The Muslim Brotherhood – in their own words

The Muslim Brotherhood – in their own words

Rick
Moran

 

They’re just puppy dogs, don’t you know? They’ve
renounced violence and have NO INTENTION of setting up a religious-dominated
government in Egypt.

Uh-huh – sure:

PMW [Palestinian Media Watch] has selected the following quotes from
Jihad is the way to illustrate central ideas of Muslim Brotherhood ideology.
PMW’s translation of the book follows below.

National goal: Islamic world domination
– “…the Islamic Ummah [nation]… can regain its power and be liberated and
assume its rightful position which was intended by Allah, as the most exalted
nation among men , as the leaders of humanity…”
– “…know your status, and
believe firmly that you are the masters of the world, even if your enemies
desire your degradation…”
– “It should be known that Jihad and preparation
towards Jihad are not only for the purpose of fending-off assaults and attacks
of Allah’s enemies from Muslims, but are also for the purpose of realizing the
great task of establishing an Islamic state and strengthening the religion and
spreading it around the world…”
– “…Jihad for Allah is not limited to the
specific region of the Islamic countries, since the Muslim homeland is one and
is not divided, and the banner of Jihad has already been raised in some of its
parts, and it shall continue to be raised, with the help of Allah, until every
inch of the land of Islam will be liberated, the State of Islam will be
established,…”

Means: Jihad – a mandatory religious duty
-“Then
comes the power of arms and weapons,… and this is the role of Jihad.”

“Jihad is a religious public duty… incumbent upon the Islamic nation, and is a
personal duty to fend off the infidels’ attack on the nation…”
– “And the
youth should know that the problems of the Islamic world, such as Palestine,
Afghanistan, Syria, Eritrea, or the Philippines, are not issues of territories
and nations, but of faith and religion. They are problems of Islam and all
Muslims, and their resolution cannot be negotiated and bargained by recognizing
the enemy’s right to the Islamic land he stole, therefore, there is no other
option but Jihad for Allah, and this is why Jihad is the way.”
– “The symbol
of the [Muslim] Brotherhood is the book of Allah [the Quran] between two swords.
The swords symbolize Jihad and the force that protects the truth represented in
Allah’s book.”
– “…that is, go out to battle, oh believers, young and old,
by foot or with animal, under all circumstances and
conditions…”

More at the link from PMW.

Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In its fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life. Islamization begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to

 

Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond’s book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and ontemporary Threat

Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In its fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life.

Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military
components. The religious component is a beard for all of the other
components.

Islamization begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to
agitate for their religious privileges.

When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the other components tend to creep in as well.

Here’s how it works:

As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country, they will be for the most part be regarded as a peace-loving
minority, and not as a threat to other citizens. This is the case in:

United States — Muslim 0.6%
Australia — Muslim 1.5%
Canada — Muslim 1.9%
China — Muslim 1.8%
Italy — Muslim 1.5%
Norway — Muslim 1.8%

At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and
disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among
street gangs. This is happening in:

Denmark — Muslim 2%
Germany — Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom — Muslim 2.7%
Spain — Muslim 4%
Thailand — Muslim 4.6%

From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. For example, they will push for the
introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure
on supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves — along with threats for failure to comply. This is occurring in:

France — Muslim 8%
Philippines — 5%
Sweden — Muslim 5%
Switzerland — Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands — Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad & Tobago — Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them
to rule themselves (within their ghettos) under Sharia, the Islamic Law.
The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia law over the entire world.

When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase
lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. In Paris , we
are already seeing car-burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam and
results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam ,  with opposition
to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam. Such tensions are seen
daily, particularly in Muslim sections in:

Guyana — Muslim 10%
India — Muslim 13.4%
Israel — Muslim 16%
Kenya — Muslim 10%
Russia — Muslim 15%

After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad
militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian
churches and Jewish synagogues, such as in:

Ethiopia — Muslim 32.8%

At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks,
and ongoing militia warfare, such as in:

Bosnia — Muslim 40%
Chad — Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon — Muslim 59.7%

From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels, such as in:

Albania — Muslim 70%
Malaysia — Muslim 60.4%
Qatar — Muslim 77.5%
Sudan — Muslim 70%

After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some State-run
ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the infidels, and move toward 100% Muslim, such as has been experienced and in some ways is on-going in:

Bangladesh — Muslim 83%
Egypt — Muslim 90%
Gaza — Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia — Muslim 86.1%
Iran — Muslim 98%
Iraq — Muslim 97%
Jordan — Muslim 92%
Morocco — Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan — Muslim 97%
Palestine — Muslim 99%
Syria — Muslim 90%
Tajikistan — Muslim 90%
Turkey — Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates — Muslim 96%

100% will usher in the peace of ‘Dar-es-Salaam’ — the Islamic House of
Peace. Here there’s supposed to be peace, because everybody is a Muslim,
the Madrasses are the only schools, and the Koran is the only word, such
as in:

Afghanistan — Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia — Muslim 100%
Somalia — Muslim 100%
Yemen — Muslim 100%

Unfortunately, peace is never achieved, as in these 100% states the most radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred, and satisfy their blood lust by killing less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons.

‘Before I was nine, I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me
against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family
against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; the tribe
against the world, and all of us against the infidel. — Leon Uris, ‘The
Haj’

It is important to understand that in some countries, with well under
100% Muslim populations, such as France, the minority Muslim populations live in ghettos, within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which they live by Sharia Law. The national police do not even enter these ghettos. There are no national courts, nor schools, nor non-Muslim
religious facilities. In such situations, Muslims do not integrate into
the community at large. The children attend madrasses. They learn only
the Koran. To even associate with an infidel is a crime punishable with
death. Therefore, in some areas of certain nations, Muslim Imams and
extremists exercise more power than the national average would indicate.

Today’s 1.5 billion Muslims make up 22% of the world’s population. But
their birth rates dwarf the birth rates of Christians, Hindus,
Buddhists, Jews, and all other believers. Muslims will exceed 50% of the world’s population by the end of this century.

Well, boys and girls, today we are letting the fox guard the henhouse.
The wolves will be herding the sheep!

Obama appoints two devout Muslims to Homeland Security posts. Doesn’t
this make you feel safer already?

Obama and Janet Napolitano appoint Arif Alikhan, a devout Muslim, as
Assistant Secretary for Policy Development.

DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano swore in Kareem Shora, a devout Muslim
who was born in Damascus , Syria , as ADC National Executive Director as a
member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC).

NOTE: Has anyone ever heard a new government official being identified
as a devout Catholic, a devout Jew or a devout Protestant…?  Just wondering.

Devout Muslims being appointed to critical Homeland Security positions?
Doesn’t this make you feel safer already??

That should make the US ‘ homeland much safer, huh!!

Was it not “Devout Muslim men” that flew planes into U.S. buildings 8 years ago?

Was it not a Devout Muslim who killed 13 at Fort Hood ?

Also: This is very interesting and we all need to read it from start to finish. Maybe this is why our American Muslims are so quiet and not speaking out about any atrocities. Can a good Muslim be a good American? This question was forwarded to a friend who worked in Saudi Arabia for 20 years. The following is his reply:
Theologically – no . . . Because his allegiance is to Allah, The moon God of Arabia 
Religiously – no… Because no other religion is accepted by His Allah except Islam (Quran, 2:256)(Koran)
 
Scripturally – no… Because his allegiance is to the five Pillars of Islam and the Quran. 
Geographically – no… Because his allegiance is to Mecca , to which he turns in prayer five times a day. 
Socially – no… Because his allegiance to Islam forbids him to make friends with Christians or Jews.. 
Politically – no…Because he must submit to the mullahs (spiritual leaders), who teach annihilation of Israel and destruction of America , the great Satan.
 
Domestically – no… Because he is instructed to marry four Women and beat and scourge his wife when she disobeys him (Quran 4:34) 
Intellectually – no… Because he cannot accept the American Constitution since it is based on Biblical principles and he believes the Bible to be corrupt. 
Philosophically – no… Because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran do not allow freedom of religion and expression.. Democracy and Islam cannot co-exist. Every Muslim government is either dictatorial or autocratic.
Spiritually – no… Because when we declare ‘one nation under God,’ the Christian’s God is loving and kind, while Allah is NEVER referred to as Heavenly father, nor is he ever called love in The Quran’s 99 excellent names. 
Therefore, after much study and deliberation….
 
Perhaps we should be very suspicious of ALL MUSLIMS 
in this country. – – – They obviously cannot be both ‘good’ Muslims and good Americans. 
Call it what you wish, it’s still the truth. You had better believe it. The more who understand this, the better it will be for our country and our future. The religious war is bigger than we know or understand. 
Can a muslim be a good soldier??? 
Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, opened fire at Ft. Hood and Killed 13. He is a good Muslim!!! 
Footnote: The Muslims have said they will destroy us from within. 
SO FREEDOM IS NOT FREE.
 
THE MARINES WANT THIS TO ROLL ALL OVER THE U.S. 
Please don’t delete this until you send it on. 

Sharia vs. Free Speech in Tennessee: CAIR Calls for Tea Party Group to Drop Speaker From Convention

Sharia vs. Free Speech in Tennessee: CAIR Calls for Tea Party Group to Drop Speaker From Convention

by Publius

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is attempting to bully the Tennessee Tea Party Convention into dropping Pamela Geller as one of their speakers for their event this weekend in Gatlinberg.

In a stirring piece of Orwellian propaganda, CAIR cautioned the group via press release:

“The Tea Party needs to decide whether it is a legitimate national political movement or just a safe haven for bigots and extremists,” said CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad. “We ask that convention organizers not legitimize Geller’s extremist anti-Muslim rhetoric by offering her an official platform.”

And CAIR should know a little something about being a safe haven for bigots and extremists. After all, their former communications director sits in jail right now after pleading guilty to weapons and explosives charges. He also admitted helping terrorists gain entry to a training camp in Pakistan.

CAIRbusted-vi

While concerned about Ms. Geller’s exercise of free speech and the Tea Party’s exercise of free association, we missed CAIR’s press release denouncing the violation of human rights in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran, Pakistan, Syria, etc… We’re sure they wrote one, it just wasn’t distributed as widely as this one.

Geller gives her initial response here, but we suspect this won’t be the last we hear on this one.

Fitzgerald: Obama constructs a reality that does not exist

Fitzgerald: Obama constructs a reality that does not exist

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama’s advisers will remove religious terms such as “Islamic extremism” from the central document outlining the U.S. national security strategy and will use the rewritten document to emphasize that the United States does not view Muslim nations through the lens of terror, counterterrorism officials said. – from this news story

This is not only a problem in the United States. It is a problem all over the Western world. How are the people of Western Europe to understand their own reality if they cannot speak truthfully, and openly, about the ideology of Islam? If they have noticed — and they have at long last noticed — that Muslim immigrants are particularly aggressive, demanding, hostile, and un-integrable, save always for a small, discrete minority of people who arrive as Muslims but become integrable only to the precise extent that they cease to take Islam to heart, or even, in the best cases, as a result of the mental freedom and physical security that the West offers them, become estranged permanently from Islam (for who knows better what Islam is all about, than Wafa Sultan, and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and Magdi Allam, and all the other outstanding and brilliant apostates who offer us their articulate testimonies?), should the peoples of Western Europe not allow themselves to employ the only vocabulary that allows them to discuss this matter?

And when they realize, as many of them now do, that this is a problem not in one, or two, or a half-dozen, countries in Western Europe, but in all of the them without exception, and perhaps most noticeably so in the two countries that have elevated Tolerance to the level of State Religions (i.e., Denmark and the Netherlands), are they to be rendered mute through a policy that fills the collective heart of the O.I.C. with satisfaction and deep pleasure?

If they realize that these Muslim immigrants pose a permanent problem that no group of non-Muslim immigrants poses, should they be reduced to whispers? Should their permitted lexicon be lacking such words as “Jihad” and “dhimmi” and “Jizyah” and even, it seems, “Islam” itself? The latter word is always and everywhere, if applied to the case, to be modified fore and aft, with such meretricious verbal tricks as “Islamism” and “Islamists,” or sleight of word, as with “violent extremists” who have kidnapped — in the alternative, hijacked — “a great religion.”

If Israelis wish to begin to grasp their own reality, and to comprehend why “peace-processes” and treaties mean nothing, but are merely part of one unending Treaty of Al Hudaibiyya being used to whittle away at the state of Israel, in order to push it back into conditions of maximum peril and hopeless vulnerability, they will need to use, and to hear others use, such words as “Islam” and “Jihad” and “dhimmi.” If the Hindus, Sikhs, and other non-Muslims of India are to grasp the permanent threat to them, one not assuaged by a possible surrender of Kashmir, but that goes on, unassuageable, forever, they will need to use such words as “Jihad” and “dhimmi” and “Dar al-Islam.” If the Thais, or the Russians, or the Filipinos, wish to understand what it is that they are dealing with, they must — they cannot but — use the words that exist to properly explain this reality. The Christians of the southern Sudan, and the Christians of southern Nigeria, have used such words as “Jihad” before. They understand, perhaps better than those in the West, what Islam is all about, because in black Africa, the Arabs and those whom they have islamized and arabized have been able to treat the black African non-Muslims as roughly, as murderously, as they wish. They have had no need to engage in the kind of stuff we see Muslims engaging in here — Interfaith-Healing, Outreach Nights at the Mosque, taqiyya masters such as Tariq Ramadan spreading their smiling word in order to charm or confuse the unwary and the ill-prepared, and to keep up this mountebank’s patter at such a pace that no one who speaks quietly, logically, and with attention to the evidence can get in a word, or if he can get in a word, can truly and properly be heard by those unwary and those ignorant Infidels over the steady tariq-ramadanian hum.

Those who make policy and construct policies are dealing with a reality that they refuse to learn adequately about. In so refusing, they hobble themselves from thinking sensibly, and at times imaginatively, about what makes the most sense, what would weaken the Camp of Islam and thus the threat to all non-Muslims from Islam and its adherents. They prefer to throw money, and men, and materiel, at the problem. The wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, before we are through, will have cost well over three trillion dollars.

Think of what that could have done, as far as this country goes. We fight over a few hundred million here and there, we fight about health care and social security, and we keep avoiding, in some collective mental paralysis, connecting these budgetary woes with the sums being spent — futilely, and quite unnecessarily, in the lands of Muslims, in order to bring them (for how long? forever?) prosperity, to bribe them into (most temporarily) being “our friends.” This “friendship” consists of their not becoming or giving harbor to those “violent extremists” who, we tell ourselves, are a discrete, isolated group, when in fact any Muslim who now, or in the future, for whatever reason, chooses to take Islam fully to heart, can become one of those “violent extremists.” And long before that, Muslims have shown, in thought, word, and deed, that they do take Islam sufficiently seriously to attempt to press its case everywhere, to change our legal and political institutions and our social arrangements, to interfere with our academic teaching and thinking about Islam, to interfere with our freedom of speech, and our ideas of what can or cannot be spoken and written. They do all this unapologetically, with violence or the threat of violence. What’s more, they conduct, unhindered, vast campaigns of Da’wa targeted at the most vulnerable and also the potentially most dangerous kinds of people — the psychically and economically marginal — who, in converting to Islam, add to the security threat to all the non-Muslims. Those former fellow citizens, now changed utterly, become a threat to us and the political institutions of this country, and the physical security of its citizens.

Because of the ignorance of Islam at the top, we have instead locked ourselves into a Tar Baby policy that requires the expenditure of vast sums on places that cannot, because of Islam, ever embrace advanced Western democracy. They cannot — because of Islam — ever be our true allies, or ever be counted on to help suppress the forces of violent Islam. They will, however, do what they can to divert outside their countries, to the Infidels, the fury of those who are working against their own regimes, as the Saudi government’s “re-education” efforts of Al-Qaeda supporters consists not in ending their Muslim fanaticism, which the Al-Saud share or promote, but in redirecting their murderous fury away from the Al-Saud themselves to the Western Infidels who deserve whatever those local fanatics wish to inflict on them — just please leave us, the nice Al-Saud, alone.

Never before has such sustained stupidity, in the face of a decade of what should have led to some obvious conclusions, been exhibited by the Western world. Even with Hitler and the Nazis, there were only six years from his resistible rise in 1933 to the outbreak of war in 1939, when suddenly “everyone” appeared to have “known all along” what Churchill and a few others, and only they, had known. We have had perfectly good information — for those who do not put their trust in the New York Times but go online — about the Jihad, in its violent manifestations, and in those that employ non-violent means, for nearly a decade. We have had the vain efforts in Iraq and the vain effort now in Afghanistan, where the actual goals are never clearly stated, because to even attempt to do that would expose the whole enterprise to the quizzical looks, and the criticism, and even the mockery, that the assumptions upon which it rests deserve.

Eventually reality will break in. But when? At what considerable unnecessary future cost? Perhaps there are those in the Obama Administration who have never read “Politics and the English Language” by Orwell, though it is now a staple in freshman composition courses. Perhaps they are unaware of how Hitler and Stalin, refashioned the lexicon, or how such words as, for example, “People’s Democracy” came to describe the most despotic of regimes.

The Obama Administration does not strike me as full of people terribly interested in, or impressed by, faith — in the way that George Bush, a born-again Christian, was so impressed with what religion had done for him that he simply couldn’t believe that something — Islam — called a “religion” could be other than good.

So what is it that prevents the Obama Administration from learning about, analyzing, studying the history of, Islam and Islamic conquest, as it would, presumably, anything else? What makes it so fearful, in the councils and corridors of power, of people speaking truthfully about such matters, or at least asymptotically coming close to that truth, so that they are now apparently being deliberately told they cannot use the very lexicon they most need, and now most lack?

The self-inflicted intellectual wounds here will have, do already have, fantastic consequences — not good ones for us, but very good for the Camp of Islam — in the world we like to call “real.” But the Obama Administration is engaged in the political construction of a reality that does not exist, and is leading itself, and those whom it presumes to instruct and protect, astray.

Muslim Brotherhood

http://www.mideastweb.org/Middle-East-Encyclopedia/muslim_brotherhood.htm

Muslim Brotherhood

Muslim Brotherhood emblem:
Qur’an and Swords

The Muslim Brotherhood (Arabic: Hizb al Ikhwan al Muslimeen – The party of the Muslim Brothers or Jamaat al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun – Society of the Muslim brotherhood )  is a fundamentalist international organization or organizations originating in Egypt, whose goals are the conversion of Muslim countries into states ruled by Sha’aria law, the re-establishment of the Caliphate and ultimately, world dominion. The Muslim Brotherhood’s ideology, which insists that Islam is a prescription for governance as well as religion, is the prototypical example of Islamism. Their slogan is self-explanatory: “God is our purpose, the Prophet our leader, the Qur’an our constitution, Jihad our way and dying for God’s cause our supreme objective.Different factions of the Muslim Brotherhood believe that an Islamic society can be achieved by violent means in the near term, or by education and “preparation” of society and “democratic” takeover.  The Muslim Brotherhood was founded formally in March 1928 in Egypt by Hassan al-Banna,  but it may have existed before in a less formal framework. 

Muslim Brotherhood Ideology

Al-Banna developed the ideology and the methods of organization and recruitment that were to characterize most radical Islamist groups which may or may not have been inspired by the Brotherhood. The ideology includes the following points:

Islam most dominate and not be dominated.

Restoration of the lost caliphate – i’adat al Khalifa al Mafqudah –  is the chief immediate political goal of the Islamist movement. 

Islam is currently inferior to the West because it deserted its roots. It will triumph by returning to its pristine form.

Social revolution and anti-colonial struggle are an integral and major part of the mission of the Islamic revival.

Violent Jihad is a central tenet of Islam and martyrdom in the cause of Allah is highly valued.  Violent Jihad is the greater Jihad, while inner struggle for moral purity is the lesser Jihad.

Islam must aim to take over the entire world and assert its superiority through violent Jihad,

Western civilization is doomed by its decadence and Jewish influence.

Ideas such as democracy and human rights are products of Jewish influence and Western decadence. Society must be ruled by God and not men.

The Jews are particularly vile enemies of Islam. Israel is to be opposed because it is a foreign western implant.

Muslim Brotherhood ideology is virulently anti-Semitic  anti-Western and anti-democratic in principle.  It is important to emphasize this last point, in view of the optimistic theories of certain academics which insist that the Muslim Brotherhood and similar groups would evolve toward democracy because of democratic traditions in Islam. The original Muslim Brotherhood ideology views all such democratic traditions as heresy, though it might use democratic means to gain power. Al-Banna was succeeded by Sayyid Qutb. The reasoning behind this opposition is explained in Chapter 6 of Sayyid Qutb‘s book, Milestones: just government is government by God, and not by men. Qutb believed that the best sort of government was a dictatorship based on Sha’aria Muslim law.

Muslim Brotherhood Method of Organization and Recruitment

Hassan al-Banna was a gifted and instinctive grass roots organizer, and the Muslim Brotherhood the pattern for other Muslim organizations in many respects:

Use of existing religious organizations – Under Al-Banna, the Muslim Brotherhood used mosques, charities and other Muslim groups as the basis of its organization and a means to spread its ideology.

Soviet style subversion – The Muslim Brotherhood, like the Soviet Comintern, set up special sections for working with different social groups such as peasants, workers and professionals.

Eclectic Facade – Al-Banna and the brotherhood tried to minimize religious and ideological disputes with the religious elites and with local traditions that deviated from Islam, in order to attract the largest number of followers and ensure their welcome in mosques, shrines and Muslim gatherings of all types.

Multi-level structure – The Muslim brotherhood created “respectable” networks for charity and Islamic studies at one level. At the same time, it created a paramilitary clandestine wing with a cellular structure like that of the pre-Soviet Bolshevik party. The legitimate activities of the open outer circle, such as charity, could be used to fund the paramilitary activities, and at the same time, the outer circle served as a basis for recruitment into the clandestine group. 

Muslim Brotherhood under Hassan Banna

Hassan Al-Banna was a teacher and agitator, who used the above methods to grow the popularity of his group. Initially, he had only modest success. By 1936, after 8 years there were only about 800 members of the Muslim Brotherhood in and around Cairo and Ismailiya, where al-Banna taught. However, the rise of Nazi Germany, interested in opposing Britiain in the Middle East, and the  Arab Revolt in Palestine, gave the Muslim Brotherhood it’s big chance. For Al-Banna and the Muslim Brotherhood, the Jewish presence in Palestine was another Westernizing colonialist influence that had to be stopped simply because it was Western. Al Banna formed a tactical and ideological alliance with the Nazis as well as with Hajj Amin al Hussayni, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, a Nazi sympathizer who coopted the leadership of the Palestinian Arab uprising. By 1938,  the Muslim Brotherhood boasted nearly 200,000 members, with fifty branches in Egypt alone, as well as numerous branches in Jordan and Palestine. The organization established mosques, schools, sport clubs, factories and a welfare service network. On the eve of World War II there were more than a half million active members registered in more than two thousand branches across the Arab world.

Muslim Brotherhood following World War II

The Brotherhood began to carry out major acts of violence in the 1940s, and was particularly active between 1945 and 1948. In one week in 1946, four violent attacks were directed at British occupation forces, wounding 128 people. Brotherhood members were put on trial and found guilty by judge Ahmed El-Khazindar. Eight months later, the judge was assassinated by two Brotherhood members.As tensions rose in Palestine, in 1947 and 1948, Jewish-owned businesses in Cairo were bombed by the Brotherhood. When Egypt invaded the newly formed state of Israel, the invasion was spearheaded by Muslim Brotherhood volunteers, who apparently coordinated to some extent with the Egyptian army. Following the failure of the war, the Brotherhood grew increasingly strident in criticizing the government. On  December 18, 1948, Prime Minister Mahmoud al-Noqrashi (Noqrashi Pasha) dissolved the Muslim Brotherhood on the grounds that it had secretly plotted to overthrow the monarchy. Twenty days later, a young Muslim Brotherhood member assassinatied Noqrashi inside the Interior Ministry building.

Al-Banna tried to dissociate himself from the assassination, asserting or pretending that he had  lost control over the group’s paramilitary wing. He declared that those who had carried out the assassination were “neither brothers nor Muslims”. Nonetheless, al-Banna was assassinated by Egyptian government agents on February 12, 1949.

Noqrashi’s successor, Ibrahim Abdel-Hadi, dealt harshly with the Brotherhood, putting large numbers of them behind bars. By the time his cabinet fell in July 1949, 4,000 Brotherhood members were in detention.

The Egyptian government, however, found it convenient to try to accommodate the Brotherhood. A court exonerated the Brotherhood on the charge of plotting to overthrow the monarchy. On April 30, 1951, the ban on the group was rescinded after the radical Wafd Party won the elections. The Muslim Brotherhood cooperated with the young officers led by Gamal Abdel Nasser, who overthrew King Farouk of Egypt, but soon fell out with the Pan Arab nationalists. A decree dissolving political parties in January 1953 did not cover the Brotherhood as it was not a political party. But a year later, the decree was invoked against the Brotherhood by President Gamal Abdel-Nasser who ordered that the group be dissolved. The supreme guide, Hassan El-Hodeibi was arrested, along with other leaders and members.

On 26 October 1954, a gunman fired bullets at Nasser as he delivered a speech in Manshiya Square in Alexandria. The government blamed the Brotherhood. Thousands of its members were rounded up and some were put on trial. Of these, six were sentenced to death and seven others were sentenced to life imprisonment.

Muslim Brotherhood under Sayyid Qutb

Following his return from the United States in 1951, Sayyid Qutb gradually assumed ideological leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood  Qutb developed and refined al-Banna’s ideology. While the idea that Muslim rule had to be extended to the west may have been implicit in Banna’s beliefs, Qutb made it far more explicit. He was also more strident in his calls to abrogate all Muslim jurisprudence and return to a somewhat hypothetical pristine state of Islam that existed in the very first years. Qutb’s struggle was no longer against colonial oppression, but against the rule of man. He decreed that all governments that did not follow his ideology were in a state of Jahiliya, the darkness and ignorance that according to Islam, pervaded the Arabian peninsula before the advent of Islam. He systematized opposition to current Muslim regimes by proclaiming that all rule of man is oppression. Man can only be free, according to Qutb, by returning to a society where laws are extracted directly from the word of God as explained in the Quran.

Qutb also originated or expanded upon the idea and practice of Takfir, branding other Muslims, and particularly state regimes, as infidels, and thus legitimizing Jihad against the Muslim states. The popularity of this idea may have been encouraged by the suffering of the group at the hands of the Nasserist regime.

In August of 1965, Nasser charged that the Brotherhood had set up an armed organisation to seize power by force and another wave of arrests followed. Hundreds of members were rounded up.

In 1966 three Brotherhood leaders – Sayed Qotb, Youssef Hawwash and Abdel-Fattah Ismail – were sentenced to death and executed for plotting against Nasser. More than 100 others were condemned to various prison terms.

Muslim Brotherhood Since Qutb

Following Nasser’s death in 1970 and Anwar As-Sadat’s rise to power, jailed Brotherhood members were released. Groups began to splinter off from the Muslim Brotherhood. The Al-Takfir Wal Hijra – a group that views society as infidel and advocates withdrawal from it announced its appearance by kidnapping and killing a cabinet minister and launching an attack on the Technical Military Academy.The mainstream Muslim Brotherhood reached a modus vivendi by renouncing violence. It remained illegal, it was tolerated by the government and, in some cases, even encouraged as a counter-balance to leftist forces whom Sadat considered the main threat to his regime.

In 1976, the group was allowed to publish a monthly magazine, Al-Dawa, which continued to appear until it was shut down by Sadat shortly before his assassination in October 1981.

In 1981, members of another offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, the Egyptian Islamic Jihad assassinated Egyptian President Anwar as Sadat. The assassination was followed by widespread suppression of the group.

The Brotherhood turned away from violence at least officially. It is unclear whether this renunciation refers only to a commitment to use democratic methods in Egypt, or whether the Muslim Brotherhood renounced violence in general. The Muslim Brotherhood became more active in civil society, winning control of several student unions and professional syndicates, and contesting parliamentary elections under stand-in party names. It is now the single largest opposition group in the Egyptian parliament. 

Muslim Brotherhood and Jihad

A basic tenet of the movement is holy war, Jihad in the sense of Jihad bis Seif, struggle by the sword. Jihad means “struggle” literally, and refers to a holy struggle or holy war.  Some Muslims believe that it refers primarily to an inner spiritual struggle. Others believe that Jihad in the sense of war should be waged only against idolators or only against those who threaten Islam. Al-Banna however, was quite explicit in stating that Jihad was to be waged as a holy duty (“fard“) to subdue any society that did not submit to Islam. (For al-Banna’s definition of Jihad, see the article on Jihad). Likewise Sayyed Qutb was explicit that Jihad was not a defensive war, but a staged struggle to “liberate” all mankind:

The second aspect of this religion is that it is a practical movement which progresses stage by stage, and at every stage it provides resources according to the practical needs of the situation and prepares the ground for the next one. It does not face practical problems with abstract theories, nor does it confront various stages with unchangeable means. Those who talk about Jihaad in Islam and quote Qur’anic verses do not take into account this aspect, nor do they understand the nature of the various stages through which this movement develops, or the relationship of the verses revealed at various occasions with each stage. Thus, when they speak about Jihaad, they speak clumsily and mix up the various stages, distorting the whole concept of Jihaad and deriving from the Qur’anic verses final principles and generalities for which there is no justification. This is because they regard every verse of the Qur’an as if it were the final principle of this religion. This group of thinkers, who are a product of the sorry state of the present Muslim generation, have nothing but the label of Islam and have laid down their spiritual and rational arms in defeat. They say, “Islam has prescribed only defensive war”! and think that they have done some good for their religion by depriving it of its method, which is to abolish all injustice from the earth, to bring people to the worship of God alone, and to bring them out of servitude to others into the servants of the Lord . Islam does not force people to accept its belief, but it wants to provide a free environment in which they will have the choice of beliefs. What it wants is to abolish those oppressive political systems under which people are prevented from expressing their freedom to choose whatever beliefs they want, and after that it gives them complete freedom to decide whether they will accept Islam or not.

….

When writers with defeatist and apologetic mentalities write about “Jihaad in Islam,” trying to remove this ‘blot’ from Islam, then they are mixing up two things: first, that this religion forbids the imposition of its belief by force, as is clear from the verse, “There is no compulsion in religion”(2:256), while on the other hand it tries to annihilate all those political and material powers which stand between people and Islam, which force one people to bow before another people and prevent them from accepting the sovereignty of God. These two principles have no relation to one another nor is there room to mix them. In spite of this, these defeatist-type people try to mix the two aspects and want to confine Jihaad to what today is called ‘defensive war’. The Islamic Jihaad has no relationship to modern warfare, either in its causes or in the way in which it is conducted.

….

This religion is not merely a declaration of the freedom of the Arabs, nor is its message confined to the Arabs. It addresses itself to the whole of mankind, and its sphere of work is the whole earth. God is the Sustainer not merely of the Arabs, nor is His providence limited to those who believe in the faith of Islam. God is the Sustainer of the whole world. This religion wants to bring back the whole world to its Sustainer and free it from servitude to anyone other than God. In the sight of Islam, the real servitude is following laws devised by someone, and this is that servitude which in Islam is reserved for God alone. Anyone who serves someone other than God in this sense is outside God’s religion, although he may claim to profess this religion. The Prophet- peace be on him – clearly stated that, according to the Shari’ah, ‘to obey’ is ‘to worship’. Taking this meaning of worship, when the Jews and Christians ‘disobeyed’ God, they became like those who ‘associate others with God’…. (Qutb, Sayyed, Milestones, Chapter 4)

Organization of the Muslim Brotherhood

Various organizations with the same or similar ideology have been called Ikhwan, Gama’a al Islamiyeh, al Jihad  and many other titles. It is difficult to determine the degree to which any “Jihadi”  group is independent, and it is probably that most Sunni Jihadist groups are related to the original brotherhood in some way. As the Muslim Brotherhood home page explains:

Al-Ikhwan has branches in over 70 countries all over the world. The movement is flexible enough to allow working under the “Ikhwan” name, under other names, or working according to every country’s circumstances. (Source: Mulsim Brotherhood home page)

Indeed, the Muslim Brotherhood and its derivatives have branched out to numerous countries, in some cases transmuting to a slightly different, generally more virulent ideology.  It had a very strong representation in Gaza. Yasser Arafat sprang from a family background in the e Ikhwan of Gaza and more importantly, the Hamas was founded by breakaway Palestinian members of the Ikhwan. The principle innovation of the Hamas was the focus of Jihadist ideology on Palestine.

The Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan) is in one way or another responsible for most of the Sunni terrorist fundamentalist groups. “New” groups formed either when the original group was suppressed and it was necessary to take another name, or because of personal difference or minor or major differences in tactics or theology, or by merger with other similar groups. The most famous such group today is probably Al-Qaeda, which resulted from a merger of Osama Bin Laden’s followers with those of Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood activist Ayman Zawahiri and other groups.

It is difficult to understand the internal organization of each group or the relations between them. Groups and terrorist actions may in some cases be directly traceable to a central group such as Al Qaeda, or they may be derivative organizations or actions such as bombings may apparently be “inspired” by Muslim Brotherhood or Al-Qaeda teachings. As noted, the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood Group had adopted a cellular organization at one time. The home page of the Muslim Brotherhood Ikhwan group states the following under the heading “Organization:”

Organization

Al-Ikhwan has branches in over 70 countries all over the world. The movement is flexible enough to allow working under the “Ikhwan” name, under other names, or working according to every country’s circumstances. However, all Ikhwan groups, in all countries are characterized by the following with respect to their method [3]:

1- Following the Salaf: Rejecting any action or principle which contradicts the Quran or Sunna, and inviting people to nothing but them both.
2- Establishing the Sunna: Working -as much as possible- to spread the Sunna in every aspect of life.
3- Increasing the Iman: By concentrating on the purity of hearts, loving Muslims in the sake of Allah, and remembrance (plus being away of any Sufi mistakes).
4- Political Activism: By putting political programs for “Islamising” government in different countries (after realistic studies), and establishing these programs thru the convenient ways which do not conflict with Islam.
5- Stressing Physical Health: By forming sports clubs and committing members to regular exercises.
6- Enriching Scientific Study: By enhancing the knowledge of members and others about Islam. Members with “Shari’a” major have special study programs.
7- Establishing a Sound Economic Infrastructure: By supporting and/or sponsoring any Islamic project and facing its “fiqh” problems. By the way, the ONLY accepted source of money to the Ikhwan is its members’ OWN money [3]. .
8- Fostering Social ties: By maintaining brotherhood links among the members of the Islamic society.

What is noteworthy of the above is that it gives almost no hint of organization, but is rather a potpourri of percepts and goals and principles. Despite the bolded text, it is likely that Muslim Brotherhood funding has come from supporters in Saudi Arabia and the United States. The Holy Land Foundation was apparently established to finance terror.Wikipedia gives an organizational scheme for the Muslim Brotherhood, but it is evidently only derived from a description of organization of the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States. From evidence released in the Holy Land foundation trial, it appears that the different groups adopt different methods suited to each country in which they are formed, but with essentially the same goals (see here). The organizational relations between these different groups are unclear.

Goals of the Muslim Brotherhood

The goals of the Muslim brotherhood are set forth in the “home page” of the group:

Main objectives

A huge tree of “sub-goals” branches from these main objectives which are derived from the Quran and the tradition of the prophet (pbuh) [3,4]:

1- Building the Muslim individual: brother or sister with a strong body, high manners, cultured thought, ability to earn, strong faith, correct worship, conscious of time, of benefit to others, organized, and self-struggling character [3].
2- Building the Muslim family: choosing a good wife (husband), educating children Islamicaly, and inviting other families.
3- Building the Muslim society (thru building individuals and families) and addressing the problems of the society realistically. .
4- Building the Muslim state.
– Building the Khilafa (basically a shape of unity between the Islamic states).
6- Mastering the world with Islam.

It should be pointed out that the “home page” notes that the person who prepared it is not a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. Therefore the information may not be authoritative. It cites two sources:

[3] “The Messages of Al-Imam-u-shaheed”, Hassan Al-Banna. [4] “An introduction to the Da’wa of Al-Ikhwan Al-Muslimoon”, Saiid Hawwa.

Muslim Brotherhood in North America

 The Ikhwan or Muslim Brotherhood have also been established in North America since the 1960s. A document published by them explained:

The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions. (Source: United States of America v. Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development et al, No. 3:04-CR-240-G, United States District Court for the Northern Division of Texas, Dallas Division, Gov’t exhibit: Government Exhibit 003-0085; 3:04-CR-240-G; U.S. v. HLF, et al. p.21. Cited herere ) .

The above document came to light as evidence in the case of the Holy Land Foundation. Among other institutions, the Ikhwan in the United States founded the Muslim Students Union and the Muslim Students Association, which spread their ideology and apparently engaged in underground activities under the cover of innocent activities such as civil rights groups and charitable foundation.

Moderation in the Muslim Brotherhood

Since about 1970, the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt has professed to have become “democratic,” seeking to take power in Egypt through free elections, education and political work.  A splinter group formed or reformed the Gamaa al Islamiya (originally a group founded by Mawdoodi), and the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, supposedly recruited “spontaneously” from a loose aggregation of university students and other individuals which continued to support violence. The Gamaa al Islamiya itself supposedly renounced violence in 1997, apparently as a result of a deal struck with the Egyptian government. The group would renounce terror, in return for a massive release of its jailed members.

Though the Muslim Brotherhood party is outlawed, candidates affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood have gained considerable representation (about 20%) in the Egyptian parliament, even though elections are heavily rigged in favor of the governing party. The announced philosophy of action of the “New faction” of Muslim Brotherhood itself at this time is that violent or “democratic” overthrow of an Arab government must be preceded by intensive Islamic education. They also court dialogue with the west, which is opposed by the “old” faction.

There is no agreement as to whether the renunciation of violence by Muslim Brotherhood groups is permanent and sincere or a tactic that was adopted due to exigencies of government repression. It is not clear either if this renunciation is a general renunciation of violence, or whether it limited to taking power in Egypt by democratic means, after which Islam must be spread by violent Jihad.  There is also disagreement about the relation between different offshoots of the brotherhood. There has been, over time, a progressive process in which older groups assume non-violent means either in reality or professedly,  and new groups are formed from members and leaders of the older groups, which are more violent. Thus, the Ikhwan Muslim brotherhood became professedly non-violent in the 1970s, spawning the al Jihad or Egyptian Islamic Jihad and the Gama’a Islamiyeh of  the blind Sheikh Omar abdel Rahman. In turn, when the Gama’a Islamiyeh renounced violence in 1997, a part of its members joined other groups to form Al-Qaeda. All these groups apparently believe in imposition of a Sha’aria state and Muslim world dominion as an end goal, and in education toward this goal, but some profess non-violent and democratic means, others are committed to violence against the west and Israel, and others are committed to violence against “non-believing” or “hypocritical” (takfiri) Muslims as well. 

Ami Isseroff

Updated December 17, 2008

References:

 Politics in God’s Name (Al Ahram Weekly, 247, 16-22 November, 1995)

Muslim Human Rights–A Record Incompatible with the Civilized World- Very long but Very Important

Human Rights
Eli E. Hertz

 

A Record Incompatible with the Civilized World


Palestinian children participate in lynching, parading and hanging of a ‘brother’

“Violence does not and cannot exist by itself; it is invariably intertwined with the lie.”

Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Arab countries attack Israel on trumped-up charges of human rights violations to cover up their own systemic human rights violations. Not only does the Arab world ignore the rule of international human rights law, many of its violations – from sanctioning honor killings of women to cross-amputations for criminals – are enshrined in the legal system of most Muslim countries. Palestinian self-rule is no different.1


Arab Nations’ Actions Fail to Put Human Rights Commitments Into Practice

In 1948, the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It was the first document considered to hold universal principles of behavior that was agreed upon by an international body. It recognized the fundamental rights of every person to life, liberty, and security; to freedom of speech, religion, and education; and to the right of freedom from torture and degrading treatment. Forty-five years later at the World Conference on Human Rights in 1993, 171 countries reiterated the universality, indivisibility, and interdependence of human rights.

Most Arab countries have constitutions that champion human rights on paper. They also have signed a number of joint declarations of high principles: The 1981 Universal Islamic Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the Islamic Council,2 the 1994 draft of the Arab Charter on Human Rights approved by the Arab League,3 the 1999 Casablanca Declaration that purported to establish an Arab Human Rights Movement,4 and the 1999 Beirut Declaration touted as the First Arab Conference on Justice.5 Yet despite the documents’ lofty principles, the record shows the Arab world is one of the worst offenders in the field of human rights.

In its 2001 report, Amnesty International found:

“[g]ross human rights violations took place throughout much of the Middle East and North Africa. They ranged from extra judicial executions to widespread use of torture and unfair trials, harassment and intimidation of human rights defenders. Freedom of expression and association continued to be curtailed; the climate of impunity remained and the victims were still awaiting steps to bring those responsible for past human rights violations to justice.”6

In Algeria, for instance, the report cites that more than 2,500 people were killed in 2001 in “individual attacks, massacres, bomb explosions and armed confrontations, and hundreds of civilians killed by armed groups.”

In Iraq, dozens of women accused of prostitution were beheaded without any judicial process, as was a woman obstetrician who actually was silenced for being critical of corruption in the health system. Iran reported 75 executions, and Saudi Arabia recorded 34 amputations as punishment.

By contrast, most of Amnesty’s report on Israel focused on unwarranted or “excessive use of force” that led to casualties among Palestinians in response to “political violence.” It also criticized Israel for arrest, detention, and trial procedures against Palestinians.

Despite Amnesty’s criticism of Israel, what is most revealing is how the Arab world responds not to its own human rights violations, but to Israel’s. Arab leaders go out of their way to exaggerate and spread lies about Israel’s behavior, not only to demonize Israel, but also to create a smoke screen that covers up Arab nations’ own deplorable human rights record.

It is a profound irony that the Arab world, which charges Israel with “ethnic cleansing” and “genocide,” destroyed once-thriving Jewish communities in Arab lands, which today are all but void of Jews. Even in areas of the West Bank and Gaza administered by the Palestinian Authority, Israeli Jews who visit there put their lives in jeopardy.7 That picture contrasts sharply from the status of the more than one million Israeli Arabs who enjoy full citizenship and human rights, and can visit and work in Jewish cities unmolested. Nevertheless, Arab and Palestinian charges against Israel persist. Among them are claims that Israeli security procedures such as roadblocks, closures, and searches established to fight terrorism purposely humiliate Palestinians.

The purpose of the smear campaign is not only to criminalize the State of Israel and the Jewish people, but also to attract additional sympathizers from the Western world. Yet those fallacious and often rabidly antisemitic diatribes are also designed to deflect attention away from the deeds of the accusers, and serve to protect genuine abusers of human rights both in the Arab world and elsewhere. Tit-for-tat arrangements among genuinely guilty nations have turned the UN’s human rights apparatus into what one critic labeled “an abusers’ caucus.”8

In fact, independent monitoring bodies in the West say that Israel is the only genuine democracy in the Middle East with separation of powers, due process, and respect for minority rights. And it is the only country in the North Africa and West Asia region that was ranked free in a survey of religious freedom conducted by the Center for Religious Freedom.9


Arab Violations: A Daily Affair

By contrast, human rights violations throughout the Arab world are a daily affair, using any objective yardstick.

The absence of basic human rights is reflected not only in the actions of regimes, but also in their social values and attitudes, which are rife with intolerance for the Other. The Arab Middle East suffers from intolerance toward non-Muslims, suppression of ethnic minorities, gross gender bias, and discrimination and persecution of people who are different in virtually every realm of life – from political views to sexual orientation.

Incredibly, suppression of freedom of expression can extend even to the reporting of public opinion. Two Iranian pollsters were sentenced to eight – and nine – year prison terms after their survey found strong public support for contact with the United States. Authorities accused the two of selling secrets to groups linked to the CIA. Among the groups cited was the Gallup organization, which had paid for the poll to find out opinions of people in the Islamic world toward America after the September 11th attacks.10

Possibly the greatest threat from outside the Arab world, and perhaps rightly so, is the Internet. That is why many Arab nations have employed methods for restricting the flow of information from the Web.11 Proxy servers filter access to content in Yemen, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia. Indeed, the Saudi government-controlled server banned at least 400,000 Websites, including sites about religion, politics, women, health, pop culture and more, a Harvard study found.12 Many Arab governments read their citizens’ e-mail, just as they tap phones and restrict free speech. One Bahraini spent over a year in jail for e-mailing allegedly political information to dissidents abroad. In Jordan, taxation and monthly Internet fees are priced so high – $70 a month for moderate usage – that only an estimated 20,000 Jordanians out of five million could afford access to the Web in 1999. By comparison, among Israel’s 6.4 million residents, 600,000 subscribed to Internet providers in 1999, and moderate usage ran an affordable $22 a month.13 Astoundingly, out of 880,000 subscribers in the entire Middle East in May 1999, more than 600,000 were from Israel, where no restrictions on Internet usage exist.14 Israel’s Business Arena reported in November 2001 that there were 1.93 million people with Internet access in Israel. The number of active home Internet users totaled 956,000.15

Other sharp splits over human rights divide Israel from its neighbors. One such realm centers on homosexuality, where the lives of Palestinian gays are so jeopardized that some have fled to Israel,16 where tolerance is the law of the land, where workplace discrimination is prohibited, where single-sex couples are eligible for spousal benefits and pensions in the civil service, and declared homosexuals serve in the army and participate in all aspects of public life.17


Endangered Human Rights Groups

 

Maybe it’s not so surprising given the conditions in most Arab nations, but human rights monitoring organizations in the Middle East also face tremendous danger.

If anything, the state of human rights in the Arab world is deteriorating, according to the Arab Commission for Human Rights,18 an umbrella group established in 1998 to try to unify human rights organizations in the region. The Commission reported that:

“It is a universally acknowledged fact that Arab countries are increasingly witnessing marked drawbacks in human rights and fundamental freedoms since the [1991] Gulf War. … The relationship between Arab governments and their citizens were becoming increasingly suppressive… While legal and operational situations of human rights advocates in at least eight Arab countries have certainly deteriorated during the 1990s, little or no noticeable achievements were made by other human rights advocates in many other Arab countries.”

Moreover, the report cited the “unbalanced growth of the human rights movement” in the Arab world. Some countries have a large number of organizations, some none. In fact, only two-thirds of the 15 human rights advocates on the commission’s board can afford to live in the country they represent, as many on-site organizations face harassment. In Egypt, for instance, a new law allowing the government to dissolve associations and non-governmental organizations (or NGOs) by administrative decree was used to harass the Egyptian Organization of Human Rights, and its director was subjected to legal harassment after he released a report on a massacre of 21 Copt Christians in January 2000.19

In the Palestinian Authority, the independent Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group has been harassed, and its head, Bassam Eid, arrested and threatened numerous times.20 Even the official Palestinian Commission for Human Rights, which the Palestinian Authority established, has been hounded by the very governmental body that established it. That should come as no surprise, given the status of human rights within the areas governed by the PA. Hearings in “‘moonlight courts’, as they function mostly in the night and hearings before them rarely last for more than a few minutes, while complaints of torture, [people] ‘disappearings’ for days or weeks before the families were told of the ‘disappeared’s’ whereabouts, abound and remain ignored” wrote Eugene Cotran, a member of the Palestinian Independent Commission for Human Rights and a British circuit judge, in 1996 in the Beirut-based Daily Star. Cotran described how the PA first simply ignored the findings of the human rights commission, then under the leadership of Hanan Ashrawi. When the commission’s criticism of the PA’s human rights violations continued, the PA arrested and jailed Ashrawi’s successor, Dr. Eyad El-Sarraj, in May 1996 following “highly critical remarks [about the PA] … in an interview.” El-Sarraj was tortured and kept in solitary confinement for 17 days, despite international pleas for his release. Finally, he was then brought before a court on false charges which were later dismissed for lack of evidence.21 Average Palestinians in the street, lacking a chorus of protesters, fare far worse.


Nearly 60 Years After Its Establishment, Israel Remains the Only Nation in the Middle East Whose Laws and Mainstream Social Values are Committed to Upholding Human Rights

 

Israel is not perfect. Its Supreme Court has reprimanded the government and security services for overstepping their prerogatives. Even when controversial, the Court’s rulings are honored, such as when the Bench ordered the government to free Lebanese nationals being held as hostages as a quid pro quo for the release of Israelis held in Lebanon.22

As in the rest of the free world, numerous Israeli human rights organizations operate freely and criticize their own government without fear of punishment. Among them are the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, established in 1972; B’Tselem (from the Biblical phrase “in the image [of God]”), established in 1989 to monitor Israeli human rights on the West Bank and Gaza; and Kav La-Oved (“Lifeline to the Worker”), dedicated to protecting the rights of foreign workers in Israel. A host of groups organized by Israeli Arabs are dedicated to minority rights issues, as well as specialty groups such as the Israeli chapter of Physicians for Human Rights and Rabbis for Human Rights, both of whom focus on Palestinian human rights. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and other international organizations also operate freely in Israel.

Of all the human rights violations, none threaten the Middle East, and particularly Israelis, more than suicide bombings. Ironically, many Arab human rights organizations invest time and energy defending or mitigating such acts, despite numerous abuses on their own turf that deserve their attention. The Egyptian Organization for Human Rights, for example, took pains to issue a special rebuttal to the 2002 report of Human Rights Watch, which labeled suicide bombings against Israelis as a “crime against humanity.” The Egyptian group instead criticized the report for what it said was a failure to put the suicide bombings into proper context (i.e., ‘the occupation’), saying that the UN had ruled on “the fundamental rights of colonized people to struggle against their occupiers, by all means at their disposal.” In the wake of a series of horrific bombings, including the Park Hotel Passover Seder massacre in 2002 and other attacks that left 60 persons dead, the head of the Palestinian Human Rights Commission, psychiatrist Dr. Eyad El Sarraj, attempted to justify such acts rather than denounce them, suggesting Israel triggered these responses by “a long history of humiliation.”23


Palestinian Breaches of Human Rights Affect Almost all Institutions and All Levels of Their Community

 

Ironically, under Israeli rule, Palestinians enjoyed more respect for their human rights than after the establishment of Palestinian self-government.24

Under Palestinian rule, for example, those who ran newspapers – once the freest in the Arab world while under Israeli administration – began to face intimidation, arrest, closure, and confiscation of editions critical of the Palestinian government. Bookstores, too, were ordered to remove critical volumes. Judges were fired for decisions that Palestinian leadership did not like, and citizens were detained for months and often tortured, without charge or the benefit of counsel. Thirty Palestinians died in custody between Arafat’s arrival in July 1994 and May 2002.25

In addition, Palestinian business owners have been subject to extortion, literally plucked off the streets, held against their will, and tortured by PA security personnel on trumped-up charges of owing back taxes, according to the Jerusalem Post in a September 1998 investigation. Thirty-six Palestinians who spoke to the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group (PHRMG) said they had paid as much as 250,000 NIS ($65,155) to win their release, the Post reported; others had been jailed for as long as two years. Yet not one cent of an estimated 7 million NIS ($1.8 million) collected under the guise of taxes was transferred to the PA Finance Ministry. Meanwhile, a network of Mafia-style ‘protection’ groups operates freely in every major Palestinian city, extorting huge fees from innocent victims. Such lawlessness should not come as a surprise, given the Palestinian Authority’s prevalent misuse of power at all levels of society, from firing, intimidating and/or arresting professionals who criticize the regime to banning a women’s protest march that called for improved safety standards following a Hebron factory fire in which 14 female employees died.26


The Abuse of Arab Women’s Rights

 

Arab abrogation of women’s rights goes further than violating their freedom to organize and protest. It is endemic not only in Palestinian society, but also in the Arab world in general, where Arab women are legally treated unequally, both in personal matters and in the workplace.

Unequal status stems from two factors: the hegemony of Islamic law and the impact of Arab paternalism.27 But regardless of the reasons, the fact remains that Arab women suffer far greater than women nearly anywhere else in the world, lagging behind other women not only in North America, Oceania, and Europe, but also in Latin America, and South and East Asia, the Arab Human Development report28 shows. The only place women are slightly worse off is sub-Saharan Africa, according to the UN’s Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM). In 2000, half of all Arab women still could not read and write, and the maternal mortality rate was double that of Latin America and the Caribbean, and four times that of East Asia.

Few women work outside their homes, even in modern-leaning countries such as Jordan, where 78 percent of Jordanian women are housewives, a 1988 survey found.29 Saudi Arabian law limits the jobs available to women to medicine, education, and banking.30 Iranian women are forbidden to study veterinary medicine and engineering – deemed to be male occupations.31 Under the Palestinian Authority, the small number of working women stems not only from a lack of employment, but from a lethal form of harassment: Women working outside the home have been murdered after being accused of collaborating with Israel or defaming their family honor. Who are the so-called collaborators? One was a seamstress, another a cleaning woman; Others included five nurses, according to the Hebrew daily Haaretz.32 One of the nurses, Aisha Abu Shawish, the head nurse and department head at Nasr Hospital, was axed to death in her home, leading many female nurses to resign.

Marginalization and disempowerment of women in Arab countries is significant.

The UN’s Human Development Project placed the onus for the region’s backwardness largely on its treatment of women, noting “the Arab world is largely depriving itself of the creativity and productivity of half its citizens.”33

And, if anything, their status is not about to improve soon, given a conservative backlash in recent decades against gains made under colonial rule or under previous regimes that sought to Westernize their countries.34 After the Islamic revolution in Iran in 1979, for instance, veiling became mandatory, on risk of public flogging with 76 lashes or jail; the minimum age women could marry was reduced from 15 to 9; female judges were thrown off the bench; and separate spheres of justice for men and women were established. In Algeria since 1984, women (no matter what their age) have lost the right to marry without consent of a male family member; polygamy and oral divorce (where men need only say ‘I divorce you’ three times and avoid due process) was reinstated; and in 1989 women’s right to vote was compromised by allowing male family heads to vote for their entire families.

Women’s rights are so ignored that small changes often are perceived as progress. In Egypt, men who wanted to escape punishment for rape or kidnapping women were allowed to marry their victims until a new law adopted in 1999 banned that option.35 Another law, adopted in 2000, ended Egyptian men’s unilateral right to divorce their wives. It was considered a human rights breakthrough when the Egyptian Supreme Court upheld the new law, which was challenged as a conflict with Islamic Sharia law. And although Egyptian women now have the right to end marriages by seeking court orders, the El Khole amendment has one condition: a woman must return all money her husband has given her before a divorce is granted.36

Such conditions may explain why 8 of 21 Arab nations have neither signed nor ratified the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women,37 with most of those who signed the document appending reservations. Nations who do not sign the Convention can continue to keep Arab girls from receiving an elementary education. They can prevent women from choosing professional careers. And they can dictate their behavior in public.38

Taken to an extreme, such policies can lead to horrific consequences, as they did in Saudi Arabia on Monday, March 11 2002. A fire at a girls’ middle school in Mecca killed 15 students because the religious police, called the Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice or the mutawwa’in in Arabic, blocked rescue efforts. Why? Because the fleeing students were not wearing their obligatory long black cloaks and head coverings required in public.

As offenders of human rights go, Saudi Arabia is considered one of the worst in the Arab world, not allowing women to obtain drivers’ licenses and requiring consent of one’s father, brother or uncle before getting married. Moreover, Saudi women have no legal redress for sexual harassment or abuse.39

In 1990, when a group of 47 highly educated Saudi women took to the roads in a one-time protest drive to challenge the law forbidding women to drive, the religious police branded them as “whores.” They received death threats, were fired from their jobs and had their passports revoked, and their husbands’ jobs were put in jeopardy.40

Human rights violations stem not only from the absence of rule of law in the Arab world; many violations result from laws themselves that call for cruel forms of corporal punishment and tolerance for those who murder women.

