Now, the idea of having some arcane Arabic religion imposed on us is somewhat far-fetched, also in light of the fact that the Western world provides freedom and living conditions rarely found in the Islamic world. In order that we may pause from fear of random killing of our cartoonists, and that we can have a free debate on the merits of Islam in the West, we really need a pause from the Jihad.

A temporary truce of 10 years, a so-called 'Hudna' in Islamic parlance, should do. After we have spent that time considering the relevance - or the lack thereof - in the West, we can resume fighting just fine. Violent Islamists would resume vilifying Jews, assaulting cartoonists and hijacking ships, non-violent Islamists would keep using anti-discrimination and libel laws to suffocate our freedoms - but we in the West would have a much clearer idea of what we are facing and how to counter it.

What is the Jihad?
Jihad is the Arabic word for effort, struggle, undertaking hardships for some end. In the context of Islam, it means the effort to make Islam reign superior, as set out by the example of the religion's founder Muhammad, who made it very clear that those who believed in him had an obligation to fight for his religion. Some examples, courtesy of TheNobleQuran.com. Note also the translators' comments in brackets, clarifying the supposedly clear prose of Allah:

• Quran 8:39:
  And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allâh) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allâh Alone [in the whole of the world].
• Quran 8:60:
  And make ready against them all you can of power, including steeds of war (tanks, planes, missiles, artillery, etc.) to threaten the enemy of Allâh and your enemy, and others besides whom, you may not know but whom Allâh does know. And whatever you shall spend in the Cause of Allâh shall be repaid unto you, and you shall not be treated unjustly.
• Quran 9:5:
  Then when the Sacred Months (the 1st, 7th, 11th, and 12th months of the Islâmic calendar) have passed, then kill the Mushrikûn (see V.2:105) wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and prepare for them each and every ambush.
• Quran:9:29
  Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
• Quran 9:88:
  But the Messenger and those who believed with him strove hard and fought with their wealth and their lives. Such are they for whom are the good things, and it is they who will be successful.
• Ibn Ishaq p. 325:
  Muslims, fight in Allah's Cause. Stand firm and you will prosper. Help the Prophet, obey him, give him your allegiance, and your religion will be victorious.
• Ibn Ishaq p. 324:
  He said, 'Fight them so that there is no more rebellion, and religion, all of it, is for Allah only. Allah must have no rivals.'
• Quran 2:216:
  Jihâd (holy fighting in Allâh's Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allâh knows but you do not know.
• Quran 2:190:
  And fight in the Way of Allâh those who fight you, but transgress not the limits. Truly, Allâh likes not the transgressors.

A footnote rich in meaning
Verse 2:190 is said to be the first call for Jihad in the Quran. In The Noble Quran, it has this footnote (also at QuranComplex.com and many other places):

"Jihad is holy fighting in Allah's Cause with full force of numbers and weaponry. It is given the utmost importance in Islam and is one of its pillars. By Jihad Islam is established, Allah's Word is made superior (which means only Allah has the right to be worshipped), and Islam is propagated. By abandoning Jihad Islam is destroyed and Muslims fall into an inferior position; their honour is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihad is an obligatory duty in Islam on every Muslim. He who tries to escape from this duty, or does not fulfil this duty, dies as a hypocrite."

 

Here we have the holy war at its finest,without a hint of remorse. It is even elevated to a pillar of Islam, a status later revoked in the final edition of the religion. The question is, should not Jihad have remained an official pillar, like the Egyptian Islamic Jihad thinks? It is, after all, the most important novelty that Muhammad introduced to the Arab religion, which had most the core elements of Islam (tax, prayer, pilgrimage, Allah worship) centuries before Muhammad (see Al-Tabari Vol. VI, pp. 19-26). Fasting was inspired by the Jews of Medina. In any case, although Jihad is not officially a pillar of Islam, it is exactly the modern-day Jihad movement that causes us much suffering as well as significant security expenses.

Next, this sentence:

By Jihad Islam is established, Allah's Word is made superior (which means only Allah has the right to be worshipped), and Islam is propagated.

 

A more open admission of guilt would be hard to find. The purpose of Jihad is to establish Islamic rule, period.

Immediately follows:

By abandoning Jihad Islam is destroyed and Muslims fall into an inferior position; their honour is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish.

 

This would seem innocent, but reveals a disturbing attitude: Without the constant pressure of Jihad, Islam would have no authority, and its rule would vanish. This is radically different from other religions, say Christianity or Buddhism, where personal conviction is what upholds the creed and the religious practice.

Therefore:

Jihad is an obligatory duty in Islam on every Muslim.

 

This does not mean that every Muslim must be a warrior or a terrorist, but it does mean that every Muslim has an obligation to act in ways that further the "Cause of Allah", i.e. Islamic rule.

Finally:

He who tries to escape from this duty, or does not fulfil this duty, dies as a hypocrite."

 

Nothing like a quick threat at the end to make sure the preceding statements are taken seriously. 'Hypocrites' in this context would mean persons who declare themselves Muslims, but refuse to join the battle when called to do so. The Quran systematically condemns 'hypocrites'. This is rather natural, for Muhammad needed soldiers for his campaigns out of Medina, and Muslims staying home to take care of their land and their families instead of fighting would damage morale severely.

This is not only a historical consideration, this is used just as well today. In a recent fatwa, the hypocrites, not the unbelievers, are destined for the lowest levels of hell (presumably those with the worst suffering):

"The Hypocrites will be in the lowest depths of the Fire; and you will not be able to find for them a helper." (Quran 4:145)

 

Most people may have assumed that the disbelievers would occupy that spot. As has been illustrated, hypocrites, by far, are the most harmful of the two. They not only deceive themselves, but they fuel the flames of discord in this world among believers and non-believers both.

Jihad and sacrifice
If one reads the core scriptures of Islam, the Quran and the Sirat, the meaning of 'Jihad' is clear enough: Fighting and sacrifice. This may be all jolly good and merry for the winners, but the victims (the infidels) probably do not like it as well.

The emphasis on sacrifice is uncanny. Sure, Islam and other religions have historically used animal sacrifice as part of their worship, but killing a few animals to satisfy some god would hardly represent a major problem, especially if the meat, the sinews etc. of the dead animals were put to good use. Sacrificing one goat (pig, whatever) at some annual ritual constitutes limited bloodshed. Bad for the sacrificial animal, messy where it gets killed, but no open-ended problem in society.

This is different, for the sacrifice in Jihad is open-ended, and it encompasses material goods as well as human life. There are promises of reward in return for this magnificent sacrifice, but by the very nature of death, the veracity of these promises could not and cannot be verified. Believers would have to take Muhammad on faith for this.

A distinct kind of sacrifice called for here is the abandonment of personal judgement, as seen in 2:216:

it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allâh knows but you do not know.

 

This flies in the face of every Western, Christian and Enlightenment concept of individual rights and responsibility. For a mature society to emerge, we need citizens to be individually mature and responsible, that they largely restrain from harmful actions and choose constructive ones. Requesting believers to act from the (supposedly) will of Allah rather than their own sense of Right and Wrong is not conductive to civilized behaviour.

The call for 'martyrdom' (becoming a Shahid)
The sacrifice of ones' one life is of course the ultimate human sacrifice, as well as the ultimate abandonment of ones' own good. Here one sacrifices not other persons, like slaves or prisoners of war, but the very body that enables one to act in this world. Sacrificing oneself in the battle for Allah means that one becomes a 'Shahid' (also spelled 'Shaheed', Wikipedia article here. The original meaning is 'witness'.), the Islamic mirror of the Christian martyrs. This concept was spelled out in detail during the life of Muhammad, for instance in context of the battle of Mutah, where the Muslims were defeated by the Byzantines.

The reaction of Muhammad to the news of the defeat and that several of his commanders had fallen in battle, is telling (Al-Tabari Vol. VIII p. 158):

"A gate to good fortune! A gate to good fortune! A gate to good fortune! I bring you news of your campaigning army. They have set out and have met the enemy. Zayd has died a martyr's death" - he prayed for forgiveness for him. "Then Ja'far took up the banner and attacked the enemy until he died a martyr's death." - he testified that he attained martyrdom and prayed for forgiveness for him."Then 'Abdallah b. Rawahah took up the banner and planted his legs firmly until he died a martyr's death" - he prayed for forgiveness for him.

(...)

"Hasten to reinforce your brothers! Let none of you hang bank." So they went forth to fight both on foot and mounted. It was a time of extreme heat.

It is not known for what purpose the Muslims decided to attack the Byzantines, but the encounter with a superior army gave them a solid licking. That does not deter Muhammad from sending the Muslims right back into battle, without a hint of sorrow for the dead, whom he obviously had known personally. Deep faith can move people to the most astonishing acts, and getting away from the desert heat into the promised lush paradise would sound like a good trade for the dusty warriors.

What about the 'Greater Jihad'?
There is no indication that Muhammad or the early Muslims had any concept of Jihad as an inner struggle.

Jihad, as related in the early Islamic sources, is about making Islam superior on earth, making Allah the only god worshipped, and implementing Islamic law (Sharia) in the land.

Impact in the West
The most visible expression of Islamic Jihad in the West in recent years was the attack on the World Trade Centre on September 11th, 2001. This surprise attack killed some 3000 non-combatants, led to the war in Afghanistan, later Iraq, as well as extensive changes to legislation and security measures throughout the world. Had it not been for this and similar Islamic attacks, airline check-in would be a breeze, terrorism an obscure tactic applied only by fringe Mafia groups.

Stealth Jihad
But the physical Jihad is only the tip of the iceberg. Visible, violent and scary, making the presence of Islam all over the world a factor to be reckoned with, challenging the existing world order and showing Muslims that their creed could potentially rule the world. Yet, this does not suffice to achieve Islamic world domination. Violence does give Islam a bad name, and does tend to provoke powerful reactions, as well as intense debate of the motivations and the goals of the terrorists.

Less visible, less prone to strong reaction is the so-called stealth Jihad, a global movement to subvert our societies without the use of guns or bombs.

The primary tools of stealth Jihad are the very laws and institutions of our Western societies, being exploited or subverted to implement Islamic rules of life, Islamic law into our societies, while simultaneously silencing any criticism hereof by means of our well-intended laws against 'hate speech', libel, racial discrimination and more.

Violent Jihad meets stealth Jihad
This strategy is, unfortunately, only all too effective. By creating an intricate web of possible excuses to confuse investigators and the public alike, alarming incidents like the Fort Hood shooting not only become possible, reactions to them also become muddle and ineffective.

Taking Fort Hood as an example, not only were the shooting perfectly preventable, the artificial doubts about the motivations also displayed a worrisome lack of national resolve to openly address the root causes of such events.

There were plenty of advance indicators that Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan was a potentially dangerous person and that action was well warranted, but political correctness - or cowardice, simply - prevented the relevant authorities from taking action.

After the tragedy, which left 13 dead and 30 wounded, one should expect that the ideology so openly touted by Maj. Hasan would be subjected to extensive scrutiny, questioning and systematic profiling, in order to protect our security personnel as well as other citizens against more random violence.

