The Salam Islamic Center, whose leaders have been praised by the FBI, staged a musical concert June 15 at the Crest Theater in Sacramento, California. “An Islamic Expression of Traditional & Contemporary Art,” came billed as the first event of its kind and one that “challenges the belief among some orthodox Muslims that music can lead to sinful behavior.”
Mohamed Abdul Azeez, imam of the Salam Islamic Center and winner of the FBI’s community leadership award, told the Sacramento Bee that staging the event was “risky” but “why not present an alternative? Instead of listening to rap music filled with filth, why not listen to clean rap?” The event, Azeez said, “represents a paradigm shift in the Muslim community. Kids are listening to this stuff, so why not be proactive and expose them to beautiful, inspiring music that promotes love of religion and country?” Imam Mahmoud Abdel of the Masjid Annur Islamic Center has a different view on music.
“Music actually makes you high, 100 percent,” he told the Bee. “It’s a chain reaction – when people listen to music, they ask for alcohol, which will lead to adultery. One step leads to another in the majority of cases. It’s well known that anybody who listens to music a lot will be distracted from his or her mission, which is worshipping God Almighty.”
Imam Mumtaz Qasmi of Sacramento’s Downtown Mosque said “Music has magic, it gets in your blood and makes you want to get up and dance and forget your personality. Your butt is shaking and she’s going to get up and her butt is going to shake – where is the religion then?” Mosques don’t allow music, the imam said, “So how can we allow it outside the mosque?”
Azeez argued that “there’s nothing conclusive in the Quran that states music is inherently wrong,” and in Egypt his parents listened to Oum Kolthoum, “the greatest singer in the Muslim world,” even though the local imam forbade it. But the FBI’s favorite imam still has reservations. He alluded to stories of how political leaders used music to sway people from the Quran and in some musical settings “really bad things took place, like the inappropriate mingling of genders, drinking or fornication.”
Homeland Insecurity: The White House assures that tracking our every phone call and keystroke is to stop terrorists, and yet it won’t snoop in mosques, where the terrorists are.
That’s right, the government’s sweeping surveillance of our most private communications excludes the jihad factories where homegrown terrorists are radicalized.
Since October 2011, mosques have been off-limits to FBI agents. No more surveillance or undercover string operations without high-level approval from a special oversight body at the Justice Department dubbed the Sensitive Operations Review Committee.
Who makes up this body, and how do they decide requests? Nobody knows; the names of the chairman, members and staff are kept secret.
We do know the panel was set up under pressure from Islamist groups who complained about FBI stings at mosques. Just months before the panel’s formation, the Council on American-Islamic Relations teamed up with the ACLU to sue the FBI for allegedly violating the civil rights of Muslims in Los Angeles by hiring an undercover agent to infiltrate and monitor mosques there.
Before mosques were excluded from the otherwise wide domestic spy net the administration has cast, the FBI launched dozens of successful sting operations against homegrown jihadists — inside mosques — and disrupted dozens of plots against the homeland.
If only they were allowed to continue, perhaps the many victims of the Boston Marathon bombings would not have lost their lives and limbs. The FBI never canvassed Boston mosques until four days after the April 15 attacks, and it did not check out the radical Boston mosque where the Muslim bombers worshipped.
The bureau didn’t even contact mosque leaders for help in identifying their images after those images were captured on closed-circuit TV cameras and cellphones.
The controversies in Oklahoma and Alabama are just a glimpse of what the North American Islamic Trust is up to nationwide.
By Ryan Mauro:
Local residents are challenging proposals to expand Muslim Brotherhood-linked mosques in Oklahoma and Alabama. The mosques’ land is owned by the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) which was identified as a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity by the federal government and the Brotherhood’s own documents.
The Islamic Society of Edmond in Oklahoma was victorious over Reverend Paul Blair of Fairview Baptist Church, who protested the Islamic Society’s plan to construct an activity center because the land is owned by the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) and the listed applicant for the permit is the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA).
A 1991 U.S. Muslim Brotherhood memo identifies ISNA and NAIT as one of “our organizations and the organizations of our friends.” The memo says its “work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within.” Federal prosecutors designated both as unindicted co-conspirators in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation for financing Hamas. The two were listed as U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entities.
Blair’s testimony focused on these connections, but the planning commission in Oklahoma can only make its decision based on issues regarding land usage.
The Islamic Society of Mobile in Alabama is facing more difficulty as ithopes to build a 6,400-square foot mosque and a 5,000-square-foot school. The mosque says that the current buildings are “dilapidated” and must be replaced.
