An accounting of the Saudi bucks infused into various universities all around the world has not been forthcoming as to the specificity of the usage of those funds. Isn’t it important to reveal just what impact those billions have had on curriculum and material presented to the next generation of our nation’s leaders?

Read this December 10, 2007 article in the Washington Times. Those Saudi bucks get spread around in more places than you’ve heard of!

The interfaithing street seems to run one way, in Wahhabism’s direction. So much for promoting understanding among various religions on university campuses around the world. Courtesy of the Saudis, of course.

I have blogged many times about the Islamic Saudi Academy, alma mater of wannabe Presidential assassin Ahmed Abu Ali, valedictoriam at the school a few years before. One example of what I’ve previously written is here, and here is another.

Now comes this November 19, 2007 article, from AAFAQ: The Leading Arab Reform Web Site:

American Senators demand Closing of Saudi Academy in Washington

(Washington – Aafaq) - On Thursday, 12 members of the United States Senate demanded that the Secretary of State, Condolezza Rice, close the Saudi Islamic Academy in Washington because of the refusal of the Saudi officials to make available for inspection the curricula that are taught in the Academy. [Full Story in Arabic]

The Saudi News Agency (WASM) said that members of the Senate demanded that the Department of State follow up on the agreement that the United States and the government of Saudi Arabia made last year on improving the freedom of religion in Saudi Arabia and stopping the export of religious extremism.

The director of the Saudi Academy, Abdullah Al-Shabnan, held a press conference on Thursday, in which he denied the use of Saudi curricula in the school and also pointed out the curricula used do not contain any enmity toward other religions or sects.

The Saudi Academy refuses to make its curricula available for inspection to the American government or to the news media.

It may be mentioned that the Institute for Gulf Affairs Washington issued a lengthy report last year, in cooperation with Freedom House. The report received worldwide attention, because it showed that the curricula used in schools in Saudi Arabia are still filled with extremism, intolerance toward of other religions, and the incitement of hatred and violence toward other religions and cultures, despite claims of the Saudi government to the contrary.

Contrast the above with the following, which appeared on November 16, 2007 in the Washington Post:

Officials of a Northern Virginia Islamic school yesterday criticized a federal commission, saying that the panel unfairly damaged the school’s reputation by recommending it be shuttered until it could prove that it is not promoting intolerance and violence through its textbooks.

Abdalla Al-Shabnan, director general of the Islamic Saudi Academy, said a report by the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom calling upon the State Department in September to close the school had taken everyone by surprise and left those affiliated with the school shaken.

Yesterday, Al-Shabnan invited a few reporters, including one from The Washington Post, to tour the school and meet with teachers, students and parents. Officials displayed some of the textbooks used, including a few routinely used by students in Fairfax County public schools. Others, written in Arabic, are religious or language texts, academy officials said. They denied that any of the texts promote religious extremism.

“Some people believe we get our orders from the [Saudi] Embassy,” Al-Shabnan said. “That is not the case. I am the one in charge. I am responsible for all the action in the school.”

Parents and students say the commission’s views do not describe the school they know. Dana Nicholas, assistant principal of the girls’ school, said the academy uses a curriculum similar to the one used by Fairfax public schools. There are religious classes and Arabic is taught, said Nicholas, who described herself as a devout Christian. But, she added, “we are just a normal school.”

Commission members said they were not persuaded by the school’s invitation to reporters, nor a letter they received from Al-Shabnan on Wednesday. In the letter, dated Nov. 12, Al-Shabnan stated that the school had made its textbooks available to a Fairfax County supervisor for review. Supervisor Gerald W. Hyland (D-Mount Vernon) said yesterday that his office had received six boxes of books from the school and that a translator from the county’s library system was looking through them.

Al-Shabnan also invited commission members to come to the school to review the textbooks.

Commission Chairman Michael Cromartie said the offer was not taken up because academy officials wanted mutually acceptable scholars and translators to review the textbooks. He said the commission had repeatedly asked Saudi Embassy officials in Washington for the books but had not received them.

The commission, created by Congress under the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, issues an annual report about religious freedom around the world. Its members are appointed by the White House and congressional leadership.

Officials with the commission said they had spent several years examining textbooks used by schools in Saudi Arabia, which gives the Northern Virginia academy much of its funding. Those textbooks, the commission members said, promoted violence against Christians, Jews, Shiites and polytheists.
The Islamic academy, which has two campuses in Northern Virginia, was founded in 1984 to educate children of Saudi diplomats from pre-kindergarten through 12th grade. About 30 percent of the roughly 1,000 students are Saudi, school officials said. The school’s governing board is led by the Saudi ambassador to the United States.

Officials of the school said the materials used there are unique, obtained from Saudi Arabia but changed to meet the needs of an American student body.

Al-Shabnan said yesterday that he had turned over the school’s textbooks to the Saudi Embassy. He said he expected that embassy officials would turn the textbooks over to the State Department.

Department officials and others with knowledge of the issue, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing inquiry, said U.S. officials think the commission’s recommendation to close the school was premature. They said the State Department was proceeding cautiously, speaking with Saudi officials about issues of religious tolerance and school curriculum, to avoid creating a crisis.

Hello, State Department? The crisis has already been created.

One of the political parties that had a couple members at the Counterjihad Brussels 2007 conference was the Sweden Democrats (Sverigedemokraterna). The U.S. blog http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com (aka LGF) has suggested that the Sweden Democrat party has “disturbing connections.”

I. BACKGROUND

Bruce Bawer, the respected author of While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within, has written favorably of the Sweden Democrats in “While Sweden Slept”:

[...]Only one sizable party in the country, the Sweden Democrats, articulates most Swedes’ concerns about their country’s immigration and integration policies. Again and again, it has been the object of breathtakingly undemocratic treatment by the political establishment. Earlier this year, for example, the government closed down the Sweden Democrats’ Web site because it had published a cartoon of Muhammad. Stig Fredriksson, head of the free-speech organization Publicistklubben, complained bitterly. But the incident was hardly reported in Sweden - and, of course, barely caused a ripple abroad. If the Bush administration had closed down a Democratic Party Web site¸ there would be scare headlines and editorials thundering about dictatorship - and rightly so. But when Sweden’s rulers did it, it was apparently acceptable - because they did it in the name of political correctness.

Sweden Democrats have been the targets of events that recall China’s Cultural Revolution. Staged “people’s protests” by members of the “youth divisions” of other parties have led to the firing of Sweden Democrats from their jobs. A few weeks ago, a junior diplomat was dismissed when it became known that he was a member of the party and had criticized his country’s immigration policy. On several occasions, thugs loyal to the ruling parties have broken up Sweden Democratic meetings and beaten up party leaders. And this is a nation in which a party led by an admitted communist was, in recent memory, part of the ruling coalition.

The Sweden Democrats enjoy considerable public sympathy. But given Sweden’s oppressively conformist political climate, that sympathy is of necessity largely sub rosa. Mr. Friedman has suggested that one reason why the party has no seats in Parliament is that Swedish elections aren’t really secret - other people at the polling place can look at your ballot and see which party you support. The stigma attached to voting for the Sweden Democrats is just that strong. Another reason is that the major parties have worked together vigorously to keep the Sweden Democrats out of the public square. The success of this collaborative effort is reflected in the fact that Sweden is the only major Western European country whose legislature contains not a single representative of a party critical of its immigration policies.[...]

They are definitely a party on the rise (see their official website here). Sweden Democrats on the Malmo City Council (Malmo has seen severely increased levels of crime due to unlimited immigration and failed assimilation) have suggested paying immigrants to leave and banning future immigration. Their success in the 2006 election (2.9% of the popular vote) gave them access to state funding. They are represented in over half of municipal governments. In October 2007, they launched a nationwide drive to change immigration policies at the local levels. In a poll of over 5,000 Swedes in September 2007, they were the third most popular party among Swedish men, putting them (for men) ahead of the Christian Democrats, the Green Party, the Centre party, the Left party, and only .1 percentage point behind the Liberal Party. Swedish popular opinion is tending against “multiculturalism” - in a recent poll, 49.8% said that headscarves should be banned at the workplace and in schools.

Most analysts across the political spectrum agree that the Sweden Democrats will gain seats in the Parliament in the next election, making them a potential tie-breaker on votes contested between the two coalitions now in power.

Fortunately, Conservative Swede, who participated in the Counterjihad Brussels 2007 Conference, has written a series of brief articles linked and excerpted below, a must-read about the Sweden Democrats and the sorry state of political resistance to Islamisation in today’s Sweden.

First, some documentary background on the Sweden Democrats, provided and translated by Ted Ekeroth, Sverigedemokraterna’s treasurer in Lund, in southern Sweden, who also participated in the Counterjihad Brussels 2007 conference. Ekeroth is pro-Zionist and Jewish, and a recipient of the 2006 Herzl award of the World Zionist Organization, “given annually to outstanding young men and women in recognition of their exceptional efforts on behalf of Israel and the Zionist cause.”

II. DOCUMENTS ON SWEDEN DEMOCRATS, AND ON THEIR POSITIONS ON ISRAEL

1. An overview presentation about the party

2. 2006 Sweden Democrats motion in defense of Israel (opposing Church of Sweden’s position against Israel )

3. 2005 Sweden Democrats press release demanding immigration policy change to prevent increased anti-semitism

4. 2006 statement by Bjorn Soder, party secretary of the Sweden Democrats, supporting Israel in the 2006 war with Hezbollah

5. Excerpts from an essay by Dan Wickstrom on the past Nazi affiliations of leaders of many other Swedish political parties and from an essay on past racist policies of other Swedish parties

6. A brief history of the Mengel leaflet fundraising incident..

7. A 2004 editorial by Ekeroth on Arafat

III. SERIES ON SWEDEN AND SWEDEN DEMOCRATS

Conservative Swede’s Series on Europe, Sweden and the Sweden Democrats

(Excerpts below - but read the whole series - an investment of a few minutes, and the right and proper thing to do, given the severity of the LGF allegations)

Part 1: Counterjihadism changing the European political map

[...]Since November 2001 a government backed by the Danish People’s Party is ruling in Denmark. With the 9/11 attacks and the far-going Islamization of Europe as background, European nationalism is no longer a fringe issue. Now there is real substance to it, and a real critical mass of popular support has emerged, and the good example of the Danish People’s Party has shown the way.In this process we see new parties emerging, the original nationalist parties transforming, and old traditional parties joining. In the last decade we’ve seen the creation of the UK Independence Party, Philippe de Villiers’ Mouvement pour la France, and the Danish People’s Party, to name a few. Nationalist parties, such as the Sweden Democrats, have been transformed (more about that later). Traditional parties such as the Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP) have joined. Also Partido Popular in Spain takes a strong anti-Jihad position with their Foreign Affairs Spokesman Gustavo de Arístegui. There are many more examples. Many reasons for hope.[...]

Part 2: Sweden Democrats and Hollywood Nazis

[NOTE: This article provides clear refutation of the link between Sweden Democrats and a photo of a woman in a Nazi uniform at http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com]

[...]Worries and warnings have been raised that we had invited crypto-Nazis to the Counterjihad summit in Brussels. One of the prime examples mentioned of such an alleged crypto-Nazi is Ted Ekeroth of the Sweden Democrats. This claim is completely ridiculous. Ted Ekeroth is a Jew and Sweden’s most high profile pro-Zionist. For this he was awarded with the prestigious Herzl Award last year.[...]

[...]I google “Tina Hallgren Bengtsson” and find this Wikipedia page in Swedish. It tells us that she left the Sweden Democrats (SD) in 1996 and joined Nationalsocialistisk Front (NSF), the Nazi Party. The picture above is from 1996, so this suggests to me that the picture has been taken during one of the Nazi rallies of NSF. This is the typical modus operandi of Expo, to paint the tendentious image that the photo is from an SD meeting. I can assure you that if this were a valid claim–that SD indeed have had meetings where people attended in Nazi uniforms–it would have been all over the Swedish MSM. But it’s not. This kind of photo+caption of Expo instead serves another purpose: as the pretext for leftist stormtroopers (Antifa) before harassing SD individuals by swinging an axe into their door, or rocks through their windows. Or when they violently sabotage public meetings of SD. And to these leftist stormtroopers it doesn’t matter that SD is Sweden’s most pro-Israel party, to these leftists the Israelis are Nazis too. [...]

Part 3: It’s a riddle

[...]As Edmund Burke said “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” Good and decent people do not want to be ostracized, i.e. being socially “killed” and lose their job etc., for opposing Islamization. The do not want to have “Racist!” and “Nazi!” hurled after them. They do not want to be beaten up by leftist stormtroopers, while the establishment is looking the other way. So if we are all going to be good people, we should just do nothing, and evil will triumph, in form of Islamo-leftism.Nevertheless, during the last two decades three frogs have tried to jump in Sweden. The first two were effectively stopped by the omnipotent power of the Swedish PC system. The third frog is the Sweden Democrats. It made a successful jump in last year’s election — after essentially having been jumping up and down for almost two decades. And next election in 2010, nothing can stop it from jumping right into the parliament.[...]

Part 4: The effect of the Constitution in Sweden

[...]So who decides in Sweden who will participate in presentations/debates on TV? Obviously all the 41 parties cannot participate. By tradition the parties that are represented in parliament participates, and nobody would accept otherwise. But among the new parties, which will participate? And who will decide?

The answer is the the whole power of this decision lies with the journalists of the Swedish Television. We know from other countries how the journalists are a guild where conformism is strong, and almost all think alike, even more so in Sweden. Furthermore, the Swedish Television is owned by a foundation where the board members are appointed by the government. No, Sweden definitely doesn’t have a system of checks and balances. And for the last seven decades the Social Democrats has been in power in a total of 60 years, so the board of the Swedish Television is just one of the many long arms of Swedish state socialism.[...]

Part 5: Sweden and Denmark, closed and open systems

[...]There’s simply no diversity in Swedish media, and they essentially all write the same things. Also the supposedly “independent Moderat” (i.e. the most right-wing you get) Svenska Dagbladet wrote in 1975, when the US withdrew, the Vietnam was liberated. When it comes to people and individuals who have concerns about the mass immigration, they are simply blocked out. The are not allowed to write columns or letters to the editor. Even advertising is refused. And if they are ever mentioned, the journalistic guild has agreed to always tag the prefix “xenophobic” before every mentioning of them. At the Swedish Television this was even written down in their guidelines, regarding the Sweden Democrats.[...]

Part 6: Brief History of Anti-establishment parties in Sweden

[...]After 9/11, more and more people have seen the urgency of the Islamisation of our country, and how it is connected to the regime of mass immigration that is pushed upon us by the elite. This, and also the changes that they can see happening in Denmark since 2001, made more and more people decide to do something about it. To start with they started to protest by voting for the “evil” party. But casting a protest vote every four years, is simply not enough. People have joined the party and transformed it. The transformation was completed by the election of Jimmie Åkesson as the new leader of the party in 2005. This was possible just because the people of Sweden knew this party existed. And there was no other anti-establishment party available on the arena.[...]

Part 7: The New Party and how it was crushed

For Westerners living far away from Europe, it can sometimes be very hard to grasp the gravity of the political situation in particular European countries. People from Eastern Europe have in recent memory the reaction from some such Westerners, when they heard about how there was no food to buy in the food store: “So why didn’t you go to another food store to buy food?” In the same manner we have recently heard across the Atlantic the (in another context perfectly sensible, but here not at all applicable) objection, that the Swedish anti-jihadists, instead of joining and co-operating with the Sweden Democrats (who everybody knows and agrees has some very problematic things in their past), should have started a fresh new party undoubtedly free from any historical baggage of real, imagined or distant neo-Nazi connections, or anything of the sort.

[...] And Hans Bergström continues: ‘this is unparalleled for a democracy and a state governed by law. Fifteen coarse meeting disturbances. The worst in Lund. Broken campaign trucks and fifteen murder threats against a political party in the middle of an election campaign in Sweden did not result in one single preliminary investigation. In the majority of places the police remained entirely passive. In some cases they put up gigantic riot barriers that also hindered the holding of an ordinary political meeting. Everything in order to avoid having to intervene against political hooligans having no understanding that freedom of assembly belongs to democracy.[...]

In conclusion - the Sweden Democrats are a small party on the rise. They have rejected their extremist past. They are represented in over half of local municipalities. They have the approval of European experts such as Bruce Bawer. They demonstrate strong support for Israel and opposition to anti-Semitism. They will probably enter Parliament in the next election. They are uniquely - in their country - opposed to Islamisation and unlimited immigration, which in Europe is inexorably tied to Islamisation.

These are not disturbing connections . They are real-world signs of progress.

The ominous clouds over Rufford Primary School in the UK symbolize the gathering storm of the Islamification of the West. I’m seeing a lot of symbolism these days. Part of my ramping-up process, no doubt.

This October 31, 2007 article, “Teachers’ Muslim Dress Order,” in its entirety:

A SCHOOL was yesterday accused of MAKING teachers dress up as Asians for a day – to celebrate a Muslim festival.Kids at the 257-pupil primary have also been told to don ethnic garb even though most are Christians.The morning assembly will be open to all parents – but dads are BARRED from a women-only party in the afternoon because Muslim husbands object to wives mixing with other men.

Just two members of staff – a part-time teacher and a teaching assistant – are Muslim.

Yesterday a relative of one of the 39 others said: “Staff have got to go along with it – or let’s face it, they would be branded racist.

“Who would put their job on the line? They have been told they have to embrace the day to show their diversity. But they are not all happy.”

The day aims to belatedly mark Eid, the end of Ramadan.

Sally Bloomer, head of Rufford primary school in Lye, West Midlands, insisted: “I have not heard of any complaints.

“It’s all part of a diversity project to promote multi-culturalism.”

Don’t you just love the beginning of the article? The teachers had to dress up as “Asians.” And what is this nonsense about a belated celebration? Can the oh-so-multicultural wait until the next Ramadan to push their agenda? I guess not. They are pressing their advantage, and the targets acquiesce and appease.

HERE, from one of my earlier postings, is a reminder as to what Ramadan celebrates — the codification of militant Islam. From this Islamic source, which I cited in my posting about Ramadan:

In the name of Allah, the Beneficient, the Merciful.The battle of Badr was the most important among the Islamic battles of Destiny. For the first time the followers of the new faith were put into a serious test. Had victory been the lot of the pagan army while the Islamic Forces were still at the beginning of their developments, the faith of Islam could have come to an end.No one was aware of the importance of the outcome of the Battle as the Prophet (S.A.W.) himself. We might read the depth of his anxiety in his prayerbefore the beginning of the Battle when he stood up supplicating his Lord:

God this is Quraish. It has come with all its arrogance and boastfulness, trying to discredit Thy Apostle. God, I ask Thee to humiliate them tomorrow. God, if this Muslim band will perish today, Thou shall not be worshipped.[...]This battle laid the foundation of the Islamic State…

The UK is ahead of the United States when it comes to Islamification and dhimmitude. By how many years? After all, last spring “Open Tent Day” was celebrated in Amherst, New Hampshire:

The picture’s caption reads as follows:

Second-grader Lucas Bellipanni tries on the traditional thobe, gutra and igal during the ‘Open Tent’ night at the Amherst Middle School.

Can you see the parallels with what happened at Rufford Primary School?

In public and secluded locations, Western nations are, in effect, being forced to celebrate Eid al-Fitr, but not at the point of the literal sword. Rather, the compulsion is political correctness, multicultural, and the fear of losing one’s job — all of which serve as weapons of the cultural jihad.