This did not take place. Rather than our security, the 'fear of an anti-Muslim backlash' made the headlines, and carefully crafted government and media reactions dominated. CAIR led the dodging of the obvious: That rarely before had an anti-Islamic backlash against this open act of Jihad, right in the heart of the US army, been more warranted! For exactly a strong public outcry would finally trigger the richly deserved scrutiny of Islamic organisations.

Homegrown Jihad
Which brings us back to Jihad Jane. She is, by all accounts, a small-time criminal who personally decided to embrace Islam and the doctrine of Jihad, and set out to demonstrate the strength of her religious conviction by assassinating the Swedish cartoonist Lars Vilks.

The 'crime' of Vilks is obviously that he has not shown sufficient 'respect' for her new-found religion, and that by making an example of him, other cartoonists and authors would be cowed into submission and refrain from ridiculing Muhammad or anything Islamic in the future. Quite predictably, the assassination plans has caused Islamic leaders to condemn - Lars Vilks.

By all accounts, assassinating Vilks would be a classical effort to demonstrate the strength of Islam, and very much in line with the example of Muhammad towards artists critical of his activities. Fortunately for Lars Vilks and freedom at large, her home-grown Jihad efforts fell apart before any actual attempt on Vilks had been made. But our reliance on technical measures to counter what is essentially an ideological problem is obviously flawed. The key problem is not terrorism, it is Jihad.

Enough, already!
Now, after almost 1400 years of Jihad, has Jihad made the earth a better place to live?

If one looks at the lists at Freedom House, it is striking that countries where Islam rule supreme flock at the bottom of the list. Islam does not seem to go well with freedom of press, rule of law, women's rights or other civil liberties.

Similar arguments can be made with respect to living conditions, though this is compensated upwards in those Islamic countries with rich oil reserves.

The trend repeats when looking at ongoing wars and armed conflicts in the world, the majority of which involve Muslims. 'Peace' is not an objective of Islamists, 'Submission' is. But that does not improve the life for actual human beings, anywhere.

We need a break from the Jihad
What we really need is a break from the Jihad, from all this "Striving in the Cause of Allah". Jihad has existed for almost 1400 years, and taking a 10-year break could hardly cause any significant harm to Islam, yet would be a major relief for the rest of us, who treasure ham sandwiches, beer and women not dressing up like tents. Islamists worldwide, violent as well as stealthy, have shown sufficient religious zeal that they deserve a rest, and we deserve a break.

One may wonder here: "Why exactly 10 years"? This is not chosen at random, it is the longest time span permitted for Islamic leaders to enter a truce with non-Muslims, a so-called Hudna. It is clear from the outset that the truce is temporary, and unless a new agreement is entered into, fighting will resume after this time span has elapsed. The historical precedent for this arrangement is the Treaty of al-Hudaybiyya, where Muhammad signed an agreement with the non-Muslims in Mecca that peace would prevail for the following ten years. Unfortunately, the historical precedent also implies a right for the Muslim side to break the treaty at their own discretion, a problem we would need to be aware of.

That goes inside the Islamic community as well. It is well known that Islamic practices are also enforced internally through various kinds of threats and intimidation, like forcing children to fast during Ramadan. It would be a relief for Muslim children and women to be free of any form of coercion (like dress codes) for a decade, after which they can be free to decide if their religious laws really bring them a better life, or if freedom of the individual to choose freely what seems appropriate and useful is the better option.

But the most important area in which to stop the Jihad is that of Lawfare. Turning our own laws against democracy and freedom seems like the utmost in impossible irony, for aren't our laws just and basically fine?

As mentioned previously, they are not. Determined Islamists with money and crafty lawyers find broken laws, like the English/Welsh libel laws, well-meaning but overly broad laws against discrimination, noise regulation directives, anti-discrimination laws etcetera.

Suspending the violent Jihad is easy, in principle: It would require that Islamic leaders agree that any use of violence in the name of Islam is against fundamental tenets of the religion, and thus constitutes abandonment of Islam. This has historically been done by means of a Takfir Declaration, and would be very effective towards eliminating the religious justification of terrorism. It would certainly destroy the motivation of recent converts like "Jihad Jane", who seek to prove themselves good Muslims, as the result of any terrorist acts would not be religious admiration, but rather excommunication.

Suspencing the non-violent Jihad is much harder, for it is difficult to identify, and in many situation Muslims would need to compromise on the strictness of their religious rules and traditions, for instance concerning halal slaughter or the habit of forcing others to obey these quite extensive regulations on living. Some proposals for this:

• Suspend the enforcement of any defamation, blasphemy and anti-discrimination laws - but uphold punishment on actual crimes, such as threats, violence and damage to property. If any of these crimes would constitute treats to a wider group of people, seek a conviction for these threats as well. Otherwise, leave the 'problem' of discrimination to the common sense of common people, who for centuries have had the right to individually discriminate between good and bad, and to act accordingly.
• Criminalize the use of threats to enforce religious habits. Religious bullying, inside or outside the family, constitutes a coercion that should not be needed if religion is truly a personal, individual choice. Threats or violence intended to force the behaviour of others constitute infringements on individual freedom, and should not be needed if a religion is constructive and attractive in itself.
• Protect Christians in Islamic countries (and Jews, too). It is estimated that upwards of 250 million Christians face severe discrimination, restrictions as well as physical assaults on their churches and property, all based on their faith. If Islam, as frequently claimed, respects Christianity, it should respect the rights of Christians as well, including the right of Christians to freely say that they do not believe in the quran or the status of Muhammad as a holy person.

After ten years of abstaining from enforcing religious ritualism and protecting individual rights, we can then assess the situation. If violence is down, individual freedoms are up, and the misuse of religion to gain political power has abated, the West should unilaterally continue this policy, even in face of renewed violent Jihad.

SOURCE: EuropeNews.DK

On March 19, 2010, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak appointed Sheikh Dr. Ahmad Muhammad Ahmad Al-Tayyeb as head of Al-Azhar, Sunni Islam's most prestigious institution. Sheikh Al-Tayyeb succeeds Sheikh Muhammad Sayyed Tantawi, who passed away on March 10. 

Sheikh Al-Tayyeb has been president of Al-Azhar University since 2003;[1] prior to that, he was Egypt's grand mufti.[2]

In 2004, Sheikh Al-Tayyeb was criticized in the U.S. Congress by the Egyptian Counterterrorism and Political Reform Act, a bill introduced in the House of Representatives by Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY). The bill included numerous examples of objectionable statements and actions by Egyptian officials, many of them translated and provided by MEMRI. One example cited in the bill is of Sheikh Al-Tayyeb's call for "martyrdom attacks" by Palestinians against Israel.

In 2003, Sheikh Al-Tayyeb forbade Muslims from assisting U.S. military in operations against Muslim countries, and also called for "martyrdom" attacks against Israel, saying: "Martyrdom operations, in which the Palestinians blow up targets of the Israeli occupation, are actions that are 100% permitted according to Islamic religious law, and it is forbidden to facilitate [the American forces'] attack of a Muslim country... Any attempt to invade Iraq is forbidden by Islamic religious law and by morality, and Islam forbids it, and even commands its believers to resist attempts at invasion and occupation. Islam is against striking any Arab or Islamic city, whether it be Baghdad or in Palestine."[3]

The following are excerpts from an extensive 2002 interview that Sheikh Al-Tayyeb gave to the Egyptian Islamic website www.lailatalqadr.com, from the MEMRI archives.[4] Following that are excerpts from an interview he gave to Nile News TV on May 25, 2007, also from the MEMRI TV archives.

Egypt's Mufti: We Condemned the September 11 Attacks, But Since Then Our Feelings Have Changed

Our Feelings Have Changed Regarding September 11

Q: "Is what happened on September 11 in the U.S. a kind of terror?"

Mufti Al-Tayyeb: "All the Muslims, and the Arab world, rejected and condemned the event, because they wouldn't want it to happen to them, so they don't want it to happen to others. We say this because Islam prohibits such attacks on peaceful civilians. But the truth is that our feelings have changed somewhat, or considerably, because we have discovered that the American administration used this event [i.e. September 11] as a pretext to cause damage, killing, and exile throughout the entire Islamic world - and I refer primarily to Afghanistan and Palestine. Today, we still read in the Western [newspapers] that the perpetrator [of the September 11 attacks] cannot be determined with certainty, yet it was claimed from the first moment that Osama bin Laden was responsible!"

Israelis Might Have Done It

"Several days ago, we saw on television a group of Israelis deported from America because they had filmed the event - that is, they knew it was going to happen. I am not saying that the event was perpetrated by the Jews, the Muslims, or anyone else; these are things we do not know. But if it is not easy to determine who carried out the deed, how is it that the Afghan people was destroyed because of an accusation that is as yet unproven?

"...The U.S. used these events as a pretext and an excuse to destroy the Islamic world and to accuse Islam of being a religion of terror and extremism. It destroyed Afghanistan and is now occupying the land of Palestine, killing the people and massacring the children, because of these false charges."

"It is the Palestinians' Right to Blow Up whatever They Want"

Q: "You said that what happened on September 11 was a crime. Aren't the Palestinians doing the same thing?"

Mufti Al-Tayyeb: "No. The situation is completely different. What the Palestinians are doing is self-defense, defense of their religion and their homeland. They are responding to the killing and to a barbaric enemy. This situation is different than what happened in America."

Q: "Does this mean that killing Israeli civilians is permitted according to Islamic law?"

Mufti Al-Tayyeb: "I will tell you: If Israel existed within its borders and was not occupying the West Bank, and the Palestinians were entering, destroying, and killing Israelis - I would tell you that this was forbidden. But if Israel is the aggressor and the American government is behind it, and the West stands by observing, it is the Palestinians' right to blow up whatever they want. I ask [the French]: If, say, Germany were to again attack France and occupy your land, would they refrain from resisting?"

On The 'Clash of Civilizations'

Q: "In the West, the term 'Clash of Civilizations' emerged when the Westerners noticed that they were being accused by the Islamic world of being corrupt and having no values. What do you make of this?"

Mufti Al-Tayyeb: "Western civilization is different than Eastern civilization, primarily in its attitude towards religion, which is divine inspiration. For us in the East, religion is sacred, and is the apex of honor in the pyramid. In contrast, in the West - as I saw when I was in France for a time - society is not interested in religion. Even if there are religious people, it is a society with a particular position on religion, a secular society. Yet this does not mean that we do not respect Western civilization. On the contrary - we absolutely respect and value it. We also think that the Muslims helped create it during the Middle Ages - though the West denies it. However, the problem arises when the West tries to impose its civilization on us. Then the clash breaks out.

"I'll give you an example. Several foreign elements maintain that sexual perversion [i.e. homosexuality] is justified. We think that it is forbidden. If these elements wish to impose this on us, under the banner of human rights, we are opposed. The West is entitled to our respect for its culture and its civilization, if we are in its country... By the same token, we too are entitled to the West's acknowledgement of our religion-based civilization, without its attempting, every so often, to sow among us certain elements that conflict with the religion... There are many good elements in Western civilization, but we are not required to accept everything it brings..."

On Freedom, Women's Rights, and Art

Q: "What is your position on the following issues: individual freedom, equality between man and woman, general moral freedom, state intervention in the affairs of the individual within his home, and literature and the cinema?"

Mufti Al-Tayyeb: "This brings us back to the previous question, and to the answer about the difference between Western and Eastern civilization in all things regarding religion. If the Western man, say, wants to satisfy his lusts and passions, he is not restricted by religion, whether in sex, food, or drink. No prohibitions apply. In contrast, we in the East are restricted by religion in all of our ways of behavior...

"With regard to equality between man and woman, Islam demands certain things of both, whether in marriage or in life in general. Therefore, perhaps, it is claimed that the Western woman is more liberated than the Eastern woman. But the truth is that in our [society] there is equality between man and woman, except in a few matters concerning inheritance. A very few matters. There are many matters in which the woman is comparable to the man, and even gets more than him... The man is fully responsible for the woman. As the Prophet said: 'Women are the sisters of men.' Moreover, we maintain that the Muslim woman is more indulged than the man. It must be remembered that Islam liberated the woman 14 centuries ago, giving her rights that Western women received only in the 19th century.

"With regard to the arts, Islam has a single goal, and that is to serve the peace-seeking human nature. Anything that actualizes this is welcomed. The problem is that there are arts that reduce man's honor, and these Islam rejects. I refer to cinema, theater, and other arts..."

Ahmad Al-Tayyeb Explains Wife Beating in Islam

(To view this clip on MEMRI TV, visit http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1478.htm.)

Ahmad Al-Tayyeb: "With regard to wife beating... In a nutshell, it appeared as part of a program to reform the wife. [According to the Koran], first 'admonish them,' [then] 'sleep in separate beds, and beat them.'"

Interviewer: "I think we must stress that this pertains to a rebellious woman..."

Ahmad Al-Tayyeb: "Of course. It's not that anybody can start beating as he sees fit. [Westerners] who claim this are talking about an Islam which is a figment of their imagination. They are villains because they know there's no such thing in Islam, and they want to pin this interpretation on it. Why? Because Islamic culture is the only culture that is spreading, and is viewed with fear by people of other cultures. In any case... This method appeared as part of the treatment of a rebellious wife. I am faced with two options - either the family will be destroyed by divorce, or I can use means that may bring my wife, the mother of my children, back to her senses. The first means is admonishment.

[...]

"The second means of treatment is 'sleeping in separate beds.' Why? Because this targets the honor... A lot could be said about this. The strength of a woman lies in her ability to seduce the man. The man is strong and can do whatever he wants, but the woman has a weapon of her own. This weapon can be targeted. Many women will come back to their senses, when they realize that this is what's involved.

[...]

"By Allah, even if only one woman out of a million can be reformed by light beatings... It's not really beating, it's more like punching... It's like shoving or poking her. That's what it is."

Endnotes:

[1] http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100319/wl_africa_afp/egyptreligionislamazhar

[2] www.alarabiya.net/articles/2010/03/19/103484.htm

[3] http://www.egypt-facts.org, March 11, 2003.

[4]  MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 402, " Egypt's Mufti: We Condemned the September 11 Attacks, But Since Then Our Feelings Have Changed," July 23, 2002, http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/702.htm .

The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) explores the Middle East through the region's media (both print and television), websites, religious sermons and school books. MEMRI bridges the language gap which exists between the West and the Middle East, providing timely translations of Arabic, Farsi, Urdu, Pashtu, Dari, Hindi, and Turkish media, as well as original analysis of political, ideological, intellectual, social, cultural, and religious trends in the Middle East.

1. Iran is now allied with al-Qaida: General David Petraeus, head of the U.S. Central Command, revealed a bombshell story that has been ignored: Iran is helping al-Qaida attack Americans.

Iran, he said in military-speak, provides "a key facilitation hub, where facilitators connect al Qaida's senior leadership to regional affiliates." Translation: Tehran is letting al-Qaida leaders travel freely back and forth to Pakistan and Afghanistan, using its territory as a safe haven, while permitting them to hold meetings to plan terrorist attacks for attacking U.S. targets and killing Americans.

While nominally Iran sometimes takes these people into custody, that seems, Petraeus says, a fiction to fool foreigners.

Oh, and Petraeus added that Iran also helps the Taliban fight America in Afghanistan. Regarding Iraq, the general explains, "The Qods Force [an elite Iranian military group within the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps] also maintains its lethal support to Shia Iraqi militia groups, providing them with weapons, funding and training,"

So, Petraeus pointed out that Iran is helping al-Qaida against the United States and also, at times, Shia groups intended to be Iran's proxies for spreading its influence in Iraq. In effect, the Tehran regime is at war with the United States. Yet this point is not being highlighted, nor does it stir rage in the hearts of White House officials or strenuous attempts to counter this threat.

Meanwhile, Iran isn't just building apartments but nuclear weapons' facilities.

2. Lebanon being further integrated into Iran-Syria alliance

In an interview with al-Jazira television, Walid Jumblatt, formerly the roaring lion of the opposition, turns into a mouse and apologizes to Syrian dictator Bashar al-Asad:

"I said, at a moment of anger, what is improper and illogical against President Bashar Assad." And now he is begging for an invitation to Damascus where he can kiss the ring of the man whose father (Hafiz al-Asad) murdered his father (Kemal Jumblatt).

One cannot blame Walid Jumblatt nor Sa'd al-Hariri, leader of the March 14 coalition, whose father was murdered by Bashar himself and has already gone to Damascus to beg forgiveness.

But Jumblatt, leader of the main Druze community in Lebanon, was a man who not long ago denied comparing Bashar al-Asad to a dog by saying that to do so would be an insult to canines. Jumblatt was also the man who bragged about being a friend of the United States during his rebellious phase. No more.

Meanwhile, Hizballah, which enjoys veto power in Lebanon's government, isn't just building apartments, its building fortifications and importing record amounts of weapons.

3. It is now clear that Russia and China won't support sanctions on Iran. The administration's plan is in major trouble and there's no way out, except to do the most minimal possible sanctions and claim victory.

Russia openly defies the Obama Administration by insisting it will finish a nuclear plant for Iran, just when Secretary of State Hilary Clinton is visiting! This was a real slap in the face, much bigger strategically than the apartments' issue. But there will be no strong reaction from Washington.

According to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev: "We believe that [engagement with Iran is] not over yet, that we can still reach an agreement."

So Russia still isn't ready to support sanctions and isn't building apartments in Iran but rather a nuclear reactor.

Same thing with China, whose Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang put it this way: "We believe there is still room for diplomatic efforts and the parties concerned should intensify those efforts."

China isn't building apartments in Iran but developing oilfields and building a huge oil refinery, plus reportedly supplying weapons.

4. Despite U.S. concessions aimed to reduce Syria's alliance with Iran, their bond is getting stronger, as witnessed by Asad's invitation to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Damascus and their signing of new cooperation agreements. During the press conference, Asad literally laughed at U.S. policy.

5. Increasing signs of Turkey's close cooperation with the Iran-Syria axis. Both Ahmadinejad and the official Syrian government newspaper now call Turkey an ally of Syria and Iran.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan sounds the same way, insisting that Iran has no intention of developing nuclear weapons, that Ahmadinejad is a "friend," and that the United States has no right to try to stop Iran from getting such weapons any way.

The Turkish government isn't building just apartments but an alliance with Tehran and an increasingly Islamist regime at home.

So let's leave it to Ahmadinejad to summarize how things seem to Iran, Syria, Hamas, Hizballah, and lots of Arabs both pro- and anti-American:

The Americans, Ahmadinejad said, "not only have failed to gain any power, but also are forced to leave the region. They are leaving their reputation, image, and power behind in order to escape....The [American] government has no influence [to stop]....the expansion of Iran-Syria ties, Syria-Turkey ties, and Iran-Turkey ties--God willing, Iraq too will join the circle...."

Iran is also building not just apartments and not even just nuclear facilities and not even just revolutions abrod. It's also building an empire or, to put things more modestly, a very large sphere of influence.

In short, the regional situation is terrible. None of this really has much to do with Arab-Israeli or Israeli-Palestinian issues; none of this is going to change because U.S. policy is seen as being tough on Israel. What the Arabs want to see is whether U.S. policy is going to be tough on Iran and its allies.

The Obama Administration policy isn't making the radicals more moderate but rather--by feeding their arrogance and belief in American weakness--making them more aggressive. Every day the regional situation is becoming more dangerous, but the highest-level and highest-priority U.S. efforts seem to be largely over getting indirect Israel-Palestinian talks which everyone involved knows will produce nothing.

Something is seriously wrong here. Of course this isn't the first time such things have happened in battling aggressive dictatorships, both in the case of Germany and of the USSR. Still, one can only echo the words of George Orwell, written in his diary in early 1941:

"The most depressing thing in this war is not the disasters we are bound to suffer at this stage, but the knowledge that we are being led by weaklings....It is as though your life depended on a game of chess, and you had to sit watching it, seeing the most idiotic moves being made and being powerless to prevent them."

Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). His new edited books include Lebanon: Liberation, Conflict and Crisis; Guide to Islamist Movements; Conflict and Insurgency in the Middle East; and The Muslim Brotherhood. To read and subscribe to MERIA, GLORIA articles, or to order books. To see or subscribe to his blog, Rubin Reports.

Right Side News reports from the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, near Gelilot , north of Tel Aviv

Highlights of the week

March 11-18, 2010

• Iran-US "cyber war" reaches new heights

• US-Israel tensions attract interest from Iranian media

• Chaharshanbeh Souri: debate on pre-Islamic tradition in the Islamic republic

• Official data on Internet penetration rate in Iran: 11.1 percent

• Pictures of the week: opening of Imam Khomeini Highway, the first two-level highway in Iran

Spotlight on Iran is taking a break for the Persian New Year (Nowruz) and Passover. The next newsletter will be released in the last week of April. Happy New Year and Happy Passover!

Iran-US "cyber war" reaches new heights

Iran announced this week the arrest of 30 people suspected of belonging to a "cyber network" allegedly operated by the US in Iran. An announcement released by the general prosecutor's office in Tehran says that the suspects were arrested in the wake of a complex IT and communications operation which exposed their involvement in a network called Iran Proxy. According to Iranian authorities, the network was established by the CIA, worked under the cover of the US State Department, and had a budget of 50 million dollars. The network was involved, among other things, in infiltrating national databases, working against Iranian authorities' efforts to block websites, providing Iranian web surfers with security services, and installing secure telephone and information lines to allow Iranians to grant interviews to Western media, such as Voice of America.

The announcement released by the authorities also claims that the US created a network of human rights activists which served as a front for the activity of the opposition organization Mojahedin-e Khalq in Iran. The network recruited Iranians through the Internet, sent them to training in Iraq and other countries, created networks for gathering intelligence (specifically regarding the activities of Iran's nuclear scientists), recruited and organized Iranians residing abroad, prepared reports designed to encourage psychological warfare against Iran, organized illegal gatherings following the presidential elections, released false information on Iran's internal situation, and attempted to hack into servers used by the Iranian government, disrupt municipal management systems across Iran, and establish a security cover for an armed struggle against the regime (IRNA, March 14).

Shortly after the publication of the reports on the arrests of the network members, Iran's media reported that the cyber department of the Revolutionary Guards had attacked 29 websites which allegedly operated under the patronage of the US. According to an announcement released by the Revolutionary Guards, cyber teams on that organization's behalf attacked websites affiliated with an American espionage network which worked against Iranian national security under the cover of human rights activity. Those cyber teams are part of a new Revolutionary Guards center which aims to track and combat organized crime, espionage, economic and social corruption, and cultural infiltration through the Internet (Fars, March 14).

From the Talkhandak blog, February 25

The conservative media have extensively covered the exposure of the American "cyber network" this week. A lengthy report published earlier this week in the daily Keyhan says that the network is yet another link in the American efforts to destabilize the Iranian regime by means of a "cyber war" waged by the CIA since 2006 with the assistance of anti-revolutionary groups, the Mojahedin-e Khalq, the Baha'is, and royalist elements. Such activities kicked into high gear following the outbreak of the riots following the presidential elections, and included efforts by US-led elements to disrupt Iran's power grid in order to cause severe economic damage and aggravate the social tensions in the country.

According to Keyhan, the CIA attempted to move the war against the Iranian regime to cyberspace and stage an "Internet coup". According to the report, Iran Proxy, the network exposed by the Revolutionary Guards, employed hackers for attacking websites, servers, and domains used by the leadership, the Ministry of Defense, the Revolutionary Guards, and universities (Keyhan, March 15). An editorial published in Keyhan emphasized the connection between the "soft war" waged by the US against Iran and public order disruptions organized by the reformist opposition since the presidential elections. It is Keyhan's claim that the internal struggle is designed to prepare Iranian public opinion for a "soft war" led by Iran's outside enemies to destabilize the Islamic republic and spread secularism.

The "Zionist-Christian triangle" (Britain, Israel, and the US) endeavored to establish a new Freemason organization in Iran to spread liberal and secular thought through activities on the cultural and political scenes, on the media, and in the universities (Keyhan, March 15).

Rah-e Sabz, a reformist website affiliated with the supporters of opposition leader Mir-Hossein Mousavi, also reported the arrest of the American cyber network members, linking the arrest with a series of actions taken in recent months by Iranian authorities to curb the use of the Internet for political needs.

In a report titled "Iran's new imaginary enemy: the Internet", the website provides an extensive coverage of the regime's activities in cyberspace, which include increasing the monitoring of websites, filtering and blocking sites, imposing severe restrictions on access to online social networks and the use of e-mail services, increased enforcement and legal action against "computer crimes", and using the "Iranian Cyber Army" by the regime to attack websites affiliated with Western and reformist elements (Rah-e Sabz, March 15).

US-Israel tensions attract interest from Iranian media

The US-Israel tensions have drawn considerable attention from Iranian media this week. Major dailies and news websites have reported on the disagreements between the American administration and the Israeli government over the continuation of building in Jerusalem, and even emphasized the statement of Israel's ambassador to Washington, Michael Oren, who was quoted by Israeli media this week saying that the relations between the two countries were undergoing the worst crisis in 35 years (Asr-e Iran, March 15).

According to the assessment of some Iranian media, it is indeed a profound, significant crisis in the relations between the two countries. Fararu, a website which extensively reported on the current crisis in Israel-US relations, noted that the relations between the two countries chilled following the election of Obama as president, and that the US administration took a stance contrary to that of Israel regarding Israel's threats against Iran. In Fararu's view, the reactions of the American administration to the policy of the Israeli government in recent days indicate that even though it is a "family dispute", it is nevertheless deep and its impact on the Middle East peace process remains to be seen (Fararu, March 16).

It is also the view of the conservative daily Vatan-e Emrooz that the crisis in US-Israel relations is real and severe. According to the daily, the visit of Vice President Joe Biden was meant to solve the disagreements between Israel and the US on promoting the peace process after the failed visit of George Mitchell. Despite Biden's declarations on the US commitment towards Israel, his visit failed when Israel declared its intention to build in East Jerusalem, and the strong friendship between the two countries took a severe blow.

The daily believes that the current crisis in the relations between the two countries also has an impact on the US policy towards Iran, since Israel's defiant measures against the US during Biden's visit derailed the vice president's attempt to take advantage of his visit to promote new psychological warfare against Iran and carry out a project aimed to contend with Iran (Vatan-e Emrooz, March 16).

In contrast, the conservative daily Siyasat-e Rooz played down the current crisis in US-Israel relations. Referring to the tension prevailing in Jerusalem in recent days, the daily criticized the silence of the international community and Arab leaders over Israel's policy and the "crimes of the Zionists". The daily reported that while the top advisor of the US president criticized Israel's decision to build new housing units in Jerusalem, he completely ignored the situation in the Gaza Strip and Israel's action against the holy sites of Islam in Jerusalem. According to the daily, this is an indication of the Americans' desire to take advantage of minor developments to conceal the Israelis' crimes (Siyasat-e Rooz, March 16).

Chaharshanbeh Souri: debate on pre-Islamic tradition in the Islamic republic

The debate on Chaharshanbeh Souri, a holiday marked on the last Wednesday of the Persian year, has once again reemerged this year. Due to the pre-Islamic roots and pagan themes of the holiday, senior clerics have in recent years called to abolish it. For example, Ayatollah Lotfollah Safi Golpayegani issued a religious ruling in 2004 arguing that the purpose of those "heathen" rituals was to compromise the Islamic identity and that therefore they must not be marked.

The call to ban the tradition has been heard once again this week. In response to a request for a religious ruling on the subject, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei ruled that since Chaharshanbeh Souri had no religious legal basis, and since the holiday traditions involved damage and corruption, the holiday had best not be marked (Tabnak, March 14). The Supreme Leader's view was shared by senior cleric Ayatollah Ja'far Sobhani, who defined the holiday as a "kind of superstition" which goes against Islamic religious law and logic. Sobhani noted that one of the goals of the Prophet Muhammad's mission was to release people from pre-Islamic customs and traditions which had confined human thought with chains and shackles.

The Prophet sought to prevent the influence of those traditions on people's lives and morals, and therefore abolished all pre-Islamic traditions which prevailed in his time. Chaharshanbeh Souri, Sobhani said, is one of those wrong traditions, the way it is marked in Iran reflects ignorance, and the damage it causes is obvious, since it often results in the injuries and even death of many youngsters who mark the holiday by building fires and jumping over them. Sobhani called on the people of Iran to carefully consider their actions during Chaharshanbeh Souri and to avoid acting in a manner which contradicts Islamic religious law and logic (Mehr, March 10).

Cleric Hojjatoleslam Yousefi Gharavi from the religious seminar in the city of Qom also had reservations regarding the Chaharshanbeh Souri celebrations, saying they were a reflection of the ritual of fire which was commonplace before the advent of Islam. Gharavi said that some sought to lend that holiday an Islamic character, even though it is not accepted in Islam, and that the holiday rituals reflected superstitions which infiltrated Iran's national traditions. The cleric admitted that the celebration of the holiday by Iranians could not be prevented, saying, however, that it should be marked differently than it is now, for example by praying, reading the Quran, and giving charity (Raja News, March 11).

The tradition of Chaharshanbeh Souri symbolizes the beginning of the Nowruz celebrations. The custom of building fires and jumping over them originates in Zoroastrianism, reflecting the desire to expel evil on the eve of the New Year. Iran's authorities attempted to abolish such rituals in the first years after the Islamic revolution; however, those attempts failed since the tradition is so deeply rooted among Iranians. Accordingly, in recent years Iranian authorities have been forced to come to terms with the Chaharshanbeh Souri celebrations and settle for monitoring them so that they do not turn into clashes between youngsters and security forces, which happened on several past occasions. In addition, the authorities work to minimize physical injuries as a result of using flammable substances. In recent years, many Iranians, including children, have been hurt in accidents taking place during Chaharshanbeh Souri as a result of reckless use of fire and of dangerous substances, such as firecrackers and fireworks.

On the eve of Chaharshanbeh Souri, several news websites reported that internal security forces deployed in various locations across Tehran to prevent activists belonging to the reformist protest movement from using the holiday celebrations as a show of power. Internal security forces chief Isma'il Ahmadi Moqaddam warned this week that those who violate public order during the holiday festivities would be dealt with severely by the police. The internal security forces, the Revolutionary Guards, and the Basij have even set up a joint headquarters for ensuring public order and dealing with possible order disruptions during the holiday events (Mehr; Fars, March 15).

Official data on Internet penetration rate in Iran: 11.1 percent

This week, the Statistical Center of Iran (SCI) released new figures on the Internet penetration rate in Iran. The results of the study carried out in 2008 by the center at the request of the information technologies company show that the Internet penetration rate in Iran reached 11.1 percent last year.

The study, which included nearly 100 thousand Iranian families across the country, showed that out of the 71.8 million people living in Iran, 7.96 million surfed the web. The penetration rate among people living in cities is 15 percent, and only 3 percent among people living in rural areas. The penetration rate in the 10 to 59 demographic is 13.9 percent.

Out of all the web surfers in Iran, 28.8 percent live in Tehran Province, where the penetration rate is 16.4--the highest in Iran. The lowest penetration rate is in the province of Sistan-Baluchistan--only 3.3 percent.

The study also shows that 75.2 web surfers do so mainly from their own homes, 15 percent surf from their workplaces, 26 percent surf from Internet cafes, and 14.9 percent surf from their educational institutions. 91.9 of home surfers use dial-up connections. 85.1 percent of families living in Iran in the Iranian year 1387 (2008-2009) had a landline telephone at home, while 71.3 percent of families had at least one cellular telephone device (ISNA, March 13).

The figures released this week are lower than the figures formerly released by Iran's Telecommunications Ministry on the Internet penetration rate in the country. In September 2008, Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Soleimani announced that the number of web surfers was 23 million people and that the Internet penetration rate was expected to reach 30 percent by 2009.

Pictures of the week: opening of Imam Khomeini Highway,
the first two-level highway in Iran (Esfahan, March 15)

Headley pleaded guilty to conspiracy to bomb public places in India; conspiracy to murder and maim persons in India; six counts of aiding and abetting the murder of U.S. citizens in India; conspiracy to provide material support to terrorism in India; conspiracy to murder and maim persons in Denmark; conspiracy to provide material support to terrorism in Denmark; and conspiracy to provide material support to Lashkar.

Attorney General Eric Holder said, "Today's guilty plea is a crucial step forward in our efforts to achieve justice for the more than 160 people who lost their lives in the Mumbai terrorist attacks. Working with our domestic and international partners, we will not rest until all those responsible for the Mumbai attacks and the terror plot in Denmark are held accountable."

Headley also plotted to bomb the office of the Jyllands-Posten newspaper which had published a cartoon about the Prophet Mohammed. It would be setback for India as well as the Danish government who would like Headley to be extradited. However, both governments can have access to Headley and question him in connection with the bombing plots. Another co conspirator Tahawwur Rana was indicted in January 2010 on three counts: conspiracy to provide material support to the Mumbai attacks; conspiracy to provide material support to the Denmark plot; and providing material support to Lashkar. He has pleaded not guilty and remains in federal custody in Chicago while awaiting trial.

Abdur Rehman and Ilyas Kashmiri, who were charged in the same indictment with conspiracy to murder and maim persons in Denmark and providing material support to the Denmark plot, are still at large.

Highlights of the Press Release (March 18, 2010) given below:

According to the plea agreement, Headley attended the following training camps operated by Lashkar: a three-week course starting in February 2002 that provided indoctrination on the merits of waging jihad; a three-week course starting in August 2002 that provided training in the use of weapons and grenades; a three-month course starting in April 2003 that taught close combat tactics, the use of weapons and grenades and survival skills; a three-week course starting in August 2003 that taught counter-surveillance skills; and a three-month course starting in December 2003 that provided combat and tactical training.

Mumbai Terror Attacks

After receiving instructions from three Lashkar members in late 2005 to travel to India to conduct surveillance, in February 2006, in Philadelphia, Headley changed his name from Daood Gilani to facilitate his activities on behalf of Lashkar by portraying himself in India as an American who was neither Muslim nor Pakistani. In the early summer of 2006, Headley and two Lashkar members discussed opening an immigration office in Mumbai as a cover for his surveillance activities.

Headley eventually made five extended trips to Mumbai - in September 2006, February and September 2007, and April and July 2008 - each time making videotapes of various potential targets, including those attacked in November 2008. Before each trip, Lashkar members and associates allegedly instructed Headley regarding specific locations where he was to conduct surveillance, and Headley traveled to Pakistan after each trip to meet with Lashkar members and associates, report on the results of his surveillance, and provide the surveillance videos.

Before the April 2008 surveillance trip, Headley met with co-conspirators in Pakistan and discussed potential landing sites in Mumbai for a team of attackers who would arrive by sea. Headley returned to Mumbai with a global positioning system device and took boat trips around the Mumbai harbor and entered various locations into the device, according to the plea agreement.

Starting Nov. 26, 2008, and continuing through Nov. 28, 2008, 10 attackers trained by Lashkar carried out multiple assaults with firearms, grenades and improvised explosive devices against multiple targets in Mumbai, including the Taj Mahal and Oberoi hotels, the Leopold Café, the Chabad House and the Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus train station, each of which Headley had scouted in advance, killing approximately 164 victims and wounding hundreds more.

The six Americans killed during the three-day siege are identified in the charges as Ben Zion Chroman, Gavriel Holtzberg, Sandeep Jeswani, Alan Scherr, his daughter Naomi Scherr and Aryeh Leibish Teitelbaum.

In March 2009, Headley made a sixth trip to India to conduct additional surveillance, including of the National Defense College in Delhi, and of Chabad Houses in several cities.

Denmark Terror Plot

Regarding the Denmark terror plot, Headley admitted that in early November 2008, he met with a Lashkar member in Karachi, Pakistan, and was instructed to conduct surveillance of the Copenhagen and Aarhus offices of the Danish newspaper Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten in preparation for an attack in retaliation for the newspaper's publication of cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed. After this meeting, Headley informed co-defendant Abdur Rehman Hashim Syed (Abdur Rehman), also known as "Pasha," of his assignment. Abdur Rehman stated to Headley words to the effect that if Lashkar did not go through with the attack, Abdur Rehman knew someone who would. Although not identified by name at the time, Headley later learned this individual to be co-defendant Ilyas Kashmiri. Abdur Rehman previously had told Headley that he had been working with Kashmiri and that Kashmiri was in direct contact with a senior leader for al Qaeda, the plea agreement states.

In late December 2008 and early January 2009, while in Chicago, Headley exchanged emails with Abdur Rehman to continue planning for the attack and to coordinate his travel to Denmark to conduct surveillance. In January 2009, Headley traveled from Chicago to Copenhagen to conduct surveillance of the Jyllands-Posten newspaper offices in Copenhagen and Aarhus and scouted and videotaped the surrounding areas.

In late January 2009, Headley met separately with Abdur Rehman and a Lashkar member in Pakistan to discuss the planned attack on the newspaper and provided them with videos of his surveillance. About the same time, Abdur Rehman provided Headley a video produced by the media wing of al Qaeda in approximately August 2008, which claimed credit for the June 2008 attack on the Danish embassy in Islamabad, Pakistan, and called for further attacks against Danish interests to avenge the publication of the offending cartoons.

In February 2009, Headley and Abdur Rehman meet with Kashmiri in the Waziristan region of Pakistan, where they discussed the video surveillance and ways to carry out the attack. Kashmiri told Headley that he could provide manpower for the operation and that Lashkar's participation was not necessary. In March 2009, a Lashkar member advised Headley that Lashkar put the newspaper attack on hold because of pressure resulting from the Mumbai attacks. In May 2009, Headley and Abdur Rehman again met with Kashmiri in Waziristan. Kashmiri told Headley to meet with a European contact who could provide Headley with money, weapons and manpower for the newspaper attack, and relate Kashmiri's instructions that this should be a suicide attack and the attackers should prepare martyrdom videos beforehand. Kashmiri also stated that the attackers should behead captives and throw their heads out of the newspaper building to heighten the response from Danish authorities, and added that the "elders," whom Headley understood to be al Qaeda leadership, wanted the attack to happen as soon as possible.

In late July and early August 2009, Headley traveled from Chicago to various places in Europe, and met with and attempted to obtain assistance from Kashmiri's contacts and, while in Copenhagen, he made approximately 13 additional surveillance videos. When he returned to the United States on Aug. 5, 2009, Headley falsely told a U.S. Customs and Border Protection inspector in Atlanta that he had visited Europe for business reasons.

After returning to Chicago, Headley spoke with Abdur Rehman by phone and, using code, described his surveillance activities and his meeting with Kashmiri's European contact. On multiple occasions throughout August and September 2009, Headley communicated with Abdur Rehman about planning the attack and media reports that Kashmiri had been killed. On Oct. 3, 2009, Headley was arrested at O'Hare International Airport in Chicago, intending ultimately to travel to Pakistan to deliver the approximately 13 surveillance videos to Abdur Rehman and Kashmiri, the plea agreement states.

For Full Text of the Plea agreement, Read Here: Headley plea agreement final.pdf

SOURCE: THE COUNTERTERRORISM BLOG

In case of violation, they have threatened to arrest reporters, seize their equipment and ban the activities of the concerned media outlet in a given area."

According to the communiqué:

1. The ban on independent mass media outlets by the Puppet Administration is, in fact, an effort by the surrogates to obscure their failure and shameful fiascos, which they face during confrontations with the Mujahideen in every part of the country.

2. The monopolization of activities of independent mass media outlets by the Kabul Puppet Administration is a clear-cut violation of norms and regulation of neutrality, independence and freedom of speech and has no justification in the light of national and international laws.

Continue to Full Report

NEFA Backgrounder - "Feiz Muhammad: Extremist Ideologue with Influence in the West"

The NEFA Foundation has released the third in a series of backgrounders on extremist ideologues that take a close look at the personalities, doctrine, scope of influence, and methods of communication of some of the most influential purveyors of radical Islamist ideology to English-speaking audiences. As U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies become increasingly concerned about homegrown terrorism at a time when Al-Qaida is actively encouraging American Muslims to commit terrorist acts, understanding the sources of radicalization becomes an essential component of combating the threat.

Here, NEFA Senior Analyst Madeleine Gruen profiles Feiz Muhammad (a.k.a. Feiz Mohammad, Sheik Feiz), an Australian citizen now residing in Malaysia, who has been labeled Australia's "most dangerous sheikh" due to the number of connections he has to known and suspected terrorists.

Muhammad's target audience is young Muslims who feel disaffected and disassociated from local Muslim communities, where mosque clerics show "a lack of interest toward the youth." His lectures frame the United States as the enemy of all Muslims, including those living in the United States and Americans living in other Western countries. He emphasizes that Muslims should regard Western culture as corrupt and immoral, and Muslims should not associate with non-Muslims.

Continue to Full Report

Also read more on NEFA Series: Target America

LAHORE, Pakistan, March 18 (Compass Direct News) - Five Muslims allegedly ransacked the house of an impoverished Christian in this capital city of Punjab Province last month and angrily beat his daughters in an effort to get the family to withdraw rape charges.

Muhammad Sajjid armed with a 30-millimeter pistol, Muhammad Sharif brandishing a dagger and Muhammad Wajjad and two unidentified accomplices carrying bamboo clubs arrived at the Lahore home of Piyara Masih the afternoon of Feb. 26, Christian leaders said. The Muslims allegedly ransacked the house and began thrashing his two daughters, a 15-year-old and her 21-year-old sister, Muniran Bibi, according to attorney Azra Shujaat, head of Global Evangelical Ministries, and Khalid Gill, president of the Christian Liberation Front (CLF).

Muniran said Sharif stabbed her four times with the dagger.

"They ripped apart my clothes, as well as my sister's," she said. "In the meantime, Muhammad Sajjid kept firing into the air to terrorize us."  

The family accuses the men of raping her then-13-year-old sister in 2008. Their frail father said that the gang leader, Sajjid, commanded his accomplices to abduct both Muniran and her sister in the most recent attack, without success. A neighbor who requested anonymity said that a large number of people gathered in front of the house upon hearing the cries of the Christian family, causing the five Muslims to flee.

The alleged attacks on the family were predicated in part on the assumption that, as Christians, they will get little help from a justice system biased against non-Muslims and easily swayed by threats, bribes or other means of persuasion from Muslims, Christian leaders said. When the family approached Nishtar Colony police for help, officers refused to register a case.

Attorney Shujaat said that in refusing to file assault charges, police bowed to the power of wealthy area Muslims. Shujaat, who is providing pro-bono counsel for the family, said he registered a First Information Report (FIR) at the Lahore High Court, accusing the men of ransacking the house and illegal weapons. Only after the high court order for police to file an FIR and strenuous efforts by him, Christian politicians and clergymen did the Nishtar Colony police register one against the Muslim gang.

Police did not register the FIR until March 2, he said, on orders of Additional Sessions Judge Justice Mahr Muhammad Yousaf.

The Christian family said they were still receiving death threats.

Gill, who besides being president of CLF is head of the All Pakistan Minorities Alliance, said the alleged rape took place on Easter Sunday, April 8, 2007, when Sajjid, Sharif, Wajjad and an unknown accomplice attacked the family.

"The chastity of [name withheld], who was 13 years old then and youngest among her sisters, was ruined by all four Muslim gang members, and later they abducted her and kept her at an undisclosed locality," Gill said.

Police later recovered her, and a medical examination proved that she had been repeatedly sexually abused, Gill added.

Shujaat said the four men were being prosecuted for rape and abduction of the girl in District and Sessions Court. Sources told Compass that the alleged rapists were granted bail and secured liberty soon after their apprehension.

Shujaat said evidence at their trial showed they were responsible for the rape, and that a conviction was imminent.

Ferhan Mazher, head of Christian rights group Rays of Development Organization, said the only way for the "perverse Muslim criminals" to do away with the court's judgment was to convince the Christian family, through threats and violence, to drop the charges.

"Therefore the Muslim men invaded the house of the Christian family to exert intense pressure on them to quash the case," Mazher said.

**********

Copyright 2010 Compass Direct News
Compass Direct Flash News is distributed as available to raise awareness of Christians worldwide who are persecuted for their faith. Articles may be reprinted by active subscribers only.
For subscription information, contact:

Compass Direct News
P.O. Box 27250
Santa Ana, CA 92799-7250
USA
TEL: 949-862-0304
E-mail: info@compassdirect.org
www.compassdirect.org

DUBLIN, March 19 (Compass Direct News) - Officials in Laos' Saravan Province yesterday visited 48 Christians expelled from Katin village and assured them that they had the legal right to embrace the faith of their choice, according to advocacy group Human Rights Watch for Lao Religious Freedom (HRWLRF).

During a 30-minute visit the delegation, led by provincial Gov. Khamboon Duangpanya, read out June 2002's Decree 92 on the Management and Protections of Religious Activity in Laos and explained its religious freedom provisions to the group, assuring them that they could freely believe in Christianity "if their faith was genuine."

HRWLRF reported that the officials also said the Christians had the right to live anywhere in the district. Ta-Oyl district officials had expelled the Christians from Katin village at gunpoint on Jan. 18 when they refused to give up their faith. Having lost access to their homes, fields and livestock, the Christians then built temporary shelters at the edge of the jungle, about six kilometers (nearly four miles) away from the village.

The district head, identified only as Bounma, on Monday (March 15) summoned seven of the believers to his office and declared that he would not tolerate the existence of Christianity in areas under his control. The group must either recant their faith or move elsewhere, he'd said.

Shortly afterwards an anonymous source told the Christians that the chiefs of Katin and neighboring Ta Loong village planned to burn down their temporary shelters within 48 hours. (See www.compassdirect.org, "Lao Officials Threaten to Burn Shelters of Expelled Christians," March 16.)

Also present at yesterday's meeting were three other provincial officials, the deputy-head of Ta-Oyl district, identified only as Khammun, and the head of religious affairs in Ta-Oyl, identified only as Bounthoun, HRWLRF reported. During the brief meeting, the Christians asked Gov. Duangpanya if they had the right to live in Katin or other villages in the district.

He responded that as Lao citizens, the Christians could live wherever they chose. In regard to their current location, however, Khammun said he would have to "consult with the proper authorities" before granting the Christians permission to remain on land owned by neighboring Ta Loong village.

After delegating this responsibility to Khammun, Gov. Duangpanya assured the Christians that they could contact him if they needed further help, according to HRWLRF.

According to the Lao Law on Family Registration, when a citizen moves from one village to another for less than a year, he or she must request permission for "temporary changing of residence" from the original village. The paperwork is then turned over to authorities in the new village and reviewed after six months. After a year, citizens must repeat the process to apply for permanent residence in their new location.

Until now provincial officials have largely ignored the plight of Katin Christians, failing to intervene last July when villagers seized a Christian identified only as Pew and poured rice wine down his throat, killing him by asphyxiation. Village officials later fined Pew's family for erecting a cross on his grave, and then detained 80 Christians in a school compound, denying them food and pressuring them to renounce their faith.

The heads of 13 families signed documents renouncing Christianity in order to protect their children; most of them, however, have since resumed attendance at worship meetings.

Provincial officials did call a meeting in September 2008 asking Katin authorities and residents to respect the religious laws of the nation, but four days later village officials seized and slaughtered a buffalo owned by a villager who refused to give up his faith.

A communist country, Laos is 1.5 percent Christian and 67 percent Buddhist, with the remainder unspecified. Article 6 and Article 30 of the Lao Constitution guarantee the right of Christians and other religious minorities to practice the religion of their choice without discrimination or penalty.

**********

Copyright 2010 Compass Direct News

Compass Direct Flash News is distributed as available to raise awareness of Christians worldwide who are persecuted for their faith. Articles may be reprinted by active subscribers only.

For subscription information, contact:
Compass Direct News
P.O. Box 27250
Santa Ana CA 92799-7250
USA
TEL: 949-862-0304
E-mail: info@compassdirect.org
www.compassdirect.org

In a speech at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy on February 26, 2010, Defense Minister Ehud Barak made extensive reference to Iran, its attempts to obtain nuclear capabilities, and the policy ramifications for the major powers and Israel towards Iran. Despite a certain measure of opacity in his address, Barak did make some unequivocal statements of interest. These express the situation assessment prevalent in Israel regarding Iran's nuclear goal and the gaps between Israel and the American administration and their implications from Israel's perspective. What follows are highlights:

a. Iran is a threat challenging not only Israel but also the entire international community. It is hard to imagine a stable world order with a nuclear Iran. Iran is attempting to "defy, deceive, and deter" the entire world with its nuclear ambitions and gain time in order to attain military nuclear capabilities.

b. Iran's objective is not merely the construction of a "Manhattan project-like crude nuclear device." Its goal is to skip to the "second or second and a half generation" of nuclear warheads that can be mounted on surface-to-surface missiles with ranges covering not only Israel but also Moscow and Paris.

c. A nuclear Iran will lead to the elimination of the non-proliferation regime. Saudi Arabia, and perhaps another state or two in the region, will also feel obligated to acquire nuclear capabilities of their own. At a later stage this might lead to third-tier dictators acting in the same manner.

d. The model Iran looks to is that of Pakistan rather than that of North Korea. The meaning of this distinction is almost certainly that Iran strives for a solid nuclear capability based on a large number of nuclear warheads and the capacity for launching them at remote targets rather than on single launchers for purposes of show.

e. These circumstances obligate adoption of a clear policy toward Iran before it manages to realize its nuclear ambitions. Such a policy must be "intensive, concrete and conclusive."

f. There is real activity aimed at instituting sanctions against Iran. The severity of these sanctions - from "targeted," to "hurting," "crippling," and "paralyzing" - remains unclear. Israel prefers the most severe option.

g. Israel will not deny its own responsibility or enter into a cycle of self-delusion and turn a blind eye to what is happening right before it. Therefore, it recommends not removing any option - i.e., the military option - from the table.

Barak's statements suggest a gap between US and Israeli perspectives on Iran's nuclear activity, in terms of its significance and severity. The United States, so it seems from Barak's address, can live with a nuclear Iran - despite its declarations to the contrary. Israel, by contrast, cannot accept such a reality. In any event, Israel must first and foremost see to its own existential interests, even to the point of not coordinating its every move with the American administration.

Barak and other senior Israeli government figures have presumably transmitted similar messages, if not even more unequivocal ones, to senior personnel in the administration. The visible result is that Israel has succeeded in convincing the administration that its threat of a unilateral move against Iran is a credible one. If so, this constitutes an impressive Israeli strategic achievement and implies that the American administration assumes that Israel has first, sufficient military capability in order to create a real threat to Iran's nuclear project, and second, the requisite determination to carry this option out. This means that Israel's threats to attack Iran do not only express a tactic of "hold me back" intended to force the administration to take aggressive measures against Iran; rather, it is necessary to relate to Israel's threats as having a high degree of credibility.

This assessment explains the sequential visits of senior American administration personnel to Israel in recent months:

• a. CIA director Leon Panetta visited Israel in May 2009 and again in January 2010.
• b. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Michael Mullen has visited Israel three times since assuming his post, most recently in March 2010 at the height of the extensive US ground offensive in Afghanistan.
• c. President Obama's national security advisor, Jim Jones, visited Israel in July 2009 and again in January 2010.
• d. The chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senator John Kerry, visited Israel in February 2010. He spoke explicitly about the administration's intention of preventing an Israeli attack against Iran.
• e. Similarly motivated, Vice President Joe Biden visited Israel in early March 2010.

The officials' meetings in Israel complement the many meetings held by senior Israeli personnel in the United States, including Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi.

At the same time, this strategic achievement on Israel's part creates great expectations regarding a military action against Iran. Should it emerge - as is likely - that the efforts to halt Iran's nuclear activity have failed, Israel will find it difficult to avoid acting. Absent any unusual circumstances, an Israeli avoidance of fulfilling its threats against Iran is liable to damage the nation's credibility and deterrent capability.

The Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) is an independent academic institute that studies key issues relating to Israel's national security and Middle East affairs. Through its mixture of researchers with backgrounds in academia, the military, government, and public policy, INSS is able to contribute to the public debate and governmental deliberation of leading strategic issues and offer policy analysis and recommendations to decision makers and public leaders, policy analysts, and theoreticians, both in Israel and abroad. As part of its mission, it is committed to encourage new ways of thinking and expand the traditional contours of establishment analysis.

Last week, rumors that Adam Gadahn had been arrested in Karachi, Pakistan, quickly swept through the global media. When the dust settled, it turned out that the rumors were incorrect; the person arrested was not the American-born al Qaeda spokesman. The excitement generated by the rumors overshadowed a message from Gadahn that the al Qaeda media arm as Sahab had released on March 7, the same day as the reported arrest. While many of the messages from al Qaeda figures that as Sahab has released over the past several years have been repetitive and quite unremarkable, after watching Gadahn's March 7 message, we believe that it is a message too interesting to ignore.

The Message 

In the message, which was titled "A Call to Arms," Gadahn starts by telling jihadists to strike targets that are close to them. He repeats the al Qaeda doctrinal position that jihad is a personal, religiously mandated duty for every able-bodied Muslim.

He then tells his audience that "it is for you, like your heroic Mujahid brother Nidal Hasan, to decide how, when and where you discharge this duty. But whatever you do, don't wait for tomorrow to do what can be done today, and don't wait for others to do what you can do yourself."

As the message progresses, Gadahn's praise of Fort Hood shooter Hasan continues. Gadahn lifts up Hasan as an example for other Muslims to emulate: "the Mujahid brother Nidal Hasan is a pioneer, a trailblazer and a role-model who has opened a door, lit a path and shown the way forward for every Muslim who finds himself among the unbelievers and yearns to discharge his duty to Allah." He adds that Hasan was the "ideal role model" for Muslims serving in the armed forces of Western countries and of their Muslim allies. Gadahn's message is clearly intended to encourage more jihadists to emulate Hasan and conduct lone wolf terrorist attacks.

Regarding the planning of such attacks, Gadahn praises Hasan for being a careful planner and for not engaging in a hasty, reckless or poorly planned operation. He states that Hasan clearly learned from the mistakes of others and did not repeat them. Although Gadahn does not specify particular plots in which he believes mistakes were made by grassroots jihadists, he is undoubtedly referring to cases such as the May 2009 arrest of a group of grassroots jihadists in White Plains, N.Y., who came to the attention of authorities when they sought help from a man who turned out to be an FBI informant. Gadahn praises Hasan for practicing careful operational security by keeping his plans to himself and for not discussing them over the phone or Internet. He also notes that Hasan did not make the mistake of confiding in a person who might have been an FBI informant, as several other plotters have done. Gadahn also says Hasan "didn't unnecessarily raise his security profile or waste money better spent on the operation itself by traveling abroad to acquire skills and instructions which could easily be acquired at home, or indeed, deduced by using one's own powers of logic and reasoning."

When discussing methods lone wolf jihadists can use to conduct their attacks, Gadahn notes that while Hasan used firearms in his assault at Fort Hood, jihadists are "no longer limited to bullets and bombs" when it comes to weapons. "As the blessed operations of September 11th showed, a little imagination and planning and a minimal budget can turn almost anything into a deadly, effective and convenient weapon which can take the enemy by surprise and deprive him of sleep for years on end."

Gadahn then turns his attention to targeting. He counsels lone wolf jihadists to follow a three-pronged target selection process. They should choose a target with which they are well acquainted, a target that is feasible to hit and a target that, when struck, will have a major impact. He notes that Hasan's choice of Fort Hood fit all three criteria, but that jihadists should not think that military bases are the only high-value targets in the United States or other Western countries. "On the contrary," Gadahn insists, "there are countless other strategic places, institutions and installations which, by striking, the Muslim can do major damage."

He then relates that jihadists must attempt to "further undermine the West's already-struggling economies" by carefully timed and targeted attacks against symbols of capitalism in an effort to "shake consumer confidence and stifle spending." (In this way, Gadahn's message tracks with past messages of Osama bin Laden pertaining to economic jihad.) Gadahn notes that even apparently unsuccessful attacks on Western mass-transportation systems can bring major cities to a halt, cost billions of dollars and send corporations into bankruptcy. He also calls upon jihadists to kill or capture "leading Crusaders and Zionists in government, industry and media."

To summarize his lessons on targeting, Gadahn urges jihadists to "look for targets which epitomize Western decadence, depravity, immorality and atheism - targets which the enemy and his mouthpieces will have trouble trying to pass off to the conservative Muslim majority as illegitimate targets full of innocent people."

Implications

First, it is significant that Gadahn, a representative of the core al Qaeda group, is openly advocating a tactical approach to terrorist attacks that was first publicly laid out by the leader of one of the al Qaeda franchise groups. Nasir al-Wahayshi, head of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), authored an article that appeared in AQAP's Sada al-Malahim online magazine in October 2009 that encouraged jihadists to conduct simple attacks with readily available weapons. Since that time, al-Wahayshi's group has been linked to Hasan and the Fort Hood shooting, the attempt to destroy Northwest Airlines Flight 253 on Christmas Day 2009 and the June 1, 2009, attack against an armed forces recruitment center in Little Rock, Ark. Normally it is the al Qaeda core group that sets the agenda in the jihadist realm, but the success of AQAP has apparently caused the core group to jump on the AQAP bandwagon and endorse al-Wahayshi's approach.

It is also telling that the core al Qaeda group chose to produce this particular video message using Gadahn as the spokesman and not one of their other talking heads like Ayman al-Zawahiri or Abu Yahya al-Libi. Gadahn, an American, is often used by the group to address the West, and English speaking-people in particular, so it is clear that the intended audience for his message was aspiring grassroots jihadists in the West. Indeed, Gadahn says in the video that his message is meant particularly for jihadists in the United States, United Kingdom and Israel. Presented in English, Gadahn's video is more easily accessible to English-speakers than al-Wahayshi's article, which was written in Arabic. Even though the al Qaeda core has been marginalized on the physical battlefield, when it comes to areas like militant philosophy, the pronouncements of the core group carry more influence with the wider jihadist world than statements from a regional franchise such as AQAP. When these two factors are combined, it is reasonable to assume that more people in the English-speaking world may pay attention to this call to simple attacks than they did to al-Wahayshi's call in October 2009. Video is also a more viral type of media than the printed word, and video messages are known to be very appealing to aspiring jihadists.

Another thing this video reveals is the continued weakening of the core al Qaeda group. It has come a long way from the early days of as Sahab, when bin Laden and other al Qaeda leaders issued defiant threats of launching a follow-on attack against the United States that was going to be even more destructive than 9/11. The group is now asking individual Muslims to conduct lone-wolf terrorist attacks and to follow the examples of Hasan and Mir Amal Kansi, the Pakistani citizen who conducted a shooting at a stoplight outside CIA headquarters in January 1993 that killed two CIA employees. STRATFOR has long been tracking the devolution of the jihadist threat from one primarily based upon al Qaeda the group to one based upon a wider jihadist movement, and this video is a clear indication that the trend toward decentralization is continuing.

This decentralization means grassroots operatives will continue to be a concern. The problems posed by such operatives are illustrated by recent cases involving American citizens like Colleen LaRose (aka Jihad Jane), Jamie Paulin-Ramirez and Sharif Mobley, who are all alleged to have been involved in recent jihadist plots. As blonde Caucasian women, LaRose and Paulin-Ramirez, in particular, do not fit the jihadist operative stereotype in most people's minds and serve to illustrate the difficulty of creating a terrorist profile based on race, ethnicity or gender.

But decentralization can also mean diminished capability. Counseling jihadists against traveling to training camps in places like Pakistan or Yemen and advising them not to coordinate their attacks with others will increase a group's operational security, but it can also have a serious impact on its operational effectiveness. Traditionally, one of the biggest problems for lone-wolf operators is acquiring the skills necessary to conduct a successful terrorist attack. Even though many Web sites and military manuals can provide instruction on such things as hand-to-hand combat and marksmanship, there is no substitute for hands-on experience in the real world. This is especially true when it comes to the more subtle skills required to conduct a complex terrorist attack, such as planning, surveillance and bomb making. This difficulty in translating intent into effective action explains why so few lone-wolf militants have been able to pull off spectacular, mass-casualty attacks.

Not putting their recruits through a more formal training regimen also makes it more difficult for groups to thoroughly indoctrinate recruits with jihadist ideology. In addition to physical training, individuals attending jihadist training camps typically receive hours of theological instruction every day that is intended to ground them in jihadist doctrine and motivate them to follow through with their plans to engage in attacks.

All that said, while the threat posed by grassroots jihadists is less severe than that posed by trained militant operatives from the core al Qaeda group or the regional franchises, grassroots operatives can still kill people - and they most certainly will continue to do so. Because of this, it is important to pay careful attention to the targeting criteria that Gadahn lays out. His focus on mass transportation targets means that historical jihadist targets such as airliners and subways continue to be at risk. For corporate security directors and the protective security details assigned to safeguard high-profile government officials and private individuals, the video should also serve as a reminder of the need to be vigilant. This is doubly true for those assigned to protect individuals of the Jewish faith, who could be thought to fit both the "Crusader" and "Zionist" labels in the mind of a prospective attacker.

For security personnel, the silver lining in all this is that grassroots operatives are often lacking in street skills and tend to be very sloppy when conducting preoperational surveillance. This means that, while these individuals are in many ways more difficult to identify before an attack than operatives who communicate with, or are somehow connected to, jihadist groups (indeed, lone wolves can seemingly appear out of nowhere), their amateurish methods tend to make them more vulnerable to detection than their better-trained counterparts. This is the paradox presented by this class of militant operative - and it is a paradox that will confront security, intelligence and law enforcement officers for many years to come.

Authorities including a religious affairs official, the district head, district police and the chief of Katin village in Ta-Oyl district, Saravan province, expelled the 48 Christians at gunpoint on Jan. 18.

Prior to the expulsion, officials raided a worship service, destroyed homes and belongings and demanded that the Christians renounce their faith. (See www.compassdirect.org, "Lao Officials Force Christians from Worship at Gunpoint," Feb. 8.)

Left to survive in the open, the Christians began to build temporary shelters, and then more permanent homes, on the edge of the jungle, according to HRWLRF. They continued to do so even after deputy district head Khammun, identified only by his surname, arrived at the site on Feb. 9 and ordered them to cease construction.

More officials arrived on Feb. 18 and ordered the Christians to cease building and either renounce their faith or relocate to another area. When the group insisted on retaining their Christian identity, the officials left in frustration.

On Monday (March 15), district head Bounma, identified only by his surname, summoned seven of the believers to his office, HRWLRF reported.

Bounma declared that although the republic's law and constitution allowed for freedom of religious belief, he would not allow Christian beliefs and practices in areas under his control. If the Katin believers would not give up their faith, he said, they must relocate to a district where Christianity was tolerated.

When the seven Christians asked Bounma to supply them with a written eviction order, he refused.

The Christians later heard through local sources that the chiefs of Katin and neighboring Ta Loong village planned to burn down their temporary shelters and 11 partially-constructed homes erected on land owned by Ta Loong, according to HRWLRF.

These threats have left the Christians in a dilemma, as permission is required to move into another district.

Both adults and children in the group are also suffering from a lack of adequate food and shelter, according to HRWLRF.

"They are without light, food and clean water, except for a small stream nearby," a spokesman said. Officials also forced them to leave the village with minimal clothing and other items necessary for basic survival.

Village officials have said they will only allow spirit worship in the area. A communist country, Laos is 1.5 percent Christian and 67 percent Buddhist, with the remainder unspecified. Article 6 and Article 30 of the Lao Constitution guarantee the right of Christians and other religious minorities to practice the religion of their choice without discrimination or penalty.

Decree 92, promulgated in July 2002 by the prime minister to "manage and protect" religious activities in Laos, also declares the central government's intent to "ensure the exercise of the right of Lao people to believe or not to believe."
----------------------------------

First, a primer about the program, drawing on a recent Center of Near East Policy Research study by David Bedein and Arlene Kushner:

Shortly after Yasir Arafat died in late 2004, the U.S. government established the Office of the U.S. Security Coordinator to reform, recruit, train, and equip the PA militia (called the National Security Forces or Quwwat al-Amn al-Watani) and make them politically accountable. For nearly all of its existence, the office has been headed by Lt. Gen. Keith Dayton. Since 2007, American taxpayers have funded it to the tune of US$100 million a year. Many agencies of the U.S. government have been involved in the program, including the State Department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security, the Secret Service, and branches of the military.

The PA militia has in total about 30,000 troops, of which four battalions comprising 2,100 troops have passed scrutiny for lack of criminal or terrorist ties and undergone 1,400 hours of training at an American facility in Jordan. There they study subjects ranging from small-unit tactics and crime-scene investigations to first aid and human rights law.

With Israeli permission, these troops have deployed in areas of Hebron, Jenin, and Nablus. So far, this experiment has gone well, prompting widespread praise. Senator John Kerry (Democrat of Massachusetts) calls the program "extremely encouraging" and Thomas Friedman of the New York Times discerns in the U.S.-trained troops a possible "Palestinian peace partner for Israel" taking shape.

Looking ahead, however, I predict that those troops will more likely be a war partner than a peace partner for Israel. Consider the troops' likely role in several scenarios:

No Palestinian state: Dayton proudly calls the U.S.-trained forces "founders of a Palestinian state," a polity he expects to come into existence by 2011. What if - as has happened often before - the Palestinian state does not emerge on schedule? Dayton himself warns of "big risks," presumably meaning that his freshly-minted troops would start directing their firepower against Israel.

Palestinian state: The PA has never wavered in its goal of eliminating Israel, as the briefest glance at documentation collected by Palestinian Media Watch makes evident. Should the PA achieve statehood, it will certainly pursue its historic goal - only now equipped with a shiny new American-trained soldiery and arsenal.

The PA defeats Hamas: For the same reason, in the unlikely event that the PA prevails over Hamas, its Gaza-based Islamist rival, it will incorporate Hamas troops into its own militia and then order the combined troops to attack Israel. The rival organizations may differ in outlook, methods, and personnel, but they share the overarching goal of eliminating Israel.

Hamas defeats the PA: Should the PA succumb to Hamas, it will absorb at least some of "Dayton's men" into its own militia and deploy them in the effort to eliminate the Jewish state.

Hamas and PA cooperate: Even as Dayton imagines he is preparing a militia to fight Hamas, the PA leadership participates in Egyptian-sponsored talks with Hamas about power sharing - raising the specter that the U.S. trained forces and Hamas will coordinate attacks on Israel.

The law of unintended consequences provides one temporary consolation: As Washington sponsors the PA forces and Tehran sponsors those of Hamas, Palestinian forces are more ideologically riven, perhaps weakening their overall ability to damage Israel.

Admittedly, Dayton's men are behaving themselves at present. But whatever the future brings - state, no state, Hamas defeats the PA, the PA defeats Hamas, or the two cooperate - these militiamen will eventually turn their guns against Israel. When that happens, Dayton and the geniuses idealistically building the forces of Israel's enemy will likely shrug and say, "No one could have foreseen this outcome."

Not so: Some of us foresee it and are warning against it. More deeply, some of us understand that the 1993 Oslo process did not end the Palestinian leadership's drive to eliminate Israel.

The Dayton mission needs to be stopped before it does more harm. Congress should immediately cut all funding for the Office of the U.S. Security Coordinator.

------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Pipes is director of the Middle East Forum and Taube distinguished visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution of Stanford University

Following dialogue is from Hamas Children's show

'Alloush: "Uncle Hassan! Uncle Hassan!"

Uncle Hassan: "My God, why are you so happy, 'Alloush?"

'Alloush: "I am like the grown-ups, watching the news."

Uncle Hassan: "Good, I hope it will be a good day to watch the news."

'Alloush: "I've heard a very good report. Very good."

Uncle Hassan: "That good?! This report will make us happy?"

=============

The following are excerpts from a Hamas TV puppet show, which aired on Al-Aqsa TV on March 11, 2010.  

· To view this clip on MEMRI TV, visit http://www.memri.org/clip/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/2419.htm .

· To view the MEMRI TV page for Al-Aqsa TV, visit http://www.memritv.org/content/en/tv_channel_indiv.htm?id=175 .

· To view the MEMRI page on Indoctrination of Children, visit http://www.memri.org/subject/en/814.htm .

============= 

'Alloush: "Yes! Do you know the Ibrahimi Mosque [in Hebron]?"

Uncle Hassan: "Who doesn't know it? We all do."

'Alloush: "Well, they have turned it into a museum."

Uncle Hassan: "What?!"

'Alloush: "So the people - all the Jews and the Christians - can visit it."

Uncle Hassan: "Are you sure that's what you heard? Are you sure?"

'Alloush: "Yes."

Uncle Hassan: "And you are still happy?!"

'Alloush: "Yes, this way they will protect it and stop destroying it. People will be able to see it, but not to touch it."

Uncle Hassan: "Are you out of your mind, 'Alloush?"

'Alloush: "Why? What's wrong?"

Uncle Hassan: "Do you know that this mosque, at the Cave of the Patriarchs..."

'Alloush: "What about it?"

Uncle Hassan: "It dates back to the days of Ibrahim. This is our legacy, and part of the Islamic waqf. How can you possibly be happy when a mosque - where we would worship Allah and pray to Him night and day - is turned into a synagogue and an archeological site, and the Jews come to defile it?"

The Jews "Want to Steal [the Mosque] and Make It Like Their False Temple"

'Alloush: "I didn't know this. What, they're making fun of us in the news?!"

Uncle Hassan: "No, they are telling the truth in the news, but as you can see, the whole world is in turmoil over this. This is sad news, a real catastrophe for the Arab and Islamic world, 'Alloush."

'Alloush: "Those Jews want to steal the Ibrahimi Mosque?"

Uncle Hassan: "Yes, they want to steal it, and then make it like their false temple. They want to add it to their legacy for their future generations, 'Alloush."

'Alloush: "Okay, so what should we do about this sad thing?"

"Dear Children... Each One Of You Must Tell His Father, His Grandfather, and the Rest of His Family That They Should All Arise as One... Against the Zionist Criminals the Enemies of Allah, and Liberate Jerusalem and All the Holy Places"

Uncle Hassan: "Unfortunately, 'Alloush and dear children, the Arab and Islamic nation is in a slumber. A deep slumber. We must stand up. We must awaken. 'Alloush and dear children - each one of you must tell his father, his grandfather, and the rest of his family that they should all arise as one. They must rise up against the criminal Zionists, who are planning to destroy Jerusalem, and to turn the Islamic waqf into something bad. We must rise against the Zionist criminals, the enemies of Allah, and liberate Jerusalem and all the holy places. We should liberate them. Do you hear, 'Alloush?"

'Alloush: "Ah, now I get it. I thought the Jews wanted to enable people to visit the Ibrahimi Mosque, but it turns out that they want to steal it."

Uncle Hassan: "That's right, 'Alloush. It's a good thing that you got it. Did you tell this to anyone else, or just me?"

'Alloush: "Just you."

Uncle: "If You Said This in the Street... People Would Accuse You Of Being a... Zionist Collaborator"

Uncle Hassan: "Very good. You didn't make us look bad. Do you know what people would accuse you of, if you said this in the street?"

'Alloush: "Of what, Uncle Hassan?"

Uncle Hassan: "They would accuse you of being a collaborator. They would think that you are a Zionist collaborator. I would like to tell you two things, in conclusion: We must think before we speak. Get it? We should be familiar with all our Arab and Islamic holy places, okay?"

'Alloush: "Okay."

The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) explores the Middle East through the region's media (both print and television), websites, religious sermons and school books. MEMRI bridges the language gap which exists between the West and the Middle East, providing timely translations of Arabic, Farsi, Urdu, Pashtu, Dari, Hindi, and Turkish media, as well as original analysis of political, ideological, intellectual, social, cultural, and religious trends in the Middle East.

Muslim Fulani herdsmen strike two more villages, slaughtering women and children.

LAGOS, Nigeria, March 17 (Compass Direct News) - Less than two weeks after a massive attack in Nigeria that killed 500 Christians, Muslim Fulani herdsmen today unleashed more horrific violence on two Christian villages in Plateau state, killing 13 persons, including a pregnant woman and children.

In attacks presumably over disputed property but with a level of violence characteristic of jihadist method and motive, men in military camouflage and others in customary clothing also burned 20 houses in Byei and Baten villages, in the Riyom Local Government Area of the state, about 45 kilometers (29 miles) from the state capital, Jos.

Christians in neighboring villages are living in fear of possible attacks by the herdsmen, who have not been deterred by the joint military and police security team enforcing curfew in the state. The ethnic Berom Christians, who live as farmers, have long faced off with Fulani nomads who graze their cattle on the Beroms' land.

The slaughter comes after a similar attack on March 7 on Dogo Nahawa, Zot and Rastat, three villages in Jos South and Barkin Ladi Local Government Areas where hundreds of villagers were struck with machetes and burned to death.

"The assailants armed with dangerous weapons attacked the two communities simultaneously at about 1 a.m. on Wednesday, March 17," Brig. Gen. Donald Oji said in a press statement, adding that timely deployment of troops averted further carnage. "Seven of the assailants have been arrested, while troops are still on the trail of more of them. Items recovered from the assailants include three locally made short guns with cartridges, bow and arrows, machetes, knives and cutlasses." 

State Gov. Jonah Jang condemned the killings, alleging that some unnamed persons were fueling misunderstanding among communities in conflict. Because the style of killing is typical of jihadist fundamentalists, Christian leaders suspect Islamic extremists are encouraging the attacks, throwing religious gas on low-burning land and ethnic conflicts.

Dalyop Nyango Mandung, a survivor of the attack whose 90-year-old mother, Ngo Hwo Dongo, was killed in her room, told newsmen that the villagers were awakened by gunshots from the Muslim herdsmen who were barricading their houses. Mandung, however, distinguished the assailants in military fatigues from the Fulani herders.

"We saw them in military uniforms, about two of them were in military uniform and the Fulani were in their normal clothes," Mandun reportedly said. "My mother was the only one killed in the family."

Another survivor, Kachollom Pam Dauda, who is pregnant, told Nigerian media that she was lucky to have escaped the killers. She also described the men in military uniform as distinct from the herders, saying, "The killers came and first shot, and the Fulani were machete-ing people."

"I climbed the roof of the house and held to the wood," she reportedly said. "It was painful more so that I am pregnant. I saw the killers kill my two sisters-in-law, Chundung and Kangyang - they could not escape. I saw as they were being butchered and slain."

Dauda said she dared not make any movement that would attract the attention of the killers.

"After they killed my sisters-in-law, they sat at the back of our house and were saying they would still come back in two days to finish us in the village," she reportedly said. "I saw two soldiers. They were speaking English and were saying, "Come let's go.' The Fulanis were more than 20 in number. When they left, my husband's uncle, Yohanna, came crying saying, 'They have killed people in the next compound.'"

In the March 7 attack, the ethnic Berom victims also included many women and children killed with machetes by rampaging Fulani herdsmen. About 75 houses were burned. State Information Commissioner Gregory Yenlong confirmed that about 500 persons were killed in the attacks.

Christian leaders said that in the March 7 attack, eyewitnesses said the Fulani Muslims were chanting "Allah Akbar" as they broke into homes and slashed men, women and children.

Gov. Jang said word of the new attacks challenged everyone's strength to endure.

"It gets to a stage when one remains strong, but when you receive the news of fresh attacks, you get broken before you recover again," he said. "I have total faith in God because I am a child of God; and because I know there is nothing that happens that God is not aware particularly when it happens to His children. I have talked to God that whatever sin we have committed on the Plateau He should have mercy on us."

**********

Copyright 2010 Compass Direct News

Compass Direct Flash News is distributed as available to raise awareness of Christians worldwide who are persecuted for their faith. Articles may be reprinted by active subscribers only.

For subscription information, contact:

Compass Direct News
P.O. Box 27250
Santa Ana, CA 92799-7250
USA
TEL: 949-862-0304
E-mail: info@compassdirect.org
www.compassdirect.org