RUTHFULLY YOURS

Islamist terrorists in Egypt bombed Coptic churches and killed dozens of innocent people on Palm Sunday, and Saudi Arabia, which finances and hosts the Muslim World League (MWL), is the global purveyor of extremist Wahhabism. More importantly, it sends a signal to persecuted Christians and moderate Muslims that they really have nowhere to turn. In his attempt at appeasing Muslims, then, the Pope is actually emboldening the “arsonists,” not the “firefighters.”

Perhaps the Pope is unaware of the nature of the MWL and Al-Azhar. If so, here is a brief description of each:

“MWL has a long history of ties to, and financial support for, Islamic extremists, terrorist operatives, and terrorist organizations including Hamas, the Abu Sayyaf Group, al-Ittihaad al-Islami, the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, Jemaat-al-Islamiyya, and al Qaeda…. MWL has often provided a platform for hateful, inflammatory rhetoric directed against Jews and the state of Israel.” — Discover the Networks.

“Any Muslim can kill an apostate and eat him, as well kill infidel warriors even if they are young or female and they can also be eaten, because they are not granted any protection..” — Al-Azhar book for high school students; 2015 investigative report conducted by the Egyptian newspaper El-Youn el-Sabi.

After a visit to the Vatican on September 20, a delegation of the Muslim World League (MWL), an international NGO based in, and funded by, Saudi Arabia, lauded Pope Francis for his past statements rejecting the link between Islam and violence. During their “historic meeting,” MWL Secretary-General Muhammad Abdul-Kareem Al-Issa and the Pope exchanged gifts and reportedly vowed to enhance cooperation “in all areas to achieve common goals, notably the spread of peace and harmony.”

The next day, the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue and the WML held an “informal meeting… during which it was repeated that:

Religion and violence are incompatible;
Religions have moral resources capable of contributing to fraternity and peace;
The phenomenon of fundamentalism, particularly when violent, is troubling and joint efforts are required to counter it, and
Situations exist where freedom of conscience and of religion are not entirely respected and protected, so there is an urgent need to remedy this, renewing ‘religious discourse’ and reviewing school books.”

The two groups then agreed to establish a joint permanent committee “in the near future” to address these issues.

Similar sentiments were expressed by the leaders of Cairo’s al-Azhar University — the world’s leading Islamic center of learning for Sunni Muslims — at its International Peace Conference in April, after Pope Francis delivered an address for which the audience awarded him much applause. According to an account in the National Catholic Register, “Probably to avoid offending its Muslim members, who consider Jesus only a prophet, [Pope Francis] seemed to deliberately omit any explicit mention of the Lord’s name, preferring to focus more generally on ‘God’ and the ‘Absolute.'”

The report went on to summarize “key points” of the Pontiff’s speech, among them:

“Despite the need for the Absolute, we must reject any ‘absolutizing’ that would justify violence which is the ‘negation of every authentic religious expression.'”

“Religion is not meant to only unmask evil but promote peace, perhaps today ‘more than ever,’ but without ‘giving in to forms of facile syncretism’ [and instead] ‘praying for one another.'”

“It is of little or no use to raise our voices and run about to find weapons for our protection: what is needed today are peacemakers, not fomenters of conflict; firefighters and not arsonists; preachers of reconciliation and not instigators of destruction.”

Thanking the Pope for his “defense of Islam against the accusation of violence and terrorism,” the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar, Sheikh Ahmed Muhammad al-Tayyib, said in his speech that humanity ought to “stress the value of peace, justice, equality and human rights regardless of religion, color, race, or language.” He added:

“We need to liberate the image of religions from false concepts, misunderstandings, malpractices, and false religiosity attached to them. These evils bestir conflicts, spread hate, and instigate violence… [W]e should not hold religion accountable for the crimes of any small group of followers.”

The twin messages at each occasion — Al-Azhar in Cairo and the Vatican in Rome — were the same: that religion is the vessel through which peace is achieved, and that Islam is no more violent than Christianity.