The most widespread breach of human rights anchored in Arabic law are so-called honor killings. It is a practice endemic to both liberal and conservative societies in the Middle East, where murderers, motivated by desire to protect their families’ honor, enjoy special legal status in all Arab countries. In most – Syria, Kuwait, Egypt, Iran, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco, Oman, Lebanon, Jordan, and in the territories administered by the Palestinian Authority – the laws that exempt perpetrators and/or mitigate punishment for honor crimes are part of each government’s civil code. In Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the laws are based directly on Sharia, or Islamic law.41

Critics charge that honor killings “are sanctioned by the educated elite, who pass laws that enable murderers to get off with little or no punishment.”42

How widespread are honor killings? At least several thousand Arab women a year are victims of honor killings, according to estimates. Countless cases of honor killings are reported as suicides or accidents. “Women are executed in their homes, in open fields, and occasionally in public, sometimes before crowds of cheering onlookers,” writes anthropologist and investigative journalist James Emery in the May 2003 edition of The World & I magazine, in an article devoted to honor killings among Palestinians on the West Bank, Gaza, and Jordan.43 Sparked not only by the discovery of extramarital relations or out-of-wedlock pregnancies, honor killings are committed for even minor infringements of modesty such as flirting.44 Perhaps the most tragic case concerned a four-year-old Palestinian girl raped by a man in his mid-twenties; the preschooler’s family abandoned her, hoping she would bleed to death because they believed she had sullied their honor.45

Even when male relatives kill their sisters, nieces, wives, mothers, or daughters to protect their family honor, the laws protect the perpetrators.46 Jordan, for instance, records at least 25 such murders a year, although those numbers are believed to be only the tip of the iceberg.47

Arab leaders who have attempted to end such legal sanctions have met with staunch opposition. After King Hussein spoke out against the practice in 1997 – the first Arab leader to do so – his successor, King Abdullah II, followed through with a proposal in 1999 that would have officially abolished honor killings. In response, 5,000 Islamic activists took to the streets in protest, including the King’s own brother, Ali. Claiming the King’s plan was tantamount to “legalizing obscenity and encouraging women to act immorally,”48 the Jordanian parliament rejected the legislation in 2000 after three minutes of debate.49 A year later the Jordanian law was amended to treat honor killings as other murders, yet a loophole remains.50 The Jordanian penal code – which perpetrators of such crimes really rely on51 – guarantees lighter sentences of no more than a year in jail for male killers of close female relatives who have committed “an act which is illicit in the eyes of the perpetrator.” Jordanian judges of such cases also remain sympathetic to those found guilty, especially since 75 percent of the cases involve brothers, often teenagers, who are treated as minors.52 In Egypt, honor killings committed by husbands whose wives commit adultery are deemed misdemeanors; however, when the reverse takes place, women are severely punished.53

The Palestinian Authority, like Jordan, also treats honor killings leniently, and the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group reports widespread incidents throughout Palestinian society.54 Although Palestinian police recorded only 38 cases between 1996 and 1999, anthropologist Emery’s informants told him “a woman beaten, burned, strangled, shot or stabbed to death is often ruled a suicide even when there are multiple wounds,” and officials are often bribed to go along. One UN-funded study (by the Palestinian-based Women’s Centre for Legal Aid and Counseling) found that 75 percent of female deaths from 1996-1998 were suspiciously ascribed to ‘fate.’55 “As a whole, the [Palestinian] judicial system conspires against victims,” including indications that families pressure forensic experts to alter their findings, the group charged.

Beyond the laws which recognize honor killings as part of Arab culture, Arab women accused of staining their families’ honor are frequently jailed to protect them from their families. At least 50 women a year are imprisoned in Jordan on honor-related cases, detention ranging from several months to several years. Arab laws that ignore human rights, however, are not limited to women. Legally sanctioned forms of cruel and unusual punishment under the aegis of extreme Islamic Sharia law include stoning individuals to death for adultery, beheading criminals with a sword, and amputation for theft, including cross-amputations of a right arm and a left leg that leave offenders horribly disabled for life.56 Saudi Arabia has one of the highest execution rates in the world at two a week, according to Amnesty International. In 1999, half the executions were of foreign nationals from developing countries,57 whose governments, unlike Western nations, rarely possess the interest or clout to intervene with Saudi authorities.


Regimes in the Middle East Not Only Intimidate Their Citizenry; They Use Terror Tactics Against Dissidents and Rivals

 

After American and British troops in April 2003 removed Iraq’s Ba’ath regime by force, 3,000 skeletons were uncovered in a mass grave in central Iraq, believed to be the victims of a 1991 Shi’ite revolt against Saddam Hussein’s regime. An estimated 200,000 Iraqis disappeared in the course of Hussein’s 24-year rule, according to Human Rights Watch.58 In 1988, during the Iran-Iraq war, 5,000 men, women, and children were killed when Iraq bombed its own Kurdish citizens with mustard gas and nerve agents in the village of Halabja. The attack was just “one event in a deliberate large-scale campaign to kill and displace the predominantly Kurdish inhabitants of northern Iraq … resulting in the deaths of between 50,000-100,000 persons, many of them women and children,” according to the U.S. State Department.59

In Lebanon’s 16-year civil war (1975-1991), more than 100,000 Lebanese, many of them civilians, lost their lives.60 The late Syrian leader Hafez Assad dealt swiftly to quell his opponents following several assassination attempts, some of which originated in the town of Hama. Consequently, Assad and his brother Rifat surrounded the town, leveled it with artillery and tank fire, and to ensure no survivors remained, employed poison gas leaving an estimated 20,000 Syrians dead.61

The first use of chemical weapons in the Middle East came between 1963 and 1967 when Egypt used phosgene and mustard aerial bombs in a civil war in Yemen, killing an estimated 1,400 persons.62

The Palestinian Authority uses the machinery of government to oppress its people.

Palestinians are plagued by a special brand of terrorism and fratricide: vigilante rule. Such has been the pattern over a dozen security organizations established by the PA. Vigilantism characterized the Intifada in 1987-93 and before that, the 1936-39 Arab revolt.63

When a Palestinian police force was first envisioned, Israeli officials expected the force would number 3,000-4,000. At Oslo, a force of 12,000 was agreed upon. Then, believing a larger force would fight terrorism, it increased to 30,000 after the September 1995 interim agreement (“Oslo II”) was signed. In the end, under the leadership of Yasser Arafat, the PA has built a police state with over 40,000 armed security personnel for a population of 2.5 million inhabitants. That is a ratio of 16 police to 1,000 civilians inside the Palestinian Authority, compared to the ratio in Europe of 4-6 police to 1,000 civilians and a ratio of 2.4 to 1,000 in the United States.64

In terms of human rights, however, the PA’s security wings have not just turned into a small army with weapons poised against Israelis, but have become a menace to their own people. Rather than taking advantage of self-rule to establish and maintain law and order, the PA simply used the machinery of self-government to terrorize Palestinians, and at times, literally, get away with highway robbery, aggravated assault, and even murder.

As a result, honor killings of Palestinian women have risen under the PA, paralleling other forms of vigilante justice carried out against a backdrop of general lawlessness.

The three-year Arab Revolt (1936-39) directed against British rule and Zionist aspirations, marked the first time Arabs in Palestine were largely free of the control of a central Western-style administration and able to organize on their own. Local rebel bands formed along family, clan, and village lines, yet coordination never rose to a regional or national scope. Instead, the revolt was “spontaneous … unsystematic, undisciplined, and [an] unstable insurgency, often prone to anarchic lapses,”65 writes Kenneth Stein, a scholar of the Mandate period. Marked by guerrilla warfare directed at British and Jewish interests, the revolt was also rife with abductions and killings of village heads who had sold land to Jews, and other so-called collaborators who refused to honor an economic boycott against Jews and the British. Ultimately, the Arab Revolt turned into a series of retributions against Arabs considered to be traitors. In other cases, collaboration charges served as a cover for settling old personal vendettas,66 says Arizona University Historian Professor Charles Smith. In all, fellow Arabs killed 494 Arabs, making up approximately 16 percent of all Palestinians killed during the Arab Revolt.67 They included mayors, affiliated officials, sheikhs, village heads (mukhtars), rival notables, and even prominent Muslim religious figures.68

“… As in Ireland in the worse days after the War or in Bengal, intimidation at the point of a revolver has become a not infrequent feature of Arab politics. Attacks by Arabs on Jews unhappily, are no new thing. The novelty in the present situation is attacks by Arabs on Arabs. For an Arab to be suspected of a lukewarm adherence to the nationalist cause is to invite a visit from a body of ‘gunmen.’”
From the Palestine Royal Commission report presented by the [British] Secretary of State for the Colonies to Parliament by Command of His Majesty in July, 1937.

The revolt which began in 1936 included demonstrations, a general strike, and a boycott which decimated the local Arab economy, with scores of Arab businesses shut down and 40,000 middle and upper-class Palestinians fleeing to neighboring countries.69 Some 50 years later, a similar pattern of fratricide repeated itself, notwithstanding quantum leaps forward in terms of urbanization and social organization, improvements in standard of living, health, education and development of a collective sense of peoplehood or political awareness that embraced all levels of Palestinian society. Despite the tightly organized nature of the 1987 Intifada, whose local and national leadership enjoyed a modern communications network, Palestinians again failed the test of statesmanship. They had built a network of local committees that managed local affairs and local resistance that transcended deep cleavages of class, clan, and geography. Yet a shared Palestinian identity based on a common enemy did not last. Self-government again regressed to a state of street-gang rule and fratricide.

“With the beginning of the Uprising, the whole system of law and order collapsed … and much of Palestinian society experienced vigilante justice,” wrote Bassam Eid of the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group.70 Palestinian street gangs of masked men punished women suspected of immodest behavior, drug dealers, informers who collaborated with Israel, and property owners who sold land to Jews, Eid wrote.

The Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group reported:

“In the course of pursuing collaborators, suspects caught by masked men were invariably tortured and killed. In the midst of this vigilantism, many innocent people – both women and men – were mutilated or killed as well, merely upon the suspicion or rumor of collaboration or as a result of a personal grudge or vendetta. This was a time of terror in the occupied territories, where the most basic guarantees of the rule of law were completely ignored.”

Palestinian radicals killed at least 800 of their own brethren suspect of providing Israel with intelligence,71 according to Professor Bard O’Neill of the National War College and an expert on terrorism. The Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group says that the number of Palestinians killed by Palestinians was equal to the number killed by Israelis.72

Motivations were mixed. ‘Palestinian collaborators’ killed included those who dared to work in Israel or maintain commercial or social ties with Israelis, not just intelligence gatherers. In 1992 alone, intra-Palestinian violence resulted in 200 deaths, most tied to rivalry between Fatah and Hamas; such killings waned in 1993 after the Oslo Accords were signed and a tacit truce, or hudna, was reached between the sides. That year, intra-Palestinian killings dropped to 83. Like the Arab Revolt that preceded it, the 1987 Intifada also devastated the local Arab economy, wiping out most standard-of-living gains Palestinians had enjoyed in the first decade of Israeli rule. From 1988-1991, the standard of living dropped 10 percent per year, according to Tel Aviv University economist Assaf Razin. The economy took another hit when 400,000 Palestinian guest workers in Kuwait were expelled after the 1991 Gulf War for siding with Saddam Hussein. That brought a sharp drop in money being sent home to families in the West Bank and Gaza, and it also cut funding to the PLO.73 In the end, the pattern remains the same, despite differences in conditions among the Arab Revolt, the 1987 Intifada and Palestinian violence today.74 Instead of fighting with chains, iron bars, clubs, and Molotov cocktails,75 today’s fratricide among Palestinians is being played out with the machinery of government, firearms, and sending children into battle, which began in the 1987 Intifada. The local bands of the 1930s and gangs of the late 1980s have been replaced by municipal and regional warlords, and organized terror and guerrilla tactics.76

As in the past revolts, the number of intra-Palestinian killings has again risen sharply, mostly due to executions in the streets. Those include assassinations of political rivals, extra judicial killings by security forces and unidentified or masked assailants, and blood feuds. In 1995, only two such killings were reported. The next year, ten were killed in such executions; 18 in 1999, 26 in 2000 and 36 in 2001. In the first seven months of 2002, 36 Palestinians were killed by fellow Palestinians, almost all in gang war-style executions, felled by a rain of bullets in the back, or a single bullet to the head by masked gunmen or members of PA security services,77 according to the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group. The list of such murders does not include countless other Palestinians killed with knives, short hoses, and clubs.

The arrival of Arafat and his wing of the PLO from Tunis only worsened tribal blood feuds, with thousands of members of the security forces newly armed and prepared to use their weapons in private vendettas tied to tribal loyalty.

In one landmark case, members of the Abu Sultan clan murdered two members of the Khalidi clan. That led the Palestinian Authority to hastily execute two brothers from the Abu Sultan clan after a quick trial intended to restore law and order and prevent a blood feud. All four fatalities were members of the PA security forces.78

“There is always someone killing someone else, in the process of taking revenge for a previous killing, seemingly without end,” wrote Gaza psychiatrist and human rights activist Eyad El Sarraj in the Jerusalem Report in 1998.79 “Even more troubling is the fact that since the establishment of the Palestinian National Authority in 1994, the number of killings has multiplied.” Among the cases cited: a teacher shot in the head as a suspected spy in front of his pupils.

El Sarraj’s observation points to the belief that Palestinian peoplehood lacks true substance, and that it only surfaces when non-Muslim administrations are in charge. Yet left to self-rule, Palestinian peoplehood quickly dissipates, digressing into deep cleavages and violent tribal rivalries). Writes El Sarraj:

“In Palestinian society today, tribal identity seems to be reemerging, as opposed to the latter years of the occupation when we defined ourselves first and foremost as Palestinians. As the internal political map is redrawn, people are regrouping into their tribal affiliations. And even political groups like Fatah are behaving today like tribes.”

With a sense of despair, he notes:

“… our tradition of revenge and our culture of violence are deep-rooted.”

The same pattern of economic self-destruction is repeating itself in the wake of self-rule under the Palestinian Authority, only it is coupled by corruption and misuse of public funds along with unemployment. And again, as during the Arab Revolt of 1936-1939 (and 1948 when Arabs responded with violence after the State of Israel was declared), educated and well-to-do Palestinians are quietly packing their bags and emigrating to escape renewed political violence and economic stagnation.

With combatants using residential neighborhoods as a haven to attack Israelis and build bombs, many fear becoming victims of collateral damage during Israeli incursions. Moreover, Muslim parents fear that their children will be tempted or enticed to become suicide bombers.

Despite self-rule, Palestinians also fear the damaging effects of a PA-controlled economy.

After two years of self-rule in 1996, Palestinians in PA-run areas suffered a 30 percent decline in their standard of living, Israeli experts estimate. By early 2002, after Palestinian leaders opted for more violence, the Palestinians’ Gross Domestic Product (GDP) plummeted by 70 percent, and the PA’s collective net worth dropped by an estimated 60 percent due to corruption, loss of productivity, and a loss of foreign aid.

Before the 1987 Intifada, 200,000 Palestinians worked in Israel; in 1992, after four years of disturbances, that number dropped to 120,000.80 “The [1987] Intifada … had a depressing effect on the Palestinian economy,” Eliyahu Kanovsky, an economist at Bar-Ilan University testified at a 1997 joint U.S. Congressional Economic Committee hearing on the lack of a peace dividend.

“The frequent closures following terrorist attacks disrupted trade and other economic relations between Israelis and Palestinians and accelerated Israel’s replacement of Palestinians by laborers from a number of Eastern European, Asian and African countries.”81

The chilling effect was not only due to disruptions in Palestinian work attendance, but also because employers grew concerned for their personal safety: 105 Israelis and 11 foreign nationals82 were killed between 1987-1993 during the Intifada, with many Jewish employers being killed by their Palestinian employees. Other Jewish employers spotted their workers in TV footage among celebrants of terrorist attacks. One employer identified his former Palestinian employee as one of the prime perpetrators of the Ramallah lynching of two Israeli reservists who merely took a wrong turn.83 By September 2000 before the outbreak of Arafat’s war, 60,000 Palestinians worked in Israel.84 By December 2001, only 39,000 still worked there.85 That drop stemmed from growing terrorist attacks on both sides of the Green Line. In response, the Israeli government invalidated all work permits for Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, and the issuance of new permits were weighed on an individual basis and by demand. One of the most unforgettable cases86 that soured Israelis on hiring Palestinians came when a 34-year old Palestinian from Gaza, employed by an Israeli bus company, plowed the bus he was driving into a crowd on a main thoroughfare leading into Tel Aviv, killing eight Israelis and injuring 23 in February 2001. He did so after dropping off a busload of Gaza workers on their way to their day jobs in Israel. Today only about 20,000 Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza have permits to enter Israel to hold day jobs.87

Palestinians blame Israel for their economic shambles. They see nothing illogical in their demands to work in Israel while attacks on Israelis continue, attacks which enjoy broad Palestinian support.88 Instead, they consider the fact that few Israelis will hire them as another form of oppression and what they term “Zionist racism.”


Emigration

 

One of the least discussed results of Palestinian human rights violations is the growing exodus of Palestinians themselves from the territories, fed up with the violence and corruption. Although no Palestinian statisticians published data on this subject, and the Palestinian media has imposed a voluntary blackout on the phenomenon, more than a quarter of Palestinians say they are considering permanent emigration, according to the Hebrew daily Haaretz.89 Even six years into Palestinian self-rule, and a year before the Terror War (‘al-Aqsa Intifada,’) a 1999 public opinion survey revealed deep dissatisfaction: 60 percent of Palestinians criticized the lack of freedom of expression; 62 percent believed that Arafat’s administration was corrupt; and 27 percent said they were considering emigration. The number of young, educated people considering emigrating was double the average, said Dr. Khalil Shikaki, adding: “People wanted a democratic society, they wanted work and they didn’t get what they wanted.” A 2001 survey of Palestinian Christians from Beir Sahour, a Christian village just outside Jerusalem (which has been used by terrorists as a base for attacking Jewish Jerusalemites), indicated that more than half of them were also considering emigration. The survey was conducted by the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem. Visa requests also have increased at numerous Western embassies, although obtaining such visas has become more difficult since September 11th. The Australian embassy – an untraditional destination for Arabs – was inundated by 2,004 immigrant visa requests between July 2000 and July 2001, compared to an average of 130 in previous years. Those leaving, according to the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group, are young and educated, and unwilling to put up with human rights violations under Palestinians self-rule. Similarly, 90 percent of the Palestinians applying for visas to Canada are engineers and pharmacists. As in times past, Palestinian society’s penchant for self-destructive behavior is boomeranging, motivating the best and the brightest to leave, while Palestinians as a whole blame Israel (again) for the collapse of their society and their economy.

Jonathan Schanzer wrote in the Middle East Quarterly, about the lesson of three Palestinian uprisings:

“Like the Arab Revolt and the first Intifada … the current Intifada also has the odor of a defeat.… The violence has again destroyed the Palestinian economy, while radicalism, fratricide and internal squabbles continue to erode society at an alarming rate…. As a direct result of the intra-Palestinian violence that accompanies these uprisings, the Palestinians are arguably no more prepared for statehood today than they were in 1936. They are simply more destitute, more fragmented, and more radical.”90


The PA Cynically and Consciously Violates the Most Basic Human Right – the ‘Right to Life and Security of Person’ in Regard to Its Own Children – in Violation of a May 2000 Amendment to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child

 

During the 1987 Intifada, Palestinians “sent mere children to fight grown-up struggles … in a ‘small-arms war.’”91 It may have proved a successful tactic as military strategies go, but on a human scale, it left Palestinian children as victims by their elders for political gain. Such victimization has escalated in the PA’s guerrilla war with Israel that was launched in September 2000. Children are purposefully and strategically positioned between Palestinian combatants and their Israeli targets, used as human shields at the front of violent clashes, exploited as couriers for explosives, and openly encouraged to forfeit their lives as direct combatants and suicide bombers. Political pedophiles literally entice children to kill themselves,92 a tactic the Palestinians have opted for despite the UN’s specific ban on such measures as a clear human rights violation.

The UN General Assembly added that ban to the Convention on the Rights of the Child in May 2000 which went into effect in 2002.93 The protocol absolutely and unconditionally prohibits the involvement of children in armed conflict. It specifically forbids the recruitment of children into regular armed forces – an all-too-widespread global phenomenon94 – but also extends the prohibition in Article 4 of the protocol, stating unequivocally that “armed groups … should not, under any circumstances, recruit or use in hostilities persons under the age of eighteen years.” Moreover, the preamble defines as a war crime the use of children under the age of 18 who “participate actively in hostilities.95

It also “condemns the targeting of children in situations of armed conflict and direct attacks on objects protected under international law … including places that generally have a significant presence of children, including schools and hospitals.” Although the protocol does not specifically cite cafes, discos, and fast-food eateries, such establishments, frequented by Israeli youth and targeted by Palestinian suicide bombers, clearly fall under the prohibition as a violation of Israeli children’s human rights, even by UN standards.

Further, the 2002 Human Rights Watch World Report charges that the Palestinian Authority has done “little to exercise its responsibility to take all possible measures to prevent and punish armed attacks by Palestinian Arabs against Israeli civilians, including suicide bombings.”96

Despite the strongly worded UN ban, the world body has failed to condemn Palestinians for victimizing children – their own or Israeli children.

The opposite has actually been the case, as the UN has served as the platform of choice for Israel bashing. One of the most blatant cases was the 2001 UN-sponsored conference on racism held in Durban, South Africa. The gathering was devoted solely to painting Israel as a human rights violator by means of a parade of fliers, bumper stickers, and posters declaring Israel racist, criminal, illegal, and an “apartheid state.”97 In many ways Durban stood as a recap of a 1975 UN General Assembly resolution, which defined Zionism as “a form of racism and racial discrimination.” That resolution was repealed in 1991, but the terminology continues to reverberate throughout the UN halls and other UN resolutions.

Lastly, within the Arab world, those whose human rights are violated include more than Arabs who belong to the ‘wrong’ ethnic group, religion, or political association, who engage in forbidden activities, who dare to speak out or show too much personal or institutional autonomy. By focusing on staying in power, many Arab regimes by definition simply impoverish the lives of their citizens, shortchanging them of their most basic human rights – to life and the realization of one’s full potential through decent health and education.

Article 25 of the Declaration of Human Rights states: “Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and his family.” It stresses that “[m]otherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance.” Article 26 states: “Everyone has the right to education … and that education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality, and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.”98

Despite Arab and European accusations that Israel oppresses and discriminates against its Arab minority and Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, objective yardsticks show a different reality. In fact, Arab children in Israel have a much better chance of staying alive and getting a good education than Muslim children in countries in Europe.99 The infant mortality rate (a key component of the UN’s Human Development Index) for Arabs in Israel ranks equal or better than the rate of members of the majority in Europe and the United States. The rate among Arabs in Israel is 7.8 deaths per 1,000, the same as for native British citizens; but the infant mortality rate among native French citizens is 8 deaths per 1,000; for native Swiss 8.2, and for white Americans 8.5.

Comparison of the infant mortality rates of Israel’s Arab minority with the minorities in the above nations also proves the fallacy of Arab and European accusations about Israel’s treatment of minorities. The infant mortality rate of minority Turks in Switzerland, for example, is 12.3 deaths per 1,000; 12 per 1,000 for minority Arabs in France; and in England 11.4 death per 1,000 for babies of mothers born in Pakistan.100

Furthermore, Israel’s overall infant mortality ratio of 7.5 deaths per 1,000 births stands in sharp contrast to the infant mortality rates in the Arab world: Kuwait (10.9), Jordan (19.6), Lebanon (27.4), Egypt (58.6), Saudi Arabia (49.6), and Yemen (66.8). Ironically, Arab newborns in the West Bank (with infant mortality of 21 per 1,000 birth) and Gaza (with infant mortality of 24 per 1,000 birth) have a better chance of surviving the first year of life than Arab infants in Lebanon, Egypt, or Saudi Arabia.101 An August 2000 report of the World Bank cited 15 deaths per 1,000 births in the West Bank and Gaza,102 data that would rank Palestinians second only to Kuwait in the entire Arab world. That data was released just before the outbreak of the Terror War (second ‘Intifada,’) which has led to disintegration of public infrastructure, including public health standards that seven years ago were the highest in the Arab world.103 “The disastrous self-destructive terrorist war against Israel … has reduced Palestinians to the most desperate conditions they have seen since the creation of Israel in 1948,” wrote Tom Rose, publisher of the Jerusalem Post.104

Beside health, the other basic human right is education. But intellectual empowerment through literacy and education pose one of the greatest threats to autocratic regimes.

Consider the 95 percent literacy rate in democratic Israel, which absorbed one million immigrants from more than 100 countries. Yet in the Arab world, where the overwhelming majority speaks a common language – Arabic – illiteracy remains high. Although Jordan (with a 93.4 percent literacy rate), Bahrain (88.5), Lebanon (86.4 percent), and Syria (85.7 percent) lead the Arab world in literacy, one of every two Egyptians does not know how to read, and at least one of every five in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria, and Iraq cannot read either, according to the CIA’s World Fact book 2002.105 Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, under Israeli rule for more than three decades, have one of the highest levels of literacy among Arabs; 85 percent.106 Throughout the Arab world as a whole illiteracy has dropped from 60 percent in 1980 to 43 percent in the mid-1990s, but even with this impressive decline, 60 million illiterate adults – mostly women, remain – according to the UN’s 2002 Arab Human Development Report.


From the very day it became an independent state on May 14, 1948, Israel has stood as a beacon of liberty

 

Israel has always perceived itself as responsible for providing a safe haven for any Jew in distress, regardless of the circumstances – displaced European Jews who survived the Holocaust, Jews from Arab countries whose communities became a target for discrimination and attacked, Jews from behind the Iron Curtain and black Jews from Ethiopia, and more recently, immigrants from Argentina and France – this is what Israel has stood for. In addition to serving as a haven for Jews, Israel has undertaken number of humanitarian gestures over the years. In the late 1970s, Israel took in 250 Vietnamese boat people, giving them asylum after an Israeli Zim Line vessel saved their lives while ships from Panama, Japan, Norway, and then-East Germany passed them by. Similar sentiments prompted Israel to give refuge to 84 Muslims from Bosnia in 1993 and 110 Albanians from Kosovo in 1999.107

Yet despite those humanitarian acts, Israel remains a victim of crimes against humanity, as Palestinian terrorist attacks specifically target Jews. In an ironic twist, Palestinians who accuse Israel of being racist and an apartheid state choose their victims solely by ethnic and racial origin, attacking places frequented by Israeli Jews. Handlers disguise their terrorist protégés to look like Jews (donning skullcaps, army uniforms, dyed hair or ‘cool’ haircuts, choosing candidates who specifically do not look Arabic). By the same token, peaceful Arabs will take steps to ensure they do not look like Jews when in predominantly Arab areas, leaving a kafiyah on the dashboard or worry beads hung from the rearview mirror. When possible, terrorists avoid harming Arabs, killing only Jews. In one case, a suicide bomber whispered a warning to a young female passenger talking in Arabic with a friend – “Something terrible is going to happen – get off the bus.” The passenger – a nursing student studying at a Jewish college in Safed – grabbed the arm of the other Arab student and quickly got off the bus at the next stop, not bothering to call police on her cell phone after the bus drove away.108 Twenty minutes later, the suicide bomber blew himself up in the packed bus, killing nine and injuring 50. In another case, a woman student who blew herself up in a Jerusalem supermarket told two women in traditional Arab dress to get out before approaching a group of other female shoppers with children whom she killed and maimed after detonating a suicide belt she was hiding under her clothes.109

Israel is accused of gross violations of Palestinian human rights based on simple ‘body counts’ – Israeli fatalities vs. Palestinian fatalities. This is misleading. An examination of circumstances surrounding many Palestinian deaths shows most were combatants, and there were countless, needless casualties among Palestinians that stemmed from reckless death-defying behavior.

The asymmetrical number of casualties among Israelis and Palestinians has incensed many observers, raising charges that Israel uses excessive force. In fact, Palestinians misread the results of a decade of self-restraint on the part of the Israeli army, whose rules of engagement permitted soldiers to fire only if their lives were clearly in danger.110 In retrospect, that policy – coupled with a similar misreading of Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from Lebanon – bolstered a false sense of invincibility among Palestinians in the face of armed IDF soldiers.

Many of the initial Israeli casualties resulted from a failure to fully grasp that the rules of battle had changed and soldiers should be allowed to fire back. Thus, Palestinians were killed attempting to dismantle a border fence near Kibbutz Nirim adjacent to the Gaza strip, having expected to simply walk into Israel proper. Others were injured and killed in the early months of the Terror War (‘al-Aqsa Intifada’) when mobs stormed isolated positions manned by Israeli soldiers and police in Gaza, the West Bank and Jerusalem. Some literally climbing up onto the walls of army compounds, shimmying up flagpoles and climbing chain link parameter fences in an attempt to overrun such positions, assuming Israelis would pull back rather than shoot back. The often-fatal consequences of such irrational behavior, a complete disregard for one’s own personal safety, emanated from a lethal naiveté – the assumption that under no circumstances would Israelis use their weapons, coupled with a growing cultural chasm where Palestinians began to encourage such behavior as long as the fatalities could be pinned on Israel. The most bizarre use of the body count is that Palestinians blame the IDF for causing the deaths of homicide bombers and Palestinians killed while preparing bombs to be used against Israelis. Under such conditions, looking for symmetry in body counts becomes irrelevant.