Initially, the planning commission voted in favor of the project, but the city council unanimously rejected its zoning application. In this case, residents insisted that their opposition has nothing to do with Islam. Indeed, none of the complaints have mentioned that the mosque is owned by NAIT.
The residents also did not focus on the fact that the mosque president’s son, Omar Hammami, has joined the Al-Shabaab terrorist group in Somalia, a branch of Al-Qaeda. He has appeared in Al-Qaeda propaganda videos and is called “The American.” He was radicalized by another mosque attendee and led the University of South Alabama’s Muslim Students Association chapter. The MSA, like NAIT and ISNA, is also listed by the Muslim Brotherhood as one of its fronts.
The State Department web portal www.america.gov continues to whitewash radical Islamists. As we’ve reported, publications showcasing Muslims in America rely on radical Islamist organizations with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, while ignoring non-Islamist Muslims. Another example is a video, “Eid in America,” about a Muslim religious holiday that can be seen here or here.
The video depicts the Dar Al Hijrah Islamic Center in Falls Church, Va. as a model of American diversity. It is packed with statements and vignettes portraying congregants as patriots who love everything about the United States. But the video fails to say anything about the longstanding history of connections between the mosque, its leadership and radicalism.
On Dar Al Hijrah’s website, there are links to the sites of two prominent organizations linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, an 80-year-old religious movement that seeks to make Islamic religious law, or Shariah, the controlling basis for society: The Muslim American Society (MAS) and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).
The imam of Dar Al Hijrah is Shaker Elsayed, a former MAS secretary-general, who has spoken admiringly of Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan Al-Banna, telling the Chicago Tribune that his ideas are “the closest reflection of how Islam should be in this life.” Elsayed also accused the Justice Department of unfairly targeting Muslims like Ahmed Omar Abu Ali, who was convicted of joining al Qaeda while overseas and plotting to assassinate President George W. Bush. Abu-Ali, currently serving a 30-year prison sentence, worshiped at Dar Al Hijrah.
The Eid video includes Esam Omeish, a member of Dar Al Hijrah’s board of directors who was recently defeated in his bid for the Democratic nomination in District 35 in the Virginia House of Delegates. In 2004, Omeish praised Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, founder of the Hamas terror group who had been assassinated a month earlier by Israel as “our beloved Sheikh Ahmed Yassin.” In 2007, Omeish was forced to resign from a Virginia immigration panel after a video was posted showing him praising Palestinians who chose “the jihad way” to liberate their land from Israel.
In addition to Abu-Ali, other terrorists who attended Dar Al Hijrah have included Abdurahman Alamoudi, currently serving a 23-year federal prison sentence for illegal financial dealings with Libya and for participating in a plot by Libyan dictator Muammar Qadhafi to assassinate Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. Another was Mousa Abu Marzook, a senior Hamas leader deported to Jordan in 1997. In March 2001, September 11 hijackers Nawaf al-Hazmi and Hani Hanjour were worshipping at Dar Al Hijrah when they met Eyad al Rababah after services. According to page 230 of the September 11 commission report, al Rababah helped them find an apartment. Al Rababah was deported to Jordan after being convicted in a fraudulent driver’s license scheme.
There are thousands of mosques in America. This is the one the State Department chose to showcase.
A drawing of Turkey’s $100 million mega-mosque complex being built in Maryland
The construction project in Maryland is about more than a mega-mosque. It’s symbol of how Turkey aspires to lead the Islamic ummah, including the American Muslim community.
By Ryan Mauro:
The Islamist government of Turkey is building a 15-acre, $100 million mega-mosque in Lanham, Maryland. Prime Minister Erdogan visited the site on May 15 in a ceremony that was attended by the leaders of two groups linked to the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood. Also present was the Maryland Secretary of State, representing Maryland Governor and likely Democratic presidential candidate in 2016, Martin O’Malley.
The mega-mosque is called the Turkish American Culture and Civilization Center and, according to the Muslim Link, it “will likely become the largest and most striking examples of Islamic architecture in the western hemisphere” when it is finished in 2014. The Muslim Link explicitly says it is “a project of the government of Turkey.”
On May 15, Prime Minister Erdogan spoke to hundreds of people at the construction site and said he’d come back for the opening ceremony next year. He warned the audience that there are groups promoting “Islamophobia,” branding potential critics as paranoid bigots. Erdogan recently said that “Islamophobia” and Zionism are equivalent to fascism and anti-Semitism, saying they are a “crime against humanity.”
