American jihad

American jihad, CAIR, Fort Dix 6, John Doe protection, War on Terror

Lawmaker: Fort Dix hero may need immunity

by  • 

This just in via the Washington Times: Members of Congress, the US Attorney that will prosecute the Fort Dix 6, and a leading Muslim-American praised New Jersey’s ‘John Doe’ today and say he is another example of why a measure to protect those who report suspicious activity from civil liability is needed. Yet leading “tough on terror” Democrats in Congress are stalling. I wonder why? Could it be they cair more about protecting the business interests of trial lawyers than the American public and our troops training at places like Ft Dix, NJ? Speaking of CAIR, they did the usual two-step:

“The events in Fort Dix are just another reminder of the need for this legislation,” said Rep. Steve Pearce, New Mexico Republican and author of legislation to protect “John Doe” passengers being sued by a group of Muslim imams for reporting their suspicious behavior. “We owe a debt of gratitude to this individual for alerting authorities to this potential terrorist attack and thwarting what could have been a terrible disaster. I can only imagine how grateful the men and women at Fort Dix and their families are for the courage of this person to take action when he saw something suspicious,” Mr. Pearce said.
…
“If we didn’t get that tip,” said U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie in New Jersey, “I couldn’t be sure what would happen.”

M. Zuhdi Jasser, director of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, agrees that the FBI’s arrests show the need to protect the principle of “see something, say something.” “What if this ‘John Doe’ had contrarily chosen to be silent due to a fear of litigation?” Dr. Jasser said.

Republican Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio and Homeland Security Committee Ranking Member Rep. Peter King of New York used a procedural tactic to add the Pearce language to a rail and transportation security bill in March. The amendment passed unanimously by Republicans and had bipartisan support from 105 Democrats. “A courageous act such as this one should not only be commended, it should be touted as a positive example of what citizens can do help prevent acts of terrorism here at home,” Mr. Boehner said. “It’s critical that Democrats leave the Pearce language intact during conference negotiations so this kind of citizen participation is fostered and protected, not discouraged and litigated,” Mr. Boehner said.

Drew Hammill, spokesman for Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, said “this is an issue for the conferees.” [Ed. — In other words, they are hoping to kill the bill in conference]

Jeffrey Addicott, director of the Terror Law Center at St. Mary’s law school, says there are no protections in place for those who report crimes, and that they can be sued for violating constitutional rights or for racial discrimination. “If the report does not have factual claims, you can be sued for violating someone’s civil rights,” Mr. Addicott said. [Ed. — The ‘John Doe’ legislation only protects those who act in good faith. It would not protect those who intentionally or maliciously file false reports]

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) praised the FBI for the arrests and said that it “seems clear that a potentially deadly attack has been averted.” “We continue to urge American Muslims to be vigilant in reporting any suspected criminal activities that could harm the safety and security of our nation.” But CAIR also said the press and public officials should “refrain from linking this case to the faith of Islam” and asked mosques and other Muslim institutions “to report any incidents of anti-Muslim backlash.” [Ed. — Translation: CAIR has lots of money and their lawyers need the work.]

6 imams, American jihad, CAIR, Islamofascists, Political wind

Air ‘Islam vs. Islamists’; let people decide

by  • 

As we mentioned Wednesday, the critically acclaimed producer of Islam vs. Islamists says PBS cancelled it’s airing for political reasons, in what seems like an attempt to silence Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, an outspoken critic of CAIR, the ‘Flying Imams,’ and the politicalization of America’s mosques. What is really behind the pulling of Islam vs. Islamists is it strikes too close to home. The radicals are right here in America and there is a growing Muslim voice of those who oppose them. That larger majority had to be silenced while CAIR and the radical imams seek their hidden agenda: the imposition of sharia law.

The Washington Times weighed in heavily, yesterday:

The stories speak for themselves when allowed to, but since the documentary is not yet available publicly, here’s a preview. Naser Khader in some respects is the heart of the film’s several threads. This Syrian-born Danish lawmaker’s life has been threatened for recommending (among other things) that would-be Islamists who want to establish Shariah in Denmark should move to Saudi Arabia. At issue is the alarming number of Muslims in Islamic communities in Western Europe and North America who expect to be governed by Islamic law in lieu of the established civil and criminal law in their new country. For simply asking the question, Mr. Khader’s life is imperiled. He is filmed travelling with heavy security.

There’s Mohamed Sifaoui. This Paris-based journalist risked his life filming an undercover expose on terrorists and extremists, including the covert filming of terrorists who vow to murder Mr. Khader if he ever reaches high office in Denmark. Mr. Sifaoui himself knows terrorist violence well. The Algerian newspaper he worked for years ago was bombed by militant terrorists moments after he left the building.

Or Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, the head of the Arizona Medical Association who condemns terrorist violence in a forum for democratic ideas, which he founded. He is depicted in the local newspaper, the Muslim Voice, as a rabid dog devouring innocent Muslims. There are others.

What distinguishes “Islam vs. Islamists,” beyond these stories of the embattled, is its access to and portrayals of critics, including violent ones, and the critics of like-minded moderates elsewhere. We are shown, inter alia, Abu Laban, the imam and late critic of Mr. Khader who toured the Middle East with cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed depicted as a pig to whip up resentment over the Danish cartoon controversy. Mr. Laban, who died of cancer in February, admits on camera that the cartoons he flourished for the maddened Islamist crowds never appeared in the newspaper Jyllands Posten. He is quoted denying that the terrorists filmed by Mr. Sifaoui vowing to kill Mr. Khader — his own associates — meant it is seriously. The threat “was a joke.” Some joke.

We see two men at intellectual and literal war with the West, the imprisoned Said Mansour, a Moroccan-born Dane, sentenced to three and a half years in prison on charges of propagandizing for terrorism, and Slimane Abderrahmane, the Algerian-born Dane held at Guantanamo for two years, who trained at al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan. Abderrahmane tells his interviewer that the moment a Muslim enters the Danish parliament he ceases to be Muslim, since only Allah can make law.
…
There will be legitimate criticism of this film. The haunting music which overlays the words and images of terrorist sympathizers is at times a bit overpowering. The lines are often less than clear distinguishing Muslims who may be sympathetic to Islamists and those who are not. Many Muslims themselves are not clear on this. This is one of the chief unresolved issues of Islam in the West today. Rather than bottle up this subject, we should let it loose.

“Islam vs. Islamists” is hard-hitting. Some will consider it biased. We don’t. The American people are grown up. They can handle it.

Who cannot ‘handle it’ are the radical leadership at the Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), their allies in Congress, and the latter’s political puppets at PBS who decided to pull Islam vs. Islamists. They want both Muslims and non-Muslims to maintain the ignorant belief that CAIR, after receiving millions of dollars from foreign sources and provided the lawyers for the “Flying Imams,’ is the moderate voice of America’s Muslims.

They cannot tolerate a comparison of what the American Islamic Forum for Democracy professes and the intimidation tactics used against them, right here in America. PBS is federally funded to provide the public with information and in furtherance of free speech yet apparently it does not want the public to know that 5 of the 6 ‘Flying Imams’ promote political action while leading the faithful in prayer in mosques near to Dr. Jasser.