USA Policy on Nigeria – See No Jihad, Hear No Jihad, Say No Jihad

J. Peter Pham PhD of the Atlantic Center; Emmanuel Ogebe of Jubilee; Anselm John-Miller of the Movement for Ogoni People; and Robin Renee Sanders former U.S. Ambassador to Nigeria. Note the Nigerian Ambassador seated behind Mr. Ogebe. http://jubileecampaign.org/congressional-hearing-on-boko-haram-and-the-continued-violence-in-nigeria/

J. Peter Pham PhD of the Atlantic Center; Emmanuel Ogebe of Jubilee; Anselm John-Miller of the Movement for Ogoni People; and Robin Renee Sanders former U.S. Ambassador to Nigeria. Note the Nigerian Ambassador seated behind Mr. Ogebe. http://jubileecampaign.org/congressional-hearing-on-boko-haram-and-the-continued-violence-in-nigeria/

Obama Administration can find no jihad in murders and kidnappings in the name of Islam in Nigeria

By Andrew Harrod:

American Nigerian policy is to “see no jihad, hear no jihad, say no jihad,” the Nigerian human rights activist Emmanuel Ogebe from the Jubilee Campaign criticized in submitted testimony for a September 18 congressional hearing.  Along with Christian girls who escaped kidnapping by the jihadist group Boko Haram (BH), Ogebe and others at recent Washington, DC, briefings analyzed Nigeria’s bloody security crisis.

“Stop the denial,” Ogebe stated at the hearing while his prepared remarks criticized United States government agencies for blaming Nigerian conflict on socioeconomic grievances.  “Contrary to” this “recurring…narrative,” BH has “made amply and repeatedly clear” that it is an “Islamist insurgency” seeking an “Islamic Sharia state,” Ogebe wrote.  A BH video, for example, proclaimed “Jihad war against…Christianity…western education, democracy.”

The result is “possibly the worst on-going genocide against Christians” even as globally “Christianity is the most persecuted religion.” “More Christians were killed in Northern Nigeria in 2012 than the rest of the world,” for example, while official reports ranked BH the “second most deadly terrorist group in the world right below the Taliban.”  In total, BH has killed over “10,000 people since 2009, both Nigerian nationals and international victims…from over 15 nations—far more than ISIS, AL Qaeda and possibly the Taliban.”

BH has “not beheaded an American…not for want of trying,” given several abduction attempts in northern Nigeria.  “I want to cut White people,” BH leader Abubaker Shekau stated in a video shortly after the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq (ISIS) beheaded American journalist James Foley.  Several Americans, though, survived an August 26, 2011, BH bombing of United Nations’ Nigerian headquarters in the capital Abuja, including one recently identified.

BH’s “threat to not only Nigerian people but also the world” has a “well documented nexus with global jihad,” as shown by Nigerians captured fighting for the Taliban in Afghanistan and Osama bin Laden’s personal secretary visiting Nigeria.  Groups like BH and ISIS globally “feed off each other,” as BH schoolgirl kidnappings have inspired ISIS sex slavery and BH has emulated ISIS’ caliphate declaration.  BH is “paralleling” ISIS atrocities, religious freedom expert Nina Shea seconded Ogebe on a September 19 Hudson Institute (HI) panel, with “clear confirmation” of BH Islamization in Nigeria under a “very brutal religious cleansing.”

“Starving refugees on mountaintops, towns overrun and their Christian population exterminated, children decapitated” characterize not just Iraq, but northern Nigeria, Ogebe wrote.  “Practically every ignoble deed” of ISIS “has been done by Boko Haram in the last three years.”  A “putative third world war” is occurring in an “incremental,” “retail,” or “franchise” manner or, as Pope Francis I recently declared, “piecemeal, with crimes, massacres, destruction.”  An “iron veil” in some countries has replaced the iron curtain’s tyranny, Ogebe assessed.  “We are all in this together,” Ogebe stated at HI given jihad’s global reach in countries like Iraq, Nigeria, and the Philippines.

“Violent Jihad is as Violent Jihad does” and “cannot be rationalized,” Ogebe’s congressional testimony criticized in assessing American attributions of BH violence to, for example, deprivation.  Nigeria is Africa’s wealthiest economy and BH bribes people from neighboring Niger to fight, Ogebe argued at a September 9 Rayburn House Office Building briefing.  The “good old days” before BH, in contrast, already exhibited Muslim animus against Nigerian Christians; Ogebe recalled a Christian student illegally forced to kneel in the sun while receiving Islamic instruction in a Muslim-majority area.  “Violent jihadist groups are never about an inclusive government,” Ogebe meanwhile qualifies American concerns about sectarianism in Iraq and Nigeria, “they are about an exclusive government.”

Yet “Violent Extremist Organization” or VEO, not jihadist, is the description for groups like BH in American training undergone by African military officers.  An equally anodyne “junket-filled tenure” marked America’s last Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom, Suzan Johnson Cook.  She covered a “record 27 countries in 29 months” with equal time in Nigeria and Ghana, a country with few religious freedom concerns.  While the presumptive presidential candidate Hillary Clinton “is playing to the gallery” now by calling BH terrorists, Ogebe noted on September 9, she resisted this designation as secretary of state.

Media such as the Wall Street Journal and American officials have often presented BH as equal opportunity killer. BH’s “campaign against all Nigerians,” for example, concerned Undersecretary of State Sarah Sewall at the September 18 hearing.  (Sewall also did not “have numbers in front of me” concerning Christianity as the world’s most persecuted faith and speculated that claims of more Christians killed in Nigeria in 2012 than the rest of the world “might not be accurate.”)  Yet BH only attacks Muslims “for cause” such as government collaboration in the midst of wholesale targeting of Christians.  Thus about 90% of the 276 schoolgirlskidnapped by BH on April 14 were Christian from Chibok, a specifically targeted majority-Christian community.

Read more at Religious Freedom Coalition

OBAMA AT THE UN: DON’T BLAME ISIS

United Nations Hosts World Leaders For Annual General AssemblyBreitbart, by DR. SEBASTIAN GORKA:

In what could have been a seminal wartime address to the nations of the world at the UN today, instead of rallying the West and her regional allies against the barbarity of the Global Jihadist Movement, President Obama chose to reinforce the administration narrative that America’s deadly enemies are a product of local injustices.
Since 2008, the Obama administration has promoted the argument that what we face in the guise of Al Qaeda, or ISIS, or any other part of the global Jihadi coalition, is simply “Violent Extremism” that grows out of “local grievances.”

This is Beltway speak for an academic idea called Social Movement Theory. (If you want the full history behind this idea and who pitched it to the White House, here is a piece on its origins).

In short, this view sees the violence of jihadi groups against Christians, Yazidis, or even fellow Muslims, as a reaction to the injustice endemic in their societies. Years of oppression by Saddam, Maliki, or the Assad family will inevitably lead to religious genocide and mass slaughter when circumstances allow (e.g. after US forces leave Iraq).

Today the President went even further by drawing the analogy that the violence here in Ferguson, Missouri is an example of the same injustices prevalent throughout the Middle East. The President of the United States appeared to equate the shooting of a thief by a sworn law enforcement officer with the mass slaughter of women and children based upon their religion.

In response to ISIS, the Commander-in-Chief called upon the “international community” to come together and improve said conditions and make “a better life” for all.

Unfortunately history teaches another lesson.

ISIS, the Islamic State, the Al Nusra Front, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram are simply the various faces of a new totalitarianism. The commonality of Jihadism with Fascism and Communism is not an accident. In fact, key Jihadi authors such as Sayyid Qutb of the Muslim Brotherhood studied Mussolini, Lenin and Hitler when writing seminal Jihadist works such as Milestones.

Social Movement Theory denies the responsibility of the perpetrators of heinous acts such as the recent beheadings of innocents journalists. Jihadi John isn’t responsible. Taking seven minutes to cut of James Foley’s head while he is alive is just the natural response to years of “oppression.”

In reality, this fight is simply another war against a totalitarian enemy who truly believes that either they will win and we will be killed or we will win. Unfortunately, it will be impossible for us to be victorious if our plan is based upon solving all injustice in the world and especially if we believe that the enemy is the victim.

Sebastian Gorka, Ph.D. is the Major General Matthew C. Horner Distinguished Chair of Military Theory at the Marine Corps University and the national security and foreign affairs editor of the Breitbart News Network. Follow him on Twitter @SebGorka.

Media Confused as Boko Haram Claims to Join the Islamic State

boko-haram_3016074bCenter For Security Policy, By Kyle Shideler:

In a video released over the weekend, AbuBakr Shekaku, head of the Nigerian jihadist group known as Boko Haram, appears to have declared allegiance to the Islamic State, proclaiming lands currently under Boko Haram control in the province of Borno part of the “Caliphate.”

Despite this, much of the Western media seemed confused about the nature of a Caliphate and what it means. From the AFP report:

In a July video, Shekau voiced support for the leader of the Islamic State and the Levant (Isil) militants Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, who in late June declared himself “the caliph” and “leader of Muslims everywhere”. But there was no indication from Shekau in the latest video that he was associating himself with Baghdadi, whose Sunni Muslim fighters have taken over parts of Iraq and Syria. As such, it was not clear if Shekau was declaring himself to be a part of Baghdadi’s call or if he was referring to a separate Nigerian caliphate.

The position of Caliph is one with purported dominion over the entire “ummah” the total collective of the Muslim faithful.There can only be one legitimate Caliph, and one Caliphate, as Shekaku is no doubt aware. Given that the  laudatory language Boko Haram has in the past offered towards the IS Caliphate, the most likely conclusion would be that Boko Haram either has joined, or intends to join the Islamic State of Al-Baghdadi. It would be incongruous for Shekaku to praise IS, and then negate its primary achievement by denying it legitimacy by claiming he was the true Caliph.

It’s worth noting that while this confusion over whether or not Boko Haram was declaring for the IS Caliphate or declaring its own Caliphate was echoed in all the western reporting which followed from the AFP report, the same confusion is not at all present in an OnIslam.net report, which draws from the same AFP wire.  The OnIslam.net report also ignores the extraneous historical detail of the Sokoto caliphate, a 19th century Nigerian Islamic state which laid claim to the Caliphate title. This is a classic example of how the disinclination to study Islamic law on matters leads to injecting unnecessary complexity into the analysis of events.

If it is the case that Boko Haram has acknowledged the territory it controls as part of the IS Caliphate, this is a major development for the Islamic State. The claim of authority by its “Caliph” Al-Baghdadi has largely been rejected by other Jihadist groups, with only minor exceptions. Yet being recognized as receiving the bay’at (oath) of notable scholars and jihadi emirs who hold actual territory is central to Al Baghdadi’s claim of legitimacy. Of course whether either group is capable of meeting the perceived obligation of such an oath, sharing and exchanging resources, personnel etc, is an entirely other matter.

Also see:

DECLARE WAR ON SHARIAH

iraq-machine-guns-held-aloft-afpBreitbart, by FRANK J. GAFFNEY, JR., Aug. 24.2014:

The National Journal called earlier this week for the United States to “declare war on ISIS.” The magazine is right to argue for a new authorization for the use of military force (AUMF), a legislative vehicle that passes these days for a congressional declaration of war. It is wrong, however, to urge that the existing AUMF, which targets al Qaeda and “associated forces,” be replaced by one that focuses just on the Islamic State (also known as the Islamic State in Iraq and the Sham/Syria, or ISIS, or the Islamic State in the Levant, or ISIL).

Nearly thirteen years after 9/11, it is past time to recognize that we are at war not with one group of “terrorists” or another. Rather, adherents to a doctrine or ideology they call shariah are at war with us. Shariah is, at its core, about power, not faith. While some small percentage (some estimates suggest ten-percent) of its dictates prescribe the religious practices, the rest of it defines comprehensively how every relationship must be ordered – between individuals, families, neighbors, business associates, all the way up to how the world is governed.

Most importantly, shariah obliges its followers to engage in jihad (or holy war). Don’t be misled by those who argue jihad means “personal struggle.” The Koran makes clear that jihad is “holy war.” And for shariah-adherent Islamists that war has two goals: the triumph of shariah worldwide and the establishment of what is, for want of a better term, a theocratic government to rule the entire planet according to that doctrine.

The jihadists may disagree among themselves about some points of theology (notably, differences that divide Sunnis and Shiites). They may be committed to the use of terrifying violence under all circumstances. Or, as in the case of the Muslim Brotherhood, they may believe it is to be used where practicable, but insist on employing not so much non-violent as pre-violent, subversive techniques where terrorism will be counterproductive.

Whatever the banner under which these shariah-adherents wage jihad – for example, the Islamic State, al Qaeda, Taliban, Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah, Taliban, Boko Haram, Al Shabab, Ansar al-Shariah or Muslim Brotherhood – all these Islamists are our avowed enemies. That is not because of how we view them. That is because of their own doctrine which is endlessly reinforced in their mosques, via the Internet, through social media and other vehicles.

We can no longer kid ourselves, or otherwise avoid a harsh reality: While perhaps hundreds of millions of Muslims around the world – including it seems the majority of those in America – practice their faith without regard for shariah (they don’t want to live under it themselves and they do not seek to impose it on others), the authorities of Islam regard shariah as the true faith and consider these co-religionists to be apostates.

At the moment, fortunately, only a relatively small number are actively engaged in violent jihad. Many more, though, are doing what shariah demands of those unable or unwilling to wield the sword in holy war: underwriting those who do, through the practice of zakat (Islam’s obligatory contributions to approved charitable causes, one of which is jihad).

Unless and until we understand that shariah-adherent Muslims are inherently dangerous, we will be unable to define our enemy correctly. Unless and until we hold such Muslims accountable, we will not only restrict unduly the focus and effectiveness of our countervailing efforts.

Worse yet, we will actually encourage Muslims – whether states like Qatar and Saudi Arabia, organizations or individuals – to associate with, underwrite, or in other ways enable deadly foes of freedom.

Some will respond that an AUMF focused on shariah is a formula for a “clash of civilizations.” The truth is that enemies of civilization – namely, those who adhere to and seek to impose, whether through violence or by stealth, brutally repressive, totalitarian, misogynistic, homophobic, intolerant and anti-constitutional shariah on others – have made no secret of their determination to conquer and destroy us and the rest of the civilized world.

Only by making clear that we are determined to fight back in defense of freedom will we have a chance of protecting our civilization against these enemies. By identifying the political-military-legal ideology of shariah as the defining ideology of those with whom we are at war – much as we did in the past against Nazism, Fascism, Japanese imperialism, and communism – we have a chance of prevailing. And that chance will be greatly enhanced if we bring to bear now, as in the past, not only military but all other instruments of national power.

We will also incentivize Muslims who do not conform to this doctrine to join us in fighting those who accuse them of apostasy, a capital offense under shariah. If they do so, the likelihood of our early success improves still further.

So, by all means, let’s have a new authorization for the use of military force. Or better yet, a proper declaration of war approved by the Congress, authorizing the use of the full array of our economic, political, intelligence, strategic and military means of waging war. But for the sake of our civilization and freedoms, we must ensure that it correctly defines the object of our defensive war: those who adhere to and are trying compel us to submit to shariah.

Nigeria death toll higher than reported

Boko Haram leader, Abubakar Shekau

Boko Haram leader, Abubakar Shekau

Town Hall:

GWOZA, Nigeria (BP) — The death toll from Boko Haram’s takeover of the predominantly Christian town of Gwoza is nearly 1,000, not the 100 included in many reports, Nigerian relations expert Adeniyi Ojutiku told Baptist Press.

The Nigerian military abandoned their weapons and fled Gwoza as Boko Haram attacked Wednesday (Aug. 6), burning government buildings, killing residents and taking hostages. Some residents managed to flee to the mountains bordering Cameroon and are without food or water; others made it 85 miles north to Maiduguri, Associated French Press (AFP) and others reported.

News surfaced just today (Aug. 15) of a separate Aug. 10 attack on the remote village of Doron Baga in northeastern Nigeria, where Boko Haram kidnapped dozens of boys and men, leaving women, girls and young children abandoned there.

Boko Haram has escalated its attacks to a new level, capturing towns and hoisting Boko Haram flags instead of killing residents and fleeing, Ojutiku said. He compared them to the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). As such, a concerted global effort is needed to conquer the rebels, he said.

Weeks before taking over Gwoza, Boko Haram violently seized Damboa and killed many in the town 22 miles north of Chibok, the site of the April kidnapping of 300 school girls, approximately 223 of which remain missing. Reports number those displaced at more than 15,000, but the number of deaths had not been reported.

“This is a new dimension in this crisis,” Ojutiku said. “A completely new dimension. Now they are following the strategy of ISIS. They attack, they occupy, they hold the town. Now that they have started adopting ISIS methodology, they should be receiving the type of treatment that ISIS is receiving.”

Based on a report Ojutiku received Wednesday, Aug. 13, from a trusted colleague who lives in Gwoza, 997 had been killed and others had been taken hostage. Previous reports were based on information gathered Aug. 6, the day of the attack, when survivors were forced to flee the city of between 50,000 and 70,000 people.

“The terrorists seized a number of residents as hostages and killed nine hundred and ninety seven an eye witness whose mother among the women that are burying the … bodies confirmed,” the colleague reported to Ojutiku. “The insurgents took over the Emirs (mayor’s) Palace as well as a Government Lodge in Gwoza, and have appointed a replacement for the town’s fleeing Emir. They have hoisted their black flags with Arabic insignia all over Gwoza in a show of their total control of the territory.”

A predawn, Aug. 13 phone call Ojutiku received from Nigeria marked “an unprecedented emergency request for prayers for the inhabitants of the Christian village of Gwoza,” he told Baptist Press.

“The town has … been under siege of Boko Haram for the past nine days,” Ojutiku said.

Read more

See Also:

Jihadist groups across globe vying for terror spotlight

January 2, 2014: Fighters of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria carry their weapons during a parade in the Syrian town of Tel Abyad, near the border with Turkey.(Reuters)

January 2, 2014: Fighters of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria carry their weapons during a parade in the Syrian town of Tel Abyad, near the border with Turkey.(Reuters)

By Perry Chiaramonte:

With every new act of stunning savagery in the name of Islam that takes place in some corner of the world, a new terrorist group seems to step into the spotlight.

From Al Qaeda’s sudden ascendance in the 1990s, to the recent rise of Boko Haram in Nigeria and ISIS in Iraq, new factions are springing up throughout the world, spreading the twisted message of violence and hate in the name of Allah. Most trace their roots to the terror group founded by Usama bin Laden, but have spun off, and fanned out around the world putting their own stamps on the indiscriminate brutality that is the trademark of terrorism.

“The trend is one of decentralization — smaller Al Qaeda affiliates charting their own courses,” said Ryan Mauro, national security analyst for the research institute The Clarion Project. “If groups like ISIS are seen as more successful, the aspiring jihadists will view them as being blessed by Allah and rally to them. Success is seen as evidence of Allah’s approval, and defeat is seen as Allah’s distancing, or even judgment.”

For now, ISIS, with a huge swath of conquered territory, hundreds of millions of dollars looted from Iraqi banks and a leader — Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi — who has pronounced himself the “Caliph” of Muslims around the world, is in position to challenge Al Qaeda for status as the most powerful terror group on the planet. That makes it a magnet for new recruits and donations, said Mauro. One chilling act could cement its role.

“If ISIS wants to overtake Al Qaeda to become the leading Salafist terror group, then it must replicate Al Qaeda’s greatest achievement: Striking the U.S,” Mauro said. “Once that happens, Al Qaeda supporters will switch to ISIS in droves unless the two reconcile.”

Boko Haram was founded in in 2002 in Nigeria’s Borno State, where it campaigned, mostly peacefully, for a Shariah state. But in 2009, after founder Mohammed Yusef was executed in Nigeria, Boko Haram took a violent turn, embracing terrorism, forcing conversions of Christians, and orchestrating kidnappings and bombings. In recent years, Boko Haram has emerged as one of the world’s most dangerous and violent Islamic terrorist sects, culminating in April’s kidnapping of nearly 300 Christian schoolgirls.

Here are some other Islamic terrorist groups operating around the world and waiting to fill any void that should be left by their more high-profile counterparts.

Read more at Fox News

Boko Haram: Growing Interest, Continuing Uncertainty on Capitol Hill

By Andrew E. Harrod:

About 90 Congressional staffers filled a Dirksen Senate Office Building hearing room last May 28 for “Boko Haram:  Beyond #BringBackOurGirls,” a Foreign Policy Initiative briefing on Nigeria’s Muslim terrorist group.  While the audience was “telling how much interest has grown in this group” for panelist Dr. J. Peter Pham of the Atlantic Council, the briefing indicated several complicated issues in the struggle against Boko Haram.

Abubakar Shekau, leader of Islamic terror group Boko Haram

Abubakar Shekau, leader of Islamic terror group Boko Haram

A rescue operation for these girls “just makes no sense,” the Atlantic Council’s Rudolph Atallah specifically commented, as their scattering makes success “next to impossible.”  Previous rescue operations in Nigeria and the region had ended in hostage deaths, concurred Blanchard, perhaps necessitating negotiations for the girls’ release.  These failures were part of wider panelist concerns with respect to Nigerian security forces, often ill-equipped and counterproductively harsh in their tactics.  Nigeria’s army actually “is not a poor and starving military,” Blanchard argued, yet corruption often consumed needed resources.  Nigeria had purchased nine Israeli Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), for example, but they currently do not operate.The April 14 Boko Haram kidnapping of 276 schoolgirlsin Chibok, Borno state, is “really only a drop in the bucket” of Boko Haram’s bloody record, although Boko Haram’s recent international notoriety largely derived from this event, Pham observed.  Boko Haram had caused 4-6,000 deaths, noted Laureen Ploch Blanchardfrom the Congressional Research Service (CRS).  The United Nations (UN) estimated six million people affected by Boko Haram’s violence in an “incredibly important country” with Africa’s largest economy and population (about 180 million). Alone Nigeria’s Muslim population was Africa’s largest Muslim community and one of the largest in the world, observed Pham.

Divergence, however, marked panelist discussions of Boko Haram’s character.  Boko Haram is a “branch of Al Qaeda that is in Africa,” Kansas Representative Mike Pompeo flatly declared in introducing the panel.  Boko Haram’s “evil barbarians” who kidnapped the Chibok girls were part of a “threat of global jihadists” facing America, recently manifested by a foiled 2013 bomb plot in Wichita close to Pompeo’s home.  A “larger, more diverse” Al Qaeda (AQ) in places like Nigeria and Syria is threatening the United States “at a full gallop,” making Nigeria an “enormous American national security interest.”  AQ has indeed “metastasized,” as President Barack Obama often says, yet contradicting Obama, AQ has become more dangerous, not less.

“Marked by economic deprivation,” by contrast, was Pham’s description for Boko Haram’s origins in northeastern Nigeria, raising thereby past controversies concerning whether material need or Muslim zeal was a greater motivation for Boko Haram.  While a “great bit of economic angst” resulted for this region from, for example, lost textile jobs, the area’s “ethnically marginalized” Kanuri tribe also had political grievances against a negligent federal government.  “Boko Haram 2.0” emerging in 2009 and “increasingly virulent,” though, has a “more standard Salafist line” while Boko Haram’s current leader Abubakar Shekau has made video appearances in “classic Al Qaeda fashion.”

Read more at Religious Freedom Coalition

Also see:

Exclusive: Nigerian Security Forces Infiltrated by Boko Haram

boko-haram-Reuters (1)by JORDAN SCHACHTEL:

Breitbart News had the exclusive opportunity to sit down with Lt. Col. Rudy Atallah, former head of African counterterrorism for the Pentagon to discuss Boko Haram and Islamist movements in Africa.

Rudolph Atallah is the former Africa Counterterrorism Director for the Department of Defense. He retired with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel after 21 years of service in the United States Air Force. Atallah is now a Senior Fellow with the Atlantic Council & CEO of White Mountain Research.

Breitbart News: Why has it been difficult to counter Boko Haram?

Rudy Atallah: Boko Haram is split into several factions run by different leaders. Also, Boko Haram has been used as a pawn in Nigerian politics. Three days ago there was a Nigerian internal investigation of nine generals and senior military officers all suspected of aiding and abetting Boko Haram. The officers were suspected of giving them weapons, access to the armories, and information on government tactics and targeting. It is very difficult to counter an organization when internally, within the Nigerian structure, there are political, militarily, and logistical issues.

Nigeria is considered a leader in the region. They’ve led ECOWAS (Economic Community of West African States) missions, they are part of the African Union community, they do peacekeeping missions all over the place. Nigeria is a powerful country. There is also a national pride element when you have such events occur on your own soil. The Nigerians historically have been more hesitant on taking external support and more bent on saying, “We can take care of this issue ourselves.” Boko Haram is resilient because they operate across national borders. When the Nigerian military comes in, Boko Haram tends to move over to countries such as Cameroon and Niger, so that makes it especially difficult to target them.

Breitbart News: Tell us about Boko Haram’s leadership structure under Abubakar Shekau.

Rudy Atallah: Several years ago it was understood that Boko Haram had a Shura council made up of 13 members. Above that Shura council was Shekau as the main leader, and the Shura council members all operated independently in separate areas. The leaders’ communications were very discreet and each ran their own cell. The Nigerians claimed at one point that they had killed Shekau, but then he resurfaced. There are also reports that Shekau was previously wounded. Because of the various reports, it remains unclear how Boko Haram is currently re-structured.

Some believe that there are three main leaders. Shekau is seen as one of them, although there are some that argue Shekau may have been pushed to the outside. There is the possibility Shekau may independently run his own group or cell of Boko Haram. There are other individuals that are also running their own branches of Boko Haram. They merge together in order to do one operation and then they will separate and go their own ways.

There’s no real solid evidence to narrow down Boko Haram’s current structure. The intelligence coming from the area where Boko Haram actually operates is miniscule. A lot of the information comes from prior kidnap victims, from NGOs that operate in the area, and from people that were attackedby Boko Haram. Jacob Zenn, whom I respect and consider to be a very a good resource, just wrote a piece where he claimed that several Boko Haram factions come together in a federation for major attacks such as the recent kidnapping of the Nigerian schoolgirls. This leads me to believe that these guys are now branched off. While they used to be one solid Shura council, right now that may be in question.

Breitbart News: What is stopping the Nigerian forces from rescuing the kidnapped schoolgirls?

Rudy Atallah: Its the complexity of the potential rescue. Its now understood that the schoolgirls have been split up in different areas. You can’t mount a rescue operation of one group of schoolgirls and potentially put the rest of them in danger in another location. By not engaging in an all-encompassing strategy, the result could end in tragedy.

A rescue operation for the girls should have occurred immediately after they were kidnapped in mid-April, but that never happened. Nobody started talking about a potential rescue operation until weeks afterwards, which is way too late.

Read more at Breitbart

SPENCER: Keith Ellison’s Rogues Gallery

k. EllisonTruth Revolt, by Robert Spencer:

Representatives Keith Ellison (D-MN) and André Carson (D-IN), the nation’s two Muslim Congressmen, and a host of Muslim leaders have published an open letter condemning Boko Haram, the Party of the People of the Sunnah for Dawah and Jihad, as un-Islamic, and calling upon the group’s leader, Abubakar Shekau, to release the girls the group has kidnapped.

