Obama unfreezes 192M for the PA

"...the aid was “important to the security interests of the United States.”


Really?  By what standard does almost 200 million buy us in terms of security?  Does it stop the inculcated hatred of the US and Israel?  Will it win the hearts and minds of the refugees so as to enable them to quit killing innocents?  Does it help to ease the pains of having to rely on outside influence to live?  Will more jizya...er, I mean aid help to lessen the impact of living in the "worlds largest concentration camp?"  It may be small by comparison to the debt Obama has racked up (almost 24T so far) but it could have been used to help far more productive causes.


From Times of Israel April 27



Obama lifts freeze on $192 million aid package to Palestinian Authority

US President Barack Obama has lifted a ban on financial aid to the Palestinian Authority. An official with the US Agency for International Development said Saturday that the money had been restored.

Obama stated that the aid was “important to the security interests of the United States.”

The US Congress froze a $192 million aid package to the Palestinian Authority after its president, Mahmoud Abbas, defied US pressure and sought to attain UN endorsement of Palestinian statehood last September. The presidential waiver means that aid can now be delivered.

The unilateral statehood gambit was strongly opposed by Israel, which said Abbas was seeking to avoid negotiating the necessary compromises and modalities of statehood with Israel. The US indicated it would veto a resolution in the Security Council seeking unilateral recognition of “Palestine,” but the issue has not come to a vote, because the Palestinians were unable to obtain sufficient support in the Security Council. They may yet seek a non-binding endorsement of statehood in the UN General Assembly.

Section 3 of Congress’s Palestinian Accountability Act, which applies to 2012, stipulates that “no funds available to any United States Government department or agency … may be obligated or expended with respect to providing funds to the Palestinian Authority.” Obama has now signed a waiver, however, the White House said Friday, and asked Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to inform Congress accordingly.

The AFP news agency quoted White House spokesman Tommy Vietor as saying the $192 million aid package would be devoted to “ensuring the continued viability of the moderate PA government under the leadership of [Palestinian Authority] President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad.”

Vietor added that the PA had fulfilled its major obligations, such as recognizing Israel’s right to exist, renouncing violence and accepting the Road Map for Peace.

OK, who spiked the Kool-Aid with willful blindness?

Read it all 

Norway: 69% rape increase in Oslo, 100% done by non-Westerners

A case of following the example of Muhammad, the "al-insan al-kamil" or perfect man whose behavior is to be emulated for all time by all Muslims.

Norway is not an exclusive example of Islam running rampant, but it is one of the most egregious in Europe.  And as long as the authorities refuse to identify Islamic teachings and texts as the main source of these disturbances, they will continue to increase.  More will suffer because it is not fashionable to point fingers at a religion, especially Islam.  To do that would make one a Islamophobe.

From Jihad Watch April 27 by Nicolai Sennels

Oslo; Norway: 69 percent increase in rapes (76 rapes in 91 days). Share of non-Westerners among 'attack-rapists': 100 percent.

...With 76 rapes during the first 91 days of 2012, the number of rapes in Oslo has increased by an alarming 69 percent compared to the same period last year. Translated from Norwegian by Nicolai Sennels, Aftenposten April 16: "Alarming rise in reported rapes in Oslo":

Last year, the number of reported rapes in the Norwegian capital rose by 30 percent. 2012 has only gotten worse.

- Overall, in the first quarter, there is an increase of 69 percent in reported rapes and attempted rapes. There are 27 more cases than in the same period last year.

Police Inspector Hanne Kristin Rohde does not like the stats she has extracted on sexual crimes in the Oslo police district.

- Very ugly numbers, she concludes.

- Is this a real increase, or are there others who choose to report rape?

- We do not know. But there has been a lot of talking about rape in the public, so we think that the increase is a result of people's willingness to report rapes to the police.

During this year's first 91 days, Oslo police have received reports on 76 rape cases, compared to 45 during the same period last year. The so called attack-rapes were included.

There is more, read it all

Egypt: Islamists rally to save the revolution

Uh, would this be the revolution they said they wanted no part of in the beginning?

How quickly the wolf changes fur.

From Ahramonline April 27 by Zeinab El Gundy

Islamists rally across Egypt to 'save the revolution'
Rallies organised by Islamist forces took place in a number of governorates across Egypt Friday to stress the importance of continuing the revolution and preventing old regime figures from reclaiming power.

Since the early morning, hundreds headed to the iconic Tahrir square. A number of banners demanding the continuation of the revolution and condemning military rule were hung around the square. Slogans include, “No elections under military rule,” “No constitution under military rule” and “No former regime icons for president.”

The April 6 movement told Reuters it would not take part in protests that pressed for demands of a single group or party and the turnout was a fraction of the previous week when tens on thousands took to the streets.

The Muslim Brotherhood organised a protest in Beheira governorate where around 3500 protesters chanted against presidential candidates Ahmed Shafiq and Amr Moussa due to their links to the old regime.

In Zagazig, the Brotherhood and other groups organised rallies that chanted against the SCAF and former regime candidates.

In Shabin El-Kom around 200 protesters joined a protest organised by one of the city’s largest mosques to protest the SCAF and former regime candidates.

Thousands of Islamists and Salafists gathered in Mansoura to demand the application of the Disenfranchisement Law, the dismissal of El-Ganzouri’s cabinet and the end of military rule. 

In Tanta and Mahalla hundreds from protesters from the Muslim Brotherhood, the April 6 Youth Movement, Kefaya and Kazeboon protested to demand the Disenfranchisement Law be applied against Mubarak regime figures.

Hundreds of protesters gathered in Sohag governorate to demand the Disenfranchisement Law be applied to Moussa and Shafiq.

Islamists protested against military rule in Assiut but the protest was boycotted by non-Islamists who claimed the former hijacked such rallies for their own purposes.

An Islamist rally in Qena was also boycotted by non-Islamists.

Read it all

"From Zawahri’s point of view, it makes no difference whether the caliphate is born of the ballot, bomb or bullet. The important thing is the victory of Islamism, which the White House also seems to endorse."

From The Washington Times April 25

EDITORIAL: Obama embraces Islam

If Islamism is OK for Egypt, why not America?

The Obama administration is doing its utmost to promote the fortunes of the Islamist parties inEgypt. A State Department official declared that with the rise of these radical groups after the Arab Spring, “people who once might have gone into al Qaeda see an opportunity for a legitimate Islamism.” They see this as a victory. The problem is, so do the terrorists.

Last year, the White House began peddling the line that the uprisings in the Middle East were a repudiation of the al Qaeda model of seeking change through terrorism. The argument was that while America opposed violent extremism, the rise of nonviolent radical movements was just fine, and even commendable. Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahri quickly dismissed this claim, saying that from the terrorists’ point of view, it didn’t matter whether an Islamist victory came through violence or not. The means were unimportant except as they related to the end state: the imposition of hard-line Shariah-based laws and policies.

From Zawahri’s point of view, it makes no difference whether the caliphate is born of the ballot, bomb or bullet. The important thing is the victory of Islamism, which the White House also seems to endorse.

The notion that there is a legitimate form of Islamism reflects a serious intellectual failing on the part of the Obama administration. President Obama seems to believe the Islamists are legitimized simply by participating in the political process. Some argue that the demands of electoral politics will moderate the Islamist parties, whose members will evolve from stern-eyed theocrats into social reformers. Others believe the only path to modernity is through embracing the Muslim Brotherhood’s barbarous values.

No matter what the source of the delusion, no political movement that exalts the Koran can peaceably coexist with the concept of freedom at the root of Western governance. Islamist notions of democracy are constrained by the strictures of their religion. Radical Muslims reject the humanistic values that gave birth to modern Western government; the self-evident truths regarding everyone’s inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are just so much infidel heresy to the Islamists. There are no inalienable rights under political Islam, only submission to the will of Allah.

Read it all

Necrophiliac beheaded and crucified in the land of the two Holy places

Our frenemy, the Saudis seem content to speak through both sides of their mouth.  They say they stand for equal rights and tolerance, but their actions speak louder than their words.  Now we all agree that having sex with a corpse is in very bad taste, especially after murdering the woman first.  To behead and then crucify the perp may be beyond Western civil laws but it is in keeping with sharia law.  The Saudis are not going to dispense justice in any way other than what sharia says, and in this case the penalty is execution by beheading.  The fact that it is done in public makes it all the more brutal.

From BikyaMasr April 27

Saudis behead and crucify Sudanese national for raping corpse

the unkindest cut of all...

AIRO: The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia beheaded and then crucified a Sudanese national after he was convicted of murdering a Saudi woman and then having sex with her corpse.

The man had confessed to murdering the Saudi housewife by strangling her in her sleep.

He then had sex with her corpse, stole her money and jewelry and fled after opening the gas cylinder in an attempt to kill the other family members.

The court sentenced him to death and crucifixion.

He appealed, according to a report in the Saudi Arabian Arabic language daily, Ajel.

The appellate court gave him the same sentence, which was upheld by the supreme court and then ultimately endorsed by King Abdullah.

The defendant, identified as Abdul Rahman Zain Al Abidin, was given a public execution and crucifixion in the kingdom’s capital Riyadh.

The preferred method of execution in Saudi Arabia is beheading by sword.

Ohio judge enforces sharia law in prison, says forced halal food not establishment of a religion

We are told sharia is benign and compatible with the constitution, that there is nothing bad or sinister about sharia and that we can trust it to be just like American civil law.  How does that comport with a decision by the director of Ohio prisons that forces all inmates to adhere to Islamic dietary principles?  It doesn't, and this judge (who is not named) needs to be not just removed from the bench but also made to read any of the books by Spencer, Geller, Warraq, Ibrahim so they understand, in context Islamic law and the problems therein.

Imagine if a prison decided to force all the inmates to adhere to a pure Catholic diet, or how about Southern Baptist-only meals?  That would immediately be challenged as a violation of the prisoners religious rights.  Islam gets a free pass because we certainly wouldn't want to be seen as Islamophobic, would we?

From the Greeley Gazette April 29 by Peter Grady

Judge rules enforcing Muslim law on everyone not establishment of religion

A federal judge says an Ohio prison that forces all inmates to adhere to a strict Islamic diet is not an establishment of religion  because everyone eats the same food.

A federal judge recently threw out prisoner James Rivers' lawsuit against Ohio Prison director Gary Mohr's decision to ban pork from kitchens in all prisons under control of the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction. Mohr made the decision to stop serving pork products after a Muslim on death row filed a lawsuit against the prison system.

Abdul Awkal, an inmate on death row, argued in his lawsuit that the prison’s failure to provide halal meals violated his religious freedoms.

Despite Awkal’s claims, Islamic teaching says it is perfectly acceptable to eat non-halal meat if there is no halal food available.

Islam teaches that meat such as pork is considered unclean and not to be eaten. This would include all pork products including sausage and bacon.

Awkal was later joined by a second Muslim who is not on death row. Prison authorities had argued that they provided non-pork and vegetarian options for Muslims. The Muslims said that was not good enough and still insisted that the food they were given meet halal standards.

Despite Awkal’s claims that eating halal meat is a requirement of his faith, Islamic teaching says it is perfectly acceptable to eat non-halal meat if there is no halal food available.

Prison authorities had argued that providing halal meet for the thousands of Muslims in prison would bankrupt the system.

In response to the lawsuit, prison officials stopped serving pork products to everyone; including atheists and those whose religion contains no such prohibition.

Read it all

Nigerian Update: April 29

16 victims of jihad at a university.  One can assume that it is Boko Haram behind this attack, as the name does translate into either "Western education is a sin" or "Books, him bad."

Another shining example of the benevolent and tolerant actions of the "religion of peace."

From the BBC April 29

Deadly attack on Nigeria's Bayero university in Kano

At least 16 people have been killed in a gun and bomb attack at a university in Nigeria's northern city of Kano, Nigerian Red Cross officials say.

Six others were in a serious condition following the attack at Bayero University campus where Christian worshippers were holding a service.

Police are searching for the gunmen.

No group has said it launched the attack, but the violent Islamist Boko Haram group is active in Kano. It has recently attacked churches.

Nigeria's central government has struggled to contain the militant group, which operates mainly in the predominantly Muslim north, but has also struck as far south as the capital, Abuja.

Sunday's attack took place in one of the lecture theatres used as a place of worship by Christians.

A witness told AFP news agency the attackers had first thrown in explosives and fired shots, "causing a stampede among worshippers".

"They now pursued them, shooting them with guns. They also attacked another service at the sporting complex."

Another witness spoke of "pandemonium", and said he had seen two men shooting indiscriminately.

Mohammed Suleiman, a history lecturer at the university, said security guards had to run for their lives when the violence broke out.

"For over 30 minutes a series of bomb explosions and gun shots took over the old campus, around the academic blocks," he told Reuters news agency.

A Red Cross spokesman said adults - possibly professors - and three women were among the casualties. Several needed urgent blood transfusions.

Kano state police spokesman Ibrahim Idris said that by the time police arrived, the attackers had "disappeared into the neighbourhood". A manhunt is under way.

But the situation at the university was now calm, according to the Red Cross spokesman.

Boko Haram carried out a bombing in Kano in January that killed more than 180 people, its deadliest attack to date.

Pakistan: water jihad against Christians

Everyone pays the same for water, except Christians.  They are being forced to pay extra "jizya" to the local imam of the mosque.  Extortion in the name of Allah is what we have here and it is against the "people of the book."

But remember, sharia law is compatible with the constitution and is perfectly benign and can coexist with Western values.

From Crosswalk April 25 by Ashfaq Fetah

Pakistani Christian Villagers Forced to Pay Muslim Cleric to Get Drinking Water

TOBA TEK SINGH, PAKISTAN (ANS) -- Scientists say that “a man or woman cannot live without air, water and food,” as these three elements play a vital role in human life.

Most countries ensure the fundamental rights to its citizens to ensure the availability of all these three elements. Citizens pay taxes to get pure drinking water and other facilities.

However, the story of Christians living in village #700/42, Pirkadiayana, Tehsil Kamalia, District, Toba Tek Singh, Punjab, Pakistan, is a different one where their supply of water was on the condition that they not only had to pay the required water tax and also pay a Muslim cleric of a mosque in the village.

In Pakistan, municipal corporations (MC) supply drinking water through their water supply schemes. Underground pipelines have been laid and a citizen applies for the connection and government then connects the house with a water supply, thus the citizen gets drinking water. The bill is collected annually.

In villages and remote areas, the government in installs the water supply system and then asks locals to form their management committees to run the system and develop their own system of collection, time table, repairs, payment of electricity bills and issuing connections. The committees run the system and try to provide water connections without any religious discrimination.

Now ASSIST News Service-Pakistan has come to know about the story of this village where poor Christians have been forced to pay water tax as well to the local Muslim cleric.

ANS-Pakistan decided to highlight this story which shows the miseries faced by Christians and an example of their unity and faith to work together despite the challenges.

The 244 Christian families of Pirkadiayana village paid extra charges to a Muslim cleric from the local Mosque from 1997-2009 to get drinking water.

Read it all

Nigerian update: April 27

6 more murdered by the religion of peace while watching a soccer game.

From the Calgary Herald April 25

6 dead after blast near soccer fans, gun attack in Nigeria

JOS- Attacks in restive central Nigeria killed five people in a village and another died in the city of Jos, where a blast also wounded nine soccer fans, police and officials said Wednesday.


The explosion in Jos took place outside a centre as spectators were leaving after watching the European Champions League semi-final between Barcelona and Chelsea late Tuesday.


"So far we have nine people injured in the stampede that followed the blast outside the soccer viewing centre," police spokesman Samuel Dabai told AFP, while military spokesman Captain Markus Mdahyelya said a body was found near the scene, but could not say if it was linked to the explosion.


The gun attack occurred in the mainly Christian village of Gwa-Rim, with the gunmen thought be from the mainly Muslim Fulani ethnic group. A number of people were also wounded.


"Five people, including two children, were killed around eight o'clock last night in Gwa-Rim village by suspected Fulani herdsmen," Plateau state government spokesman Pam Ayuba told AFP.


