Several of the videos also praise the military wing of HAMAS, the Izz ad-Din al Qassam Brigades, as well as Hamas spiritual leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin.

Other Clips from Videos:
Caption: “I am from Hamas.”
Man singing: “I am from Hamas.”
Caption: “Hamas, a continuous revolution.”
Caption: “Do not throw away your weapons.”

At the end of two of these fundraising videos, a flashing banner rose from the bottom of the screen urging people to donate to The Occupied Land Fund, the name used by HLF until the early 1990s.

*** Khaybar, an oasis near Medina inhabited mainly by Jews in the 7th century. In the year 628, Muhammad led the Muslims against it, defeating the Jews in battle and subjugating the survivors, who would later be expelled from Arabia. The chant implies that history will repeat itself.

Some Recent CTB Posts on Pakistan and Terrorist Violence:

Pakistan: Revenge Attacks on Chinese Nationals and Security Personnel, July 19, 2007

Operation Lal Deen: Rising at Pakistan’s Red Mosque, July 6, 2007

Peshawar Hotel Blast Rocks Volatile Pakistan, May 15, 2007

Islam and Suicide Terrorism in Pakistan, May 14, 2007

In a video recording, made roughly 15 years ago, obtained by the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT), Siddiqi exhorted the successes of violent jihad, proclaiming:

When people really carry on Jihad, they carry on the Islam in its peak in its totality. And that’s why in the hadith the Prophet (SAS) said (Arabic), ‘No people have ever neglected Jihad except they became humiliated.’ And people leave, renounce Jihad, they became humiliated. That means in order to gain the honor, Jihad is the path, Jihad is the way to receive the honor.

[…]

The most first and foremost the most important effect of Jihad on Afghanistan on the Muslim Ummah at large because I do not see that Jihad of Afghanistan, only the victory of the Afghan people. Certainly it is the victory of the Afghan people, but I see it as the victory of the Muslim Ummah at large. I see it as the victory of Islam and in that sense it brings, aychsa, dignity and honor to the whole Muslim Ummah.

I can see that there is already some impact after Jihad in Afghanistan in the Intifada movement in Palestine. With this, more courage, more strength, more confidence and shall I even say that in a few years we will be celebrating with each other the victory of Islam in Palestine. Insh’allah, we shall be celebrating the coming of the Masjid al-Aqsa under the Islamic rule. We shall be celebrating insh’allah the coming of Jerusalem and the whole land of Palestine insh’allah and the establishment of the Islamic State throughout that area.

And as I first reported in American Jihad, at the Jerusalem Day Rally in Washington DC, October 28, 2000, Siddiqi said:

The people of Palestine, they were not given the right to return to their homes and to their land, like any refugees. Any people that you find that have occupied land, they have the right to return to their own land, they are not given that right. They are not given that right to go back. Jerusalem, which is the heart of the whole issue, Jerusalem has not been solved. There have been all types of accuses (sic) have been made. The land of Aqsa, the land of Jerusalem, is the land that belongs to Muslims.

The United States of America is directly and indirectly responsible for the plight of the Palestinian people. Our government is responsible for plenty of the injustice that is going on there. The United States is the greatest supporter of Israel – economically, militarily, and politically. We give billions of dollars to the State of Israel.

Our Congress and our media is blaming the victims, not the oppressors. The Palestinian demonstrators are not violent people. The violent people are those who are oppressing them day and night and for many years. We want to say to our government to respect the right of the Palestinian people. Do not be the blind supporters of oppressors. And al-Aqsa, my brothers and sisters, is our sacred mosque. It belongs to Islam. It belongs to all the Muslims of the world, 1.5 billion Muslims of the world, it belongs to them. We cannot accept any type to the al-Aqsa mosque. We cannot give up Jerusalem. Jerusalem belongs to Islam. We want justice and peace. We want justice for ourselves and as for everyone else. We do not want anyone mistreated. We want respect for all holy places and for all people.

We want our government to be on the side of justice and not on the side of oppression. We want our government not to be a blind supporter of Israel. We want our government to stop feeding the Israeli war machinery. We want to awaken the conscience of America. America has to learn that because if you remain on the side of injustice, the wrath of God will come. Please! Please all Americans, do you remember that, that Allah is watching everyone. God is watching everyone. If you continue doing injustice, and tolerating injustice, the wrath of God will come.

In the comments to Siddiqi’s post, he is asked whether he said the above (in particular, “America has to learn ... if you remain on the side of injustice, the wrath of God will come. Please, all Americans. Do you remember that? ... If you continue doing injustice, and tolerate injustice, the wrath of God will come.” By “injustice,” he meant U.S. support for Israel.”) and Siddiqi replied that the “statement is mutilated and distorted.”

Rather than being “mutilated and distorted,” Siddiqi said exactly that and more, calling for the destruction of Israel by “peaceful” means (the right of return), as well as violent means, supporting the violent jihad of the Palestinian terrorist groups and their suicide bombings, that Siddiqi euphemistically calls an “uprising,” and further stated that Jerusalem belongs to Muslims and Muslims alone, justifying violence to acquire it, which is all in contrast to his message of brotherly love and inter-faith relations that the Post and Newsweek uncritically published.

In a September 2002 speech at an ISNA convention, Siddiqi stated of 9/11, well after Osama Bin Laden took credit for the attacks:

It is, the point is that we said, whosoever did it, we condemn it. We did not say it is Muslims who did it. We did not say this and that. But the point is that whosoever did it, it was wrong. And this is a basic point … We cannot say in surety whoever did it or not. But the point is that if the name of Islam is taken, we have to clarify the name of Islam.

Yet Siddiqi’s radicalism is not limited to his own statements, but also to the company he keeps. In January of this year, the New Yorker published an article profiling a famous former congregant at Siddiqi’s mosque, Adam Gadahn (a.k.a. Azzam the American), which included the fact that Siddiqi had hosted the notorious Blind Sheikh to speak about jihad:

In December, 1992, Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, a prominent Egyptian cleric and Islamic radical also known as the Blind Sheikh, visited the Islamic Society to lecture about jihad, and Siddiqi sat beside him to translate. Abdel Rahman dismissed nonviolent definitions of jihad as weak. He stressed that a number of unspecified enemies had “united themselves against Muslims” and that fighting them was obligatory. “If you are not going to the jihad, then you are neglecting the rules of Allah,” he said. The opportunities for jihad were virtually everywhere, ranging from apostate Middle Eastern regimes to “those who are taking the wealth of Muslims from petrol or from oil.” As he spoke, a red toolbox, with a slit cut into its lid for donations, was passed around the room. Videotapes of the lecture were later offered for sale at the society’s bookstore. (emphasis added)

Several months afterward, Abdel Rahman was indicted for helping to plot the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. One of his fatwas, issued from prison in 1998, became central to Al Qaeda’s justification of mass violence. (When I asked J. Stephen Tidwell, the assistant director of the F.B.I.’s Los Angeles division, about Siddiqi’s association with Abdel Rahman, he said, “We have a very strong relationship with Dr. Siddiqi. You do have to put it into the context of back then.” Siddiqi told me that Abdel Rahman “was touring, and some people insisted that he should be there.”

Also of note is the FBI’s insistence, despite copious evidence of his radicalism, of partnering with Siddiqi. This problem of legitimizing radical Muslims goes far beyond the media's involvement: it extends right up through the highest levels of our top law enforcement agency.

Once again, sadly, we are left to come to the same conclusion: one must be very suspicious when the media and the FBI tell you they have found, or are dealing with, mainstream Muslim leaders, involved in “inter-faith” activities. They are often suckers for polite smiles and Western business suits, but pull back the covers, and the truth is, all too often, much more sinister.

Amazingly, unlike today, where Islam is mentioned in U.S. court cases on a daily basis, references to the religion did not appear in many American judicial opinions - either federal or state - until the 1960s. Prior to that time, I found one 19th Century case in which a rather ponderous judge engaged in some written philosophical (and irrelevant) musings on the development of law on whether the government should reimburse private parties for land that was destroyed when the government built a canal. Canal Appraisers of State of New York v. People ex rel. Tibbits, 17 Wend. 571, Lock. Rev. Cas. 51, 1836 WL 2823, N.Y., 1836. Then, in the 1950s, a couple of state courts issued opinions in cases where persons wanted to change their names to monikers more appropriate to their Muslim faith. In re Taminosian, 97 Neb. 514, 150 N.W. 824, Am.Ann.Cas. 1917A, 116 (Neb. 915); Application of Wing, 4 Misc.2d 840, 157 N.Y.S.2d 333 (N.Y.City Ct. 1956).

The issue of Islam in American courts started to take hold in the 1960s, mainly arising in two contexts: (1) the religious rights of Muslim individuals incarcerated in American prisons, and (2) the claim by American Muslims that they should be exempted from mandatory service in the U.S. military because of their religious beliefs. Each type of case involved courts struggling with Islamic doctrine, but only the second resulted in the Supreme Court entering squarely into the controversy.

The early Muslim prison cases, by and large, involved the growing popularity of the Nation of Islam (NOI) among incarcerated Americans, where courts tried to decide whether the Black Muslims, then led by Elijah Mohammad, qualified as a religion, as opposed to a nationalist cult. Although the military draft cases also involved the NOI, the courts’ focus was on the sincerity of the individual’s religious beliefs, rather than the relationship between the NOI’s brand of Islam and that practiced by Muslims in other parts of the world. This meant that these cases are more interesting to our current debates about Islam than the prison cases.

The claim of American Muslims to “conscientious objector” exemption from military service was undoubtedly hurt by the first controversy reported in American case books. Wallace Delaney Muhammad was granted contentious objector status in 1955, but he then proceeded to harm the cause of future Muslim-American claimants by informing his draft board in 1957 that he would refuse to participate in meaningful civilian alternative to national security at an Illinois hospital. On May 20, 1958, he was convicted of draft evasion and sentenced to three years in prison. U.S. v. Mohammad, 288 F.2d 236 (7th Cir. 1961).

The boxer formerly known as Cassius Clay registered for the draft in 1960. In 1964, he converted to Islam and became a member of the Nation of Islam, and thereafter became known as Muhammad Ali. On February 28, 1966, facing induction, he filed a conscientious objector status form with local draft board. Clay v. U.S., 397 F.2d 901 (5th Cir. 1968). Up to that time, including the Mohammad decision, there had been only four cases of Muslim-Americans claiming conscientious objector status resulting in court decisions. Moore v. U.S., 302 F.2d 929 (9th Cir. 1962); U.S. v. Taylor, 351 F.2d 228 (6th Cir. 1965), and U.S. v. Al-Majied Muhammad, 364 F.2d 223 (4th Cir. 1966). Six months later, Ali tried to decrease his odds of going to Vietnam by claiming to be a credentialed minister for the NOI. Clay v. U.S., 397 F.2d 901 (5th Cir. 1968).

The publicity surrounding his case meant that American courts were, more than in the prison cases, going to have to carefully delve into Islamic doctrine and what it says about the acceptability of violence. And yes, there would be wiretaps.

Ali's claim was used by several other would-be Muslim military inductees of the era. The wording in these claims was so consistent as to suggest either central planning by the NOI or an effort by other draft-eligible Muslims to copy Ali‘s example: he was a Muslim, and he and his fellows did not believe that they should be forced to take part in wars conducted by the United States, unless the Government would agree to give them their own territory, in which event they would have something to fight for. Clay v. U.S., 397 F.2d 901 (5th Cir. 1968). See also U.S. v. Al-Majied Muhammad, 364 F.2d 223 (4th Cir. 1966); Carson v. U.S., 411 F.2d 631 (5th Cir. 1969); U.S. v. Orr, 474 F.2d 1365 (2nd Cir 1973); U.S. v. Lemons, 480 F.2d 1214 (5th Cir. 1973)

Ali’s claim did not impress his local draft board in Houston, where he had moved from Kentucky, nor the higher authorities. On March 6, 1967, the Presidential Appeal Board unanimously voted to classify him 1-A. Three weeks later, Local Board No. 61, Houston, Texas ordered Ali to report to it on April 28, 1967, for delivery to the induction station. He reported as ordered, for but declined to submit to induction on the grounds of his religious beliefs as a minister of the Islam Religion. He was indicted on May 8, and convicted June 20, 1967. Clay v. U.S., 397 F.2d 901 (5th Cir. 1968).

It was then that the wiretaps came into play. It turns out Ali was captured on warrantless FBI electronic surveillance years earlier, talking by phone to some people the FBI was interested in at the time - Elijah Mohammad and Martin Luther King. When this became known, the Supreme Court ordered the lower courts to re-open his case to see if the wiretaps either tainted his prosecution or were helpful to his defense, in which case they should have been turned over to him. Clay v. U.S., 400 U.S. 990, 91 S.Ct. 457 (Mem).

It turned out the wiretaps, which were not court-authorized (this was before FISA), were not related to the issue of Ali’s guilt, though they are interesting historical artifacts.

On March 24, 1964, Ali spoke by phone to Elijah Muhammad. Elijah said he wanted to see Ali as he was going to make a minister out of him when he quit thinking of fighting all the time. Elijah told Ali would make a better minister than a fighter anyhow. Elijah then said he would contact him when he had time to talk to him. Elijah also told him to “keep quiet.” U.S. v. Clay, 386 F.Supp. 926 (S.D. Texas 1969)

On September 4, 1964, Ali spoke by phone to Martin Luther King. King wished him well on his recent marriage. Ali invited King to be his guest at his next championship fight, King said he would like to attend. Ali said that he is keeping up with King that King is his brother, and that he was with him 100 percent but can't take any chances, and that King should take care of himself, that King is known world wide and should “watch out for them whities,” adding that people in Nigeria, Egypt, and Ghani had asked about King. Id.

A federal judge in Houston, on July 14, 1969, found that the wiretaps did not taint the government’s evidence in the Ali prosecution, that he was not entitled to further discovery, and that he did not have the right challenge the legal or constitutional basis for the wiretaps. U.S. v. Clay, 386 F.Supp. 926 (S.D. Texas 1969). On July 6, 1970, this ruling was affirmed on appeal. U.S. v. Clay, 430 F.2d 165 (5th Cir. 1970). It was all set up for the Supreme Court. For the first time in American history, the justices would undertake analysis of Islamic religious doctrine and what it says about individual obligation to undertake or avoid organized violence, as this was relevant to Ali‘s case.

The Court, in another case, had recently determined that the Department of Justice had been using the wrong standard in ruling on conscientious objector claims: if the claims were “political or racial,” they were not religious. The Court concluded that the claimaint's beliefs need not emanate from an actual religioun to qualify, and the test was whether they were held sincerely and were religious-like, even if not styled as part of an organized system of a recognized religious tradition. Welsh v. United States, 398 U.S. 333, 90 S.Ct. 1792, 26 L.Ed.2d 308 (1970).

According to the Court in the Ali case, in order to qualify for classification as a conscientious objector, a registrant must satisfy three basic tests: (1) that he is conscientiously opposed to war in any form; (2) that this opposition is based upon religious training and belief, as the term has been construed in Supreme Court decisions; and (3) that this objection is sincere. Under recent Supreme Court precedent, the Selective Service System must be concerned with the registrant as an individual, not with its own interpretation of the dogma of the religious sect, if any, to which he may belong.

In the Ali matter, the Department of Justice had had concluded that “the teachings of the Nation of Islam preclude fighting for the United States not because of objections to participation in war in any form but rather because of political and racial objections to policies of the United States as interpreted by Elijah Muhammad. * * * It is therefore our conclusion that registrant's claimed objections to participation in war insofar as they are based upon the teachings of the Nation of Islam, rest on grounds which primarily are political and racial.” However, the Court noted that the record shows that Ali’s beliefs are founded on tenets of the Muslim religion as he understands them, and there was no question that they were sincere. Thus, according to the Supreme Court, “the Department was simply wrong as a matter of law in advising that the petitioner's beliefs were not religiously based and were not sincerely held.” Ali’s conviction was reversed. Clay v. U.S., 403 U.S. 698, 91 S.Ct. 2068 (1971).

The more interesting part of the ruling, in terms of its description of Islamic doctrine, came from the concurring opinion of Justice William Douglas, who used the opportunity to dip into the Holy Koran.

“In the present case there is no line between ‘carnal’ was and ‘spiritual’ or symbolic wars,“ Douglas wrote. “Those who know the history of the Mediterranean littoral know that the jihad of the Moslem was a bloody war.”

Douglas noted that Ali had testified that he was:

sincere in every bit of what the Holy Qur'an and the teachings of the Honorable Elijah Muhammad tell us and it is that we are not to participate in wars on the side of nobody who-on the side of non believers, and this is a Christian country and this is not a Muslim country, and the Government and the history and the facts shows that every more toward the Honorable Elijah Muhammad is made to distort and is made to ridicule him and is made to condemn him and the Government has admitted that the police of Los Angeles were wrong about attacking and killing our brothers and sisters and they were wrong in Newark, New Jersey, and they were wrong in Louisiana, and the outright, every day oppressors and enemies are the people as a whole, the whites of this nation. So, we are not, according to the Holy Qur'an, to even as much as aid in passing a cup of water to the-even a wounded. I mean, this is in the Holy Qur'an, and as I said earlier, this is not me talking to get the draft board-or to dodge nothing. This is there before I was borned [sic] and it will be there when I'm dead but we believe in not only that part of it, but all of it.

Justice Douglas then got into the concept of jihad:

O ye who believe! Shall I guide you to a gainful trade which will save you from painful punishment? Believe in Allah and His Apostle and carry on warfare (jihad) in the path of Allah with your possessions and your persons. That is better for you. If ye have knowledge, He will forgive your sins, and will place you in the Gardens beneath which the streams flow, and in fine houses in the Gardens of Eden: that is the great gain.

Thus God propoundeth unto men their examples. When ye encounter the unbelievers, strike off their heads, until ye have made a great slaughter among them; and bind them in bonds; and either give them a free dismission afterwards, or exact a ransom; until the war shall have laid down its arms. This shall ye do. Verily if God pleased he could take vengeance on them, without your assistance; but he commandeth you to fight his battles, that he may prove the one of you by the other. And as to those who fight in defence of God's true religion, God will not suffer their works to perish: he will guide them, and will dispose their heart aright; and he will lead them into paradise, of which he hath told them. O true believers, if ye assist God, by fighting for his religion, he will assist you against your enemies; and will set your feet fast.

Justice Douglas noted that war is not the exclusive type of jihad, and that there is action by the believer's heart, by his tongue, by his hands, as well as by the sword. Regarding the military type, Douglas quoted again from the Islamic scriptures:

The jihad, in other words, is a sanction against polytheism and must be suffered by all non-Muslims who reject Islam, or, in the case of the dhimmis (Scripturaries), refuse to pay the poll tax. The jihad, therefore, may be defined as the litigation between Islam and polytheism; it is also a form of punishment to be inflicted upon Islam's enemies and the renegades from the faith. Thus in Islam, as in Western Christendom, the jihad is the bellum justum.

