from the Meccan period of revelation, to the later and violent verses of the Medina period. Islamic law is substantially derived from the Medinan period. Where a conflict exists, anything said during the Medinan period overrules anything on the same subject in the Meccan. And anything said in the later part of the Medinan period either overrules or controls anything said in the earlier part. [link]

In an attempt to polish Islam’s image, Muslim activists usually quote verses from the Quran that were written in the early days of the Islamic movement while Mohammed lived in Mecca. Those passages make Islam appear loving and harmless because they call for love, peace and patience. Such is a deception. The activists fail to tell gullible people that such verses, though still in the Quran, were nullified, abrogated, rendered void by later passages that incite killing, decapitations, maiming, terrorism and religious intolerance. The latter verses were penned while Mohammed’s headquarters was based in Medina. [The Quran's Doctrine of Abrogation -- Abdullah Al Araby]

A clear-cut example of this principle of abrogation is the oft quoted passage from the Old Koran, “Let there be no compulsion in religion.” (Q 5:99) which is abrogated by  chronologically later passages such as these:

Quran (3:56) – “As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help.”

Quran (8:12) – “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them”

Quran (9:29) – “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”

Quran (17:16) – “And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction.”

And on it goes. Apologists for Islam insist these passages refer to retaliatory measures to be taken when attacked.

Regarding these passages, it is to be noted that the Koran is the word of God and not a testament as are the Old and New Testaments and is thereby much less subject to “interpretation.” Moreover, it is axiomatic in Islam that Muhammad is the perfect male to be emulated as much as possible by all male Muslims. The post-Meccan Muhammad is a warrior, raider, conqueror, and subjugator of the non-Islamic world. The mission of all good Muslims is, correspondingly, the spread of Islam any means possible.

The great divide between the Old Koran, which is relatively tolerant and accepting of Jews and Christians, and the New Koran which views Jews and Christians as vermin worthy only extermination or servile groveling before their Muslim masters, enables the supremacist mandate in Islam to present one face to the West’s useful idiots and another to the faithful.

It has worked.

The Old Koran is used to piously claim that terrorism, suicide bombing, and persecution of religious minorities and disempowerment of women are “un-Islamic.”

What is the useful-idiot version of Islam? Here it is a culled version based on quotes from President Bush’s comments on Islam:

Islam is a faith that brings comfort to people. It inspires them to lead lives based on honesty, and justice, and compassion. It’s a faith that has made brothers and sisters of every race. It’s a faith based upon love, not hate. Mohammad’s word has guided billions of believers across the centuries, and those believers built a culture of learning and literature and science. All the world continues to benefit from this faith and its achievements.

And here is President Obama solemnly declaring that Islam is based on the principles “of justice and progress, tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.”

But here are the real five pillars of Islam for the faithful:

I. Islam is to dominate over all other religions Q9:33, 61:9, 8:39

2. Muslims are to purify all of Arabia of its Pagans who can convert or be killed Q9:5 3. 3. Muslims are to fight and subjugate other non-Muslims and subdue and make them inferior second-class citizens (Dhimmis) to pay jizya (humiliation tax) to save their lives. Q9:29

4. Muslims are to have hatred and enmity forever for non-Muslims until they worship Allah alone Q60:4, they should fight those unbelievers close to them and let them find harshness in the Muslims Q9:123

5. Muslims must engage in this jihad (struggle) as this fighting is ordained for them even if they dislike it 2:216 and they are told they can overcome much greater enemies to a multiple of 10 times or more Q8:65

From George W. Bush to Hillary Clinton the “hijacked Islam” or “un-Islamic” meme has infected U.S. foreign policy and enabled creeping Sharia at home. It seems to have gotten to the point that exonerating Islam is the primary concern of U.S. foreign and defense policy with regard to terrorist activity from ISIS to Fort Hood to Boko Haram. The first order of business is to insure that “us folks” understand that terrorism has nothing to do with Islam. Just after the terrible treatment of Yazidis and the beheading of Foley, practically the first words out of President Obama’s mouth were that “ISIL speaks for no religion.”

The Obama crew has been suckered, bamboozled, and taqiyyaed into believing the Islam of the Old Koran is the real Islam. But as the menacing face of the Islam of the New Koran turns fully into view it is becoming increasingly clear that it is the Obama team of useful idiots who have been hijacked. Even CNN has published a report showing that al Qaeda affiliated groups are gaining strength:

Last year’s most lethal incidents were carried out by the Taliban in both Afghanistan and Pakistan, Nigeria’s Boko Haram, al Qaeda in Iraq, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, and ISIL

That was in April, before ISIL showed its real power. And wait till we pull out of Afghanistan. It will be brutally clear that it is not ISIL but Obama and his crew of Islam’s useful idiots that “speak for no religion.”