On the same trip to the U.S., Erdogan brought a special guest: The father of one of the Islamists killed in Israel’s 2010 raid on a Turkish flotilla that tried to break Israel’s legal blockade on the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip. Erdogan reportedly wanted to him to meet President Obama.
The site will have five buildings, including a mosque “constructed using 16th century Ottoman architecture that can hold 750 worshipers.” The site’s design reinforces concerns that Turkey wants to restore its glory days as the Ottoman Empire.
The event was also attended by the leaders of two U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entities.
The first, Naeem Baig, is the president of the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA). A 1991 U.S. Muslim Brotherhood memo, which says its “work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within,” lists ICNA as one of “our organizations and the organizations of our friends.” It even refers to meetings with ICNA with talk about a merger.
ICNA is linked to the Pakistani Islamist group Jamaat-e-Islami and its conferences feature radical speakers. A former ICNA president was recently indicted for horrific war crimes committed during Bangladesh’s 1971 succession from Pakistan – the torture and murder or 18 political opponents.
The second official from a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity that attended the event was Mohamed Magid, president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). ISNA and several of its components are listed as U.S. Muslim Brotherhood fronts in the same 1991 Brotherhood memo. ISNA was also an unindicted co-conspiratorin the Holy Land Foundation case, dubbed the largest Islamic terror-funding trial in the history of the U.S. Federal prosecutors in the case also listed ISNA as a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity.
The reaction to a recent Muslim robbery of a priest in France is a sad indication of where the country is headed. A Catholic official pointed out, “If it had been an imam or rabbi, he [the Interior Minister] would already been on the spot.” This is no surprise, as Socialist President Hollande’s pandering to the Muslim population played a large role in his election.
The incident began when four Muslims surrounded the priest and told him to hand over his cell phone. One thief knocked him unconscious. The attack may have been motivated by criminality and not jihad, but the two are part of a common trend.
There are over 750 government-designated “Sensitive Urban Zones” in France, referred to as “No-Go Zones” by Dr. Daniel Pipes. About 5 million Muslims live in these areas of France where law enforcement doesn’t exercise decisive control. When the authorities do have to step in, a violent backlash quickly arises. There are many videos of Muslim worshippers holding illegal prayers in the streets when their mosques overflow without any response from police.
On New Year’s, about 1,200 cars were set on fire and police clashed with residents in the Muslim-majority districts of Strasbourg and Mulhouse. In August, a two-day rampage was sparked when a Muslim was arrested for driving without a license around the time of a funeral. Massive riots have broken out in these no-go zones because of the hostility to reasonable law enforcement. Over half of the French prison population is Muslim, where many are radicalized.
A lack of integration is the most common factor in Islamic terrorists. These unassimilated areas are not just breeding grounds for criminals, but for extremism as well—particularly when foreign Islamist governments and organizations get involved.
The Saudi Arabia-based Muslim World League, described by Andrew McCarthy as “the Muslim Brotherhood’s principal vehicle for the international propagation of Islamic supremacist ideology,” is helping finance the construction of 200 new mosques. The French Council of the Muslim Faith wants to eventually doublethe 2,500 mosques in the country.
Qatar, the supposed U.S. “ally” that subsidizes the Muslim Brotherhood, is also active in France’s Muslim community. It is financing mosques and the Union of Islamic Organizations in France, the Muslim Brotherhood’s main branch there. It demands the government to pass a law against “Islamophobia.” The Qatari government is also investing $65 million in the suburbs where over 1 million Muslim immigrants live.
This isn’t purely an act of humanitarianism or a business investment. The Qatari constitution is based on Sharia Law. The Christians in Qatar, almost 6% of the population, are allowed to practice their faith but cannot proselytize to Muslims. Hypocritically, Emir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani publicly pledged in December 2011 to “spare no effort” to proselytize the Islamic teachings of Muhammad al-Wahhab, the founder of what is often called “Wahhabism.”
Mosques become a state within a state, except for the welfare assistance.
If radicalized means self-segregated, embittered, and angry enough to be ambivalent about the mentorship of jihadists, then America needs to pay close attention to neighborhood Islamic centers. There is a nexus between disaffected Muslims and those who graduate to violence, and twostudies point to the American mosque. Now that another plot has been executed rather than foiled, there is finally overdue focus on the imams who foment resentment and alienation.
We have allowed mosques to serve as citadels, cutting Muslims off from the democratic society outside. When Muslim marriages are arranged, then officiated and filed within the mosque; when large and small contract disputes are adjudicated by a sheikh; when marriages are ended and custody determined by the imam, and financial disagreements assessed by mosque officials, observant Muslims might as well be living anywhere.
Certainly, the conditions for those that live under tight mosque control do not reflect anything that resembles America.
Constitutional rights and due process protections do not penetrate many sharia-observant mosque domains. After speaking with several Muslim individuals seeking to reassert constitutional rights after summary judgments were rendered, it is apparent that what purports to be Islamic arbitration is really more akin to kindergarten sandlot refereeing. The documents reveal that there was no semblance of legal process expected in arbitration proceedings, no conflict of interest disclosures, and no provision for structural fairness rules.
Even Muslim legal scholar M. Ali Sadiqi, writing for the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America, noted that Muslims would have difficulty bringing internal arbitration standards into conformity with American legal principles, since under sharia inheritance rules women are entitled to only one quarter of the estate — and one eighth if there are children.
In Germany, law enforcement authorities now see the Islamic courts as a competitive “shadow justice system,” and complain that sharia-styled tribunals interfere with the government’s duty to administer both civil and criminal justice.
In Britain, Baroness Cox has been working tirelessly for years to see British law reinstated and sharia jurisdiction reversed. During hearings on her bill, now called the Arbitration and Mediation Services Equality Bill, Baroness Donaghy (Labour Party) called the presumed acquiescence of women to unequal and often cruel treatment as “consensual as rape.” A Muslim woman told Baroness Cox:
I feel betrayed by Britain, I came to this country to get away from all this but the situation is worse here than in my country of origin.
From Britain to the Netherlands, Spain, Denmark, France, Germany, and America, it is possible for Muslims to experience no notable difference between life in the West and the conditions that they fled back in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Egypt, and Iraq. The only mentionable difference: the generous social welfare programs offered in the Western cultures.
When I inquired of a local imam as to how he identified radicalization and whether he was concerned about it, he tellingly pivoted to accusations that the U.S. government does not do enough for immigrant Muslims.
In contrast, Western-oriented American Muslim Dr. Zuhdi Jasser called out clerics who urge adherents to “focus on their own victimization, patronizingly reminding the rest of America not to be ‘racists’ [or] ‘bigots.’”
Islamic society of Boston
The unquestionably radical nature of the Islamic Society of Boston mosque and its counterpart the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center (called “small one” and “big one” by locals) illustrates the worst of Islamist subversion. Whether the Tsarnaev brothers attended to the degree that the mosque was a key part of their radicalization is unknown, but it could not have been a mitigating influence in their conversion to terrorism. The pedigree of convicted terrorists that have emerged from IBS/IBSCC incubation, the close Muslim Brotherhood connections, the terror group ties, and the criminal convictions of leadership figures lead one to wonder how much more radical activism still seethes within this mosque community.
We also have examples of the poisonous rhetoric purveyed at these two mosques. In just one instance, invited imam Abdullah Farooq was videotaped saying that the Patriot Act “permits [government] to come to your door” and “to come anywhere they want and to come after you anytime.” He went on to urge action in the name of Allah against “oppressors,” by “grabbing on to gun and sword … to step out into this world and do your job.”
A 2004 lesson (active link now disabled) that gave tips on disciplining a wife recommended hanging up a whip in plain sight as a deterrent, but not advocating actual physical punishment unless she really needs it.
Sheikh Ahmed Mansour, an exile from Egypt, said that the ISB mosque “was controlled by fanatics.” He likened the atmosphere to the sharia extremism that he left behind: “I left Egypt to escape the Muslim Brotherhood, but I had found it [at ISB].” When Mansour told Fox News that fiery sermons can spur impressionable young men to violence, even if the speaker doesn’t explicitly advocate it, he was warning America that radicalization comes from the rhetoric that cleverly stops short of illegal incitement to imminent violence.
“We don’t debate unprofessional councillors, unprincipled journalists, and self-righteous community organizers; we turn the tables on them”: this is how British planning lawyer Gavin Boby, also known as the “mosque buster”, describes the activity of his organization, the Law And Freedom Foundation. He uses the law to stop the building of mosques in the UK by demonstrating to local councils that the building of a mosque or an Islamic centre is actually in violation of British law. And he succeeds: the count so far is 16 victories out of 17 cases.
Gavin Boby is a 48-year-old planning lawyer from Bristol, South-West England. He deals with planning permissions or zoning permissions.
Like many other people in Britain, for almost 10 years Boby had witnessed the progressive penetration of Islam in his country, but like many other people he watched idly not knowing what to do about it.
It was the same feeling of impotence that most of us shared. But then, a couple of years ago, he had this idea. Many mosques disrupt neighbourhoods and drive out long-time residents. Non-Muslim women in particular are made to feel uncomfortable in those areas. Why not use his legal skills to help local communities resist planning applications for mosques?
The BBC video above the article exposes how corrupt the process of granting mosque planning applications can be, showcasing a session in the Rochdale Council’s planning committee in the North of England, during which councillor Begum does not allow discussion before the vote is taken and rushes the other members to vote.
This is very topical in light of the recent revelations that the Boston bombers’ mosque ”has been associated with other terrorism suspects, has invited radical speakers to a sister mosque in Boston and is affiliated with a Muslim group that critics say nurses grievances that can lead to extremism”, has classic jihadi texts in its library, and gave money to two terrorist charities which have been shut down by the U.S. government. But then again, when is something about the violent nature of Islam not topical these days?
Still, this is a good way to introduce the mosque buster’s work. What are mosques? As we know, mosques are not like churches or synagogues, they are far more than houses of worship and contemplation, many of them are centres of jihadist activity that indoctrinate to commit and support violence against infidels. In America, as many as 4 different studies have independently come to the same conclusion that 80 per cent of US mosques ”were teaching jihad, Islamic supremacism, and hatred and contempt for Jews and Christians”.
The Law And Freedom Foundation website declares: “A mosque is not merely a place of worship. Islamic doctrine requires the application of Islamic law within its geographical reach.”
In an interview Gavin Boby explains that mosques are being used as the bridgehead, the forefront of the advance of Islam in a territory. What happens in neighbourhoods – usually working class districts which are not used to dealing with officialdom – where a mosque is built is that the area changes forever for its residents, who no longer recognize it and eventually have to move out, due to things like the parking jihad, general harassment, vandalism.
“The parking jihad is” he describes, “soon after the construction of a mosque, people will find no parking space there, their driveway is being blocked or even a car is parked in the driveway inside your property and if you ask them to move their car they’ll say it’s only for an hour.” The parking tends to be used as a way to establish possession and control over the area, of saying: “This is a mosque area, we are the owners now and there’s nothing you can do about it”, and then after that it gets worse until the point when people move out.
“The Koran,” the Bristol lawyer continues, “calls 14 times for the enslavement of non-Muslims, and 3 times for killing the unbelievers wherever they are found. This is obviously against English law. You don’t need to be a good lawyer to fight it but you need to be a very good lawyer to get around it.”
Partly, the mosque buster’s approach is that of finding the contradictions and incompatibilities between Islam and Western fundamental principles (that’s the easy part), and making mosque building and planning regulations become the battleground of these ideological conflicts.
In the same way as Islam is not just a religion but also a political doctrine of supremacy and power, so the mosque is not simply a building of worship but also a political one.
Gavin elaborates:
This is the Islamic doctrine, every mosque is instructed to be based upon the original mosque in Medina, where Muhammad originally in the 7th century set up his religious-political doctrine of social control, and the mosque is a place of government, it is a place where treaties are made, death sentences are passed, armies are blessed and dispatched, it is primarily about political control and it is very much used as a tool of advance. Prime Minister Erdogan of Turkey talked about that, the Muslim Brotherhood compared their mosques to battalions and to beehives, where Muslims will gather and then advance, and there’s nothing new about this, it goes back to the 7th century.
So this is the why of the Law And Freedom Foundation’s operation. Now let’s see the how.
Enza Ferreri is an Italian-born, London-based author and journalist. She has been a London correspondent for several Italian magazines and newspapers, including Panorama, L’Espresso, and La Repubblica.
USA Today reported Tuesday that “the mosque attended by the two brothers accused in the Boston Marathon bombing has been associated with other terrorist suspects, has invited radical speakers to a sister mosque in Boston and is affiliated with a Muslim group that critics say nurses grievances that can lead to extremism.”
The Islamic Society of Boston was founded by Abdulrahman Alamoudi, the leading “moderate Muslim” in Washington throughout the 1990s. Alamoudi turned out to be an al-Qaeda financier and is now in prison.
