Wednesday, October 3, 2012

Gatestone Update :: Soeren Kern: Muslim Riots Reach Europe: Part II, and more



Gatestone Institute
In this mailing:

Muslim Riots Reach Europe: Part II

by Soeren Kern
October 3, 2012 at 5:00 am
Be the first of your friends to like this.
Abu Assad al-Almani asks Muslims in Germany to attack any German citizen who supports the film by "cutting their heads from their bodies and capturing it on film so that it is accessible to the public, so that the whole of Germany, and even the whole of Europe, knows that their criminal games will be thwarted by the sword of Islam."
Muslim protests over an American-made anti-Islamic YouTube film, Innocence of Muslims, have spread to more European cities. Muslim rioters had initially clashed with police in Belgium, Britain and France, but since then, protests have spread to Austria, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Norway, Serbia and Switzerland.
In Germany, while thousands of Muslims took to the streets in various cities, the biggest demonstration took place in the Dortmund, where 1,500 Muslims holding Turkish flags marched through the city center on September 22. In Hanover, protests involved about 1,000 Muslims on September 23. In Baden-Württemberg, North Rhine-Westphalia and Lower Saxony police reported protests involving 1,600 people. Protests were also reported in Bergisch Gladbach, Cuxhaven, Münster, Freiburg and Karlsruhe.
A radical Islamist, Abu Assad al-Almani, has called for bombings and assassinations in Germany after it emerged that the actor who plays Mohammed in the anti-Islam movie was allegedly German. In an 8-page document, entitled "Settling Scores with Germany," and posted on the Internet on September 25, Abu Assad states: "In addition to the ugly cartoons, now the Americans have produced a film in which those pigs poke fun at our dear prophet and insult him."
Abu Assad continues: "The one who played our noble Messenger was a German;" he then calls for revenge attacks. He asks Muslims in Germany to attack any German citizen who supports the film by "cutting their heads from their bodies and capturing it on film so that it is accessible to the public, so that the whole of Germany, and even the whole of Europe, knows that their criminal games will be thwarted by the sword of Islam."
The Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) says the document has been produced by a group called the Global Islamic Media Front (GIMF), the European propaganda arm which supports Al Qaeda and other radical Islamic organizations. The BKA says it is taking the threat "very seriously."
In Berlin, Interior Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich has postponed at the last minute a poster campaign aimed at countering radical Islam for fear it might have incited violence by extremists. The posters had been due to go up as of September 21in German cities with large immigrant populations. The posters were aimed at those who suspected that a friend or family member might be drifting towards radical Islam.
In another sign that German officialdom is coming unhinged by political correctness, the ruling Christian Democrats (CDU) lashed out at Baden-Württemberg's Integration Minister, Bilkay Öney, for stating what many Germans believe is obvious, namely that "Islam tolerates no criticism." She also said it was easier to dialogue with Muslims in Germany because they are relatively well educated. "In other parts of the world," she said, "some take to the streets and set fire to embassies."
CDU regional director Thomas Strobl rebuked Öney, a Turkish-born German politician, saying: "What Mrs. Öney says is surprising and shocking. Such remarks are unacceptable, as they emphasize what divides us, instead of linking and integrating." Strobl wondered how Öney, who is a Muslim, could hold such politically incorrect views about Islam.
Elsewhere in Germany, more signs emerged that the threat of Muslim violence is endangering free speech in Germany. Development Minister Dirk Niebel (FDP) called for a ban on broadcasting the anti-Islam video in Germany. "Such a film should not be shown. We should not be adding fuel to the fire," he told the newspaper, Bild. "The person who demands limitless freedom of expression has no idea what conflicts can be provoked by it," Niebel said. His comments follow similar statements by German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle and Interior Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich.
In Greece, the center of Athens (recently dubbed the "New Kabul") turned into a war zone (videos here) on September 23, when more than 1,000 Muslims -- mostly immigrants from Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh -- hurled bottles and other objects at police, who were trying to prevent the rioters from descending on the American Embassy.
Protesting Muslims, chanting "All we have is Mohammed," gathered in Omonia Square holding banners reading, "We demand an immediate punishment for those who tried to mock our Prophet Mohammad." Shouting "Allah is Greater," they then assaulted police with stones, bottles and slabs of marble they broke from the sidewalks.
When Greek riot police used tear gas to control the protesters and protect the security zone they had established around the embassy, infuriated Muslims responded by vandalizing streets and buildings in downtown Athens, as well as by setting fires to trash bins, smashing shops and display windows and vandalizing automobiles. Around 30 Muslims were arrested.
Also in Athens, Muslim inmates at the Korydallos prison (Greece's main prison, in which an estimated 70% of the inmates are Muslim) went on a rampage and protested the anti-Islam video by burning mattresses, sheets and clothing. Security officials at the prison brought the situation under control after using teargas to force the rioting inmates to return to their cells.
In Austria, some 700 Muslims descended on the American Embassy in the Alsergrund district in downtown Vienna on September 22. They carried banners and shouted slogans of protest against the film, and called for the establishment of an Islamic Caliphate. The protests were well organized: some Muslims wearing orange vests were waiting at the nearby metro station to guide protestors toward the embassy. According to the Austrian newspaper Tageszeitung Österreich, one young woman wearing a headscarf said, "The film has triggered such a rage in me, I had tears in my eyes." Other protesters wondered how it was possible that the film portrayed "our beloved prophet as a child molester and misogynist."
In Norway, in front of the American Embassy in Oslo on September 21, more than 150 radical Islamists gathered, shouting, "This world needs another Osama." Separately, hundreds more Muslims gathered at Youngstorget Square in central Oslo to protest the anti-Islam film. Oslo's imams were joined in the protest by the city's Conservative Mayor Fabian Stang, as well as Lutheran Bishop Ole Christian Kvarme, who said in a speech: "With this peaceful protest we want to maintain and strengthen our unity. As believers we understand each other."
In Italy, the Interior Ministry announced on September 25 that it had expelled two Libyan jihadists who were urging attacks against Western targets in revenge for the film denigrating Mohammed. Police said the Libyans, aged 26 and 28, had been in a hotel in Rome for several months, receiving medical care after being injured during the Libyan conflict. Police said they were expelled after they "began activities of proselytizing and propaganda to jihad within the Libyan community."
In Serbia, several thousand fans from a local football club in the country's Muslim-majority Sandzak region protested against the film on September 21. Defying a ban on political slogans at the march, supporters of Torcida Sandzak football club waved banners reading, "The Prophet is in my heart" and "Freedom for Palestine, Afghanistan and Libya." There was a heavy police presence at the march, where protesters also waved the flags of Turkey and Bosnia.
In Spain, the Islamic Commission, a Muslim umbrella group, has sent a letter to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon demanding the enactment of an international law that would outlaw blasphemy "so that no attack against religious sentiment will go unpunished."
Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute. He is also Senior Fellow for European Politics at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group. Follow him on Facebook.
Related Topics:  Soeren Kern

