What future do the people with open arms welcoming the Muslim influx face?
What future do the people with open arms welcoming the Muslim influx face?
by Ben Marquis
Though it may sound odd, there is something of an informal hierarchy and honor code among criminals and prison inmates, and those who prey upon young children are generally held in low regard or flatly despised by other criminals who are at least honorable enough to leave children alone.
As such, it was no great surprise to learn that a convicted terrorist who had threatened violence against the young royal prince in the United Kingdom received a bit of “prison justice” from unknown assailants who were incarcerated with him.
That terrorist’s name is Husnain Rashid and he is currently serving three concurrent life sentences after he confessed to three counts of “engaging in conduct in preparation of terrorist acts,” as well as a four-and-a-half year sentence for “encouraging terrorism” among jihadists, according to the Sun.
Rashid initially ran into trouble after he shared images online of
the 4-year-old Prince George of the British royal family family next to
an anonymous jihadist fighter with a message that read: “Even the royal
family will not be left alone.”
According to the U.K. Daily Star, Rashid was attacked on Wednesday, June 25, by at least one other inmate at the Manchester Strangeways prison who used a toothbrush with a blade attached to it to slash a huge gash on or near Rashid’s right ear, likely due to his threats against the young prince.
“There was blood all over his cell and the landing,” explained an anonymous source at the prison. “Nobody likes him or what he did, like threatening that young royal lad and all the ice cream stuff.”
“We don’t tolerate that kind of thing in Strangeways,” the source added.
Rashid was reportedly taken to a hospital for treatment while the prison attempted to identify his unknown assailant.
“A prisoner received hospital treatment for minor injuries following an incident at HMP Manchester on Wednesday 25 June,” said a Prison Services spokesperson in a brief statement, according to The Sun.
“An investigation is taking place.”
To be sure, we don’t condone “prison justice” or think it is a good thing when vigilantes take matters into their own hands. It’s the job of the proper authorities to mete out justice in accordance with established law.
That said, we have a hard time feeling much pity for someone like this admitted terrorist receiving such unorthodox justice at the hands of another prisoner — particularly given his terrorist threats against children — and don’t feel particularly compelled to vehemently condemn the jihadist’s attacker.
In other words, don’t call for violence against innocent children unless you are prepared to defend yourself from others — even convicted criminals — who instinctively understand that innocent children must be protected.
As radical Islamic terrorism continues to fester around the globe and true justice for criminal jihadists seems spotty at best, this would-be murderous militant will not only spend the rest of his life behind bars, but will also likely spend the rest of his days in fear of what his fellow convicts may do to him in response to his atrocious calls for violent jihad against children.
By Cillian Zeal
Few nations have felt the sting of Islamism as acutely as Sudan. When the Second Sudanese Civil War started in 1983 (just 11 years removed from the First Sudanese Civil War), the east African nation was already one of the more despairing corners on God’s green earth.
Yet, the regime in Khartoum felt that what its citizens really needed — instead of economic development or jobs or anything of that ilk — was the imposition of Shariah law. And when the mostly-Christian south didn’t resign themselves to the legally codified strictures of the Quran and Hadith, among other non-religious issues of exploitation that were deeply unpopular in that region of the world, the government decided to embark on a conflict that lasted over 20 years and resulted in the highest death count of any war since World War II.
Alas, not so much — at least where the Obama administration is concerned.
“The Middle East Forum has discovered that the Obama administration approved a grant of $200,000 of taxpayer money to an al-Qaeda affiliate in Sudan — a decade after the U.S. Treasury designated it as a terrorist-financing organization,” Sam Westrop of the Middle East Forum wrote in a piece for National Review this week. “More stunningly, government officials specifically authorized the release of at least $115,000 of this grant even after learning that it was a designated terror organization.”
The funds in question were distributed by an interlocutor to the Islamic Relief Agency or ISRA — a Khartoum-based organization also known as the Islamic African Relief Agency that had links to Osama bin Laden and Maktab al-Khidamat.
Maktab al-Khidamat was an Afghani fundraising organization that was the progenitor of al-Qaida. ISRA had raised more than $5 million for Maktab al-Khidamat by 2000, in addition to helping “to secure safe harbor for” bin Laden when things went awry.
In October 2004, the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control designated ISRA a terrorist finance group, meaning (obviously) it shouldn’t be receiving any aid from any American, much less their government. However, a July 2014 award of $723,405 to evangelical group World Vision Inc. to “improve water, sanitation and hygiene and to increase food security in Sudan’s Blue Nile state” included $200,000 for ISRA.
When the U.S. Agency for International Development had been alerted to the fact that ISRA was probably on the terror list by World Vision, they started an assessment of the situation and warned the group to “suspend all activities with ISRA.” However, World Vision was apparently unhappy with this, saying that the assessment was taking too much time and that ISRA “had performed excellent work” for the evangelical group and that the assessment was “putting contractual relationships in limbo for such a long period is putting a significant strain” with their relationship with officialdom in Khartoum, since ISRA also has close contacts with the Sudanese government.
“World Vision’s statement stunned USAID officials, who complained that World Vision’s behavior ‘doesn’t make sense,’” Westrop writes. “USAID official Daniel Holmberg emailed a colleague: ‘If they actually said that they wanted to resume work with ISRA, while knowing that it was 99% likely that ISRA was on the list then I am concerned about our partnership with them, and whether it should continue.’”
By January 2015, the Treasury Department’s OFAC had ruled that ISRA was indeed a terrorist organization, meaning World Vision would have to cut ties with them. Instead of realizing they were in bed with an organization that had helped create al-Qaida and backing away, World Vision wrote to Obama administration USAID official Jeremy Konyndyk, imploring him for a new contract to pay ISRA for “monies owed for work performed” and said that “their whole program will be jeopardized.”
There’s a lot of machinations behind the scenes here, but here’s the condensed version: the Obama administration eventually approved a new contract for ISRA after “close collaboration and consultations with the Department of State,” which World Vision said came as a “great relief as ISRA had become restive and had threatened legal action, which would have damaged our reputation and standing in Sudan.”
In other words, the Obama administration acted on behalf of an organization which in turn was willing to act on behalf of an organization with close ties to al-Qaida and the mephitic Sudanese regime.
The Obama administration has a long and storied history of ignoring extremism, from the Islamic State group to Afghanistan to Africa, where groups like Boko Haram barely made the administration’s radar. Now, we discover that the administration was giving money to a group that actively fundraised for al-Qaida in a country that’s already been devastated by Islamism.
Nineteen months on, we’re still dealing with that ugly legacy — and so, unfortunately, is the rest of the world.
Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers' newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.
By Chris Agee
The Austrian government is pursuing a controversial plan as part of a broader effort to address concerns of radicalization among refugee and immigrant communities.
Amid a wave of right-wing electoral victories, particularly last year’s win by the populist Freedom Party, lawmakers have increasingly targeted Islamic groups for added scrutiny under the country’s so-called law on Islam.
That legislation prohibits any religious group from receiving foreign
funds as well as imposes a duty on Muslim groups to respect Austrian
tradition through “a positive fundamental view towards state and
The chancellor, who helped craft the law before he was elected to his current post last year, made his position clear in Friday’s news conference.
“Political Islam’s parallel societies and radicalizing tendencies have no place in our country,” he said.
At least 11 of these cases are reportedly under review and two imams involved have already been found to be in violation.
Austrian officials indicated that as many as 60 imams are thought to belong to the ATIB and Vice Chancellor Heinz-Christian Strache said the response being announced at that news conference was “just the beginning.”Although an ATIB representative recently confirmed Diyanet was paying imams in Austria, he said there are efforts in place to shift those payments to a domestic source.
“We are currently working on having imams be paid from funds within the country,” Yasar Ersoy said.
In addition to the individual imams found to be in violation of Austrian law, leaders say at least seven mosques are set to be shuttered for alleged links to extremism.
The Grey Wolves, a Turkish nationalist youth organization, operates one illegal mosque in Vienna, according to the Austrian government. Another six believed to be funded and operated by a different entity will also be shut down.
Despite the legal and national security arguments for their actions toward some within Austria’s Islamic population, Turkish leaders have decried the recent announcements as bigoted.
In a statement, Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan described Austria’s response as evidence of an “Islamophobic, racist and discriminatory wave” within the country.
Erdogan spokesman Ibrahim Kalin went further in a tweet posted Friday.
“The Austrian government’s ideologically charged practices are in violation of universal legal principles, social integration policies, minority rights and the ethics of co-existence,” he wrote. “Efforts to normalize Islamophobia and racism must be rejected under all circumstances.”