And it wasn’t just Alamoudi. USA Today notes that others linked to the Islamic Society of Boston include Aafia Siddiqui, who “was arrested in Afghanistan in 2008 while in possession of cyanide canisters and plans for a chemical attack in New York City”; Tarek Mehanna, who was “sentenced in 2012 to 17 years in prison for conspiring to aid al-Qaeda”; Ahmad Abousamra, who “is wanted by the FBI on charges of providing support to terrorists and conspiracy to kill Americans in a foreign country”; and Jamal Badawi, who “was named as a non-indicted co-conspirator in the 2007 Holy Land Foundation terrorism trial in Texas over the funneling of money to Hamas, which is the Palestinian wing of the Muslim Brotherhood.”
Originally a trustee of the Islamic Society of Boston was Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood and perhaps the most popular Islamic preacher in the world. He once said on al-Jazeera: “Throughout history, Allah has imposed upon the [Jews] people who would punish them for their corruption. The last punishment was carried out by Hitler… This was divine punishment for them. Allah willing, the next time will be at the hand of the believers.”
On Wednesday, my organization, the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) issued an 18-point action plan for defending freedom in the wake of the Boston jihad bombings (read the whole thing here). Two of the points apply directly to the Islamic Society of Boston, where the Tsarnaev brothers went for Muslim prayers:
• AFDI calls for immediate investigation into foreign mosque funding in the West and for new legislation making foreign funding of mosques in non-Muslim nations illegal.
• AFDI calls for surveillance of mosques and regular inspections of mosques in the U.S. and other non-Muslim nations to look for pro-violence materials. Any mosque advocating jihad or any aspects of Sharia that conflict with Constitutional freedoms and protections should be closed.
The influence of radical Islam is on the rise around the world — and in the United States.
Mosques and Islamic schools called madrassas increasingly are teaching extreme, fundamentalist interpretations of the religion that presumably inspired the Chechen-born suspects in the Boston Marathon bombings.
“The way to gain influence among the Muslim community is to control the mosques — to control what people think — to have the right imam preach the right message,” says Steven Emerson, an award-winning journalist and author.
Mr. Emerson, executive director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, shared with me shocking insights about the growth of radical Islam in the United States, noting that terrorist network cells have grown rapidly since 1991.
A map painstakingly produced by his nonprofit organization identifies 127 terrorist training and teaching centers in more than 36 states.
It also shows an al Qaeda presence in Ashland and Quincy, Mass., even though bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev reportedly has told authorities that he and his older brother Tamerlan acted alone in the Boston Marathon attack, which killed three and injured more than 180 on April 15.
Tamerlan Tsarnaev reportedly posted videos of radical Islamic preachers on his YouTube page.
Mary Habeck, a researcher in radical Islam at Johns Hopkins University, said that Russian sheik Abdelal-Hamid al-Juhani is an “important ideologue for al Qaeda in Chechnya and the Caucasus … [and] preaches the form of Salafism that Tsarnaev was [allegedly] interested in — one that is usually associated with al Qaeda,” according to a recent report by The Daily Beast.
Salafism and Wahhabism are extreme, fundamentalist interpretations of Islam whose teachings have been gaining adherents around the world. They call for strict enforcement of Islamic or Shariah law under a global theocracy. The strictest adherents advocate the killing of unbelievers, or infidels.
One impetus behind the increase in these radical Islamic teachings is the work of a key U.S. ally in the Middle East — Saudi Arabia.
Saudi Arabia has sponsored several charities that have been spreading the Salafist and Wahhabist message, such as the al-Haramain Islamic Foundation and the International Islamic Relief Organization. Both charities have built numerous mosques and madrassas around the world.
In 2004, the Treasury Department accused the al-Haramain Islamic Foundation of having direct ties to Osama bin Laden, and the U.N. 1267 Sanctions Committee has issued a worldwide ban against the charity.
In a 2003 public hearing on terrorism, Mr. Emerson noted that bin Laden’s brother-in-law, Mohammad Jamal Khalifa, was the leader of the International Islamic Relief Organization. The U.N. has since listed the charity’s offices in the Philippines and Indonesia as being linked to al Qaeda.
Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia has financed more than 4,000 mosques and madrassas around the world, with more than 2,000 being built in the U.S. — a 50 percent increase since 2000 and a 100 percent increase since 1990 — mostly led by Wahhabi-trained imams.
Read more at The Washington Times
• John Price is a former U.S. ambassador to Comoros, Mauritius and the Seychelles islands. He currently serves as a resident scholar at the University of Utah’s Hinckley Institute of Politics. He is the author of “When the White House Calls,” and regularly writes commentaries on Africa and the Arabian Peninsula.
By Lloyd Billingsley:
