Western Values

10 Things You Need to Know about…Slavery in Islam

 

  1. Muslim slave trade in Africa has lasted 14 centuries and continues to this day in places like Mauritania, Saudi Arabia, and Sudan.
  2. Over 17 million slaves (mostly black women and children) were transported out of Africa by Islamic traders. Another 85 million are believed to have died en route.
  3. The Prophet Muhammad practiced and approved of slavery, and directed his men to do the same. 
  4. The Qur’an devotes more verses to informing Muslim men of their right to keep women as sex slaves, than it does to telling them to pray five times a day. 
  5. The Arabic word for “black” (Abd) is synonymous with the word for “slave”.
  6. Muhammad's father-in-law, Umar declared that Arabs could not be taken as slaves, and freed all Arab slaves.  This led to the wide Islamic campaign to capture slaves in Africa, Europe and Asia.  
  7. Western slave trade exploited Africans primarily for agricultural labor. The Arab slave trade on the other hand, has more often used men for military service, and women for sex and for their wombs – to produce children who will be Muslims.
  8. Many Muslim leaders since Muhammad have had harems of hundreds (or even thousands) of non-Muslim young girls and women to service their desires.
  9. Converting to Islam does not automatically grant a slave his freedom, although this is said to increase the slave master's heavenly reward.
  10. According to Islamic courts, slave masters may treat their slaves however they choose without fear of penalty.


Genocide In Sudan – Again

FrontPageMag
By Stephen Brown
June 27, 2011
Imagine the outcry if the American government was suddenly to engage in a campaign of extermination against the Navajos, one of America’s aboriginal peoples. The protests, especially from the Left, would be deafening.
But what would be unimaginable in America today is currently taking place in Sudan, whose rulers are no strangers to genocide. Sudan’s original people, the African Nuba tribes inhabiting central Sudan’s Nuba Mountains, are currently facing a massive campaign of ethnic cleansing at the hands of the Arab and Islamist central government, whose leader, President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, is currently under indictment by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for war crimes in Darfur.
“The Sudanese Army and its allied militias have gone on an unsparing rampage to crush rebel fighters in the Nuba Mountains …, bombing thatch-roofed villages, executing elders, burning churches…,” stated the New York Times, citing United Nations officials and “villagers who have escaped.”
This is not the first time the Nuba, descendants of Sudan’s ancient Nubian kingdoms, have faced annihilation at the hands of their “government.” In 1983, Sudan’s southern black African tribes, already marginalised and racially discriminated against, rose up against the Arab central government (as the African tribes in Darfur were to do 20 years later). The African Nuba joined the rebellion within a few years, providing the South’s rebel army, the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA), with thousands of fighters.
The cause of the 1983 revolt was Khartoum’s forced Arabization and Islamization policy, under which the country was to be governed by sharia law. Largely Christian and animist, the culturally African Nuba and southern Sudanese opposed these measures, causing the Khartoum government to declare jihad against them in 1989.
“The Government of Sudan’s self-declared jihad against the peoples of these southern regions is tantamount to attempted genocide,” a Christian activist, who witnessed firsthand Khartoum’s homicidal aggression, told a Congressional committee in 1995.
Largely unnoticed by the outside world, the Nuba and southern Sudanese, with some Israeli help, put up a fierce and brave resistance, defeating the jihad, but they suffered greatly for their heroic stand. Two million people died in the fighting that largely took place on their territory and another four million were displaced. Tens of thousands of black African Sudanese were also taken to Arab northern Sudan as slaves.
One of them, Francis Bok, a Dinka tribesman, told his story here in FrontPage Magazine of his ten years working as a child slave, from the age of seven to 17, for a cruel Arab master. While another, Mende Nazer, a Muslim Nuba, recounted her stolen childhood and trail of tears as a slave in an Arab household in Khartoum in her book Slave: My True Story. Nazer was 13 when captured in a Arab slave raid on her Nuba Mountains village.
The 22-year civil war between the Sudan’s northern Arabs and southern Africans ended in 2005 with the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) that will see South Sudan become independent July 9. The Nuba Mountains, however, are north of the bloody and still unsettled boundary set out in the CPA, so the Nuba will not be joining South Sudan after it becomes independent next month. Even worse, the CPA did not grant the Nuba autonomy, as they desired, leaving their status undefined.
In his latest military campaign against the Nuba Mountains, President al-Bashir’s army and government-sponsored militias are once more spreading death indiscriminately. The official cause of the Sudanese government’s latest round of mass murder is that “tens of thousands” Nuba fighters have refused to disarm and “are digging into the craggy hillsides.”
But reports indicate the Sudanese military is waging a campaign of extermination along with a military one. Mig-29 warplanes are bombing Nuba villages unopposed, while witnesses have stated government troops “were shooting ‘the black people’.” UN officials have also reported the planting of landmines and digging of possible mass graves.
“Nuba were often just shot on sight by Khartoum forces, no questions asked,” testified former State Department official Roger P. Winter before a congressional hearing recently. “Today, again, Nuba are positioned for liquidation by Khartoum forces.”
The Sudanese army also tried to unilaterally disarm SPLA soldiers in Abyei, which set off the recent fighting there. An accord was signed last week, however, between Khartoum and the SPLA at the African Union headquarters in Addis Ababa that would see 3,000 Ethiopian troops replace the soldiers of both sides in the disputed area. The Nuba Mountains were not part of this accord.
Given the Khartoum government’s record of breaking promises, vicious racism and genocide against its black African population, no one can blame the Nuba for refusing to give up their weapons. And the fact the central government has appointed Ahmed Haroun, who is also under ICC indictment for genocide in Darfur, as governor of South Kordofan where the Nuba Mountains and Abyei are located, indicates Winter’s analysis concerning possible annihilation of the Nuba is a looming reality. Like in Darfur where the ethnically cleansed Muslim African tribes were replaced by Arabs, the attack on the Nuba may be the beginning of a similar, sinister colonial project.
As during the 1983-2005 civil war, American evangelical Christians are taking the lead in demanding an end to the North’s aggression against the Nuba and the African Dinka tribe in Abyei. Sarah Palin, for example, was to visit the Abyei region next month with Franklin Graham, the son of Billy Graham, but cancelled due to scheduling problems. Before the recent Addis Ababa agreement, Khartoum had ethnically cleansed an estimated 60,000 Dinka from Abyei with tanks.
American evangelical organizations have passionately advocated against Christian persecution and slavery in Sudan and elsewhere in the world. Appeals from American evangelicals to George W. Bush were instrumental in causing the former president to broker the CPA. Under its terms, peace was established and thousands of Nuba and southern Sudanese African slaves were able to return home from Arab northern Sudan.
“George W. Bush did more to free modern-day slaves than any other president,” wrote author E. Benjamin Skinner in A Crime So Monstrous, his book about human trafficking.
In comparison, America’s political Left, which never concealed its disdain for Bush and his evangelical Christian supporters, has remained relatively silent about Sudan’s suffering black African population. This is surprising when one considers the Left is in the forefront of calling for reparations for descendants of Atlantic slave trade victims. The Left was also very loud and effective in ending the terrible apartheid system in South Africa.
But since many leftists appear to believe only whites can be oppressors, its non-action on Sudan makes sense. It is probably also for this reason leftists so vehemently protest the expulsion by Israel of a few Palestinian terrorists from the West Bank and vigorously prepare flotillas for Gaza, while remaining largely mute when tens of thousands of terrorized black Africans, fearing death and enslavement, are forcibly expelled from their homes in Abyei. Since there is no such white villain in the Sudanese situation, leftist moral outrage on Sudan, in comparison, is nearly non-existent.
Much the same can be said about the America’s African-American leaders. Their concern about the decades-long black slave trade in Sudan has been minimal. This disinterest was so shameful that Al Sharpton was moved to criticise his fellow black leaders after his 2001 visit to Sudan.
“I am outraged that more of us, particularly of the African American leadership, have not talked about the slave trade that I witnessed with my own eyes in the Sudan,” Sharpton said after his return.
But since then, it has been noted Sharpton has not said much about the plight of black African Sudanese. Jesse Jackson has also not made their desperate situation a priority, although he was Bill Clinton’s special envoy to Africa during Clinton’s second term. One critic believes that if America’s black clergy had not pressured Sharpton and Jackson to comment, nothing would ever have ever been said about the Sudanese slave trade. For his part, Louis Farrakhan, head of the Nation of Islam, casts doubt on whether slavery even exists in Sudan.
This leaves President Obama, America’s first African-American president and, one would think, the Afrcian Nuba people’s best hope for survival. In a statement released last week, the president called the situation in South Kordofan “dire.” Obama also recognised the bombings by the Sudanese military and “reports of attacks based on ethnicity.” Incredibly, though, the president’s statement did not mention who is carrying out these “ethnic” attacks and which ethnic group was made homeless. And instead of threatening Khartoum with a call for a Libya-like, no-fly zone over Abyei and the Nuba Mountains to protect civilians from the bombings, Obama mildly praised the recent accord on Abyei, commending both parties “for taking this step forward toward peace…”
But instead of peace, Obama’s naïve and less than insightful approach to Khartoum’s hard-line and continued aggression is sure to produce only more of the same for Sudan’s long-suffering, southern Sudanese and Nuba populations: war, enslavement and death.

FrontPage Magazine
By Stephen Brown
June 27, 2011

Imagine the outcry if the American government was suddenly to engage in a campaign of extermination against the Navajos, one of America’s aboriginal peoples. The protests, especially from the Left, would be deafening.

But what would be unimaginable in America today is currently taking place in Sudan, whose rulers are no strangers to genocide. Sudan’s original people, the African Nuba tribes inhabiting central Sudan’s Nuba Mountains, are currently facing a massive campaign of ethnic cleansing at the hands of the Arab and Islamist central government, whose leader, President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, is currently under indictment by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for war crimes in Darfur.

“The Sudanese Army and its allied militias have gone on an unsparing rampage to crush rebel fighters in the Nuba Mountains …, bombing thatch-roofed villages, executing elders, burning churches…,” stated the New York Times, citing United Nations officials and “villagers who have escaped.”

This is not the first time the Nuba, descendants of Sudan’s ancient Nubian kingdoms, have faced annihilation at the hands of their “government.” In 1983, Sudan’s southern black African tribes, already marginalised and racially discriminated against, rose up against the Arab central government (as the African tribes in Darfur were to do 20 years later). The African Nuba joined the rebellion within a few years, providing the South’s rebel army, the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA), with thousands of fighters.

The cause of the 1983 revolt was Khartoum’s forced Arabization and Islamization policy, under which the country was to be governed by sharia law. Largely Christian and animist, the culturally African Nuba and southern Sudanese opposed these measures, causing the Khartoum government to declare jihad against them in 1989.

“The Government of Sudan’s self-declared jihad against the peoples of these southern regions is tantamount to attempted genocide,” a Christian activist, who witnessed firsthand Khartoum’s homicidal aggression, told a Congressional committee in 1995.

Largely unnoticed by the outside world, the Nuba and southern Sudanese, with some Israeli help, put up a fierce and brave resistance, defeating the jihad, but they suffered greatly for their heroic stand. Two million people died in the fighting that largely took place on their territory and another four million were displaced. Tens of thousands of black African Sudanese were also taken to Arab northern Sudan as slaves.

One of them, Francis Bok, a Dinka tribesman, told his story here in FrontPage Magazine of his ten years working as a child slave, from the age of seven to 17, for a cruel Arab master. While another, Mende Nazer, a Muslim Nuba, recounted her stolen childhood and trail of tears as a slave in an Arab household in Khartoum in her book Slave: My True Story. Nazer was 13 when captured in a Arab slave raid on her Nuba Mountains village.

The 22-year civil war between the Sudan’s northern Arabs and southern Africans ended in 2005 with the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) that will see South Sudan become independent July 9. The Nuba Mountains, however, are north of the bloody and still unsettled boundary set out in the CPA, so the Nuba will not be joining South Sudan after it becomes independent next month. Even worse, the CPA did not grant the Nuba autonomy, as they desired, leaving their status undefined.

In his latest military campaign against the Nuba Mountains, President al-Bashir’s army and government-sponsored militias are once more spreading death indiscriminately. The official cause of the Sudanese government’s latest round of mass murder is that “tens of thousands” Nuba fighters have refused to disarm and “are digging into the craggy hillsides.”

But reports indicate the Sudanese military is waging a campaign of extermination along with a military one. Mig-29 warplanes are bombing Nuba villages unopposed, while witnesses have stated government troops “were shooting ‘the black people’.” UN officials have also reported the planting of landmines and digging of possible mass graves.

“Nuba were often just shot on sight by Khartoum forces, no questions asked,” testified former State Department official Roger P. Winter before a congressional hearing recently. “Today, again, Nuba are positioned for liquidation by Khartoum forces.”

The Sudanese army also tried to unilaterally disarm SPLA soldiers in Abyei, which set off the recent fighting there. An accord was signed last week, however, between Khartoum and the SPLA at the African Union headquarters in Addis Ababa that would see 3,000 Ethiopian troops replace the soldiers of both sides in the disputed area. The Nuba Mountains were not part of this accord.

Given the Khartoum government’s record of breaking promises, vicious racism and genocide against its black African population, no one can blame the Nuba for refusing to give up their weapons. And the fact the central government has appointed Ahmed Haroun, who is also under ICC indictment for genocide in Darfur, as governor of South Kordofan where the Nuba Mountains and Abyei are located, indicates Winter’s analysis concerning possible annihilation of the Nuba is a looming reality. Like in Darfur where the ethnically cleansed Muslim African tribes were replaced by Arabs, the attack on the Nuba may be the beginning of a similar, sinister colonial project.

As during the 1983-2005 civil war, American evangelical Christians are taking the lead in demanding an end to the North’s aggression against the Nuba and the African Dinka tribe in Abyei. Sarah Palin, for example, was to visit the Abyei region next month with Franklin Graham, the son of Billy Graham, but cancelled due to scheduling problems. Before the recent Addis Ababa agreement, Khartoum had ethnically cleansed an estimated 60,000 Dinka from Abyei with tanks.

American evangelical organizations have passionately advocated against Christian persecution and slavery in Sudan and elsewhere in the world. Appeals from American evangelicals to George W. Bush were instrumental in causing the former president to broker the CPA. Under its terms, peace was established and thousands of Nuba and southern Sudanese African slaves were able to return home from Arab northern Sudan.

“George W. Bush did more to free modern-day slaves than any other president,” wrote author E. Benjamin Skinner in A Crime So Monstrous, his book about human trafficking.

In comparison, America’s political Left, which never concealed its disdain for Bush and his evangelical Christian supporters, has remained relatively silent about Sudan’s suffering black African population. This is surprising when one considers the Left is in the forefront of calling for reparations for descendants of Atlantic slave trade victims. The Left was also very loud and effective in ending the terrible apartheid system in South Africa.

But since many leftists appear to believe only whites can be oppressors, its non-action on Sudan makes sense. It is probably also for this reason leftists so vehemently protest the expulsion by Israel of a few Palestinian terrorists from the West Bank and vigorously prepare flotillas for Gaza, while remaining largely mute when tens of thousands of terrorized black Africans, fearing death and enslavement, are forcibly expelled from their homes in Abyei. Since there is no such white villain in the Sudanese situation, leftist moral outrage on Sudan, in comparison, is nearly non-existent.

Much the same can be said about the America’s African-American leaders. Their concern about the decades-long black slave trade in Sudan has been minimal. This disinterest was so shameful that Al Sharpton was moved to criticise his fellow black leaders after his 2001 visit to Sudan.

“I am outraged that more of us, particularly of the African American leadership, have not talked about the slave trade that I witnessed with my own eyes in the Sudan,” Sharpton said after his return.

But since then, it has been noted Sharpton has not said much about the plight of black African Sudanese. Jesse Jackson has also not made their desperate situation a priority, although he was Bill Clinton’s special envoy to Africa during Clinton’s second term. One critic believes that if America’s black clergy had not pressured Sharpton and Jackson to comment, nothing would ever have ever been said about the Sudanese slave trade. For his part, Louis Farrakhan, head of the Nation of Islam, casts doubt on whether slavery even exists in Sudan.

This leaves President Obama, America’s first African-American president and, one would think, the Afrcian Nuba people’s best hope for survival. In a statement released last week, the president called the situation in South Kordofan “dire.” Obama also recognised the bombings by the Sudanese military and “reports of attacks based on ethnicity.” Incredibly, though, the president’s statement did not mention who is carrying out these “ethnic” attacks and which ethnic group was made homeless. And instead of threatening Khartoum with a call for a Libya-like, no-fly zone over Abyei and the Nuba Mountains to protect civilians from the bombings, Obama mildly praised the recent accord on Abyei, commending both parties “for taking this step forward toward peace…”

But instead of peace, Obama’s naïve and less than insightful approach to Khartoum’s hard-line and continued aggression is sure to produce only more of the same for Sudan’s long-suffering, southern Sudanese and Nuba populations: war, enslavement and death.

This article was originally published here

The US Need to Expand its Focus in Fighting Radical Islam

By Tawfik Hamid
www.tawfikhamid.com
The US costs in the War on Terror has exceeded, in some estimates, 2 trillion dollars. Despite this huge cost, the phenomenon of Islamic radicalism and terrorism has not been defeated. Killing Bin Laden has been a great step but it is certainly not the end of the story. Terrorist acts are still threatening the world and lately the attacks on Non-Muslim minorities have been on the rise in many parts of the Muslim world.
The US has reached the point where it MUST reevaluate its strategies in fighting Radical Islam.
The primary focus of the US in the war on terror has been to target the terrorists themselves. This approach, while needed, has proved to be unsatisfactory.
Albert Einstein famously defined insanity as "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." This is a very important lesson to be learned by the US administration. They need to start thinking in alternative and more efficient approaches to fight Islamic Radicalism. The US cannot simply spend another 2 trillion dollars using the same approach again and again and hope for a different result. This approach is not going to defeat Islamic Radicalism and expecting a different outcome will be disastrous.
The US must consider expanding their primary focus in the war on terror from the Jihadists to include the Mullahs and scholars who incite hatred, violence, and dehumanization of others. The hate-filled teaching of Mullahs and scholars ultimately manifest itself as terrorism. The US must interrupt the radicalism cycle at the incitement stage. This approach is much more effective than a late intervention when terrorists have already been created.
The advantage of this approach is that the scholars who incite the use of violence-unlike the Jihadists-are fewer in number, more visible, and above all want to live. The latter point is extremely important. Targeting Jihadists does not deter other Jihadists from committing acts of terrorism because a Jihadist's motivation is martyrdom. Conversely, many of the scholars who preach violence, without participating in the Jihadi activities, are interested in living and enjoying their political power and occasionally wealth.
An example to illustrate how violent teaching can materialize can be found in the Islamic scholar from Egypt (Ashraf Abou Anas) who recently said to his followers, in a province called Imbaba, "We will not be real men if we did not burn every church in Imbaba." This simple statement that appeared on You Tube triggered thousands of Muslims to attack churches in Cairo and resulted in burning of churches and the killing of many innocents. Some of these innocents were burnt alive.
When the scholar's statement was put on YouTube, he realized that he would be prosecuted and severely punished by the authorities. He immediately released another statement to change his message of hate. He replaced his message of hate with a new message, a message that promoted peace, love, and harmony. This obviously was an attempt to save himself from punishment. This illustrates how preaching can incite violent atrocities and how the scholars who incite the violence can turn to peaceful preaching but only if they believe that they will be held responsible for the violence that results from their teaching. Conversely, the threat of being punished will not easily change the beliefs of a true Jihadist.
When scholars who promotes violence realizes that they will be persecuted as terrorists and judged as a criminals they are likely to change their violent message to a peaceful one. This change can prevent many terrorist acts and atrocities. Targeting these scholars must also include targeting the individuals and organizations that help them promote their violent message. Therefore, promoting violence against others needs to be treated as material support for terrorism.
Some may argue that those who incite violent acts or justify them are protected by the laws of freedom of speech. Pastor Terry Jones, who recently burnt the Quran, was not allowed by a US court decision to demonstrate peacefully in front of a mosque. The US authorities made this ruling in the belief that this demonstration could disturb peace. Therefore, if the act of a peaceful demonstration in front of a mosque is seen as disturbance to the peace in our society; then how should the teaching of young Muslims to declare war on Non-Muslims to spread Islam is a religious duty be seen?. This same principle needs to apply to those who promote that the life of Non-Muslims is inferior to the life of Muslims. These beliefs are being taught from many Sharia books which give Jihadists the justification that they may kill Non-Muslims.
Many violent and deadly Muslims riots were initiated by Mullahs who incite violent acts. In addition, some leading Islamic scholars such as Sheik Youssof Al-Quradawy have justified suicide bombings against Israeli civilians (to including pregnant mothers). If these scholars knew that they would be prosecuted in international courts for inciting such hatred and violence, perhaps many of them would change their message of hatred. This in turn would protect many young Muslims from the destructive outcome of violent teaching.
Expanding our focus in the fight against Islamic Radicalism is imperative. The US needs to change from just targeting the Jihadists, who conduct the terror acts, to targeting the scholars, who promote violence. Treating and persecuting the scholars who promote violence as terrorists and criminals will be a more effective tool in weakening the phenomenon of Islamic terrorism. 

