India: Muslim clerics rule divorce pronounced while drunk is valid, as is unsent text message

One can only assume that drunken texting is also legit. "Talaq uttered in drunken state valid: Darul Uloom," by Pervez Iqbal Siddiqui for the Times of India, January 7:

LUCKNOW: Typing the word ‘talaq’ on an SMS which may not be “sent” or uttering the words ‘talaq’ thrice even under influence of alcohol or in a fit of rage amounts to separation under the sharia.

Darul Uloom-Deoband recently issued a fatwa on three issues contrary to the common belief that the state of intoxication or anger or not communicating the decision of ‘talaq’ to the partner did not amount to divorce in Islam.

In a recent query from Bangladesh (dated December 28, 2008) it was asked: A person intending to give his wife one talaq, typed “I give one talaq to you.” in his cellphone SMS. But after thinking over, he changes his mind and does not send the SMS at all. Will this result in talaq?

According to the Dar-ul-Ifta, in the above condition, one Talaq will be deemed to have occurred, whether the SMS was sent or not.

In Fiqh term, SMS is a text which, if written by husband with the intention of Talaq, will be valid. In another question (dated January 3, 2009) a man asked Dar-Ul-Ifta that he said the word ‘talaq’ three times in anger during a fight with his wife though it was not his intention to give his wife talaq.

“A week after the incident we came to know that she was pregnant, we want to live together” the question asked. In its response, Dar-ul-Ifta ruled: “That since the divorce came in clear words thrice, the element of intention looses [sic] its legitimacy.” Another question is, if a husband is completely drunken and unconscious and beat his wife and he says talaq three times, will the marriage end? According to Dar-Ul-Ifta, talaq given after drinking in state of intoxication is valid in Hanafi sect. “Now, the husband can not marry her without Sharai halalah,” Dar-Ul-Ifta ruled.

As per the Sharia, according to Islamic scholars, Talaq should be given once at a time after a period of 30 days each.

This wipes off all possibilities of taking the drastic step in a fit of rage or under the influence of alcohol.

What about a habitual drinker, or one who just happened to hit the sauce before uttering talaq No. 3?

If a person changes his mind after uttering the word ‘talaq’ once or twice, he can always take his words back within the next 40 days (the Iddat period) of the last utterance and the marriage will stand intact.

Malaysia: Unwilling to wait for court ruling on the use of "Allah" in Catholic publication, gov't bans it from publishing in Malay language

An update on this story. "Malaysia: Government bans Malay section of Catholic newspaper," from Compass Direct News, January 5:

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia, January 5 (Compass Direct News) – Malaysia’s Ministry of Home Affairs has ordered the Catholic weekly Herald to cease publishing its Malay-language section pending the outcome of a court case over the newspaper’s right to use the Arabic word “Allah” for God.

The government also included two other conditions: The newspaper can be sold only in churches, and it must be printed clearly on the cover that it is meant for Christians only.

The three conditions were included in the renewal notice of the weekly’s annual printing license issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs on Tuesday (Dec. 30). A hearing in the court case is scheduled for Feb. 27.

The publisher of the Herald has rejected the conditions imposed on the newspaper and on Friday (Jan. 2) submitted a letter of appeal to the Ministry of Home Affairs.

Father Lawrence Andrew, editor of the Herald, told Compass that the letter did not specify consequences if the newspaper does not comply with the conditions. Officials from the Ministry of Home Affairs told the New Straits Times on Thursday (Jan. 1) that they will be monitoring the Herald’s actions closely.

Fr. Andrew told Compass he hopes to receive a revocation of the restriction from the ministry in the next two days, before the first edition of the weekly for 2009 goes to print. Otherwise, the weekly will have to be scaled down to 24 pages, down by a quarter of its usual size.

Murphy Pakiam, Roman Catholic archbishop of Kuala Lumpur, told the New Straits Times on Saturday (Jan. 3) that he was “perplexed” by the ban on the Malay-language section of the newspaper and could not see how the restriction was related to the court case.

“Even if the courts dismiss our application for judicial review, that has no bearing on the publication in [the Malay language],” he said.

Fr. Andrew reportedly said the ban was “unacceptable” and urged the government to “let the court decide” and not “jump the gun.” In a report by The Associated Press (AP) on Saturday (Jan. 2), he described the prohibition as amounting to persecution.

“It curtails our freedom of expression and diminishes our rights as citizens,” he told AP.

Earlier, Agence France-Presse reported Fr. Andrew as saying, “The constitution says Malay is the national language, so why can’t we use the national language in Malaysia?”

Archbishop Pakiam told news website Malaysiakini.com on Friday (Jan. 2) that the publisher will consider legal action if it receives no response from the ministry within seven days or if the restriction is not retracted.

The Herald is a multilingual newspaper published by the Catholic Church of Malaysia. It typically publishes in four languages – English, Malay, Mandarin and Tamil – with the Malay-language section catering primarily to its East Malaysian indigenous members, who make up significantly more than half its readers.

The weekly has a circulation of 13,000 and an estimated readership of 50,000. The newspaper is sold in Catholic churches and is not available from newsstands.

In 2007 the government issued a series of warnings to the Herald to discourage the publisher from using the word “Allah” in referring to God in the Malay-language section of its multilingual newspaper. The government feared use of the word might cause confusion among the country’s majority-Muslim population.

The publisher, however, maintained that it had a right to use the word and took the government to court over the issue. This latest prohibition was issued ahead of the court hearing scheduled in February....

Vatican reaffirms that "theological dialogue" cannot take place with Muslims

Why? Because "we [Catholic Christians] do not have the same relationship with God." Try telling that to dhimmi Methodist Rev. Susan Boegli, who believes Muslims and Christians "share the same God, the same principles of loving one another, of peace and justice. How we do that, the difference is in the details." She even has a John Esposito DVD affirming this position.

"Vatican cardinal assesses dialogue with Muslims, Hindus, others," from Catholic Culture, January 5:

Asked whether theological dialogue is possible with Muslims, Cardinal Tauran quoted remarks recently made by Pope Benedict and affirmed that theological dialogue, strictly speaking, cannot take place between Christians and the followers of other religions because “we do not have the same relationship with God and much less with our respective sacred books.”

Intercultural dialogue is possible, though, as well as about religious topics such “creation, life, family, prayer, fasting, eternal life,” and thus, according to Cardinal Tauran, it is possible to speak in a loose sense about theological dialogue. Quoting the Second Vatican Council, Cardinal Tauran added that the Church esteems all that is good and true in other religions and works with the followers of other religions for justice, peace, and charitable initiatives.

Cardinal Tauran added that the sacred books of other religions ought not to be referred to as “Sacred Scriptures.” Catholics in formation in “institutes of instruction, seminaries, and novitiates” should study the founders of other religions, while “we Christians obviously have the duty” of introducing the Bible to followers of other religions...

Majority of Iranians think U.S. out to "humiliate" Islam

But alas: Majority of Americans still do not think that Islam is out to, not just humiliate, but subjugate non-Muslims. "Poll Shows Iranians Think U.S. Out to Humiliate Islam," from New America Media, January 5:

A new World Public Opinion.org poll taken in 21 nations concludes that Iranians – more than any other people surveyed – believe the United States purposefully tries to humiliate the Islamic world.

The poll results show that almost two-thirds of Iranians said they believe that Americans hate Muslims and go out of their way to humiliate the Islamic countries and their people. About 40 percent of Muslims in the other Islamic countries surveyed accept that view.

Conducted from July to October, the poll surveyed 21,740 respondents from 21 nations, including the Muslim majority countries of Iran, Azerbaijan, Turkey, Egypt, Palestine, Jordan, Pakistan and Indonesia plus Nigeria.

The poll found that worldwide, in Muslim and non-Muslim countries alike, majorities believe the United States is disrespectful of the Muslim world, but fewer than half believed this was done intentionally. Some 16 percent said “the U.S. mostly shows respect to the Islamic world,” 36 percent said America was “often disrespectful out of ignorance and insensitivity,” and 31 percent said “the U.S. purposely tries to humiliate the Islamic world.”

Of the Americans surveyed, 56 percent said the United States shows respect, about a third thought the United States was disrespectful out of ignorance and 5 percent thought the country was out to humiliate the Islamic world.

As many Americans think the United States is out to humiliate Muslims as Iranians think the United States shows respect to the Islamic world.

The complete survey can be found at: http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/.

Fitzgerald: The UN: Thoroughly infiltrated and taken over by Muslims at every level

It is hard to think of an organization that has been more thoroughly infiltrated and taken over by Muslims at every level, than the United Nations. It has for decades been filled with such willing collaborators as Edward Mortimer, the former Chief Speech Writer and Senior Adviser, as he billed himself, to Kofi Annan -- and for all I know, perhaps he's still senior-advising and chief-speech-writing for that Innocent Abroad Ban Ki-Moon, especially when it comes to Muslim matters.

This infiltration can be seen everywhere, from the actual staffing of the U.N. secretariat, to the power of the Islamic bloc, which is the last sizable voting bloc left now that the Soviet bloc has dissolved. What should be the bloc of enlightened democracies has lost its way -- not least because of the effect of the anti-Israel atmosphere with which the United Nations is suffused, and the atmosphere of apologetics for Islam with which it is also suffused. And then of course there are those Western countries whose elites are terrified of offending the aggressive and dangerous Muslims who are now living in their very midst, and about which they have not a clue as to what to do. At the United Nations, Islam, or the Organization of the Islamic Conference, whenever Israel or Darfur or anything to do with Islam comes up, effectively calls the tune.

Fitzgerald: What happens when the news reports are so obviously biased

CNN has been particularly outrageous in its coverage of the Israeli actions in Gaza, but it is not the only offender.

There are lessons that news reporters should have learned. They have not been learned. Here is what the last 40 years should have taught them, and us:

1) The Arabs consistently lie. Nasser lied when he told Hussein that Egypt had destroyed Israel's airforce. He lied when later he told Hussein that the Arabs should claim that it was the Americans and British who helped the Israelis and that was why the perfidious Jews managed to succeed.

Bahrain: Shi'ite, Sunni clerics protest plans for civil family law

A case study in the obstacle that sharia poses for the advancement of women's rights: Islam elevates women, and we've got sharia law, so what more can they ask for? The mentality is comparable to a short-sighted (though apocryphal) pronouncement often attributed to Bill Gates, circa 1981, that "640K [of RAM] ought to be enough for anybody," where sharia is the "640K": It's all you "need," and all you're going to get.

"Bahrain Shiite clergy feud with parliament over family law," from Agence France-Presse, January 3:

MANAMA (AFP) — Bahraini Shiite Muslim clergymen on Saturday declared that a proposed family law cannot pass parliament and insisted that only the Shiite religious authority has jurisdiction over family matters.

The six Shiite clergymen said the law, which was referred to parliament for approval on Saturday, should be drafted by clergymen and approved by the highest Shiite marjaia (Shiite religious authority) Ali al-Sistani.

"Such a regulation dealing with Islamic law must have the approval of the highest Shiite marjaia and not a council of representatives with no expertise on sharia (Islamic law)," Sheikh Mohammed al-Shihabi of the Shiite Muslim Scholar Council told AFP.

In the absence of a personal status law in Bahrain, sharia, in both its Sunni and Shiite interpretations, has been the only arbiter when it comes to marriage, divorce, child custody and inheritance.

Islamic Sunni and Shiite courts rule on family and other personal cases.

The Shiite clerics in December said a plan for the Gulf kingdom's legislative authority to bring in a family law was an unnecessary and provocative move.

Bahraini women activists have long been demanding that a law regulating personal status issues be enacted and that related disputes be referred to civil courts, instead of to religious courts headed by clergymen.

Meanwhile, Britain has accommodated activists lobbying for the opposite.

Connecticut: Muslim inmate sues to get halal meat

Stealth Jihad Update: Once again a Muslim in America demands that non-Muslims accommodate his particular practices and beliefs, rather than considering that he has to adapt his own behavior to American mores -- especially since he is in prison!

More on this story. "Conn. inmate sues to get halal meat," from UPI, December 31 (thanks to Islam In Action):

A Connecticut prison inmate has sued the state, claiming that his religious freedom as a Muslim has been violated by the lack of halal meat.

Ricardo Collins filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court on Dec. 23, The Hartford Courant reported.

"I am a American Muslim and I am being denied the halal meat for the two Islamic feast days," Collins said in his complaint. "The halal meat for the two feasts have great 'spiritual meaning' to the Muslim community all over the world."

The named defendants include Corrections Commissioner Theresa Lantz and other officials, including chaplains at the Corrigan-Radgowski correctional facility in Uncasville.

Collins was sentenced to 70 years after he was convicted of killing a man in Bridgeport in 2002. He recently won an appeal granting him a new trial.

Brian Garnett, a spokesman for the prison system, said that it meets the requirements set down by a court decision that ruled that New Jersey prisons were not required to serve halal meat, which has been slaughtered according to religious rules.

That court decision will most likely soon be revisited.

Pakistan: Taliban demands all unmarried girls be wed to their jihadists

Another consequence of a mindset that views women as possessions, and considers all of the earth to be rightfully entitled to Muslim believers, particularly those who wage jihad.

"Girls to marry militants, orders Taliban," from the Times of India, January 2 (thanks to all who sent this in):

ISLAMABAD: On the heels of their crusade against girls going to schools, the Taliban have now issued new dictum in the areas under their sway asking parents of the grown up daughters to marry them to militants or "face dire consequences".

What is their definition of "grown up?"

This new force-marriage campaign is being run in most of the areas in the Pakistan's troubled NWFP through regular announcements made in mosques to congregations.

Such instances have come to light recently through some of the affected women daring to go to authorities for justice rather than meekly surrender to the militants’ dictates.

Salma, who teaches in a primary school in Peshawar, told the Dawn newspaper that Taliban have told families to declare in mosques if they have unmarried girls so that their hand could be given in marriage, most probably to militants.

If they did not do so, the girls would be forcibly married off, the newspaper quoted the 30-year-old widow as saying.

She also said the Taliban in the Swat valley of NWFP have threatened women with dire punishment, if they are found outside their homes without identity cards and a male relative accompanying them.

Couples should also carry 'Nikah Nama' or marriage certificates with them when they venture out of home or they will be in trouble, she said.

"I have heard that Taliban have announced that if a girl above the age of seven is found outside her house, she would be slaughtered," Salma said.

Once an avid listener of Pakistani Taliban commander Maulana Fazlullah's FM radio station, Salma doesn't tune in to the channel any more.

"Usually there is only dreadful news on the radio, so I stopped listening to it," said Salma, who has three sons.

Fazlullah, also known as Mullah Radio for the fiery sermons he broadcasts on his illegal FM station, leads a campaign by Taliban militants to enforce Shariat or Islamic law in Swat.

Fazlullah's followers have blown up or torched over 100 girls' schools in Swat and barred women from going to markets.

The Taliban's recent decision to completely ban girls' education from January 15 has upset Salma and her colleagues because most of them are the sole bread-winners of their families.

"My colleagues were crying when they heard this bad news. Some have aged and handicapped parents while others have lost their male members in the ongoing conflict," she said.

"Our principal has said that all female teachers should write down the domestic problems forcing them to work so that they could be forwarded to Taliban, who would be requested to review their policy about women's education," Salma said.

No concept of education as a human right (irrespective of gender), or of innate human curiosity and the right to the pursuit of happiness, and least of all, of self-determination. All of these are fundamental to the Western understanding of "elevating" the status of women.

Women who go out for work, especially social work, are tagged as immoral and eliminated by militants controlling the area, he said.

Bakht Zeba, a 45-year-old woman councillor who was a staunch supporter of girls' education, was murdered on November 25. She was first threatened by Taliban to stop her activities or face dire consequences. When she did not pay heed to the warnings, the Taliban shot her dead in her house.

Warner: Refuting Counter-Terrorism Dhimmitude

A terrific piece by Bill Warner at the Political Islam site:

After the Mumbai jihad a friend received a letter from someone who works in counter-terrorism. The friend is an apologist for Islam. The counter-terrorism friend poses their dhimmitude (apologies) so skillfully that it is worth countering their arguments.

The argument goes on for a full page. The conclusion is that Islam is not anyone's enemy, but radical Islam is a threat to everyone. The argument does not include a single fact taken from Islamic doctrine. Everything is based upon what some Muslims have told them. In a court of law, such "proof" is called hearsay. In short, the argument can be summarized by: I know some good Muslims; hence, Islam is good.

The background for my argument is the doctrine of Islam. Every Muslim, without exception, will tell you that the Koran is the perfect, complete, universal word of the only god, Allah. The Koran insists that Mohammed is the perfect model, pattern, of behavior for all Muslims. Mohammed's behavior is so important to Islam that it has a special name, Sunna. The Sunna is found in two texts, the Sira (Mohammed's sacred biography) and the Hadith (the sacred traditions of Mohammed). All of Islamic doctrine is based upon three texts: the Koran, the Sira, and the Hadith, the Trilogy.

I will not quote from the letter, but will summarize the points. They are the same points of all the other "experts."

"Moderate Muslims are not silent."
Well, we have to grasp the thick end of the wedge first. What is a "moderate Muslim?" What defines moderate? There are two references for moderation. The counter-terrorism friend's reference is "nice." A moderate is a nice person who won't harm a kafir (an unbeliever).

But we are talking about a Muslim, so the only valid reference for moderation is Islam, not "nice." It is the model of Mohammed who determines what Islam is. So if a Muslim imitates the Sunna of Mohammed, then they are moderate. Sunna is the words and deeds of Mohammed, the perfect pattern for all Muslims. The Koran says over 70 times that all Muslims are to imitate Mohammed in every detail of their life. To that end Islam has an enormous literature about Mohammed in the Sira (his sacred biography) and the Hadith (his sacred traditions).

At this point we meet the main sticking point in understanding the doctrine of Islam. Muslims are to be Mohammedans and follow the Koran. But which Mohammed and which Koran do they follow? Mohammed preached the religion of Islam in Mecca for 13 years and gained 150 followers. In Mecca the Koran is generally religious.

Then Mohammed moved to Medina and became a politician and warrior. In 10 years time he annihilated the Jews of Medina, who were half of the town's citizens. Then he turned to attacking all kafirs. In the last 9 years of his life he was involved in a violent event every 6 weeks, on the average. He died without a single enemy left in Arabia. The Koran in Medina is political in nature and very violent.

So there are two Korans-the Meccan Koran and the Medinan Koran. In the same way there are two Mohammeds-Meccan Mohammed and Medinan Mohammed. The confusing thing is that the two Mohammeds and the two Korans contradict each other. But the Koran gives a rule for resolving the contradictions-the later is better and stronger than the earlier. So Medina abrogates Mecca. The bad news is that jihad developed in Medina and all the "nice" verses are weaker than the intolerant verses.

But the earlier "nice" verses are still true. After all, the Koran is the exact words of Allah, who never lies. So Islam holds two contradictory positions on all politics. This is dualism. But the dualism is very confusing. Islam must be one or the other. Right? No. It is both at the same time. There is an Escher print that illustrates this dualism very well. Look at the print. Do you see angels or devils? Notice that you can't see both at the same time.

The Western mind has been trained that both sides of a contradiction can't be true. So the question arises? Which of the two Korans is the real Koran? Which of the two Mohammeds is the real Mohammed? We see this when people say: that is not the real Islam. Or: he is not a real Muslim. The entire question of which is the real Islam misses the point that Islam embraces both sides of the contradiction. Islam is killing kafirs. Islam is being tolerant of kafirs. Islam is both tolerant and peaceful and intolerant and murderous.

Go back to the Escher illustration. Does it make any sense to ask if it is a picture of angels? Or to ask if the devils are the "real" illustration? No, it is about both and any attempt to argue one over the other misses the point. Both of them are needed for the illustration to work. In the same way, Islam can only be BOTH Mecca and Medina.

Let's return to the point of the "moderate" Muslim. Now we have to ask the question: is this Muslim a moderate of the Meccan variety or of the Medinan variety? Mohammed Atta, who was the lead jihadist on September 11, 2001, was a moderate of the Medinan sort. Just like Mohammed. Or is the "moderate" Muslim of the Meccan, generally religious and nice, type? The counter-terrorism expert does not make it clear which type she actually means, since it could be either.
The term "moderate" Muslim has no meaning because it does not identify which side of Islam the moderate is.

But we all know that what is meant is that moderate Muslims speak nicely and we are not afraid of them. They mean a Meccan Muslim when they use the word "moderate." Let's tackle his claim that the moderate Muslims are not silent. They may not be silent in dealing with kafirs, but they are silent in dealing with Medinan Muslims. Why? Two reasons. Medina was violent and most people are afraid of violence. That is the reason violence works. But there is a second reason. Remember that the Medinan jihadic Koran is better than the Meccan version. Medina trumps Mecca and Muslims know this.

"Radical Islamic groups"
What does "radical" mean? Killing, robbing, enslaving, assassination, torture, deceiving, jihad? As long as those behaviors occur with the kafirs on the receiving end, they are all acts that were performed by Mohammed. If Mohammed did them then they are not radical. Mohammed defines the middle of the road--normative behavior.

What happened in Mumbai, India, the World Trade Towers and Beslan, Russia was not radical. Each and every action at those sites was based upon the Sunna of Mohammed.

It is time to dwell a moment on the word "kafir." The strict meaning of kafir is unbeliever, but unbeliever is a neutral term. The Koran defines kafir by its usage. Kafirs can be robbed, raped, crucified, tortured, deceived, enslaved, plotted against, insulted and more. Kafir is the worst word in human language. Our counter-terrorism expert is a kafir and does not know it.

"moderates are using the Koran to prove the radicals to be wrong"
Anytime anyone only references the Koran when they are talking about Islam, you are dealing with a deceiver or an ignorant person. The Koran is only 16% of the Islamic canon. The Koran does not have enough in it to accomplish even one of Islam's vaunted Five Pillars. The Sira and the Hadith compromise the 84% of Islamic canon that shows a Muslim how to be a Muslim.

The Hadith devotes 20% of its text to jihad. The Sira devotes 75% of its words to jihad. Which "moderate" can deny those facts?

The Meccan Koran devotes 67% of its words towards kafirs, not Muslims. The Medinan Koran devotes 51% of its material to the kafir. Out of all this material in the Koran some of it in Mecca seems to promise goodness to the kafir, but the later Koran takes away the chance of goodness.

The "radicals," the Medinan Muslims, are right. The Meccan Muslims are deceivers, perhaps of themselves, but certainly deceivers without any doctrinal basis.
Let's vet the Muslim experts. If anything they say agrees with Mohammed then they are right. If anything the Muslim says disagrees with Mohammed then they are wrong. So who needs a Muslim? Go straight to Mohammed, the Sira and the Hadith. We don't need hearsay; we need facts, Mohammed's facts, and not Islamic gossip.

I don't care about what any Muslim says, except Mohammed. Actually, there is one, and only one, Muslim who will give you the straight truth-an apostate, one who has left Islam. But apostates tell us that no one believes them. Obviously, our counter-terrorism expert has never talked with any apostates.

"I don't think maligning Islam's holy man is proper behavior"
Since when is quoting from the Sira and Hadith maligning? Mohammed gave out the rules for rape in jihad. He owned sex slaves, told Muslims it was good to beat their wives, laughed when his enemy's heads were thrown at his feet. It's in the book. Such behavior goes on for page after page, year after year. Why is referring to facts maligning?

"The counter-terrorism expert is a Jew and gives two incidents of how Muslims have helped Jews. In Albania some Muslims did not turn Jews over to Nazis, some Muslims helped a Jewish kid on the NY streets and became good friends."
Sure, many Muslims have been good to kafirs. Dualism allows for that. But let's examine what Mohammed did to the Jews; that is Sunna.

In the Mecca Mohammed portrayed himself in the line of Jewish prophets and that his angel was Gabriel, a Jewish angel. Large parts of the Meccan Koran are derived from the Old Testament, but all of the stories have been modified to preach that Allah destroys all of those who do not listen to his prophets. Other than that Mohammed is the Jew's best friend.

Then he moved to Medina, which was half Jewish, and they told him that he was not a prophet. Both Mohammed's and the Koran's attitude changed about the Jews. (It is interesting how well the Koran tracks Mohammed's political progress. This parallel might cause the cynic to wonder if Mohammed wrote the Koran.)

In Medina Mohammed attacked, robbed and exiled the first two Jewish tribes. The third tribe was enslaved, sold for profit to be used for jihad and the 800 male members were executed in one day. Before that Mohammed had two different Jews assassinated for speaking against him. After every Jew was gone in Medina, Mohammed went 100 miles out his way to attack the Jews of Khaybar. They had done nothing to Mohammed. (Does this remind you of the Jews in Mumbai?)

After he had crushed them, he tortured the Jewish leader to death (does this remind you of Mumbai?), took their land and made the Jews Islam's first dhimmis. Dhimmis had no civil rights and had to pay a tax of half of all their income to Islam. Then on his deathbed, Mohammed banished the Jews from Arabia. His annihilation of the Jews in Arabia was 100%, better than Hitler
.
Hitler hated Jews, but it was not until the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem gave him the idea of extinction (taken from the Sunna of Mohammed when he annihilated the Jews of Medina), that the death camps were planned. Only 6.8% of Mein Kamph is Jew hatred, whereas, 10.6% of the Medinan Koran is involved in Jew hatred. So the Koran of Medina has more Jew hatred than Mein Kamph, but who is counting?

That is the Sunna of Mohammed.
Andrew Bostom's seminal encyclopedia, The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism, is 766 pages of disgusting bigotry by Islam. But for this Jew in counter-terrorism, his three examples show that Islam is the friend of the Jews.

There are 14 verses in the Koran that say that a Muslim is not the friend of the kafir. Here is one about the Jews:

Koran 5:51 "O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people."

But let's be clear here. Isn't it strange that people assume that a Muslim is only influenced by Islam? Every Muslim actually has three parts: Meccan Muslim, Medinan Muslim and kafir-Muslim.

To the degree a person is ruled by Islam, they are not a kafir's friend. But "Muslims" are also influenced by the Golden Rule (the Golden Rule is not part of Islamic dualistic ethics) and can actually be a friend of a kafir, because the kafir-Muslim is not following Islamic ethics, but kafir ethics.

So if the Muslim is actually your friend, then in that moment he is not Islamic. But there is another possibility. Mohammed repeatedly told Muslims to deceive kafirs when it would advance Islam. So the friendship may be deception. Tragic, isn't it? (Please do not respond and say that Islam has a Golden Rule. Give me the quote from the doctrine. Islam has two sets of rules-one for Muslims and a second for kafirs. The very word for all non-Muslims, kafirs, denies the Golden Rule. Mohammed treated Muslims one way and kafirs another way. Ethical dualism is Sunna.)

The counter-terrorism expert is not unique. Their arguments are the same as Bush, Kennedy, Pelosi, the FBI chief and the rest of the politicians, media experts and religious leaders. His arguments are standard Government Issue.

Here is the problem. All of my arguments are based upon the actual doctrine. When I talk about Islam I use the Koran, the Sira and the Hadith. Their arguments are based upon hearsay and opinion. But according to the media and university intellectuals I am a hate[-]filled bigot and they are a beacon of goodness. Lies are good. Truth is bigotry. Can we say Orwellian?

I can defend my statements. I believe in critical thinking and facts. I want our government "experts" to give an argument to defend their doctrine of hearsay and opinion. What is the argument for not reading the Koran, Sira and Hadith? What is the argument for deliberate ignorance?

Read it all.

Airline apologizes to Muslims making "suspicious remarks"

"HEY AHMAD! (Salama 'alikum) IS THIS THE SAFEST AREA IN A PLANE? HUH, IS IT?!" Either the nine Muslims were being this outlandish, or else they weren't. If not, the other passengers reporting them were being merely extra paranoid, and extremely nosy. Yet if it was the latter case, wouldn't paranoid and nosy people be blowing the whistle on Muslims daily, in planes, trains, and everywhere else? Yet this sort of thing happens rarely -- maybe once a year, indicating, perhaps, that the Muslims in question were, one way or another, creating undue attention for themselves? More on this story.

"9 Muslims removed from flight get AirTran apology," by Brian Westley for the Associated Press, January 2:

WASHINGTON (AP) — AirTran Airways is apologizing to nine Muslim passengers kicked off a New Year's Day flight to Florida after other passengers reported hearing a suspicious remark about airplane security.

One of the passengers says the confusion started at Reagan National Airport in Washington, D.C., when his brother was talking about the safest place to sit on an airplane.

In a statement Friday, Orlando-based AirTran says it refunded the air fare for the nine passengers and planned to reimburse them for replacement tickets they bought on another airline...

Nigeria: Child brides, broken lives

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88:

Narrated 'Ursa:

The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with 'Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).

British telecom firm cuts ties with Israeli company over Gaza ops

The dhimmi idiots are angry that Israel has chosen to defend itself. It Israel had just lain down and died, all would be well. The ironically named "FreedomCall" may come to regret this before they are entirely subjugated. "British telecom firm severs ties with Israeli counterparts," by Meir Orbach for Ynet News, December 31 (thanks to James):

British telecommunications firm FreedomCall has terminated its cooperation with Israel's MobileMax due to the IDF operation in Gaza.

"We received an email from the British company informing us that it is severing all ties with us and any other Israeli company following Israel's strike in Gaza," said CEO Raanan Cohen.

"We weren't expecting this from them and there was no prior warning. I don't intend to appeal to them or answer the letter."

The email from FreedomCall said, "As a result of the Israeli government action in the last few days we will no longer be in a position to consider doing business with yourself or any other Israeli company."...

Solomon Islands: Muslim man attacks Anglican priest, threatens to cut off his head

"Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks..." (Qur'an 47:4).

"Police Hunt Suspect on Anglican Priest Attack," from SIBC News, January 2:

Police in Malaita are searching for a man allegedly responsible for attacking an Anglican priest in East Malaita over religious differences.

Solomon Star reports that Malaita's Provincial Police Commander David Diosi confirms police is searching for the suspect Jack Rade - leader of the Muslim League community in East Malaita in relation to the attack.

Mr. Diosi confirms witness reports saying Mr Rade had threatened to cut off the priest's head and destroy anyone who goes against the will of the Muslim League Community of East Malaita.

He says police did attempt to arrest Mr Rade on one occasion after the attack but he escaped custody after lying to them.

He says communities in East Malaita have since retaliated to the attack by hijacking and damaging a jeep vehicle owned by the Muslim group.

He says the community is also demanding compensation from the Muslim group.

The Provincial Police Commander says the situation between the Muslim group and communities in East Malaita is very hostile and police have appealed to the Muslim elders to handover the suspect.

The Anglican priest is reportedly suffering from trauma after the assault which happened on the sixteenth of December 2008.

The attack reportedly was in retaliation to an alleged stoning of the Muslim League's vehicle and hurling of insults directed towards their adopted Islam religion.

Police have declined to release the name of the priest.

Dutch Left calls for an end to suicidal notion of tolerance

For years I have insisted that the resistance to the jihad and Islamic supremacism is not a Left/Right, liberal/conservative issue, but one of the defense of our common civilization -- however, hardly anyone on the Left has ever demonstrated any awareness of this, perhaps because they have increasingly discarded the values of that common civilization altogether. However, harsh reality is causing some people to wake up in the Netherlands.

"From the left, a call to end the current Dutch notion of tolerance," by John Vinocur for the International Herald Tribune, December 29 (thanks to all who sent this in):

AMSTERDAM: Two years ago, the Dutch could quietly congratulate themselves on having brought what seemed to be a fair measure of consensus and reason to the meanest intersection in their national political life: the one where integration of Muslim immigrants crossed Dutch identity.

In the run-up to choosing a new government in 2006, just 24 percent of the voters considered the issue important, and only 4 percent regarded it as the election's central theme.

What a turnabout, it seemed - and whatever the reason (spent passions, optimism, resignation?), it was a soothing respite for a country whose history of tolerance was the first in 21st-century Europe to clash with the on-street realities of its growing Muslim population.

Since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States, the Netherlands had lived through something akin to a populist revolt against accommodating Islamic immigrants led by Pim Fortuyn, who was later murdered; the assassination of the filmmaker Theo Van Gogh, accused of blasphemy by a homegrown Muslim killer; and the bitter departure from the Netherlands of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Somali woman who became a member of Parliament before being marked for death for her criticism of radical Islam.

Now something fairly remarkable is happening again.

Two weeks ago, the country's biggest left-wing political grouping, the Labor Party, which has responsibility for integration as a member of the coalition government led by the Christian Democrats, issued a position paper calling for the end of the failed model of Dutch "tolerance."

It came at the same time Nicolas Sarkozy was making a case in France for greater opportunities for minorities that also contained an admission that the French notion of equality "doesn't work anymore."

But there was a difference. If judged on the standard scale of caution in dealing with cultural clashes and Muslims' obligations to their new homes in Europe, the language of the Dutch position paper and Lilianne Ploumen, Labor's chairperson, was exceptional.

The paper said: "The mistake we can never repeat is stifling criticism of cultures and religions for reasons of tolerance."...

That would be a good starting point, but the wind is still largely blowing in the opposite direction.

Read it all.

Maldives' Ministry of Islamic Affairs asks police to ban discos on New Year's Eve

Haram. So very, very haram.

They're unconstitutional, you see, because Islam is the basis of all laws, and the mixing of the sexes that occurs in discos is un-Islamic. "Ministry Asks Police To Ban Discos," by Ibrahim Mohamed for Minivan News, December 31:

The ministry of Islamic affairs appealed to the Maldives Police Service on Wednesday to end to all the discos organised for New Year’s Eve celebrations.

Police sergeant Ahmed Shiyam confirmed Dr Abdul Majeed Abdul Bari, the minister of Islamic affairs, had made an official request to the police commissioner, Ahmed Faseeh, for police to take action regarding this matter.

“We will be taking steps in accordance to the ministry’s request,” said Shiyam, but he did not comment on what action the police would take.

Dr Bari refused to comment on the issue on Wednesday.

Sheikh Mohamed Shaheem Ali Saeed, the state minister of Islamic affairs, said the ministry had formally requested the police stop the discos from taking place because they were contrary to Islam. He added the ministry had received complaints from the public.

“We have received hundreds of complaints asking for a ban on the DJs,” he said. “So, the number of people who are against having DJs is greater than the number who wants them."

“Even a police official has informed us that they have also been receiving complaints.” he said.

According to Shaheem, it is haram or forbidden in Islam for both sexes to dance together.

Article 10 of the Constitution states the religion of the Maldives is Islam and Islam shall be the basis for all laws in the land.

Although Article 27 stipulates everyone has the right to freedom of expression, the right only exists as long as it is “not contrary to any tenet of Islam”.

Shaheem said the ministry had met with and advised some of the people organising the events.

“They said a lot of money had been invested to organise the events and it would be a great financial loss if the discos were cancelled,” he said. “They added they would not organise more discos in the future.”

Hussain Ibrahim, a prominent lawyer, agreed there was no law which permitted discos.

Ibrahim, also a former constitutional assembly member, said discos were forbidden in Islam and as such would be contrary to the Constitution.

“I can’t believe it,” said 25-year-old Ali Hussain after hearing the ministry’s decision. “It’s a big surprise. I’ve been celebrating New Year’s Eve for the past five years by going to discos. Boys and girls want to dance to music on this night.”

Hussain added if discos are banned, circumcision parties should also be forbidden.

“In circumcision parties, men and women dance very closely, so the ministry’s decision is unfair.” he said.

Duly noted.

Connecticut: Muslim inmate sues over lack of halal meat

How about some Tofurky? Or the "vegetarian loaf" Lee Boyd Malvo requested (recipe included at the link), and then complained about?

Mm-mm punitive! "Muslim inmate files suit over lack of halal meat," from the Hartford Courant, December 31:

UNCASVILLE, Conn. - A Muslim inmate in a Connecticut prison has filed a federal lawsuit, alleging he has been denied meals that conform to his religious standards.

Ricardo Collins says officials are denying his right to freedom of religion by failing to provide meat that is "halal," slaughtered in accordance with Islamic law.

The 27-year-old inmate, who is being held at Corrigan-Radgowski Correctional Center, filed his lawsuit in U.S. District Court on Dec. 23.

Prison officials declined to comment, citing department policy on pending litigation.

A spokesman says meals served to Muslim prisoners comply with their religious standards, even if they do not contain halal meat.

The world is full of vegetarian sources of protein. But those don't bring the gratification of getting back at the prison system by convincing officials outside the system to force it to provide special accommodations.

Collins recently won an appellate court decision granting him a new trial on a murder charge. He had been convicted in Superior Court of killing a man in Bridgeport in 2002.

Russia: Church bells offend Muslims

Dhimmis are forbidden bells: "Such non-Muslim subjects [of the Islamic state] are obliged to comply with Islamic rules that pertain to the safety and indemnity of life, reputation, and property. In addition, they...are forbidden to openly display wine or pork, (A: to ring church bells or display crosses,) recite the Torah or Evangel aloud, or make public display of their funerals and feastdays..." -- 'Umdat al-Salik o11.5

"Church bells strike false note with Muslims," from Russia Today, December 27 (thanks to James Jatras):

The Muslim community in Russia's Nizhny Novgorod region is opposing plans to include church bells in a proposed new regional anthem. Local authorities had earlier set a competition to compose an anthem for the region.

The work is still being composed and officials say the last thing they want to do is to hurt people's feelings.

The Muslim community wanted the regional governor to change some of the rules of the contest. Using the sound of church bells was mandatory and Muslim leaders thought this alienated other ethnic and religious groups.

"There should be no political or religious themes in the anthem. It should be something that uplifts people and brings them together. I think including religion goes against this." Said Gayaz Zakirov, spiritual leader of the region’s Muslims....

At least for now.

A bad year for religious freedom in Indonesia

Islamic Tolerance Alert: The Indonesian year-in-review. "Religious Freedom Curtailed as Government Bows to Pressure," by Muninggar Sri Saraswati for the Jakarta Post, December 31:

Religious freedom in Indonesia took a few steps back in 2008 as the government buckled under pressure from both mainstream and minority hard-line Muslim groups, to the detriment of minority organizations.

One of the most high-profile cases was the bid, led by the Islam Defenders Front, or FPI, in October to ban the Islamic Ahmadiyah sect, which resulted in a joint ministerial decree ordering the group to restrict its religious activities.

The decision was taken despite FPI threats to use violence against minority religious groups, including the destruction of mosques and houses belonging to Ahmadiyah followers. Religious intolerance came to a head in June when the FPI ambushed a peaceful rally organized by the National Alliance for the Freedom of Faith and Religion at the National Monument park, or Monas, in Central Jakarta.

Although FPI Chairman Habib Rizieq was later sentenced to 18 months in prison, the government decree means that Ahmadiyah members face legal prosecution if they fully practice their faith.

Prior to the decree, Ahmadiyah followers were able to follow their beliefs peacefully, even though the Indonesia Ulema Council, or MUI, declared Ahmadiyah heretical in 2005.

Ahmadiyah members, unlike mainstream Islamic groups, believe its founder, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, is the last prophet — rather than Muhammad.

Another minority sect, the Kingdom of Eden, led by Lia Eden, has been targeted by Muslim groups for tainting the teachings of what they say is “pure” Islam.

Lia was arrested by the police on Dec. 15 for releasing an edict that claimed major religions should cease to exist.

Following the demands of thousands of Muslims, the police charged her with blasphemy.

Lia, who claims to be the Holy Spirit, God’s messenger Gabriel and a reincarnation of the Virgin Mary, was previously sentenced to two years in jail in 2006 on the same charge. She was found guilty of distributing books and video compact discs of her teachings, which were considered by some to be irreverent toward Islam.

Ahmadiyah was not the only target. The National Commission on Human Rights, or Komnas HAM, has documented violent and discriminative acts against other minority religious groups, such as Jamaah Al-Qiyadah, the Tani Mulya Church and the Dayeuh Kolot Christian Church.

However, Komnas HAM said it was most concerned about the general decline in religious freedom in the country through the enactment of laws and bylaws by the central and regional governments that show a total disregard for minority religious groups and national diversity.

President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono approved the vaguely worded anti-pornography bill in late November, despite continuing opposition from several provinces, ethnic groups, rights activists and pluralist organizations which claim it could allow majority groups to use violence and intimidation against minorities.

And these stories were far from the only ones. There were rampages against Christian schools and churches, worship permits withheld, and creeping sharia in general.

Regional-level bylaws to implement the spirit of sharia have also been seen as a threat to religious diversity in the country.

The Ministry of Home Affairs is currently reviewing 37 Sharia-based bylaws in force in several regions across the country, many of which are considered discriminatory and to violate existing laws.

Ifdhal Kasim, who chairs Komnas HAM, said that “the discrimination inherent in the bylaws threaten the basic freedom of a number of minority groups in Indonesia.”

“Ironically, the state tends to let these things happen by omission or, in some cases, by criminalizing the victims,” he said.

“Indonesia was founded on the spirit of diversity,” he said. “We should not forget that.”

Turkey: Italian priest's attacker gets four years in prison

Stabbed for being a priest

If a Christian had attacked and stabbed a Muslim in Turkey, would he too get four years, or would he be executed? This story also reminds that "moderate" Turkey's "small Christian community has been targeted in a spate of attacks over several years, prompting concern among human rights groups and the European Union, which Ankara hopes to join."

"Italian priest's attacker sentenced in Turkey," from Reuters, December 29 (thanks to Jeffrey Imm):

ANKARA (Reuters) – A Turkish court sentenced a man to four years in prison Monday for stabbing an Italian Catholic priest in 2007 in a case that has highlighted attacks against Christians in Muslim but secular Turkey.

A court in the coastal city of Izmir in western Turkey passed the sentence against Ramazan Bay for stabbing Adriano Franchini, Anatolian news agency reported. Franchini survived the attack.

Bay told the court he had been influenced by media reports of other attacks against Christians, including the shooting death of Andrea Santoro, another Italian Catholic priest, in the Turkish Black Sea city of Trabzon in 2006.

Turkey's small Christian community has been targeted in a spate of attacks over several years, prompting concern among human rights groups and the European Union, which Ankara hopes to join.

Three Christians, two Turks and a German, had their throats slit by youths who burst into their Bible publishing house in the southeastern town of Malatya last year.

Turkish Armenian writer Hrant Dink was also slain last year in Istanbul by a young nationalist gunman. A prosecutor on Monday indicted a colonel for failing to provide protection to Dink, who had received several death threats, Anatolian said.

Christians in Turkey number barely 100,000 in a total population of nearly 75 million.

Saudi minister warns against growing Saudi racism

“Regrettably, we have become overwhelmed by arrogance and even racism, and we have begun to imagine that we are better..." Racism is one thing; being "overwhelmed by arrogance," on the other hand, and believing "that we are better," is simply a product of Islamic supremacism.

"Saudi minister warns against racism," from the Daily Times, December 30 (thanks to Jeffrey Imm):

RIYADH: Saudi Labour Minister Ghazi Al Gosaibi has warned against growing racism among Saudis towards the millions of foreign workers in the kingdom, media reports said on Monday. Gosaibi told senior Labour Ministry officials that the country should treat foreign workers better, protect their rights and not succumb to racism, local newspapers reported.

“Regrettably, we have become overwhelmed by arrogance and even racism, and we have begun to imagine that we are better than those who have come to share in shouldering the burden of development,” he said. Foreign workers have a huge presence throughout the kingdom, estimated at more than eight million altogether.

Australia: Topless bathing to be banned to "protect" Muslims

Who needs "protection" from whom?

After all, Australia wants all people from far and wide to feel welcome, and "at home," especially "If they've come from a Middle Eastern or Asian country [general PC-code for "Muslim country"] where women never go topless - in fact they usually wear a lot of clothing - I think it's important to respect all the different cultures that make up Australia." Indeed -- especially those that may attack you for not behaving like a subdued dhimmi.

"Topless ban to protect Muslims and Asians: Nile," by Georgina Robinson for the Sydney Morning Herald, December 30 (thanks to Kyros):

Conservative MP Fred Nile says he wants topless bathing banned in NSW to protect Sydney's Muslim and Asian communities.

The Reverend Nile has rejected allegations that prudishness is behind a bill he has prepared to ban nudity, including topless sunbathing, on the state's most popular beaches.

Australia's reputation as a conservative but culturally inclusive society was at risk of erosion by more liberal overseas visitors, he said.

"Our beaches should be a place where no one is offended, whether it's their religious or cultural views," he said.

"If they've come from a Middle Eastern or Asian country where women never go topless - in fact they usually wear a lot of clothing - I think it's important to respect all the different cultures that make up Australia."

The practice was at risk of raising the ire of Muslim men in particular, Mr Nile said.

"I don't want to have any provocations or disturbances on our public beaches," he said...

And there it is: All that talk of "inclusiveness" and "respect" is little more than fear of "raising Muslim ire" which would lead to "provocations and disturbances on our public beaches."

Saudi Arabia: Doctor halts wedding of 5-year-old girl

Sharia Alert: "We cannot technically impede a marriage with a girl of this age. However, we can delay the process (by refusing to carry out the [state-mandated pre-marital] tests)."

"Saudi Arabia: Doctor stops wedding with five year-old," from Adnkronos International, December 30:

Riyadh, 30 Dec. (AKI) - A doctor in Saudi Arabia was able to stop the wedding of a five and 11 year-old whose family wanted to marry them to protect financial assets. "Thanks to the law that compels spouses to carry out blood analyses before marriage, we were able to stop a wedding with underage girls, among them a five year-old," said Hani Harsani, the doctor in charge of laboratory analysis in an interview with Saudi daily al-Watan.

"Two sisters came to us accompanied by their parents to undergo pre-marital blood analyses. The first one was five, and the other 11 years-old. When we asked the mother why they wanted to do the tests, she told us that she wanted to marry the girls to cousins to preserve the family's property rights."

During the interview, Harsani remembers an episode when a 10-year-old orphan was brought to do pre-marital blood tests by her brother, who wanted to marry the sister to a 40-year-old friend who already had two other wives.

"We cannot technically impede a marriage with a girl of this age. However, we can delay the process (by refusing to carry out the tests)," said Harsani.

"I hope a law can be passed sooner rather than later to establish a minimum age for marriage."

That would be nice. But opposition will be fierce, and the defenders of child marriage will invoke Muhammad's own example in marrying Aisha at the age of 6, and consummating the marriage when she was 9. They may also invoke Qur'an 65:4, which takes child marriage for granted in allowing for the divorce of pre-pubescent girls.

Pre-marital blood tests are compulsory in Saudi Arabia to ensure the spouses are in good health, but also to prevent the spread of hereditary diseases to the children.

Simple Shimon: "Nobody in this world understands what are Hamas' goals and why it continues to fire missiles"

Dazed and confused

Mr. Peres, I am very glad to clear this up for you. The Hamas Charter quotes the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood in this way: "Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it" (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al-Banna, of blessed memory).

The Charter also says, in article six:

The Islamic Resistance Movement is a distinguished Palestinian movement, whose allegiance is to Allah, and whose way of life is Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine, for under the wing of Islam followers of all religions can coexist in security and safety where their lives, possessions and rights are concerned.

That security and safety is elucidated by the Qur'an, in which Muslims are told to "fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, even if they are of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." (9:29)

So once the rule of Islamic law is established over all the land of Israel, and the Jews pay the jizya tax with willing submission and feel themselves subdued, accepting a status of inferiority (dhimmitude) vis-a-vis the Muslims, their security and safety will be secured -- as long as they don't get out of line.

That is what Hamas' goals are: the destruction of the Jewish state and the subjugation of the Jews under the rule of Islamic Sharia. That's why it continues to fire missiles from Gaza.

Happy to be of service, sir!

"Peres: There's no logic to Hamas rocket attacks from Gaza," by Barak Ravid for Haaretz, December 30 (thanks to Mladen):

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and President Shimon Peres held a meeting on Tuesday morning at the President's Residence in Jerusalem. The premier updated Peres on the latest developments as the Israel Defense Forces offensive in Gaza enters its fourth day....

"Israel is not fighting the Palestinian population but a terrorist organization whose raison d'etre is continued violence and destabilizing the region," said Peres, who also remarked that Hamas bears responsibility for the situation unfolding in Gaza.

"Nobody in this world understands what are Hamas' goals and why it continues to fire missiles," the president said. "This shooting has no point, no logic, and no chance."

Indian gov't minister: "Islamic terrorism" an incorrect term made up by Westerners angry over 9/11

Pranab Mukherjee is largely repeating himself. "Term 'Islamic terrorism' wrong : Pranab," from the Press Trust of India, December 29:

Kolkata, Dec 29 (PTI) Describing as "unacceptable" the term 'Islamic terrorism', External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee today said a "disinformation campaign" has been launched to vitiate the atmosphere and asked the people to protest it.

"Not only is this expression Islamic terrorism unacceptable, there should be protest against it. Islam has nothing to do with terrorism. The patriotism of Muslims is no less than others in the country," Mukherjee told a programme to mark 200 years of the Bengali translation of the Quran here.

He said deliberate attempts were being made to vitiate the atmosphere but Islam, which preached love and communal harmony, was against terrorism. "Terrorism is against humanity." He said universal brotherhood was the basis of Islam which attracted people all over the world to it.

Mukherjee said that after 9/11, people in Europe and US coined the phrase 'Islamic terrorism' and tried to project it was a conflict between Islamic and Christian civilisations.

Challenging those who described Islam as a religion of fundamentalists, Mukherjee asked them to show which part of the Holy Book encouraged fundamentalism.

The danger of fundamentalism depends in large part on what the fundamentals are; Qur'an 33:21 upholds Muhammad as the supreme example of human conduct. Given the open-ended calls for violence against unbelievers in the Qur'an (e.g., 9:5), along with the biographies (Sira) and accounts of Muhammad's sayings and actions (ahadith) that are accepted as sound (sahih) by Muslims (e.g., Bukhari, Muslim) it becomes clearer why armed jihad just doesn't want to go away.