Islam's Messiah (Mahdi); Obama

The difference between Jimmy Carter's mistakes in handling the 1979 revolution in Iran and Obama's handling of the 2011 revolution in Egypt is that Carter's team made mistakes out of ignorance and naiveté. Thirty-one years later, Obama's diplomatic team cannot claim naiveté in dealing with the Muslim Brotherhood and the radical Islamists. Obama is consciously supporting the Islamists in Egypt and facilitating their rise to power.

How else can one explain the extraordinary statements of James Clapper, Obama's director of national intelligence, in his testimony before the House Intelligence Committee, that the Muslim Brotherhood is a "secular organization" that has "eschewed violence"? They operate hospitals in Egypt, so they must be peace-loving humanitarians? Hamas operates charities in the Gaza territory, so they are not really dedicated to the destruction of Israel?

We might forgive some American citizens for being confused about the character and goals of some Islamic organizations disguised as charities, but don't we expect more from our "intelligence community"? As one wit has already observed following Clapper's testimony, we might as well abolish Clapper's agency and save the taxpayers $40 billion if this is the quality of "intelligence" our policymakers are getting from that bureaucracy.

Clapper's statements, made this past week at the height of the Egyptian crisis, might be excused or explained away if they were an isolated incident. But his statements are part of a pattern of mischaracterizing and underestimating the threat from radical Islam. Clapper's testimony can only be viewed as part of the Obama administration's persistent efforts to "humanize" the Muslim Brotherhood and prepare the ground for a new Islamist-run Egyptian government.

In his televised interview on Super Bowl Sunday with Fox News pundit Bill O'Reilly, Obama specifically included the Muslim Brotherhood in the groups that must be included in any new Egyptian government. This is the equivalent of President Woodrow Wilson welcoming the Bolsheviks into the Russian government in 1917. 

Obama went to Cairo in 2009 to deliver his first speech on foreign soil, a speech that was billed as his "outreach to the Muslim world." Obama specifically requested that representatives of the Muslim Brotherhood be invited to the speech. 

In 2005 parliamentary elections in Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood won 20 percent of the vote by putting on a moderate face and talking about social reforms and civil liberties. But in 2008 they replaced their leadership with a more fundamentalist, less secular group that has renewed the call for Shariah law and a turn away from Western civil institutions. Surely, our intelligence community knows this.

Today in Egypt, there are a dozen or more secular, reformist parties that will seek public support in the next elections. We have to ask, why is the Obama administration favoring the Muslim Brotherhood and insisting that they be included in any constitutional reform committee? 

The contrast between Obama's behavior during the Iranian street protests in 2009 and his very visible intervention in the Cairo situation is chilling. Pro-democracy demonstrators against the corrupt Ahmadinejad theocracy, which had rigged the presidential election to guarantee Ahmadinejad's victory, were greeted with indifference in the White House. Thousands of Iranian dissidents were jailed and tortured. But when Cairo erupted in protests against a secular dictatorship, Obama readily took sides. 

We live in a far more dangerous world in 2011 than we did in 1979. When the radical mullahs seized power in Iran and imposed a dictatorship based on radical Islamic doctrine, we thought it might be a short-lived experiment and not a direct threat to the United States. Today Iran is on the verge of getting nuclear weapons and is exporting money and "revolutionary training cadres" to Venezuela and elsewhere. Hezbollah has seized power in Lebanon and Hamas controls Gaza. In this environment, why are we welcoming a political role for the Muslim Brotherhood in the most populous nation in the Middle East? 

Both by constitutional separation of powers and by tradition, the president has wide latitude in conducting foreign policy. George Bush waged a war to achieve "regime change" in Iraq and was widely criticized for it. Obama clearly has a different vision of regime change, one that includes anti-American radicals dedicated to the destruction of Western democracy. 

What we need most is regime change in Washington, D.C.

Read more: Obama's Islamic tilt in Egypt http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=262489#ixzz1Dp1wis00

Obama’s Muslim Brotherhood Ties

 

Obama’s Muslim Brotherhood Ties

by Robert Spencer

02/08/2011

Barack Obama has declared that all opposition groups should have representation in the next Egyptian government, which essentially ensures that the Muslim Brotherhood will be part of that government.  The Brotherhood is the largest opposition group in Egypt, so it will probably end up in the driver’s seat in any new regime, and steer Egypt toward becoming an Islamic state inveterately hostile to the United States.

So why isn’t Obama working to limit the Brotherhood’s scope and influence?  Maybe because he doesn’t really have a problem with the Brotherhood, despite its hostility to America.  He made sure to invite Brotherhood leaders to attend his notorious speech to the Islamic world in Cairo, Egypt, in June 4, 2009.  Starting in the earliest days of his administration, he showed an intense desire to establish friendly ties with Brotherhood-linked organizations—despite the Brotherhood’s stated goal of “eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within.”

Obama first reached out to the Brotherhood when he chose the leader of a Muslim Brotherhood-linked group that had been named an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case to give a prayer during his inauguration ceremonies.  Ingrid Mattson, then-president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), offered this prayer at the National Cathedral on Obama’s Inauguration Day—despite the fact that the ISNA has admitted its ties to the Brotherhood.  The previous summer, federal prosecutors rejected a request from the ISNA to remove its unindicted co-conspirator status.

Obama didn’t ask Mattson to explain the ISNA’s links to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas.  On the contrary:  He sent his senior adviser, Valerie Jarrett, to be the keynote speaker at the ISNA’s national convention in 2009.

Even worse, in April 2009, Obama appointed Arif Alikhan, the deputy mayor of Los Angeles, as assistant secretary for policy development at the Department of Homeland Security.  Just two weeks before he received this appointment, Alikhan (who once called the jihad terror group Hezbollah a “liberation movement”) participated in a fund-raiser for the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC).  Like the ISNA, MPAC has links to the Muslim Brotherhood.  In a book titled In Fraternity:  A Message to Muslims in America, co-author Hassan Hathout, a former MPAC president, is identified as “a close disciple of the late Hassan al-Banna of Egypt.  "The MPAC-linked magazine The Minaret spoke of Hathout’s closeness to al-Banna in a 1997 article:  “My father would tell me that Hassan Hathout was a companion of Hassan al-Banna. ... Hassan Hathout would speak of al-Banna with such love and adoration; he would speak of a relationship not guided by politics or law but by a basic sense of human decency.”

The late al-Banna, of course, was the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Terror researcher Steven Emerson’s Investigative Project has documented MPAC’s indefatigable and consistent opposition to virtually every domestic anti-terror initiative.  Its magazine The Minaret has dismissed key counterterror operations as part of “[t]he American crusade against Islam and Muslims.”  For his part, while Alikhan was deputy mayor of Los Angeles, he blocked a Los Angeles Police Department project to assemble data about the ethnic makeup of mosques in the Los Angeles area.  This was not an attempt to conduct surveillance of the mosques or monitor them in any way.  LAPD Deputy Chief Michael P. Downing explained that it was actually an outreach program:  “We want to know where the Pakistanis, Iranians, and Chechens are so we can reach out to those communities.”  But Alikhan and other Muslim leaders said that the project manifested racism and “Islamophobia,” and the LAPD ultimately discarded all plans to study the mosques.

The Muslim Brotherhood is a pro-Sharia group.  Obama’s chief adviser on Islamic affairs, Dalia Mogahed, is a pro-Sharia Muslim.  In their Gallup survey published under the hubristic title "Who Speaks for Islam?  What A Billion Muslims Really Think," Mogahed and Saudi-funded dhimmi, or non-Muslim, pseudo-academic John Esposito cooked their data to increase the number of Muslim “moderates,” counting as “moderate” Muslims who wanted Sharia rule, hated America , supported jihad-martyrdom suicide bombing, and opposed equality of rights for women.  Mogahed also defended Sharia on a British TV show.

With Brotherhood operatives in the American government and working closely with it, thanks to Barack Obama, it’s no surprise that he would have no problem with their being part of the Egyptian government too.

Obama Beware the Muslim Brotherhood

Beware the Muslim Brotherhood

It might eventually take over a post-revolution Egypt

 

Sunday, February 13, 2011

By Jack Kelly, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

 

What will happen next in Egypt? We don't know. But the consequences -- for good or ill -- will be enormous.
Egypt is the most important nation in the Arab world. It's population (80.5 million) is more than that of Iraq (29.7 million), Saudi Arabia (25.7 million), and Syria (22.1 million) combined.

If Egypt becomes a stable, Western-style democracy, it will transform the region.

But if Egypt becomes an "Islamic republic," as Iran did after its revolution in 1979, war and depression are likely.
So it's important to get the transition right.
We're off to a rocky start. The protests caught the Obama administration by surprise, and it's been behind the power curve ever since.

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak resigned Friday -- a day after he said he wouldn't -- and turned power over to the military. This is probably the best result possible under the circumstances.

It happened in spite of the Obama administration's ever-shifting policy. In his rambling televised address Thursday night, Mr. Mubarak stuck a rhetorical finger in the president's eye. "I would never permit ... any sort of intervention that would come from outside," he said.
"This was a direct slap at Obama," said Middle East expert Barry Rubin. "He basically said: 'I am an Arab warrior, not a community organizer.' "

To give the impression they're on top of things, President Obama and his aides have spoken out frequently. But their many shifts in position have alienated both supporters of the regime and those protesting it.

"The official U.S. position is that Mubarak needs to go immediately, he needs to stay indefinitely, he needs to stay for a bit and then go, he needs to stay for a bit longer and then go sooner rather than later, unless he decides to stay until September," summarized humorist Mark Steyn.
"The improvisational -- critics say closer to schizophrenic -- nature of U.S. diplomacy during the crisis leaves the administration in the unwelcome position of having to make amends with whichever side emerges from the Egyptian tumult as the governing power," wrote Ben Smith in the Webzine Politico.

Our news media have been of little help in understanding what's going on. The networks sent their big names to Cairo though none spoke Arabic, knew the culture or knew the players.

"Their being in Cairo was adding zero news value other than making the plight of Western reporters the focal point of the story, which was not the point of their being in Cairo in the first place," said Rich Galen, who had been press secretary for House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

Few journalists have mentioned the protests were sparked by a doubling of food prices in the last year. But the greatest disservice they have done is to misrepresent the nature of the Muslim Brotherhood.
When journalists tout the brotherhood's "moderation" because it has publicly eschewed violence, they fail to mention that its goals are similar to al-Qaida's; that it grew to prominence because of its alliance with Adolf Hitler and that -- according to Kuwait's education minister -- it is the father of all current terror groups in the Middle East.

Confusion about the Muslim Brotherhood is not limited to journalists. In testimony to the House Intelligence Committee Thursday, James Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence, described the brotherhood as "largely secular."
"This is one of the most reckless and irresponsible statements ever made publicly by an American official at a critical and delicate moment," said John Podhoretz of Commentary magazine.

Obama administration cluelessness about the brotherhood is dangerously reminiscent of Carter administration policy toward Iran in 1979. President Jimmy Carter's U.N. ambassador, Andrew Young, once described the Ayatollah Khomeini as "some kind of saint."

The Muslim brothers are bad guys. But they seem to have been as surprised by the protests -- which have been dominated by young people who seem genuinely interested in freedom and democracy -- as the Obama administration was.

Mr. Obama should be providing the democratic elements among the protesters with more than lip service. But it's evident his administration has few contacts among them, and they have little regard for him.

So maybe it's good that few in Egypt are paying much attention to what Mr. Obama has to say.

Jack Kelly is a columnist for the Post-Gazette and The Blade of Toledo, Ohio (jkelly@post-gazette.com, 412 263-1476).

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11044/1124812-373.stm#ixzz1Dotx5H89

President is an atheist or fake Christianity

Obama’s fake Christianity?

Liberals argue whether the president is an atheist

President Obama‘s coddling of Islam has many Americans questioning his national-security judgment, if not his intentions. In his administration’s muddled response to the crisis in Egypt, one clear message came from all the president’s men: A new government in Cairo “has to include a whole host of important nonsecular actors,” as stated by White House spokesman Robert L. Gibbs. The hitch is that in the Middle East, nonsecular means radical Islamist, like the Muslim Brotherhood. Now, in the middle of this global clash of civilizations, Mr. Obama‘s own religious disposition is being questioned – and not from the right, but the left.

On his HBO show “Real Time” on Friday, host Bill Maher said of Mr. Obama, “I think he’s a centrist the way he’s a Christian – not really.  … His mother was a secular humanist and I think he is.” When Princeton University professor Cornel West challenged Mr. Maher‘s point about Mr. Obama‘s religion, saying, “He changed his mind on the God question, brother Bill,” the comic retorted, “It’s like when he says ‘I struggle with gay marriage’ – you don’t struggle with gay marriage, you’re fine with gay marriage.” Another guest – who insisted Mr. Obama has “always been pretty centrist” – helpfully reminded that Mr. Obama “did go to church before he was a candidate for the presidency.” That church, of course, was presided over by the racist, anti-American, hate-spewing Rev. Jeremiah Wright. 

Bill Maher can be a funny guy. His website flashes the crack, “It doesn’t make me un-American to say I’d rather live in Paris than in places where cheese only comes in individually wrapped slices.” Aside from the fact that bashing France is a national pasttime and a pretty reliable measure of patriotism, a man who prefers unpasteurized fromage can’t be all bad. That said, his humor has a very tangible dark side, especially when it comes to faith. In the past, Mr. Maher has called Christianity “the ultimate hustle” and ridiculed the fight of good versus evil as a shakedown: “If God gets rid of the devil – and he could, he’s all powerful – well, then there’s no fear. There’s no reason to come to church. There’s no reason to pass the plate.”

Liberals hate it when anybody throws their own gaffes back in their faces. Media Matters can chuck bricks at us all they want for taking purported cheap shots at the president. This debate over Mr. Obama‘s religion is happening among his most ardent supporters, just like the birther flames being fanned by MSNBC’s Chris Matthews and Hawaii’s Democratic Gov. Neil Abercrombie. Mr. Obama‘s critics just sit back and laugh while Democrats do their dirty work for them. With friends like Mr. Maher, Mr. Obama doesn’t need enemies.

© Copyright 2011 The Washington Times, LLC

Sierra Club vs. Wyoming Rancher

The Sierra Club and the U.S. Forest Service were presenting an alternative to the Wyoming ranchers for controlling the coyote population. It seems that after years of the ranchers using the tried and true method of shooting or trapping the predators, the Sierra Club had a "more humane" solution to this issue. What they were proposing was for the animals to be captured alive. The males would then be castrated and let loose again. This was ACTUALLY proposed by the Sierra Club and by the U.S. Forest Service. All of the ranchers thought about this amazing idea for a couple of minutes. Finally an old fellow wearing a big cowboy hat in the back of the conference room stood up, tipped his hat back and said; "Son, I don't think you understand our problem here... these coyotes ain't ?uckin' our sheep... they're eatin' 'em!" The meeting never really got back to order. .

.

This is how our government governs...what a joke!

Obama administration's Justice Department

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration's Justice Department has asserted that the FBI can obtain telephone records of international calls made from the U.S. without any formal legal process or court oversight, according to a document obtained by McClatchy.

That assertion was revealed — perhaps inadvertently — by the department in its response to a McClatchy request for a copy of a secret Justice Department memo.

Critics say the legal position is flawed and creates a potential loophole that could lead to a repeat of FBI abuses that were supposed to have been stopped in 2006.

The controversy over the telephone records is a legacy of the Bush administration's war on terror. Critics say the Obama administration appears to be continuing many of the most controversial tactics of that strategy, including the assertion of sweeping executive powers.

For years after the Sept. 11 attacks, the FBI sought and obtained thousands of telephone records for international calls in an attempt to thwart potential terrorists.

The bureau devised an informal system of requesting the records from three telecommunications firms to create what one agent called a "phone database on steroids" that included names, addresses, length of service and billing information.

A federal watchdog later said a "casual" environment developed in which FBI agents and employees of the telecom companies treated Americans' telephone records so cavalierly that one senior FBI counter-terrorism official said getting access to them was as easy as "having an ATM in your living room."

In January 2010, McClatchy asked for a copy of the Office of Legal Counsel memo under open records laws after a reference to it appeared in a heavily excised section of a report on how the FBI abused its powers when seeking telephone records.

In the report, the Justice Department's inspector general said "the OLC agreed with the FBI that under certain circumstances (word or words redacted) allows the FBI to ask for and obtain these records on a voluntary basis from the providers, without legal process or a qualifying emergency."

In its cover letter to McClatchy, however, the OLC disclosed more detail about its legal position, specifying a section of a 1978 federal wiretapping law that the Justice Department believes gives the FBI the authority. That section of the law appears to be what was redacted from the inspector general's report and reveals the type of records the FBI would be seeking, experts said.

"This is the answer to a mystery that has puzzled us for more than a year now," said Kevin Bankston, a senior staff attorney and expert on electronic surveillance and national security laws for the nonprofit Electronic Frontier Foundation.

"Now, 30 years later, the FBI has looked at this provision again and decided that it is an enormous loophole that allows them to ask for, and the phone companies to hand over, records related to international or foreign communications," he said. "Apparently, they've decided that this provision means that your international communications are a privacy-free zone and that they can get records of those communications without any legal process."

That interpretation could be stretched to apply to e-mails as well, he said.

However, Bankston said, even if the law allows the FBI to ask for the records — an assertion he disagrees with — it would prohibit the telecommunication companies from handing them over.

Meanwhile, the refusal to provide to McClatchy a copy of the memo is noteworthy because the Obama administration — in particular the OLC — has sought to portray itself as more open than the Bush administration. The decision not to release the memo means the details of the Justice Department's legal arguments in support of the FBI's controversial and discredited efforts to obtain telephone records will be kept from the public.

The FBI and Justice Department have refused to comment on the matter.

For years, the Bush administration had refused to release the memos that provided the legal underpinning for harsh interrogations of overseas terror suspects, citing national security, attorney-client privilege and the need to protect the government's deliberative process.

In April 2009, the Obama administration released four of the Bush-era memos that detailed many of the controversial interrogation methods secretly authorized by the Bush administration — from waterboarding to confining prisoners in boxes with insects.

Experts that track government spying and the Freedom of Information Act said the refusal to release the FBI memo to McClatchy appears to be improper and contrary to the intent of FOIA.

Since the memo appears to be exclusively on the OLC's legal justification for getting the phone records, the Justice Department should be able to release at least portions of it, experts said.

"It's wrong that they're withholding a legal rationale that has to do with the authorities of the FBI to collect information that affects the rights of American citizens here and abroad," said Michael German, a former FBI agent of 16 years who now works for the American Civil Liberties Union. "The law should never be secret. We should all understand what rules we're operating under and particularly when it comes to an agency that has a long history of abuse in its collection activities."

Sens. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., and Ron Wyden, D-Ore., demanded more than a year ago that Attorney General Eric Holder release a copy of the memo.

The Justice Department has responded, Wyden said this week, but he declined to elaborate on the exchange.

"I do think the level of secrecy that surrounds the executive branch's interpretation of important surveillance law is a serious problem," he told McClatchy, "and I am continuing to press the executive branch to disclose more information to the public about what their government thinks the law means."

When President Barack Obama authorized the release of the interrogation memos, he said at the time that he was compelled to release them in part because of an open records lawsuit by the ACLU.

"While I believe strongly in transparency and accountability, I also believe that in a dangerous world, the United States must sometimes carry out intelligence operations and protect information that is classified for purposes of national security," he said.

Obama said he'd concluded the documents could be released because they wouldn't jeopardize national security and because the interrogation techniques described in the memos had been widely reported. By then, the practices were no longer in use.

The FBI's activities discussed in the most recent and still secret OLC memo also have been widely publicized. An inspector general report that revealed the existence of the FBI memo was one in a series on the FBI's informal handling of telephone records and it concluded the bureau had committed egregious violations of the law.

When revealing the existence of the OLC memo, the inspector general described it as having "significant policy implications that need to be considered by the FBI, the Department, and the Congress."

Since 2006, it appears the bureau has refrained from using the authority it continues to assert, according to another heavily redacted section of the inspector general's report.

"However, that could change, and we believe appropriate controls on such authority should be considered now, in light of the FBI's past practices and the OLC opinion," the inspector general warned.

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/02/11/108562/obama-assertion-fbi-can-get-phone.html#ixzz1DnOeWNqB

Bedbugs and Islamic maniacs

If you haven't seen this guy before, you've missed an extraordinarily erudite speaker who was a comedian before he found his niche. He is serious when he is funny and he is funny when he is serious. And, boy, does he make sense. This is his latest, and I think the first of 2011.

Of course those who read Islam’s text and the fine example of Mohammad know that text, laws and Mohammad fully endorse the ‘right’ of Muslim men to take the women, children, property and land of the infidel not only in jihad or raids but any time they feel like claiming that the dhimmis have ‘broken their pact’ to be totally subservient to their Muslim overlords.   Such acts not only take children from their families and remove ‘reproductive’ females, but they generate fear and constantly enforce the powerlessness of the non-Muslims who receive little help from the police or government.  In this Islamic country the police and government are as dangerous to non-Muslims as the readily ignited Islamic mob.   Abduction, slavery and forced conversion to Islam is what Muslims call, bringing ‘enlightenment.’

Reports of Muslim men abducting and forcibly marrying and converting Coptic Christian women and girls have filtered out of Egypt with increasing frequency over the past decade. The emerging patterns

In this article, Nadia recounts some of the more distressing incidents she has encountered:

“In 1992 in the village of Sanboo (Upper Egypt) Muslims disabled 15-16 young men by cutting off their right arm at the shoulder and their left leg at the knee.   They killed 13.  No-one was charged.”

“In the report on the abduction (enslavement), forced conversion to Islam and forced marriages of Coptic girls to Muslims, none of those responsible for the abductions had been brought to justice.”

“If a girl is raped and manages to get back home there is no testing, no reporting and if you insist that a report be made, it goes no further.   If a parent reports abduction they are not permitted to have a copy of the police report.  Such incidents were brought to the Minister of the Interior but when the Ministry checked with the police NO information was there; it ‘goes missing.’”

“In a current case where the young girl who is very ill, was abducted, the mother was at the police station 5or 6 times a day because if her daughter doesn’t get her medicine she will die.  She told them she suspected a certain person.   But they did nothing and it’s been 3 years now.  She doesn’t know if her daughter is alive or dead.....she said ‘if she’s dead just give me her body.’ The head of police was interviewed when they were in Melbourne ‘visiting’ and he was asked about specific cases.  His response---‘give something in writing to prove the allegations.’”

“In Upper Egypt girls are approached by principals and teachers to convert to Islam!  If a girl reports them then she is accused of trying to seduce a teacher and expelled while the teacher is promoted.”

“In 2000, a village in Luxor El-Kosheh, 20 Christians were killed and no-one was charged!   The police ‘taking care of the investigation’ were promoted and given money for their ‘good work.’”

“Al-Azhar university which originally began as a theological institute teaching Islam and still trains imams, gives fatwas and ‘interpretations’ and allows entry to courses such as medicine, law, engineering  to Muslims who have much lower academic scores.  Muslims who couldn’t enter a normal university are ‘educated’ at al-Azhar which lets in poor standard Muslims and supposedly trains them as doctors and feeds them Islam’s hatred of non-Muslims.”  (Beware Muslim doctors for many reasons including poor overseas training!!)

“A mother of 5 with a sick daughter with severe anaemia went to the public hospital for her daughter’s blood transfusion.  She was told she had to pay but she didn’t have any money as she was very poor.  The doctor tells her to go across the road to the mosque and speak to the imam who enabled the transfusions and gave food and water but a Muslim man took her and the child to al-Azhar as conversions go through al-Azhar and they were converted on the spot, issued with an ID and then taken back to her town and placed in a branch of the al-Azhar which has over 500 branches or juristic associations.   These associations supposedly provide social work, medical advice etc to MUSLIMS free of charge.   What we don’t know is a ‘hidden section’ looks after ‘converts’ who are kept under lock and key with a guard and security system!  She stayed for 2 months under sedation—drugged—she could move and talk but wasn’t really there!  They forgot to give the medication and she started to feel that she was returning to her old self.  With a bit of luck and help she managed to escape and ran to the church with her little girl!

The Coptic priest had previously reported her missing to the police who claimed they didn’t know where she was.   When she returned to the church, the priest took her with him to the police to report what had happened.  They requested to keep her 24 hours to interrogate her ---in the middle of the night she was taken to a secret security place (people don’t know where they have their offices) and tortured.  She was taken and put in a room ½ filled with water in the middle of winter, beaten, offered money to stay ‘Muslim’; they broke 3 of her back teeth, forced her to defecate and urinate in front of the guards, etc... 

The Church went to the governor...the priest said ‘I took her in in good condition, in ‘good faith’ and let her out of the custody of the church.’   The priest wanted the law to do the right thing, but they kept the woman for 3 days.   The church was trying to co-operate with the authorities...The police officer who did the violence to her was never punished or questioned and 2 months later received a promotion to another city (2003)

Right now she is constantly on the move with her 5 children.”

“The case shows the police involvement in pressuring women, forcing them to remain as Muslims, the role of al-Azhar...the force, drugging, threat of imprisonment ---WHERE IS THE LAW?”

“In Germany, Muslim convert Marwa al-Sherbiny was stabbed ---a one-off stabbing, Not religiously backed and not the result of endless discrimination and persecution---yet the whole world jumped up and down because a Muslim convert had been killed  ....but there’s not a word when Coptic girls are raped, drugged, abducted, killed...”

“Copts question what’s going on---but they just claim it’s ‘individual cases’ or ‘incidents’ , not the government against the Christians yet every piece of evidence incriminates them.” 

“In the mid 1970-90’s there were straight abductions –girls would be walking down the street and were taken and never seen again.  Sometimes 6 months later the parents would get a letter saying the girl converted to Islam and now married.   The parents were forbidden any contact with their daughter!”

“But when some in the world became aware of what was happening, their strategy changed to luring girls and ‘seduction.’   Look at who is targeted –socially disadvantaged girls, little education, no money, little future.. 
Socially disadvantaged Muslim boys eg a person who doesn’t work, mechanic (lower class in Egypt), unemployed, someone who is just an errand boy etc are ‘paid to entrap’.   The boys are promised a flat or apartment, money to start a little business, protection from the police..”

“Muslim girls are involved in the entrapment.  A Muslim girl (friend ha.ha) talks to a Christian girl – asks her to visit, go to the shops or visit ‘granny’ and a trusting person goes...before you know it she’s raped.   Once the girl has been raped she is seen in the Coptic culture as a second hand product particularly for poor girls and they are forced into Islam.  But converts are always second class Muslims and she is taken on to serve the first wife ---she is a slave.  Muslims enslave Coptic girls!”

“The church has built crisis homes within the monasteries but the girls need more rehabilitation, some remain there for an indefinite period.   Families can be ashamed and may let the church care for the girl.  Some are married off to widows.   Is the church protecting the girls?   The Coptic culture needs to learn how to cope with the enforced shame Islam inflicts on them.”  

(I heartily agree –children are not responsible where adults rape and brutalise them and these girls are not responsible when Islam and Muslim men rape and brutalise them –they need every care and support so they can return to a normal life with their heads held high.   It is the sick depravity and violence to others plus the loathing of females that permeates Islam that bears all the shame and all the responsibility!)

 “(A worse case response from the primitive area of Upper Egypt)  El-Manya –This is the worst town in Egypt, which hosts the Muslim Brotherhood.  It breeds the most vicious Muslims. A girl  of 18 years with a 20 year old brother, the only 2 children, came home one day and said she had been raped by a Muslim and that to save the family from shame she would go convert to Islam—she had ‘died.’  The mother was too scared to speak to the father but told the son who spoke to the father.  They confronted the girl and while the father refused to punish her, the brother shot her......... and claimed she fell down the well.   The brother went to the priest for forgiveness...”

(Nadia said such violence to women was not part of their ancient Egyptian custom but developed from the Arab/Islamic culture forced on them.  Clearly some Copts brought up under the culture of Islam for 1300+ years where shame and honour reside in the ownership of women’s bodies and where women are held responsible for rapes etc must step out from this hate filled misogynist Islamic culture and both protect and support their girls and women who are the constant targets of Islamic abuse because Islam’s text and laws fully endorse the abuse of others.   Some would rather die than be forced to live as a Muslim slave.  Yes wouldn’t it be amazing if Islam’s culture changed but it won’t because violence towards and loathing of girls and women permeates Islam’s text, laws and Mohammad’s sick example!).

“Rich, well educated girls have some chance of safely claiming rape and possibly fighting a case in court.”  

Nadia noted that while some bishops/priests would allow her to speak to people, others would not.  

(This is the psychological aspect of centuries of dhimmitude; they have forgotten how to fight for equality and basic human rights, others fear violent responses if they dare to make public the ongoing abuse of Copts in particular.   Some as true dhimmis will do anything in the hope of being left alone –but they are never left alone!   I know Copts even in Australia who fear speaking out because they will suffer here and in Egypt!!   Remember, Mohammad was made victorious with terror  - DON’T let Muslims use fear to destroy our freedom and equality!)

(Mohammad himself and all those vile Muslims following have taken the women and children of others and enslaved, raped, and forced them into Islam.  This is a well tried plan which removes the breeding stock of others, often aided by the emasculation of non-Muslim males, and uses the wombs of women to breed Muslims and the children for the Muslims sexual enjoyment.   It is a means of ensuring the genocide or total submission and degradation of others.   The only reasons Copts still survive is they have a strong faith and they serve as communal slaves for Muslims often doing those tasks that Muslims refuse to do eg clearing rubbish –though the Egyptian government has now let this out to others and killed the Copt’s pigs that fed on the garbage and gave the Copts an income  (Lateline, ABC,  Australia 19/4/2010);–so Copts are becoming more ‘expendable.’   They are the exploited, reviled underclass even in ‘modern’ [ha, ha,] Egypt where any ‘justice’ that we would recognise never applies to non-Muslims.   Remember, Islamic ‘justice’ is something very different and horrendous for all non-Muslims.  Islamic ‘justice’ ensures the superior position of allah’s slaves, Muslims.)image to read the full story)

“Human rights issues:   There is no system for DNA samples ---and who could trust the police with such samples anyway!”

“If a Muslim male raped a Muslim female and she went to the police, he would be forced to ‘marry’ her for 2-3 days then divorce her (yes, those few magic words) -.   This is LEGALISED RAPE!!”

(***Reliance of the Traveller:  Law m8.10  p 535:   A man is obliged to pay the amount typically received as marriage payment by similar brides when the marriage was (N. Consummated, but) invalid OR when a man FORCES A WOMAN TO FORNICATE with him.   When a woman voluntarily fornicates with a man, she does not receive any marriage payment.    
     
Forcing a woman to fornicate is RAPE (virtually impossible for a Muslim female to prove without male witnesses!).  Fornication is sex outside marriage - this could at least result in a whipping --or death for the Muslim female eg Iran hangs girls for crimes against their chastity --ie being raped.   In some Islamic cultures the male can marry the female he raped, throw a bit of money to her or her guardian and enjoy her as his wife, then divorce her!  No problem, no punishment –lovely!  And it happens to Muslim girls in the Islamic world and in the west [Barenakedislam 2010].   This is how they treat their own Muslim girls—imagine the hell they subject Coptic or non-Muslim girls to!! )

“For a Christian girl –if she is forced to marry the Muslim male she is forced into Islam and then divorced!   But she cannot return to Christianity for she would be an apostate from Islam and you could be removed from the system ---you don’t exist, no superannuation, no hospital treatment, can’t get a job....so forcing girls into Islam is a means of killing them ....they cannot simply marry, divorce and return to Christianity for they nolonger ‘exist.’”

“In 2004 an Italian girl with a Lebanese Muslim boyfriend who wanted marriage began to feel unsafe and didn’t want to convert.   The boyfriend was becoming aggressive and threatening ...so the girl and her mother had to MOVE!  This case is in Australia, Melbourne"

“A Copt has a tattoo of a cross on their wrist but when a Copt ‘converts’ the Muslims burn the cross off using acid!”

“Following the claim that a Christian boy raped a Muslim girl, Muslims shot dead 7 people coming out of a church on 7th Jan 2010 (Coptic Christmas) plus the accused boy’s father and brother coming out of court at the first hearing.  The boy was found not guilty, there was no investigation, there was no proof the girl was even raped...the whole system is corrupt...they can claim anything, frame anyone...”

(Indeed it would be a very brave Copt male who would get anywhere near a Muslim.
 It should be noted that throughout Islam’s horror history, all sorts of claims are made to excite the Muslim mob to extreme violence as has been recorded in many of the articles on slavery.  It was the Muslim mob that slaughtered the Armenians on many occasions over many years after assertions from imams and ditto for attacks on Hindus, Copts, Assyrians, ....whom ever!   Note the Mohammad cartoons...ohhh, they’re insulting allah/Mohammad...kill, kill!

The claimed rape or contact with a Muslim female is of course a violation of the 'Dhimma pact' and although only one member of the subjugated group is accused of the transgression, the whole group is punished by the Muslim mob!   Whether such a ‘pact’ has actually been ‘signed’ is irrelevant  as Islam’s religion and culture set the relationship between superior Muslims and subjugated non-Muslims and this continues today.   These communal attacks by Muslims on others are frequently reported across the Islamic world including the middle-east, Africa, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, China (Uigurs)  eg torching churches, houses, temples, businesses and all forms of violence, rape, torture and murder.  

Australia witnessed the same when the angered Muslims who had caused the trouble in Cronulla with their abuse of Australian women and attack on a lifeguard, came back later and randomly smashed cars, shops and attacked people in other sites –yet Muslims are still a minority here so imagine how bad it could become if they are NOT stopped!!!!)   

“In Egypt, if 2 Muslims go to the police claiming they heard a Christian say allah was god and Mohammad his prophet, the Christian is forced to be Muslim.”

My interviewee claims that since the 60’s it has been impossible to find the Sirat Rasul’allah in Arabic in Egypt  because they are ‘modifying’ it, no doubt to fool the west but there’s still the Koran, hadith, laws ...though ‘English’ translations are a modified, sanitised version but still vile enough to scare any thinking person! **

Like the Israelis who treat Muslims, including those who have tried to kill them, in their hospitals, so do the Copts (El 2009).   But such kindness will not alter the Islamic dictate from allah and example of Mohammad to kill, enslave or totally subjugate ALL non-Muslims so all the religion is allah’s and sharia rules.

Both Copts and Christian converts out of Islam not only face severe persecution and death in Egypt, they are unsafe in Australia.  For the past two years, ''Mina'' has regularly phoned his mother in Egypt. But the 36-year-old is so scared for the safety of his family here and in Egypt that he has not told her he lives in Australia, instead letting her believe he is in the United States.  Following his conversion out of Islam in Egypt he was arrested, beaten and his passport taken –but he eventually fled to Australia but fears Egypt’s security police operating here (Jackson  2010).   A woman convert to Christianity, attempting to exit Egypt with her family was arrested, jailed, beaten, sexually attacked ...and told by the judge that he wanted to kill her! (Compass direct News 2009).

Insanely we allow Muslims into Australia while those suffering Islamic violence find it almost impossible to escape their Islamic hell hole. 

Insanely we treat Muslims as victims and look the other way, leaving the real victims, those suffering under Islam, unprotected.  We don’t even bother to report their suffering and totally fail to demand that non-Muslims in the Islamic world are treated as free, equal citizens with every right and protection expected in the west.   We don’t even bother to listen to their personal experiences of Islam or give them protection if they do manage to reach Australia!!

Why is the Islamic world excused from the demand that they behave as civilised people?  Why are Islam’s laws and practices tolerated in any way, let alone allowed to be practiced in western countries?   Why do we allow Muslim children in Australia to attend Muslim schools and mosques where Islam’s vile attitude to others is pushed into their heads from childhood, threatening the future and freedom of others in Australia!   Why do we have laws like the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act in Victoria which gag those who tell the truth about Islam because ‘TRUTH’ is NOT a defense against prosecution!

Why is the world silent on the violence, murder and persecution carried out by MUSLIMS!!!

From Bill Warners Bulletin of Christian Persecution -May 15, 2010 - May 31, 2010 (www.PoliticalIslam.com)

*May 22, 2010 United States/Egypt
Leaders of the Coptic Christians, whose community is facing growing persecution in Egypt, say they have been unsuccessful in efforts to gain a hearing from the White House or other parts of the Obama administration. (What else would you expect from Islam’s abeed/slave, Obama)

*Egypt, May
For nearly two years, El-Gohary and his teenage daughter have been living in hiding because he abandoned Islam and embraced Christianity. During this time he has been beaten and forcibly detained, and his daughter has been attacked. He has had to endure death threats, poverty and crushing boredom.

---

References:

1)  Barenakedislam:  NEW ZEALAND: 14-year-old Muslim girl forced to marry her rapist and live as his sex slave.  http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/2010/03/21/new-zealand-14-year-old-muslim-girl-forced-to-marry-her-rapist-and-live-as-his-sex-slave/    March 2010

2)  Compass Direct News: EGYPT: JUDGE TELLS OF DESIRE TO KILL CHRISTIAN.  January 27, 2009   http://copts.com/english1/index.php/2009/01/27/egypt-judge-tells-of-desire-to-kill-christian/#more-2783

3) El, Kal.  Egypt: Persecuted Christians serve medical needs of Muslims who attack them.  http://infidelsarecool.com/2009/05/07/egypt-persecuted-christians-serve-medical-needs-of-muslims-who-attack-them/   May 7, 2009 •

4) Jackson, Andra.  Keeping the faith in the shadow of persecution   http://www.theage.com.au/national/keeping-the-faith-in-the-shadow-of-persecution-20100112-m4qg.html   January 13, 2010

5)  Reliance of the Traveller:  A classic manual of Islamic sacred law.   In Arabic with facing English Text, commentary and appendices edited and translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller  Al-Misri, Ahmad ibn Naqib;  Amana publications  Maryland USA 1994