The U.S. Muslims’ argument is based on the claim that Boko Haram kidnapped the girls because they were seeking an education, while in Islam both men and women are enjoined to get educated. This neatly avoids the real objection that Boko Haram has to girls (and boys) getting educated: that the education they were getting was Western in style and orientation, rather than based on the Qur’an and Islam.

Once again we see Muslim leaders condemning the kidnapping of these girls without even mentioning the Qur’an’s allowance for a man to have “captives of the right hand” with whom he can have sexual intercourse (4:3; 4:24; 33:50. etc.). It would be refreshing if even once these “moderate” Muslim leaders would address these passages and explain how Boko Haram and other Muslims who kidnap girls and use them as sex slaves are misunderstanding and misusing the Qur’an. But it hasn’t been done yet.

Also noteworthy is the company that Ellison and Carson are keeping. Following their names are those of thirty Muslim leaders in the U.S., many with statements and associations on record that normally would give any Congressman pause before he allowed their names to be associated with his. Indeed, the rogue’s gallery joining Ellison and Carson in signing this letter would be enough to topple any politician in other circumstances – but when it comes to Leftist politicians and Muslim leaders with unsavory ties, the rules that apply to conservatives fall by the wayside.

Topping the list is the Imam Mohamed Magid of the ADAMS Center in Sterling, Virginia. Magid is the president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), which has admitted ties to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. ISNA was also named an unindicted co-conspirator in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation, which was once the largest Islamic charity in the U.S. and was then shut down for funneling money to Hamas.

Next is Oussama Jamal, who, according to Investor’s Business Daily, “once headed the notorious Bridgeview Mosque in Chicago. One of that mosque’s leaders was arrested and jailed for funneling millions to Hamas. And one of its most honored guests was bin Laden’s spiritual mentor, the late Palestinian cleric Abdullah Azzam….‘The walls were covered with Hamas posters and recruiting literature showing masked gunmen brandishing automatic weapons. . . . You could see daggers plunged into Jewish hearts wrapped up in American flags,’ said Steve Emerson, describing the mosque in his book ‘American Jihad.’ ‘They even had a library filled with terrorist videos.’”

Also signing from the Bridgeview Mosque were the Imams Jamal Said, an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land trial, and Kifah Mustapha, who was denied a police chaplaincy in 2010 because of his support for Hamas, including a video in which he sings: “O Hamas, teach us the rifle … O Hamas, raise the banner of Jihad.”

Mazen Mokhtar of the Muslim American Society is also a signer. The Muslim American Society is the Muslim Brotherhood’s chief operating arm in the U.S. A 2004 Chicago Tribune piece that is now carried on the Muslim Brotherhood’s English-language website, Ikhwanweb, states: “In recent years, the U.S. Brotherhood operated under the name Muslim American Society, according to documents and interviews. One of the nation’s major Islamic groups, it was incorporated in Illinois in 1993 after a contentious debate among Brotherhood members.”

Among the signers are at least two Muslim leaders who have expressed disdain for American Constitutional government. A convert to Islam, Sheikh Hamza Yusuf of Zaytuna College, said in 1996: “I became Muslim in part because I did not believe in the false gods of this society whether we call them Jesus or democracy or the Bill of Rights.”

And the Imam Suhaib Webb of the Islamic Society of Boston, who last November dismissed secularism as a “radical lunatic ideology.”

Then there is Hatem Bazian, a professor of “Islamophobia” at (where else?) the University of California Berkeley, who has equated the Boston jihad bombings with “Islamophobia” and, several years ago, called for an “intifada” in the U.S. A supporter of the bloody intifadas in Israel is Nihad Awad of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), another unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land trial. Awad has said: “I am a supporter of the Hamas movement.”

Shaykh Yasir Qadhi of the Al-Maghrib Institute in Memphis is recorded on video calling Jews and Christians filthy and saying that their lives and property can be taken in jihad by Muslims, quoting Muhammad’s statement: “I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah’s Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform a that, then they save their lives and property from me except for Islamic laws and then their reckoning (accounts) will be done by Allah.” (Bukhari 1.2.24) So if they don’t become Muslim, their lives and property are not safe.

Opponents of the American system, unindicted co-conspirators, supporters of bloody uprising and religious warfare in the U.S., and of terror groups abroad – if the context of all this were anything but Islamic, the mainstream media would be in an uproar, and calls for the resignations of Ellison and Carson would fill the airwaves. As it is, this letter has passed unnoticed, except for plaudits to the Congressmen for their “moderation.” One wonders if any of these politicians’ unsavory associates ever laugh up their sleeves at this suicidal naivete.

Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and author of the New York Times bestsellersThe Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad. His latest book is Arab Winter Comes to America: The Truth About the War We’re In.

UN adds Boko Haram to al Qaeda sanctions list

By 

The United Nations has added Boko Haram to its al Qaeda sanctions list, citing the Nigerian group’s ties to al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) and prolific terrorist acts. The move comes more than one month after Boko Haram kidnapped over 200 girls, thereby gaining international infamy.

Boko Haram “has maintained a relationship with” AQIM “for training and material support purposes,” the UN’s sanctions page reads. AQIM is one of al Qaeda’s several regional branches and the group’s emir, Abu Musab Abdel Wadoud (a.k.a. Abdelmalek Droukdel), has sworn bayat (an oath of allegiance) to al Qaeda’s senior leadership.

The UN says that Boko Haram has “gained valuable knowledge on the construction of improvised explosive devices from AQIM.” In addition, a “number of Boko Haram members fought alongside al Qaeda affiliated groups in Mali in 2012 and 2013 before returning to Nigeria with terrorist expertise.”

The UN also cites a November 2012 statement made by the terrorist group’s leader, Abubakar Shekau, in which he “expressed Boko Haram’s solidarity with al Qaeda affiliates in Afghanistan, Iraq, North Africa, Somalia and Yemen.”

In a previous statement, issued in July 2010, Shekau praised al Qaeda and offered his condolences for the “martyrdom” of al Qaeda’s two top leaders in Iraq. “Do not think jihad is over,” Shekau said. “Rather, jihad has just begun. O America, die with your fury.”

US government already recognized relationship between AQIM and Boko Haram

The UN’s recognition of Boko Haram’s ties to AQIM are hardly surprising given that the US government has repeatedly pointed to the relationship.

In June 2012, the State Department designated three individual terrorists, including Abubakar Shekau. The two other jihadists designated, Khalid al Barnawi and Abubakar Adam Kambar, “have ties to Boko Haram and have close links to al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb,” State reported.

Read more at Long War Journal

‘Muslimsplaining’ Islamic Terrorism Away

ATTACK AFGHANISTANby :

As bloody bodies and smoke rise into the air after a cry of Allahu Akbar and a bomb detonation, each Muslim terrorist attack is followed by “Muslimsplaining” why the latest act of Islamic violence had nothing to do with Islam.