A statistical analysis which examined the age, gender, and combatant status of all fatalities since the beginning of the September 2000 Terror War found 54 percent of Palestinian fatalities were among combatants while 80% of Israeli fatalities were among non-combatants, thus painting an entirely different picture of whose human rights are under attack.

The study111 by the International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism also revealed that straightforward body counts – 1,900 Palestinians vs. 700 Israelis – create a warped picture because they lump together all Palestinian fatalities, including suicide bombers, those killed preparing bombs, and innocent bystanders. When fatalities were analyzed (based on open source material in Arabic and Hebrew) by age, gender, and combatant status (full combatants, probable combatants, uniformed non-combatants, suspected collaborators, violent protesters, unknown protestors, non-combatants, health-related, and unknown), an entirely different picture emerged: 54% of Palestinian losses were actively involved in fighting (not including stone throwers or unknowns); 80% of the Israelis killed were non-combatants with women and girls accounting for 31% of the Israeli casualties, compared to 5% of Palestinian females. Palestinian fatalities are concentrated among teens and young adult males, while Israeli casualties range from infants to senior citizens caught in crowded civilian targets, including 174 fatalities of people over age 45. Lastly, among Palestinians, at least 253 of their own 800 fatalities were deaths in which Palestinians were directly responsible for Palestinian deaths such as the murder of collaborators and bomb preparation accidents.

In fact, Palestinians have killed Israelis simply for the “crime of being Israeli,” the report charged. It also contradicts accusations that Israel has indiscriminately targeted women and children, as Palestinians often claim. Instead, the statistics show that the vast majority of Palestinians killed were Palestinian men and boys engaged in behavior that they knew placed them in danger. Their reckless, death-defying behavior reflected a culture of death purposefully and cynically championed by Palestinian political and religious leaders for political gain.

IN A NUTSHELL

  • The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the UN General Assembly in December 1948 champions the right to “life, liberty and security of person”; “freedom of thought, conscience and religion”; “freedom of opinion and expression”; “equal protection of the law”; freedom from “arbitrary arrest”; and “inhuman, degrading treatment or punishment.”
  • Despite rhetoric which paints Israel as a human rights oppressor, the facts and even the testimony of Palestinian human rights activists demonstrate that the Arab world flagrantly and systematically violates the human rights of its own people.
  • For Arabs and Jews in the Middle East, genuine respect for one’s person, privacy, property, gender, beliefs, right of expression; protection from arbitrary arrest, and from cruel and unusual punishment exist only in Israel. Many regimes in the Arab world have no qualms about terrorizing their own citizenry, using cruel and unusual punishments and engaging in murderous attacks on opponents to keep their citizenry in line.
  • Discrimination against women in the Arab world is widespread. It ranges from restrictions on their autonomy to laws that legitimize honor killings for breaching modesty customs.
  • The Palestinian Authority has not only turned the machinery of government into a police state in two opportunities for self-rule – the 1987 Intifada, and a decade of self-rule under the Palestinian Authority – but is responsible for the disintegration of Palestinian society into a lawless reign of terror which threatens Palestinians as well as Israelis.
  • Palestinian leaders think nothing about victimizing both their own children and Jewish Israeli children for political gain.
 


1 See Sharia – Islamic Law at:
http://americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4726&search=arlandson. (11559)
2 For the text of the document, see:
http://www.al-bab.com/arab/docs/international/hr1981.htm#Foreword. (11582)
3 “Re-drafting the Arab Charter on Human Rights: Building for a better future” See:
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE010022004?open&of=ENG-375. (11561)
4 The Casablanca Declaration of the Arab Human Rights Movement See:
http://www.hri.ca/doccentre/docs/casa-dec.shtml. (11562)
5 For the texts of these documents, see:
http://www.undp-pogar.org/activities/justice/beirut.pdf. (11563)
6 “Middle East and North Africa,” Amnesty International, April 2001. See:
http://web.amnesty.org/web/ar2001.nsf/regMDE/regMDE?OpenDocument. (10462)
7 For two examples, see the case of two Israeli restaurateurs invited by an Arab colleague to an eatery in Tul Karm at:
http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0j7n0. (10463) and a 16-year-old boy who went to visit a girl he met on the Internet who lured the youth to his death near Ramallah at:
http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0j1n0. (10464)
8 See David Matas’ critique of the behavior of the UN Commission on Human Rights See:
http://www.bnaibrith.ca/briefs/unchr/unchr-14b.html. (11180)
9 “Figure 1: Religious Freedom by Area” in Freedom House – Center for Religious Freedom. See:
http://www.freedomhouse.org/religion/publications/rfiw/fig1.htm. (11181)
10 Jim Muir, “Iran tries pollsters on spying charges,” BBC, December 3, 2002. See:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2539605.stm. (11179)
11 “The Internet in the Middle East and North Africa: Free Expression and Censorship,” Human Rights Watch, June 1999. See:
http://www.hrw.org/advocacy/internet/mena/summary.htm. (11182)
On Jordan, see: http://www.hrw.org/advocacy/internet/mena/jordan.htm. (11183)
12 “Saudi Arabia Blocks Religious Websites,” Christianity Today, August 7, 2002. See:
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2002/130/31.0.html. (11184)
Also see: “Internet Filtering in Saudi Arabia in 2004” at:
http://www.opennetinitiative.net/studies/saudi/. (11564)
13 “Israeli Internet penetration rate on the rise,” e-Marketer, November 2002. See:
http://www.nua.ie/surveys/index.cgi?f=VS&art_id=905358572&rel=true. (11185)
14 For a comparison of usage in Israel and its Arab neighbors in 1999. See chart at:
http://www.hrw.org/advocacy/internet/mena/appendix-a.htm. (11186)
15 See Israel’s Business Arena: Almost 2 million online in Israel at:
http://www.nua.ie/surveys/index.cgi?f=VS&art_id=905357429&rel=true. (11187)
16 Yossi Klein Halevi, “Refugee Status,” New Republic, August 19, 2002, at:
http://www.jpef.net/sep02/Refugee%20status.pdf. (10465)
“Death threat to Palestinian gays,” BBC, March 6, 2003 at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2826963.stm. (11565)
17 Chris McGreal, “Gay Israeli MP faces new battle in Knesset,” Guardian, November 5, 2002, at:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/gayrights/story/0,12592,836330,00.html. (10467)
18 Arab Commission for Human Rights at:
http://home.swipnet.se/~w-79939/wiae.htm. (11566)
19 Cited in The Egyptian Organization for Human Right’s (EOHR) annual report at:
http://www.eohr.org/annual/2000/s4.htm. (10468)
In the pogrom on Christians (there are virtually no Jews left in Egypt) in the southern Egyptian village of Al Kosheh in January 2000, 100 Christian-owned businesses and homes were destroyed by a mob of 3,000 Muslims. Many of the 21 Copts murdered were told to renounce their faith, and when they refused they were executed on the spot. The Egyptian government wanted to hush up the embarrassing affair. For details, see the Center for Religious Freedom report at:
http://www.freedomhouse.org/religion/news/bn2000/bn-2000-01-03.htm. (10469)
20 Kenneth C. W. Leiter, “Life under the Palestinian Authority,” Middle East Quarterly (September 1998) at:
http://www.meforum.org/pf.php?id=406. (11190)
21 Eugene Cotran, “The Evolution of the Rule of Law in Palestine,” Daily Star, December 19, 1996, at:
http://www.soas.ac.uk/Centres/IslamicLaw/DS19-12-96RoLPalestine.html. (11191)
22 “High Court of Justice Ruling on Lebanese Detainees,” Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Jerusalem, 12 April 2000, at:
http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0h810. (11644)
23 See “Comments On The Human Rights Watch Report,” EOHR, November 2002, at:
http://www.eohr.org/press/2002/11-7.htm. (11642)
Eyad El Sarraj, “Why We’ve Become Suicide Bombers,” Peace Work (May 2002) at:
http://www.afsc.org/pwork/0205/020506a.htm. (11194)
24 For an overview of human rights abridgements, see section on human rights by sociologist Kenneth Leiter, “Life under the Palestinian Authority,” Middle East Quarterly (September 1998) at:
http://www.meforum.org/pf.php/?id=406. (11190)
25 For 2005 details, see the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group, “Brothers Against Brothers” at:
http://www.phrmg.org/pressrelease/2005/December%2030%20Brothers%20Against%20Brothers.htm. (11646)
26 For a look inside the Palestinian Authority and for case studies of its misuse of power against critical journalists, protesting workers, and others – from false arrest to use of torture in order to silence criticism and prevention of peaceful assembly, see the Palestinian Center for Human Rights report: “The Right to Free Expression and the Right to Peaceful Assembly – The Case of the West Bank and Gaza, January 1, 1999 – April 30, 2000” at:
http://www.pchrgaza.org/files/S&r/English/pdf/Series Study 23.pdf. (11647)
27 For an overview of progress and regression in the status of women, see Homa Hoodfar, “Muslim Women on the Threshold of the Twenty-First Century,” Dossier 21 (1998
http://wluml.org/english/pubsfulltxt.shtml?cmd[87]=i-87-f226d81549de18253f9cce3ff4045df2&cmd[190]=i-190-f226d81549de18253f9cce3ff4045df2. ( 11648)
28 For an overview of the status of women conducted by the UN Development Program, based on the UN’s Arab Human Development Report 2000, see “Arab Women Moving Fast, but Still Far to Go” at:
http://www.rbas.undp.org/ahdr/press_kits2002/EnglishPressKit.pdf. (11649)
29 “Jordanian Women: Past and Future,” Princess Basma Resource Centre, 1998, p. 9 (draft document), cited in Fadia Faqir, “Interfamily Femicide in Defense of Honor: The Case of Jordan,” Third World Quarterly 22, no. 1 (2001): 65-82 at:
http://www.secularislam.org/articles/femicide.htm.
30 U.S. Congressional Human Rights Caucus: Human Rights in Saudi Arabia: The Role of Women, Testimony of Amal Al-Qahtani, Ph.D., citizen of Saudi Arabia and head of the Saudi Institute – a U.S.-based human rights advocacy group, June 4, 2002.
31 For an overview of progress and regression in the status of women, see Homa Hoodfar, “Muslim Women on the Threshold of the Twenty-First Century” at:
http://wluml.org/english/pubsfulltxt.shtml?cmd[87]=i-87-f226d81549de18253f9cce3ff4045df2&cmd[190]=i-190-f226d81549de18253f9cce3ff4045df2. (11648)
32 “Abuse of Women Under Arafat’s Palestinian Authority Regime,” December 27,2001, quoting Haaretz, June 16, 1994, at:
http://www.zoa.org/pressrel/20011227a.htm. (11202)
33 “Arab Women Moving Fast, but Still Far to Go,” UN Development Program, at:
http://www.rbas.undp.org/ahdr/press_kits2002/PR4.pdf. (11677)
34 Interview with Azar Nafisi, author of “Reading Lolita in Tehran” in The Atlantic, May 7, 2003 at:
http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/interviews/int2003-05-07.htm. (11678)
35 “The Human Rights Situation in Egypt: Introduction” in “Annual Report 1999-2000,” Egyptian Organization for Human Rights, at:
http://www.eohr.org/annual/2000/intro.htm. (11204)
36 “Arab Women Moving Fast, But Still Far to Go,” at:
http://www.rbas.undp.org/ahdr/press_kits2002/PR4.pdf. (11677)
and “Victory for women’s rights: The Supreme Constitutional Court rejects constitutional challenge to Al Khol Law,” Egyptian Organization for Human Rights Press, December 16, 2002 at:
http://www.eohr.org/press/2002/12-16A.HTM. (11205)
37 Ibid.
38 Human Rights Watch, “Saudi Arabia: Religious Police Role In School Fire Criticized,” See:
http://www.hrw.org/press/2002/03/saudischool.htm. (11650)
39 U.S. Congressional Human Rights Caucus: Human Rights in Saudi Arabia: The Role of Women, Testimony of Amal Al-Qahtani, Ph.D., citizen of Saudi Arabia and head of the Saudi Institute – a U.S.-based human rights advocacy group, June 4, 2002.
40 Maureen Dowd, “Driving While Female,” New York Times, November 17, 2002.
41Fadia Faqir, “Interfamily Femicide in Defense of Honor: The Case of Jordan,” Third World Quarterly 22, no. 1 (2001): 65-82 at:
http://www.secularislam.org/articles/femicide.htm. (11201)
42 James Emery, “Reputation is Everything: Honor Killings Among the Palestinians,” Worldandi (May 2003, at:
http://www.worldandi.com/newhome/public/2003/may/clpub.asp. (11679)
43 Ibid.
44 See Palestine, in “Case study: Honor Killings and Blood Feuds” at:
http://www.gendercide.org/case_honour.html. (11208)
45 Suzanne Ruggi, “Honor Killings in Palestine,” Jerusalem Times, 1998 at:
http://www.merip.org/mer/mer206/ruggi.htm. (11209)
46 For an overview of the problem, see Ilene R. Prusher, “One woman tackles ‘honor’ crimes in Jordan” Christian Science Monitor, August 10, 2000, at:
http://csmweb2.emcweb.com/durable/2000/08/10/p13s1.htm. (11680) and Gendercide Watch, “Case Study: ‘Honor’ Killings and Blood Feuds,” at:
http://www.gendercide.org/case_honour.html. (11208)
47 Fadia Faqir, “Interfamily Femicide in Defense of Honor: The Case of Jordan,” Third World Quarterly 22, no. 1 (2001): 65-82.
48 Ibid.
49 For case studies and sources, see Jordan, in “Case study: Honor Killings and Blood Feuds” at:
http://www.gendercide.org/case_honour.html. (11208)
50 “Arab Women Moving Fast, But Still Far to Go,” at:
http://www.rbas.undp.org/ahdr/press_kits2002/PR4.pdf. (11677)
51 Roundtable on Strategies to Address “Crimes of Honor,” Center for Islamic and Middle Eastern Law, London University, p. 4 at:
http://www.soas.ac.uk/honourcrimes/Meet_RoundtableReport.pdf. (11419)
52 Ibid.
53 Cited in “Commentary of Egypt’s Third and Fourth Periodic Reports to the Committee On Human Rights,” Egyptian Organization for Human Rights, at:
http://www.eohr.org/report/2002/un2.htm. (11213)
54 “Killing of Women on the Basis of Family Honor,” Monitor, August 2002, at:
http://www.phrmg.org/monitor2002/Aug2002.htm. (11685)
55 Roundtable on Strategies to Address “Crimes of Honor,” Center for Islamic and Middle Eastern Law, London University, p. 7 at:
http://www.soas.ac.uk/honourcrimes/Meet_RoundtableReport.pdf. (11419)
56 “Amnesty demands Saudi probe,” BBC News, March 17, 2000 at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/681597.stm. (11166)
Testimony on religious persecution in Saudi Arabia before the U.S. House of Representatives, Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights, see:
http://www.freedomhouse.org/religion/publications/newsletters/2000/March-April/newsletter_2000-mar04.htm. (11167)
57 “Amnesty demands Saudi probe,” BBC News, March 17, 2000 at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/681597.stm. (11166)
and “Saudi Arabia ‘buys silence’ on abuse,” March 28, 2000 at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/693729.stm. (11686)
58 Scott Wilson, “Iraqis Break Silence About Secret Graves,” Washington Post, May 5, 2003.
59 “The Lessons of Halabja: An Ominous Warning,” U.S. State Department at:
http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/iraq/warning.htm. (11217)
60 “Background Note: Lebanon,” U.S. State Department at:
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/35833.htm. (11218)
61 Emanuel A. Winston, “Arab Nations’ Solutions To Terror and Insurgency,” see:
http://www.tzemach.org/fyi/docs/winston/aug20-01.htm. (11219)
62 “Egypt: Chemical Weapons Program,” Federation of American Scientists at:
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/egypt/cw/. (11220)
63 Jonathan Schanzer, “Palestinian Uprisings Compared,” Middle East Quarterly (Summer 2002) at:
http://www.meforum.org/pf.php?id=206.
64 Kenneth Leiter, “Life Under the Palestinian Authority,” Middle East Quarterly at:
http://www.meforum.org/pf.php?id=406. (11687)
65 Kenneth W. Stein, “The Intifada and the Uprising of 1936-1939: A Comparison of the Palestinian Arab Communities” in The Intifada: Its Impact on Israel, the Arab World, and the Superpowers, ed. by Robert O. Freedman (Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida, 1991), pp. 3-36.
66 Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict (New York, St. Martin’s Press, 1992), p. 94.
67 Kenneth Stein, “The Intifada and the Uprising of 1936-1939,” pp. 3-36.
68 For data and examples – including 11 mukhtars slain along with family members between February 1937-November 1938, see The 1938 and 2001 proposed partitions of western Palestine in “Policy of Appeasement” quoting Arab v. Arab (pamphlet) (Rydal Press, UK, 1939), Esco Foundation for Palestine (1937) and other sources, at:
http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~peters/appeasement.html. (11225)
69 Jonathan Schanzer, “Palestinian Uprising Compared,” Middle East Quarterly (Summer 2002) at:
http://www.meforum.org/article/206. (11689)
70 Human Rights and Legal Position of Palestinian ‘Collaborators,’ PHRM, July 2001, at:
http://www.phrmg.org/monitor2001/jul2001.htm. (11226)
71 Bard E. O’Neill, “The Intifada in the Context of Armed Struggle,” in Freedman, The Intifada, pp. 57-58.
72 See Gershom Gorenberg, “The Collaborators,” Times News, August 18, 2002, quoting PHRMG, at:
http://www.phrmg.org/articles/18August2002.htm. (11227)
At the end of the Gulf War Kuwait expelled some 400,000 Palestinians. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_exodus_from_Kuwait. (11690)
73 At the end of the Gulf War Kuwait expelled some 400,000 Palestinians. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_exodus_from_Kuwait. (11690)
74 Both divergences and similarities are discussed in Kenneth Stein’s work cited above.
75 Don Peretz, Intifada: The Palestinian Uprising (Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1990), quoted in Jonathan Schanzer “Palestinian Uprisings Compared,” Middle East Quarterly at:
http://www.meforum.org/article/206. (11689)
76 Ibid.
77 “Deaths as a result of gunfire,” Palestinian Human Rights Monitor, at:
http://www.phrmg.org/PHRMG%20Documents/Gunfire%20tables/Tables/gunfire_english.htm. (11691)
78 Lamia Lahoud, “License to kill,” Jerusalem Post, September 8, 1998.
79 Dr. Eyad El Sarraj “Kill Your Neighbor!” This article was published in The Jerusalem Report on October 26 1998 under the title “Spare thy neighbor.” See:
http://www.gcmhp.net/eyad/kill_your_neighbor.htm. ( 11692)
80 “West Bank and Gaza in Brief,” World Bank, August 2000. See also Country Brief at:
http://lnweb18.worldbank.org/mna/mena.nsf/Countries/West+Bank/8830DA075FD4A1EC85256CC9006F9B7F?OpenDocument.
81 Eliyahu Kanovsky, “Has the Peace Process Reaped Economic Dividends?” Testimony before the U.S. Congress – Joint Economic Committee, October 21, 1997, at:
http://www.house.gov/jec/hearings/israel/kanovsky.htm. (11236)
82 B’tzelem; “Israelis killed in the Occupied Territories (including East Jerusalem) since the Beginning of the 1987 Intifada until the end of Nov. 2002,”
83 Alan Philips, “Lynch mob suspects held by Israelis,” Telegraph, June 26, 2001 at:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/06/26/wisr26.xml. (10596)
84 Albert Robinson, “Fence May be Final Blow to Palestinian Economy,” Reuters, July 1, 2002, at:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0701-03.htm. (11240)
85 Ibid.
86 “Eight killed in Palestinian bus attack,” Israel Insider, February 15, 2001, at:
http://www.israelinsider.com/channels/security/articles/sec_0001.htm. (11241)
87 Israel Seals Off West Bank, Gaza,” CBS News, February 10, 2003 at:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/02/11/world/main540203.shtml. (11242)
88 For the results of public opinion polls, see the chapter on “Rejectionism.”
89 Ari Shavit and Jalal Bana, “The Secret Exodus – Palestinian Emigration,” October 5, 2001 at:
http://www.emigrations.net/pr01.htm. (11243)
See also CAMERA: “AP Article on Palestinian Emigration Blames Only Israel” at:
http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_article=644&x_context=2. (11244)
90 Jonathan Schanzer, “Palestinian Uprising Compared,” Middle East Quarterly (Summer 2002) at:
http://www.meforum.org/article/206. (11689)
91 On the goals of this strategy – encouraging children to lead violent demonstrations and teenage youth to become combatants in order to gain sympathy and points for their cause in the international arena, and delegitimize Israel and cast Israelis as heartless victimizers, see Daniella Ashkenazy, “Small-Arms Warfare,” Jerusalem Post, January 31, 1990.
92 Musa Ziyada: In the spring of 1995 in Gaza City, I met Musa Ziyada, a 15-year-old boy with huge almond eyes. He had apparently been recruited by Hamas, the radical Islamist group, to carry out a suicide bombing in Israel. See Isabel Kershner, Washingtontpost.com, May 7 2006 “Rise of the Zealots,” at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/04/AR2006050401620.html.(11693)
93 “Wars and civil conflicts are taking a massive toll on children,” UNICEF at:
http://www.unicef.org/children-in-war/. (11694)
Text of the protocol can be accessed at:
http://www.unicef.org/crc/annex1.htm. (11695)
94 “Child Soldiers,” BBC World Service. See:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/people/features/childrensrights/childrenofconflict/soldier.shtml. (10425)
95 See UNICEF, “The Convention on the Rights of the Child” at:
http://www.unicef.org/crc/crc.htm. (11695)
96 Human Rights Watch World Report, 2002: Middle East and North Africa Overview.
97 Irwin Cotler, “Beyond Durban: The conference against racism that became a racist conference against Jews,” 2001, see:
http://www.jafi.org.il/agenda/2001/english/wk3-22/6.asp. (11248)
98 For full text, see: http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html. (11249)
99 Amnon Rubinstein, “More equality than in Europe,” Haaretz, October 9, 2002 at:
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=217633&contrassID=2&subContrassID=4&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y. (10470)
100 See statistics at:
http://www.barnardos.org.uk/resources/researchpublications/documents/MDarticl_1.pdf. (10249)
and the National Statistics Online – home of official UK statistic:
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/default.asp. (11251)
101 U.S. Central Intelligence Agency Document: Infant Mortality Ratios at:
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/fields/2091.html. (10472) and World Health Organization at:
http://www.who.int/whr2001/2001/archives/1999/en/pdf/StatisticalAnnex.pdf
102 “West Bank and Gaza in Brief,” World Bank (August 2000), at:
http://lnweb18.worldbank.org/mna/mena.nsf/All/F192A5DA7D266F048525694700278825?OpenDocument. (11001)
103 See Tom Rose, Weekly Standard, January 21, 2002, at:
http://www.aijac.org.au/updates/Jan-02/140102.html. (11234)
104 Tom Rose, at: http://www.aijac.org.au/updates/Jan-02/140102.html.
105 U.S. Central Intelligence Agency Document: Literacy Rates at:
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/fields/2103.html.(11696)
106 “West Bank and Gaza in Brief,” World Bank, August 2000, at:
http://lnweb18.worldbank.org/mna/mena.nsf/All/F192A5DA7D266F048525694700278825?OpenDocument. (11001)
107 Helen Schary Motro, “Israel’s forgotten lesson,” by Helen Schary Motro, Christian Science Monitor, April 19, 2001.
http://csmonitor.com/cgi-bin/durableRedirect.pl?/durable/2001/04/19/p11s1.htm. (11254)
108 “Israeli Arab nursing student charged for failure to warn of bus bombing,” Jerusalem Post, August 7, 2002.
109 Cited in Herbert Adam and Simon Fraser, “Political Travel through the Holy Land” Global Review of Ethno-Politics, January 2003.
110 In one classic section of TV footage, an armed Israeli soldier was seen ducking behind his tank rather than facing a Palestinian youth fearlessly ‘closing the gap’ between them, armed with a huge rock.
111 For a summary of the study see Don Radlauer, “The al-Aqsa Intifada – An Engineered Tragedy,” January 7, 2003 at:
http://www.ict.org.il/articles/articledet.cfm?articleid=440. (11259)
For the full study, see:
http://www.ict.org.il/articles/articledet.cfm?articleid=439. (11260)