By Tawfik Hamid
www.tawfikhamid.com

The US costs in the War on Terror has exceeded, in some estimates, 2 trillion dollars. Despite this huge cost, the phenomenon of Islamic radicalism and terrorism has not been defeated. Killing Bin Laden has been a great step but it is certainly not the end of the story. Terrorist acts are still threatening the world and lately the attacks on Non-Muslim minorities have been on the rise in many parts of the Muslim world.

The US has reached the point where it MUST reevaluate its strategies in fighting Radical Islam.

The primary focus of the US in the war on terror has been to target the terrorists themselves. This approach, while needed, has proved to be unsatisfactory.

Albert Einstein famously defined insanity as "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." This is a very important lesson to be learned by the US administration. They need to start thinking in alternative and more efficient approaches to fight Islamic Radicalism. The US cannot simply spend another 2 trillion dollars using the same approach again and again and hope for a different result. This approach is not going to defeat Islamic Radicalism and expecting a different outcome will be disastrous.

The US must consider expanding their primary focus in the war on terror from the Jihadists to include the Mullahs and scholars who incite hatred, violence, and dehumanization of others. The hate-filled teaching of Mullahs and scholars ultimately manifest itself as terrorism. The US must interrupt the radicalism cycle at the incitement stage. This approach is much more effective than a late intervention when terrorists have already been created.

The advantage of this approach is that the scholars who incite the use of violence-unlike the Jihadists-are fewer in number, more visible, and above all want to live. The latter point is extremely important. Targeting Jihadists does not deter other Jihadists from committing acts of terrorism because a Jihadist's motivation is martyrdom. Conversely, many of the scholars who preach violence, without participating in the Jihadi activities, are interested in living and enjoying their political power and occasionally wealth.

An example to illustrate how violent teaching can materialize can be found in the Islamic scholar from Egypt (Ashraf Abou Anas) who recently said to his followers, in a province called Imbaba, "We will not be real men if we did not burn every church in Imbaba." This simple statement that appeared on You Tube triggered thousands of Muslims to attack churches in Cairo and resulted in burning of churches and the killing of many innocents. Some of these innocents were burnt alive.

When the scholar's statement was put on YouTube, he realized that he would be prosecuted and severely punished by the authorities. He immediately released another statement to change his message of hate. He replaced his message of hate with a new message, a message that promoted peace, love, and harmony. This obviously was an attempt to save himself from punishment. This illustrates how preaching can incite violent atrocities and how the scholars who incite the violence can turn to peaceful preaching but only if they believe that they will be held responsible for the violence that results from their teaching. Conversely, the threat of being punished will not easily change the beliefs of a true Jihadist.

When scholars who promotes violence realizes that they will be persecuted as terrorists and judged as a criminals they are likely to change their violent message to a peaceful one. This change can prevent many terrorist acts and atrocities. Targeting these scholars must also include targeting the individuals and organizations that help them promote their violent message. Therefore, promoting violence against others needs to be treated as material support for terrorism.

Some may argue that those who incite violent acts or justify them are protected by the laws of freedom of speech. Pastor Terry Jones, who recently burnt the Quran, was not allowed by a US court decision to demonstrate peacefully in front of a mosque. The US authorities made this ruling in the belief that this demonstration could disturb peace. Therefore, if the act of a peaceful demonstration in front of a mosque is seen as disturbance to the peace in our society; then how should the teaching of young Muslims to declare war on Non-Muslims to spread Islam is a religious duty be seen?. This same principle needs to apply to those who promote that the life of Non-Muslims is inferior to the life of Muslims. These beliefs are being taught from many Sharia books which give Jihadists the justification that they may kill Non-Muslims.

Many violent and deadly Muslims riots were initiated by Mullahs who incite violent acts. In addition, some leading Islamic scholars such as Sheik Youssof Al-Quradawy have justified suicide bombings against Israeli civilians (to including pregnant mothers). If these scholars knew that they would be prosecuted in international courts for inciting such hatred and violence, perhaps many of them would change their message of hatred. This in turn would protect many young Muslims from the destructive outcome of violent teaching.

Expanding our focus in the fight against Islamic Radicalism is imperative. The US needs to change from just targeting the Jihadists, who conduct the terror acts, to targeting the scholars, who promote violence. Treating and persecuting the scholars who promote violence as terrorists and criminals will be a more effective tool in weakening the phenomenon of Islamic terrorism. 

Jihad in the Digital Age

IPT News
May 31, 2011
Jihad has gone digital.
Al-Qaida has long embraced the Internet and modern technology, but loosely-affiliated jihadists are hunting for new ways to fight the West in the Information Age. At the cutting edge of technology, from Apple IPad 2 to using new internet protocols, jihadists are carrying the 7th century idea of an Islamic Caliphate well into the 21st century.
Recently, jihadi hackers have produced a magazine of their own and Islamist programmers have modified a shooting game for al-Qaida. A major jihadi commentator even released his first message to the 'brothers' on Facebook, a sign that Western social media is being used by those who want its destruction. Collectively, there is a growing jihadi reliance on high technology, social media, and the Internet.

IPT News
May 31, 2011

Jihad has gone digital.

Al-Qaida has long embraced the Internet and modern technology, but loosely-affiliated jihadists are hunting for new ways to fight the West in the Information Age. At the cutting edge of technology, from Apple IPad 2 to using new internet protocols, jihadists are carrying the 7th century idea of an Islamic Caliphate well into the 21st century.

Recently, jihadi hackers have produced a magazine of their own and Islamist programmers have modified a shooting game for al-Qaida. A major jihadi commentator even released his first message to the 'brothers' on Facebook, a sign that Western social media is being used by those who want its destruction. Collectively, there is a growing jihadi reliance on high technology, social media, and the Internet.

Continue reading here

Jihad’s Child Suicide Bombers

Despite the Taliban’s denial that it uses children as human explosives, its spring offensive began with a suicide bombing by a 12-year-old boy. The attack is just one more sign that the militant group and its terrorist allies are increasing their efforts to recruit, train and utilize child suicide bombers.
The young terrorist’s suicide blast, which killed four Afghan civilians and wounded twelve in the Afghan province of Paktika, was roundly condemned by Afghan President Hamid Karzai as “inhumane and against all Islamic principles.”
Yet, it was one of two such suicide attacks carried out by child bombers in eastern Afghanistan over the past several weeks, attacks that killed over 15 people. Soon after those assaults, Afghan authorities showed off five captured would-be suicide bombers –all under the age of 13 — trained by Taliban and al Qaeda terrorists in Pakistan.
As one Afghan intelligence official said, “They have been told that infidels are in Afghanistan … and they have been encouraged to go for Jihad.” In a disturbing twist, one of the captured bombers thought he would survive the attack when he was told by his instructors that “the (infidels) will be killed and you will live.”
For its part, the Taliban denied using children as human explosives, saying they do not use “beardless” or underage boys in their militant operations. According to a statement released by the terror group, “Those who haven’t grown a beard due to being underage are prohibited to spend time with the mujahedeen in residential and military centers.”
Unfortunately for the Taliban, that statement contradicts its past claims to have trained anywhere from a few hundred to several thousand juveniles as suicide bombers. In fact, the Afghan government places the figure of trained child suicide terrorists closer to 5,000.
While the number of suicide bombers can range from as little as age seven to over forty, most suicide bombers are under the age of 18. Sadly, the recruitment and training of these children is not only extensive and well organized, but growing.
To that end, suicide training factories have sprouted up all over the Afghan-Pakistan border, with most located in the Pakistani province of Waziristan. There, it’s been estimated that the Fedayeen-e-Islam have trained over 1,000 suicide bombers at three facilities. More disturbingly, many suicide training centers have been designated into junior and senior camps.
The Pakistani army found one such junior camp, equipped with computers, video equipment and literature, where children as young as age 10, according to one army officer, “knew about the planting of explosives, making and wearing and detonating suicide jackets.”
The increased demand for child bombers comes as the Taliban have focused its efforts on attacking an expanding list of civilian targets, sites which include schools, mosques, markets, government offices and other public places.
Tragically, the results have been all too effective. In the month of February alone, Afghanistan saw suicide bombings in the capital of Kabul that killed 10 civilians; an attack in Khost that killed nine; an attack in Kandahar that killed 18; an attack in Jalalabad that killed 40; and an attack in Kunduz that killed 28.
To some, the emphasis on suicide bombings is seen as a sign of the terror group’s desperation. According to one Afghan army commander, the Taliban and its terrorist allies have “no ability to conduct large scale operations anywhere, so he has switched tactics.” As district leader Hamdullah Nazak, a reported survivor of 11 attempts on his life said, “Of course. It’s the only way for the Taliban now.”
Whether the increase in suicide attacks is a sign of desperation or not, the reality is that the vast majority of the bombings continue to be made by the most vulnerable. Unfortunately, as children make particularly good suicide terror candidates, they remain the Islamists’ favorite choice of human explosive.
According to a report by the Joint Intelligence Group at Guantanamo, child suicide bombers “are more willing to martyr themselves due to their lack of reasoning on taking innocent lives.”  That willingness to die is of course exploited by the militants through a variety of ways, including desensitization and brainwashing. As one Afghan official has noted, “They are made to watch video films, showing physical torture and killing of Muslims women and children …by what they call infidels.”
Like their adult compatriots, juvenile bombers are told that the rewards for performing such deadly deeds are great. One captured suicide bomber said he was told by his instructors that as a good Muslim he had a duty to defend Islam and that “as soon as I blow myself up, I will be in heaven and will get eternal peace.” Even the fact that a bomber may kill another child is justified by the Islamic trainers, who argue that those killed are “non-believers or children of non-believers.”
Still, despite the indoctrination, most suicide recruits are not trusted to complete their deadly tasks on their own. That is why the terrorist trainers ensure that most recruits are accompanied to their targets by a handler who leaves them to detonate their explosives. For those who display a change of heart in the process, the terrorists rely on the threat and use of violence to ensure compliance.
As Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton has said, the terrorists “purposely inflict violence on children to strike fear in those who oppose them.” That need to resort to violence to guarantee obedience comes from the fact that many recruits don’t come to the jihad willingly, but are the victims of kidnapping by the terrorists.
Willing or not, a suicide recruit remains a highly valued product. In fact, the sale of recruits has become a very lucrative business. The Taliban alone have reportedly been buying children as young as seven. As one Afghan official stated, “The ongoing price for child bombers has been fixed at $ 7,000 to $ 14,000; the price depends on how quickly the bomber is needed and how close the child is expected to get to the target.”
While 90 percent of the trained bombers are estimated to have been used in Afghanistan, it has been reported that 5,000 Pakistani children have received training on suicide bombing for use in Pakistan.
Pakistan’s interior minister claimed that of the 2,488 incidents of terrorism in Pakistan in the last two years — which claimed the lives of 3,169 people — most were the result of suicide bombings conducted by underage terrorists. The most recent attack came in April when two young suicide bombers struck a Pakistani shrine that killed 50 worshippers and wounded more than 100.
Of course, the fact Islamist militants would continue to use children in such a grotesque manner comes as little surprise. After all, these same terror groups have used children with Down syndrome and mentally impaired women as suicide bombers in the past.
So, in a world where underage suicide bombers are referred to by their terrorist handlers as “weapons of mass destruction or atom bombs,” and where children play a game called suicide bomber with the frequency American children play tag, it’s understandable that they will continue to be preyed upon by their malevolent elders.

FrontPageMag
By Frank Crimi

Despite the Taliban’s denial that it uses children as human explosives, its spring offensive began with a suicide bombing by a 12-year-old boy. The attack is just one more sign that the militant group and its terrorist allies are increasing their efforts to recruit, train and utilize child suicide bombers.

The young terrorist’s suicide blast, which killed four Afghan civilians and wounded twelve in the Afghan province of Paktika, was roundly condemned by Afghan President Hamid Karzai as “inhumane and against all Islamic principles.”

Yet, it was one of two such suicide attacks carried out by child bombers in eastern Afghanistan over the past several weeks, attacks that killed over 15 people. Soon after those assaults, Afghan authorities showed off five captured would-be suicide bombers –all under the age of 13 — trained by Taliban and al Qaeda terrorists in Pakistan.

As one Afghan intelligence official said, “They have been told that infidels are in Afghanistan … and they have been encouraged to go for Jihad.” In a disturbing twist, one of the captured bombers thought he would survive the attack when he was told by his instructors that “the (infidels) will be killed and you will live.”

For its part, the Taliban denied using children as human explosives, saying they do not use “beardless” or underage boys in their militant operations. According to a statement released by the terror group, “Those who haven’t grown a beard due to being underage are prohibited to spend time with the mujahedeen in residential and military centers.”

Unfortunately for the Taliban, that statement contradicts its past claims to have trained anywhere from a few hundred to several thousand juveniles as suicide bombers. In fact, the Afghan government places the figure of trained child suicide terrorists closer to 5,000.

While the number of suicide bombers can range from as little as age seven to over forty, most suicide bombers are under the age of 18. Sadly, the recruitment and training of these children is not only extensive and well organized, but growing.

To that end, suicide training factories have sprouted up all over the Afghan-Pakistan border, with most located in the Pakistani province of Waziristan. There, it’s been estimated that the Fedayeen-e-Islam have trained over 1,000 suicide bombers at three facilities. More disturbingly, many suicide training centers have been designated into junior and senior camps.

The Pakistani army found one such junior camp, equipped with computers, video equipment and literature, where children as young as age 10, according to one army officer, “knew about the planting of explosives, making and wearing and detonating suicide jackets.”

The increased demand for child bombers comes as the Taliban have focused its efforts on attacking an expanding list of civilian targets, sites which include schools, mosques, markets, government offices and other public places.

Tragically, the results have been all too effective. In the month of February alone, Afghanistan saw suicide bombings in the capital of Kabul that killed 10 civilians; an attack in Khost that killed nine; an attack in Kandahar that killed 18; an attack in Jalalabad that killed 40; and an attack in Kunduz that killed 28.

To some, the emphasis on suicide bombings is seen as a sign of the terror group’s desperation. According to one Afghan army commander, the Taliban and its terrorist allies have “no ability to conduct large scale operations anywhere, so he has switched tactics.” As district leader Hamdullah Nazak, a reported survivor of 11 attempts on his life said, “Of course. It’s the only way for the Taliban now.”

Whether the increase in suicide attacks is a sign of desperation or not, the reality is that the vast majority of the bombings continue to be made by the most vulnerable. Unfortunately, as children make particularly good suicide terror candidates, they remain the Islamists’ favorite choice of human explosive.

According to a report by the Joint Intelligence Group at Guantanamo, child suicide bombers “are more willing to martyr themselves due to their lack of reasoning on taking innocent lives.”  That willingness to die is of course exploited by the militants through a variety of ways, including desensitization and brainwashing. As one Afghan official has noted, “They are made to watch video films, showing physical torture and killing of Muslims women and children …by what they call infidels.”

Like their adult compatriots, juvenile bombers are told that the rewards for performing such deadly deeds are great. One captured suicide bomber said he was told by his instructors that as a good Muslim he had a duty to defend Islam and that “as soon as I blow myself up, I will be in heaven and will get eternal peace.” Even the fact that a bomber may kill another child is justified by the Islamic trainers, who argue that those killed are “non-believers or children of non-believers.”

Still, despite the indoctrination, most suicide recruits are not trusted to complete their deadly tasks on their own. That is why the terrorist trainers ensure that most recruits are accompanied to their targets by a handler who leaves them to detonate their explosives. For those who display a change of heart in the process, the terrorists rely on the threat and use of violence to ensure compliance.

As Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton has said, the terrorists “purposely inflict violence on children to strike fear in those who oppose them.” That need to resort to violence to guarantee obedience comes from the fact that many recruits don’t come to the jihad willingly, but are the victims of kidnapping by the terrorists.

Willing or not, a suicide recruit remains a highly valued product. In fact, the sale of recruits has become a very lucrative business. The Taliban alone have reportedly been buying children as young as seven. As one Afghan official stated, “The ongoing price for child bombers has been fixed at $ 7,000 to $ 14,000; the price depends on how quickly the bomber is needed and how close the child is expected to get to the target.”

While 90 percent of the trained bombers are estimated to have been used in Afghanistan, it has been reported that 5,000 Pakistani children have received training on suicide bombing for use in Pakistan.

Pakistan’s interior minister claimed that of the 2,488 incidents of terrorism in Pakistan in the last two years — which claimed the lives of 3,169 people — most were the result of suicide bombings conducted by underage terrorists. The most recent attack came in April when two young suicide bombers struck a Pakistani shrine that killed 50 worshippers and wounded more than 100.

Of course, the fact Islamist militants would continue to use children in such a grotesque manner comes as little surprise. After all, these same terror groups have used children with Down syndrome and mentally impaired women as suicide bombers in the past.

So, in a world where underage suicide bombers are referred to by their terrorist handlers as “weapons of mass destruction or atom bombs,” and where children play a game called suicide bomber with the frequency American children play tag, it’s understandable that they will continue to be preyed upon by their malevolent elders.

Frank Crimi is a writer living in San Diego, California. You can read more of Frank’s work at his blog, www.politicallyunbalanced.com.

This article was originally published here

Jihad Slavery in Sudan

Jihad Slavery in Sudan

Charles Jacobs reports from Sudan on the horrors of slavery.