India: The Next Terrorist Insurgency

by S.K. Bhattacharya
October 3, 2012 at 4:00 am
Be the first of your friends to like this.
Because terrorism works: The death of a U.S. Ambassador in Libya, after all, seemed sufficient to convince many Americans that they should flee the entire Islamic world.
Although so far India's Maoists have shown little interest in attracting global attention by attacking international targets, journalists who study their insurgency reckon that they need only be patient: The Naxals will figure it out soon enough. Then the journalists' careers as International Naxal Experts will be assured.
Why do the journalists reckon this? Because terrorism works: The death of a U.S. Ambassador in Libya, after all, seemed sufficient to convince many Americans that they should flee the entire Islamic world.
The problem is not that America has insufficient intelligence; America has insufficient patience and insufficient curiosity. One look at the map below should be sufficient to suggest to you that a Maoist insurgency covering a third of the territory of the world's second-most populated country should receive attention from the media. Why doesn't it? Because it is far away. The insurgency is very well-covered in India -- in the English-language press, at that -- but Americans do not read the Indian press. The Indian government is not keen to encourage foreign journalists to report on the insurgency; no one can blame them: the antidote to the insurgency is to gain state control over the Naxal-infested areas. To do this, India needs foreign investment -- a lot of it, fast. Investors would not like the sound of this insurgency if they knew about it.

That many Americans have never heard of a story so manifestly important is evidence that America is, if it continues to slide-line itself, in the terminal phase of imperial decline, which, one is tempted to conclude, seems exactly what the current administration wants: to deliver the world to despots.
Britain lost its empire because it was obsessed with preventing the 1857 mutiny -- which had already happened, so there was no point in preventing it. Focusing on the threat of violent seditious activity, colonial authorities underestimated the threat of non-violent sedition. They thus lost access to Indian society precisely when they needed it most. As Britain's intelligence bureaucracy grew ever more elaborate, the scope of its security efforts narrowed -- even as the scale of the secessionist threat grew. Britain's imperial policy suffered from a chronically poor sense of timing. Moderate nationalist leaders were marginalized, militant ones strengthened. Over time, the militants gained respectability. The British authorities had detailed knowledge of secessionist plans, but failed to prevent them from from being realized. They did not understand these plans, and relied upon analytical models that were out of date. Crucially, British India lost the ability to recognize gaps in its own coverage. Precisely as the need for information about secessionist activities increased, its interest in this information decreased. As militant nationalism made inroads, sources of intelligence to the colonial Government dried up. As the popular base of the secessionist movement widened, the Government's response narrowed -- it focused only on containing the violence. The information in its possession was evaluated from an excessively narrow, binary perspective: Did it suggest an imminent threat to British life and property? Authorities were incapable of asking themselves the larger question -- was the entire British empire at threat?
British authorities failed to grasp the larger picture. Cultural barriers distorted threat perception and led to misdirected countering action. This distortion did not occur for want of information: Britain's vast bureaucratic apparatus ensured an abundance of it. But the British did not recognize its strategic value until it was too late. Information was plentiful; insight was scarce.
Brave posturing and stentorian denunciations in the wake of the latest terrorist outrage are no substitute for insight. For insight, look at that map.
S.K. Bhattacharya is a private defense and security analyst, working to help democratic governments.
Related Topics:  India

The YouTube Video as a Dress Rehearsal

by Shoshana Bryen
October 3, 2012 at 3:00 am
Be the first of your friends to like this.
The Obama administration's handling of the organized assaults on American Embassies and personnel on September 11, 2012 – and later the other organized protests across the Middle East, North Africa, Afghanistan and Pakistan – is a window into its possible reaction should Israel conclude that the cost of facing a nuclear-armed Iran outweighs the cost of a military strike against Iranian facilities.
It was a "dress rehearsal," so to speak, and frightening at many levels – not least of which is that there appears to be no understanding in the White House that there are those who need the United States as their enemy. President Obama said "the tide of war is receding," but our withdrawal from Iraq and impending withdrawal from Afghanistan are understood by Iran, the Taliban, al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood and various Salafist groups as unilateral retreats in the fact of their continuing expansion. This is not only true of Islamic organizations and governments; Vladimir Putin threw out USAID last week, undoing yet another part of the administration's "reset" with Russia, and Hugo Chavez keeps "U.S. imperialism" on his teleprompter for every occasion.
The administration pedaled as hard and fast as it could from association with the junky YouTube that it claimed set off the massive demonstrations across the Muslim world.
  • "Let me state very clearly and I hope it is obvious that the United States government had nothing to do with this video," Secretary Clinton said. "To us, to me personally, this video is disgusting and reprehensible. It appears to have a deeply cynical purpose, to denigrate a great religion and to provoke rage."
  • In case she wasn't clear, she added, "The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others."
  • President Obama weighed in. "The United States has been a nation that respects all faiths… We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others."
  • A "hateful video" triggered a "spontaneous protest … outside of our consulate in Benghazi," said Amb. Susan Rice. Rice and Jay Carney insisted that neither U.S. policy nor President Obama was the focus of the outburst.
  • The FBI rousted an American citizen in the middle of the night and took from his home for "questioning," about a "parole violation," walking him right by a line of journalists camped outside.
  • The administration asked YouTube to consider whether the clip "violates the terms of use" so it could be removed.
  • The administration spent more than $70,000 to run ads in Pakistan denouncing the video and disclaiming responsibility.
There couldn't have been a stronger and more concerted effort to ask people not to blame President Obama & Company – time, money and relegation of the First (and maybe the Fifth) Amendment to an afterthought.
It didn't work. A protester in Malaysia on Friday held a sign that read, "Obama, our patience has its limit. Don't blame us if your citizens die. Blame yourself. U started it!" In Egypt they raised the al Qaeda flag and chanted, "Obama, there are still a billion Osamas."
Compare that to Gen. Dempsey's comment – unquestionably pre-approved by the White House, since he's still got his stars – that the U.S. didn't want to be seen as "complicit" in any Israeli strike on Iran. His remark follows a series of high-profile efforts by the Administration to distance itself from Israel in the international arena even beyond administration-sanctioned statements that military action against Iran would be useless or counterproductive or premature.
  • Bowing to Turkish wishes, the administration allowed Israel to be barred from the multilateral air-rescue exercise Anatolian Eagle. Then Israel was publicly slapped by both Secretary of Defense Panetta and NATO Secretary General Rasmussen when Turkey said Iran-related intelligence coming from NATO installations inside Turkey could not be shared with Israel.
  • The U.S. held a Special Operations exercise, Eager Lion 2012, with 19 Arab and Muslim countries in May, just after canceling its vaunted Austere Challenge exercise with Israel. Maj. Gen. Ken Tovo, head of the U.S. Special Operations Forces, told reporters covering Eager Lion 2012 in Amman, "The message that I want to send through this exercise is that we have developed the right partners throughout the region and across the world ... insuring that we have the ability to ... meet challenges that are coming to our nations."
  • He was seconded by Rasmussen, who simply waved away Israel's absence from the NATO meeting in Chicago, even as he acknowledged that 13 other NATO "partner" nations would attend because, "In today's world security challenges know no borders, and no country or alliance can deal with most of them on their own."
  • Austere Challenge was slated again and then reduced in size and scope.
  • Israel is not a member of the Obama Administration's Global Counterterrorism Forum – which has 29 members, 11 of whom are members of the organization of the Islamic Conference. How's that for distancing? Israel can't be a member of a counterterrorism forum because it won't agree that attacks on Israeli citizens constitute terrorism.
The administration claims that bilateral U.S.-Israel relations are just peachy, but abandoning Israel in the international arena strongly enhances the efforts of the delegitimizers and boycotters. And to no end.
Radical Arab and Iranian good will cannot be bought by administration efforts to put distance between itself and Israel or by trying to steer their anger toward a single American exercising his First Amendment rights with a video camera. They are at war with the United States – with this president, with the last two and with the next one (whether in 2013 or 2017). Only by acknowledging the depth of the predicament and by standing with our friends, including Israel, can we hope to defeat our foes. Hiding or sidling away won't help.
Our enemies are smarter than that.
Shoshana Bryen is Senior Director of The Jewish Policy Center in Washington.
Related Topics:  Shoshana Bryen

To subscribe to the this mailing list, go to http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/list_subscribe.php
Posted by solsticewitch13 at 10:43 AM

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)