This document uses extensive links via the Internet. If you experience a broken link, please note the 5 digit number (xxxxx) at the end of the URL and use it as a Keyword in the Search Box at www.MEfacts.com

 

 

Posted in B Hussein Obama, Barack Hussein Obama, Barack Obama, democrat muslim, Hussein Obama, Islam, islam fundamentalist, Islam ideology, Islam stupidity, Islam sympathizers, Islam Threat, Islam unrest, islam violating treaties, Islam's Founder, islamc illegal immigration, ISLAMIC ASSEMBLY OF NORTH AMERICA, Islamic Banking, Islamic centers, Islamic Circle of North America, Islamic cowards, Islamic cult, islamic death threats, Islamic denial, Islamic doctors, Islamic Extremists, Islamic Fifth Column, Islamic history, Islamic immigration, Islamic Imperialism, Islamic Jihad, Islamic law, Islamic lies, Islamic Multiculturalism, Islamic myths, Islamic Nukes, Islamic perversion, Islamic prison recruiting, Islamic Propaganda, islamic recruiting, Islamic Schools, Islamic Slavery, Islamic Society of Boston, Islamic Society of North America, islamic taxi drivers, Islamic terrorism, Islamic torture, Islamic Women Rights, Islamic-mein-kampf, Islamism, Islamist Terror, Islamist Web, Islamists, Islamo-fascists, muslim, Muslim Albanians, Muslim Alliance, Muslim American Society, Muslim Brotherhood, muslim charities, Muslim Civil Liberties Union, muslim clerics, muslim democrats, Muslim doctors, muslim extremist, Muslim Fundamentalism, muslim ghettos, Muslim immigration, Muslim integration, Muslim lies, Muslim Mafia, Muslim Propaganda, Muslim Rape, muslim schools, Muslim soldiers, Muslim Student Union, Muslim Students’ Association of the U.S. and Canada, muslim sympathizers, Muslim Violence, Muslim vote, Muslims go home, Obama. Leave a Comment »

This is a must watch and very scary

This is the most important email I’ve ever posted WATCH ALL OF IT
then forward it to all those that need to know the truth
 
Bud

Subject: This is a must watch and very scary

This is not a joke. Must watch!!! and forward!!! 

I wish that I could look at this and NOT believe it.

 

 

 

Posted in B Hussein Obama, Barack Obama, democrat muslim, Hussein Obama, Imams, Imams and Terrorism, Immigration, In The News, Islam, islam fundamentalist, Islam ideology, Islam stupidity, Islam sympathizers, Islam Threat, Islam unrest, islam violating treaties, Islam's Founder, Islamabad, Islamberg, islamc illegal immigration, ISLAMIC ASSEMBLY OF NORTH AMERICA, Islamic Banking, Islamic centers, Islamic Circle of North America, Islamic cult, islamic death threats, Islamic denial, Islamic doctors, Islamic Extremists, Islamic Fifth Column, Islamic history, Islamic immigration, Islamic Imperialism, Islamic Jihad, Islamic law, Islamic lies, Islamic Multiculturalism, Islamic myths, Islamic Nukes, Islamic perversion, Islamic prison recruiting, Islamic Propaganda, islamic recruiting, Islamic Republic of Iran, Islamic Schools, Islamic Slavery, islamic taxi drivers, Islamic terrorism, Islamic torture, Islamic Women Rights, Islamism, Islamist Terror, Islamists, Islamo-fascists, muslim, Muslim Albanians, Muslim Alliance, Muslim American Society, Muslim Brotherhood, muslim charities, Muslim Civil Liberties Union, muslim clerics, muslim democrats, Muslim doctors, muslim extremist, Muslim Fundamentalism, muslim ghettos, Muslim immigration, Muslim integration, Muslim lies, Muslim Mafia, Muslim Propaganda, Muslim Rape, muslim schools, Muslim Student Union, Muslim Students’ Association of the U.S. and Canada, muslim sympathizers, Muslim Violence, Muslim vote, Myths of Islam, Obama. Leave a Comment »