Guest
Column: Disturbing Questions Lurk Behind Dutch "Jihad Galas"
by Abigail R. Esman
Special to IPT News
February 27, 2015
|
|
|
|
|
Share:  
|
  Be the
first of your friends to like this.
 It's hard
enough choosing the right gown for the Oscars, the prettiest frock for
Junior Prom. But how do you select the burqa that best befits a jihadi
gala?
Two such soirees, ostensibly being staged to raise money for
humanitarian aid to Syria, Palestine, and elsewhere in the Middle East and
Asia, have raised controversy in the Netherlands in recent weeks. Nicknamed
"jihad galas" by local media, both events have been forced to
revamp their programs and venues after the government raised concerns about
several of their invited speakers.
In the process, heightened focus on the two organizations has helped
unveil a web of secrecy and deceit behind many such endeavors and the
people who support them.
The first event, tentatively scheduled to take place in
Utrecht on March 1, aims to raise funds for World Wide Relief (WWR), a
Dutch-based organization that supports children in Syria, among others. The
other, originally set for March 8 in Rijswijk and now planned as a live-stream
event to be broadcast from an undisclosed location, will benefit Holland's Rohamaa Foundation, a self-described "Islamic-inspired"
charity that aids communities in Morocco, Tunisia, Egypt and Southern
Turkey.
But according to a number of reports, the two groups, which claim to
have each raised hundreds of thousands of euros from Dutch Muslims, have
links to Salafist preachers and supporters of ISIS and al-Qaida. Several of
those preachers were invited to speak at the galas, including some from the
Middle East who received visas from the Dutch government to do so.
Immediately, concerned Parliament members, armed with information provided
by the National Coordinator for Counter-terrorism (NCTV), protested,
successfully demanding that the visas be rescinded in light of the imams'
anti-Western, Salafist profiles. The uproar has led to changes in plans for
both galas, though Rohamaa has hinted that its invited speakers will still
be heard via the live-stream broadcast.
While the government has not banned either event from taking place
(Rohamaa itself made the decision to hold the event online), the
controversy surrounding the two galas has set off heated debates about the
meaning of "free expression" in the current climate: If you allow
Charlie Hebdo's provocative content, shouldn't you also allow the
anti-Western tirades of Salafist imams? If not, why not?
The question touches on a highly sensitive issue that has long raised
hackles even among members of the United Nations: Resolution 16/18, an
initiative of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, which bans speech that would be construed as "incitement
to imminent violence," received U.S. approval in 2011.
The problem with this argument, and with Resolution 16/18, is that the
Mohammed cartoons do not, in themselves, incite violence, however much some
Muslims might insist otherwise. They are simply used that way by religious
fanatics and Islamists whose twisted logic determines that anger and insult
are reason enough to justify violent behavior.
The speakers invited to the Dutch galas, on the other hand, include
Egyptian imam Wahid Baali, who has decried the killing of Osama bin Laden, and Saudi
Sheikh Assim al-Hakeem, known for supporting the execution of Christians and Jews who
insult the prophet Mohammed, and for his conviction that women are obliged to serve the sexual needs of their husbands.
(Al-Hakeem was among those whose visas were rescinded.)
Rohamaa invitee Muhammad Hussan has referred to Jews as "those hateful and disgusting
creatures." He also owns Al-Rhama TV, whose programming, according to MEMRI, frequently exhorts Muslims to
annihilate the Jews. If you're looking for speech that "incites
violence," it would be hard to find better examples than these.
WWR in particular seems to have forged a strong and intricate network
among the stars of Salafist activity. In addition to partnering with
al-Hakeem and Baali, WWR founder Abou Hafs has also chummed up with
the Belgian extremist Tarik Chadlioui, aka Tarik ibn Ali, considered one of
the top fundraisers for Salafist causes in Europe. Just last year, Ronald
Sandee, a former Dutch secret service official, described Chadlioui as "one of the most important
influences behind the now-banned organizations Sharia4Belgium and the
German Millatu Ibrahim, as well as the Dutch Sharia4Holland. He has many
contacts via social media with young men from Belgium, Holland, and Germany
who have joined the jihad in Syria."
World Wide Relief is also frequently praised on Dutch jihadists' web sites,
according to Dutch newspaper NRC Handelsblad. Even Hafs, the NRC
reports, has been known to praise Dutch Muslims who travel to Syria
to join the jihad. The father of 19-year-old Dutch suicide bomber Sultan
Berzel, who blew himself up in Baghdad, killing 20 others, has accused him of spreading "IS ideology."
In speeches across the country, Hafs calls on fellow Muslims to resist the influence of
"kuffars" (unbelievers) and to separate themselves from Dutch
society or secularism by refusing to vote in Dutch elections.
But if that's not enough to keep you from ordering up your Albert Nipon
niqab, your abaya by Alaia and sending in your contributions to the
cause, try this: no one really seems to know exactly what Rohamaa and
World Wide Relief fund actually do with their donations.
Though Rohamaa claims to work through Allah "in an Islamic
way," it seems to do so secretively: its website provides no
information about its officers or administrators, let alone its financial
activities. (A button for "sponsors" on its home page is
inactive.) And no reports seem to be available on its finances, beyond the
basic banking information one would need to wire a donation.
The same seems to be true of World Wide Relief. An extensive investigation by the NRC Handelsblad
revealed that the organization consistently failed to submit annual reports
of its activities as required by law. There may be a reason for this: based
on what information is available on the charity's website, Roland Sandee, now the chief global jihad analyst for
the Kronos Advisory think tank, calculated that only half of the €150,000
allegedly devoted to humanitarian aid in Syria had actually been spent –
though details about the use of those funds are lacking. What happened to
the other €75,000 is a mystery. This, while dozens of European Muslims head
off to Syria in the guise of "humanitarian aid." In fact, says
the NRC, many fundraisers for such organizations themselves
eventually "show up in Syria as jihadists." Officials who spoke
to the NRC also noted that, "A portion of the collected funds
[of these charities] is likely given to non-humanitarian causes."
At the Oscars, at least, no matter what you wear, you know who the
winners are. What's clear about these galas is we're the ones
who lose.
Abigail R. Esman, the author, most recently, of Radical State: How Jihad Is Winning Over Democracy in
the West (Praeger, 2010), is a freelance writer based in New
York and the Netherlands.
Related Topics: Abigail
R. Esman, Netherlands,
World
Wide Relief, Rohamaa
Foundation, Salafists,
Wahid
Baali, Assim
al-Hakeem, MEMRI,
Muhammad
Hussan, Abou
Hafs, Roland
Sandee, Syria
|
Print
Send
Comment
RSS
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment