Western Resistance

« March 2007 | Main | May 2007 »

April 30, 2007

UK: Islamists Convicted - 7/7 Links And MI5 Oversights

The men pictured above were today convicted at the Old Bailey, London, of plotting to set off bombs based on the fertilizer ammonium nitrate at various locations. All five were given life sentences.

They are (clockwise): Jawad Akbar, Omar Khyam, Waheed Mahmood, Anthony Garcia and Salahuddin Amin.

Two other people who were on trial with them - Shujah Mahmood, aged 19, and Nabeel Hussain, aged 21, were found not guilty. Shujah Mahmood of Crawley is the brother of Omar Khyam, the ringleader of the group.

All of the men found guilty, as well as Shujah Mahmood, had attended at least one terror training camp in Pakistan. Nabeel Hussain had not taken part in such training. A student from Brunel University, Hussain had been the only one of the seven accused to be allowed bail.

The seven people had been arrested after 600 kilograms of ammonium nitrate were found in a storage depot in Hanwell, west London. Most of the arrests had taken place on March 30, 2004. Mohammed Momin Khawaja, their Canadian associate who is currently awaiting trial in his native country, had been arrested the day before, on March 29. It has been alleged in the trial that Khawaja was to supply detonators for the group.

Another individual who gave evidence at the trial was Mohammed Junaid Babar, who had a house in Lahore, Pakistan. In August 2004 Babar, a US citizen, agreed to cooperate with terror investigators at a New York Court. On June 2, 2004, he had pleaded guilty on five counts of providing material support to terrorists. He admitted to sending money and supplies to a senior Al Qaeda member in Pakistan, setting up a jihadist training camp, and assisting in a bombing plot (this one) in London. Some of the convicted men had spent time in Pakistan, where they stayed at Babar's house. Babar and those convicted today were all connected with the UK extremist group Al Muhajiroun.

News of today's convictions can be found from the BBC, The Times, the Telegraph, Express and Guardian.

On Western Resistance, the following entries detail the history of the trial:

Trial starts, March 21, 2006
Plot to blow up "Ministry of Sound" nightclub
Discussions of plane attacks
Jihad book found at suspect's home, July 13, 2006
Trial hears of Canadian plotter's involvement
Omar Khyam's testimony
Evidence of fertilizer, stored in Hanwell, west London
Anthony Garcia's testimony

MI5 and the 7/7 bombers

I will be compiling a report on the trial, the plot and its participants later, but for the moment I wish to focus on the most serious allegations which have only emerged today, as the trial has now concluded and reporting restrictions have been lifted.

As reported in Telegraph and the Guardian, it was revealed today that group had been in contact with two members of the four man suicide team that committed the atrocities of 7/7, killing 52 people and injuring hundreds. These were the leader of the cell, Mohammed Sidique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer.

A report on 7/7 was published in May 2006 by the parliamentary inquiry team, the Intelligence and Security Committee (ICS), which had claimed that MI5, Britain's homeland intelligence agency, had not been to blame for not identifying the seriousness of Mohammed Sidique Khan's intent.

On May 14, the Sunday Times made the claim that MI5 had failed to disclose to the ICS team some crucial information. MI5 had transcripts of Mohammed Sidique Khan, it was revealed, in which he was heard talking with suspects who were planning another separate bombing attack. These suspects were the ones among those convicted today. Mohammed Sidique Khan was heard discussing making a bomb, and also discussing plans to mount armed jihad and to go to Al-Qaeda terror training camps abroad. According to an (unnamed) member of the ICS committee, these transcripts were never presented before the committee. Instead, senior security officials had presented evidence which had been accepted at face value by the Tony Blair appointees on the committee.

On 11 July 2006, these allegations were discussed by the chairman of ISC, Paul Murphy MP in the House of Commons. According to Hansard (Column 1323) he said: "Our report was published on the basis of evidence given to us that was agreed by the agencies.

We found that the extent of home-grown extremism was underestimated by the agencies. We also recommended several changes to the threat and alert systems, so I was pleased that my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary announced the necessary changes to the House only yesterday.

Some allegations have been made that material was withheld from the Committee during the course of our investigations into the events of July last year and, indeed, that we were misled by the agencies. We have examined each and every one of those claims, whether they were made verbally or in the media, and are satisfied that they are not true. Our report stands as an accurate representation of the facts as we saw them. Although we have investigated the claims over the past weeks, we are still of the opinion that the conclusions at which we arrived in our written report were right."

He also said, (Column 1324): "When the Committee compiled its report on the events of 7 July, several matters caused us concern. We were worried that the agencies had not really recognised the speed with which young Muslim men, in particular, were becoming radicalised. Although that is no longer the case, the situation came as something of a surprise. We were also worried that we had all underestimated the possibility of suicide bombings happening in our own country. It is good that MI5 is now reaching out into the regions of our country, especially our great cities, so that we are in a position in which we can, we hope, avoid such problems in the future."

MI5 had seen Sidique Khan and Tanweer almost 18 months before July 7, 2005. They were seen in the company of Omar Khyam, leader of the group convicted of plotting terror attacks. This evidence was suppressed by the judge in the case, Sir Michael Astill, who felt that disclosure of this information would prejudice the trial.

The first time Sidique Khan had been seen and photographed by MI5 agents was at the Toddington Service station on the M1 motorway, on February 2, 2004. Khan was driving a green Honda Civic vehicle, and had just met with other terror suspects.

Later in February, Khan and Tanweer had been followed for 15 hours as they drove in this vehicle. They traveled from Crawley, West Sussex, (a town where Omar Khyam, Waheed Mahmood, and Javad Iqbal lived at separate addresses), to Slough, Berkshire, to Wellingborough in Northamptonshire and then back to Slough. The Honda Civic was following another vehicle, a silver Suzuki Vitara, driven by Omar Khyam. The MI5 agents were officially tailing Khyam.

On February 21, 2004, Sidique Khan was heard discussing travel with Khyam. The latter individual had bought an airline ticket to Pakistan. Their conversation was recorded. Khan said: "This is a one-way ticket, bruv, yeah, you agree with that, yeah? You're happy with this... basically.. because you're going to leave now, you may as well rip the country apart economically as well. All the brothers are running scams. All the brothers that are leaving are doing it. That's all I've got to say, bruv. Is there anything you'd like to ask? Then fire away."

Mohammed SIdique Khan had enquired if he could delay leaving the country as his wife Hasina Patel was six months' pregnant. Khyam replied "No problem". Khyam had said that within two weeks of landing in Pakistan, he would be "at the front". Sidique Khan said "With regards to the babe, I am debating whether or not to say goodbye and so forth."

MI5 had denied after 7/7 that there had been any Al-Qaeda connection with the four killers, Sidique Khan, Tanweer, Germaine Lindsay and Hasib Hussain. However in September of that year, Al Qaeda released a video of Khan making his last testament. Shortly before the first anniversary, Al Qaeda released a video of Shehzad Tanweer.

The information now available in the media, which shows that MI5 had recorded and photographed Tanweer and Khan in connection with Omar Khyam and his cell, has spurred calls for an official inquiry. Home Secretary John Reid has said that an inquiry will be costly and will take agents away from their jobs tracking immediate terror threats.

Below are some of the official responses to the news today. I am reproducing them in their entirety, as under copyright law of the US there is "justifiable" reason for reproducing in full, and under UK law, reproducing entire articles can be done if justifiably for the purpose of review.

As what I intend to write later on this subject will require objective criticism of some of MI5's claims, I am reproducing firstly a statement from the new head of MI5, Jonathan Evans, from the MI5 website.

*****************************
MI5 Director General Jonathan Evans' Statement

CONVICTION OF FERTILISER PLOTTERS:
STATEMENT BY JONATHAN EVANS (30.04.07)

Today five individuals were found guilty of terrorist-related offences after a trial at the Old Bailey.

I welcome this outcome. It is recognition of the hard work put in by my staff, the police and other agencies, and represents another plot prevented - one of a growing number of potentially devastating attacks the Security Service has stopped.

But the severity of the threat facing our country means expanding counter-terrorist operations at an unprecedented rate just to keep pace. We calculate the number of those with similarly violent intentions to those convicted today has increased substantially since 2005.

My Service has never been complacent. The attack on 7 July in London was a terrible event. The sense of disappointment, felt across the Service, at not being able to prevent the attack (despite our efforts to prevent all such atrocities) will always be with us. The reality is that whilst we will continue to do everything in our power to protect the UK public, we must be honest about what can and cannot be prevented in a democratic society that values its freedoms.

We are today on our website providing more information to the public on the links between those convicted today and the 7 July bombers. The Security Service will never have the capacity to investigate everyone who appears on the periphery of every operation. I believe the account we are publishing here will make this clear.

************

MI5 -

LINKS BETWEEN THE 7 JULY BOMBERS AND THE FERTILISER PLOT

Introduction

The fertiliser plotters:

* Omar Khyam
* Jawad Akbar
* Salahuddin Amin
* Anthony Garcia
* Waheed Mahmood

This account sets out what the Security Service and Police knew of the links between those involved in the 2004 'fertiliser plot' - the trial of which ended on 30 April 2007 - and two members of the group responsible for the 7 July 2005 terrorist attacks in London. It has not been possible to make this information public until the end of the trial for legal reasons.

The Security Service and Police are publishing this account to provide an answer to the question: "If the Security Service and Police had already come across two of the bombers before 2005, why did they not prevent the attacks in London on 7 July?"

It also explains what the Security Service has done and is continuing to do to prevent further attacks. There is a brief summary at the end of this account to provide an update on our current work.

Why did the Service and the Police not prevent 7 July?

The Security Service and Police were appalled by the attacks of 7 July, and it is deeply frustrating that we were not able to prevent them. It is true that the Security Service and Police did come across two of the 7 July bombers - Mohammed Siddique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer - during the earlier investigation into the fertiliser plot. However, even with the benefit of hindsight, it would have been impossible from the available intelligence to conclude that either Khan or Tanweer posed a terrorist threat to the British public.

Khan and Tanweer were never identified during the fertiliser plot investigation because they were not involved in the planned attacks. Rather, they appeared as petty fraudsters in loose contact with members of the plot. There was no indication that they were involved in planning any kind of terrorist attack in the UK.

The intelligence leads generated by the investigation into the 7 July bombings enabled the Security Service and Police to go back over the fertiliser plot records and put names to voices and faces. The details below need to be read with these facts in mind.

The fertiliser plot

Omar Khyam with fertiliser intended for use in terrorism

Throughout 2003-4, the Security Service and Police undertook Operation Crevice, a large-scale investigation into a terrorist conspiracy known as the 'fertiliser plot' - so-called because a group of individuals planned to detonate a fertiliser-based explosive device in the UK. Despite the improvised nature of the device, success of the plot would have resulted in a huge loss of life as the possible targets included a nightclub and a shopping centre.

At the time, this was both the Security Service's and the Police's largest ever counter terrorist operation. The scale of intelligence gathering meant switching resources from other less urgent investigations. It also meant making judgements on a daily basis about where to concentrate resources based on who presented the greatest threat to the UK public.

It was in the investigation of this conspiracy that Khan and Tanweer first came to the Security Service's attention as unidentified individuals on the periphery of the plot. To give an idea of scale, the links between the fertiliser plot bombers and Khan and Tanweer represent less than 0.1% of all the links on record in relation to the fertiliser plot investigation.

Khan and Tanweer links to the fertiliser plot

1. Two men discuss fraud scams at fund raising meetings

During February and March 2004, an unknown man subsequently identified as Khan met with members of the fertiliser plot on five occasions. He was accompanied by another unknown man, subsequently identified as Tanweer, on three of these occasions. The meetings took place in Crawley, the home of several of the fertiliser plot conspirators.

There was no indication as a result of the intelligence available at the time on these meetings that either Khan or Tanweer were involved in terrorist plotting. These meetings appeared to centre on the raising of money. Conversations record Khan and Tanweer discussing how to raise cash through a variety of fraud scams, such as purchasing building equipment on credit, defaulting on payment and selling the goods on for cash. There is no record of Khan and Tanweer discussing terrorist activity or bomb building.

The Security Service did record another conversation involving an individual identified after 7 July as Khan. From the context of the recorded conversation it is possible that Khan was talking about going to fight with militia groups in the Pakistani border areas.

2. A man called 'Ibrahim'

"We conclude that, in light of the other priority investigations being conducted and the limitations on Security Service resources, the decisions not to give greater investigative priority to these two individuals were understandable."
- Intelligence and Security Committee Report into the London Terrorist Attacks on 7 July 2005.

It has become clear since 7 July that Khan was known to detainees held outside the UK in early 2004. Some detainees had mentioned men from the UK, known only by pseudonyms, who had travelled to Pakistan in 2003 and sought meetings with Al Qaida figures. In the aftermath of the 7 July attacks, Khan was identified by a detainee (who had seen a press photograph) as one of the UK men, known to him only as 'Ibrahim'.

Follow-up investigations in 2004 into the unidentified men on the periphery of the fertiliser plot included the circulation of photographs to foreign intelligence services in an attempt to identify these individuals. Photographs of Khan were shown to two detainees who had provided the earlier information, but without a positive result.

If Khan had been recognised, the Security Service might have allocated more resources to investigating him. However, given the operational priorities at the time, there is no guarantee that Khan would have been seen as a high priority target even then. In the event, the investigation was put on hold due to the need to focus on far more urgent cases posing potential large-scale threats to life.

3. Investigation of Khan and Tanweer post 7/7

Following the atrocities of 7/7, the Security Service and Police undertook a large-scale investigation into the perpetrators of the attacks. It was only at this point that the identities of Khan and Tanweer became clear.

Painstaking analysis of surveillance records following the attacks, in order to determine what - if anything - of the bombers was known to the Security Service and Police prior to 7/7, revealed their presence on the periphery of the fertiliser plot. Examination of Khan's telephone records showed his contact with Omar Khyam. This, along with a subsequent review of surveillance photographs taken during the fertiliser plot investigations, confirmed his presence in meetings with Khyam and others during February / March 2004.

What is the Service doing to prevent further attacks?
"My Service is dedicated to tackling the deadly manifestations of terrorism. Tackling its roots is the work of us all."
- Security Service Director General Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller, speech at Queen Mary, London, 9 November 2006

The fertiliser plot, the 7 July attacks, and the other plots the Security Service has either disrupted or investigated all show that the threat from extremists has been growing since 9/11. As the then Director General Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller said in a speech to students of Queen Mary, University of London, last November: "Because of the sheer scale of what we face the task is daunting." When the fertiliser plot took place it was one of 50 networks of which the Service was aware. By the time of Dame Eliza's speech three years later the Security Service had intelligence on 200 networks involving some 1600 individuals.

Expansion of the Security Service to counter this threat to the UK has been under way since the attacks in the US in 2001. This has not only meant recruiting more staff and establishing an developing the Security Service's network of UK offices, but also increasing the capability of the organisation to gather and assess intelligence.

This is bringing successes, some public, some not. Most recently, there was extensive coverage of the disruption of an alleged plot to blow up passenger jets over the Atlantic. The increase in the conviction of people for terrorism offences since 7 July is evidence that the Security Service is not, as some have suggested, exaggerating the threat.

The creation of the Centre for the Protection of the National Infrastructure (CPNI) in February this year will improve the advice we provide to public and private sector industries on how to guard against terrorist attack.

It is only by working with others in this way, as Dame Eliza pointed out in her speech, that the Security Service can succeed against the scale of threat we face. This means working with the Police, other UK agencies, government and the private sector, security and intelligence services internationally - and, more broadly, with the help and support of the UK public.

***********************

Home Office Statement

Five convicted of UK bomb plot
30 April 2007

Five men have been convicted and given life sentences for a bomb plot that could have killed hundreds in Britain.

Jurors in the Old Bailey trial heard of plans to target a shopping centre, nightclub and the gas network with a fertiliser bomb.

The plot was smashed by police in 2004 and today, after a year-long trial, five men have been convicted and given life sentences.

Omar Khyam, 25, from Crawley, West Sussex, was found guilty of conspiring to cause explosions likely to endanger life between January 1 2003 and March 31 2004.

Also convicted were Waheed Mahmood, 35, and Jawad Akbar, 23, also of Crawley; Salahuddin Amin, 32, from Luton, Bedfordshire; Anthony Garcia, 24, of Barkingside, east London.

Two other men, Nabeel Hussain and Shujah Mahmood, were found not guilty.

The Home Secretary, John Reid, said, 'Five dangerous terrorists are now behind bars thanks to the hard work of our police and security services. I want to thank the men and women in the police and security service who have worked extremely hard to ensure the perpetrators of this plot have been brought to justice and a major terrorist attack that could have killed and injured many people has been averted.

'The government has invested heavily in counter-terrorism over the last five years. The Security Service will have doubled in size by 2008 but it is important to remember that 100 per cent commitment can never guarantee 100% success. Today's case reminds us all that the terrorist threat we face is real and severe.

'I want to take time now to reflect on the verdicts.'

****************

METROPOLITAN POLICE STATEMENT

Operation Crevice: MPS statement

Bulletin 0000000683
30 April 2007 

Deputy Assistant Commissioner Peter Clarke, Head of the MPS Counter Terrorism Command and National Coordinator of Terrorism Investigations, said:

"We are pleased that the overwhelming evidence presented to the Court against these men enabled the jury to reach their decision.

"This case marked a new stage in our understanding of the threat posed by Al Qaeda to this country.

"The investigation showed the links that these men had with Al Qaeda in Pakistan.

"Most of them had attended a terrorist training camp in Pakistan in 2003, and were taught how to make explosives; some had been involved in extremism as far back as 2001.

"This was not a group of youthful idealists. They were trained, dedicated, ruthless terrorists who were obviously planning to carry out an attack against the British public.

"Operation Crevice is a landmark case for a variety of reasons, in particular the scale of the investigation that was needed to gather the evidence to bring these men to justice.

"The threat posed by this group of men demanded an unprecedented response from the police and Security Service. It was imperative that the public were protected from these men and their plans.

"At the time it was the largest counter terrorism operation ever seen in the UK. The success was achieved through close co-operation and sharing of intelligence between the UK, the USA, Canada and Pakistan.

"It was the first time since 9/11 that we in the UK had seen a group of British men intent on committing mass murder against their fellow citizens.

"They were involved in an international conspiracy, and the evidence showed that they would not balk at killing as many people as they could. We heard them praising the attacks in Madrid, saying that there were no such things as innocent victims. They had to be stopped.

"There is always a balance to be struck between allowing terrorists to go ahead with their planning, so that we can gather evidence, and making sure the public are safe. We will never gamble with public safety.

"In this case we decided to arrest the plotters when we feared that they were getting closer to mounting their attack. We could take no risks.

"While under surveillance they were heard discussing possible targets such as shopping centres, nightclubs, trains - all heavily crowded places where the loss of life and destruction could have been massive.

"We now know that two of the people who attacked London on 7th July 2005 met with Khyam's group during the Operation Crevice surveillance operation. They were not part of that plot, and at that time were not a threat to public safety. In every case, and Operation Crevice was no exception, decisions have to be made as to who poses a threat to the public, and how resources should be used.

"The decisions made during the investigation have been examined by the Parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee. Their report was published in May last year.

"It is a grave disappointment and a matter of great regret to everyone involved in counter-terrorism that we were not able to prevent the attack on 7th July 2005. What this case and others in the future will show is that we are dealing with a threat posed by interlinked networks of terrorists.

"We will continue to do everything within our power, and within the law, to keep the public safe from the threat of terrorism.

"Everyone involved in Operation Crevice - Police, Security Service and Crown Prosecution Service, can be proud of their role in helping to stop a terrorist atrocity and gathering and presenting the evidence which has led to these convictions."

"We will continue to do everything within our power, and within the law, to keep the public safe from the threat of terrorism.

"Everyone involved in Operation Crevice - Police, Security Service and Crown Prosecution Service, can be proud of their role in helping to stop a terrorist atrocity and gathering and presenting the evidence which has led to these convictions."

*********************

POLICE VIDEO

The Metropolitan Police have released a video (Windows Media Format), in which one of the men who was today convicted, Salahuddin Amin, is filmed being questioned. It is 4.1 mb in file size, and can be downloaded HERE

*********************

STATEMENT FROM THE FBI REGARDING MOHAMMED SIDIQUE KHAN

(This report came out after claims had been made in the book the One Percent Doctrine by Pulitzer Prize winner Ron Suskind. We at Western Resistance discussed the claims in this book on June 20, 2006. It is referred to in the section below this, in a list of "rumours" and "realities" put out on the MI5 website)

For Immediate Release
June 22, 2006

Washington D.C.
FBI National Press Office
(202) 324-3691

FBI Responds to Report on London Bomber

Washington, D.C. - In response to several news reports based on material from the book entitled "The One Percent Doctrine" the FBI would like to clarify some facts. The book asserts that Mohammad Sidique Khan, a suspect in the London subway bombings of July 7, 2005, was on the U.S. "No Fly List" and attempted to enter the United States three times. That reporting is inaccurate. There is an individual named Mohammed Ajmal Khan, who is currently incarcerated in the United Kingdom for providing material support to terrorism. Many of the facts the book inaccurately associates with Mohammed Sidique Khan do apply to Mohammed Ajmal Khan. It appears that the author has intertwined facts relating to both men causing some confusion.

International cooperation has been, and will continue to be, crucial to preventing and disrupting terrorist networks. We continue to work closely with our domestic and international partners to review and share intelligence information and to conduct investigations as necessary.

*********************

MI5 STATEMENT ON "RUMOURS AND REALITY"

(In relation to reports of the 7/7 bombers and the information disclosed today)

RUMOURS AND REALITY

Since the 7 July London bombings, a number of rumours and misunderstandings have emerged concerning investigations into the bombers and their links to other extremists, particularly the fertiliser bomb plotters. This page addresses a number of these rumours and provides the facts behind the myths.

Rumours
Khan and Tanweer were under surveillance by the Security Service before 7 July but this was called off before the attacks.
Reality
They appeared as unidentified contacts during surveillance of those central to the fertiliser bomb plot. They were not fully identified until after 7 July.

Rumours
The Security Service and Police had tapes of the 7/7 bombers discussing bombing attacks and tapes of Khan discussing the planning of terrorist attacks.
Reality
The Security Service did record conversations involving an individual identified after 7 July as Khan. However, he did not discuss either the planning or execution of terrorist attacks in these conversations. The only discussions of bombing attacks that were recorded involved the people who have just been tried/convicted for their participation in the fertiliser plot.

Rumours
Khan and Tanweer were closely involved with the fertiliser bomb plot and therefore known terrorists.
Reality
Neither Khan nor Tanweer were involved with the fertiliser bomb plot. They appeared as petty fraudsters in loose contact with members of the fertiliser plot and the intelligence collected on them gave no indication that they posed a terrorist threat.

Rumours
Khan's car was bugged by the Police/Security Service so why was he not prevented from carrying out an attack?
Reality
Khan's car was not 'bugged'. After 7 July, the Police identified material recovered from the bomb site at Edgware Road tube station as belonging to Khan. Because they suspected his involvement, they put a tracking device (not a listening device) in his car. Forensic evidence confirmed later that he had died in the attack.

Rumours
There were recordings of Omar Khyam (one of the defendants in the fertiliser plot trial) talking to Khan about bomb-making.
Reality
The Security Service did record conversations involving an individual identified after 7 July as Khan. However there is no recording of Khyam discussing bomb-making with Khan.

There does however appear to have been a misinterpretation, by some sections of the media, of a ruling given by the Judge at the beginning of the fertiliser plot trial. These stories misinterpreted the ruling to mean that Khan was present when the fertiliser bomb plotters discussed bomb making. In response, the Judge made a second ruling in June 2006 to make it clear that this reporting was 'based on a false interpretation' of his original ruling.

Rumours
Khan had visited the US to associate with Islamist extremists and planned attacks on US cities in 2003. The FBI had put him on their 'no fly' list - preventing any aircraft from landing in the US with him on board. He had also been refused a US visa.
Reality
The Security Service has no record of Khan ever visiting the US, nor is there any information to suggest he was planning attacks on US cities. These claims are likely to be based on misidentification as some of these circumstances are true of a Mohammed Ajmal Khan. The FBI has stated that Khan was not on their 'no fly' list. There is also no record of Khan ever having been refused a US visa. See the FBI's press release, "FBI Responds to Report on London Bomber", of 22 June 2006.

Rumours
A detainee, who identified Khan after the 7 July attacks from pictures in the media, was not shown a surveillance photo of Khan taken during the fertiliser bomb plot investigation.
Reality
The detainee was shown surveillance photographs of Khan but failed to recognise him. The same detainee went on to identify Khan from photographs in media reporting, but only after the 7 July bombings and only as 'Ibrahim'.

Rumours
Convicted terrorist Mohammed Junaid Babar had tipped off the FBI and New York Police about Khan.
Reality
Prior to 7 July 2005 here is no record of Babar (who was called as a prosecution witness at the fertiliser plot trial) identifying either to the FBI or NYPD someone called 'Khan' as a threat. Only after 7 July did Babar identify Khan as somebody he knew.

Rumours
Tanweer was identified by non-UK intelligence agencies as someone accessing radical internet websites.
Reality
No such report was received by any of the UK intelligence agencies.

Rumours
The Security Service held back intelligence information when giving evidence to the Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) hearings into the 7 July bombings.
Reality
The Security Service did not withhold any evidence from the ISC. The chair of the ISC, Paul Murphy MP, made this clear when he spoke in the debate on the ISC Annual Report [Adobe PDF, 445 Kb] on 11 July 2006. He said:

"Some allegations have been made that material was withheld from the Committee during the course of our investigations into the events of July last year and, indeed, that we were misled by the agencies. We have examined each and every one of those claims, whether they were made verbally or in the media, and are satisfied that they are not true." (Hansard, 11 July 2006, column 1323).

Rumours
A criminal mastermind responsible for orchestrating the attacks left the UK the day before 7 July.
Reality
This is not the Service's current assessment. It was an initial strand of investigation in the immediate aftermath of the 7 July attacks but it was subsequently discounted.

Rumours
The Saudi authorities warned the UK agencies about the 7 July attacks.
Reality
No prior warning of the attacks was received from any source. The Saudis provided information about possible planning for an attack in the UK which was materially different from the attacks that took place in London on 7 July.

Rumours
A Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre* report was issued in May 2005 assessing that there was no danger of an attack in the UK.
Reality
A JTAC report was issued in May 2005 but it did not state that there was no danger of an attack. The text of the assessment is reproduced in paragraph 82 of the ISC report into the 7 July bombings [Adobe PDF, 661 Kb]. It includes the warning that there was 'a continued high level of threat and that an attack might well be mounted without warning'.

Rumours
In February 2004, the Security Service recorded Khan's wish to fight and him saying goodbye to his family - a clear indication that he intended a suicide mission.
Reality
The Security Service did record conversations involving an individual identified after 7 July as Khan. From the context of the recorded conversation it is probable that Khan was talking about going to fight with militia groups in the Pakistan border areas. He was not talking about acts of terrorism in the UK.

Rumours
Khan travelled to Indonesia and associated with known Jemaah Islamiyah extremists.
Reality
There is no intelligence to suggest this took place.

******************

Notes on the above -

*JTAC or the "Joint Terrorism Analysis Center" is based at MI5 headquarters at Thames House, Millbank London.

The last statement, that Khan had traveled to Indonesia (and also Malaysia and the Philippines) where he met with Al Qaeda-linked terrorist group Jemaah Islamiyah was made by the Singapore-based terrorism consultant Dr Rohan Gunaratna. He made these statements in a BBC Newsnight Report, which was made by Richard Watson, one of the BBC's best reporters on terrorism affairs. The show was aired on October 25, 2005.

The claim that Saudi intelligence warned Britain about an imminent attack immediately prior to 7/7 was made in the Observer newspaper of August 7, 2005. In February 2006, "senior White House officials" were said to have confrmed that there was a warning from Saudi Arabia, according to the Observer of February 5, 2006.

***********

Footnote: Tomorrow, Family Security Matters and Western Resistance will be publishing an account of MI5's structure and history, which was completed this morning, before the news of today's trial and the removal of restrictions on details revealed at the trial.

Posted by Giraldus Cambrensis at 6:40 PM | Comments (0)

April 29, 2007

Book Review: Milestones

It is hard to believe a book can be written that contains the essence of pure evil. But such a book exists. It is titled Milestones*, by Sayyid Qutb.

The book is an attempt to explain the crisis of Islam--why were Muslims, once powerful, are now weak. Qutb claims this has happened because there is no real, existent Islam; all societies now (at the time of his writing) are living in "ignorance of the divine guidance". The corollary being that all "Muslim" societies are not Muslim at all.

Qutb's solution to the crisis of Islam--stop me if you have heard this one before--is yet more Islam. His specific plan is to have Islam take root in a society (take over a country) and then after recreating "real Islam" use Jihad and Da'wa to unify the Islamic world, then "unify" the whole World under the banner of Islam.

This is standard Islamic daydreaming, true. But the devil really is in the details. Mr. Qutb explains, for example, how Islam is a source of liberation from the domination of other men--that is, complete slavery--is preferred to imperfect liberty. He also helpfully explains how Muslims are "liberated" from, say, the tyranny of family, nation, and tribe, and how every bond ought to be broken in the name of Islam. And this is called good.

So, that's why I call this book pure evil; it manages to present a case in which the destruction of the human spirit is held out as the highest good. A Christian might call this "the Sin against the Holy Spirit", the only unforgivable sin.

Milestones is hard reading; not hard to read, mind you, but hard reading—emotionally wrenching, exhausting. Still, I urge readers to consider reading this book nonetheless. It will help you understand the enemy like no other book this size would. And that should be enough for those who want to know.

* No link is provided because the book is sold by an Islamic outfit. Please check your local libraries.

Posted by Ruy Diaz at 9:31 AM | Comments (1)

April 28, 2007

Denmark: Muslim Hijab Woman To Run For Parliament

Associated Press via ADN.com, Seattle Pi and Newsday reports that a Danish woman who wears a hijab and refuses to shake hands with men has announced her intention to stand in the 2009 parliamentary elections in Denmark.

This 25-year old woman, Asmaa (Asama) Abdol-Hamid, came to Denmark with her family from Palestine when she was 6. She works as a social worker at Odense and is a member of Odense city council. The blog Agora traces her trajectory via entries in the Danish media.

In June 2001, she was photographed selling falafels in Vollsmore, an immigrant neighborhood in Odense. At this time she was head of the "Young Women's Activity Organization". Two months later, this group protested the impending appointment of Carmi Gillon (former head of intelligence agency Shin-Bet) to the post of Israeli ambassador to Denmark.

In the late summer of 2004, Abdol-Hamid wrote newspaper letters complaining about Denmark's "24-year" rule which was designed to dissuade arranged marriages. This law prevents migrants from bringing in spouses under the age of 24. Abdol-Hamid claimed the law was intended to reduce foreigners entering Denmark, and abused their "human rights".

In December 2004 she was rejected as a candidate for the Social Democrats, but in the following year joined the "Unity List" a socialist/communist coalition.

In May 2005, when Queen Margrethe II was quoted in a biography stating that "We are presently being challenged by Islam. Both globally and locally," Abdol-Hamid writes a letter, condemning Margrethe. In return, letters condemn Abdol-Hamid.

In May, 2005, supports radical cleric Abu Laban in his demands for the family of a disco bouncer to pay "blood money" to the family of a Muslim man shot b the bouncer. In July 2005, she attended an anti-George W. Bush demonstration.

The Jyllands-Posten newspaper's publication on September 30, 2005 of cartoons of the alleged prophet Mohammed brought Abdol-Hamid into the limelight. On October 29, 2005, a month after the cartoons were printed, Abdol-Hamid acted as coordinator for 11 Muslim bodies in a complaint made to the Danish police against the newspaper.

Two days later, she refused to shake hands with a politician from the anti-immigration Danish People's Party (DPP - Dansk Folkeparti), an action which was motivated by religious prejudice against touching men, more than a political statement. This gesture brought her a public denouncement from the leftists at the "Unity List" coalition. On November 11, 2005, Abdol-Hamid was condemned by Karsten Hønge of the Socialist People's Party (Socialistisk Folkeparti - SF), who said she was a "fundamentalist who shouldn't call herself a socialist." He said that she was trying to limit freedom of speech by trying to ban the cartoons, an action which made her "belong to the reactionaries".

The November 2005 election was a disaster for Abdol-Hamid, who was not elected. However, her railings against freedom of speech were rewarded when in the end of March, 2006, she was given her own eight-part show on Denmark's state-funded DR2 network. She was the first hijab-wearing presenter to host a Danish TV show. Her co-host was Adam Holm, an advocate of press freedom. DR2 aimed for the show to promote dialogue between Muslims and non-Muslims, and justified her headscarf by stating: "headscarf-wearing women are part of Danish society and we need to accept this fact."

Asbol-Hamid's televised headscarf elicited contrary reactions from Denmark's feminists. Vibeke Manniche, head of the Women for Freedom association, said of the choice of Asbol-Hamid to host the show was "an insult to both Danish and Muslim women. She sends the signal that an honourable woman cannot go out unless her head is covered." Feminist Forum claimed her presence on DR2 TV "strengthens ethnic and gender equality in Denmark."

After the TV appearance, she received emails. She said of these: "Some emails were critical and offensive; but I was never provoked and dealt with them in accordance with our Islamic teachings, trying to explain my viewpoints to the senders."

At her press conference on Friday, April 27 to announce her intentions to stand in 2009 as a parliamentary candidate, Abdol-Hamid claimed "I want another Denmark where we talk about the difference between groups. When we talk about values, (we need) to be open to whatever people are, Muslim or non-Muslim. We have a constitution in Denmark and it will be upheld."

There has been a background of controversy behind this decision by Abdol-Hamid. There claims that she has changed her political position, and she has been condemned by members of the Danish People's Party (Dansk Folkeparti).

A week before her press conference, DPA and EUX.TV reported on the controversy. Three members of Dansk Folkeparti had made negative comments about Muslims in general and Abdol-Hamid in particular. One of these, thrologian Soren Krarup had compared the hijab to a "totalitarian symbol" like the swastika. Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the premier and leader of the Venstre liberal party, had condemned Krarup's comments.

On his website, Krarup stated: "The Danish People's Party would like to underline that this is not a critique of the individual woman, who may wear a headscarf, but a general critique of Islam's veiling of women."

Mogens Camre, who is also a DPP representative in the European Parliament, had on April 18 said to the daily newspaper Politiken that Abdol-Hamid needed psychiatric care. On Friday, April 20, he issued a public apology, explaining that his comments had been to highlight the absurdities of Islam. In an internet press release, Camre said: "It wasn't my intention to comment on Abdol-Hamid's mental condition, but rather the absurdities of the Islamic view on the world, so therefore I'm sorry about those statements."

On April 20, Morten Messerschmidt had reiterated Krarup's comments about the hijab representing totalitarianism.

As a result, the three politicians were reported to the police on April 20. The complaint had been filed by the Documentation and Advisory Center on Racial Discrimination. Its spokeswoman, Line Boegsted, had said "We're reporting them to police for violating racism laws on behalf of two Danes who have asked us to do so."

Any attempt to punish the three DPP members would be stymied by their possessing diplomatic immunity - the EU parliament and Danish Parliament would have to officially lift immunity provisions against the accused men to proceed with a prosecution.

The Unity List, also known as the Red-Green Alliance, has claimed that the "anger generated against Asmaa is likely due to the fact that she is trying to combine being a practicing Muslim with supporting democracy, gender equality and socialism."

On Thursday, April 19, the daily Politiken had published an interview with Abdol-Hamid in which it claimed that she supported the death penalty (not legal under Danish law). On Friday 20, Abdol-Hamid denied the claim and demanded an apology from the paper. The newspaper however has stood by its claims, maintaining its interview was accurate.

At her press conference on Friday April 27, Abdol-Hamid reiterated her claim that she did not support the death penalty, and said that she was "unconcerned with whatever sexual or ethnic background people have."

Not all of Denmark's Muslims are happy with Abdol-Hamid. Karl Ritter of Associated Press quoted Hamid El Mousti, who sits on Copenhagen's City Council. He said: "If you don't shake hands with men, you can't be a part of the Danish Parliament. I'm from Morocco and we shake hands with women. If you do not salute people, communication between you and others will be very bad."

Posted by Giraldus Cambrensis at 5:13 PM | Comments (0)

April 26, 2007

South Africa: Funeral Raises Islamist Tensions

Today, the Independent Online reported on the funeral of an anti-apartheid activist, Ismail Abrahams, also called locally "Boeta Mylie from Bonteheuwel".

Abrahams had also been a member of Islamic groups which could be construed as radical, including "Call of Islam" and the more controversial group called Qibla. The latter group, founded in South Africa in the early 1980s, was started with the aim of implementing the ideals of the Iranian Shia revolution in South Africa, particularly in the Western Cape, where a high number of Muslims live.

After Abrahams died on Friday after a long struggle with cancer, his funeral took place on Saturday (April 21), attended by the Premier of Western Cape province, Ebrahim Rasool, a member of the ruling African National Congress (ANC) party. Rasool had been regarded highly by Abrahams and it had been the deceased's desire that he should attend the funeral. Abrahams' family had said that the dead activist's desire had been to see his funeral uniting radical factions in Islam with those who once fought together against apartheid - represented by Finance Trevor Manuel and Ebrahim Rasool, whom Abrahams had regarded as a "son".

What resulted at the Bonteheuwel was an angry demonstration, which saw the Premier of Western Cape province insulted and threatened by members of radical groups. The disturbance indicated that Islamism, which has long been simmering away in the Western Cape, has not disappeared and is as potentially explosive as it has ever been.

In 2000, there had been a series of nine bombings in the province which caused serious injuries. On August 25, 1998, there had been an explosion at Planet Hollywood, Cape Town, In all, there had been 189 bomb attacks between 1996 and 2000.

The Planet Hollywood attack was assumed to be the handiwork of PAGAD (People Against Gangsterism and Drugs), a mainly Muslim group which had been formed in December 9, 1995 in the Cape Flats section of Cape Town. In 2001 a major crackdown took place by authorities against PAGAD leadership, and the violence appeared to subside. PAGAD was also blamed for a car bombing at the Victoria and Alfred Waterfront in Cape Town on January 1, 1999, and also a firebombing of a US-affiliated restaurant exactly a week later. PAGAD vigilantes are shown below.

At Abrahams' funeral on Saturday, members of PAGAD were in attendance, along with some wearing Hizbollah sweaters, some with Hamas bandanas, and others with ANC and Qibla T-shirts.

Abrahams himself had been a radical - his noble struggle against apartheid was not ennobled by his involvement with Qibla, whose slogan was "One Solution, Islamic Revolution". Qibla's leader was Achmad Cassiem. WIth PAGAD, members of QIbla used radio station 786 to promote their anti-US and pro-Islamist message.

In 1999, according to that year's US Patterns of Global Terrorism report, Qibla had about 250 members, and PAGAD had at least 50 gunmen. Two of Abrahams' sons, Yusuf and Nazeem, had been found guilty of committing a bombing against the Lincoln Tavern in Belgravia, at Kimberley in Northern Cape in 1985.

With Abrahams' associations with terrorist groups, it is not hard to explain the degeneration of the funeral service. When Premier Rasool tried to deliver a eulogy, he was shouted down by Islamists, who upon his arrival at the mosque had accused him of being "too accommodating of other faiths", for not outlawing alcohol consumption, and not fulfilling their expectations of Islamic policy making.

Security forces intervened, and the funeral ended earlier than expected. Today, according to Independent Online, the premier explained his views. He said: "I knew they (the militant Islamic factions) would also claim Boeta Mylie as one of their own and would be there. But I had thought that we should leave that dangerous period of the late 1990s behind us and move towards a far more peaceful period in the Western Cape."

"I was very disappointed that such narrow-minded people would have tried to disrupt the funeral of a man that we all understood to be courageous in the struggle against apartheid. They disrespected him by the way they behaved."

The family of Ismail Abrahams expressed their disappointments at the behavior of the Islamist elements. The irony is that the funeral of someone who took part in the struggle against racial apartheid was disrupted by people who support religious apartheid.

The funeral highlights how ferocious one strand of South Africa's Muslim population can be. Muslims comprise only 2.3% of the demographic in SA. The most well known Muslim in the nation was the controversial Indian-born Ahmed Deedat, who died in 2005 aged 87. Deedat was responsible for da'wah activities leading to many conversions into Islam in South Africa and beyond, but has been criticized as an anti-Semite.

American journalist, counter-terrorism expert and Fox TV presenter Steve Emerson produced a show called "Terrorists among us - Jihad in America" in 1994. When this was aired in South Africa, Emerson was informed by the FBI that a South African Muslim group had sent a team to the US to kill him. The identity of this group is not known, though it may have been from Qibla. Since that time, Emerson has had to be cautious in his activities.

Qibla's alliance with PAGAD highlighted its terrorist potential. PAGAD had a militant activist wing, called the G-Force. PAGAD emerged from an alliance of Muslims and local neighborhood watch groups, but turned to direct actions of vigilantism and eventually full-blown terrorist attacks. It was notorious for its killing of Rashaad Staggie on August 4, 1996 (pictured left).

Staggie was one of two brothers (Rashied Staggie was the other) who ran a small gang, the Hard Livings gang, in the Cape Flats selling drugs, and his murder was caught on film. The Cape Flats had been where people had been relocated after a racially mixed area of Cape Town, called District Six, had been demolished in 1950 under the terms of the Group Areas Act - it predominantly housed those classed as "coloured" - neither specifically black, Indian, or white.

A large march of Muslims, mostly wearing kefftieh scarves wrapped around their faces, with a motorcade of 500 vehicles descended upon the neighburhood. Staggie was set on fire, and then shot dead. In 2002, PAGAD's national coordinator Abdus-Salaam Ebrahim, PAGAD's security chief Salie Abader, a former spiritual leader of Pagad called Abdur-Razaak Ebrahim, and Pagad member Moegsien Mohamed were acquitted of involvement in the public lynching of Staggie, but were found guilty of public violence. After the acquittals of these men on lynching charges, there were fears of a resurgence of bombing attacks.

Abdus-Salaam Ebrahim (pictured, right) was sentenced in March 2002 to five years' jail and was sent to Goodwood Prison. Abdur Razaaq Ebrahim was jailed for three years - though he was told that he would not necessarily serve the entire jail term.

By 2000 PAGAD was thought to be officially dead. The behavior at Saturday's funeral raises further doubts about the real disappearance of the group.

On Monday, August 29, 2005, there were warnings made by South Africa's Intelligence Minister Ronnie Kasrils that al-Qaeda was believed to be trying to set up networks in the country.

He said: "There are groups in Africa that claim to be part of al-Qaeda and other structures, and here in southern Africa they have been discovered seeking refuge and quite possible attempting to set up networks. There is nothing to stop terrorists attacking a maritime target in Africa, along our busy sea lanes or in our harbors.... We must also note the potential for terrorist groups to use the sea.. Africa is not immune to this."

"The challenge to us is to develop our maritime power, our naval power, to a level where this continent will no longer be an easy target ... and to discourage adventures by foreign actors, be they states or non-state groups such as international terrorists, narcotics smugglers or mercenaries."

Posted by Giraldus Cambrensis at 12:56 PM | Comments (1)

April 25, 2007

UK: Muslim 9/11 Suspect Is Freed By Court

News from Associsted Press via Pravda, Denver Post, CNN and also from Reuters and the Times:

Farid Hilali (pictured left) has been in prison in Britain for more than three years. He was the first person to be subjected to the new European Arrest Warrant in 2003, which had been issued from Spain on the orders of Spanish Judge Baltasar Garzon.

38-year old Hilali, a Moroccan national, had been suspected of involvement in 9/11, mainly on account of his involvement with Syrian-born Imad Eddin Barakat Yarkas, also known as Abu Dahdah (pictured below right). Yarkas was jailed on September 26, 2005 for a total of 27 years. He had been found guilty of conspiring to cause the attacks of 9/11 but the high court in Spain did not find him guilty of killing the 2,973 victims of 9/11. Yarkas was sentenced then to 12 years for leading a terrorist group, and 15 years for "conspiracy to commit murder".

However, on February 16, 2006 Yarkas had his sentence reduced by 15 years, after federal prosecutors recommended that the "conspiracy to commit murder" conviction should be waived. On June 1, 2006 this conviction was officially quashed by the Spanish Supreme Court. Yarkas' 12-year sentence for being a terrorist leader still stands.

Farid Hilali was arrested in south London in September 2003. He also claimed that he had been tortured by MI5 agents. In May last year, Hilali had lost his appeal against extradition to Spain. The extradition had been approved in June 2005. Intelligence agents had released recordings of phone conversations with Yarkas about plans to fly planes.

Hilali was called "Shakur" and the phone conversations with Yarkas had included references to "cutting the bird's throat", an apparent allusion to the American bald eagle. Hilali was heard to say that he had "entered the field of aviation".

Hilali's lawyer, veil-wearing Muddasar Arani (who has also represented Abu Hamza and other terrorists) said: "No explanation has been tendered, in spite of numerous requests by me and my firm, as to why the Spanish authorities have obstinately proceeded with a dud case."

Posted by Giraldus Cambrensis at 2:24 PM | Comments (0)

Saudi Arabia: The Closet Kingdom, Gay Pride Flourishes in the Cradle of Islam

The May issue of the American magazine, the Atlantic, has an interesting article about Saudi Arabia's flourishing gay community. According to the well-researched article, despite Islamic strictures against homosexuality a large segment of the Saudi Arabian population, both male and female, frequently engage in homosexual acts.

According to Islamic law homosexuality is punishable by death. This punishment, however, is a poor deterrent. According to the article, most Saudi men become gay because it's easier to pick up a man than to find a woman. The situation is the same for young women. The article claims that Saudi Arabia's inhumane laws and dread morality police, which forbid dating between young men and women, in fact are a major factor pushing them towards homosexuality in their youth.

Still, even after marriage, many Saudi men continue to return to their male lovers, especially when their wife is pregnant or menstruating.

Below are some of the most pertinent parts of the article:

Talal, a Syrian youth who moved to Riyadh in 2000, calls the Saudi capital a ``gay heaven.''

``I used to have the feeling that I was the queerest in the country,'' said Yasser, a Saudi youth. ``But then I went to high school and discovered that there are others like me. Then I find out it's a whole society.''

Many gay expatriates say they feel more at home in the kingdom than in their native lands.

``Guys romp around and parade in front of you,'' said Marco, a 41-year old gay man from the Philippines living in Saudi Arabia. ``They will seduce you. It's up to you how many you want, every day.''

A magazine editor in Jeddah told me that many boys in Mecca, where he grew up have sexual relations with men, but they don't see themselves as gay. ``Homosexuality is considered to be a stage of life, particularly at youth.''

``[Saudi Arabia] is the land of sand and sodomites,'' said Tasmin, a female student who told me about the lesbian enclave at her school. ``The older men take advantage of the little boys.''

Dave, a gay American teacher living in Saudi Arabia, put it this way: ``Let's say there's a group of men sitting around a cafe. If a smooth faced boy walks by, they all stop and make approving comments. They're just noting: ``That's a hot little number.''

Posted by at 12:49 PM | Comments (0)

April 24, 2007

Iran: Summer Heralds Enforcement Of Muslim Dress Code

With summer around the corner, Iran is engaging on its campaigns of enforcement of strict dress codes. These annual events never target the shabby appearance of individuals such as President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who can make the best tailored suit look cheap. As always, they are aimed at imposing restrictions upon women, encouraging them to wear head coverings in the heat, and preferably to wear the chador, the Iranian equivalent of a chador.

The news is carried by Reuters via the Scotsman, and by the Daily Telegraph.

Women who do not abide by the sharia dress codes can be given lashes, fines or prison terms. Mehdi Ahmadi, spokesman for Tehran's police force, was quoted as saying: "Police have started from Saturday to confront those women who appear in public in an inappropriate way."

Already 1,300 women have been stopped by police and warned about the Islamic dress code, which was introduced after the 1979 Islamist revolution. 59 women have been "referred to the court".

Posted by Giraldus Cambrensis at 9:22 PM | Comments (0)

Islam: Muslim Poll Suggests Extremist Sympathies

News from Reuters, Hindustan Times and Gulf Daily News:

A survey has been conducted among Muslims in Egypt, Morocco, Pakistan and Indonesia. The poll was conducted by WorldPublicOpinion.org and the University of Maryland. The interviews were conducted face to face. The original pollster's findings can be found here.

The questions were asked between December 9, 2006 and February 15, 2007. In Morocco, 1,000 interviews were made, with 1,141 respondents questioned in Indonesia, 1,243 in Pakistan and 1,000 from Egypt.

The poll found that three out of four people agreed with seeking to "require Islamic countries to impose a strict application of sharia" and to "keep Western values out of Islamic countries." Two thirds of respondents wanted to "unify all Islamic counties into a single Islamic state or caliphate."

Less than one in four people beiieve al Qaeda carried out the 9/11 attacks, with Pakistani respondents being the most sceptical (3% thought al Qaeda committed the 9/11 terror attacks). Most people were not sure who did carry out the attacks.

The goals of Al Qaeda (but not the methodology) were supported by most respondents. In all four countries, more than 70% of those polled supported the following goals: to "stand up to Americans and affirm the dignity of the Islamic people,", to "push the US to remove its bases and its military forces from all Islamic countries," and to "pressure the United States to not favor Israel."

Support for attacks against civilians was strongest in Morocco (19% weakly justified this, 6% justified this and 2% strongly justified it and only 57% disagreed), followed by Egypt (6% had weak support, 8% had support, and 7% had strong support and 77% disagreed). In Pakistan, 8% weakly justified civilian attacks, 4% justified this, and 1% strongly supported attacks against civilians, with 81% opposed. In Indonesia, there was least support for civilian attacks, with 84% opposed. Only 7% of respondents weakly supported civilian attacks, and 13% justified such attacks, but no individuals expressed strong support for attacks against civilians.

Majorities thought that the US was seeking to "weaken and divide the Islamic world". On average, 79% felt this. In Pakistan and Indonesia, 73% thought this, with 92% of Egyptians believing this. An average of 64% thought the US was trying to "spread Christianity in the region".

Many supported insurgent attacks against US forces in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Persian Gulf, with an average of around half of the respondents in the four countries agreeing with this, and three in ten disagreeing with this.

Posted by Giraldus Cambrensis at 9:08 PM | Comments (0)

US: Maine Mosque Pig Head Bowler Is Dead

On July 5, 2006, I wrote that a 33-year old man named Brent Matthews had confessed to police for a "hate crime". He had taken a frozen pig's head and bowled it into the Auburn Islamic Center, on Lisbon Street, Lewiston, Maine on the 4th July at 10.15 pm. About 40 Muslims were worshipping at the mosque at the time, and Matthews' Independence Day jape was not viewed favorably.

The representatives of the Council of American Islamic Relations (whose members have included individuals convicted on terrorism charges) exploited the event to promote themselves and their religion. Convert Ibrahim Hooper, who seems to think it is perfectly "American" to promote the ideas of a genocidal and child-molesting so-called prophet, said then that Muslims in Maine should "increase their outreach efforts to educate people of other faiths about Islam."

Hooper suggested one of CAIR's propaganda exercises should be carried out at an "open-house" day at the mosque, such as "Explore the Quran" or "Explore the Life of Muhammad." CAIR's explorations of the life of Mohammed never deal with Mohammed's documented genocide of male members of the Jewish Banu Qurayzah tribe nor his sexual molestation of a child - his "wife" Aisha, who was aged 9 when she was sexually abused.

Brent Matthews killed himself at the weekend, state the Press Herald/Maine Today and the Boston Channel. Obviously Mr Matthews was suffering from some severe emotional problems.

At around 8.30 am Saturday, Mr Matthews was in a parking lot with a semi-automatic handgun off Main Street in Lewiston. At 8.14 he had phoned the police in distress. When they arrived, a brief standoff took place, while officers tried to talk to him. He raised the gun to his head and fired once, killing himself.

A man purporting to be one of his relatives wrote: "Brent Matthews is my Uncle, my family. He was a bit of a racist, there is no denying that. But that wasn't all he was. He was a good man with a heart.

Brent Matthews was almost a father figure to me, like my other two Uncles were, and took part in raising me. We've shared a lot of good times, and I know a lot of things, due to his efforts. Not only that, but my two cousins, were looked after by him as well, we were his family, the ones who actually knew him.

So seriously, before you go around throwing phobias, claiming he was nothing but a racist, learn to know the person, before you judge, because this very same thing could happen to you, and you may be the one who ends up with the bullet in your head."

Another correspondent to the Press Herald/Maine Today wrote: "For those of us that knew Brent, we have lost a very dear and true friend. The news seems to only remember him as the person involved in the mosque incident - Everyone makes bad decisions in their lives, but that doesn't necessarily make you a bad person, and he wasn't a bad person. I mean, come one, what is the point in all of the headlines?? Every news article I have read references the "pig's head incident", in some form, in the headline. That wasn't who he was. But, I guess putting "Loving son, brother, uncle, and friend" doesn't sell the papers and TV shows, does it? There was so much more to him than what the news showed. I just hope that people can look past that and realize that there was a very good man under there who would do anything for his friends and family. He did so much for so many people, and he deeply touched the lives of everyone he knew and met.

What everyone needs to remember is that there is a family and friends grieving right now over the loss of a loved one. Don't use this tragedy as an excuse to attack each other's views and beliefs. Please, show some respect for Brent and the people who love him."

Posted by Giraldus Cambrensis at 7:56 PM | Comments (0)

UK: Islamist Izzadeen Among Six Arrested

News from the Telegraph, Times, Guardian, Channel 4 News, Birmingham Post, Kuwaiti News Agency, AFP, Associated Press and the Herald:

Six people were arrested this morning in dawn raids upon properties in east London, Southall and Luton in Bedfordshire. Abu Izzadeen, the notorious Islamist connected with the Saved/Saviour Sect and Al Ghurabaa, was among those arrested.

Izzadeen, who was born as Trevor Brooks in Hackney, before converting to Islam in 1994, the day before his 18th birthday. He changed his first name to "Omar", and then changed his entire name to Abu Izzadeen. He was involved with Al-Muhajiron, the Islamist group founded by Sheikh Omar Bakri Mohammed. A biography of Izzadeen can be found in two parts HERE and HERE.

The arrests today were made under the terms of section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2006, and all six individuals are said to be held at top-security Paddington Green police station for questioning. A police spokesman said: "The arrests form part of a long-term pro-active and complex investigation into alleged incitement and radicalization for the purposes of terrorism, as well as alleged provision of financial support for international terrorism."

The incitement refers to comments which Izzadeen made at Regents Park Mosque in 2004, which were revealed in a video presented by ITV News on February 5 this year. On this video, Izzadeen said: "Whoever allies himself with the Kaffirs (non-believers) against the believers - he is one of them. So those so-called enemies to Allah who join the British Government - 'cos remember the British Government, my dear Muslim brothers, are crusaders... crusaders come to kill and rape Muslims. Whoever joins them - he who joins the British Army, the American Army, he is a mortal kaffir and his only hukum (punishment) is for his head to be removed. Indeed, whoever changes his deen (Muslim code of life); kill him."

Izzaden was arrested on February 8 under Section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2006. The arrest in February was connected with a statements he made at Small Heath Community Center in Birmingham on Sunday July 2, 2006, shortly before the first anniversary of the 7/7 terror attacks against London Transport, which killed 52 people.

This is the entire statement for which he was questioned (and balied after a short detention) in February, which I transcribed from a video circulated on the internet:

"Mr Mohammed Sidique Khan left us a will saying exactly why he took these operations up. He said 'Until we feel security, you will be our targets." And you - the journalists - you will be the targets. Yeah... and you the journalists - you will be the targets. Are you prepared to die? No you're not. Because you're cowards. You like life."

"I'm quite firm on this issue. Because I remember there was one Japanese, or South Korean, he came to Iraq, and when he was captured by the 'terrorists' - we don't support terrorism - what did he say? Did he have a stiff upper lip? Was he praying? He said (Izzadeen's voice imitates a whining child) "I don't want to die". (The audience laughs). Do you remember that? It was a very heart-wrenching time. Until you saw the bombings, the gassing, imprisonment and torture, of my people. My people - what does that mean? It's all about the global mentality. Someone who believes 'I'm a Muslim' first, last. I know as timely apportions (?), there have been many epitaphs, speeches and sermons, and then your archbishop of somewhere-or-other's going to come out and say 'Yeah, vote for peace around the world, blah, blah, blah.' But I think it's time to read Mohammed Sidique Khan's will, you'll see the answer to our problems."

"Because these people are making clear statements. 'If you stop, you'll be saved. If you don't stop, we're going to kill you - indiscriminately.' We're talking about people who like to die, the way you like to live. Do you know what that means? For the journalists especially. Friday night, and you've been working the whole week, and you're going to be spending all your money on the booze - Friday night is a poofs' night out. Kuffar go out on a Friday - they go to the pubs, they go to clubs, they drink, they vomit, they lose all their sanity, that's their life. And you love that!"

"They're like the animals, (he says something in Arabic) but they're worse! An animal never does that. Only kuffar do that. And, of course, we must declare, that we do not support terrorism. I don't support terrorism. I condemn the terrorism of the British government. I condemn the terrorism of the USA! Every single day, the biggest terrorist in the world is George W. Bush, and his sidekick haman (bath attendant) Tony Blair. I say (he says something in Arabic) I curse them. That's right."

"Bin Laden - he offered, before 7/7, by a few months - he made a statement where he offered to the European public - he never (made it) just (to) the governments - of sua, or gunda excuse me - the offer (of) gunda - the 'truce'. He offered to you, Madam, non-Muslim, and you sir, non-Muslim, and offered to you... The rest of us are Muslims so he knows what we want anyway - he gave it to you... Offer.. of.. truce. And did you respond, Madam? Did you respond sir? No. Therefore you're to blame as well."

"Let's talk about 9/11. They said - 9/11, 3,000 killed. Unfortunately they said it that day on the news - (word unclear) - 'That was the day that changed people's lives... Especially those inside the tower. (laughter). There was one woman - a black woman - you remember in 9/11 - she came out of the smoke and she's crying. (people laugh). I gonna cry - it's so touching, honestly. (more laughter). She came out, and she said - she's covered in sight, in sight, dust, smoke, and she goes: (his voice goes high) 'I was here the last time as well.' (more laughter) It's not a lie... It's so... so touching honestly."

"Look to Spain - example of what happened in Spain. The Spanish, too, they were part and parcel of the 'war on terror'. And the then prime minister - who sided with his ally in the White House - George W. Bush - to (unclear) the Muslims. And what did the Mujahideen do? And I say Mujahideen - obviously the word is terrorists - terrorists (unclear) anyway - the terrorists, what did they do? They decided to.. attack. In the heart of Madrid, the capital of Spain, with all the security, with all the CCTV cameras, with all the awareness about terrorism, didn't help in the end. You cannot stop someone who's determined to die. But more importantly, to take you with him."

"An Israeli soldier, he had dual citizenship, he was a French national. In the Israeli army there are numerous people, from around the world. Therefore, is France not also at risk from the terrorists? Not according to me - but if you apply the formula - I can see maybe France, could be Paris, the Eiffel Tower, who knows? It's a reality, something to be considered. I know I like to joke a lot, but if you think about it, why not?"

"The Jewish community, outside Palestine, they also have a role to play, in the condemnation of the apartheid pirate state, cancerous state, of Israel. The Jewish community in the UK they need to condemn the terrorism of the Israeli state, vocally, publicly, in the streets (have) demonstrations - boycott Israeli goods, and the Jews themselves, that should be their role. Otherwise, who knows? What could happen? 7/7.." (laughter)

"Because I believe - and it's only my own view - from surveying what's happening around the Muslim worlds (sic) - and it's taking place in the UK over the last year - I believe attacks in the UK are very likely. And I refer, once again to the chief of police who says, once again, 'inevitable", 'can't be stopped'. But I say with a slight footnote - it can be stopped. If we are willing, to stand side by side, and stop the oppression against the Muslims. And stop the occupation of the Muslim lands, stop supporting those type regimes, and maybe then, just then, as bin Laden said, in one of his statements, the offer of truce was there for all of us. If we had risen in the UK and shown that we were against the government, maybe there would have been no 7/7. But the lesson's in your own hands. If you make the effort, I'm sure that those terrorists see that, and won't bomb you again. But if you don't, you have no-one to blame but yourselves."

Izzadeen's associate, former deputy leader of Al-Muhajiroun Anjem Choudary, said: "The Muslim community are subject to a witch hunt and I see this as a continuation of that witch hunt by the Blair regime." He also stated that the six men who were arrested were "very decent, practising Muslims who have raised their voices against the government."

Today, Tony Blair warned that terrorism was still a global threat. He and cabinet colleagues received their first briefing today from Jonathan Evans, who became the new head of MI5 (homeland security/intelligence) this month. He took over from Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller who headed MI5 for five years.

Jonathan Evans is a renowned counter-terrorism expert who cut his teeth on Irish terrorism in the 1908s and 1990s before becoming involved in international terror investigations in 1999.

Posted by Giraldus Cambrensis at 7:03 PM | Comments (0)

UK: Muslim Face Veils Allowed In Court

Part of the measure of whether a person is telling the truth can be found in their facial expressions. We reported on November 8 that an immigration hearing at Hanley, Stoke-on-Trent, UK, stopped because judge George Glossop objected to a legal executive, Shabnam Mughal, wearing a face veil or niqab, which obscured her face and also muffled her voice.

Judge Glossop consulted the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (AIT) about the issue, which was to be arbitrated by Mr Justice Hodge, the husband of leftist Margaret Hodge, former leader of Islington Council. Justice Hodge is president of the AIT. Hodge ruled that the lawyer can wear the item if he/she "has the agreement of his or her client and can be heard reasonably clearly by all parties to the proceedings, then the representative should be allowed to do so."

Now, it appears that the face-veil can be worn in criminal cases too, according to new official guidelines. The Judicial Studies Board's Equal Treatment Advisory Committee ruled that whether veils were to allowed in court would be decided on a "case by case" basis. The ruling effectively supports the niqab, as long as it does not "interfere with justice".

The Daily Mail reports that if it is felt that a woman giving evidence needs to have her veil removed, then the "courtroom could even be cleared of anyone not directly involved in the case for her to proceed with her evidence". Most court cases happen in the public eye, and rightly so. Justice must be seen to be done. If a courtroom is cleared because of a woman's religious vanity, then a basic principle of British justice is being undermined.

As we have a policy of ignoring the copyright of Iranian state news sources until Iran complies with international law, a report from the Islamic Republic News Agency appears below:

Muslim women allowed to wear face veils in UK courts

April 24, IRNA

Muslim women should be permitted to wear the niqab, or face veil, providing it did not interfere with the administration of justice, according to new official guidelines.

The guidance by the Judicial Studies Board's Equal Treatment Advisory Committee (ETAC) follows a case at an immigration court last November, where a judge ordered an adjournment because he said he was having difficulty hearing legal executive Shabnam Mughal.

The permission is also seen at odds with guidelines issued by the Department of Education and Science last month that allowed schools to be able to ban pupils from face veils on security, safety or learning grounds.

In its guidance, the ETAC said forcing a woman to choose between participating in a court case or removing the veil could have a "significant impact on that woman's sense of dignity" and could serve to "exclude and marginalize."

Committee chairwoman Justice Cox said that at the heart of the guidance is "the principle that each situation should be considered individually in order to find the best solution in each case." "We respect the right for Muslim women to choose to wear the niqab as part of their religious beliefs, although the interests of justice remain paramount," Cox was quoted saying by the Daily Mail newspaper Tuesday.

"If a person's face is almost fully covered, a judge may have to consider if any steps are required to ensure effective participation and a fair hearing - both for the woman wearing a niqab and for other parties in the proceedings," she said.
The issue was politicized last year, when leader of the House of Commons, Jack Straw controversially called on Muslim women to remove face veils.

It came as a teaching assistant was suspended and then sacked for wearing a niqab veil during lessons at a West Yorkshire school in northern England.

Posted by Giraldus Cambrensis at 5:48 PM | Comments (0)

Islam: Why must we be silent in the face of such outrages?

This article by Adrian Morgan (Giraldus Cambrensis of Western Resistance) appeared earlier today in Family Security Matters and is reproduced with their permission.

Why must we be silent in the face of such outrages?

The past week has seen three incidents demonstrating Islamists' total hatred for Christianity and the values of the West. On Wednesday, April 18 in Malatya, central Turkey, three Christians were tied up, tortured for up to three hours, and then had their throats slit. Two of the victims, Ugur Yuksel amd Necati Aydin, were Turkish, and the other was a German national, Tilmann Geske. Their crime was to be Christians, working for Zirve, a publishing house which prints Bibles.

Four people were arrested at the scene. The suspected leader of the killers, 19-year old Emre Gunaydin, had thrown himself from a window to escape arrest, sustaining head injuries in the fall. On Saturday, Gunaydin's girlfriend was also arrested. Malatya is the hometown of Mehmet Ali Agca, who tried to murder Pope John Paul II in 1981. Even though both Turks who died on Wednesday had abandoned Islam and converted to Christianity, Ugur Yuksel was buried as a Muslim.

Thousands of miles away on Jolo island in the southern Philippines, seven Christians were taken hostage by Muslim terrorists on Monday. Their kidnappers belonged to the group Abu Sayyaf, which has links with Al Qaeda and also the pan-Asian terror group Jemaah Islamiyah which has enacted numerous atrocities, including the Bali bombings of October 12, 2002, in which 202 people died, and October 1, 2005, in which 20 people died.

The Abu Sayyaf group has a reputation for hostage-taking. It also has a reputation for decapitating hostages. The leader of Abu Sayyaf on the island of Jolo is Radullan Sahiron, one-armed man, who rides a horse. This individual would be easy to identify, but because he beheads local people whom he considers to be "spies", no-one informs on him, and he has so far escaped arrest. He has a 5 million-peso bounty on his head, worth $89,000 US.

On Thursday, April 19, the severed heads of five of the Christian victims were left at one army camp, and the heads of the other two were left at another military camp later on the same day. Their bodies were found in a village on Friday.

On Tuesday, in Peshawar, main city of Pakistan's troubled North-West Frontier Province, a disturbing video was recovered by Associated Press. A bearded man, identified as Ghulam Nabi, is shown in a car, claiming his innocence. A ligature is tied around his neck. Nabi is then shown on his knees on the ground, his hands tied behind his back. A man pulls at his beard to expose his throat. He is then decapitated.

What makes this video more disturbing is that the killer is a fresh-faced boy, barely 12 years of age. The video (censored at the moment the knife touches Nabi's throat) can be found here. The boy hacks at the victim's neck, and when he finally severs the head, it is raised aloft, while the words "Allahu Ackbar" ("Allah is great") are chanted by onlookers. The soundtrack of the video has songs praising Mullah Omar (leader of the Afghan Taliban) and Osama bin Laden.

Ghulam Nabi was a Pakistani Taliban member from Baluchistan, southwestern Pakistan, who was accused of being a "spy" for the US. Nabi was blamed for the death of Akhtar Mohammad Osmani, an ex-governor of Uruzgan province in Afghanistan. Osmani, a senior leader in the Afghan Taliban, had been killed by a US airstrike on December 19 last year.

Slitting throats and beheading people are not the actions of honorable men, especially as in Turkey and the Philippines the victims were guilty only of belonging to another faith. Apologists for Islam will claim that such actions are not typical of Islam, yet these people are either deliberately lying or they are totally ignorant of Islam's history.

In Turkey, the killings of the three Christians have been condemned by the most senior Muslim in the nation, Ali Bardakoglu, head of the Religious Affairs Directorate. On September 14, 2006, Bardakoglu had demanded that Pope Benedict XVI should retract comments which had been made in a speech at the University at Regensburg. Bardakoglu called the pontiff's words "extraordinarily worrying, saddening and unfortunate" and questioned if they reflected the "spite, hatred and enmity" of others in the Christian world.

In his Regensberg Address on September 12, Benedict had quoted a Byzantine emperor, Manuel Paleologos, who around the year 1391 had said "show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." Though the Pope did not condone this statement, Muslims around the world did what Muslims seem to do best - they whined about their victimhood and threatened violence.

In Pakistan, the US-designated terror organization Jamat ud-Dawa (not outlawed by Pakistan) issued a fatwa, urging the Muslim community to kill the Pope. In Britain Anjem Choudary, a former leader of Al-Muhajiroun claimed outside the Catholic Westminster Cathedral that the Pope should be executed. Choudary was not charged for this.

Killings of Christians ensued. In Iraq, an Assyrian priest, Father Paulos Iskander, was beheaded, and a 14-year old Christian boy was crucified in Albasra. A group calling itself "Kataab Ashbal Al Islam Al Salafi" threatened to kill all Christians in Iraq if the pontiff did not apologize to Mohammed, the founder of Islam.

In Israel, churches were attacked. In Somalia on September 17 an Italian nun, Sister Leonella, was shot three times in the back while she worked in the SOS Hospital in the Huriwa district of Mogadishu. Three other nuns were subsequently evacuated for their safety. A Somali imam, Sheikh Abubukar Hassan Malin, urged Muslims to "punish" the Pope. He said: "Whoever offends our Prophet Mohammed should be killed on the spot by the nearest Muslim."

When Salman Rushdie received a fatwa against his life on February 14, 1989 for "insulting" Islam, Muslims across Britain, India and Pakistan called for his death. In July 1991, Hitoshi Igarashi, Rushdie's Japanese translator, was stabbed to death. In the same month Ettore Capriolo, the Italian translator of the Satanic Verses, was seriously injured in a stabbing attack.

On November 2 2004, baby-faced Muslim killer Mohammed Bouyeri stabbed, shot and tried to behead film-maker Theo van Gogh on an Amsterdam street. Van Gogh had made a film about the appalling treatment of women in Islam. This film, called Submission, (Islam means just that) had been scripted by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Somali apostate from Islam. With a knife, Bouyeri had pinned a "hit list" to Van Gogh's chest. This list named people who had insulted Islam, including Hirsi Ali and Dutch politician Geert Wilders.

In February last year, Danish cartoons of the so-called prophet Mohammed led to violent riots from Indonesia to Gaza to Pakistan, Nigeria and India. At least thirty people died. The illustrators had to go into hiding. A Taliban commander in Pakistan claimed that assassins were traveling to Denmark to kill the artists. In Trabzon in Turkey on February 5, 2006, Catholic priest Father Andrea Santoro was shot in the back by a 16-year old youth who shouted "Allahu Ackbar". The youth was later sentenced to 18 years' jail.

In India, a Muslim state minister in Uttar Pradesh offered $10 million to anyone who beheaded any of the Danish cartoonists. In Peshawar in Pakistan Mohammed Yousaf Qureshi, imam of the Mohabat Khan mosque, offered1.5 million rupees ($17,000) and a car to anyone who killed one of the cartoonists. Neither of these individuals was charged with incitement.

When Banglaldeshi author Taslima Nasreen wrote of the poor treatment of Hindus in her native country and criticized Islam's treatment of women, an imam issued a fatwa against her, offering a bounty of $5,000 upon her head. In 1994 after mass protests against her, Taslima had to leave Bangladesh. She later went to Calcutta in India to care for her dying mother. In March 2004, the head of the Muslim Raza Academy threatened to burn her if she ever set foot in Mumbai (Bombay).

In January 2004, Syed Noor-ur-Rehman Barkati, main imam of Tippu Sultan Mosque in Kolkata said to a congregation of 10,000 that he would offer 20,000 rupees ($436) to anyone who would blacken Taslima's face "with ink, paint or tar. Or she can be garlanded with shoes." In June 2006 the same imam offered on local TV the sum of 50,000 rupees ($1,175) to anyone who blackened her face and drove her out of Calcutta. Last month Taqi Raza Khan, president of the All India Ibtehad Council, issued a 500,000 rupee ($11,760) reward for anyone who would decapitate (sar qalam karna) or drive Taslima Nasreen from India.

In Pakistan, a malicious rumor that a Koran has been "desecrated" is enough to cause anti-Christian riots. On November 12, 2005, such a rumor led to a community at Sangla Hill in Punjab province being attacked by Muslim fanatics who were urged on by imams at mosques. Four churches were attacked, along with two priests' houses, a kindergarten school, a nunnery and a medical center.

On February 19, 2006 Muslims incensed by the Danish cartoons rampaged against Christian targets in Sukkur, Sindh province in south Pakistan. The St Saviour's Church and St Xavier's Church, as well as St Mary's school which had been built in 1889, were set alight.

On September 19 last year, French philosophy lecturer Robert Redeker wrote an incisive piece on Islam for the newspaper Le Figaro. This included a statement that the Koran was "a book of unparalleled violence". As a result, he found himself and his family on the receiving end of death threats. Photographs of Redeker's family and maps of his home were circulated on the internet. He and his family moved location several times, and he lost his job.

Is there a pattern in the above incidents? Since the fatwa against Salman Rushdie, Muslims around the world have learned to exploit the politics of fear. Muslims have threatened, and continue to threaten, death against anyone who "insults" Islam or its founder. And what is the end result? People in the West buy into this thuggish barbarism. The ideological foundations of the West were built upon the finest principles distilled from ancient Greek, Christian and Jewish heritage. Yet now, those who represent us in the media and politics are intimidated into silence. Like cowards with no principles, we offer up our bellies to the beast of Islam.

Last week the biggest news in Lewiston, Maine, concerned a terrible "hate-crime", where a college student put a bag of pork onto a table where Muslim Somali students were eating. The incident was not something to praise, but compared to Islam's intimidation of the entire Western world, it amounts to less than a hill of beans.

In Europe, the ideologues of the European Union have created a lexicon of words that politicians must never use - such as "fundamentalism", "jihad" and "Islamic terrorism", even though Islam was built upon terrorism and war. One EU commissioner, Franco Frattini, has even stated publicly that there is "no such thing" as Islamic terrorism.

Out of fear, people cave in before they are even threatened. In September 2005 the Tate Gallery in Pimlico, London, removed an artwork by conceptual artist John Latham, because it contained a copy of the Koran. In November 2005, a production of the play Tamburlaine the Great was deliberately censored at the Barbican in London. The producer, David Farr, omitted a scene where Tamburlaine burns the Koran, admitting he had done so for fear of offending Muslims.

When a 1740 play by Voltaire, entitled Fanatacisme, ou Mahomet le Prophete (Fanatacism, or Mohammed the Prophet) was due to be read out in Geneva in 1994, the authorities banned the performance. When the play was performed in the southern French town of Saint-Genis-Pouilly in December 2005, Muslims caused a small riot.

In Germany in September 2006, Deutsche Oper Berlin cancelled a production of Mozart's opera Idomeneo. The revised production included severed heads of religious leaders, including Mohammed. This was thought by Kirsten Harms, the theater's Director, to be too risky. She cited "questions of sensitivity, also questions of political diplomacy" for her actions. The opera was later staged with little fuss.

Dante Aligheiri (1265 - 1321) wrote the visionary book the Divine Comedy (Divina Commedia) in three parts. The Inferno features (in Canto 28) a description of Mohammed in Hell: "Rent from the chin to where one breaketh wind. Between his legs were hanging down his entrails; his heart was visible, and the dismal sack that maketh excrement of what is eaten." In the 15th century, artist Giovanni da Modena painted a fresco of Hell, including Mohammed as one its denizens, in the Basilica of St Petronio in Bologna, Italy (pictured). In 2002 a Muslim plot to destroy the fresco was foiled.

In Britain, appeasement of Muslims proliferates. Churches hold interfaith services, with Muslims leading prayers. So far, no mosque has reciprocated by holding interfaith services with Christians leading prayer. Judeo-Christian morality guided the West and helped it to grow, yet now Christians are weak in defense of their faith. Councils such as Lambeth in south London have purged all mention of Christmas in their Christmas illuminations.