Also see:

Report: 3 More Americans Killed Fighting with ISIS in Syria

PJ Media, by Patrick Poole, Aug. 31, 2014:

Reports this past week identified two Americans – Douglas McCain from San Diego and Abdiraaman Muhumad from Minneapolis — who were killed by Syrian rebel groups last weekend as they were fighting with ISIS.

A new claim was made on a Syrian rebel Twitter feed this morning saying that an additional three Americans have been killed fighting with ISIS near Ghouta.

A video purporting to show the three dead Americans was posted on Youtube (WARNING: GRAPHIC VIDEO):

 

Yet another American from Florida, Moner Mohammad Abusalha, conducted a suicide bombing for Jabhat al-Nusra — the official Al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria — back in May.

An article in the current issue of The Economist reports on Western foreign fighters joining jihadist groups in Syria and Iraq. The following graphic included in that article estimates that 70 Americans are currently fighting there, though other estimates have indicated that more than one hundred may be in the area.

20140830_MAC990_595

GRAPHIC: The Economist

Iraqi Sunnis who fought al-Qaeda not keen to quell ISIS

Tribal fighters carrying their weapons pose for photographs during an intensive security deployment to fight against ISIS in the town of Haditha, northwest of Baghdad. (File photo: Reuters)

Tribal fighters carrying their weapons pose for photographs during an intensive security deployment to fight against ISIS in the town of Haditha, northwest of Baghdad. (File photo: Reuters)

By Dina al-Shibeeb, Al Arabiya News, Aug. 29, 2014:

While Iraqi Sunni tribes were crucial in defeating al-Qaeda in 2005, they have not shown the same determination in battling the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) despite reports of them fighting the militant group.

Political observers say this is due to the disfranchisement of the Sunni population by outgoing Shiite Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

“Malki’s government and its Iranian allies suppressed the Iraqi Sunnis so much that ISIS was able to sweep through Sunni areas without much resistance at first because of resentment toward the premier,” Walid Phares, an advisor to the U.S. Congress on the Middle East, told Al Arabiya News.

“ISIS is taking advantage and seizing more land, power, and eliminating Arab Sunni moderates in Iraq,” Phares said.

Michael Pregent, an adjunct lecturer at the National Defense University in Washington, said the central government broke its promise to integrate 90,000 Sunnis who fought al-Qaeda into the security apparatus, and provide them with jobs.

“They helped get rid of al-Qaeda, but the government fired all of them and put a lot of their leaders in jail,” Pregent, a former U.S. Army officer who was embedded with Iraqi Kurdish forces, told Al Arabiya News.

“The problem is that the government viewed them as a threat” because of the number of Sunni fighters, he added.

Phares said: “ISIS knows that the only possible threat against them, short of an all-out international ground campaign, is an uprising by [Sunni] tribes.”

Sheikh Ali al-Hatem, head of the Dulaim tribe, on Saturday urged Sunni leaders to withdraw from talks to form a new government, despite designated Prime Minister Haidar al-Abadi being considered more moderate than Maliki.

Hatem also called on Sunni authorities to fight Shiite militias.

Similarly, on Aug. 17 the Revolutionary Tribal Council called for the formation of regional guards to protect Anbar province.

It called on the international community to label “crimes by Shiite militias as terrorism,” and to “confront” them “the same way they are confronting ISIS in Kurdistan and Mosul.”

However, Sunni leader Ahmed Abu Risha has vowed to take revenge on ISIS for killing his nephew Mohammed Khamis.

Abu Risha said fighting ISIS was a “duty,” taking a similar stance to that of the central government in Baghdad.

Abu Risha met with the head of the Shiite National Iraqi Alliance, Ibrahim al-Jafaari, on Thursday, and both confirmed the importance of forming a government.

Analysts predict that Sunnis will turn on ISIS.

“Soon, ISIS will start oppressing [Sunnis] as well,” Phares said. “Sunni moderates will rise, but chances are that ISIS will meet them with extreme violence.”

The unlikely alliance between ISIS and remnants of late President Saddam Hussein’s regime seems to be unravelling.

On July 14, Reuters reported clashes between ISIS and the Naqshbandi Army, led by Saddam loyalists, which killed at least 12.

“ISIS is now targeting the Naqashbandis, and is trying to disarm them. ISIS is acting strategically. They’re pre-empting,” said Phares.

Pregent said ISIS “relies on intimidation, fear, services, rewards and punishments, and tacit support from the disenfranchised Sunni population to thrive. I believe ISIS sheds as many supporters as it gains when it moves into new areas.”

Phares said: “Despite its power, ISIS is still small in size compared to the large mass of Arab Sunni tribes.

“What is needed at this point is for a Sunni area to be liberated from ISIS but not taken by Baghdad’s forces. This could become the basis of a possible liberation later.”

The militant group is already showing some “cracks,” said Pregent.

“ISIS is no longer travelling from town to town with their convoys. They’re losing their propaganda war… there is no footage since the start of U.S. airstrikes of ISIS rolling into Sunni towns in victory parades – those days are gone.”