Articles
Islamic Terrorism Is Rampant in Bangladesh
When we think of Islamic Fundamentalist groups, we tend to think about the Middle East because of the huge media coverage about them in these countries. However, while we shudder at the gruesome situation in these regions, fundamentalist Islamist groups are systematically spreading fear and terror in developing countries in South and Southeast Asia.
We now see the rising pattern in gruesome murders and abductions of secular and atheist writers, bloggers, and publishers, along with ordinary citizens and religious minorities such as Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, and even believers in Shia custom, in Bangladesh.
“In 2017, at least 107 Hindu citizens were killed, and 31 others disappeared in Bangladesh, according to Dhaka Tribune. Moreover, 782 Hindus have been either forced to leave the Muslim majority nation or threatened to flee, “said the report. 23 were forced to convert.
These citizens are being harassed by both Islamic-run Bangladeshi state and jihadist-extremist groups. In 2016, the Sunni-Islamic government also put at least 11,000 people under arbitrary arrest during a heavy-handedness crackdown, in just a couple of weeks.
“A group calling itself “Defenders of Islam” admitted the responsibility for three murders, including the murder of a blogger who was beheaded,” said Reporters Without Borders in 2014. Ansarullah Bangla Team is responsible for multiple onslaughts against the country’s non-Muslims, and in addition released a “hit list” of 84 Bangladeshis, mostly secularists. Although these threats and hit lists are no secret, the Islamic government of Bangladesh has responded by arresting the victims instead. According to reports, the government captured and jailed several secularist bloggers on charges of defaming Islam and by shutting down several websites in the country.
The continuous systematic genocide of Hindus in Bangladesh is not new.
The Hindu minority which survived the 1971 massacre, is once again being subjected to governmental terrorism and ethnic cleansing. The vanishing of Hindus that comprised 31 percent of the Bangladesh population in 1947, has become so common that this minority group’s population had dwindled to a meager 9 percent by 2016.
The attack on the Hindu community despite condemnation by various international social and civil rights bodies and media has not stopped but instead worsened.
Reports state that radical Islamist groups like Ansarullah Bangla Team recruit young Muslim citizens, and then the leaders take the new members to the Sundarbans’ Karamjal area for a week-long brain-washing program to indoctrinate juveniles with the ideology of ‘Ansar al-Islam.’ These young members will later be dispatched to Rangamati’s Alikadam area for another month-long training program which gives them skills on how to use weapons. At the end of their training, the well-brainwashed Jihadists are ready to carry out attacks across the country. They openly use various social media apps, to contact each other according to BD News 24.
Similarly, the leaders of the Islamist fundamentalist group Hefazat-e-Islam Bangladesh have called for arming “all Rohingya refugees,” if necessary. “Thousands of Rohingya have quietly settled in the United States, but there are many more who are still living in dire conditions inside refugee camps in Bangladesh. With no jobs and no opportunities to make a living, the refugees are vulnerable to groups like the Hefazat-e-Islam Bangladesh’s Fatwa, who are willing to go to any extent to spread their radical views and recruit new converts.
According to humanitarian organizations like Reo-Research and Empowerment Organization, who are working closely with Hindu Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh, thousands of victims were forced to convert into Islam and if they refused, they would kill the men and forcefully rape the Hindu women. “They shot my husband and in-laws including everyone in front of my eyes. The mask covered people killed and told us to marry them and convert to Islam, I agreed to it to save my life. They took me into the jungle for 2 days and raped me,” Anika Dhar a Hindu Rohingya refugee, told REO representatives in 2017.
With a literacy rate of 72.9 percent as of 2018, and most of the Muslims in Bangladesh send their children to the religious education courses in Bengali and Arabic. These courses commonly try to teach killing for the sake of Allah.
90 percent of the Bangladesh population are adherents of Islam and Islam is the state religion in this country. Bangladesh is the 8th most populated country in the world with 170 million citizens. 90.4 percent of them which is almost 154 million, are Muslim. Islam was introduced to Bengal in at least 7th-8th century by the Arab missionaries, and Persian merchants, who previously were forced to convert in Islam after the aggressive-Muslims incursion to the territory of Persia.
Who’s to blame?
After the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the United States Department of the Treasury initiated the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program (TFTP) to identify, track, and pursue terrorists and their networks. The U.S. Treasury Department has been positioned to track terrorist money and uncover terrorist cells and networks in the U.S. and around the world. On the other hand, the United States has diplomatic relations with Bangladesh and has an embassy in Dhaka with 400 staff. The critical question is, how are such terrorist groups being funded and how do they proliferate under the noses of the U.S and other international agencies,
In the end, it is worth mentioning that funding such groups is an open secret, it has done by states and various national and international bodies for their own benefits or to maintain a status quo or ensure that their weapons are always in demand.
“The Islamic fundamentalist groups are closely interlinked and have associate bodies in various Islamic and non-Islamic nations. For example, nations like Iran are known to fund and train Taliban militants. Terror organizations like ISIS are openly radicalizing youths in Europe, America, Far East, and Australia. Where are they getting the funds from, if we are all fighting to end terrorism, who are the double-faced players supporting these groups from under the table? Where do they get funds for such massive online radicalization campaigns, to sustain the livelihoods of their members and recruits and train their recruits”? said Prabalta Rijal, an international journalist. According to her, terrorism cannot exist without the support of more powerful entities than themselves, entities willing to protect, shelter and fund them.