Sometimes the Muslimsplainers are Muslims. Often they aren’t even Muslims.

When Boko Haram, an Islamic terrorist group aligned with Al Qaeda, kidnapped Nigerian girls, the media’s Muslimsplainers sprang into action to explain why it had nothing to do with Islam.

Time featured “5 Reasons Boko Haram is Un-Islamic”; a listicle friendly article from one of those non-Muslim experts on why Islam is feminist

“With their sustained campaign of murders and kidnappings, the members of Boko Haram conduct themselves in a manner that could barely be more alien to the Prophet Muhammad teachings,” the article claimed.

Mohammed spread Islam through a sustained campaign of murders and kidnappings. Claiming that murder was alien to Mohammed is like claiming that pledge drives are alien to PBS.

As proof, Time cited a statement from Saudi Arabia’s grand mufti, Sheikh Abdulaziz al-Sheikh, that Boko Haram was “set up to smear the image of Islam.”

This is the same Sheikh al-Sheikh who called for destroying all the churches in the region and  marrying off 10-year-old girls. Destroying churches and raping schoolgirls is exactly what Boko Haram stands for. If you believe the media, the same grand mufti who supports raping children in Saudi Arabia as Islamic… opposes raping them in Nigeria as un-Islamic.

The only reason the double Sheikh who speaks out of both sides of his mouth denounces Boko Haram and other Al Qaeda groups is because he is a mouthpiece for the Saudi ruling family which opposes them.

Saudi Arabia isn’t opposed to Al Qaeda because it’s un-Islamic. It’s opposed to Al Qaeda because the Islamic group wants to replace the House of Saud, upsetting the deal between Wahhab and Saud that created a balance between the tyrannical royal family and the mosque.

Saudi Arabia and its mouthpieces don’t oppose Al Qaeda because it’s un-Islamic. They oppose it because it’s too Islamic for them.

Muslimsplaining by non-Muslims is dishonest. Time claims that Mohammed opposed harming women and other non-combatants when he and his men enslaved and raped captured women. It claims that Islam opposes forcibly marrying off underage girls, when Mohammed married an underage girl and the very Muslim religious leader quoted by Time in its introduction supports it.

Time claims that Boko Haram’s war against Christians is un-Islamic and yet the grand mufti it cites who called for the destruction of Christian churches based his demand on Mohammed’s deathbed statement, “Two religions shall not co-exist in the Arabian Peninsula.”

If we are to believe Time, not only is Boko Haram un-Islamic but so is the grand mufti that Time quoted to prove Boko Haram is un-Islamic.

And so is Mohammed.

If Mohammed is un-Islamic because he raped girls, enslaved women and murdered religious minorities in a campaign of violence and slavery… is there even an Islam?

Either Mohammed, the founder of Islam, is un-Islamic so that Islam, as defined by the Muslimsplainers, doesn’t exist. Or the Muslimsplainers are lying about Islam.

Read more at Front Page

 

They Reject your Motivations, and Substitute Their Own

CSP, by Kyle Shideler:

Congress continues to struggle with Obama Administration officials, from all branches, in an effort to force them in matters of oversight, to merely assert facts that are already well known to everyone.  A good example of this was the recent success of Rep. John Cornyn who was able to get recently appointed FBI Director James Comey to admit that Fort Hood Shooter Nidal Hassan was in fact motivated by Al Qaeda.

This should not have been news at all, since Hassan, a self-declared “Soldier of Allah”, was in direct correspondence with Al Qaeda cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, a fact known to the U.S. counterterrorism officials prior to his attack. Yet the administration has continued to insist the matter was one of “work place violence”, not Islamic terrorism.

Assistant Secretary Sarah Sewall at House Foreign Affairs Committee, Subcommittee on Terrorism Nonproliferation and Trade hearing on Boko Haram.

Assistant Secretary Sarah Sewall at House Foreign Affairs Committee, Subcommittee on Terrorism Nonproliferation and Trade hearing on Boko Haram.

Yet even going on six years of an administration which introduced the world to the phrase “man-caused disasters,” we’ve not seen as tasteless a display of reality rejection as the one put on by Assistant Secretary Sarah Sewall at House Foreign Affairs Committee, Subcommittee on Terrorism Nonproliferation and Trade hearing on Boko Haram.

Asked by Rep. Jeff Duncan whether Boko Haram discriminates against Christians, Sewall uttered the jaw-dropping reply:

I wish there was such discrimination in Boko Haram attacks. Boko Haram attacks everyone who is Nigerian. Boko Haram is an equal-opportunity threat for all Nigerian citizens.” (Emphasis added)

This statement, which combines a basic falsehood with disturbing callousness, earned rightful derision by the subcommittee, who pressed forward with additional inquiries, citing facts, including the 25:1 ratio in attacks against churches as opposed to mosques. Sewall began to backpedal:

The question that I was asked was whether there was an official State Department position on the motivations of Boko Haram, which I simply don’t have with me.

It seemed Assistant Secretary Sewall had misplaced her copy of the current truth as issued by the State Department, thus explaining her flailing answer.

While less grating than the tone-deaf reply, it is perhaps more appalling from a policy standpoint that Ms. Sewall thinks it appropriate that the State Department even have an “official position on the motivations of Boko Haram.” The only “position on the motivations of Boko Haram” that matters is Boko Haram’s, based on what they say and do. And they have not been shy on making their feelings known.

Boko Haram leader AbuBakr Shekhau has said, “Nobody can stop us and live in peace, except if you accept Islam and live by sharia law.” A simple statement that is pregnant with meaning. Instead, the State Department’s position is that economic deprivation, corruption, and bad governance by the Nigerian government motivate Boko Haram.

Sadly no. That’s what motivates the State Department’s interactions with the Nigerian government. State  has used every new outrage by Boko Haram to rhetorically flog the Nigerian government for their failings on these issues. And they may be issues on which the Nigerian goverment deserves criticism, but they are irrelevant to the current conflict with Boko Haram, which is a jihadist terrorist organization motivated to impose shariah law.

This administration continues to insist on protecting us from the threats they they wished we faced, and solving problems they wish we had, instead of addressing the threats and problems this nation actually faces.

Unfortunately such distortions of reality will always come crashing down, violently, and at great cost.

On Hannity Show Brigitte Gabriel and Ali Sina Agree that ISLAM is the problem

A discussion of Boko Haram led to an examination of the ideology that motivates them. Ali Sina explained that he left Islam when he read the Quran and realized how evil it was. He went on to say that most Muslims have not read the Quran and moderate Muslims such as Zuhdi Jasser are not telling the truth about Islam.

BrigitteBrigitte Gabriel explained that it is Islamic ideology which subjugates women and persecutes Christians that is motivating Boko Haram. She said she goes into Arabic chat rooms online and sees them laughing at us and our twitter hashtag campaign, #BringBackOurGirls.

Ali Sina asserted that political correctness is what prevents us from admitting that the problem is Islam…not radical Islam or Wahhabi Islam or extreme islam…just ISLAM and the example of Mohammed.