Read it all

Comedian sentenced to jail and fine for "insulting Islam"

Imagine if Bill Mahr or Jon Stewart or Jeff Dunham were arrested , tried and convicted for "Insulting Christianity."

From ABC April 25 by Alexander Marquardt

Egypt’s Most Popular Comedian, Adel Iman, Guilty of Insulting Islam

The verdict of a popular Egyptian comedian convicted of offending Islam has been upheld by a Cairo court, raising fears among Egyptian liberals and secularists about the Islamic tide rising since the downfall of former President Hosni Mubarak last year

Imam, one of the Arab world’s most famous actors, was first convicted in February of “contempt of religion” – illegal under Egypt’s penal code – and appealed. The case was brought against him by an ultra-conservative Islamist lawyer named Asran Mansour for three films Imam made in the early- to mid-1990s. The titles are “The Terrorist,” “Morgan Ahmed Morgan” and “Terrorism and Kebab.”

Imam, 71, played a fundamentalist terrorist in the first and a corrupt businessman in the third. Mansour accused Imam of blasphemous mocking of Muslim symbols like beards and the jilbab, a loose-fitting robe worn by some Muslims.

The sentence was three months in jail and 1000 Egyptian pounds, around $170. Imam’s lawyers have said they will appeal the verdict that was “given on the wrong legal basis.”

“My client’s films were certified, not censored, by surveillance authorities before their release to the public,” lawyer Sawat Hussein told Reuters today.

Condemnations poured in from Egypt’s art world and beyond. The Egyptian Creativity Front said the ruling would limit the freedom of expression and lead to restriction on art. Author of “The Yacoubian Building” Alaa al-Aswany said on Twitter that he disagrees with Imam politically but the ruling sends Egypt “back to the darkness of the Middle Ages.”

“This is an unimaginable crime of principle in developed nations,” Aswany wrote.

Read it all

Egypt: parliament mulling new laws allowing marriage to 14 year old girls and legalizing sex with your dead wife

Just when you think Islam cannot get any stranger, along comes this article.  Is it possible we are living in the 7th century where rights are dictated by a whim?  At times I just don't know who is in charge of the asylum.

From Al-Arabiya April 25 by Abeer Tayel

Egypt’s women urge MPs not to pass early marriage, sex-after-death laws: report

Egypt’s National Council for Women (NCW) has appealed to the Islamist-dominated parliament not to approve two controversial laws on the minimum age of marriage and allowing a husband to have sex with his dead wife within six hours of her death according to a report in an Egyptian newspaper.

The appeal came in a message sent by Dr. Mervat al-Talawi, head of the NCW, to the Egyptian People’s Assembly Speaker, Dr. Saad al-Katatni, addressing the woes of Egyptian women, especially after the popular uprising that toppled president Hosni Mubarak in February 2011.

She was referring to two laws: one that would legalize the marriage of girls starting from the age of 14 and the other that permits a husband to have sex with his dead wife within the six hours following her death.

According to Egyptian columnist Amro Abdul Samea in al-Ahram, Talawi’s message included an appeal to parliament to avoid the controversial legislations that rid women of their rights of getting education and employment, under alleged religious interpretations. 

“Talawi tried to underline in her message that marginalizing and undermining the status of women in future development plans would undoubtedly negatively affect the country’s human development, simply because women represent half the population,” Abdul Samea said in his article.

The controversy about a husband having sex with his dead wife came about after a Moroccan cleric spoke about the issue in May 2011.

Zamzami Abdul Bari said that marriage remains valid even after death adding that a woman also too had the same right to engage in sex with her dead husband.

Two years ago, Zamzami incited further controversy in Morocco when he said it was permissible for pregnant women to drink alcohol.

But it seems his view on partners having sex with their deceased partners has found its way to Egypt one year on.

Egyptian prominent journalist and TV anchor Jaber al-Qarmouty on Tuesday referred to Abdul Samea’s article in his daily show on Egyptian ON TV and criticized the whole notion of “permitting a husband to have sex with his wife after her death under a so-called ‘Farewell Intercourse’ draft law.”

Read it all

Nigerian update: April 24

Five less jihadists on earth, five more in paradise.  While assembling the explosives, police tried to arrest them.  Tossing a bomb out the window and at police ended with all the bombs going off at the same time, leaving nothing but rubble and body parts.  Ahh, the joys or premature detonation.

From The Daily Star April 23

Islamist militants killed by own bombs: Nigerian army

KANO, Nigeria: Five suspected Islamist militants were killed when bombs they were assembling exploded during a shootout with government troops in northern Nigeria, a military commander said Monday.


"I can confirm that five suspected members of Boko Haram were on Saturday night blown to pieces by IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices)," they were assembling, Colonel Victor Ebhaleme told AFP.


Ebhaleme said the bombs were being assembled for attacks planned for the flashpoint city of Maiduguri, the epicenter of an increasingly bloody insurgency that has left more than 1,000 people dead since mid-2009.


He said the joint military task force (JTF) deployed to the region to stem the violence had surrounded the hideout and "engaged the suspects in a shootout".


Ebhaleme said the insurgents had thrown a bomb at the soldiers when the other bombs inside the house went off "killing the five suspects and destroying the house".

Did Muhammad Exist?

A review of Robert Spencer's new book, "Did Muhammad Exist?"

From FrontPageMag April 23 by Bruce Thornton

Robert Spencer Asks: Did Muhammad Exist?

Editor’s note: Robert Spencer’s acclaimed new book, Did Muhammad Exist?: An Inquiry into Islam’s Obscure Origins, is now available. To order, click here. 

One of the jihadists’ most potent psychological weapons is the double standard Muslims have imposed on the West. Temples and churches are destroyed and vandalized, Christians murdered and driven from the lands of Christianity’s birth, anti-Semitic lunacy propagated by high-ranking Muslim clerics, and Christian territory like northern Cyprus ethnically cleansed and occupied by Muslims. Yet the West ignores these depredations all the while it agonizes over trivial “insults” to Islam and Mohammed, and decries the thought-crime of “Islamophobia” whenever even factual statements are made about Islamic history and theology. This groveling behavior confirms the traditional Islamic chauvinism that sees Muslims as the “best of nations” destined by Allah to rule the world through violent jihad.

Even in the rarefied world of academic scholarship, this fear of offense has protected Islam from the sort of critical scrutiny every other world religion has undergone for centuries. Some modern scholars who do exercise their intellectual freedom and investigate these issues, like Christoph Luxenberg or Ibn Warraq, must work incognito to avoid the wrath of the adherents of the “Religion of Peace.” Now Robert Spencer, the fearless director of Jihad Watch and author of several books telling the truths about Islam obscured by a frightened academy and media, in his new book Did Muhammad Exist? challenges this conspiracy of fear and silence by surveying the scholarship and historical evidence for the life and deeds of Islam’s founder.

As Spencer traces the story of Muhammed through ancient sources and archaeology, the evidence for the Prophet’s life becomes more and more evanescent. The name Muhammad, for example, appears only 4 times in the Qur’an, as compared to the 136 mentions of Moses in the Qur’an. And those references to Muhammad say nothing specific about his life. The first biography of Muhammad, written by Ibn Ishaq 125 years after the Prophet’s death, is the primary source of biographical detail, yet it “comes down to us only in the quite lengthy fragments reproduced by an even later chronicler, Ibn Hisham, who wrote in the first quarter of the ninth century, and by other historians who reproduced and thereby preserved additional sections.”

Nor are ancient sources outside Islam any more forthcoming. An early document from around 635, by a Jewish writer converting to Christianity, merely mentions a generic “prophet” who comes “armed with a sword.” But in this document the “prophet” is still alive 3 years after Muhammad’s death. And this prophet was notable for proclaiming the imminent arrival of the Jewish messiah. “At the height of the Arabian conquests,” Spencer writes, “the non Muslim sources are as silent as the Muslim ones are about the prophet and holy book that were supposed to have inspired those conquests.” This uncertainty in the ancient sources is a consistent feature of Spencer’s succinct survey of them. Indeed, these sources call into question the notion that Islam itself was recognized as a new, coherent religion. In 651, when Muawiya called on the Byzantine emperor Constantine to reject Christianity, he evoked the “God of our father Abraham,” not Islam per se. One hundred years after the death of Muhammad, “the image of the prophet of Islam remained fuzzy.”

Non-literary sources from the late 7^th century are equally vague. Dedicatory inscriptions on dams and bridges make no mention of Islam, the Qur’an, or Mohammad. Coins bear the words “in the name of Allah,” the generic word for God used by Christians and Jews, but say nothing about Muhammad as Allah’s prophet or anything about Islam. Particularly noteworthy is the absence of Islam’s foundational statement “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.” Later coins referring specifically to Muhammad depict him with a cross, contradicting the Qur’anic rejection of Christ’s crucifixion and later prohibitions against displaying crucifixes. Given that other evidence suggests that the word “muhammad” is an honorific meaning “praised one,” it is possible that these coins do not refer to the historical Muhammad at all.

Lebanon: jihadists target shops selling alcohol, 5 injured in latest blast

Selling alcohol is haram in Islam.  Murdering those that sell it is halal.

This is Islam.

From The Chicago Tribune April 23 by Hussein Saad

Bomb in south Lebanon restaurant injures five

TYRE, Lebanon (Reuters) - Five people were injured and a building was damaged when a bomb exploded in a restaurant in the south Lebanon coastal town of Tyre early on Monday, a Lebanese security source said.

There has been a spate of bombings in majority-Muslim Tyre in the last few months of clubs, shops and restaurants that sell alcohol, whose consumption is forbidden by Islam, and several restaurants have stopped serving alcohol as a result.

The latest bomb detonated shortly after midnight in the Nocean, a restaurant serving alcohol, on the third storey of a commercial complex in the east of the city, shattering the windows of nearby cars.

"Five employees were injured, but only lightly," the source said, adding that four of them were discharged from hospital on Monday morning.

Lebanese security forces cordoned off the area, where large chunks of concrete had fallen onto the streets.

"I was on my way to the restaurant in my car, talking on the phone. I heard an explosion and then something fell on the car," Nocean owner Zahi Zaydan told Reuters.

Two bombs detonated in a nightclub and a liquor shop in Tyre in November, and a restaurant selling alcohol was targeted in December. The majority of Tyre residents are Shi'ite Muslims but members of Lebanon's Christian and Sunni Muslim communities also live in the city.

The Cairo Declaration of Human Rights; time for a serious reform

The Cairo Declaration of Human Rights is Islam's way of cementing what is considered human rights, freedoms and values according to sharia law.  Signed by all Muslim countries and trumpeted by the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) it is supposed to show how Islam values basic human rights, yet since it is based entirely in sharia law it does not comport with any Western values or recognized constitutions.  As the article points out, "... the declaration empowers states, not individuals. In the modern world, Shari’ah has increasingly become integrated in states’ domestic legal systems. In the absence of any international authority to decide on Shari’ah, the Cairo Declaration effectively diminishes the universality of human rights by  relegating them to the discretion of governments."


When our dear leaders decides that government is above people, it is at that point where we have lost all power to affect change through a redress of grievances.  Will we see Muslims, en masse, protesting this travesty of human rights and demanding their governments provide these basic of all values?  Are their Muslim apologists out there who will go to Muslim countries and explain how they have misunderstood Islam and it's peaceful teachings?  Aslan?  Hooper?  Esposito?  Anybody?


From The Brookings Institute April 23 by Turan Kayaoglu

It’s Time to Revise The Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam

To the surprise of many, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) has shown a new commitment to advancing human rights by establishing an Independent Permanent Human Rights Commission within the organization. In the Commission’s first meeting in Jakarta, Secretary General Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu asked the 18-member Commission in his opening address to “review and update OIC instruments, including the Cairo Declaration [of Human Rights in Islam]…” If the Commission intends to indeed advance human rights, then the Cairo Declaration is the first among these instruments in need of serious revision.

In 1990, the OIC approved a document that is now referred to as the Cairo Declaration in an attempt reconcile the concept of human rights and Islam. The Declaration protects many of the universal human rights: it forbids discrimination; supports the preservation of human life, supports the protection of one’s honor, family, and property; and affirms the human right to education, medical and social care, and a clean environment.

From an international human rights perspective, the controversial nature of the Cairo Declaration lies in its claim of adherence to Shari’ah. Its preamble affirms that“fundamental rights and universal freedoms are an integral part of [Islam]” and these rights and freedoms are “binding divine commandments” revealed to the Prophet Muhammad in the Quran. The central role of Shari’ah can be clearly seen in the Declaration’s articles. Article 22 states that “Everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to principles of Shari’ah.” Article 12, affirms that “every man shall have the right, within the framework of Shari’ah, to free movement” (nothing is said  about every woman). Articles 24 and 25 further makes Shari’ah supreme by asserting that Shari’ah is the Declaration’s “only source of reference.”

Such shorthand and cursory use of Shari’ah gives rise to four important shortcomings. The first is that it renders the document too restrictive. Shari’ah represents an extensive moral and legal code, and limiting rights such as free speech to a Shari’ah compatible framework of values would essentially render free-speech meaningless. Furthermore, the document is rendered ambiguous., as it does not specify what constitutes Shari’ah. Given the diversity of opinions on the subject across time and between and within madhabs (schools of Islamic law), it is impossible to know what rights are protected.

Interestingly, the declaration empowers states, not individuals. In the modern world, Shari’ah has increasingly become integrated in states’ domestic legal systems. In the absence of any international authority to decide on Shari’ah, the Cairo Declaration effectively diminishes the universality of human rights by  relegating them to the discretion of governments.

Finally, the declaration conflicts with international human rights. The document provides only a subordinated status to religious minorities and also prohibits conversion from Islam. It also presents glaring evidence of discrimination against women, as it provides the right to freedom of movement or marriage only to men.

These shortcomings render the Declaration useless at best and at worst harmful for human rights. Not surprisingly, the only people who take the document seriously are critics of Islam who invoke it to argue the religion’s incompatibility with human rights. Muslim advocacy groups, scholars on Islam and human rights, and even the OIC Secretary General İhsanoğlu have either ignored the declaration or have avoided defending it publicly. 

Read it all

Israel warns that Egypt more a threat than Iran, Egypt responds with sabre-rattling

The game of one-upmanship continues.  Israel comments on the dangers of a Islamic Egypt and they take it as an act of aggression.  The brink gets closer and closer while the US plays footsies with the Muslim Brotherhood.

From the Times of Israel April 21 by Elhanan Miller

Egypt’s military leader responds to Lieberman with threat of violence

I

n remarks apparently directed at Israel, Field Marshal Muhammad Hussein Tantawi, the head of Egypt’s Supreme Council of Armed Forces (SCAF) and the country’s de facto leader, threatened on Monday to thwart any foreign aggression against Egypt. He was speaking in the wake of reports, widely covered in the Egyptian media, that Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman has warned of an imminent military threat emanating from Egypt.

“Our borders are constantly burning, but we do not attack any neighboring country but only protect our borders,” Tantawi told Egyptian press during a live ammunition maneuver in the Sinai Peninsula titled “Nasr 7.” “If anyone comes close to Egypt’s border, we will break their leg. Therefore, our forces must be in a perpetual state of alert.”

A second senior military figure, Major General Muhammad Higazi, commander of Egypt’s Second Field Army, also issued a tacit threat, warning that potential aggressors should “reconsider before thinking of attacking any part of Egypt’s territory.”

In Jerusalem, the Foreign Ministry sought to calm the dispute. “Theforeign minister was interviewed today on two Israeli radio stations,” a spokesman said on Monday evening, “and he made it very clear that both sides have a clear interest in keeping the peace agreement.”

On Sunday, the Hebrew daily Maariv reported that Lieberman recently sent a letter to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, warning him about a potential threat from Egypt and requesting that Israel’s southern command be reinforced by three military divisions. “The Egyptian issue is much more disturbing than the Iranian problem,” Lieberman was reported to have said during closed discussions on the topic.

Lieberman’s comments were prominently covered in Egyptian media on Monday, sparking condemnation from commentators and politicians.

Egypt’s Foreign Ministry asked the Israeli government on Monday to clarify the statements attributed to Lieberman.

 Read it all