Jews are regularly insulted and attacked by Muslims. I saw this at first hand when I lived in Stamford Hill, an Orthodox Jewish area of north London. Jews had lived there for a century but in the 1990s, Muslims from outside the neighborhood began to buy up properties in the area to create Islamic seminaries. In Casenove Road, N16, a Muslim boys' school was set up less than 15 yards from an Orthodox school, and fighting regularly occurred, instigated mostly by Muslim pupils. The media and the police ignore their plight, preferring to magnify the slights against Islam, which rarely involve violence. Jewish people are FOUR TIMES more likely to be on the receiving end of faith-based attacks than Muslims.

Rabbi Alex Chapper, from Ilford in Essex, was walking home from synagogue with three friends, when they were attacked by a group of seven Muslim teenagers, who had called them "Yehudi". One shouted: "We are Pakistani, you are Jewish. We are going to kill you," before punching Rabbi Chapper in the face. One Jewish man was hit over the head with a bottle, but police did nothing. Rabbi Chapper said: "We identified the youths and told the police but they were never prosecuted. They just did not seem interested. I feel very let down."

English language Islamic websites continue to produce anti-Semitic filth like the following from a Saudi site: "The Jews, who are the nation of pigs and monkeys, are nothing but a source of evil, corruption, tribulation and war. Hatred against the Muslims is inherited by every generation of Jews who in turn teach it to their children. Our enmity and hostility against them is based on our faith."

Abdulrahman al-Sudais (also spelled Sudeis or Sudayyis) is imam at the Grand Mosque at Mecca. He has called Jews "the scum of the human race, the rats of the world, the violators of pacts and agreements, the murderers of the prophets, and the offspring of apes and pigs."

This anti-semitism was initiated by Mohammed himself, who according to Sahih Muslim said: "The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him..." Sura 5:60 of the Koran describes certain Jews transformed into apes and pigs, and in Sura 5:82 it is written: "Thou wilt find the most vehement of mankind in hostility to those who believe (to be) the Jews and the idolaters."

Two high street banks in Britain, the Natwest and Halifax, ordered that no pigs should be depicted in their branches or advertising, lest they offend Muslims. Jews have been a vital presence in Britain since the time of Oliver Cromwell, and though Jews do not eat pork, no bank had paused to consider if images of piggy banks might offend Jews. Dudley Council tried to ban all images of pigs in 2005, lest these "cause offense" to Muslims.

Schools also try to censor mentions of pigs, for fear of hurting Muslim feelings. In Batley, Yorkshire, a principal banned all telling of stories involving pigs to young children. Barbara Harris explained: "Recently I have been aware of an occasion where young Muslim children in class were read stories about pigs. We try to be sensitive to the fact that for Muslims talk of pigs is offensive."

This March, a children's concert was altered by politically correct teachers, who objected to mention of the Three Little Pigs. These became the "Three Little Puppies", before public outcry reversed the decision. A spokeswoman for Kirklees Primary Music Festival said: "We feared that some Muslim children wouldn't sing along to the words about pigs. We didn't want to take that risk. If changing a few words avoids offense then we will do so."

A recent report from Britain's Historical Association claims that in some UK schools, teachers have stopped teaching about the Holocaust or the Crusades. This is because the educators were unwilling to confront "anti-Semitic sentiment and Holocaust denial among some Muslim pupils."

We in the West (and particularly in Britain) have become deracinated, afraid to talk of our culture with any pride. "Heritage" in Britain merely celebrates a few old buildings, but not the thoughts, deeds, traditions, inventiveness, aspirations and inspirations of our forebears.

In the United States, Muslims have openly campaigned to demand that public buildings have no representations of Mohammed displayed. According to Bukhari, "whoever makes a picture, will be punished on the Day of Resurrection and will be ordered to put a soul in that picture, which he will not be able to do." In the 1950s, when the Muslim presence in America was minimal, a sculpture of Mohammed was removed from the steps of the Manhattan Appellant Courthouse in New York after lobbying by Muslim nations.

In 1935, when the current Supreme Court building was opened, it contained a frieze of historical law-givers, carved by architectural sculptor Adolph A. Weinman. This included an image of Mohammed (pictured). In 1997, CAIR petitioned Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, demanding that the statue be sandblasted or removed. CAIR, then only three years in existence, objected to the sword in Mohammed's hand as it was viewed as "reinforcing long-held stereotypes of Muslims as intolerant conquerors."

The stereotype is not incorrect. According to the Koran, Mohammed himself was a warmonger. One entire Sura of the Koran, (Sura 8, Al-Anfal or "The Spoils of War") describes the caravan raiding committed by the "prophet" outside Mecca. The earliest biographer of Mohammed was Ibn Isshaq (d. 768). His work survives in redactions by Ibn Hisham (died 828). In one of the many battles waged by Mohammed, that of Udud (625 AD), the prophet offered a sword to the bravest fighter, saying of this weapon: "It is to strike the enemy's faces with it until it is bent."

If Mohammed were alive today, he would almost certainly be in jail, guilty of war crimes. Suspecting a plot against himself, he ordered that the entire male population of a Jewish tribe in Medina, the Banu Qurayzah, should be decapitated, according to Isshaq's testimony. 700 males were beheaded in one afternoon while Mohammed watched. The wives and children of the tribe were distributed as slaves and "booty" to his followers.

Mohammed today would also be subject to the terms of Megan's Law. When he was in his sixth decade of life, Mohammed consummated his marriage to Aisha. She was a child aged nine. Bukhari (810 to 870 AD) wrote (Vol VII, Book 62, Number 64): "Narrated Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that 'Aisha remained with the Prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death)."

Tabari (d. 923) wrote (IX:131): (Aisha narrated) "My mother came to me while I was being swung on a swing between two branches and got me down. My nurse wiped my face with some water and started leading me. When I was at the door she stopped so I could catch my breath. I was then brought in while the Messenger was sitting on a bed in our house. My mother made me sit on his lap. Then the men and women got up and left. The Prophet consummated his marriage with me in my house when I was nine years old."

Personally, I can only describe such an individual as a monster, despite claims by Somali cleric Sheikh Ahmed Abdullahi that Mohammed was "the most honorable person who ever lived in the world."

Via the internet, I have twice been subjected to Muslim threats to have my head sliced off, because I was not "respectful" of Islam. While extremists terrorize people with their threats, so called "moderate" political Muslims simultaneously work with their leftist allies to erode the social fabric of Western societies. I have been vilified by members of Britain's left as a "frothing right-wing Islamophobe", even though I abhor any poor treatment of individual Muslims. Such is the price, it seems, of free speech in today's world.

I am a citizen of a free country that is rapidly losing its sense of what freedom represents. Freedom of expression, freedom of speech, are fundamentals in a healthy democracy. Appeasement to an uncompromising 7th century ideology, especially when such appeasement is motivated more by fear than genuine respect, is the fast route to totalitarianism or subjugation.

America is not nearly as far down the road to perdition as Europe and Britain. Unless people are allowed to speak freely, critically and openly about any dead religious figure, even if that speech causes offense to some, the very mainstays of our Western values will disappear. I would rather live free and forthright, even with death threats from barbarians, than be cowed into silence under PC servitude. Remember what your constitution was built upon, and stand up for what it contains. I fear that Britain is already dying. Please do not allow this to happen to your great nation.

Adrian Morgan

© 2003-2007 FamilySecurityMatters.org All Rights Reserved

Posted by Giraldus Cambrensis at 6:45 AM | Comments (5)

April 23, 2007

US: West Pennsylvania Muslim Leaders Abhor Freedom Of Speech

Ayaan Hirsi Ali, according to the Associated Press, the International Herald Tribune and Jerusalem Post is due to address the University of Pittsburgh-Johnstown, but she has received condemnation from two Muslim leaders in west Pennsylvania who seem unable to comprehend the basic principles of freedom of speech.

It is not enough for terrorists to threaten critics into silence. Hirsi Ali has had numerous death threats from Muslims in the Netherlands, where she was a Member of Parliament. These followed her scripting of a TV documentary called Submission. As a result of this TV show, the filmmaker who produced it, Theo van Gogh, was stabbed, shot and nearly decapitated in broad daylight in Amsterdam on November 2, 2004. His killer, Mohamed Bouyeri, posted a list of people whom he thought should be killed, which included Ayaan Hirsi Ali. This list was pinned to van Gogh's chest with a knife.

While such actions intimidate people into silence, or in Hirsi Ali's case caused her to live for a year and a half in strict seclusion, only venturing out with bodyguards, political Muslims who claim to be "moderate" also connive with this intimidation. They demand special rights which are imparted to no other minorities in Western nations. Groups like CAIR, the MCB and others specialize in trying to change society, and shield their religion from criticism. Yet they do little to practically prevent Muslims from threatening others who attack Islam. Despite these political Muslims' claims to be guardians of human rights, they rarely support the freedom of speech upon which Western democracies are founded.

If only unintentionally, such Muslim "representatives" actually partake in a two-pronged attack upon Western values. One prong of this front against freedom is made up of terrorists like Bouyeri and others who support death for Islam's critics, while the political Muslims intimidate government, media and educational bodies to remove any hostility against Islam, disguising their mission to erode Western values under the cover of "protecting religious minorities".

Two people have recently been at the forefront of the campaign to silence Hirsi Ali, a member of the American Enterprise Institute since September 2006, by attempting to prevent her from taking part in a discussion at the University of Pittsburgh-Johnstown.

These individuals are Mahmood A. Qazi and Fouad ElBayly, of the Islamic Center of Johnstown. Qazi said: "I don't want her to poison anyone's mind. She doesn't believe in God. How can she talk about God?" Fouad ElBayly and Qazi met with Jerry Samples, vice president of academic and student affairs, in an attempt to prevent Hirsi Ali from attending the event, which was scheduled for Tuesday night. Samples agreed to let the two enemies of free speech speak about "God" later, at the university, but did not exclude Hirsi Ali. The event went ahead as planned with strong security, with no incidents.

With a hat tip to LGF, Fouad ElBayly, who is the current president of the Islamic Center of Johnstown has expressed some distinctly unpleasant attitudes, according to an article in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.

ElBayly said of Hirsi Ali: "She has been identified as one who has defamed the faith. If you come into the faith, you must abide by the laws, and when you decide to defame it deliberately, the sentence is death."

He qualified his statement by saying that such an execution should only happen in a Muslim country, after Hirsi Ali received a trial. Having exposed the sheer barbarism and intolerance of dissent within the heart of Islam, ElBayly said: "If it is found that a person is mentally unstable, or a child or disabled, there should be no punishment It's a very merciful religion if you try to understand it."

I have tried to understand Islam, and I have read the Koran and Hadiths, and there is no mercy in Islam, when it is followed literally. It is a totalitarian faith. As Hirsi Ali said: "Our God demands total submission. He rewards you if you follow His rules meticulously. He pu