When asked if she agreed, Brigitte cited a 2006 Pentagon study that came to the conclusion that Islam was the problem but the media avoided it as if it was” nuclear and harmful to your health” She then asserted that it is the ideology “coming straight from the mouth of Mohammed” that is driving Boko Haram and radicals always win in debates with moderates because they quote doctrine supporting their case. She went on to say that In the Arabic world it is an insult to say “moderate Islam” or “radical Islam”…there is only one Islam. “Moderate Islam is an American verbiage” that we came up because we could not believe that this was coming out of a religion.

This is a departure from Brigitte’s long time use of the term ‘Radical Islam” in her writings and lectures.

Listen to the podcast here:

http://www.iheart.com/talk/show/24392822/?episode_id=26883064

Click on this one:

Tue, May 20th, 2014 Hour 3

May 20, 2014 | 32 min

Air Force Vet Anthony Coleman discusses the poor treatment he received from the VA Hospital in AZ; Brigitte Gabriel and Ali Sina discuss the terrorist group Boko Haram

****

Zuhdi Jasser, seems to negate as historically unreliable anything negative about Mohammed and still professes him to be “the best example for man”. Is this a heartfelt conviction or a political calculation? If you want to know more about Zuhdi Jasser, a very insightful article was written by Andrew Harrod when he reviewed Jasser’s book, “A Battle for the Soul of Islam”.

Watch this 2011 debate between Spencer and Jasser moderated by Andrew McCarthy:

 

Ali Sina actually had an interesting twitter conversation with Zuhdi Jasser recently which he wrote about. Jasser defends his version of Islam with whether it is politically expedient not whether it is true. He seems to be promoting “Jeffersonian Liberty” not Islam.

Dr. Zuhdi Jasser: The Deception of Moderate Islam by Ali Sina May 9, 2014

Zuhdi-Jasser1-300x223These days the discussion everywhere is about the 200 schoolgirls kidnapped in Nigeria and offered for sale by the Muslim terrorist group Boko Haram. And guess who the media is turning to for answers! The self-proclaimed “moderate Muslim” Dr. Zuhdi Jasser! He will tell the Americans that slavery has nothing to do with Islam and terrorism is un-Islamic.

He sent a tweet announcing that he had been invited by Fox News for an interview. I sent him a tweet, congratulating him for having another chance to bamboozle the American public. Here is our mini debate on twitter.

Dr. Jasser is under the delusion that if he shows Muslims the superiority of American constitution they will abandon the Quran. Nothing can be further from the truth. Muslims follow the Quran not because it is good, ethical or even logical, but because they think it is the unaltered word of God. That is the end of discussion. If Dr. Jasser really knows Islam and Muslim he should know that for them the Quran is the ultimate authority. It is ridiculous to expect them to turn their back to Allah and his messenger and follow a non-Muslim American president. Is he really this deluded or is he deceiving his audience? But let us see the rest of our tweets.

Dr. Jasser’s says by highlighting the evil teaching of the Quran I am radicalizing Muslims. So for 1400 years Muslims lived peacefully, like angels, until I began pointing out the hate and the violence in the Quran. It is then that they became radicalized.

This is really what he thinks. I heard this argument numerous times. This is the typical Muslim thinking. They blame their victim for their violence. By virtue of following a narcissist, Muslims share his psychosis and reason like their prophet.

I tried to show the fallacy of his argument with the following question.

There you have it. One he saw he can’t defend his absurd argument he ended the discussion. Of course Islam is violent. Of course the Boko Haram is not doing anything that Muhammad did not do. Muhammad made immense fortunes by enslaving women and children and selling them or ransoming them in exchange with money.

The truth is that Zuhdi Jasser and his Canadian counterpart, Tarek Fatah, a closet Ahamdi not even recognized as a Muslim, have no effect on Muslims. Not only are they not converting the radicals to moderates, they will most likely be killed just like any apostate, if they go to a real Islamic country.

Muslims don’t care how others interpret the Quran. They are not illiterate. They can read for themselves. Those who read the Quran and Tafseer know that the so called radicals have the correct understanding of the Quran. The solution to end the Islamic violence is not to lie more and claim Muhammad was a man of peace. The solution is to tell them the truth and show them that the Al Qaida, the Wahhabis and the mullahs of Iran are the real Muslims. The differences between them are superficial. They perfectly understand the spirit and the essence of Islam and follow the examples of Muhammad. It is my belief as well as experience that most Muslims, once see the ugly truth, will leave Islam.

That is how we can put an end to Islamic violence, with truth, not with more lies. But truth is ugly, so most people prefer lies. But lies are only a mask covering the truth. That is why Zuhdi Jasser and Tark Fatah get invited by the Media and ex-Muslims are ignored.

This reminds me of a joke. A man lost his keys in the dark, unable to see anything, he went farther away searching they under the light. When his friend said, but you lost them over there, he replied, “here I can see better”. Our politicians and the media love to interview the “moderate Muslims” even though they have no answers because those who have the answer say things that are not pleasant to hear.

Needless to say that Dr. Jasser’s reasoning that Muslims can’t handle the truth and will become radicalized if they hear is is an insult to Muslims. He basically saying Muslims are stupid, incapable of accepting the truth. Muslims become offended and throw tantrum when their religion is slighted. The solution is not to lie more. They don’t need anyone to patronize them.

Many Muslims are leaving Islam silently. I have received thousands of emails personally. We need to intensify our efforts and spread the truth to everyone. A well written, well documented and well produced movie can bring that change.

Truth is often bitter, that is why people resort to sweet lies. But lies kill us, and truth will set us free

Boko Haram violence explodes; the West struggles to “understand”

Mitigating Religious Conflict in Nigeria
Boko Haram in Focus at Washington, DC, Briefings

by Andrew Harrod:

(Washington, DC) Nigeria’s jihadist group Boko Haram was recently featured in several Washington, DC, briefings, including a presentation by a Nigerian teenager who was the lone survivor of a family massacred by Boko Haram.  These briefings highlighted significant challenges in combating Boko Haram’s brutal terror campaign.

Deborah Wakai Peters was forced to watch the murders of her father and brother at the hands of the Boko Haram.

Deborah Wakai Peters was forced to watch the murders of her father and brother at the hands of the Boko Haram.

Fifteen-year old Deborah Peters appeared at a May 13 Hudson Institute panel to discuss a December 22, 2011, Boko Haram attack on her home near Chibok in Nigeria’s Borno state.  Peters saw Boko Haram assailants, one of whom she knew, shoot her pastor father.  Targeted after rebuilding his church which had been burnt down by Boko Haram the previous November, the pastor suffered martyrdom after refusing to recant his Christian faith.  The terrorists then killed her brother as well, and left the young girl lying between the bodies.