Far from harming Ali’s claim, this helped him, for Justice Douglas noted that “The jihad in the Moslem's counterpart of the ‘just’ war as it has been known in the West. Neither Clay nor Negre should be subject to punishment because he will not renounce the ‘truth’ of the teaching of his respective church that wars indeed may exist which are just wars in which a Moslem or Catholic has a respective duty to participate…. What Clay's testimony adds up to is that he believes only in war as sanctioned by the Koran, that is to say, a religious war against nonbelievers. All other wars are unjust.”

This wonderful concept meant, to Justice Douglas, that Muhammad Ali was entitled to avoid Vietnam by availing himself of conscientious objector status.

So we have the Supreme Court, in 1971 - a full 30 years before 9/11 - coming to terms with the Islamic concept of jihad, and worrying about the FBI's use of wiretaps (which Justice Douglas, in another opinion of the same era, described as “a dirty business” and a “disease.” Heutsche v. United States, 414 U.S. 898, 899 (1973)).

These cases are more reason, if there were any doubts, that people concerned with the violent underpinnings of Islam and the efficacy of American counterterrorism efforts should renew their library cards.

FBI Agent Lara Burns also testified Thursday, describing an interview she had with defendant Mufid Abdulqader on April 5, 2002. Abdulqader claimed that, before moving to Dallas in 1995, he didn’t know anybody at HLF except his cousin, co-defendant Akram Mishal. But records seized from HLF offices contradicted Abdulqader’s claim. Prosecutors offered into evidence a 1990 American Express bill in the name of defendant Shukri Abu Baker and the Occupied Land Fund. The bill included travel charges for Abdulqader, who performed in a musical troupe, known as Al Sakra, at fundraisers for HLF throughout the country. The same credit card bill listed identical itineraries for other members of the band.

The Occupied Land Fund was an earlier name for HLF.

Abdulqader also claimed that he was merely a volunteer for HLF and sometimes served as a fundraiser, but that he was never compensated anything more than for travel expenses. Again, documentation from HLF offices seemed to contradict him. Prosecutors presented checks written from HLF to Mufid Abdulqader for “services.” To emphasize the distinction, the government also included checks made out to Abdulqader for “travel.”

The testimony of Agent Burns is expected to last for the next several days. The trial resumes on Monday.

Who is Fawaz Mushtaha?
In addition to his IAP work, Mushtaha was also the president of Light Star Travel Agency in Virginia and contact for The Dar El-Eiman Tour Group which share an address and phone number. Dar El-Eiman identifies itself as a Hajj agency--planning trips to Saudi Arabia. According to their 2002 brochure:

Dar El-Eiman announces that the following well-respected imams and scholars will be accompanying this year’s Hajj Trip.

Among the 4 scholars listed:

**Muhammad al-Hanooti: A former IAP president who gave a speech in 1998 in his capacity as an imam stating:

At the moment, Dar al-Hijra [the name of the mosque he is addressing] is the greatest example in sacrifice, execution and in carrying out the Jihad that Allah calls for. Allah will give us the victory over our tyrannical enemies in our country. Allah, the infidel Americans and British are fighting against you. Allah, the curse of the infidel Americans and British are fighting against you. Allah, the curse of Allah will become true on the infidel Jews and on the tyrannical Americans.

**Dr. Salah Sultan: Whose "vision", according to his online resume, is: "To live happily. To die as a martyr." On May 17, 2006, on al-Risala TV, Dr. Sultan praised Yemenite sheikh Dr. Al-Zindani, who has been categorized by the U.S. government as a "Specially Designated Global Terrorist" for "his support to bin Laden and al-Qaeda."

In her cross examination, Nancy Hollander, defense attorney for Shukri Abu Baker, focused on Levitt’s employment with the Washington Institute, which was founded by Martin Indyk, as a way of questioning his objectivity. Indyk previously served as U.S. Ambassador to Israel. Hollander also asked Levitt a series of questions about his relationship with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and the Jewish Federation, both of which have hosted Levitt as a speaker

Earlier that day, prosecutors in the terror-support trial against the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) had opened their case Wednesday morning by calling Dr. Levitt, an expert witness to explain HAMAS structure to jurors and detail its operations in the United States.

Levitt walked jurors through HAMAS history, explaining how it broke off from the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood and rose to power in the Palestinian Authority in January 2006.

HLF and seven of its top officials are charged with channeling material support to the Palestinian terrorist group. Five of those officials are on trial in a Dallas courtroom while two others live abroad and are considered fugitives.

Levitt previously served as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis at the US Department of Treasury and as a Counterterrorism Intelligence Analyst for the Federal Bureau of Investigation. His latest book “HAMAS: Politics, Charity, and Terrorism in the Service of Jihad,” directly speaks to the charges facing HLF. He has testified in other criminal trials in the United States including US v Marzook et al in Chicago and US v Al-Arian et al in Tampa.

His morning testimony focused on delineating HAMAS’ origins, and beliefs as spelled out in the group’s charter and identifying some of its key players. "Hamas seeks to establish an Islamic Palestinian state in all of Israel, Gaza and the West Bank," he said.

The Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist organization with representation throughout the world, “is very active in the United States,” Levitt said. It is represented in the United States as the Muslim American Society (MAS) which was founded in 1993 in Illinois and maintains branch offices throughout the United States in at least 27 cities.

In an extensive Chicago Tribune story on the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in the U.S [free registration required], the origins are described:

...the U.S. Brotherhood operated under the name Muslim American Society, according to documents and interviews. One of the nation's major Islamic groups, it was incorporated in Illinois in 1993 after a contentious debate among Brotherhood members. Some wanted the Brotherhood to remain underground, while others thought a more public face would make the group more influential… When the leaders voted, it was decided that
Brotherhood members would call themselves the Muslim American Society, or MAS,
according to documents and interviews. An undated internal memo instructed MAS
leaders on how to deal with inquiries about the new organization. If asked, "Are you the
Muslim Brothers?" leaders should respond that they are an independent group called the
Muslim American Society. "It is a self-explanatory name that does not need further
explanation. And if the topic of terrorism were raised, leaders were told to say that they
were against terrorism but that jihad was among a Muslim's ‘divine legal rights’ to be used
to defend himself and his people and to spread Islam.

NAIT was named by the HLF prosecutors as a Muslim Brotherhood group and as an un-indicted co-conspirator in the case.

Tuesday, representatives of the MAS Dallas chapter protested outside of the Earle Cabell Courthouse against the trial, which they dub a witch hunt brought on by post-September 11 Islamophobia. Mahdi Bray, the Executive Director of the MAS Freedom Foundation, headquartered in Washington DC, flew to Dallas for a press conference which took place during the lunch break. During the trial proceedings yesterday, Bray sat in the courtroom with family and friends of the defendants.

The Government’s questioning of Dr. Levitt will continue this afternoon.

Following the Government’s opening statement, attorneys for the five defendants: Shukri Abu Baker, Mohammad El Mezain, Ghassan Elashi, Mufid Abdulqader, and Abdulrahman Odeh, asserted that the prosecution’s proof was based solely on associational evidence which will not prove that the defendants gave material support to HAMAS. Furthermore, the defense claimed that the Zakat Committees, which the prosecution mentioned, had never been designated as terrorist organizations and that they are even registered with the Palestinian Authority. Each one maintained that his client was a good, decent, law-abiding citizen who merely wanted to extend aid to people whose lives had been hardened by the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Nancy Hollander, attorney for Shukri Abu Baker, stated that following the US designation of HAMAS as a terrorist organization in 1995, HLF officials “were so concerned that they hired lawyers and went to the government and said that they wanted to make sure that they were on the right side of the law, but that they were never told to stop working with anyone because they were not breaking any laws.”

Joshua Dratel, attorney for Mohammad El Mezain, picking up where Hollander left off, maintained that the Government’s case is about “quantity, not quality.” Dratel claimed that the Government wants to make this case about association and family relationships, which are not crimes, as substitutes for evidence, citing our First Amendment rights to free speech and assembly.

The case is expected to last several months and will include testimony from expert witnesses from the United States and abroad, evidence from wiretaps and material obtained through search warrants, bank records, and video tapes as the Government tries to prove its case that the defendants knowingly engaged in a 14 year conspiracy to support HAMAS from right here in our very own country.

Ongoing Problem of Jihadist Unfiltered Propaganda Using News Media

This is not a new issue, and as Steven Emerson points out in his July 24 posting, there are "American newspaper editors advocating on behalf of Hamas", such as former public editor for the Chicago Tribune.

In March 2004, Newsweek published an interview with Hizbullah supporter Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah, where Newsweek acknowledged his "role as the spiritual leader of Hizbullah" but stated that he was "no longer so closely associated" with Hizbullah. The Newsweek interview focused on the U.S. 2004 elections, Iraq, suicide bombers, "the Jewish lobby" and his view that President Bush should go "to a psychiatrist".

Nearly a year earlier, on April 7, 2003, Newsweek again did an interview with Hizbullah supporter Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah.

In both cases, the interviews serve as functional "columns" for Hizbullah "supporter" Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah to provide a mainstream media source for his viewpoints, unchallenged and undebated, without any references to Hizbullah as U.S. Government-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization, but only as a "resistance" organization.

On March 23, 2006, the U.S. Department of the Treasury designated Hizbullah propaganda organization Al-Manar as a "Specially Designated Global Terrorist Entity" and as an "Arm of Hizballah Terrorist Network". In this designation, the U.S. Department of the Treasury stated that "Al Manar and al Nour are the media arms of the Hizballah terrorist network and have facilitated Hizballah's activities".

The challenge is, with a nation of free speech and a free press, what actions apply to US news media organizations that pick up where the now prohibited Al-Manar and other propaganda organizations leave off.

Sources:

April 30, 2007 - U.S. State Department Foreign Terrorist Organization Listing

July 24, 2007 - U.S. Department of Treasury - Specially Designated Nationals List (SDN)

July 24, 2007: Washington Post: Lebanese Cleric Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah - Jihad is Self-Defense Against Aggression

July 23, 2007 - Douglas Farah: What is Missing in the Current Debate on Islam

July 24, 2007 - Steven Emerson: Tribune's Former Public Editor: Hamas Operative Is An Asset To Chicago Community

June 22, 2007 - Reuters: Hamas scores publicity coup in U.S.

June 20, 2007 - Washington Post: Engage With Hamas - We Earned Our Support - Ahmed Yousef

June 20, 2007 - New York Times: What Hamas Wants - Ahmed Yousef

November 1, 2006 - New York Times Editorial: "Pause for Peace" - by Ahmed Yousef

May 12, 2004 - Newsweek: "From Mistake to Mistake" A leading Shiite cleric discusses Iraq, suicide bombers, U.S. elections -- and why he thinks George W. Bush should see a psychiatrist - interview with Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah

April 7, 2003 - Newsweek: War in Iraq - "‘We Don't Trust America" - interview with Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah

March 23, 2006 - U.S. Department of Treasury: U.S. Designates Al-Manar as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist Entity Television Station is Arm of Hizballah Terrorist Network

In 2006, Wycliff took to his paper’s editorial page yet again, writing:

Muhammad Salah has been on my conscience for the last 13 years. What has troubled me about the Salah case from the beginning was the secrecy of it all. He and a couple of colleagues were arrested by Israeli military authorities during a trip to the occupied territories back in 1993. They were held incommunicado from the beginning, and the U.S. government seemed strangely lackadaisical about the whole business.

For that effort, Wycliff was presented a community service award by the Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago, whose Chairman kicked off the ceremony by announcing, “Given that KindHearts, a Muslim Charity in Toledo, Ohio, has [recently] had its assets frozen without due trial or process, these awards have become even more meaningful.” An ironic, yet telling statement, since KindHearts, like Salah, was the target of law enforcement because of its extensive links to the Hamas terrorist organization.

Just to remind everyone, the jury found Salah guilty, and the judge sentenced Salah, because he (see page 35):

corruptly endeavored to influence, obstruct and impede the due administration of justice by submitting to the United States District Court, through lawyers acting under the authority of the court, false and misleading verified answers to interrogatories propounded on defendant SALAH in a civil suit filed against defendant SALAH and others which answers falsely stated, among other things, that defendant SALAH had never provided or delivered funds for the purpose of supporting Hamas.

That’s right, the jury found Salah was a member of Hamas and had perjured himself about handling and delivering Hamas funds. Despite this, after having publicly advocating for Salah for years from his perch at the Tribune, Wycliff was not deterred from offering more public support for Salah, continuing in his letter:

I got to know Mr. Salah and his family initially as a result of my writing about him, first as editorial page editor of the Chicago Tribune and later as public editor. Maybe I am naïve, but I was appalled to see my government going after a citizen in defiance of all the due-process principles I was taught decades ago in civics classes: a trial and conviction before punishment; presumption of innocence, the right to confront one’s accusers, and so forth.

At this point, one can question Wycliff’s grasp on reality. It is obvious that Salah was in fact tried and convicted before he was punished, was presumed innocent before – and throughout - his trial (in fact, he was acquitted on a greater charge, even if trial watchers and followers of Salah’s career with Hamas feel he is guilty in fact, if not by the law), and, like all criminal defendants, had the opportunity to confront his accuser: the U.S. government.

How Wycliff missed these facts is a mystery, and it seems sour grapes to claim that a trial, in which Salah received an acquittal on a very serious racketeering charge, was somehow unfair to him. Perhaps Wycliff's years of ethically and morally questionable public advocacy on behalf of a Hamas operative has clouded his thought process.

At sentencing, Judge St. Eve told Salah, “Telling the truth is the bedrock of our judicial system and a slap on the wrist will not provide a deterrent.” If only Mr. Wycliff, the former public editor and long time editorial page editor of one of America’s major newspapers, felt the same way.

Three Arrests in Manchester under Terrorism Act
On July 18, BBC reported that "Three men have been arrested in Manchester for alleged terrorism-related activity. The three were arrested under the Terrorism Act 2000 and a fourth man was arrested under immigration legislation."

London Terror Police To Track Cars via CCTV Cameras
The July 17 London Times reported that "[p]olice in London are to be able to track vehicles entering the capital by accessing congestion charge cameras as a result of the 'enduring threat' of terrorist car bombings" and that the UK government "lifted restrictions on access to the cameras to enable the Metropolitan Police to view images in 'real time' from the 1,500 congestion charge cameras in the capital. "

UK Dirty Bomber and NYC Terror Plotter Dhiren Barot Returned to Prison
On July 12, AFP reported that, after being scalded with water and oil, British Jihadist Dhiren Barot "returned Saturday to his cell after hospital treatment for severe injuries suffered in prison" and that "[p]olice sources said Barot returned to Frankland Prison in Durham following treatment at Newcastle's Royal Victoria Infirmary in northeast England, where he had been admitted on Monday".

UK Ambulance Crews Get Radiation Detectors
The July 22 Daily Mail reports that "Britain's ambulance crews have been issued with personal radiation monitors in response to the growing threat of 'dirty bomb' attacks by terrorists. "

UK "Oil" Suspects Released
The July 20 London Times reported that two Bristol terror suspects arrested for due to belief that they had posed 50 liters of' hydrogen peroxide, were released when the containers were found to hold vegetable oil. The arrests were related to a drug investigation.

UK Politics - English in Mosques.
UK's political news has an ongoing debate regarding actions to discourage extremism in mosques including greater control over foreign imams. BBC previously reported that over 50% of UK's imams are from Pakistan. The July 22 Daily Telegraph reported Muslim politician views that "Mosques should be banned from recruiting foreign preachers unless they speak excellent English, according to a senior Muslim politician"; this idea has been condemned by the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB). The July 22 Daily Telegraph also quotes the MP as stating that "MCB was 'hindering the fight against terrorism'."

Sources:

July 22, 2007 - Daily Express: Terror case 'botched' by Australians

July 22, 2007 - DPA: Australia to deport Indian doctor held over British bomb plot

July 22, 2007 - Times of India: Australia denies new claims against Dr. Mohammed Haneef

July 22, 2007 - Australian Herald Sun: Haneef plot probed

July 22, 2007 - AFP: Bomb plotter back in British cell after hospital care: police

July 22, 2007 - Daily Telegraph: Preach in English, Muslim peer tells imams

July 20, 2007 - London Times: Dr. Mohammed Jamil Asha remanded over failed car bombings

July 20, 2007 - London Times: Bristol terror suspects released

July 19, 2007 - Daily Telegraph: M6 doctor charged over car bomb plot

July 19, 2007 - The Times of India: Cousins chatted before UK terror attack

July 19, 2007 - Daily Mail: Veiled protest as race-hate Muslims are jailed

July 19, 2007 - Daily Telegraph: Drop-out is jailed for missile blueprints

July 18, 2007 - Missile blueprint smuggler 'celebrates' jail term

July 18, 2007 - Daily Telegraph: Yassin Nassari's Terror Blueprints

July 18, 2007 - BBC: Three arrests under Terrorism Act - in Manchester for terrorism-related activity

July 18, 2007 (updated July 19) - Daily Telegraph: British radicals 'are a danger to America'

July 18, 2007 - London Times: Four jailed for hate crimes at cartoon protest

July 17, 2007 Daily Mail: Jail for the Muslim with blueprint for rocket

July 17, 2007 - Guardian: Two Britons in court on terrorism charges

July 17, 2007 - London Times: Terror police to track capital's cars

July 17, 2007 - BBC: Half of terror suspects released

July 17, 2007 - UK Sun: 4,000 are UK terror suspects

July 17, 2007 - NDTV: 'Indian suspect knew UK terror plot'

July 16, 2007 - Australian News: Sabeel Ahmed will plead not guilty

July 15, 2007 - Daily Telegraph: 4,000 in UK trained at terror camps

July 9, 2007 - Daily Telegraph: Nuclear alert by ex-head of MI5

May 5, 2007 - Daily Telegraph: US pushes for visa control on Pakistani Britons

April 7, 2007 - Daily Telegraph: Britain 'could stage another September 11'

So what was once good enough for Mr. Scheuer and also “found in the annals of Islamic history,” is now somehow “the last refuge of neoconservatives” and something that there is “no chance” of becoming a reality.

Of course, whether or not the Islamists will actually be able to re-establish a caliphate is hardly the point. It is the fact that al Qaeda is intent on trying to do just that – a point which Scheuer himself makes in his book – which is a driving force behind al Qaeda’s extremism and terrorism.

Never mind the fact that one of the ways al Qaeda seeks to generate support amongst Muslims, both for themselves and for the idea of the re-establishment of the caliphate, is by attacking Western targets, obscuring the fact that much of the damage and violence launched by bin Laden and his minions have been against other Muslims.

Mr. Scheuer needs to brush up on his Islamic history a bit, and he should start by reading his own book.

The reconciliation conference convenes against the backdrop of a rapidly deteriorating security situation. Even with Ugandan and Ethiopian boots on the ground, the streets of Mogadishu are plagued by fighting. Explosions and small arms fire targeting TFG and Ethiopian soldiers rock Mogadishu almost daily. For example, the Bakara market was hit by attacks on two straight days: on July 17 four civilians died in a blast at the market, and three people (including a Somali soldier) were killed in a July 18 grenade attack. Before that, bombs killed three and wounded thirteen on July 12 in attacks on TFG forces. On July 11, mortars were fired at the presidential palace.

Moreover, the conference itself is an attractive target. Militants announced in an intensive leafleting campaign that they would attack delegates. Shabaab, the ICU's youth wing, announced last weekend that anyone who went to the conference was "sentenced to death." Somali president Abdullahi Yusuf issued a blistering rejoiner, stating that "even if a nuclear bomb explodes in Mogadishu . . . it [the conference] will be held as scheduled." Mortars slammed neighborhoods near the conference site as it opened on Sunday, but they failed to hit their target. At least twelve mortars have been fired at the conference so far. Although the discussions continue, the delegates are taking risks every day that they attend.

The conference faces many obstacles to success, including the fact that the factions most responsible for insurgent violence in Somalia refuse to attend. Their boycott places a hard limit on the amount of stability the conference will be able to produce. The TFG's lack of resources is another obstacle: the TFG has lacked the resources to implement a countrywide federally-backed court system, and has been unable to provide the security that Somalis crave. Other countries have been hesitant to get involved, and aid has not been forthcoming. Since the TFG cannot collect tax revenue and is relying on reluctant external donors to resolve monetary concerns like its soldiers' wages, it is confronting a constant internal economic crisis.

While there are many discouraging signs, few things are certain in warfare, and it is too early to declare the TFG's defeat. At least one positive development has come from the conference: the participation of the Hawiye clan. Haji Iman Omar, the Hawiye clan leader, recently agreed to attend the conference -- reversing his previous refusal to attend. This is significant because Omar has been very anti-government, and has enjoyed a strong relationship with ICU. If Omar ends up changing this stance, that could have an effect on what other Hawiye clansmen do. Moreover, the ICU continues to use Omar's statements in their recruiting efforts. So far Omar has reporteldy said little at the conference, so it remains to be seen whether this conference will split him from the ICU.

The conference also at least gives the TFG the chance to try to put its house in order. The TFG -- essentially a power-sharing group with no unifying ideology -- has been riven by internal rivalries. This makes it difficult for the TFG to present a credible face internationally. If the TFG were able to resolve some of these internal disputes and put forward an image of unity and cohesion, that may help it to attract external donors and give the Somali people more confidence in the government. However, accomplishing this would require a level of competence that the TFG has never displayed.

Sasha Eckstein contributed research to this analysis.

This was not the only instance of militants targeting Chinese citizen in Pakistan. Around 9,000 workers (engineers, technicians and buisnessmen) from China who are engaged in various construction projects are facing the maximum brunt in the aftermath of Red Mosque fiasco. Radical elements in Pakistan believe China is instrumental in ultimate storming of the red mosque and influence Pakistan to clamp down Pro Taliban/ Uighurs elements hiding/operating in the country. Earlier on July 8, three Chinese nationals were killed in Peshawar by unidentified militants. Last month, students of seminaries inside Red Mosque raided a Chinese massage parlor in Islamabad and abducted seven Chinese nationals. However they were released with a strict warning not to involve in any immoral activities. Later Pakistan was urged by Chinese authority to safeguard Chinese citizen and their business interests in Pakistan.

With this deteriorating security situation, President Musharraf is actually in a catch-22 state whether to impose a state of emergency or not. Again, a shattered peace pact with tribal militants in Wazirstan and signs of Al Qaeda’s presence in its territory, make things further down for him. Now both Washington and Beijing are watching closely at the unfolding situation in Pakistan and Mush's next move.

Earlier incidents:

• July 17: Around 16 people died in a suicide attack just outside the venue of a lawyers rally in the capital Islamabad.

• July 15: Suicide attacks took place in the Swat and Dera Ismail Khan districts of NWFP targeting police personnel. The first attack took place at Matta (Swat) where around 20 people including 13 security personnel were killed. The next attack of the day was in Dera Ismail Khan Police Lines where over 25 people were killed (including 12 police personnel).

• July 14: A suicide bomber drove an explosive laden car into the convoy of Frontier Corps personnel near Miranshah, in North Waziristan. 23 FC personnel were killed and 27 others injured in the incident.

The term “Islamophobia” has been described by media and Islamic organization sources as the catalyst for this investigation and trial. Make no mistake about it; this trial is not about ethnic discrimination or political motivation. This trial’s sole consideration is the willful disbursement of funds by HLF to HAMAS, a terrorist organization. Islamic groups espousing “Islamophobia” or political motivation are providing a disservice to their constituencies. Islamic groups must stand up and honestly recognize the fact that their charities are vulnerable to exploitation by terrorist groups and have historically served as a significant source of funding for terrorists. It’s incumbent on the Islamic community to police its charities and ensure donations intended for charitable purposes are in fact used for charitable purposes and not in any way to support terrorism. Islamic charities serve a vital role and provide much needed relief to the poor and destitute.

There have been reports that the HLF case was driven by political pressure brought to bear by the Israelis. There is absolutely no truth to this allegation. This investigation was initiated by the FBI, specifically based on the predication that HLF was providing funds and other support to HAMAS. The Israelis have cooperated with the investigation but have no influence over the investigators or prosecutors.

Distinctions have been drawn between the social and military wings of HAMAS. As a result, it has been theorized that providing funds to the social or charitable wing of HAMAS should be acceptable because humanitarian aid is provided to the needy. The unfortunate reality is that no such distinction can be drawn. HAMAS, the organization, the entire organization, must be recognized and treated as a terrorist organization. Regardless of the use of funds, under all circumstances, HAMAS, the terrorist organization benefits. This is a heart wrenching and unfortunate reality for those who truly need aid. HAMAS must be held responsible for this because of the manner in which they use charities to support their terrorist activity. The U.S. government has rightly taken a hard line in this regard.

A theme gaining traction in the media has been that there is pressure on the government to win this trial. The government has suffered setbacks in two recent cases, which possessed similarities to this case. First was the Sami Al-Arian case in Tampa. Al-Arian was tried on charges of providing material support to the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. He was acquitted of certain charges and there was a hung jury concerning other charges. Al-Arian ultimately accepted a guilty plea to lesser charges. The second case occurred in Illinois where two subjects were found not guilty for providing material support to HAMAS. The reality is, neither of those cases factor into the HLF case. The prosecutors and investigators are focused specifically on HLF. Those other cases are irrelevant with respect to this case. Another case, which hasn’t been mentioned in this context, was the Infocom case, which was related to HLF. In Infocom, five brothers, including Ghassan Elashi, a subject in the HLF case, were convicted in Dallas for conducting business with Libya and Syria, known state sponsors of terrorism. They were also convicted for financial dealings with a longtime HAMAS operative.

Despite the fact that HLF did provide funding and support to HAMAS, obtaining a conviction in this matter will be a challenge for the government. As mentioned earlier, this is an extremely complex and document intensive case. This is where the “lawyering” comes into play. The prosecutors must prove their charges beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense attorneys must create questions and doubts to sway the jury for acquittal. They must establish doubt to the government’s argument that the subjects knowingly provided material support. In cases of such complexity, it is difficult to gauge how the jury will respond. The prosecutors should attempt to simplify the case as much as possible.

This is an extremely important case. However, regardless of whether there are prosecutions or acquittals, actions already taken against HLF and other charities have definitively disrupted the flow of funds to terrorists. In December 2001, HLF assets were frozen. In and around that time frame, the assets of other charities were also frozen. These actions had a chilling effect on charitable giving to like charities. The indictment and trial in the HLF case continue the deterrent created by the asset freezes. The disruptions achieved have diminished the flow of funds to terrorists. Consider the current HAMAS financial state. If HAMAS still had access to a funding mechanism such as HLF, it would have been extremely beneficial. Fortunately, they don’t.

Should the government lose this trial, they will receive harsh criticism and in a sense validate some of the myths addressed above. It will also cause the government to take a step back to seriously reevaluate prosecutive theory and investigative methodologies. Should the government win this case, they should leverage the sense of credibility achieved in this matter and use it to work with the Islamic community to address the areas of vulnerability, such as charities, exploited by terrorists. Meaningful dialogue is an important step in this process.

Win or lose, the government should reevaluate prosecutive theories and investigative methodologies in cases of this nature. They should identify mechanisms that work best and develop new mechanisms to better address future challenges. From the stand point of lessons learned, training curriculums should be developed for prosecutors and investigators to enhance their skills and abilities in handling these challenging and complex cases.

The practice of not using "Jihad" and "Jihadism" was lately defended by two academics at the National Defense University [2] who based their arguments on a study published by a Washington lobbyist, Jim Guirard.[3] On June 22, 2006, Jim Garamone, writing for the American Forces Press Service, published the study of Douglas Streusand and Harry Tunnel under the title "Loosly Interpreted Arabic terms can promote enemy ideology." Streusand told CNN that "Jihad is a term of great and positive import in Islam. It is commonly defined as striving or struggle, and can mean an internal or external struggle for faith." [4]

The article was posted under the title "Cultural Ignorance Leads to Misuse of Islamic Terms" by the US-based Islamist organization CAIR. [5] Since then the "concept" of deflecting attention away from the study of Jihadism has penetrated large segments of the defense newsletters and is omnipresent in Academia. More troubling though, is the fact that scholars who have seen the strategic threat of al Qaeda and Hezbollah have unfortunately fallen for the fallacy of the Hiraba. Professor Michael Waller of the Institute of World Politics in Washington wrote recently that "Jihad has been hijacked" as he bases his argument on Jim Guirard's lobbying pieces.[6] Satisfied with this trend taking root in the Defense intelligentsia of America, Islamist intellectuals and activists are hurrying to support this new tactic.

The good holy war is when the right religious and political authorities declare it against the correct enemy and at the right time. The bad jihad, called also Hiraba, is the wrong war, declared by bad (and irresponsible) people against the wrong enemy (for the moment), and without an appropriate authorization by the "real" Muslim leadership. According to this thesis, those Muslims who wage a Hiraba, a wrong war, are called Mufsidoon, from the Arabic word for "spoilers." The advocates of this ruse recommend that the United States and its allies stop calling the jihadists by that name and identifying the concept of Jihadism as the problem. In short, they argue that "jihad is good, but the Mufsidoon, the bad guys and the terrorists, spoiled the original legitimate sense."[7]

When researched, it turns out that this theory was produced by clerics of the Wahabi regime in Saudi Arabia and the Muslim Brotherhood, as a plan to prevent jihad and Jihadism from being considered by the West and the international community as an illegal and therefore forbidden activity. It was then forwarded to American- and Western-based interest groups to be spread within the Untied States, particularly within the defense and security apparatus. Such a deception further confuses U.S. national security perception of the enemy and plunges democracies back into the "black hole" of the 1990's. This last attempt to blur the vision of democracies can be exposed with knowledge of the jihadi terror strategies and tactics, one of which is known as Taqiya, the doctrine on deception and deflection. [8]

First, the argument of "good jihad" raises the question of how there can be a legitimate concept of religious war in the twenty-first century to start with. Jihad historically was as "good" as any other religious war over the last 2,000 years. If a "good jihad" is the one authorized by a caliph and directed under his auspices, then other world leaders also can wage a "good crusade" at will, as long as it is licensed by the proper authority. But in fact, all religious wars are proscribed by international law, period.

Second, the authors of this lobbyist-concocted theory claim that a wrong jihad is called a Hiraba. But in Arab Muslim history, a Hiraba (unauthorized warring) was when a group of warriors launched itself against the enemy without orders from the real commander. Obviously, this implies that a "genuine" war against a real enemy does exist and that these hotheaded soldiers have simply acted without orders. Hence this cunning explanation puts "spin" on jihad but leaves the core idea of jihadism completely intact. The "spoilers" depart from the plan, attack prematurely, and cause damage to the caliphate's long-terms plans. These Mufsidoon "fail" their commanders by unleashing a war of their own, instead of waiting for orders.

This scenario fits the relations of the global jihadists, who are the regimes and international groups slowly planning to gain power against the infidels and the "hotheaded" Osama bin Laden. Thus the promoters of this theory of Hiraba and Mufsidoon are representing the views of classical Wahabis and the Muslim Brotherhood in their criticism of the "great leap forward" made by bin Laden. But by convincing Westerners that al Qaeda and its allies are not the real jihadists but some renegades, the advocates of this school would be causing the vision of Western defense to become blurred again so that more time could be gained by a larger, more powerful wave of Jihadism that is biding its time to strike when it chooses, under a coherent international leadership.

Dr Walid Phares is a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and a visiting scholar at the European Foundation for Democracy. This piece was adapted from his recently published book The War of Ideas: Jihadism against Democracy.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] See John Esposito, The Islamic Threat: Myth or Reality? 3rd edition. (New York: Oxford University Press) 1999.

[2] May 23, 2006

[3] "Hiraba Versus Jihad," the American Muslim. August 2003.

[4] See Henry Shuster, "Words in War," CNN, October 19, 2006.

[5] Quoting the American Forces Press Service on June 29, 2006.

[6] Michael Waller. "Making Jihad Work for America." The Journal for International Security Affairs. Spring 2006

[7] See James Fallows, "Declaring Victory," Atlantic Monthly (September 2006).

[8] According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, Taqiya: "spelled Taqiyah, Arabic Taqiyah ("self-protection"), in Islam, [is] the practice of concealing one's belief and foregoing ordinary religious duties when under threat of death or injury to oneself or one's fellow Muslims. The Qu'ran allows Muslims to profess friendship with the unbelievers (3:28) and even outwardly to deny their faith (16:106), if doing so would save them from imminent danger," on the condition that their hearts remain attached to faith. Also see Larry Stirling, "On Taqiya' and ‘Fatwas,'" San Diego Source, September 25, 2006; also Walid Phares, "al-Taqiyah: The Muslim Method of Conquest," Freeman Center for Strategic Studies, December 1997.

"The trial has taken over my thoughts during the day and my dreams during the night," said Noor Elashi, daughter of Mr. Elashi and a reporter at the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

"While I'm driving, while I'm working, while I'm eating, it's all I think about," she said. "I keep asking myself, 'How can my father and the other co-defendants be accused of supporting heinous acts of violence when all they did was feed, clothe and help educate Palestinian orphans and widows?'"

What Mr. Trahan fails to elicit from Ms. Elashi is a quote on her feelings about her family member, Hamas Deputy Political Bureau Chief Mousa Abu Marzook, married to her cousin. Marzook is the second-ranking official of a designated foreign terrorist organization responsible for hundreds of civilian deaths as well as the infusion of a culture of death, martyrdom and hatred in a large segment of Palestinian society. Regardless of the outcome of the HLF trial, Ms. Elashi’s father is going to prison for laundering Marzook’s money, yet Trahan somehow fails to get a comment on that rather important aspect of her father’s life.

Then Ms. Elashi, via Mr. Trahan, tells us just how much she and her family love the United States of America:

"It's unimaginable that a man who loves America so much would face such tribulations in the country he now calls home," Ms. Elashi said.

Ms. Elashi said her father was uprooted from his childhood Palestinian home in 1967, along with his parents and four brothers. The family settled in the U.S. about 25 years ago and has called it home since.

"America is the only home that my five siblings and I have ever known – from my brother who lives and breathes skateboarding, to my teenage sister, whose favorite show is Gilmore Girls."

That’s right. The Elashis are just your normal, average, American family; a normal family with a relative who’s a high-ranking leader in one of the most murderous terrorist organizations in the world, and a father (and several uncles, for that matter) already convicted of serving as his U.S.-based money launderer.

Expect the public defense to continue throughout the course of the trial and even after its conclusion, and expect the themes of “Islamophobia” and “American values” to be part of the actual legal defense, as well, as seen in the trials against Sami al-Arian in Tampa and Muhammad Salah and Abdelhaleem al-Ashqar in Chicago.

UK Missile Plans Terrorist Found Guilty
On July 13, the Khaleej Times reported that "Yassin Nassari, 28, was found guilty of possessing documents likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism...[t]he charges related to computer files on the hard drive of Nassari’s computer -- including plans for building a missile". Yassin Nassari's wife was found not guilty of of failing to disclose information to police. Khaleej Times reports "[a]mong the evidence produced in court was a letter written by El-Hor to Nassari in which she wrote she was proud of him and happy that Allah had granted him the chance to be a shaheed (martyr) in the cause of jihad, or holy war."

UK Suspected July 21, 2005 Al Qaeda Operative Free in London.
The July 15 London Times reports that a suspected Al-Qaeda operative for the July 21 bomb plots is walking freely in London. London Times states that "[suspected] Al-Qaeda operative who is believed by MI5 to have played a key role in the events leading up to the July 21 failed bombings is at liberty and living in east London. Mohammed al-Ghabra, a 27-year-old Syrian who has been given British citizenship, is said by security sources to have arranged for the leader of the failed 21/7 London suicide attacks to travel to Pakistan for terrorist training."

London Times reports that the British Treasury stated "Al-Ghabra has organised travel to Pakistan for individuals seeking to meet with senior Al-Qaeda individuals and to undertake jihad training. Several of these individuals have returned to the UK to engage in covert activity on behalf of Al-Qaeda. " British Treasury claimed it had information showing he had undertaken jihadi training at a terrorist camp in Kashmir.

UK Considering Restrictions on Offenders in Foreign Travel
The July 12 Guardian reported that UK Prime Minister "Gordon Brown is considering introducing restrictions on offenders traveling to Pakistan and other countries in an attempt to stop radical Muslims going abroad for training by terror groups" and that "[t]ravel to certain countries could be restricted, and those convicted of less serious crimes could be included in a ban". AP also reported that "Home Secretary Jacqui Smith has been ordered to examine possible restrictions on the travel of those convicted of terrorism and other offenses."

UK Terrorist Dhiren Barot Attacked in Prison
On July 15, 2007, Channel 4 reports that convicted British Jihadist terrorist Dhiren Barot was attacked in at the Frankland prison and scalded with hot water. Barot is serving a 40 year sentence. Barot's lawyer is calling for a special area for Muslim terrorists and "for Muslim prisoners to be given special rights in jail." Channel 4 has also provided a video on this report.

The Daily Mail reported that lawyer Mudassar Arani it is unfair they must undergo frequent searches and curbs on meeting other imprisoned radicals. The Daily Mail reported that Dhiren Barot "was moved to a Durham jail after bosses at Belmarsh in London feared he was radicalising Muslims there."

Debate on UK Detention Policies
The UK police have raised issues on the limitations of the 28 day detention policy. Sky News reports that the UK's Association of Chief Police Officers stated that "said police were struggling to operate within this limit [of 28 days for detention], stressing the global scale of terror investigations and the need to arrest suspects early.' " The police officers' organization representative stated that "police were 'up against the buffers' on the 28-day limit." The Daily Telegraph reported that "[a] senior police chief ignited a major row yesterday after calling for terror suspects to be kept in custody 'for as long as it takes' without charge."

Australia News reports that UK Security Minister Alan West felt that "the police and security services needed more time to analyse the data, and were hamstrung by the 28-day limit on holding suspects. 'I think, looking at the complexity of this, there will be occasions when we need more than 28 days'."

The London Times also reports that the UK Security Minister Alan West is opposed to Parliament making decisions to amend laws to extend the detention period for terrorist suspects, and is advocating that such issues should only be dealt with by British courts.

Tablighi Jamaat and "Mega Mosque"
The July 15, 2007 Daily Express reported that the new "mega mosque" being planned for London "is being funded by the fundamentalist Tablighi Jamaat sect. One member of the sect is said to be Kafeel Ahmed, who was engulfed in flames when a Jeep laden with gas canisters crashed into a Glasgow Airport building two weeks ago. The 7/7 suicide bombers Moham­med Siddique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer attended the European headquarters of Tablighi Jamaat at Dews­bury, West Yorkshire."

UK Car Bomber Kafeel's dream was to build India housing complex where Shariat would rule.
Rediff India News reports the British car bomber Kafeel Ahmed "had a dream of constructing a housing complex on the outskirts of Bangalore where Shariat would have been the rule of law."

UK Former Jihadist Speaks Out.
Former British Jihadist Hassan Butt speaks out in the July 14 London Times, challenging British Muslims to deal with Jihadism in the UK. Butt states "[w]e can no longer turn a blind eye to the driving force behind terror attacks both at home and abroad. It should not matter how painful or embarrassing this admission may be, and nor should it matter how taboo this subject is."

UK Passport Issuance Control Sought
The Daily Mail, reporting over concerns in laxity in issuance of British passports, reported on July 12 that "[m]ore than a million British passports have been issued to immigrants over the past decade according to new Government figures. The 1,020,510 total - an average of 102,000 every year - means an immigrant is granted British citizenship every five minutes. Under current rules, even heinous criminals - including murderers and rapists - can be approved for a passport if they wait for a 'clear period' before applying."

Sources:

July 17, 2007 - The Australian: Canberra's court bypass traps doctor

July 16, 2007 - Australian news: Haneef lawyer to appeal visa cancellation

July 16, 2007 - Australian news: UK monitoring 30 terror cells, 2000 suspects

July 16, 2007 - BBC: Bomb accused remanded in custody

July 16, 2007 - London Times: Suspects released as police seek extended detention

July 16, 2007 - Daily Telegraph: Anger over call to hold suspects indefinitely

July 16, 2007 - Sky News: Police Demand Greater Powers On Terror

July 16, 2007 - London Times: Leave terror detention to courts, says Brown's new security minister

July 16, 2007 - Rediff India: Kafeel's dream was to build housing complex where Shariat would rule

July 15, 2007 - London Times: Fixer for 21/7 plot free in London

July 15, 2007 - Channel 4: Terrorist Barot 'attacked in prison'

Channel 4 Video on Dhiren Barot Attack -- alternate link

July 15, 2007 - Daily Express: Fears grow over "mega mosque"

July 15, 2007 - BBC: Two bomb attack suspects released

July 14, 2007 - The London Times: Muslim heads stuck firmly in the sand

July 13, 2007 - BBC: Woman in UK bomb probe released

July 13, 2007 - Khaleej Times: Husband guilty, wife freed in UK terrorism trial

July 13, 2007 - Daily Mail: Jailed terrorist fanatics 'should be treated as prisoners of war'

July 12, 2007 - BBC: Red tape holds up UK terror probe

July 12, 2007 - Guardian: Offenders may be prohibited from traveling to Pakistan

July 12, 2007 - AP: Travel bans considered to stop Britons from training for terrorism overseas

July 12, 2007 - Daily Telegraph: Hospitals 'must tighten security'

July 12, 2007 - Sky News: NHS: Could Terrorists Spread Killer Virus?

July 12, 2007 - UK News of World: Al Qaeda evil is spreading like a virus

July 12, 2007 - Daily Mail: Another foreigner gets a UK passport every five minutes

July 11, 2007 - BBC: Assets of terror suspect frozen

In plenty of situations in American life, citizens agree to be bound by the rulings of institutions that do not have any force of law, other than the consent of the parties. Private arbitration, for example, is an established form of resolving labor and stock trading disputes. The legality of arbitration judgments, and their enforceability by U.S. courts, is generally determined by contract law. What happens when religion is injected into the equation?

It might help to consider this question outside of the context of Islam. I can offer up the tradition where I come from, a religious institution in the news lately because of Mitt Romney’s Presidential campaign.

The Mormon Church is somewhat similar to Islam, in terms of how its adherents view their role in society. Mormons believe their church is the only true faith on earth, and they struggle with maintaining doctrinal purity in the face of assimilation. The LDS Church has been known to punish dissidents in a heavy-handed way, and to suffer frustration at how their beliefs are portrayed by non-adherents.

As Professor McCormack’s colleague, Edwin Firmage, described in the book Zion in the Courts, the Mormon Church has its own justice system established to enforce behavioral standards on its members. Bishop courts determine whether Mormons who have violated the behavioral norms of the faith should remain on the memberships roll. These courts are empowered to sanction members with the punishment of excommunication, which results in the stripping of membership and the individual inability to take partake in Mormon sacrament and participate in other spiritual functions.

In some communities, excommunication can seriously impact one’s livelihood. If a Mormon lresides is a predominantly LDS enclave, her Church membership may be necessary for professional goodwill. A Mormon physician, for example, may have staff privileges at LDS Hospital, and a patient base that involves a reputation for trustworthiness fostered through years of faithful church service. This means that being publicly stripped of LDS Church membership can have some real financial consequences, not to mention an impact on non-pecuniary aspects of life (like one’s relationship with neighbors).

The Mormon Church’s internal court system – which also delves into member’s marital conduct and the reasons for divorces – has never been challenged in real courts, in part because there have not been ex-members willing to go that route, but also because lawyers know real courts are reluctant to get too involved in religious matters. This does not mean that the LDS Church has never been sued. For example, some Mormon institutions – which required employees to conform their conduct to Church standards – have been sued for religious discrimination. Corporation of Presiding Bishop of Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints v. Amos,. 483 U.S. 327, 107 S.Ct. 2862, 97 L.Ed.2d 273 (1987). .

Viewed this way, Imam Eid’s idea may not be particularly radical. It has precedent in other American settings. Perhaps he was simply advocating an increase in church-provided services to American Muslims.

However, the risk lies in a particularly apt observation by Zeyno: Shari’ah is a system of Islamic laws that makes no distinction between public and private life and that, when applied, encompasses all aspects of life. The danger of Eid’s proposal would arise if the American Muslims succeeded in setting up a religious court system that was the exclusive means of resolving disputes among Muslims, while insisting that the American judicial system had no right to intervene.

This would be a change in the current law – private arbitration judgments that require illegal actions are unenforceable – but is conceivable if American society ever reached a point of Balkanization where current institutions were perceived as feeble in the face of religiously-inspired violence. This benefit would not likely be limited to Islam. Conceivably, every ethnic enclave could insist that it has the right to educate and police its own members according to its own standards and conceptions of justice. This power would extend even over those who are unwilling to be bound by the enclave's norms but who have not yet reached the age of majority. Certainly, this would be bad.

Imagine a Shar’iah court system in America that insists that it has the exclusive right to resolve disputes between Muslim husbands and their wives, or one in which the youthful indiscretions of Muslim teenagers result in punishment for theft that is required by the Qur’an. Then go the next step and assume that this system is sanctioned American society, through a pre-arrangement not to interfere with the “internal” affairs of the American Muslim community. This is not obviously what Imam Eid is suggesting. He was careful to note that his proposal would be “within the scope of American law.”

However, the scope of American law is not immutable. Muslim civil rights organizations, since 9/11, have been active in promoting changes to the law to benefit their members, and have argued that such time-tested law enforcement tools as undercover operations and electronic surveillance should be off limits when targeting Muslims. Consider how Imam Eid himself seeks to justify his Shar’ia court proposal, in the abstract to his dissertation cited by Zeyno:

At present, Islamic organizations, mosques, and centers have jurisdiction over Islamic matters. Each of these organizations may react differently to these conflicts, create tensions among themselves, and become a source of confusion for Muslims. At the same time, the state’s involvement in matters that were, and for many still are, religious issues raises difficult legal problems as well as other issues concerning the relationship between religion and the state in America.

(emphasis added.)

It is conceivable that Eid is referring in his dissertation to the hard-line Islamic organizations which unnecessarily discourage it members from certain life activities because of their erroneous interpretation of the Muslim doctrine, and this is what he wants to change. If this were the case, however, why would he have included the emphasized sentence, complaining about state involvement in religious matters?

If Imam Eid and others believe that the U.S. should accept Shar’iah law and permit the resolution of private disputes to religious authorities without any oversight of the lawful authorities, we should be very worried. Some of us, after all, like the fact that we have a state that stands in the way of us being forced to act in accordance with others’ religious sensibilities, and we would rather keep it that way.

The AFP asserts that they had some intelligence that an Italian priest, Giancarlo Bossi, who was kidnapped from his parish on the Zamboanga Peninsula on 10 June was being held in the Tipo Tipo region. Most analysts and government attributed his kidnapping to the Abu Sayyaf Group, not the MILF. It fits the profile of both groups. From 1991-1995, the ASG engaged in exclusively anti-Christian violence, bombing churches and attacking Christian clergy. Though the ASG degraded into a criminal element in the mid-1990s, by 2000, they had re-entered a more ideological fray, and again stepped up attacks on Christians and missionaries. The MILF by contrast has never engaged in sectarian conflict and, indeed, has worked closely with members of the Catholic clergy in peace efforts.

There is a possibility that the MILF were involved. The Philippine police labeled Akiddin Abdusallam as the lead kidnapper. The MILF acknowledge that he was once an MILF member but that he had previously been kicked out of the MILF and had since joined the ASG. This is unverifiable, and a standard response of MILF when a member/former member is implicated in an act of terrorism. I would note that MILF units on the Zamboanga Peninsula, ostensibly part of the 108th Base Command, have always been a less disciplined force, without the standard kit, discipline and numbers found in MILF forces in central Mindanao. They have also been closely tied to ASG in that area. If one recalls, there were frequent skirmishes between the MILF and the AFP during the latter’s campaign against the ASG in 2001-02 that led to the death of Abu Subaya. These incidents were reported to the Malaysian-led International Monitoring team. The AFP always asserted that the two groups in that region were indistinguishable and often worked together.

Even if the MILF did not assist in the abduction, it is not unreasonable to think that local members are giving the ASG sanctuary. It is not historically unprecedented. On 11 July, a military spokesman told one of the country’s two major TV networks, "We have persistent reports that Bossi is being held in Al-Barka town [in Tipo Tipo] and the MILF is preventing us from searching the priest," he said

Further complicating the matter is the possibility that some renegade members of the MNLF, who on 19 April launched attacks on Philippine army posts on the Zamboanga peninsula, assisted in the kidnapping (This group is believed to have followed an MNLF leader on Jolo, Habier Malik, who took up arms against Philippine and US forces on 13 April and since disappeared into the bush allegedly with the ASG).

The Tipo Tipo portion of Basilan is home to the Yaccan tribe, who are very loyal MILF members. It is the one part of the Sulu Archipelago, which is predominantly dominated by Tausigs, where the MILF have a strong presence. In 2002, when US and Philippine forces were engaged in operations against the ASG on Basilan, they negotiated an informal agreement with the MILF that they would not enter the Tipo Tipo region. This was allowed for the sake of the nascent peace process between the MILF and Philippine Government, despite the fact that there was significant intelligence that the MILF gave the ASG sanctuary. The area remains firmly in MILF hands.

The MILF has asserted through the media and their website that they were acting in self -defense. The MILF’s chief negotiator and Central Committee member, Mohagher Iqbal, told Reuters that “The incident could have been avoided if the government had coordinated with our forces in Basilan before they actually moved in... Our forces were attacked, we only defended ourselves.” But the MILF there have a history of giving a degree of sanctuary to the ASG. Would the permission really have been given? Could Philippine troops have had freedom of operation? The AFP asserts that they were leaving the area when they were ambushed? If they were voluntarily leaving, why the ambush?

The AFP asserts that they were ambushed not just by MILF but also by the ASG. The MILF deny that there were any ASG in the area, and publicly assert that they have nothing to do with them. There have, however, been periods of cooperation in the past.

But not only were the troops fired upon and 14 killed, but ten of those were then beheaded. Now this does not fit a pattern of MILF behavior. To my knowledge they have not beheaded any enemy before. The ASG is another matter. Many recall the 2000 beheading of an American national. On 19 April this year, the ASG beheaded six people in nearby Jolo. Beheadings are something the ASG likes to do.

The MILF readily admit killing the marines, but they deny beheading them. On 11 July, the MILF website said that the 10 were “beheaded by unknown groups after the fighting.” On 13 July, the MILF announced on their website that they were investigating the incident which they acknowledge was “an act both strictly prohibited by Islam and the Geneva Conventions that provide rules of engagement especially on non-combatants.”

The MILF says that “unknown groups” were responsible for the beheadings, but not the ASG; for to admit that it was the ASG would be to admit that they were protecting them and operating in concert with them. So who did the gratuitous and grisly act?

The MILF website on 13 July stated that Matarul Hakim Alkanul, a partially blind immam, was found dead in his in the morning of July 10 in Guinanta. Though they don’t explicitly blame security forces, the intention is clear. Supporters of the MILF are now circulating a more detailed report that the beheadings were in retaliation for the killing of an ustadz by security forces. The report asserts that enraged local civilians spontaneously desecrated the corpses in revenge.

The only press report about the imam’s death was a GMA report that simply cited the MILF website. The imam’s death, while it could very well be true, has not been independently confirmed. Even if true, it is not too convincing of an explanation. I am the first to admit that the AFP has committed some pretty egregious human rights violations in the past. But even still, they never caused civilians to spontaneously desecrate the corpses of 10 AFP in a pique of rage.

The GRP-MILF peace process is clearly not going as smoothly as the Philippine Government would like us to believe. The issues are enormously complex, there are a lot of competing interests, and there are spoilers on both sides. The longer the talks are dragged out, the more the MILF hardliners who are already skeptical of the peace process, will feel vindicated in their analysis that the government is not negotiating in good faith or doesn’t have the political will to negotiate a durable political settlement. The reality is, the longer talks go on, the more the MILF’s military capabilities diminish. So they may respond robustly to government violations of the ceasefire if for not other reason than to remind the government of the costs of returning to war. They may also maintain some ties to the ASG and continue training members of Jemaah Islamiyah, as force multipliers, as they have always done.

There is another calculated justification on the MILF’s part. Despite the fact that in 2002 there was an informal agreement that the AFP would not enter the MILF’s zone on Basilan, the ceasefire committee currently does not cover Basilan. It was on the table at the 13th round of exploratory talks, but those fell apart. On 11 May, the army spokesman even denied that the MILF had territory in Basilan: "As far as we are concerned, there is only one authority and one government in Basilan and that is the Republic of the Philippines, not the MILF." Starting in 1999, the MILF really began to push for formal demarcation of its camps; a process begun but then scrapped by hardliners in the AFP and Philippine Government, as they felt they were acknowledging de jure sovereignty of the MILF.

A few things must be done immediately:

The two sides must renew their commitment to the ceasefire.

While the IMT is not legally mandated to cover Basilan, an ad hoc team should be sent there immediately.

The government must resume its commitment to the peace process with the MILF. Elections are over and there is no reason to forestall talks any longer.

The MILF must stop trying to have it both ways. This is unlikely to happen, but the double speak is just absurd. The MILF cannot blame rogue commanders all the time. If it does, there is no incentive for the government to negotiate with the central leadership.

The AFP, US military advisors and the Embassy in Manila must acknowledge that despite considerable successes against the ASG, it can still be a thorn in their side. They must also admit something they have been loathe to do, and something that they have criticized in my recent article in Jane’s, that the ASG are doggedly trying to make a comeback on Basilan, Jollibee notwithstanding.

I would like to draw attention of readers to one review essay by Martha Crenshaw in Security Studies (T&F), Vol. 16 (1), Jan-March 2007). She has reviewed some 13 seminal books on suicide terrorism in this essay titled "Explaining Suicide Terrorism: A Review Essay". Reviewed books include Robert Pape’s Dying to Win (Random House, 2005), Ami Pedahzur’s Suicide Terrorism (Polity Press, 2005), Mia Bloom’s Dying to Kill (Columbia Univ. Press, 2005) and Shaul Shay’s The Shahids (Transaction Pub., 2004). Crenshaw also included two translated books: German author Christoph Reuter’s My Life is a Weapon (Trans by Helena Ragg-Kirkby, Princeton Univ Press, 2004) and French author Farhad Khosrokhavar’s Suicde Bombers (Trans by David Macey, Pluto press, 2005). Couple of Assaf Moghadam's work on the subject (in Pedahzur (ed), Root Causes Suicide Terrorism, Routledge, 2006) also figures in this review.

I hope it would serve greatly who can’t avail all 13 books on the subject to start with.

This slight degree of separation between a terrorist organization and self-described civil rights advocacy group makes it no surprise that CAIR was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the case against the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development. The fact that CAIR is basically funded by foreign sources (see the Pipes article cited above) puts it in the camp of the old Communist front organizations that the Soviet Union funded during the Cold War.

There are several important conclusions to be drawn here, beyond the obvious - that political leaders should shun CAIR. There is also the good news, the Washington Times reports that since 2000 CAIR’s membership has dropped from 29.000 to 1,700. American Muslims have effectively rejected CAIR’s bid to be their leader. This speaks well for the American Muslim community and its readiness to distance itself from those linked to terrorism.

But it is also a sharp reminder of Hamas’ ingenuity and global ambitions. That Hamas would start a U.S. propaganda arm like the IAP is unsurprising. That it would then spin off a “civil rights” organization that has taken on the broad mandate of shaping U.S. views towards Islam is an important reminder that Hamas is a sophisticated organization and, like Hezbollah, not simply a terrorist threat but also a capable political actor. Also, it shows that although Hamas ostensibly focuses on the Palestinian issue, it does share in the global ambitions of its parent organization – the Muslim Brotherhood. We forget these realities at our peril.

Hamas is now poised to take on an international role as the first Muslim Brotherhood state. It has already won an election and a war. Their opening gambits as Gaza’s rulers, the release of BBC journalist Alan Johnston and also the return of a lion kidnapped from the Gaza zoo, have been savvy. Hamas is portraying itself as a responsible player that can maintain order in the Gaza strip – unlike the deposed Fatah. If Hamas can play its cards well, it can establish itself as the a group with which “business can be done.” Achieving this kind of legitimacy will have a profound effect across the region where in most countries the Muslim Brotherhood or one of its offshoots is the primary opposition to the government. They have shown remarkable ingenuity – the establishment of CAIR is only one example – don’t bet against them.

About the Graph and My Research at the University of Maryland
You can view this graph live here: the nodes are navigable, but it takes a moment for the site to generate the graph.) A brief description of my dayjob using the Semantic Web to research terrorism is here. A short academic paper I wrote about it can be found here and the website (technically a Semantic Web terrorism research portal) is here. Quick caveat, the data on the site - which is very much research in progress - is less important than the underlying technology.

While I will continue on this project, I also have a new position (still with the University of Maryland) with the Laboratory for Computational Cultural Dynamics which seeks “to develop the theory and algorithms required for tools to support decision making in cultural contexts.” That is, we hope to develop computer systems that will help model how different cultures act and react in different situations. When these models are developed they can be applied to a range of issues including counter-insurgency, development, crime prevention, and disaster relief.

This is what we know: in 1962, a federal court in New York determined that prison officials were legally justified in taking action against group of Muslim prisoners who were agitating, based in part on a document that described the requirements for members of a group called the Muslim Brotherhood.

There are three possibilities, and hopefully readers and contributors of the Counterterrorism Blog can assist me in determining which is most likely: (1) The document in the court opinion derives from the Ikwan, as Doug Farah and I originally suspected, (2) the document derives from the Nation of Islam, which briefly adopted the name or literature of the Muslim Brotherhood or (3) the document comes from third group that went by the name Muslim Brotherhood.

Here is some additional factors I found:

Malcolm X allegedly met with Muslim Brotherhood's Said Ramadan in Switzerland in 1964. Elijah Muhammed, the leader of the Nation of Islam during the relevant period, joined the group in 1933, around the same time as the formation of Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. According to FBI reports issued under the Freedom of Information Act, the Nation of Islam was publicly accused by a group known as the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood in 1959 of not being true Muslims.

What do these additional factors suggest? The second of these possibilities I mentioned is supported by the fact that another Muslim Brotherhood prison case (Desmond v Blackwell) involved an inmate who specificaly complained that he was being deprived of writings of Elijah Muhammad. This would suggest judges of that era may have been confused about the distinction between these two groups and conflated them. However, the document excerpted in the Pierce opinion specifically referred to the Muslim Brotherhood, not the Nation of Islam. Moreover, it would not make any sense for the Nation of Islam to force its adherents to follow the edicts of a group known as the Muslim Brotherhood, nor that the Muslim Brotherhood would permit the Nation to use its internal policies, if the two groups were not aligned. This makes the second possibility highly unlikely.

The first possibility is suggested by the date of Elijah Muhammad's conversion and by Malcom X's meeting with Ramadan in the early 1960s. Under this theory, the Nation and the Ikwan may have secretly (and perhaps temporarily) joined forces based on common origin, and the language of the Muslim Brotherhood document in the Pierce case represented a melding of rhetoric of the the two groups.

What about the third possibility - the document refers to a third group, which was distinct both from the Nation of Islam and the Muslim Brotherhood we know today, which went by latter's name?

Here's some additional information to support this theory. The person described in the FBI document as criticizing Elijah Muhammed was Alhajji Talib Ahmad Dawud. He was married to a jazz singer named Dakota Station and founded a group called the Muslim Brotherhood as an offshoot of an Indian group called Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam (AMI). Many of its converts were black musicians like McCoy Tyner, and - while practicing an orthodox brand of Islam - they were not political. In fact, Dawud even sued the Nation of Islam when it appeared that his wife's singing career was being tarnished by the Nation's reputation.

In my opinion, the Pierce document did not come from Dawud's group. It's an open question whether it came from the Ikwan. Anyone else out there want to try their hand at this question?

First, as stated on his webpage, in his 2005 dissertation, Imam Eid advocates “the establishment of Shari’ah courts which would manage the family affairs of American Muslims and mediate their religious affairs within the scope of American law.” While seemingly innocuous, this is a very problematic line, as Shari’ah is a system of Islamic laws that makes no distinction between public and private life and that, when applied, encompasses all aspects of life. Does the White House and the Commission realize that this would mean American Muslim women would no longer be able to enjoy their full rights as American citizens? If his proposal is enacted, American women would be first and foremost considered as Muslim, separated from the mainstream American society, and subject to strong social pressure to confirm to Islamist norms?

Second, as Imam Eid openly admits, he came to the US as a representative of the Muslim World League (MWL), a quasi-governmental agency of the Saudi Arabian government primarily tasked with promoting its rigid and dogmatic interpretation of Islam, known as Wahhabism. In Wahhabi eyes, those who do not practice their form of Islam are infidels and enemies. Moreover, as many of my CTB colleagues have pointed out, the highest U.S. official tasked with monitoring terrorist financing has expressed concerns about the activities of the MWL.

In her post, Tamar Tesler wrote, “As recently as July 2005, Stuart Levey, the U.S. Treasury’s Under Secretary for Terrorism & Financial Crimes, noted that “Saudi Arabian charities, particularly the International Islamic Relief Organization (IIRO), the World Association [sic] of Muslim Youth (WAMY), and the Muslim World League (MWL) continue to cause us concern."

Victor Comras in his post mentioned a speech by Under Secretary Levey on May 23, 2005, in which he said, "For too long, wealthy donors and multinational charities in Saudi Arabia were underwriting terrorism of all kinds, without any meaningful controls. Since 9/11, our government has worked aggressively to press the Saudis to take action against these financiers and to clean up their charitable sector.... We impatiently await the creation of a commission to monitor the charitable sector, and continue to insist that this commission regulate all Saudi charities, without exception of such groups as the Muslim World League and the International Islamic Relief Organization, or "IIRO."

Zachary Abuza in his post on Mohammad Jamal Khalifah, the brother-in-law of Osama bin Laden and who was killed in Madagascar, mentions how “Khalifah established the branch offices in the Philippines of the Muslim World League and the sister agency, International Islamic Relief Organization… Khalifah was able to divert funds to the MILF and Abu Sayyaf by hiring members of these groups, their close family members or supporters to positions in the IIRO… On 3 August 2006, the US Treasury department designated the Philippine Branch of the IIRO as a terrorist financier.”

And Olivier Guitta wrote on the arrest of a French imam, Dahou Meskine, along sixteen others arrested for allegedly financing Islamic terrorism. Quoting from his post, "The most probable organization that benefited from this money is the Algerian terrorist group GSPC.” In his last sentence, Olivier mentions, “In addition, he received donations from the Muslim World League and was the official translator of Abdullah bin Abdul-Mohsin Al-Turki, Secretary General of the Muslim World League during his French visit in October 2002.”

According to a Boston Globe article of January 27, 2007,

"…although he no longer has a mosque, Eid said he still holds his original appointment from the Muslim World League, a theological and cultural entity in Saudi Arabia that certifies imams, which sent him to Boston in 1982....Outside of not having his own mosque, Eid said his work today is largely what it was before."

This may also explain why he included the following on his webpage in regards to having attended a White House Iftar (the Ramadan dinner): “Disclaimer: I attended this event for dawa purposes only." To whom is this American citizen apologizing for having attended an event at the White House—and why? Is he deceiving everyone except those to whom he addresses his “disclaimer”? Moreover, while to an untrained ear this may sound like an innocent statement (the formal definition of dawa is “summons” or “call,” and can mean the inviting of non-Muslims to the faith), in the context of MWL’s Wahhabi Islam and its suspected ties to terrorists, it becomes highly problematic.

Was Imam Eid still connected to the MWL when he was appointed to the Commission? Has he since ended this relationship and disavowed any MWL connection with terrorists overseas? Even if he just ended it, can he really act independently in a way that would not lead to a conflict of interest after having served Saudi interests for over two decades? For example, will he raise critically important concerns contrary to Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia (and other areas where Wahhabism is spreading, thanks to the activities of the MWL)?

To put it simply: As the MWL is a quasi-government entity—controlled not just by any government, but one that has significant shortcomings on issues of religious freedom—how does Imam Eid’s membership of the Commission affect its objectivity and support its mission statement? Moreover, would other commission members be even able to recognize it if Imam Eid were saying things that would seem reasonable to well-intentioned Jews and Christians, but not to non-Islamist Muslims?

I would like to think that these questions were asked when Imam Eid’s nomination was first suggested—especially since his connection to MWL and his PhD abstract calling for Shari’ah in the US are both on his website. If not, then maybe the Congress should do so now.

It is hardly surprising that Yousef, or Marzook for that matter, would have a representative in America. Both Hamas leaders spent a significant amount of time living in the United States, developing an extensive infrastructure of front groups for the terrorist organization.

It is notable that, from the Post’s perspective, the controversy was not the publishing of propaganda from a designated foreign terrorist organization, but rather that its major competitor had published a similar op-ed from the same author that very day.

But while certain sectors of the American media are bending over backwards to provide a platform for terrorist leaders to promote their agenda, the combined efforts of federal law enforcement and private lawsuits are slowly rolling up Hamas’ American network, engineered by Marzook, Yousef and others.

Just yesterday their former colleague, Muhammed Salah, was sentenced to 21 months in prison for obstruction of justice. Salah’s conviction resulted from his lying about his Hamas connections in a civil lawsuit brought by the parents of David Boim, an American teenager murdered by Hamas terrorists in 1996. While Salah was acquitted on the racketeering charge and did not receive the stiffest penalty possible, his trial, conviction and sentence demonstrate that federal law enforcement officials are very serious about prosecuting terrorism financing cases. Salah’s co-defendant, Abdelhaleem al-Ashqar, is scheduled to be sentenced in September.

Further, jury selection is slated to begin next Monday in the case against the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, the largest terrorist financing case in U.S. history.

The recent spate of op-eds by Hamas leaders in American newspapers, though, presents two potential questions for federal prosecutors and the family members of the victims of Hamas terrorism: just who exactly is Ahmed Yousef’s representative in the United States? And do Marzook and Haniyeh have U.S.-based representatives facilitating the publication of their op-eds?

Some resources:
11 July 2006 Mumbai Train Bombings
Mumbai Blasts
For Pictures/Graphic Details

The consistent failures to secure our borders, create an immigration system that has meaningful integrity and effective efforts to enforce the immigration laws from within the interior of the United States all contribute to our vulnerabilities. It is also important to understand that while everyone who understands law enforcement agree that the cultivation of informants is an important component of counterterrorism, the most effective way of cultivating informants within alien communities is to enforce the immigration laws and then provide opportunities to those aliens who violate the laws to become informants and seek their assistance in identifying terrorists as well as other relevant intelligence.

Rather than focusing on methodology for keeping the terrorists out (if they are not already here), it would appear that our officials such as Michael Chertoff accept the fact that terrorists can easily cross our borders and simply move on to the next issue - how to minimize the damage they do within our country!

The administration and members of the Senate had been pushing for a Guest Worker Amnesty Program in the guise of a bill that would have granted official identity documents to millions of illegal and undocumented aliens whose nationalities as well as their names are unknown and unverifiable. Fortunately this bill is dead, for now, but I am concerned that Capitol Hill may well try to resurrect this bill yet again. I came to refer to the last version of this bill as the "Terrorist Assistance and Facilitation Act of 2007."

There are so many ways that terrorists can easily circumvent our nearly nonexistent efforts at securing our border that I understand why Secretary Chertoff seems to believe that we cannot stop the bad guys from entering our country, but this is not the way it can or should be! Our borders needed to be secured after the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993. The Visa Waiver Program needed to be terminated after the attacks of 9/11; instead, President Bush, former Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge, and the other current and former members of the administration have been clamoring for an expansion of the disastrous Visa Waiver Program! Our nation currently permits corporations to make national security decisions for the United States! As a consequence of this lunacy, "We the People" may pay for this with our lives!

Our government is supposed to be "Of the people and for the people." Apparently this is not the case!

We the People need to make our concerns heard in Washington. It is time to remind the members of Congress that they work for us! If only 14% of the American people approve of the way that Congress does its job, then it is time that the 86% who do not approve call their senators and members of the House of Representatives tomorrow morning!

Democracy is not a spectator sport!

a. What if the footage of "Taliban graduation" aired by a TV network wasn't obtained and thus wasn't shown to the American public? Would it mean that the Taliban aren't graduating, or haven't been graduating since 2001 or even before? Will that mean that there were no Jihadist graduates already heading to the West? Does it mean that this is the "only" graduation by the Taliban, other Jihadists around the world? Did we have to "see" that particular footage to "learn" that a Jihadi machine is producing "graduates" as we speak, even if they are not featured on ABC or al Jazeera?

b. What if the Pastor hasn't met with the al Qaeda representative? Would that meant that the Jihadists weren't marching and aren't willing to strike deep inside the West? With great sympathies to the cleric, who should be thanked for reporting, but was that a "new" revelation? We have the leaders of al Qaeda informing us every few months on al Jazeera and online, and a daily wave of chat rooms statements enlightening us on the "blessed strike to come." Why aren't we taking that seriously until a "personal story" occurs somewhere? Don't we know that there is a standing order by al Qaeda to strike when and where possible?

c. Did we have to wait for the British Jihadis to load two Mercedes and one Jeep and target a nightclub and an airport to "learn" that this is a possible tactic? Is this scenario that impossible to imagine and project? What did we learn from these tactics that we've already seen in the Sunni triangle in Iraq, Israel, Lebanon, Morocco, Algeria and Afghanistan? That it could happen in England too? So are there advisors in the West who are telling Governments and the public on both sides of the Atlantic that there is no such thing as "Jihad;" that there is no "war on terror;" that "it is about socio-economics?" So what have we learned tactically from the UK failed "raids?" What is it that our imagination has failed to predict, since the 9/11 Commission has told us that we have a "failed imagination."

d. Then we learn about the discovery of 45 doctors who planned for a Jihad in Jacksonville against a US base. What did we really discover here? That doctors "can be" Jihadists? Weren't we listening to "Doctor" Ayman Zawahiri for years and many other "doctors" in the region threatening with Terror? Haven't we seen in the 20th century’s darkest moments "Nazi doctors" involved in one of the most horrific genocides of all times? Or were we surprised by the fact that Jihadists were planning on attacking a US base in the US homeland? Didn't we analyze enough the Fort Dix guys who were planning a similar attack on American soil against an Army base few weeks ago? Weren't the two Georgia young Jihadis, arrested last year, planning on striking at US military installations across the nation? In short, is that shocking to "learn" that the Jihadis are targeting our national defense?

e. Last but not least, we are supposing that "al Qaeda likes to attack in the summer." So, should we discount attacks in the fall, winter and spring?

I am not being sarcastic here but there is something strange about how we proceed in analyzing the Jihadi war against democracies and America, and how we break news to the public. On the one hand, the overwhelming majority of the academic elite, many in the political establishment and most of the mainstream media are desperately trying to demobilize their audiences by claiming that all what we see "is just a mirage." And on the other hand, the same media tells us that al Qaeda could be "attacking us this summer" because of a graduation, a Pastor's report, tactics we learned from London, doctors-turned-Jihadis, and summer times. With all these ingredients, the debate on Terrorism seems to be swinging between total denials on the one hand and blurry vision on the other hand.

This summer and any other summer, and all other seasons by the way, are Jihadi times. We need to adapt to this reality for as long as this conflict is on. For al Qaeda and its allies, as well as the Khomeinists are on the path of war. And when they are in that mode, nothing should surprise us.

* Al Qaeda has already established cells in the UK, the US and the West. If there is an "additional" cell coming this way, we would certainly be happier if the Government would have detected it, and will stop it. But it would be misleading the public to state that al Qaeda's second cell ever to infiltrate the country (after Mohammed Atta's in 2001) is "now" heading to our shores.

* The intention to penetrate our systems and to strike is as old as the Jihadi war against the West (that would be at least since the early 1990s). An al Qaeda representative in Iraq is not serving us with news if he "reveals" that the group will be spilling blood soon.

* Arresting the Terror-doctors is a positive development, but we shouldn't be in shock and awe about it. Our analysts and public educators should have (and some have) informed the public of the deep penetration that has been taken place within liberal democracies. We should learn form the infiltration of this particular segment of the medical field to preempt the penetration of other sectors, and of other fields as well. We should project that the Jihadists have infiltrated the engineering, computer, banking, security and other fields.

* Zawahiri's orders to strike inside the West and within the realm of moderate Arabs and Muslims are al Qaeda standing orders at least since 2001. His additional statements are reminders of what has already been a war waged at will and is taking place as its perpetrators are acquiring means and targets.

* Yes, it may be true that, statistically, most al Qaeda known attacks have taken place in the West between July and September, with the exception of Madrid's March 11, but there is no "Jihadi summer time." If and when these "forces" would acquire targets and circumstances, they will most likely wait for warmer months to strike.

So, if indeed evidence is gathering that al Qaeda is preparing for a series of attacks in the US in the next weeks and months, then it is important to inform and ready the public for it. But the media -and their sources- must help their audiences put the information in context. There is a Jihadi war on liberal democracies including America, and a US-led campaign on Terror. The learning and educational processes must be set in this general direction not in terms of an out-of-context sensationalism. For it would have been out of line if in 1942, spokespersons and reporters in Allied nations would have been announcing that "unidentified planes with Swastikas on their wings were dropping what we think could be bombs on European cities."

*****

Dr Walid Phares is the Director of Future Terrorism Project at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and a visiting fellow with the European Foundation for Democracy. He is the author of The War of Ideas: Jihadism against Democracy.

Before any American reacts with too much disbelief at the handling of the Zaoui case by our Kiwi cousins, we would do well to remember the case of Mazen Al-Najjar. Al-Najjar is the brother-in-law of convicted Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) supporter Sami Al-Arian. Al-Najjar was deported from the US (finally) in 2002...ironically the same year Zaoui arrived in New Zealand...after what was a seven year legal battle by the US Government to remove him from the United States. Like Zaoui, the Al-Najjar case involved multi-year detention based in part on classified evidence and a lengthy public drama pitting his supporters, and most of the media, against the Feds. In the end, the Al-Najjar case boiled down to the US Government deporting an illegal alien who had overstayed his student visa by nearly two decades and who was suspected of being a national security risk. Many years and probably millions of taxpayer dollars were required to remove that one illegal alien. Unfortunately, cases like Zaoui and Al-Najjar are not so rare.

India: 'Secret data' found in Car Bomber Kafeel Ahmed's Computer Hard Disk. Hindustan Times reports that "[e]xperts have succeeded in decoding 'secret information' stored in the hard disk of a computer seized from Kafeel Ahmed's home in Bangalore" and will "report on the disk's contents to Bangalore Police". It is believed that Kafeel Ahmed "stored 'project' data in the hard disk and protected it with a secret code that is difficult to decipher". "Kafeel, before leaving for Britain on May 5, had handed over the disk to his mother Zakia Ahmed, warning her that it contained some important information on his 'project'. Kafeel also asked his mother to ensure the safety of the disk and not to let it slip into anyone's hands."

India: UK attack linked to science hub strike? Hindustan Times reports that there may be links between the UK car bombers and a 2005 attack on an Indian science hub. "In Bangalore, investigators looked for connections between Kafeel Ahmed and the Iraqi doctor Bilal Abdulla...They worked on evidence that suggested Abdulla visited Bangalore to meet Kafeel and his brother Sabeel — a line of enquiry the police said could lead them to clues on the attack on the Indian Institute of Science (IISc) in December 2005."

Australian Terrorism Probe Into UK Bomb Plot Heads to India. Hindustan Times and Bloomberg are reporting on this. Bloomberg states: "Australian police widened their investigation into a terrorist plot to detonate car bombs in the U.K. and sent a detective to India, the home country of three suspects in the case. The officer will 'liaise' with Indian authorities also probing" the bombings.

Australia: Dr. Mohammed Haneef's lawyer may appeal detention. The Australian reports: "The lawyer for a Gold Coast doctor being detained over the bungled British bomb plots says he may launch an appeal. Authorities want to hold Gold Coast doctor Mohamed Haneef as long as they can to ensure any links to British bomb plotters are thoroughly investigated, the government says. Dr Haneef has been held without charge under federal counter-terrorism powers since he was arrested trying to leave Brisbane international airport on a one-way ticket on July 2."

Australia Visa Cross-Checks System Moved Up to September. The Australian reports that a news security system upgrade that will perform visa cross-checks has been moved up from October to September. "Attorney-General Philip Ruddock said yesterday the new system of background checking for visa applicants, proposed on Sunday, would have likely detected a group of doctors who had similar country of origin, training and travel patterns."

Scotland: Petrol proof sought in new anti-terror measure. The Scotsman reports: "Filling stations in Edinburgh are vetting customers buying petrol in cans, as security is stepped up following the terror attack at Glasgow Airport. Police have said that anybody buying a can of petrol should now be asked for identification and quizzed over what they plan to use it for. They should also be asked to pay by credit or debit card, to ensure the purchase can be traced. Any staff who turn away a customer who refuses to co-operate have been promised police backing."

Sources:

AP: Zawahiri Threatens Retaliation Against Britain for Rushdie Knighthood

SITE Institute: "Malicious Britain and its Indian Slaves" -- An Audio Speech by Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri Produced by as-Sahab Media

Newsweek: Bin Laden's Army - A one-time jihadi looks at why so many radical Islamic groups include doctors and engineers—and how their involvement threatens the religion itself.

AP: Jury deadlocks on last 2 defendants in failed London transit attacks

CNN: Jury dismissed in UK terror plot

Daily Telegraph: Police let the July 21 bombers slip the net

Sky News: Cops Face Pressure Over 21/7 'Failings'

Sky News Video: Pakistan's Visa Process

Reuters: Chronology of major terrorism trials in Britain

BBC: Terrorists had plans of Sizewell

Times of India: UK terror plot: Cops see Al-Qaida link

The Hindu: 'No proof to link Kafeel with Al-Qaeda'

Guardian: Imam Says 2 UK Suspects Changed Recently

Hindustan Times: 'Secret data' found in Kafeel's computer hard disk

Hindustan Times: UK attack linked to science hub strike?

CBS: Burned UK Suspect Unlikely To Survive

Bloomberg: Australian Terrorism Probe Into U.K. Bomb Plot Heads to India

The Australian: Haneef's lawyer may appeal detention

The Australian: Terror evidence may be lost after 'bungle'

The Australian: New visa cross-checks ramp up scrutiny

Scotsman News: Petrol proof sought in new anti-terror measure

This insight does not come from those cases that have already been well publicized. As described in the Counterterrorism Blog by Matthew Levitt, starting in Dallas this month, federal prosecutors will be opening a trial that involves allegations that persons affiliated with the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development illegally provided material support to Hamas, and this case has generated some pre-trial rulings that mention the Muslim Brotherhood. U.S. v. Holy Land Foundation, 2006 WL 3542685 (N.D.Tex 2006.). After 9/11, prosecutors in Virginia succeeded in obtaining a conviction of a Hamas operative named Soliman Bihieiri for naturalization fraud, though they failed to obtain the terrorism enhancement at sentencing, during which they presented evidence about his association with the Muslim Brotherhood. U.S. v. Biheiri, 299 F.Supp.2d 590 (E.D.Va.,2004). The Muslim Brotherhood was also mentioned in one court case involving Mousa Abu Marzook’s New York proceedings to determine whether he should be extradited to Israel, which had charged him criminally. Matter of Extradition of Marzook, 924 F.Supp. 565 (SDNY 1996).

There were several opinions arising out of the civil wrongful death lawsuits, in which American lawyers sought or are seeking damages from entities and governments allegedly associated with the Muslim Brotherhood. Weiss v. National Bank of Westminster, 2007 WL 1460933 (E.D.N.Y 2007); Weiss v. National Westminster Bank PLC, 453 F.Supp.2d 609 (E.D.N.Y.,2006;) Strauss v. Credit Lynonnaise, 2007 WL 1558567 (E.D.N.Y 2006.); Strauss v. Credit Lyonnais, S.A. 2006 WL 2862704 (E.D.N.Y. 2006); Boim v. Quranic Literacy Institute, 340 F.Supp.2d 885 (N.D.Ill.,2004); and Ungar v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 211 F.Supp.2d 91 (D.D.C. 2002). These opinions recite the plaintiff’s allegations that the Muslim Brotherhood should be held responsible for some terrorist attacks.

The most common type of case mentioning the Muslim Brotherhood (16 opinions), it turns out, involves immigration litigation, where aliens litigated whether they should be sent back to their home countries. Several involved persons who claimed that they would be persecuted or tortured if returned to their home country - typically Syria or Egypt - because of the perception that they are affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood. Farag v. Attorney General, 2005 WL 147463 (E.D.Pa. 2005); Elzour v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 1143 (10th Cir. 2004); Kharrat v. I.N.S., 60 F.3d 833 (9th Cir. 1996); Kharrat v. I.N.S., 60 F.3d 833 (9th Cir. 1995); Khano v. I.N.S., 999 F.2d 1203, (7th Cir. 1993); Ajlani v. I.N.S., 947 F.2d 953 (10th Cir. 1991)(unpublished); and Chebchoub v. I.N.S., 257 F.3d 1038 (9th Cir. 2001). Several of these cases involved an alien’s allegation that they would be threatened by the Muslim Brotherhood if forced to go home. Almasri v. Gonzlalez, 147 Fed.Appx. 707, 2005 WL 2673540 (9th Cir. 2005).; Malak v. Ashcroft, 110 Fed.Appx. 217, 2004 WL 2202256 (3rd Cir. 2004)(unpublished); Zaza v. Ashcroft, 106 Fed.Appx. 640, 2004 WL 1987310 (9th Cir. 2004); Al-Sayegh v. Ashcroft, 104 Fed.Appx. 656, 2004 WL 1826220 (9th Cir. 2004); Khalil v. Ashcroft, 337 F.3d 50 (1st Cir. 2003); Aljabi v. I.N.S., 108 F.3d 336 (9th Cir. 1997)(unpublished); Rouman v. I.N.S., 983 F.2d 1077 (9th Cir. 1993); and Elnager v. I.N.S., 930 F.2d 784 (9th Cir. 1991).

Among these immigration cases is a single opinion arising out of the celebrated case involving the U.S. government’s refusal to permit academic Tariq Ramadan to come to the U.S. to accept a teaching appointment at Notre Dame. American Academy of Religion v. Chertoff, 463 F.Supp.2d 400 (S.D.N.Y. 2006). In that litigation, Ramadan - who is the grandson of Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood - claimed that he has not embraced his grandfather's vision and has never considered himself a Muslim Brotherhood member.

The most interesting of the Muslim Brotherhood cases, however, involve persons who argued that their constitutional rights were being violated by not being permitted to engage in Brotherhood activities while incarcerated in American correctional facilities. Reischauer v. Jones, 2007 WL 1521578 (W.D.Mich 2007); Reischauer v. Jones, 2005 WL 2045833 (W.D.Mich. 2005); Small v. Lehman, 98 F.3d 762 (3rd Cir. 1996); Salih v. Smith, 1994 WL 750529 (D.Md. 1994); Munir v. Scott, 792 F.Supp. 1472 (E.D. Ich 1992); and Muhammed v. Michigan, 924 F.2d 1058 (6th Cir. 1991)(unpublished).

The truly amazing insight come from three of these prisoner lawsuits:

• George Desmond, an inmate at the federal prison in Lewisburg, Pennsylvania, filed a lawsuit complaining that prison officials refused his request to enjoy religious instruction from Elijah Muhammed, the leader of the Nation of Islam. The officials decision was based on the content of the meetings that had been held were hate-filled and filled with anti-Christian and anti-Jewish diatribes, and the prison had uncovered coercive recruiting by the group among the black inmate population, and their decision was ultimately affirmed.

• In New York, Emmanuel Washington sued the warden of the Green Haven State Prison, claiming that three fellow prisoners had been segregated from the others and deprived of the guidance of their own minister, and of the right to receive prayer books, Holy Koran magazines and newspapers, solely because they are adherents of the Muslim Brotherhood. The trial judge found that the Muslim Brotherhood as it existed at the prison was not a religion but rather a secret organization which was a fomenting point for unrest and frustration, and that plaintiffs had been punished for their membership in the Brotherhood and segregated as a proper and necessary step in the insurance of discipline and good order within the prison and that, in so doing, the Warden had violated no rights.

• James Pierce, Martin Sostre and another inmate of the Clinton Prison in Dannemora, New York unsuccessfully challenged the wardens decision to punish them for agitation, which they claimed was as a result of their association with the Muslim Brotherhood.

Why are these cases so interesting? It turns out they were litigated in the early 1960s. Desmond v. Blackwell, 235 F.Supp. 246 (W.D. Pa. 1964); Sostre v. McGinnis, 334 F.2d 906 (2nd Cir. 1964); and Pierce v. LaVallee, 212 F.Supp. 865 (S.D.N.Y. 1963), 319 F.2d 844 (2nd Cir. 1963).

This revelation is stunning. It means is that the Muslim Brotherhood was sufficiently active and well-organized in the United States to have reached American prisoners, and to have litigated prison conditions here, starting over 40 years ago. The fact that this legal history exists has, to my knowledge, never been considered in recent debates about whether to embrace the Brotherhood as an organization that can help the U.S. meet the challenge of violent jihadists.

These old cases should be of vital interest for another reason, which involved a court’s decision in one of them. The Pierce case described what triggered the disciplinary action against the three Muslim inmates accused of “agitation” in the administrative action challenged in the lawsuit. At the Clinton facility, there had been a system whereby plots of land in the prison yard of varying dimensions are assigned to inmates for their use during specific hours when yard privileges are available. Some 300 plots, known as “courts,“ were dedicated to various recreational or educational purposes. One or more of such courts were assigned to and controlled by members of the Muslim organization.

In the spring of 1959, the prison authorities directed surveillance of the Muslim court and a report by the yard guard of activities on them. The testimony of the guards indicated a more or less continuous activity within the Muslim court. A larger number of inmates that was usually found gathered at that area and were often addressed by some individual. Upon the approach of a guard to the Muslim court, all conversation and activity ceased so that the guard was unable to hear what was being said. When the guard moved out of hearing distance, conversation resumed and the speaker apparently received the full attention of the group. This action was interpreted by prison officials as indicating furtive discussions, indicative of secretiveness or condition of unrest.

On August 10, 1959, the prison authorities examined a homemade “locker” located on the Muslim court and discovered a Muslim Brotherhood written constitution. This document was significant enough to the court’s decision for it to include it as an appendix to the Pierce opinion. It provided:

1. To maintain ourselves and the Muslim Brotherhood as the vigorous, intellectual vanguard of the struggle for complete unity among our brothers by employing the unifying force of Islam.

2. To secure & maintain the complete intellectual unity & awakening of our brothers by promoting the advantages of unity of action and organization through the study of: Islam; our history which has been concealed from us; the struggle for freedom being made by our brothers at home and abroad; and all other pertinent subjects.

3. To build and train leaders for the future struggle so that each member upon his release shall be so equipped, that he will be able to successfully organize his own group or be an asset to any organization he may join.

INTRODUCTION

Since no movement can endure unless there is a stable organization of trained, selected and trusted men to maintain continuity and carry its program forward to successful conclusion.
And since the more widely our brothers are drawn into the struggle for freedom the more necessary it is to have an organization such as the Muslim Brotherhood to establish unity of action and thereby making it impossible and difficult for demagogues, sell-out men, uncle-toms, traitors, cowards and self-seekers to lead astray any section of the masses of brothers.

And since, in a country like this with a despotic anti-brother and anti-Muslim government, and in addition being inside the prison of the enemy, the more necessary it is to restrict the Muslim Brotherhood to persons who are sincere and going “all the way”. These will be trained in the art of combatting all manner of intrigues, deceptions & persecutions thereby making it difficult for anyone to disrupt the programs of the Muslim Brotherhood.

I therefore accept and abide by the laws of the Muslim Brotherhood which are as follows:-

1. I will irrevocably obey and act upon the orders, commands, instructions and directions of the Muslim Brotherhood.

2. I will always serve, sacrifice and suffer anything for the cause for which the Brotherhood stands, and will at all times be ready to go on any mission that I may be called upon to perform.

3. I will always and in all circumstances help a member of the Muslim Brotherhood in all things and in all difficulties.

4. I will make it my aim & duty to foster the cause for which the Brotherhood stands among all the brothers.

5. I will, except as a last resort avoid the use of violence.

OATH OF ALLEGIANCE

On my life, honor and fortunes, I solemnly pledge and promise that I shall always live up to the aims and aspirations of the Muslim Brotherhood, and shall never under any circumstances divulge any secrets, plans and movements of the Muslim Brotherhood, nor betray a member brother; and if I dare to divulge any secrets, plans or movements of the Muslim Brotherhood, or betray a member brother or the cause, or use the influence of the Brotherhood for my own personal interest, I do so at my own risk and peril.

MEMBERSHIP

Only brothers shall be eligible for membership and these must accept Islam, the objects, policy, program & discipline of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Any person who is a known informer or a homosexual shall not be eligible for membership. (the rumor that one is an informer, shall, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, bar one from membership).

Application for membership shall be made through a member who shall introduce the applicant to members of the Brotherhood for their acceptance or otherwise.

All new members accepted by the organization shall undergo a probationary period of two months. During this time such probationary member shall be given a copy of the Rules of Court only and such probationary member shall be carefully watched at all times by all members as to his conduct, sincerity and motives of joining the Brotherhood.

During the probationary period, the probationary member shall merely be an observer at Brotherhood meetings and although he may voice his opinion, he shall not vote. He may participate in all activities of the organization except the meetings in which strategy & secret plans are discussed.

It shall be the duty of all full-fledged members to instruct the probationary member on Islam, Arabic and all other projects, activities & studies (except secret plans & strategy) of the Brotherhood and to aid him toward becoming a full-fledged member.

After the two month probationary period, the probationary member shall become a full-fledged member of the Brotherhood only upon an affirmative vote of the members.

Should the probationary member fail to receive the necessary vote, a second vote shall be taken to extend his probationary period for an additional month.

If on the second vote less than the majority of the members vote for extension of the probationary period, the probationary member shall be denied membership.

MEMBERSHIP DUES AND CONTRIBUTIONS

Each individual member of the organization shall pay monthly dues as determined by the Brotherhood unless exempted therefrom.

The Brotherhood shall maintain a fund (from dues & voluntary contributions), such fund to be used for supplementing the diet of the members and furthering the cause of the Brotherhood only.

COMMUNICATION

A close liaison shall at all times be maintained between all members of the organization, in prison and out. As far as possible all communications should be done by personal contact, or employing only members as couriers and messengers. Letters & notes on important subjects (in prison) should be written in Arabic (on the outside, letters, telegrams, telephones & cables should be used only for making appointments to discuss business). Discussion of Muslim Brotherhood matters in public places is forbidden.

All members shall upon their release maintain contact with the Brotherhood and aid it.

Also important is part of the Pierce court’s ruling - that the Muslim Brotherhood should be treated as a political rather than religious organization, for purposes of determining the constitutional claims of the Brotherhood prisoners. Pierce v. LaVallee, 212 F.Supp. 865 (S.D.N.Y. 1962).

In considering to what extent the U.S. should officially embrace the Muslim Brotherhood, it is not a question whether they are already at our shores. They are, after all, so entrenched that they have been an organized group in our prisons for almost half a century.

It should be noted that this aspect of American jurisprudence dealing with the Brotherhood is a small portion of those cases that have involved the religious rights of Muslims in U.S. prisons. Prison litigation is a trademark of the Nation of Islam. As I will describe in another article, starting in the 1960s, a full 80 percent of all references to the Nation of Islam in American federal court opinions (197 cases out of approximately 250) involved prison litigation.

(As always, the opinion in this article are the author's own, and do not reflect those of the Department of Justice.)

Bangladesh: British Jihadists Traveling to Bangladesh for Training. London Guardian reports that that "[s]ignificant numbers of Britons are travelling to Bangladesh to train in terrorist techniques amid rising concern among security and intelligence officials about the increasing appeal of al-Qaida's message throughout the Middle East and south-east Asia. Their concern is compounded by a realisation among al-Qaida leaders of the value of individuals who can enter western countries easily. Officials say the number of Britons of Bangladeshi descent apparently prepared to consider carrying out terrorist acts marks a new and worrying development. It coincides with the increasing number of young Britons travelling to Pakistan via South Africa in an effort to avoid being noticed by British security officials. Recent terrorist trials have shown how the Britain-Pakistan link has been crucial, with many convicted terrorists having trained in camps in Pakistan." The London Times has also previously reported on the use of South Africa by British Jihadists to get to Pakistan.

UK Outsourcing Immigrant Checks to India. Daily Mail reported that the UK "Foreign Office was criticised for contracting out vital checks on immigrants to a private company in India." The Daily Express is reporting that "[t]he Foreign Office has also come under fire for contracting-out vital security checks on immigrants to a private company based in India. Earlier this year, responsibility for security checks on immigrants from countries including India and Pakistan was given to VFS Global. The business, which employs local staff, even carries out the critical task of taking fingerprints and storing them electronically."

EU Human Rights Laws and Terrorists. The London Times reports that "Migrationwatch says the UK should give six months’ notice that it will withdraw from the convention and announce that that any foreigners convicted of a terrorist offence will be deported to their home country at the end of their sentence. The report adds that the Government should also be allowed to detain suspects for long periods of time. Ministers will continue to find it almost impossible to kick out terrorist suspects or those who have served a sentence for terrorism while the UK remains in the convention. Migrationwatch says that the convention and its interpretation by the courts is acting as a 'positive encouragement' to terrorists to come to the UK because it is almost impossible to deport them to foreign states with poor human rights records."

Scotland - Hizb ut-Tahrir bid to control Scotland's main mosque. Scotland's Daily Record reports: "A radical Islamic group tried to gain control at Scotland's main mosque just months before one of its members allegedly tried to bomb Glasgow airport. The Hizb ut-Tahrir sect are said to have put forward candidates for ruling positions at the city's Central Mosque. The group want a global Islamic state. But their plans failed when officials realised who was putting up nominees for senior positions."

Scotland: Terror debate raises stark views. During a BBC Scotland program entitled "Scotland After the Bomb", Aamer Anwar stated: "A Stealth bomber in Iraq is the moral equivalent of a suicide bomber in Scotland". This was greeted by "rounds of applause" by the BBC studio audience. On the BBC Scotland program, Mr. Anwar continued "There is no justification for the murder of innocent people. The US and Israel, however, are equal to any 9/11 hijacker." BBC reports that "[h]e added that it was a myth that there was an inclusive, multicultural Scotland..."

London Central Mosque Protest - Media Recording. WorldNetDaily.com has reported a recording by radio host Rusty Humphries of Anjem Choudary and an estimated 3,000 protesting Islamists in front of the London Central Mosque on June 22, 2007. The report quotes Anjem Choudary as shouting "One day my dear Muslims, Islam will govern Britain!" The report quotes Abu Saif as stating "Brothers and sisters, make no mistake. Make no mistake. The British government, the queen, the MPs in this country, they are enemies to you, enemies to Allah and enemies to the Muslims." WND reports that "Abu Saif is believed to be a member of the group Hizb ut-Tahrir".

WND states that radio broadcaster Rusty Humphries interviewed Abu Saif, and reports that the "Muslim leader said he does not believe in democracy and insists there is no such thing as freedom of religion, 'because freedom is an absolute term.' 'Are we to say that Muslims can fully practice religion in America,' he asked in an attempt to explain. 'Say, for instance, I was a Muslim in America. Could I call for the destruction of the American government and establishment of an Islamic state in America? No. So where is the freedom of religion? There is none.' "

More background on doctors in car bomb plots. Newsweek has done an article on additional background on doctors in car bomb plots, which doesn't mention Hizb ut-Tahrir or other influences. The Newsweek article is intended to show links between the British Jihadists and Iraq.

Sources:

BBC: Four guilty over 21/7 bomb plot

AP: 4 guilty of plotting suicide bombing attack in London

Sky News: Three Guilty Over 21/7 Bomb Plot

Daily Mail: 21/7 bombers failed to kill dozens as 'mastermind' could not do maths

BBC: Profile: Muktar Ibrahim

BBC: Profile: Ramzi Mohammed

BBC: Profile: Yassin Omar

BBC: Profile: Hussain Osman

Daily Telegraph: The four guilty July 21 bombers

ITV News: Profile of the July 21 plotters

Daily Telegraph: Nuclear alert by ex-head of MI5

London Times: Recruit Muslim spies in war on terror, urges new security chief

Daily Telegraph: New UK terror threat from foreign students

Interpol Web Site on UK Non-Cooperation

BBC: UK defends its border procedures

Guardian: Britain failing to check migrants on terror database, says Interpol chief

Daily Express: Interpol: Britain is letting in terrorists

Belfast Telegraph: Terror networks operating in Ulster

KUNA: Five face second week of questioning over bomb plots

BBC: Australia extends Haneef inquiry

Daily Mail: Police in Australia search bomb suspect's car and flat

Evening Standard: Police in Australia search bomb suspect's car and flat

AP: India: Police seize UK terror suspect's computer

NDTV: Hard disk reveals Kafeel's terror links

International Herald Tribune: British terror suspect worked in jet design

AFP: No arrests in India over Britain terror plot: police

NDTV: Kafeel Ahmad linked with Tablighi Jamaat

August 2006: Hindustan Times: UK terror suspects' faith made in India

August 2006: India Daily: Suspected Terrorists for Recent UK Terror Plot Keep Faith in Tablighi Jamaat

Times of India: Kafeel's mother feared he was on wrong path

Daily Telegraph: Car bomb suspect visited al-Qa'eda's heartland

Guardian: More Britons travelling to Bangladesh to train in terror

May 3, 2007: London Times: British terrorists using Africa as secret staging post (story on use of South Africa to get to Pakistan)

London Times: "Change human rights laws to stop encouraging terrorists"

Daily Mail: Families abandon overseas holidays because of airport terror fears

Scotland Daily Record: Mosque Takeover Bid

BBC Scotland: Terror debate raises stark views

WorldNetDaily news report on London Central Mosque protest

Newsweek: Doctor of Death - A busted terror plot in Britain puts the spotlight on radicalized Muslim professionals.

The Syro-Iranian plan to crush Lebanon is not new. It has been incrementally developing since the summer of 2005. The plan moved forward inch-by-inch — assassinations, intimidations, so-called dialogue, urban intifada in Beirut, intelligence activities, war with Israel, propaganda, fighting with Fatah al Islam, etc. — so that by early summer 2007, the gradual crush would be set to begin.
.
The Lebanese cabinet of Fuad Seniora is aware of this possibility, but it lost multiple opportunities, early on, to bring in the United Nations and a multinational presence on the Syrian-Lebanese borders and in the major cities. The Syro-Iranian axis took advantage of this to reinforce its own forces within Lebanon.
.
The "axis" believes that the United States and its allies will be less-and-less capable of intervening by early 2008, hence during the summer-fall 2007 period we may see moves to gain more territory in Lebanon.
.
The main issue now is the presidency of the republic. Elections are currently slated to take place in September. But current, pro-Syrian President Emile Lahoud will try to postpone the elections as long as he can. The March 14 movement (opposed to the Syrian regime) will try to vote for its candidate — not yet selected — by late October/early November. The new president won't be recognized by Hezbollah and its allies.
.
Hezbollah and its allies will form a government of their own and take control of large parts of Lebanon. This plan is two years old. It is being publicized only now by both parties in the propaganda-warfare realm.
.
There is a possibility that the "axis" may attempt to break down the Seniora government during the summer (July-September) through ground action, and also by initiating the formation of another cabinet.
.
Al Mustaqbal, the pro-Hariri daily is publishing reports about a potential coup d'etat by Hezbollah as a "preemptive strike." The information about Iran-Hezbollah plans for a coup, were made available as early as 2006 by the Lebanese international lobby (also known as the World Council of the Cedars Revolution). The March 14 coalition chose to release this information now, as the other side is also leaking it in an attempt to intimidate the Seniora cabinet. Hence, as both sides are leaking it simultaneously, it has been picked up by international monitors of the various media, including MEMRI. In short, the plan of a coup d'etat by Hezbollah, and backed by Iran and Syria is two years old, but it is surfacing now as the crush moment draws dramatically closer. "

Read the MEMRI report here.

Dr Walid Phares is the Director of the Future Terrorism Project at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracy and the author of War of Ideas

MI5 Agents To Spot Student Terrorists in Scotland. The Daily Express reports that "foreign students in Scotland will be spied on to ensure campuses do not become secret havens for potential terrorists... and [o]verseas applicants, particularly those enrolling for 'high risk' courses such as engineering or chemistry, will be kept under surveillance." Daily Express reports that one of the Jihadists in the Bali Bombing, Azahari Husin, had forged friendships while at Reading University. Moreover, "David Capitanchik, a terrorism expert at Robert Gordon University, in Aberdeen, said some groups have been active on British campuses since 9/11." In addition, the Daily Express states that a "study in 2005 warned that campuses in Scotland had already become a recruiting ground for Islamic fundamentalists."

Call for Information, Cooperation on Terror Suspects. Sky News reports that UK PM Gordon Brown is calling for "greater international sharing of information about possible terrorist suspects", especially across Europe. UK Security Minister West also "said preventing people being recruited to extremism was central to defeating terrorism and called for the public to inform on suspects".

UK Terror Suspect Monitoring Failing Due To Electronic Tag Failures. Daily Mail reports on the failure and unreliability of electronic tag devices used to monitor Islamist terror suspects who are under "house arrest" and control orders.

Convicted Terrorist Working as UK Traffic Warden. Daily Mail reports on a convicted Jihadist terrorist, Mustapha Boutarfa, who now has a job working as a UK traffic warden. Jihadist Mustapha Boutarfa was "jailed for his involvement in a bomb attack on the Paris Metro - which killed eight people and wounded 80". Daily Mail states "It was unclear why Boutarfa was allowed back into Britain. It is understood he lied about his criminal conviction when he applied for his job as a traffic warden."

Not In Their Name? BBC reports that the Muslim Council of Britain has advised UK Muslims that it is their "Islamic duty to co-operate with the police to ensure the safety of British citizens - Muslims and non-Muslims." Daily Telegraph questions the relative change of heart by the Muslim Council of Britain saying that "in the past, the MCB has seemed to be somewhat lukewarm about encouraging British Muslims to go to the police or security services with any suspicions they might have about friends or acquaintances who they think might be involved in terrorism. It is, after all, only nine months since Mr Bari issued a scarcely veiled threat to the authorities: he said that if the Government and 'some police officers and sections of the media' continued to 'demonise Muslims… Britain will have to deal with two million Muslim terrorists, 700,000 of them in London'."

The London Times reports that " 'We acknowledge that there is radicalisation taking place in our community,' said Daud Abdullah, deputy leader of the Muslim Council of Britain." Daily Telegraph also reports comments by former extremist Ed Husain that "None of the leading members of the MCB have condemned the hard-line anti-Western ideology of figures such as Syed Qutb", and that the Muslim Council of Britain does not denounce the terrorist group Hamas. Daily Telegraph also provides a graphic which summarizes statistical information on Muslims in the UK, as well as surveyed support among some British Muslims for suicide bombing, terrorism, and Sharia law.

Negative Reactions in Calls for British Muslim Protest Against Jihadism. The London Times reports on some negative response among British Muslims on calls for Islamic protest against Jihadist terrorism. "On the ummah.com forum a lively debate flourished. One participant, junaid368, asked: 'Shouldn't the Muslim community of UK protest [against] the recent terror attacks?' One response advised: 'Don't forget, if they [the alleged bombers] are Muslim, they are your brothers. Don't ever give the impression the kufr [nonMuslims] are more valuable.' And a user called AbuMubarak posted: 'Instead of kissing kufr butt, why don’t we go forth and tell them that they must worship Allah and fear the fire?' Another poster, Saadet, wrote: 'No Muslim should make any official condemnation of this incident . . .' " Per London Times: "But not all comments were negative. A contributor called Kal-El wrote: 'It's time to show the world that we are not barbaric people who lust for blood. I am sick and tired of my faith being tarnished in this way and . . . being labelled a terrorist simply because I am a Muslim.' "

Failure of UK Policies in Preventing Jihadism? London Times reported that "[t]wo years on from the 7/7 attacks, government strategy for tackling Islamic extremism is in turmoil". London Times has documented policy failures: "proposal to shut mosques “fomenting extremism” was immediately shelved after protests from Muslim leaders and the police; no progress has been made on plans to speed up the extradition of terror suspects wanted in other countries; and nobody has been convicted under a new offence of glorifying terrorism (though one person has been charged). Plans to boot out radical preachers have been hampered by the government’s failure to secure agreements with other countries not to torture deportees. Only four agreements have been signed and one person deported. A proposal to ban Hizb ut-Tahrir, a group with which at least two of the alleged car bomb plotters came into contact, was dropped. The use of "control orders" to keep terror suspects under close scrutiny is descending into farce. Out of 18 suspects placed on these orders -- a form of house arrest -- seven have absconded."

Meantime, as London Times reports, "Quite apart from the car bombs, recent court cases have revealed other, home-grown terrorists are still intent on plotting death and destruction. A poll last month by Channel 4 News revealed that almost a quarter of Britain’s 2m Muslims still do not believe that the 7/7 attacks were carried out by the four named suicide bombers -- even though two of them left video-taped testimonies. More than half of those polled also felt the security services had made up evidence to convict terror suspects. A survey in July 2006 found that 13% of Muslims in Britain viewed the 7/7 bombers as heroic and 16% said that while the attacks were wrong, their cause was right."

London Times also reports: "Gordon Brown has dropped the use of the phrase “war on terror”, and Jacqui Smith, the home secretary, was careful not to single out Muslims or Islam when briefing MPs about the car bombing attempts."

Sources:

Daily Telegraph: Warning of 15-year fight against terror

BBC: Terror fight 'may take 15 years'

The Daily Star: New bomb warnings

Daily Telegraph: Nuclear alert by ex-head of MI5

The New York Times: British Identify Two "Principal" Suspects

Observer: Terror suspect's jet bomb plot link

London Times: Car bombs are linked with Iraq's Al-Qaeda

The Australian: Modern militant 'recruits himself'

London Times: Biting back at terror suspects - How far did the alleged plot to bomb London stretch? A special report on a case that spans the globe from the UK to Iraq, India and Australia

The Australian: Graphic of International Plot Ties

Australian Sunday Mail: Indian police hunt for 12 UK bomb suspects

Times of India: Jihadi CDs seized from Kafeel's home

Times of India: 'Kafeel had left a suicide note at his house'

The Hindu: Was car-bomb designed in Bangalore?

Australia News: Doctors freed after terror questioning

Australia Courier-Mail: Focus on bomb plot transfers

Australian Sunday Mail: Car bomb 'to be detonated from Australia'

Daily Telegraph: Islamic charity linked to car bomb suspect

London Times: How I befriended a Glasgow bomb suspect and Islamic radical

Daily Express: MI5 Agents To Spot Student Terrorists

Sky News: PM Gordon Brown - 'Urgent' Need To Share Terror Information

Sky News: Call To Snitch On Terror Suspects

Daily Express: Tag fiasco: Failures in monitoring terror suspects

Daily Express: NHS doctors accused of bomb plots, Al Qaeda fanatics working for the police, and now the Terrorist traffic warden

BBC: 'Islamic duty' to help UK police

Daily Telegraph: Not in their name?
Related graphic

London Times: The battle for hearts and minds - Two years on from the 7/7 attacks, government strategy for tackling Islamic extremism is in turmoil

Metro: Anti-terror message 'failing'

-- Terror Suspect told family "the time has come now". Daily Telegraph reports on Dr. Kafeel Ahmed advising his family hours before Glasgow attack that "the time has come now", and also reports on social network Internet site called Orkut where a bombing suspect placed " a series of messages had been left in the run-up to the attack by a user calling himself 'mujahid' [holy warrior]."

-- Britons find comedy in Jihadist terror attacks. London Times and ABC News both did stories on how some Britons found comedy and humor in the failed Jihadist terror attacks. London Times reports that "Paul Stokes, the Mash’s co-editor, said: 'It helps that nobody died in the attack'".

Sources:

Sky News: London Remembers July 7 Bomb Attacks

DPA: Analysis: Britain remains top terror target two years after July 7 attacks

CNN: Suspect charged in UK bomb attempts

Daily Mail: Eight Al Qaeda fanatics working for the police (but they don't dare sack them)

Evening Standard: Eight Al Qaeda fanatics working for the police (but they don't dare sack them)

Sky News: Al Qaeda Extremists 'Working In Police'

Times of India: E-mails, internet chats of terror suspects probed

Daily Mail: Terror-case doctor talked of car bombs

Times of India: Five Indian doctors released, Haneef not charged yet

Times of India: Haneef continues to be quizzed; remains in custody in Aus

The Australian: Six doctors questioned as terror net widens

The Australian: Radical group faces ban

Daily Telegraph: The textbook terrorists

London Times: "The unexpected profile of the modern terrorist: 26, from a caring family, married, with children, graduate"

Daily Telegraph: Terror suspect told family 'time had come'

London Times: Airport hit by suicide bombers? You’ve got to laugh...

ABC News: Chin Up: British Papers Poke Fun at Terror

Al-Qaeda

Since 9/11, Al-Qaeda has gone from operating as a terrorist group, with an organizational structure, to evolving into an ideology aligned with regional terrorist groups, back to a group being reconstituted as an organization. In essence, Al-Qaeda the group versus Al-Qaeda the ideology presents overlapping challenges and a sense of confusion. Regardless of the form, as a group or an ideology, Al-Qaeda has been a constant threat to U.S. security. It still seeks to infiltrate operatives into the U.S. to conduct catastrophic attacks. The genesis of Al-Qaeda has caused changes in the manner it raises and uses funds. In the period around 9/11, Al-Qaeda relied on wealthy donors and charities for much of its funding. As the organization became disrupted and less identifiable due to U.S. government action, pressure was brought to bear on wealthy Middle Eastern donors and charities, especially in Saudi Arabia. This led to greater reliance on criminal activities to raise funds. As Al-Qaeda becomes more visible as an organization again, it is likely that new funding sources and donors will emerge. On the other side of the ledger, Al-Qaeda’s funding needs went from being extremely large as an organization to less demanding as an ideology. The reemergence of an organization will require an increase of organizational funding requirements. Operational activities continually require funding sources. If funds are not available through the group, the operators will have to generate funding through their own devices to include criminal activity.

Regional Terrorist Groups aligned with Al-Qaeda

Since 9/11, regional groups have emerged as a significant threat. They are more autonomous and in many instances have adopted Osama Bin Laden’s ideology. Groups to include Jemaah Islamiah, Ansar Al-Islam, Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group (GICM), and Salafist Group for Call and Combat (GSPC) are examples of highly dangerous and visible regional groups aligned with Al-Qaeda. In the pre 9/11 environment and shortly thereafter, these groups received funding from Al-Qaeda. When Al-Qaeda’s organizational presence diminished, so did its funding support. These groups rely on their own fundraising mechanisms, to include criminal activity. Certain of these groups may receive some state sponsored funding. It will be interesting to monitor Al-Qaeda’s reemergence to determine if they again provide funding to regional groups.

Homegrown Cells

The homegrown threat is posed by self-radicalized groups and individuals already living in the U.S. who are inspired but not led by Al-Qaeda. These groups pose vastly different threats and capabilities in comparison to Al-Qaeda. For the most part, they have proven to be unsophisticated and operate on a small scale. Many of these individuals have funded themselves through legitimate jobs. Because of the small scale of their operations, they have not required significant funding. In other countries, in addition to legitimate jobs, homegrown terrorists have funded themselves through government entitlement programs.

Shia Extremists

The most notable Shia terrorist group is Hezbollah. Hezbollah is centered in Lebanon. A great deal of its funding comes from state sponsors Iran and Syria. In addition, Hezbollah has established a worldwide infrastructure that raises significant amounts of funding through organized criminal activity and questionable business practices. In fact, in many respects, Hezbollah operates like a traditional organized crime family in terms of its criminal activity. Almost all terrorist groups operate based on ideology. Hezbollah operates with a sense of ideology but also with a sense of greed, like an organized crime family. Most other terrorist organizations do not operate with a sense of greed. Hezbollah also requires considerably more money because of its position in Lebanon and its outreach and marketing as a benefactor to the Lebanese people. In addition to state sponsors and criminal activity, Hezbollah has raised significant funds through donations from the global Lebanese expatriate community. Although the U.S. has designated Hezbollah a terrorist organization, many countries have not, making it easier for Hezbollah to raise funds in those venues.

Palestinian Terrorist Groups

Palestinian terrorist groups include Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ). Their activities have emanated from the Palestinian territories and have focused their attention on Israel. Hamas is the most recognizable Palestinian terrorist group, especially since gaining political leadership in Palestine. The U.S. recognizes Hamas as a terrorist organization. As is the situation with Hezbollah, many countries do not, which makes fundraising in those territories viable. The fighting between Hamas and Fatah for power has consumed the Palestinians and has split the territory with Hamas controlling Gaza and Fatah the West Bank. Hamas relies on charities, donations, friendly Arab States and state sponsors for funding. Hamas has been particularly skillful in using charities for fundraising and logistical support for their terrorist activities. The U.S. and Israel have led an international sanctioning effort against Hamas which has successfully limited, restricted or denied funding sources through banking channels. This has adversely impacted Hamas’ operating capability. Hamas has had to rely on informal financial channels such as bulk cash shipments and couriers to receive funding.

Domestic Terrorist Groups

Domestic terrorist groups are those groups operating strictly within the U.S. They encompass a broad spectrum of groups motivated by a number of political and social issues. These groups include white supremists, militia/sovereign citizen movements, black separatists, animal rights activists and environmental extremists. Funding sources for these groups usually originate with group members, sympathizers or group generated revenue. Groups generate revenue from front companies, either legitimately or illegitimately. In the case of the National Alliance, they raised funds through the sale of books and publications. Certain of these groups also generate funds through the sale of false identification documents.

Terrorist financing is extremely challenging to identify and deal with. Understanding that varying organizations have unique operational considerations, requiring different financial infrastructures, sets the foundation for understanding and developing methodologies to counter these infrastructures and disrupt the flow of funds.

While possibly not as horrendous as the 2005 Kashmir earthquake, there have been over 200 deaths so far and at least two million are homeless. Karachi, Pakistan’s leading port, and a sprawling megalopolis with over 10 million inhabitants (some population estimates double this figure) that suffers from power outages and poor municipal services at the best of times, was battered. Particularly hard hit were the coastal regions of the Pakistani province of Baluchistan, where the floods have isolated communities, cutting transport and communications links. Outbreaks of cholera and other diseases also loom.

The Pakistani provincial and federal governments have been slow to respond. In shades of our own Katrina disaster, Pakistan’s National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) has been roundly criticized for its failures. At one point, the NDMA chairman claimed that there had been 14 deaths when the media had already confirmed nearly 100. There have been large-scale protests throughout flood-hit parts of Baluchistan.

At the moment the Pakistani government is distracted. There is a standoff in Pakistan’s capital between government forces and the radical Islamist “Red Mosque.” The nation has also been rocked with massive protests in the wake of President Musharraf’s ham-handed firing of the chief justice.

A timely and large-scale relief package is much needed. Aiding people suffering from natural disasters is always the right thing to do. Also, it is good public diplomacy. The Pakistani image of the United States changed when the U.S. led the way in delivering assistance to Pakistan after the 2005 earthquakes. Models of U.S. Army Chinook helicopters became the favorite toy for Kashmiri children.

U.S. aid to Pakistan’s coastal regions would also serve a range of positive strategic purposes. The aid would be an opportunity for U.S. and Pakistani military forces to work together in a peaceful role. The Pakistani military is effective, but heavily focused on a conventional war with India. The U.S. has been assisting the Pakistani military in its transformation into a more nimble force that can perform a range of missions. Collaborating on flood relief would be a learning experience for both militaries.

One of the Pakistani government’s major concerns is that eventually the United States will abandon it, leaving Pakistan encircled by India. A major rescue operation might help reassure Pakistan that the U.S.-Pakistan relationship is for the long-term. If the Pakistani government were more confident in strength of the U.S.-Pakistan relationship it might also be more flexible in undertaking political reforms that move the country back to democratic civilian rule.

The region hardest hit by the flooding is Baluchistan, the largest in area, but poorest province of Pakistan. Sitting on mineral wealth, including natural gas, and with a seacoast that is just beyond the Straits of Hormuz and the terminus for the shortest land route to Central Asia, Baluchistan has become central for Pakistan’s future development. Baluchi frustration with the Pakistani government has sparked uprisings in the past. The current round of violence between the Baluchi tribes and the government is fueled by the failure of the investments in the province to bring benefits to the inhabitants. Past Pakistani governments responded to Baluchi uprisings with negotiations, but currently the Pakistani military is responding with a large-scale offensive. Last year, the Pakistani military assassinated a prominent tribal leader, Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti. The government’s failure to deliver disaster relief is seen as simply another example of the Pakistani government’s attitude towards the region.

A strong aid program might help defuse some of these tensions and allow the government and the Baluchis to resolve their disputes. With Baluchistan bordering southern Afghanistan (Taliban leader Mullah Omar is rumored to be in the vicinity of the provincial capital Quetta) the Pakistani military does not need this distraction from the main battle against the radical Islamists. Additionally, China has built a deep-water port at Gwadar on the Baluchi coastline. It would only be prudent for the United States to also be engaged in this strategic region. Finally, if assistance from other sources is not forthcoming, the void will be filled by Pakistan’s powerful Islamist organizations. The Baluchis have not traditionally been extremist in their religious beliefs, but if no one else shows concern for their plight that could change.

Delivering aid to the suffering people in Pakistan’s coastal regions is an opportunity to provide much needed humanitarian relief while improving relations with a nation crucial in the fight against radical Islam.

Aaron Mannes is a researcher in international security affairs and Ph.D. student at the University of Maryland.

Shiraz further recounts,

"Bilal talked about the validity of jihad, about expelling American and British troops. He described jihad as the highest pinnacle of Islam. He worked to the same endgame that we were all working to. There was no difference between us at the time. He would laugh when we talked about a particular bomb attack in Iraq. We all rejoiced then. And yet even I didn't think that he would take action himself.

Like myself, Bilal didn't have any non-Muslim friends and the circle of Muslims he chose to socialise with was small and selective. But he certainly trusted and respected us. I think this was solely because he recognised that we shared the same ultimate vision as him for Iraq and the wider Muslim world. In that sense our views were virtually identical. We only differed over our choice of method."

And I completely agree with Shiraz and all those other Muslims who either escaped the Islamist trap or have been lucky not to have ever fallen into it that:

"….I believe it's wrong to distinguish between 'extremism' and 'violent extremism' as the government has been doing in recent months. The two are inextricably intertwined. Without movements such as Hizb creating the moral imperatives to justify terror, people like Bilal wouldn't have the support of an ideological infrastructure cheering them on. And, I believe, it's a fallacy to suggest that the culpability of agitators and cheerleaders is any less than for those who actually carry out acts of terror."

Indian doctor tells family he is working on confidential global warming project. The Times of India reports that Dr. Kafeel Ahmed told his family that "I am involved in a large scale confidential project. It is about global warming. I cannot reveal the details. It involves a lot of travelling. I have to present a lot of papers at various places. The project has to be started in the United Kingdom. After starting it there, I will come back to Bangalore and continue it from here." Dr. Kafeel Ahmed is being treated for burns in Glasgow attemped car bombing. Times of India also reports that "He had also told his mother and sister that his earlier presentation failed and asked them to pray for him this time." Investigators are tying to decipher if this is referring to to a terrorist attack. Guardian reported today that Dr. Kafeel Ahmed was being transfered to a specialist burns unit and is still in critical condition.

Terror Profiling Not Permitted by UK Police. Daily Express reports that "officers carrying out spot checks at key sites have been told not to target people based on their ethnicity or age." Police officer source told the Daily Express: "At the moment we are stopping middle class, white pensioners and while we are searching their vehicle another car with four men of Middle Eastern or Asian appearance goes sailing past towards the airport and we have missed them."

Follow-up on Stolen NHS syringes used in failed car bomb attacks. The Daily Mail has a follow-up story on stolen NHS syringes used in the London car bombs. ABC reported this on July 4 afternoon.

Australia and UK Doctors looking for work. Dr Khalid Ahmed and his brother Sabeel both sought medical work in Australia, per Australian news media.

NHS recruitment substandard compared to other nations. Daily Mail is reporting that UK National Health Service recruitment standards are substandard, and that "two of the suspects in the car bomb plot who got jobs as doctors with the NHS were turned down by Australia because of their stricter controls."

UK Imams largely come from Pakistan. BBC and the Daily Telegraph did reports on foreign countries that imams are sourced from, with statistics showing a large number from Pakistan.

Sources:

Daily Telegraph: Glasgow terror plot police charge first suspect

RFERL: British PM Says Investigators Figuring Out Terrorist Cell

London Times: Bombing plots "were carried out with bin Laden's blessing"

Guardian: Bombs plot investigators look at role of al-Qaida cells in Iraq

Sky News: Terror Plotter Jailed For Nine Years

London Times: 'Clean skin terrrorist' guilty of hoarding car bomb manuals

AP: British court convicts man of having terrorist manuals, and money laundering

Reuters: Britain convicts al-Qaida "sleeper" agent Omar Altimimi

The Australian: Cambridge ring linked to bombs

BBC Video "Politics of Terror" focuses on Hizb ut Tahrir

AP: U.K. terror suspects made U.S. inquiry

The Philadelphia Inquirer: Sources: 2 in plot explored U.S. jobs

Daily Telegraph: Five ex-NHS doctors quizzed over UK bombs

London Times: Fresh terror raids on Australian hospitals

BBC: New Australia raids over UK bombs

Deutsche Presse-Agentur: Indian police question family of UK terrorist plot suspects

Times of India: I'm working on confidential project on global warming, Kafeel told parents

Guadian: Glasgow suspect moved to burns unit

Daily Express: Terror Search Fiasco

Blog: UK Police: Look Out For People Doing Things

Daily Mail: Stolen NHS syringes used in failed car bomb attacks

ABC News: Exclusive: U.K. Terror Plot -- Why the Bombs Failed

Australia News: Terror suspect doctors sought work in Queensland

Daily Mail: NHS fiasco as foreign bomb suspects are handed jobs while British doctors are forced to go abroad for work

BBC: Few UK imams 'come from Britain'- only 8 per cent
Related BBC graphic:

Daily Telegraph: Only 6pc of imams are native English speakers

More than two months have been passed since Maulana Abdul Aziz gave the Pakistan government ultimatum to enforce Sharia law in the country. He even threatened that clerics will Islamize society themselves, if the government failed to enforce Sharia and employ suicide bombers to go to any extent. The trouble started following an April 17 clerics’ convention on the protection of Madrassas (seminaries) declared that suicide bombings were un-Islamic and must not be encouraged. The convention was organized by the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazlur (JUI-F) faction. The convention also noted deteriorating security situation in the North West Frontier Province and elsewhere in the country, blaming Lal Masjid administration for their clarion call for Shria and Jihad.

In mid April, it was reported that over 300 militants affiliated to several Sunni outfits like the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ), Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) and Harkat-ul-Jihad Islami have reorganized themselves and sheltered in the Capital to work as “a back up in the event of a military action against the Lal Masjid.” Now it has been learned that many of the surrendered students actually belonging to these terror groups.

In the meantime, the ongoing standoff entered fourth day even after thousands of students surrendered and return to their houses. Pakistani security forces are still on guard and trying to flush the last remaining militant holed up inside the Mosque premise.

For latest developments, See, MetroBlogging Site.

On a trip to Saudi Arabia to meet with OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ishanoglu to “discuss future CAIR-OIC projects,” CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad made his feelings on the American-OIC envoy known, telling the Saudi-based Arab News, “[w]e hope that the selection of the individual would also be representative of the Muslim community and its views,” meaning that to avoid an Awad-engineered outcry and pressure campaign, the envoy must be “CAIR-approved.”

President Bush said that the special envoy’s job would be to “listen and learn” from the OIC, and that the envoy “will share with (the OIC) America's views and values.” Unless the purpose of the envoy would be to see who can be the more radical and anti-American mouthpiece, CAIR needs to be kept as far away from this initiative as possible, lest both organizations gang up in some outrageous, Karen Hughes-approved “grievance theater” performance. CAIR and the OIC are already in lockstep on virtually all issues, especially relating to terrorism, and CAIR is in no position to share America’s views and values with anyone. In fact, someone needs to explain America’s views and values to CAIR.

As readers of this blog know, CAIR was recently officially named (pdf) as a Muslim Brotherhood organization and as an un-indicted co-conspirator in the case against alleged Hamas-fundraisers, the Dallas-based Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF). Beyond that, CAIR’s lengthy history of extremism, pro-terrorist sentiments and anti-Semitism has been extensively reported and is well known.

And the Arab News article telegraphs just how useless having a CAIR-approved individual as special envoy to the OIC would be:

Muslims and Muslim organizations in the US have been criticized for not being effective in lobbying and standing up to smear campaigns compared to other US minorities. This is the most common criticism heard from the Muslim world, according to Awad, who added that Muslims in the US are heading in the right direction and that the Muslim community there is becoming more effective and gaining ground in building bridges.

So the “most common” criticism has not been that Muslim organizations in the U.S. have failed to sufficiently condemn terrorism or put forward policies and positions that condemn the targeted use of violence against civilians by such groups as Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah and Al-Qaeda, but that CAIR is not “effective” in standing up to “smear campaigns” against it. Expect more of this if CAIR has any say about the President’s appointment.

The President’s plan to appoint a special envoy to the OIC was a bad idea from the start, and can only be further compounded by letting CAIR – or other Islamist groups like it - have any say in the matter.

-- Plan to consult Muslim leaders on raids shelved. Guardian reports: "Police have scrapped a plan to allow Muslim community leaders to examine intelligence ahead of terror raids".

-- Scottish House Used as Makeshift Bomb Factory. AP is reporting that a "Scottish house had been used as a makeshift bomb factory to carry out the terror attacks in London and Scotland" a few miles from Glasgow airport, and that Jihadists"slept upstairs and used the downstairs as a makeshift bomb factory".

-- London Bomb Failed Due to Mechanism. ABC reports that "London bomb plot allegedly planned by a cell of doctors failed early last Friday morning because a medical syringe used as part of the firing mechanism caused a malfunction."

-- Prophet cartoons protester convicted in London of incitement to murder. AP reports that on conviction of London's Mizanur Rahman, a "speaker at a rally protesting against cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed was convicted Thursday of inciting murder." Prosecutors showed video of Rahman calling for the death of British soldiers and carrying "placards calling for the beheading and annihilation of anyone who insulted Islam".

-- Britain Lowers Terrorism Threat Level to Severe. ABC News reported that "Britain reduced its terrorism threat level to 'severe,' meaning further attacks are still considered likely but not imminent, as was feared when authorities raised the level to 'critical' after the failed attacks. Still, Britain's home secretary asked the public to remain vigilant, saying there was still a 'serious and real threat against the United Kingdom.'"

-- House of Lords To Hear Terrorism Law Appeals. Sky News reports that the UK House of Lords will hear an appeal on control orders regarding British Jihadist suspects. UK Court of Appeal ruled last year that such control orders "were incompatible with Article 5 of the European Convention On Human Rights, which prevents indefinite detention without trial." Sky News reports that "[t]en terror suspects [have been] placed under controversial control orders - including at least two who are on the run".

-- Daily Express Reports UK PM and EU Disallows Link Between Terror and Islam. Daily Express has reported that UK PM Gordon Brown "has banned ministers from using the word 'Muslim' in ­connection with the ­terrorism crisis. The Prime Minister has also instructed his team – including new Home Secretary Jacqui Smith – that the phrase 'war on ­terror' is to be dropped." In addition, the Daily Express reports that "Secret EU guidelines have been drawn up warning governments not to link Islam and terrorism."

Sources:

Daily Telegraph: 45 Muslim doctors planned US terror raids

Sky News: Full Text Of Vicar's Terror Warning Email

Reuters: UK court jails trio who incited terrorism over Web

UK Television Video Report on Cyber-terrorists

Washington Post: Terrorism's Hook Into Your Inbox - U.K. Case Shows Link Between Online Fraud and Jihadist Networks

BBC: Jihad tapes targeted professions

AP: British court convicts man of having terrorist manuals, and money laundering

Guardian: Man convicted of keeping terror manuals

Reuters: Britain convicts al-Qaida "sleeper" agent Omar Altimimi

AP: British court cases highlight Al-Qaeda threat

Courier-Mail: Ringleader 'Al-Qaeda sleeper'

Daily Mail: Terror suspects: Mohammed Haneef - Doctor who was trapped at airport

Daily Mail: Terror suspects: Mohammed Asha - Surgeon 'who turned radical'

Daily Mail: Terror suspects: Bilal Abdulla - Wanted revenge for his friend killed in Iraq

Daily Telegraph: Ties that bind terror car bomb suspectsIllustrative Chart

London Times: Indian doctors held in terror raids are cousins

Daily Telegraph: Airport attack doctor was known extremist

BBC Video "Politics of Terror" focuses on Hizb ut Tahrir and their infiltration into British schools and institutions

Sky News: Prime Minister Gordon Brown addresses demands of Parliament members to ban Hizb ut-Tahrir

Evening Standard: Home Office staff can join Islamic extremists

BBC Video (30 minute) regarding Parliament debate on Islamist groups

Guardian: Plan to consult Muslim leaders on raids shelved

AP: British Media: Scottish House Used as Makeshift Bomb Factory

ABC News: UK Terror Plot -- Why the Bombs Failed - ABC News: Medical syringe used in firing mechanism caused malfunction

AP: Prophet cartoons protester convicted in London of incitement to murder

ABC News: Britain Lowers Terrorism Threat Level

Sky News: House of Lords To Hear Terrorism Law Appeals

Daily Express: Brown: Don't say terrorists are Muslims

Daily Express: Europe tells Britain: Don't Says "Muslim" in Connection With Terrorism

Sources

Daily Telegraph: British Cleric: 'Al-Qa'eda leader told me of bomb plot'

Sky News: 'Those Who Cure You Will Kill You'

Sky News: Full Text Of Vicar's Terror Warning Email

Daily Telegraph: Bomb suspects on MI5 files

Daily Mail: NHS terror plot: police investigate global email network used by 'bombers'

BBC: UK 'spooks' under fire in papers

Daily Telegraph Strict new checks for foreign NHS doctors

Reuters: Brown orders doctors probe after British bomb plot

ABC News: Investigators: Scotland and London Bomb Attempts Linked to Same Two Men

CNN: UK terror police find suicide note

AP: Evidence suggests terror suspects hatched plot in Britain

UPI: British: Bombing suspects recruited here

AP: Country on high alert as 7/7 anniversary looms

Daily Telegraph: Yard sends terror detective to Australia