This is not merely ironic, as less than three weeks earlier in Egypt, Islamist terrorists bombed Coptic churches and killed dozens of innocent people on Palm Sunday, and Saudi Arabia, which finances and bases the MWL, is the global purveyor of extremist Wahhabism. More importantly, it sends a signal to persecuted Christians and moderate Muslims that they really have nowhere to turn.

“Evicted five centuries ago by crusading Christians, the Arabs are back in Spain, using their oil dollars to buy land that was seized from their ancestors by the sword”. — James M. Markham, The New York Times, 1981.

The Madrid daily ABC wrote that 800 mosques in Spain are out of control. The Spanish daily La Razon charged that Gulf donors, such as Qatar, were a source of Spain’s Islamization. The Saudis also launched a new Spanish television channel, Córdoba TV, as did Iran.

They dream of, and work to, regain the “lost Caliphate” of Spain. Some Islamists do it with bombs and car-ramming attacks. Others, more surreptitiously, do it with money and dawa, Islamic propaganda. The second way may be even more effective than the first.

The ceremony in 2003 was announced with bombastic headlines: “After a wait of more than 500 years, Spanish Muslims, have finally succeeded in building a mosque of their own in the shadow of the Alhambra, once the symbol of Islamic power in Europe”. A troupe from al Jazeera was sent to follow the event: a muezzin climbed to the minaret of the Great Mosque of Granada to call the faithful to prayer for the first time in five centuries.

From Osama bin Laden to the self-proclaimed Caliph, Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi, all the leaders of the global jihad — including the terror cell that killed 17 people in Barcelona — have mentioned Spain among the lands to be conquered by Islam. There is, however, not only jihad. There is also “the quiet conquest”, as it has been dubbed by the French magazine, Valeurs Actuelles. The quiet conquest is a sinuous attempt to re-Islamize Spain through cultural centers, mega-mosques, proselytizing, conversions and financial investments. This pacific attempt to elicit submission has been underway for some time and has been backed by a flow of money from countries such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia. According to a former commander of British forces in Iraq, General Jonathan Shaw, these two countries in particular have ignited a “time bomb” by funding the global spread of radical Islam.

The New York Times first detailed in 1981 that, “evicted five centuries ago by crusading Christians, the Arabs are back in Spain, using their oil dollars to buy land that was seized from their ancestors by the sword”. Spain back then did not even recognize the State of Israel, and the Spanish monarchy regularly visited Saudi Prince Fahd while he was relaxing in the south of Spain. After that, it was Kuwait’s turn: “During the late 1980’s, when Spain was booming, Kuwait came shopping for corporations and investments”.

Since then, the Arab monarchies have targeted Spain with huge investments. Some emblematic buildings in Madrid and Barcelona, ​​not to mention the Costa del Sol, are now owned by Arab investment groups, from the Santiago Bernabeu stadium in Madrid to the W Hotel in Barcelona. In Marbella, just a few meters away from the King Fahd Mosque, there is the Alanda Hotel, which offers halal food and services to meet the demands of the Muslim clients. In 2011, the International Petroleum Investment Company, controlled by the Emirate of Abu Dhabi, purchased Cepsa, the second-largest Spanish company in the oil sector.

Last January, Spain’s King Felipe VI visited Saudi Arabia and announced that Spain would boost economic, trade and investment relations with the Islamic kingdom. Before that, in 2012, Saudi Aramco awarded Spanish companies projects worth $700 million. Spain and Qatar are now discussing the formation a $1 billion joint investment fund that would help the Gulf state invest in Latin America. The Arab Emirates’ media called Spain “a hotspot for investment from the Arab world”. After Qatar, it was the Oman’s turn to invest in the Spanish market: Oman just agreed to invest up to $120 million in a uranium mine in Spain, to be used for Omani nuclear energy plants.

Sweden’s Jasin party is not unique. Islamist parties have begun to emerge in many European countries, such as the Netherlands, Austria, Belgium, and France.

In the Netherlands, Denk ran on a platform against the integration of immigrants into Dutch society (instead advocating “mutual acceptance”, a euphemism for creating parallel Muslim societies); and for establishment of a “racism police” that would register “offenders” and exclude them from holding public office.