The girl’s mother, described by Nigerian human rights activist Emmanuel Ogebe as a Muslim convert in “one of those strange love stories that doesn’t end very well,” was not in the house at the time.  Nonetheless, she cannot return home as Boko Haram would kill her as an apostate.  Another pastor who helped bring Deborah Peters to the United States was himself a victim of a May 2013 Boko Haram attack.

Boko Haram has perpetrated “massive genocides” of Christian Nigerians in Muslim-majority northern Nigeria in order to establish a Muslim rule, with Taliban-style stadium beheadings in the “old-fashioned way,” Ogebe noted.  The terror group marked Christian dwellings for subsequent nocturnal attacks and had an “MO” of close range “shoot to kill” headshots.  While sporadic killings of Christians are “normal in northern Nigeria,” such as when Muslims blame Christians for an eclipse, Boko Haram presents “persecution on steroids.”  Boko Haram attacks, for example, have “virtually de-Christianized” Nigeria’s Yobe state, Ogebe wrote online, leaving hardly 80 pastors where once over 1,000 churches existed, a percentage loss greater “than the decimation of Christians in Iraq.”

Twice denied an American visa for insufficient family ties (“You can’t make this stuff up,” Ogebe observed), Deborah Peters had a low profile once in the United States.  Ogebe and his colleagues “tactically decided not to put her in a public space” because “we could not sacrifice the mental health of this young child” suffering from trauma.  International outcry over Boko Haram’s April 14 kidnapping of hundreds of mostly Christian girls, however, some of whom Peters had “literally…played with” moved her to “put a face to this travesty,” in Ogebe’s words.

The April 14 attack marked Boko Haram’s transition away from “gentlemen terrorists,” Ogebe noted.  Boko Haram in the past had often spared women, children (in an exception, Boko Haram feared that Peters brother would grow up to be a pastor like his father), and the elderly — in what Ogebe had described online as a “religious gendercide.”  Boko Haram had now moved to “gender-based targeting of women,” though, after the men had left various regions to avoid death.  Girl captives who had escaped Boko Haram horrifyingly related how their captors had forced them upon pain of death to convert to Islam and marry Boko Haram supporters.

Read more at Religious Freedom Coalitionn with video

 

Confusion on Boko Haram and Terrorism

George Will3By Andrew C. McCarthy, May 17, 2014:

For admirers of George Will and Charles Krauthammer, it’s a real treat to find them together many nights on Bret Baier’s panel on Special Report. But I must confess to nearly falling out of my chair upon watching the replay of a segment last night in which Mr. Will opined that Boko Haram seemed to him more like “a military insurgency” than a terrorist organization. Dr. K vigorously refuted this assertion and was right to do so.

At issue was the State Department’s failure, during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary, to designate Boko Haram as a terrorist organization. I sympathize with Will’s (very) general premise that “terrorist” is an overused term. But the premise was inapposite in this case.

Terrorism is the use and threatened use of mass violence in violation of the laws of war in order to coerce a government or society into policy changes or the acceptance of some ideological agenda. It does indeed trivialize the term to apply it to people who do not commit terrorism, whether they are serious criminals (e.g., mafia hit-men or serial murderers) or, as is fashionable on the Left, to people who merely represent things with which one disagrees (e.g., energy-producers, “the one percent,” or the Tea Party). It is not wrong, however, to refer to terrorists as terrorists—it’s entirely accurate.

Will said he sees terrorism as “random” violence, while Boko Haram seemed to him more like a military insurgency against the Nigerian government. Since Boko Haram has what Will sees as “military objectives,” that somehow suggests to him that its violent attacks are more like lawful combat operations than terrorism. It is tough to unwind all he gets wrong here (though Krauthammer did a very good job of it).

A terrorist organization is distinguished from a militia by its failure to comply with the laws and customs of war—particularly, its intentional targeting of civilians and civilian infrastructure. Al Qaeda has military objectives, too; so does every terrorist organization. The fact that a terrorist organization has “military objectives” is beside the point if it pursues those objectives through mass-murder attacks in conjunction other operations distinguished by their extreme cruelty—like brutally murdering scores of school boys and turning young girls into sex slaves, as Boko Haram does.

I assume that by “random” attacks, Will means that terrorists terrorize by creating an atmosphere of intimidation in which anyone could be attacked at any time. Military insurgencies, by contrast, conduct more regular, predictable attacks, concentrating on targets that have military value (even if hitting them causes collateral damage to civilians). If that’s how he sees it, one has to assume that he simply does not know much about Boko Haram. Its attacks are as random as any other terrorist organization’s. There are more of them, but that is because Boko Haram is a particularly vicious group, not because it is fighting a traditional battlefield campaign. And while it attacks government targets (just like al Qaeda has attacked the Pentagon, U.S. embassies, and U.S. military installations), Boko Haram routinely targets civilian centers, school children, churches, and other Western targets that could only be considered “military objectives” by a violent jihadist who sees non-Muslims as “at war with Islam.”

Moreover, as Bret Baier pointed out, Tom Joscelyn has outlined long-standing ties between Boko Haram and al Qaeda. (Tom’s latest on that, in the Weekly Standard, is here.) Will appears to be under the misimpression (one the State Department promotes) that Boko Haram is not part of the global jihad but is simply waging a local war for political control of Nigeria. But this canard elevates what progressives want to believe about Boko Haram (and radical Islam generally) over the reality of how these groups define themselves.

Boko Haram’s official name is Jama’atu Ahlis Sunna Lidda’awati wal-Jihad, meaning “People (or The Group) Committed to the Propagation of the Prophet’s Teaching and Jihad.” The short handle Boko Haram reflects a part of this overarching Islamic supremacist mission: “Western education is forbidden.” (Note the wishful thinking of progressives repeatedly peddled over the past few days: Boko Haram, we’re told, is not an Islamist group; they are just a backward-thinking political group opposed to education. In fact, what they oppose is Western education; they are all for Islamic education because they are an avowedly Islamist group.)

Boko Haram’s explicit goal is the imposition of sharia law, first in Nigeria (because that’s where they are) but ultimately worldwide. Even then-Secretary Clinton, despite failing to designate Boko Haram as a terrorist organization, acknowledged in congressional testimony that Boko Haram shared al Qaeda’s “jihadist” ideology (see the clip Bret played last night—jihadist is the word Clinton used … no doubt because the Obama administration was being criticized at the time for suppressing it). This jihadist ideology does not recognize national borders, so it is foolish to portray it as content to wage local wars for political control of this country or that. It sees the world as Dar al-Harb (the realm of war) versus Dar al-Islam, in which the latter must conquer the former. In fact, as I noted here at Ordered Liberty a few days ago—citing Tom Joscelyn’s Long War Journalpartner, Bill Roggio—Boko Haram’s leader, Abubaker Shekau, explicitly threatened the United States (in sympathy with al Qaeda) in 2010: “Do not think jihad is over. Rather, jihad has just begun. America, die with your fury.” Like al Qaeda, Boko Haram sees itself as at war with the West and non-Muslims generally, not just with the Nigerian government.

Read more at PJ Media