Per Washington Times’ Julia Duin, hate is taught at the 23-year-old Islamic Saudi Academy, Alexandria, VA.The school has been under investigation before. Presently citizens are asking the State Department to close the school because it threatens other religions and could undo our Republic.“The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), which advises Congress, the State Department and the president on religious-freedom issues, has issued a 30-page document saying the Saudi Embassy, which operates the 933-student academy, is violating U.S. law.”

This is not hysteria on the part of USCIRF. It is cold logic, as anyone who has been following the history of this school’s instruction is aware, not to mention verses in the Koran that advocate killing all non-Muslims.

Those who seek to bar the publishing of these verses are a party to the atrocities instigated by extremist Muslims. It is akin to Germans who shied away from exposing Hitler setting up camp to extinguish Jews and Jewish sympathizers.

In other words, bald fact, no matter how unpleasant, must be put “out there.” Those who hope it simply “will go away” are integral to the threat.

“At issue are textbooks the USCIRF says contain ‘highly intolerant and discriminatory language, particularly against Jews, Christians and Shi’a Muslims.’ Its findings are based on a three-year study of Arabic-language textbooks, some of them from the Saudi Academy, by the Center for Religious Freedom in the District.

“The textbooks instructed students to ‘hate’ Jews, Christians, ‘polytheists’ and other ‘unbelievers,’ praised violent jihad as a ‘religious duty’ and to believe as fact the anti-Semitic forgeries known as ‘The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.’”

Now would it surprise anyone that the academy heads inform media that no such hate literature exists?

What knowledgeable persons know about extremist Islamics is that they believe Allah permits them to lie, considering deceit a virtue when it furthers Islam World Rule. Therefore, for academicians at the school to boast that texts and instructors’ lectures are void of hate is exactly what Allah would decree.

“Saudi officials said in response that the textbooks were being revamped and an official at the academy, who asked not to be named, said school textbooks were revised in 2006.

“The USCIRF was rebuffed when it asked the embassy this summer to see copies of the new textbooks, spokeswoman Judith Ingram said.

“’We’ve simply gotten nowhere with our requests,’ she added.”

Nowhere? What does that honestly say about academy officialdom? This is not rocket science. This is in-your-fact warning.

If fundamentalist Bob Jones University was accused of teaching hate, it would welcome outsiders to read every text on campus as well as attend every lecture in every lecture hall.

If evangelical Wheaton College were accused of instructing Christians to kill non-Christians, campus officials would hold press conferences, invite any personages to investigate curricula and sit in on any teaching forums throughout an entire school year.

Why then is the Islamic Academy not opening up its classes and texts to anyone? This school is located in America. It is using our soil to destroy our nation.

If that is not the case, then the academy must come forth with the evidence.

“The Saudi Academy is one of 20 international Saudi schools around the world. The Virginia academy’s main campus is on Richmond Highway in Alexandria and a west campus for young children is on Popes Head Road in Fairfax. Twenty-eight percent of its students are Saudi citizens.

“The USCIRF has long been critical of Saudi Arabia, and in 2004 it named the kingdom a ‘country of particular concern’ in terms of religious-freedom violations. As a result, the Saudi government promised the State Department it would allow greater religious tolerance within its borders. During a visit there this spring, USCIRF officials said they were stonewalled by the Saudis on several issues, including the content of current school textbooks.”

There is reason for suspicion. Anyone who sidelines that suspicion is part of the problem, furthering the plot to undermine America.

Excerpt from the Associated Press, October 29, 2007 ( http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5igZiBbZdKa9Gvx8uwXlsIOxoBQ5wD8SJA1AG0 ):

Fairfax County officials are reviewing Arabic-language textbooks at a private Islamic school following a federal panel’s recommendation that the school be shut down.

The county does not expect to find any problems with the textbooks at the Islamic Saudi Academy, but wants to study the issue “to put the matter to rest,” Fairfax County spokeswoman Merni Fitzgerald said Monday.

[...]

Fitzgerald said the county is not concerned about the books’ contents, but because it is the academy’s landlord it wants to investigate in light of the commission’s report.

“In order to put the issue to rest, these actions are being taken,” Fitzgerald said. “I’m sure there won’t be anything in there that people would find objectionable.”

Sounds as if Ms. Fitzgerald is “investigating” with a certain mindset.  How objective will this investigation be?

In his 1953 novel Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury published a story about a dystopian society in which all books are burned. According to one review at Amazon.com,

In Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury’s classic, frightening vision of the future, firemen don’t put out fires–they start them in order to burn books. Bradbury’s vividly painted society holds up the appearance of happiness as the highest goal–a place where trivial information is good, and knowledge and ideas are bad. Fire Captain Beatty explains it this way, “Give the people contests they win by remembering the words to more popular songs…. Don’t give them slippery stuff like philosophy or sociology to tie things up with. That way lies melancholy.”

Another review states the following:

The disturbing thing about the book is that, unlike many other books that deal with the distant future, “Fahrenheit 451″ (written in 1953) hasn’t been proved wrong simply by time itself. Not at all. Actually, what is shocking to realize is that we’ve come quite close to the society Bradbury writes about. Perhaps books haven’t been banned yet, but it is indeed the entertainment industry that controls people’s minds, the political correctness has reached ridiculous levels…

Coincidentally, early last spring I chose Fahrenheit 451 as one of the readings for my World Literature class for the 2007-2008 school term. At the time, I didn’t realize just how important the reading of Bradbury’s classic was going to be.

Now comes the story about the recall and destruction of Alms for Jihad: Charity and Terrorism in the Islamic World, a book published just last year and now becoming scarce at the behest of Sheikh Khalid bin Mahfouz. From this source:

I’ve gotten numerous reports from readers who have attempted to purchase Alms for Jihad from Books a Million and elsewhere, only to have the purchase denied because that title is currently unavailable. That’s because, as Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld and I discussed earlier this week, Khalid bin Mafouz has successfully bullied the Cambridge University Press into pulping the book. Cambridge has even sent out notices to have it removed from some libraries…

According to the above source, Alms for Jihad is becoming increasingly difficult to obtain (at any price, according to Cassandra, who phoned me last night), even via digital download. At the moment, the hard copy of Alms of Jihad is unavailable at Amazon.com, although the site has a link for digital download. I don’t know if that link still works.

Mark Steyn has written a commentary about the disappearance of Alms for Jihad. His commentary is reproduced below in its entirety (emphases mine):

How will we lose the war against “radical Islam”?Well, it won’t be in a tank battle. Or in the Sunni Triangle or the caves of Bora Bora. It won’t be because terrorists fly three jets into the Oval Office, Buckingham Palace and the Basilica of St Peter’s on the same Tuesday morning.The war will be lost incrementally because we are unable to reverse the ongoing radicalization of Muslim populations in South Asia, Indonesia, the Balkans, Western Europe and, yes, North America. And who’s behind that radicalization? Who funds the mosques and Islamic centers that in the past 30 years have set up shop on just about every Main Street around the planet?