“I consider every death of an American, British or Dutch soldier as a victory”. — Dyab Abu Jahjah, leader of a group called Movement X and possibly starting an Islamist party in Belgium. The Belgian political magazine Knack named Jahjah the country’s fourth-most influential person.

The “I.S.L.A.M” party, founded in 2012, is working to implement Islamic law, sharia, in Belgium. The party already has branches in the Brussels districts of Anderlecht, Molenbeek and Liege. The party wants to “translate religion into practice”.

In France, as the journalist Yves Mamou recently reported, the PEJ has already approved 68 candidates and wants to abolish the separation of church and state, make veils mandatory for schoolgirls in public schools, introduce halal food in all schools and fight “Islamophobia”.

Sweden’s brand new first Islamic party, Jasin, is aiming to run for the 2018 parliamentary elections. According to the website of the party, Jasin is a “multicultural, democratic, peaceful party” that is “secular” and aims to “unite everyone from the East… regardless of ethnicity, language, race, skin color or religion”. Jasin apparently knows what the Swedes like to hear.

In an interview, the founder and spokesperson of the party, Mehdi Hosseini, who came from Iran to Sweden 30 years ago, revealed that the leader of the new political party, Sheikh Zoheir Eslami Gheraati, does not actually live in Sweden. He is an Iranian imam, who lives in Teheran, but Jasin wants to bring him to Sweden: “I thought he was such a peaceful person who would be able to manifest the peaceful side of Islam. I think that is needed in Sweden,” said Hosseini.

The purpose of the Jasin party, however, does not appear to be either secular or multicultural. In its application to the Swedish Election Authority, the party writes — with refreshing honesty — that it will “firstly follow exactly what the Koran says, secondly what Shiite imams say”. The Jasin party also states that it is a “non-jihadi and missionary organization, which will spread Islam’s real side, which has been forgotten and has been transformed from a beautiful to a warlike religion…”

In mid-September, the Swedish Election Authority informed Jasin that it failed to deliver the needed signatures, but that it is welcome to try again. Anna Nyqvist, from the Swedish Election Authority, said that a political party with an anti-democratic or Islamic agenda is eligible to run for parliament if the party’s application fulfills all formalities. Nyqvist considers it unproblematic that the leader of the party lives in Iran. “This is the essence of democracy, that all views should be allowed. And it is up to them to choose their party leader”, Nyqvist said.

Sweden’s Jasin Party is not unique. Islamist parties have begun to emerge in many European countries, such as the Netherlands, Austria, Belgium, and France.

In the Netherlands, two Dutch Turks, former members of the Socialist party, founded a new party, Denk, only six months before the Dutch parliamentary elections. Despite the short timeframe, they managed to get one-third of the Muslim vote and three seats in parliament. The party does not hide its affinity for Turkey: Criticism of Turkey is taboo just as is their refusal to name the Turkish mass-slaughter of the Armenians during the First World War a genocide. The party ran on a platform against the integration of immigrants into Dutch society (instead advocating “mutual acceptance”, a euphemism for creating parallel Muslim societies); and for establishment of a “racism police” that would register “offenders” and exclude them from holding public office.

Tuesday morning’s row on the conference floor over how Labour will challenge and punish Jew-hatred was in equal parts shambolic and frightening.

Jews attacking Jews. Israel hated at every turn. Age-old tropes spewed from the podium. How the antisemites must have loved the Labour conference.

What an absolute shower. If ever there was an example of farce combined with despicable antisemitism, this was it.

Tuesday morning’s row on the conference floor over how Labour will challenge and punish Jew-hatred was in equal parts shambolic and frightening.

It is now beyond doubt who is truly running Labour. The mainstream has been blown away and the hard-left is tightening its grip on the party’s soul.

The absence of moderate MPs was noticeable in Brighton. Those who came were largely silent in public. This is a different party now and all discussion of leadership challenges or post-Corbyn reformation is redundant.

All the old boys were back — Ken Livingstone and Ken Loach all over the airwaves offering their unwanted views on Jews and the Holocaust; and amid it all, there was Mr Corbyn, on the dais, watching silently. Oh, Jeremy Corbyn.

The atmosphere around the main conference centre was horrible. I watched a group of delegates scream “f*** off” as Tom Watson, deputy leader, spoke, before bemoaning missing the opportunity to “bodycheck” Laura Kuenssberg, the BBC political editor, as she ran by. Then they asked John McDonnell, Shadow Chancellor, to sign autographs — and all of this within five minutes.

The depth of the party’s problem with antisemitism was all too visible – and this year it came with a new level of frightening warnings.

“Be careful,” one opponent of the proposed rule changes said from the podium, in what seemed to be a thinly-veiled threat followed swiftly by an antisemitic trope about collusion with right-wing media.

There was criticism of the Jewish Labour Movement after it put out leaflets on the eve of the rule change vote urging people to “help Jeremy Corbyn fight antisemitism”.

Mr Corbyn, remember, keeps telling us how much he hates abuse, but could not bring himself to utter just three words in his main speech: “Don’t be antisemitic”.

It was embarrassing to hear Emily Thornberry try to explain that he was not at the Labour Friends of Israel reception because he was preparing his speech, while he was partying his way through at least four other events.

JLM’s efforts in the past 18 months have been worthwhile but bringing up the leader’s name — with all that he implies for Jewish voters — amid days of foul rhetoric looked a misstep.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The latest parade of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard displayed a new ballistic missile, the Khorramshahr. Though it had been modified to appear less threatening, the new missile matches a North Korean ballistic missile known by different names in the West, including BM25. The Khorramshahr could eventually enable Tehran to threaten the capitals of Europe with nuclear warheads, and it raises the level of the Iranian missile threat to Israel.https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/parades-pyongyang-ends-up-tehran/

Iran’s leaders love military parades and hold them twice a year. The first is in April, when the Iranian Armed Forces – the legacy of the Shah’s imperial military machine – celebrates “Army Day.” During the second annual parade, in September, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) celebrates “Sacred Defense Week,” which commemorates the eight-year Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s.

The IRGC overlaps the official armed forces in almost every respect, deploying its own infantry, armor, air force, and navy. But it possesses one service that is uniquely its own: a strategic missile force. The IRGC is tasked by the regime to develop, manufacture, and deploy Iran’s long-range as well as tactical-range missiles, including the famous liquid propellant Shahab 3 missiles and the somewhat less renowned solid propellant Sejjil 2 missiles.

The IRGC’s annual parade is a combination of carnival, exhibition of future projects, and demonstration of military power. The parade is arranged by order of significance. It ends with columns of mobile long-range ballistic missiles on their launchers, preceded by trucks bearing banners that read “Death To America” and “Death To Israel” in three languages: Persian, Arabic, and English (the English version is somewhat more polite: “Down With” rather than “Death To”). This latter part of the parade gets most of the world’s attention because it flaunts Iran’s new missiles.

At the latest parade, on September 22, the Iranians displayed a brand new ballistic missile, dubbed the “Khorramshar” (after a border city where an epic battle of the Iran-Iraq war took place). It was hauled on the same TEL (transporter erector launcher) that is used for the Shahab 3 and the Sejjil, but the missile itself was evidently thicker and shorter. The Iranians covered its bottom section, presumably to hide its propulsion system and thus obscure its source. But this precaution did not help: Most observers immediately associated the “Khorramshar” with the North Korean HS10 IRBM, first displayed in Pyongyang in 2010. Indeed, in a video the Iranians released shortly after the Tehran parade showing a flight test (the only one to date) of the Khorramshar, it appeared to be leaving a trail of flame similar to that of its North Korean twin.

These two missiles – the North Korean and the Iranian – originated in development programs that North Korea commissioned at the Makeyev missile factory in Russia immediately after the fall of the Soviet Union. At the time, Russia’s defense industry, like the country in general, had reached a nadir, and the new government of President Yeltsin had difficulty supervising the arms factories. The Makeyev factory had been one of the pillars of the Soviet ballistic missile industry; it had developed the original Scud and the first seaborne ballistic missile of the Soviet Union, originally called the R27. This submarine-launched missile carried a single nuclear warhead of an unknown weight with a range of about 2,500 km (in improved models, the range increased to 3,500 km).

When Pyongyang came calling in the early 1990s, the Makeyev factory, like all the other former Soviet arms factories, was out of work and its engineers out of a livelihood. Almost anything could be bought from them. The North Koreans exploited the Russians’ distress and commissioned the Makeyev factory to develop two new missiles: a 1:1.5 scale-up of the Scud missile with a range of over 1,000 km; and a conversion of the sea-launched R27 (which was being phased out by the Russian Navy) into a mobile ground-launched missile.

The first project ended successfully, and the new missile, which in the West was called the Nodong (or Rodong), was displayed in Pyongyang in 2010. The second project was apparently stopped by the Russian government before completion, but the design documentation and the already manufactured components were transferred to North Korea along with a quantity of parts – mostly rocket engines – of R27 missiles that had been collected from Russian junk yards.

Seventy-eight-year-old Roger Pinto was sitting in his suburban Paris home the night of Sept. 7 when three young men broke in and cut off the electricity. They knocked Mr. Pinto unconscious, according to his account, and when he came to, one of them said: “The Jews have lots of money, and you will give us what you have.”

They tied up and beat Mr. Pinto, his 72-year-old wife and their son, held them for several hours, and eventually ran off with jewelry, cash and credit cards. The Pintos were treated for minor injuries. Authorities are investigating the attack as a hate crime: “The motivation for this cowardly act seems directly related to the religion of the victims,” said Interior Minister Gérard Collomb.

Such an acknowledgment is unusual in France. Parliament enacted a hate-crime law in 2003, in response to attacks on Jews during the height of the second intifada in Israel. But the idea of crimes motivated by bias sits uncomfortably with the French Republican model, based on the notion of integration into a uniform national identity. France officially does not classify its citizens according to race, religion or ethnicity.

Thus officials have often equivocated about designating anti-Semitic attacks as hate crimes. In 2014 four armed burglars allegedly broke into a young Jewish couple’s residence and raped the 19-year-old woman while pinning down her partner. As in the Pinto case, the suspects demanded money, asserting: “Jews, you have money at home, you do not put it in the bank.” Prosecutors charged the suspects with group rape, robbery and abduction but dropped hate-crime charges this past February.

French authorities initially denied anti-Semitic motives in the brutal 2006 kidnapping, torture and murder of 23-year-old Ilan Halimi by a band of Muslim thugs styling themselves the Gang of Barbarians, only to acknowledge them at trial three years later. The clues weren’t hard to find: When the working-class Halimis couldn’t pay the ransom his captors initially demanded, the gang replied: “Go and get it from your synagogue.” They also contacted a rabbi and told him: “We have a Jew.”

This past April Sarah Halimi, a 66-year-old Orthodox Jew (who had no direct relation to Ilan Halimi), was killed when a neighbor allegedly broke into her third-story Paris apartment, beat her and pushed her out the window. The suspect was captured in another neighbor’s apartment, where he was holed up chanting verses from the Quran. (The suspect has claimed insanity.) Only last week, after months of pressure from the Jewish community, did French prosecutors classify Sarah Halimi’s killing as a hate crime.

Jews have also been prominent public targets. A man pledging allegiance to Islamic State killed four at a Parisian kosher supermarket just after the Charlie Hebdo massacre in 2015, and Mohammed Merah’s 2012 shooting rampage at a Jewish school in Toulouse also took four lives. Pro-Palestinian protesters chanted “Death to the Jews” and “ Hitler was right” in 2014, as they marched through Paris setting Jewish shops ablaze and besieging synagogues. Street assaults, graffiti and taunts are common.

The violence and hostility are taking a toll on the community. Whereas 30 years ago most French Jews enrolled their children in public schools, only about one-third do today. Some 40,000 French Jews have emigrated since 2006, more than 20,000 of them between 2014 and 2016. After the 2015 supermarket murder, 12,000 soldiers were deployed to protect Jewish institutions. But there are half a million Jews in France, and the army isn’t big enough to guard all of their homes. CONTINUE AT SITE

What you would never know, from all this hand-wringing about “Islamophobia,” is that only a few weeks before the conference, the country’s media had reported on a popular imam in Biel who, in his sermons, “asked Allah to destroy the enemies of Islam — Jews, Christians, Hindus, Russians, and Shiites.”

The imam in question, Abu Ramadan, preached that Muslims who befriended infidels were “cursed until the Day of Judgment” — which, of course, is not radical at all, but is straight out of the Koran.

The crisis is real. But, says Swiss Muslim author Saïda Keller-Messahli, Swiss politicians, “especially on the left,” refuse to address it. Instead of trying to defend their country from radicalism, they think their job is to “protect minorities and multiculturalism.”

Mosque kindergartens and youth groups, too, are “places of religious indoctrination” for Swiss Muslims. So are the German-speaking public schools, in which imams are permitted to teach classes in Islam using instructional materials from Saudi Arabia or Turkey.

If you listen to some of Switzerland’s pollsters and government officials, the country is suffering from a serious and ever-intensifying crisis — anti-Muslim bigotry.

In August, a study concluded that Swiss Muslims “are generally well integrated into Swiss society.” Their main problem? They face “Islamophobia.”

Another study the same month found that the percentage of Swiss non-Muslims who feel “threatened” by Islam had more than doubled since 2004, from 16% to 38%.

At a September 11 conference, Switzerland’s Federal Commission against Racism (FCR) issued an explicit alert: “hostility toward Muslims,” it warned, was rising – and was “fed by facts that have nothing to do with Muslims themselves.”

Conference organizers blamed this “hostility” on online “propaganda”; Interior Minister Alain Berset accused Swiss citizens of erroneously holding “Islam responsible for all the extremist acts committed in its name.”

What you would never know, from all this hand-wringing about “Islamophobia,” is that only a few weeks before the conference, the country’s media had reported on a popular imam in Biel who, in his sermons, “asked Allah to destroy the enemies of Islam — Jews, Christians, Hindus, Russians, and Shiites.” The imam in question, Abu Ramadan, preached that Muslims who befriended infidels were “cursed until the Day of Judgment” — which, of course, is not radical at all, but is straight out of the Koran.

Abu Ramadan has been living in Switzerland for almost two decades. In 1998, he came to the Alpine country from Libya as an asylum seeker, but over the years has returned home several times — in addition to visiting Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries. This fact should have automatically negated his right to asylum and resulted in his expulsion. But the years went by, and the government, ignoring the evidence right there on his passport, did nothing.

On the contrary: over the years, in fact, the Swiss state had given Ramadan the equivalent of $620,000 in welfare payments.

Reportedly, some public officials were well aware of his hate sermons — but until the content of those sermons surfaced in the media, nobody in the government had made any effort to do anything about him. Instead, people such as Interior Minister Berset and the members of the FCR had kept busy going to conferences and tarring the general public as “Islamophobes”.

At least one high-profile individual in Switzerland has long rejected the official line about successful Muslim integration and unfounded infidel Islam-hatred: Saïda Keller-Messahli. Of Tunisian descent, living in Zurich, she has spent years investigating institutional Islam in Switzerland and urging politicians to take action against it. Asked in a recent interview whether Abu Ramadan is an isolated case, Keller-Messahli said no: such preaching, she explained, is common in Swiss mosques, part of an international strategy to plant a “discriminatory” and “violent” Islam in Switzerland and elsewhere in the West.

Keller-Messahli has just published a book entitled, Switzerland: An Islamist Hub (“Islamistische Drehscheibe Schweiz”). It is sort of a field guide to Islam in Switzerland. The country’s mosques belong to various networks based here and there in the Muslim world; many of the imams have been trained in Egypt or Saudi Arabia; many of the mosques receive funding — and take orders — from organizations in Turkey. In her book, Keller-Messahli draws all the connections, follows all the money trails, and spells out the poisonous articles of faith. And she prescribes strong medicine: monitor the mosques, cut off the foreign cash, and expel the preachers of jihad.