Congressman Conyers and Islam

John Conyers, D-MI, is likely to become new chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. Last year, just for practice, he held a mock impeachment hearing of President Bush in anticipation of the real thing.

But Conyers has other plans as well--especially on behalf of his Muslim constituency. Just take a look at his House Resolution 288:

Text of My Resolution Regarding Religious Intolerance

I received a large number of comments, and quite a spirited debate, concerning my resolution opposing religious intolerance, including desecration of the Quran. I appreciate all of the comments, both those supporting and opposing my actions. I continue to believe that given recent events, it is worthwhile for the Congress to actually express its support for the freedom of religion. The resolution was drafted to oppose all religious intolerance. To the extent it mentions the Quran and Islam specifically, that is obviously to respond to those who believe our nation would tolerate disrespect of that religion or its holy book. Clearly we should not, at least in my opinion. [emphasis added]

Here is the actual text of Resolution 288, as it appears on Conyers' web site, seeking religious tolerance for all religions while placing a heavy emphasis on protection of Islam :

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives condemning bigotry and religious intolerance, and recognizing that holy books of every religion should be treated with dignity and respect.

Whereas believers of all religions, including the Abrahamic faiths of Christianity, Judaism and Islam, should be treated with respect and dignity;

Whereas the word Islam comes from the Arabic root word meaning “peace” and “submission”;

Whereas there are an estimated 7,000,000 Muslims in America, from a wide variety of ethnic backgrounds, forming an integral part of the social fabric of America;

Whereas the Quran is the holy book for Muslims who recite passages from it in prayer and learn valuable lessons about peace, humanity and spirituality;
Whereas it should never be official policy of the United States Government to disparage the Quran, Islam, or any religion in any way, shape, or form;

Whereas mistreatment of prisoners and disrespect toward the holy book of any religion is unacceptable and against civilized humanity;

Whereas the infringement of an individual’s right to freedom of religion violates the Constitution and laws of the United States: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives–

(1) condemns bigotry, acts of violence, and intolerance against any religious group, including our friends, neighbors, and citizens of the Islamic faith;

(2) declares that the civil rights and civil liberties of all individuals, including those of the Islamic faith, should be protected;

(3) recognizes that the Quran, the holy book of Islam, as any other holy book of any religion, should be treated with dignity and respect; and

(4) calls upon local, State, and Federal authorities to work to prevent bias-motivated crimes and acts against all individuals, including those of the Islamic faith.

The problem is that there is no reason to single out Islam as being especially deserving of respect and tolerance.

o For 2005 the FBI report on bias attacks indicates that 68.5 were anti-Jewish while only 11.1 were anti-Islamic. In other words, when it comes to bias attacks--Jews are far and away the group that is in greater danger and more in need of protection

o For 2004, the FBI report indicated that 67.8 were anti-Jewish and 12.7 showed anti-Islamic bias. This indicates that the trend shows that while anti-Jewish bias attacks were slightly up--anti-Islamic attacks actually went down.

o An investigation by Daniel Pipes of the anti-Islamic bias attacks reported by CAIR in 2004 showed "sloppiness, exaggeration, and distortion." Two of the claims were actually cases of arson by Moslem store owners themselves, using the story of anti-Islamic bias to cover what they had done. The American Thinker describes a third such case. Other reported attacks lacked evidence or were actually reported by CAIR twice. Further incidences of falsified accounts of Muslim hate crimes going back to 2003 can be found on Michelle Malkin's blog: Myth of the Muslim hate crime epidemic and More Muslim hate crime myths. A report on NPR investigating the reporting of bias crimes in general noted that

any bias incident, from a Muslim being yelled at from a passing car, to a Muslim being profiled on a plane, can wind up in CAIR's report

Yet it is understandable that Conyers would go out of his way to assuage his Muslim constituency.

Far out of his way.

As already noted, Conyers has met with Mohammed Ali Elahi, who has ties with Hezbollah, and has received money from the American Muslim Council, which has openly supported Hamas. In 2005, Conyers sponsored a resolution condemning Narendra Modi, chief minister of the Indian state of Gujarat--which led the US government to refuse him entry into the US. The reason given for the condemnation was that in 2002, a Muslim mob burned a train, killing 58 Hindus. As a result, anti-Muslim riots broke out and some Muslim and human-rights groups said Modi failed to stop the violence. Conyers claimed to have taken his cue from CAIR, whose own background reveals ties to terrorism

*Four of CAIR’s officials have been charged with terrorist activities, in relation to Hamas and Al-Qaeda. Two of those officials are behind bars in the United States; the other two have been deported. One of them, Ghassan Elashi, was just sentenced, this past Thursday, to seven years in prison. Another CAIR official was listed by the U.S. Attorney’s office as a potential co-conspirator to the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.

*CAIR has solicited money for two terrorist “charities” which were shut down shortly after the attacks on 9/11 for raising millions of dollars for Hamas and Al-Qaeda. Leaders of both these organizations were representatives of CAIR.

*CAIR has been named as a defendant in a lawsuit put forward by the family of the former Chief of the FBI’s Counter-Terrorism Section, John P. O’Neill, for his murder during the 9/11 attacks.

*CAIR’s parent organization, the Islamic Association for Palestine, in 2005, was shut down after it was found liable for the murder of an American boy, David Boim, during a Hamas terror operation in Israel.

Conyers claims that his resolution singles out tolerance for Muslims "obviously to respond to those who believe our nation would tolerate disrespect of that religion or its holy book." Such a straw-man argument, especially in light of the numerous bogus reportings of anti-Islamic bias crimes by CAIR does nothing for furthering the respect that is supposed to be the goal of Conyers' resolution to begin with.

If anything the resolution--with its call that "it should never be official policy of the United States Government to disparage the Quran, Islam, or any religion in any way, shape, or form" implies a chilling effect on open discussion and debate.

How odd that Congressman Conyers, who stages a mock impeachment of the current President of the United States, should suddenly get cold feet when it comes to discussing a religion whose more extremist followers have declared war on the West.

Thanks to Gateway Pundit for the link!

See also Conyers' ethical issue in Conyers' "Lack of Clarity"

Crossposted at Soccer Dad

Technorati Tag: John Conyers and CAIR and Islam

Hasbarah Is Not Just An Israeli Problem

We all tend to criticize Israel for its lack of effective Hasbarah. Either there is not enough material or what does exist is badly written; the people who are supposed to best represent Israel often don't get the job done. Remember when the appointment of the Israeli ambassador to Great Britain in January 2004 was made, and the choice was criticized because he did not know English?

Well, apparently, poor hasbarah, is not an exclusively Israeli problem.

Mudville Gazette recently received an email from CENTCOM Public Affairs about something new that is available through their web site called "Nature of the Enemy", and it presented information gleaned from open-source material available on the Internet. It is accessible here.

His opinion of this one page PDF:

This, my friends, is another of the many reasons why we're losing the information war. One of the most ironic aspects of it is that this is the same DoD that was recently chastised for attempting to plant stories in the Iraqi media to influence public opinion.

Information war, hasbarah--either way, this is something that is not an Israel problem; it is a problem for the US as well.

Why are Israel and the US not up to the Information War?

1. They are not clear on the fact that the Information War is a war.
2. They don't have the passion or the respect for their own culture
3. It is not just an question of information, but the way it is presented--and repeated.
4. They are both too invested in the idea of being civilized democracies and don't want to offend, nor deprive others of their 'right' to express their own contrary progaganda.

Civilizations did not get to be that way by being that civilized.

Technorati Tag: Israel and Hasbarah and US.

The GOP Ad That Won't Be Shown

Hat Tip: Little Green Footballs

Here is an ad developed by David Zucker for GOP strategists for the 2006 election campaign. According to Drudge:

the advertisement was deemed "too hot" by GOP strategists all across Washington, DC who have refused to use it!

Maybe Zucker could develop something about Israel's appeasement instead...

Technorati Tag: Republicans and Democrats and North Korea.

Al Qaeda To Attack U.S.--Now They Tell Us

Artuz Sheva reports Al-Qaeda Issues "Offer that Can't be Refused"

An Al-Qaeda video released on Saturday called on Americans and the rest of the Christian world to "repent" and convert to Islam. Expert: "This is the invitation that precedes the attack."

The newly released video, posted on an extremist Islamic website, contained footage of Al-Qaeda's deputy leader Ayman al-Zawahri and a man identified as Adam Yehiye Gadahn. Gadahn is an American convert to Islam, wanted by the FBI for his alleged role in developing Al-Qaeda propaganda in Pakistan.

“To Americans and the rest of Christendom we say, either repent [your] misguided ways and enter into the light of truth," Gadahn threatened, "or keep your poison to yourselves and suffer the consequences in this world and the next... But whatever you do don’t attempt to spread your misery and misguidance to our lands.”

“Muslims don’t need democracy to rid themselves of their homegrown despots and tyrants. What they do need is their Islamic faith, the sprit of jihad and the lifting of foreign troops and interference from their necks,” Gadahn stated. He read verses from the Koran in Arabic, and then translated them into English, calling on Muslims to strengthen their faith and expel their rulers.

Robert Spencer, director of JihadWatch and author of several popular books on Islam, explained to Arutz-7's Nissan Ratzlav-Katz that the tape "appears to be the call to Islam that the Muslim Prophet Muhammed requires to be extended to infidels before they can be lawfully attacked by Muslims."

"Once that call is rejected," Spencer feels, "Muslims are required to begin hostilities in order to subjugate the infidel population in question and bring it into the Islamic social order. Thus it seems likely that terror attacks and/or attempted terror attacks will follow Gadahn's 'invitation' - although there is no certainty that they will follow within a certain time frame."

Al-Zawahri, also speaking on the tape, urged viewers to heed Gadahn's “Invitation to Islam. He stated ominously, "To the American people and the people of the West in general ... Allah sent his Prophet Muhammad with guidance and the religion of truth ... and sent him as a herald."

If Spencer is correct, then this call to 'accept Islam or face attack':

1. is a warning--unlike 9/11. How would Al Qaeda explain that--Practice?
2. amounts to 'convert or die'--what about "there is no coercion in religion." Religion no, Islam yes?

According to Answering Islam

S. A. Rahman makes the distinct claim:

This verse is one of the most important verses in the Qur'an, containing a charter of freedom of conscience unparalleled in the religious annals of mankind.... [1]

Compare that with what Raphael Patai writes in The Arab Mind about

the doctrine of Din Muhammad bi'l-sayf (literally, "The religion of Muhammad with the sword"), which required all Mulsims to spread Islam by the force of arms. [p.155]

After all, Islam's massive occupation during its heyday reached as far as Russia.

Rahman does admit that some commentators minimize the area covered by the 'no compulsion' verse, and claims with a straight face:

Such an interpretation can perhaps be attributed to the unconscious pressure of orthodox tradition. [emphasis added]

Have Rahman and his fellow apologists ever heard of Al Qaeda?

Technorati Tag: Al Qaeda and Terrorism and US and Islam.

Al Qaeda To Attack--Now They Tell Us

Artuz Sheva reports Al-Qaeda Issues "Offer that Can't be Refused"

An Al-Qaeda video released on Saturday called on Americans and the rest of the Christian world to "repent" and convert to Islam. Expert: "This is the invitation that precedes the attack."

The newly released video, posted on an extremist Islamic website, contained footage of Al-Qaeda's deputy leader Ayman al-Zawahri and a man identified as Adam Yehiye Gadahn. Gadahn is an American convert to Islam, wanted by the FBI for his alleged role in developing Al-Qaeda propaganda in Pakistan.

“To Americans and the rest of Christendom we say, either repent [your] misguided ways and enter into the light of truth," Gadahn threatened, "or keep your poison to yourselves and suffer the consequences in this world and the next... But whatever you do don’t attempt to spread your misery and misguidance to our lands.”

“Muslims don’t need democracy to rid themselves of their homegrown despots and tyrants. What they do need is their Islamic faith, the sprit of jihad and the lifting of foreign troops and interference from their necks,” Gadahn stated. He read verses from the Koran in Arabic, and then translated them into English, calling on Muslims to strengthen their faith and expel their rulers.

Robert Spencer, director of JihadWatch and author of several popular books on Islam, explained to Arutz-7's Nissan Ratzlav-Katz that the tape "appears to be the call to Islam that the Muslim Prophet Muhammed requires to be extended to infidels before they can be lawfully attacked by Muslims."

"Once that call is rejected," Spencer feels, "Muslims are required to begin hostilities in order to subjugate the infidel population in question and bring it into the Islamic social order. Thus it seems likely that terror attacks and/or attempted terror attacks will follow Gadahn's 'invitation' - although there is no certainty that they will follow within a certain time frame."

Al-Zawahri, also speaking on the tape, urged viewers to heed Gadahn's “Invitation to Islam. He stated ominously, "To the American people and the people of the West in general ... Allah sent his Prophet Muhammad with guidance and the religion of truth ... and sent him as a herald."

If Spencer is correct, then this call to 'accept Islam or face attack':

1. is a warning--unlike 9/11. How would Al Qaeda explain that--Practice?
2. amounts to 'convert or die'--what about "there is no coercion in religion." Religion no, Islam yes?

According to Answering Islam

S. A. Rahman makes the distinct claim:

This verse is one of the most important verses in the Qur'an, containing a charter of freedom of conscience unparalleled in the religious annals of mankind.... [1]

Compare that with what Raphael Patai writes in The Arab Mind about

the doctrine of Din Muhammad bi'l-sayf (literally, "The religion of Muhammad with the sword"), which required all Mulsims to spread Islam by the force of arms. [p.155]

After all, Islam's massive occupation during its heyday reached as far as Russia.

Rahman does admit that some commentators minimize the area covered by the 'no compulsion' verse, and claims with a straight face:

Such an interpretation can perhaps be attributed to the unconscious pressure of orthodox tradition. [emphasis added]

Have Rahman and his fellow apologists ever heard of Al Qaeda?

Technorati Tag: Al Qaeda and Terrorism and US and Islam.

If Al Qaeda is Behind the Kidnapping of the Fox News Journalists--Why?

According to The Blotter, the kidnapping of the two Fox News Journalists--Steve Centanni and Olag Wiig--by a group identifying themselves as the Holy Jihad Brigades, may in fact have been carried out by Al Qaeda.

Besides the similarity in the language used by the terrorists to that used by Al Qaeda in the past, the nature of the kidnapping itself is not the kind done by Palestinian terrorists:

Also unusual for Palestinian militants was the extraordinary demand issued in the statement that "Muslim prisoners in U.S. jails be released within three days" in exchange for the two Fox journalists. Targeting journalists from an American news organization and making demands on the United States rather than Israel is not typical for Palestinian groups.

So why has Al Qaeda now taken an interest in this particular area of the Middle East?

Analysts believe that al Qaeda has expressed an increasing interest in the Arab-Israeli conflict for a number of reasons, one of which is their major setbacks in Iraq. Their tactics of beheading and mass murder of innocent civilians have not been popular with the majority of Iraqis, and their leader Abu Musab al Zarqawi was killed by a U.S. air attack two months ago.

Al Qaeda's camps in Afghanistan have been dismantled after their allies, the Taliban, were overthrown by the U.S.-led war in October 2001, and their leadership has been forced to seek refuge in the tribal areas of Pakistan. Many of their top operatives have been arrested in the past four years.

By contrast, the increasing chaos of Gaza represents an opportunity for al Qaeda to tap into the growing rage of young Palestinians, frustrated with the corruption of their leaders and the lack of any real progress towards a viable state. The impoverished camps of Gaza represent a "fertile ground" for al Qaeda, according to Palestinian observers.

Finally, the huge political boost achieved by Hezbollah, a Lebanese Shiite organization, during the last engagement with Israel represents a major challenge for al Qaeda. "Al Qaeda has been overshadowed by Hezbollah. The only way to regain the limelight is to focus its attention on the Palestinian issue," said Gerges.

So far, the terrorists have in fact made this more of an anti-American than an anti-Israel attack.

But they have only just started.

Technorati Tag: Israel and Al Qaeda and Centanni and US.

"They Will Always Hate You"

Fouad Ajami--Director of the Middle East Studies Program at John Hopkins University--addresses the issue of the clash between Islam and the West:

I mean, in fact, the great question is, you know, the famous question, why do they hate us? And the Bernard Lewis answer is why worry about it? They will always hate you. What you should worry about is, why don't they fear us? Why don't they take us seriously? I mean, this is the question. [emphasis added]

Ajami is talking about the West in general and the US in particular--but how about Israel?

It really doesn't seem that the Moslem world takes Israel seriously either. It's all very well for Shimon Peres to say in a Reuters interview that the president of Iran should remember that Iran can also be wiped off the map, but how serious can the Moslems take Israel when there are headlines like: Peretz's First Mission as Defense Minister: Destroy Outposts

When I first saw the headline I thought they were talking about destroying the outposts Iran had set up in southern Lebanon to gather intelligence and identify targets in Israel. After all, what better mission for a Defense Minister to organize? Instead, it turns out that:

Only one day into the job, DM Peretz has already set one of his main priorities for the coming months: the destruction of Jewish outposts throughout Judea and Samaria that have been deemed illegal. [emphasis added]

As important as the issue of illegal settlements might be, there is also the issue of setting priorities, and what kind of message is conveyed by the way that Israel sets her priorities. As a result of these sorts of actions:

• Hamas sees no reason to deviate from its already successful strategy
• The West is only encouraged to cajole--and pressure--Israel into more concessions
• Israel's own morale only sinks further and tensions increase
  

Even the US gets it, that there is a psychological component to the war. The US military showed a video of al-Zarqawi wearing tennis shoes and fumbling with a machine gun. Of course, The New York Times--also known as the Haaretz of the US--goes so far as to actually defend al-Zarqawi:

The weapon in question is complicated to master, and American soldiers and marines undergo many days of training to achieve the most basic competence with it. Moreover, the weapon in Mr. Zarqawi's hands was an older variant, which makes its malfunctioning unsurprising. The veterans said Mr. Zarqawi, who had spent his years as a terrorist surrounded by simpler weapons of Soviet design, could hardly have been expected to know how to handle it.

Nebuch.

I suppose we should be thankful that at least The Times refrained from telling us about al-Zarqawi's difficult childhood.

Meanwhile, Olmert had his own problems:

The new ministers pledged their allegiance to the State of Israel one by one – preceded by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. Olmert was unable to sign with his pen, however, and was given another, which also didn't work. In all, the new prime minister went through four pens before he successfully affixed his name to the pledge to act in Israel's best interests as the head of its government. [emphasis added]

The point is that in the Middle East, image also counts; how Israel is perceived by the Arab world matters.

Has Israel lost focus on why she is hated by the Arab world?
According to Ajami, when dealing with radical Islam, the question boils down to 2 possibilities:

And so do they hate us for what we do? Or do they hate us for what we are?

Israel is locked into the first, forgetting Bernard Lewis' advice:

"Why worry about it? They will always hate you. What you should worry about is, why don't they fear us? Why don't they take us seriously?"

More to the point, why don't Olmert and Kadima take this seriously.

Crossposted at Israpundit

Technorati Tag: Israel and Fouad Ajami and al-Zarqawi and Olmert and Middle East and US and Bernard Lewis.