For the answer, let us turn to a fascinating book called “Alms for Jihad: Charity And Terrorism in the Islamic World,” by J. Millard Burr, a former USAID relief coordinator, and the scholar Robert O Collins. Can’t find it in your local Barnes & Noble? Never mind, let’s go to Amazon. Everything’s available there. And sure enough, you’ll come through to the “Alms for Jihad” page and find a smattering of approving reviews from respectably torpid publications: “The most comprehensive look at the web of Islamic charities that have financed conflicts all around the world,” according to Canada’s Globe And Mail, which is like the New York Times but without the jokes.Unfortunately, if you then try to buy “Alms for Jihad,” you discover that the book is “Currently unavailable. We don’t know when or if this item will be back in stock.” Hang on, it was only published last year. At Amazon, items are either shipped within 24 hours or, if a little more specialized, within four to six weeks, but not many books from 2006 are entirely unavailable with no restock in sight.Well, let us cross the ocean, thousands of miles from the Amazon warehouse, to the High Court in London. Last week, the Cambridge University Press agreed to recall all unsold copies of “Alms for Jihad” and pulp them. In addition, it has asked hundreds of libraries around the world to remove the volume from their shelves. This highly unusual action was accompanied by a letter to Sheikh Khalid bin Mahfouz, in care of his English lawyers, explaining their reasons:

This highly unusual action was accompanied by a letter to Sheikh Khalid bin Mahfouz, in care of his English lawyers, explaining their reasons:”Throughout the book there are serious and defamatory allegations about yourself and your family, alleging support for terrorism through your businesses, family and charities, and directly.

This highly unusual action was accompanied by a letter to Sheikh Khalid bin Mahfouz, in care of his English lawyers, explaining their reasons:”Throughout the book there are serious and defamatory allegations about yourself and your family, alleging support for terrorism through your businesses, family and charities, and directly.”As a result of what we now know, we accept and acknowledge that all of those allegations about you and your family, businesses and charities are entirely and manifestly false.”

Who is Sheikh Khalid bin Mahfouz? Well, he’s a very wealthy and influential Saudi. Big deal, you say. Is there any other kind? Yes, but even by the standards of very wealthy and influential Saudis, this guy is plugged in: He was the personal banker to the Saudi royal family and head of the National Commercial Bank of Saudi Arabia, until he sold it to the Saudi government. He has a swanky pad in London and an Irish passport and multiple U.S. business connections, including to Thomas Kean, the chairman of the 9/11 Commission.

I’m not saying the 9/11 Commission is a Saudi shell operation, merely making the observation that, whenever you come across a big-shot Saudi, it’s considerably less than six degrees of separation between him and the most respectable pillars of the American establishment.

As to whether allegations about support for terrorism by the sheikh and his “family, businesses and charities” are “entirely and manifestly false,” the Cambridge University Press is going way further than the United States or most foreign governments would. Of his bank’s funding of terrorism, Sheikh Mahfouz’s lawyer has said: “Like upper management at any other major banking institution, Khalid Bin Mahfouz was not, of course, aware of every wire transfer moving through the bank. Had he known of any transfers that were going to fund al-Qaida or terrorism, he would not have permitted them.” Sounds reasonable enough. Except that in this instance the Mahfouz bank was wiring money to the principal Mahfouz charity, the Muwafaq (or “Blessed Relief”) Foundation, which in turn transferred them to Osama bin Laden.

In October 2001, the Treasury Department named Muwafaq as “an al-Qaida front that receives funding from wealthy Saudi businessmen” and its chairman as a “specially designated global terrorist.” As the Treasury concluded, “Saudi businessmen have been transferring millions of dollars to bin Laden through Blessed Relief.”

Indeed, this “charity” seems to have no other purpose than to fund jihad. It seeds Islamism wherever it operates. In Chechnya, it helped transform a reasonably conventional nationalist struggle into an outpost of the jihad. In the Balkans, it played a key role in replacing a traditionally moderate Islam with a form of Mitteleuropean Wahhabism. Pick a Muwafaq branch office almost anywhere on the planet and you get an interesting glimpse of the typical Saudi charity worker. The former head of its mission in Zagreb, Croatia, for example, is a guy called Ayadi Chafiq bin Muhammad. Well, he’s called that most of the time. But he has at least four aliases and residences in at least three nations (Germany, Austria and Belgium). He was named as a bin Laden financier by the U.S. government and disappeared from the United Kingdom shortly after 9/11.

So why would the Cambridge University Press, one of the most respected publishers on the planet, absolve Khalid bin Mahfouz, his family, his businesses and his charities to a degree that neither (to pluck at random) the U.S., French, Albanian, Swiss and Pakistani governments would be prepared to do?

Because English libel law overwhelmingly favors the plaintiff. And like many other big-shot Saudis, Sheikh Mahfouz has become very adept at using foreign courts to silence American authors – in effect, using distant jurisdictions to nullify the First Amendment. He may be a wronged man, but his use of what the British call “libel chill” is designed not to vindicate his good name but to shut down the discussion, which is why Cambridge University Press made no serious attempt to mount a defense. He’s one of the richest men on the planet, and they’re an academic publisher with very small profit margins. But, even if you’ve got a bestseller, your pockets are unlikely to be deep enough: “House Of Saud, House Of Bush” did boffo biz with the anti-Bush crowd in America, but there’s no British edition – because Sheikh Mahfouz had indicated he was prepared to spend what it takes to challenge it in court, and Random House decided it wasn’t worth it.

We’ve gotten used to one-way multiculturalism: The world accepts that you can’t open an Episcopal or Congregational church in Jeddah or Riyadh, but every week the Saudis can open radical mosques and madrassahs and pro-Saudi think-tanks in London and Toronto and Dearborn, Mich., and Falls Church, Va. And their global reach extends a little further day by day, inch by inch, in the lengthening shadows, as the lights go out one by one around the world.

Suppose you’ve got a manuscript about the Saudis. Where are you going to shop it? Think Cambridge University Press will be publishing anything anytime soon?

The following is some additional information about Alms for Jihad. According to this source, the book:

is properly sourced, with hundreds of references. And Burr and Collins provided Cambridge University Press with all their materials on bin Mahfouz’ al Qaeda and Hamas financing, contrary to the false statements by both bin Mahfouz’ and Cambridge University Press attorneys.Incredibly, the publishing arm of the world’s second oldest English speaking university (est. 1209), completely capitulated to bin Mahfouz, offering a comprehensive apology and substantial damages, according to an agreement read in the U.K. High Court on July 30, 2007. Cambridge University Press also promised to pulp the books, publish a detailed apology on its website and contribute to bin Mahfouz’ legal costs.[T]hese authors’ statements and data were all previously well documented by the media and U.S. Congressional, Court, Treasury Department and other official statements.

These reports were further corroborated by French intelligence officials at the General Directorate of External Security (DGSE), and published in the French daily, Le Monde. The DGSE reported that in 1998, they knew bin Mahfouz to be an architect of the banking scheme built to benefit Osama bin Laden; both U.S. and British intelligence services knew it, too.

In short, Cambridge University Press had nothing for which to apologize….

The pre-existing British intelligence knowledge of bin Mahfouz’ terrorist ties render the British High Court announcement all the more appalling an infringement of free speech…

Libraries here in the United States are not legally obligated to remove Alms for Jihad from their stacks. This morning, I noted that the Fairfax County Public Library system does not have the book; however, I do not know if the Fairfax system ever carried the book, but if so, voluntary censorship, resulting from fear of litigation, is afoot. You might want to check the library system in your area. Also, check your local bookstores. Cassandra told me yesterday that she couldn’t find the book in her area. Is the book being pulled here in the United States?

After all, libel suits are costly affairs. Jeffrey Breinholt of the Counterterrorism Blog recently compiled the following list of legal actions attempted or taken against books unfavorable to Islam, Muslim organizations, and individual Muslims (emphasis mine):

Two news flashes on August 1, 2007. First, the lawyers representing the so-called Flying Imams in their lawsuit against US Airways announced that they were not going after the unnamed passengers whose concerns prompted the men to be pulled off the Arizona-bound flight (here). I suppose that is good to know, now that the long-term policy implications of their lawsuit are about to justify (literally) an act of Congress. Second, Cambridge University Press announced that it was going to destroy all copies of the 2006 book Alms for Jihad: Charity and Terrorism in the Islamic World, in response to a libel claim filed in England by Khalid bin Mahfouz, a Saudi banker (here).

And let’s not forget the recent dust-up between CAIR and the Young America’s Foundation, when the group scheduled Robert Spencer to speak.

Continuing now with the piece from the Counterterrorism Blog:

Connected? Absolutely. Each story involves people who do not like how information flows these days. Each chose litigation as the means to try to get their way.[...]DATELINE - BOSTON 2003
The Boston Herald reported on community concerns with the generous land deal between the city and the Islamic Society of Boston (ISB), based on suspicions that ISB had connections to terrorists in the Middle East. ISB sues the Herald and various people who provided it information for libel. Islamic Soc. of Boston v. Boston Herald, Inc.,21 Mass.L.Rptr. 441, Not Reported in N.E.2d, 2006 WL 2423287, Mass.Super. 2006.

DATELINE - WASHINGTON DC 2003
A sitting U.S. Congressman finds himself having to explain why he has chosen not to run for re-election, after public reports that he and his wife are having marital problems. To redress public concerns, he speaks by phone to a reporter from the Charlotte Observer, and describes how living in Washington no longer appeals to him, especially across the street from the headquarters of the Council for American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) after the events of 9/11 and the rumor he heard that CAIR is a fundraising front for Hizballah. CAIR sues the congressman for libel. CAIR v. Ballenger, 444 F.3d 659 (D.C. Cir. 2006)

DATELINE - SAN FRANCISCO 2002
The Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith (ADL) posts a letter on its website calling for an investigation of Khadja Ghafur, the former superintendent of public charter schools, based on indications that public schools under his supervision are teaching religion and are associated with a controversial Pakistani organization. Ghafur sues the ADL for libel. Ghafur v. Bernstein, 131 Cal.App.4th 1230, 32 Cal.Rptr.3d 626, Cal.App. 1 Dist.,2005.

DATELINE - CHICAGO 2001
The New York Times and other news organizations report that Global Relief Foundation (GRF) is the target of an investigation based on suspicions of its terrorist fundraising. GRF sues the news organizations for libel. GRF v. NY Times, 390 F.3d 973 (7th Cir. 2003)

DATELINE - OMAHA 2001
Radio personality Rick Dees makes some on-air statements that are offensive to Muslims. Durkhan Iqraa Jihad Mumin and two other people sue Dees and his station for libel. Mumin v. Dees, 266 Neb. 201, 663 N.W.2d 125 Neb. 2003.

DATELINE - VIRGINIA 1998
America Online (AOL) permits chat rooms dealing with the the Qu’ran and the beliefs of Islam, and this generates posts that Muslims consider harassing and blasphemous. One Muslim visitor to the chat room user sues AOL for libel. Noah v. AOL, 261 F.Supp.2d 532 (E.D. Va. 2003)

DATELINE - NEW YORK 1994
The New York Post publishes an interview of Dr. Betty Shabazz, the widow of Malcolm X, suggesting complicity of Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan in the assassination of her husband. Farrakhan sues the Post for libel. Farrakhan v. N.Y.P. Holdings, Inc.,168 Misc.2d 536, 638 N.Y.S.2d 1002, N.Y.Sup.,1995.

DATELINE - BOSTON - 1993
The Wellesley College journal Counterpoint publishes an article about professor Tony Martin, who is believed to be associated with the Nation of Islam, suggesting that the decision to grant him tenure was based on threats of litigation. Martin sues Counterpoint for libel. Martin v. Roy, 54 Mass.App.Ct. 642, 767 N.E.2d 603, Mass.App.Ct., 2002.

DATELINE - BOSTON - 1984
The Boston Globe publishes an article about Yusuf Islam, the popular musician formerly known as Cat Stevens, describing how he had embraced Islam and moved to Iran. Islam sues the Globe for libel. Globe Communications Corp. v. R.C.S. Rizzoli Periodici, S.p.A., 729 F.Supp. 973 (S.D.N.Y.1990).

DATELINE - NEW YORK - 1983
Newsweek publishes an article suggesting that Pakistani businessman Mahmoud Khan is associated with the CIA. Khan sues Newsweek for libel. Khan v. Newsweek, Inc, 160 A.D.2d 425, 554 N.Y.S.2d 119, N.Y.A.D. 1 Dept.,1990.

DATELINE - ARIZONA - 1981
A student religious journal Al-Ittihad publishes an unfavorable review of a translation of the Qu’ran by Rashad Khalifa, using the words “charlatan” and “mental imbalance.” Khalifa sues the journal for libel. Khalifa v. Muslim Students’ Ass’n of U. S. and Canada, Inc., 131 Ariz. 328, 641 P.2d 242, Ariz.App., 1981

DATELINE - SAN FRANCISCO - 1980
A California television station broadcasts “Death of a Princess,” a film depicting the public execution of a Saudi Arabian princess for adultery. Prince Khalid Abdullah Tariq Mansour Faissal Fahd Al Talal, on behalf of 600 million Muslims throughout the world, sues the television station for libel. Khalid Abdullah Tariq Mansour Faissal Fahd Al Talal v. Fanning, 560 F. Supp. 186 (N.D. Cal. 1980)

DATELINE - WASHINGTON D.C. 1964
The Evening Star newspaper publishes an article describing political activist Dolphin Thomas as a chief spokesman for Malcolm X and his Black Muslim Mosque. Thomas sues the Star for libel. Thompson v. Evening Star Newspaper Co., 394 F.2d 774 (D.C. Cir. 1968).

DATELINE – BIRMINGHAM 1935
The Birmingham Post reports that an Arab sheik is interested in acquiring an American bride for his harem, and describes what he is looking for and some of his good attributes. The newspaper is sued for libel. White v. Birmingham Post Co., 233 Ala. 547, 172 So. 649, Ala. 1937.

Legal efforts to control how Muslim organizations and individuals are portrayed is not limited to public statements. They extend to non-public statements about Muslim employees’ job performance. This list above does not contain other lawsuits that are more akin to the recent US Airway litigation: Muslim employees who sued for their employers for libel, alleging that their employers spoke about their job performance to state licensing boards created to assure quality health care, or government agents or persons employed by the university or company responsible for investigating the employment discrimination allegations that arose from the libel actions themselves. Mawaldi v. St. Elizabeth Health Center, 381 F.Supp.2d 675 (N.D. Ohio 2005); Shabazz v. PYA Monarch, LLC, 271 F.Supp.2d 797 (E.D.Va. 2003); Obu v. Ohio Dept. of Aging,119 Ohio Misc.2d 131, 774 N.E.2d 812, Ohio Ct.Cl.,2002; Ahmed v. Gelfand,160 F.Supp.2d 408 (E.D.N.Y. 2001); Naeemullah v. Citicorp Services, Inc., 78 F.Supp.2d 783 (N.D.Ill. 1999); El-Ghori v. Grimes, 23 F.Supp.2d 1259 (D.Kan.1998); Al-Khazraji v. Saint Francis College, 523 F.Supp. 386 (W.D. Pa. 1981). In all of these lawsuits, the libel complaints were dismissed by the court, which ruled that the employee had no action. There must have been some very disappointed lawyers.

These cases may be the tip of the iceberg. Although truth is a defense to libel lawsuits, it generally takes thousands of dollars to establish the truth sufficiently to achieve a dismissal. Settlement is sometimes the best option, no matter how unmeritorious the allegations. When that happens, there will be no court opinion. Thus, we do not know how many more cases are out there in which someone facing steep legal bills chose to quietly settle. For those defendants, they will probably never mention the word Islam again in public. Who loses then? In the long run, fear of discussion has costs to society’s search for the truth. Some of us like the fact that information flows so efficiently, and we want to keep it that way.

Moreever [sic], the truth is not always obvious when the lawsuit is being pursued. It often takes many years and much more lively American dialogue to get there. That means the use of litigation to control the flow of information should matter to those all who appreciate the gradual pace at which knowledge develops. There is now no question that GRF was under investigation - it has since been designated as a terrorist financier by President Bush. Cat Stevens’ conversion to Islam and his relocation to Iran is now common knowledge, as is the CIA‘s involvement in Afghanistan through Pakistani intermediaries. Historically, with some libel actions, we sometimes look back years late and wonder how anyone could have questioned the information then at issue, either because it is so obviously true or because our mores have changed. Then we feel dirty.

…[O]f these cases I list above, there was only one that was not dismissed in favor of the defendants - the oldest one, involving the Arab Sheik looking to acquire an American wife. In that 1937 case, the Alabama judge refused the dismiss the libel action…

Read the entire article.

Litigation jihad — another of the tactics used to accomplish the Islamification of the West and to silence the critics of Islam. Is the blogosphere next on their hit-list?

[Hat-tip to Maccus Germanis for providing me this link]

Listen to The Gathering Storm Radio Show, which WC and I cohost. The show broadcasts live every Friday for one hour at noon, Pacific Time. 

The call-in number is (646) 915-9870.

Callers welcome!

Friday, August 3: Our guest at the top of the hour will be Pamela Hall of Stop the Madrassa: Protecting Our Public Schools from Islamist Curricula. Ms. Hall recently appeared on the Glenn Beck Show, to name just one of the media on which she has appeared. Information about Stop the Madrassah:

STOP THE MADRASSA is a grass roots coalition of citizen groups and individuals concerned about the NYC Department of Education’s non-responsive posture regarding the creation of a new public school to teach Arabic history, culture and language: the Khalil Gibran International Academy (KGIA).The school is projected to open soon - in September 2007 - but Mayor Bloomberg and the NY Department of Education have refused to answer the public’s questions. The community’s concerns have been dismissed and silenced by the school bureaucrats. City and state officials who are creating this special Arabic/Middle Eastern public school have either failed to properly conduct the necessary background and preparatory work to open such a school, or they are purposefully evading their legal obligations to inform the public of the status of their work….

Read more HERE.

From this source:

Bloggers, clear your calendars Sunday, July 22, through Friday, July 27. Some real propaganda bombshells are bound to be dropped, and you’ll want to be there when “several leading Muslim clerics and thinkers from around the globe will participate in an unprecedented online dialogue about their religion, terrorism and human rights.”

The “dialogue,” sponsored by The Washington Post and Newsweek Interactive and presented in conjunction with Georgetown University, has been dubbed “Muslims Speak Out” and will take place at On Faith, a blog operated as a joint effort of the Post and Newsweek.

More at this link.

Listen to The Gathering Storm Radio Show, of which I am cohost. The show broadcasts live every Friday for one hour at noon, Pacific Time.

The call-in number is (646) 915-9870.

Callers welcome!

I may be phoning in to the show from The Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C., where I’m scheduled to attend a lecture by Dr. Tawfik Hamid, Muslim reformer and author of The Roots of Jihad. HERE is Dr. Hamid’s web site, and HERE is Google-search information.

Friday’s lecture runs from noon-2:00 PM, EDT. If I can nab Dr. Hamid for an interview in the first half hour of the show, I will! In any case, I plan to call in with an immediate report on the lecture.

If you are unable to listen live to the radio show, you can listen to recordings of the radio broadcasts later by CLICKING HERE.

The picture’s caption reads as follows:

Second-grader Lucas Bellipanni tries on the traditional thobe, gutra and igal during the ‘Open Tent’ night at the Amherst Middle School.

The following is the full May 31, 2007 article:

‘Open tent’ at Amherst Middle SchoolAMHERST— For one night, on May 9, the quaint colonial town of Amherst, New Hampshire, was transformed into a Saudi Arabian Bedouin tent community, with the help of 80 seventh-graders at the Amherst Middle School. The weather cooperated, providing 85 degree temperatures to give an authentic Saudi feel to the evening.

More than 250 guests arrived at the open tent and were welcomed with an Arabic greeting of “Marhaba” by students at a Saudi customs desk.

During the check-in, guests selected a traditional Arabic name for their name badge and completed an actual Saudi customs form, which warned in bold letters “Death for Drug Trafficking ” at the top.

Once inside, guests were encouraged to circulate among 14 different stations created by the students.

The Arabic food-tasting station offered four entrées, curried chicken, lamb, tomato chicken with cardomom, and Moroccan chicken, served with pita breads, hummus, and couscous. Fresh fruits, cardomom coffees, and spice teas were also served.

Flowing fabrics hung from the ceiling separated the family and men-only dining sections. The tables were set on large rugs and lowered so that the diners sat on the floor.

Only the seventh-grade boys were allowed to host the food stations and the Arabic dancing, as the traditions of Saudi Arabia at this time prevent women from participating in these public roles.

Dressed in traditional Arabic wear—long plaid kilts, white shirts and turbans—the boys offered food and entertained guests. The Arabic dancers enthusiastically performed to music and encouraged male visitors to join their dance.

Seventh-grade girls hosted the hijab and veil stations, where other female guests learned how to wear the required head covering and veils. An antique trunk full of black abayas worn by women, and white thobes worn by the men, were available for guests to try on.

Cultural items displayed throughout the room included Arabic books, games, food, and newspapers and magazines.

An Islamic religion station included a Muslim prayer rug with a compass imbedded in it to locate Mecca, readings on the Islamic faith, call to prayer items and prayer beads.

Younger visitors gravitated to the Arabic listening station, the Arabic coloring book stations and the mural, while visitors of all ages found the slide shows of Saudi Arabia to be captivating.

The “open tent” was created to encourage participants to reach out and learn from people around the world, and to promote curiosity and cultural understanding.

Are any such events, complete with prayer stations, being held for other cultures in public schools througout America?

Well, at least the event didn’t include dressing up as suicide bombers in order to promote a sympathetic understanding of jihad. Maybe the textbooks already take care of that.

[Hat-tip to GM, who sent me this information]

This posting was requested via email to me from Lak Vorha, D.C. Online Editor of The Washington Examiner Newspapers.

Picture caption:

(AACE Worldwide Pty Ltd)
An automatic wudu washer, shown here on a promotional brochure manufactured by Australia-based AACE Worldwide, has come under scrutiny as many public institutions have approved their use paying for their installation through tax-funded dollars while turning down other religious groups to install equipment to follow their own faith and service.

Article from the Washington DC Examiner Newspaper:

Editorial: No favors for Muslim studentsThe principle of separation of church and state in tax-funded institutions has been upheld in more than a dozen Supreme Court rulings. As a result, overtly religious symbols of mainstream religions such as Nativity scenes, the Ten Commandments and menorahs have largely been banished from the public square on the grounds that they offend unbelievers.But many public colleges and universities have been quietly accommodating some students’ religious activities while ignoring or even trampling on the First Amendment rights of other students.  

 

For example, last year administrators at the Minneapolis Community and Technical College banned a coffee cart operator from playing music “tied to Christmas,” but approved the use of tax dollars to install special basins for Wudu so that Muslims could ritually wash their feet before prayer. College President Phil Davis defended this glaring double standard by absurdly insisting that “the foot-washing facilities are not about religion, they are about customer service and public safety.” At least a dozen other public colleges and universities in the nation have also installed Wudu facilities, including George Mason University in Fairfax.

A GMU spokesman said there were no complaints from other student religious groups when the Muslim Student Association was given permission by administrators to convert a common third-floor meditation room into a makeshift mosque. Would Campus Crusade for Christ be allowed to turn the facility into a makeshift Resurrection scene? The spokesman acknowledged that the other student religious groups have to reserve rooms or meet off campus when they want to pray together. At another state-supported school in Virginia, The College of William & Mary President Gene Nichol recently agreed to return the cross he had removed last year from the college’s historically Christian chapel only after angry alumni threatened to withhold millions in donations.

The paradox strains logic. Church and state remain firmly separated on campuses where the majority of students are Christian, Jewish or of no faith, but administrators toss the principle right out the window to satisfy a minority of Muslim students. Many college officials are granting prerogatives to Muslim students in the United States and Canada that are not permitted to other groups. For instance, the Ontario Human Rights Commission regards failure to make special accommodations for Muslim students, including inserting “Islamic perspectives” into secular curriculums like nursing and finance, as a form of “Islamophobia.” Expect similar political correct demands soon on American campuses.

This Orwellian, some-religions-are-more-equal-than-others approach is both hypocritical and discriminatory. The Constitution, to say nothing of basic fairness, demands that the same rules regarding the public expression of religious faith be applied equally to everybody. And for once wouldn’t it be refreshing to see a college president show some real backbone when faced with unreasonable demands from activist minority students seeking exclusive privileges?

Read Other Articles About Muslims on Examiner.com

Northern Virginia blogs Islam

Wahrheit of Illumination Inc. speaks out for facing reality in the UK and keeping actual history in the history books - like the history of the Holocaust and of the Crusades:

Acknowledge reality, or it will automatically work against you. Muslims who are offended by reality will never break out of the circumscribed mental world they live in, and teachers who try to deny historical reality to avoid giving “offence” are one small step from dhimmitude, if they’re not already there.

Not talking about it is not going to make the bad people who want to blow you to pieces go away. It’s going to work against you.

Perhaps only another deadly scene of people blown to bits and burned to ashes is going to concentrate the minds of the British people, or the Americans. You’d think that the relatively recent demonstrations of the consequences of ignoring reality in London and New York would have been enough.

But that’s just history now, right? How long until they’re afraid to talk about 7 July in British classrooms?

Read the whole thing…

the following was posted to the 910 Group Forum; I am copying in a portion of this referral.

… the Center for the Study of Political Islam ( http://www.cspipublishing.com/ ) is a group which has published a group of books: translations of the Koran, Hadith (Bukhari) and Sira, and put those works into the broader political context.

It’s enlightening reading, if nothing else; but their goals - in bringing the ultimate fascism of political Islam into broad view dovetails into our own goals, which is to protect civilization from this barbarism.