Kaveh Taheri (Twitter: @TaheriKaveh), American Truth Project contributor, is a Turkey-based Iranian Human Rights researcher and journalist who has worked exclusively on Middle East. Kaveh, who was a former political prisoner in Shiraz, had been sent to prison for his writings and statements on his websites and weblogs in Iran and fled the country through Turkey to save his life.
The U.S. Senate’s recent confirmation of Zahid Quraishi as America’s first Muslim federal judge to a lifetime position on the District Court of New Jersey raises some concerning questions.
First and foremost, there is the question of his faith. Does it matter if Zahid Quraishi is a Muslim? The Left would, of course, maintain that raising the Muslim identity of Quraishi is racist, bigoted and “Islamophobic.” But those who understand the reality of Sharia – and the fact that Islam is not a race — understand that this matter is more complicated than what might first meet the eye.
It may very well matter if Quraishi is not just a Muslim “by name” – or just a “secular Muslim” by birth heritage. Indeed, if, as an adult adherent to Islam, he devoutly recites the Shahada — “There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah” – then Quraishi’s Muslimness could matter very much. That’s because it could indicate whether or not Quraishi would ever uphold aspects of Sharia – Islamic law – in his legal rulings.
As a survivor of Sharia law, I can tell you: Sharia matters — and in the most horrendous and painful of ways.
It is vital to understand that in Islam, Allah’s Law is supreme for Muslims, above all other laws and legal systems. And that poses a problem for America when Islam resides on its territory, because Sharia is completely incompatible with the U.S. Constitution and the foundations of a free society.
Quraishi’s relationship to Islam, therefore, matters a great deal — seeing that his new position entails significant power and influence in America.
So let’s dig a little bit deeper on Quraishi.
The Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) surprisingly did not come out and cheer Quraishi’s appointment — as one might have expected them to do. Instead, the Muslim “civil rights” organization appeared to be quite furious about him. Zahra Billoo, head of CAIR’s San Francisco branch, issued a statement affirming that she “would much rather have a white Christian judge with progressive values… It’s not enough that he is Muslim. In fact, it’s insulting.”
It appears that the problem for Billoo and CAIR is that Quraishi is not a Muslim from an apparent “list” of “20 to 50 Muslims who have been in the fight” for “social justice.” One unnamed Muslim politician who complained to Slate magazine about Quraishi’s appointment echoed the same theme: “We don’t know what his stances are on civil rights because you can’t find one article or anything that he’s written publicly about the Muslim struggle in the last 20 years post-9/11.”
For those concerned about Quraishi’s potential ties to Sharia, this negative disposition from the “Sharia camp” toward the Muslim judge might appear to be good news. But is it?
CAIR’s concern about Quraishi’s supposed lack of support for “progressive values” appears to be a good sign in light of CAIR’s own record of opposing counterterror measures and slandering opponents of jihad and Sharia tyranny. However, CAIR’s disposition toward Quraishi tells us little, if anything, about the key issue at stake: does the judge hold Islamic values or not?
The narrative takes another peculiar twist when we examine what transpired during Quraishi’s questioning before the Senate Judiciary Committee: When asked by Committee Chair, Democrat Senator Dick Durbin: “What do you know about Sharia law?” Quraishi answered that he knew “nothing about Sharia.“
Really?
Quraishi knows “nothing” about Islam or Islamic Law?
Christine Douglass-Williams has commented on Quraishi’s dubious answer:
“Virtually everyone knows something about the Sharia. In his position, Quraishi is likely to know a lot, and was probably fibbing, and not in an intelligent way, either. It isn’t possible that a man of his standing, who ‘has served as a military prosecutor and Army captain in Iraq, as an assistant U.S. Attorney who has tried cases of public corruption, organized crime and financial fraud, and as a white-collar criminal defense lawyer’, would know ‘NOTHING’ about Sharia.”
True indeed.
What makes the matter even more peculiar is that when one pulls up Quraishi’s questionnaire answers for the Senate Judiciary Committee, one finds that he is mentioned as a “Muslim” many times in his “Honors and Awards” list. So Quraishi is praised, rewarded and held in acclaim by the Muslim community for his achievements in light of his Muslimness, but he personally doesn’t know anything about Islamic law at all?
Could it be that Quraishi might actually not be the incidental Muslim he postures as being? Could it be that he has been recognized and awarded by important prominent Muslim organizations because they gauged that, among other things, he actually is somewhat of an adherent Muslim after all?
Is it possible that CAIR might really not be as upset as it is claiming to be about Quraishi’s appointment? Or maybe it is upset, but not for the reasons it has given? Could it also be that certain players involved in this narrative are engaging in some form of taqiyya – the command in Islam for Muslims to deceive non-Muslims?
Would it also be out of bounds to ask: even if Quraishi is not an adherent Muslim, is it legitimate to be concerned that he one day could become one?
It is vital to stress at this point that Islam is not just a “religion” the way that Christianity and Judaism are religions. Islam is much more than a “faith.” For example, like Judaism, Islam has a legal system — but Islamic Law extends far beyond any Judaic (or even secular) legal system. Sharia embodies all the commands of Allah and all the examples of Muhammad-as divine law that must be implemented in all areas of life.
Qur’an 33:21 is just one verse of many that confirms that Muhammad is “an excellent pattern” for Muslims to follow. It would do well for people to keep in mind that the “excellent” examples that Mohammed set for his followers included the following: marrying a six-year-old girl, A’ishah, and having sex with her when she was nine (Sahih al-Bukhari 5134); encouraging rape of female captives (Qur’an 4:24); stating that women are stupid (Qur’an 2:282) and that hell is comprised of mostly women (Bukhari 29); commanding men to beat their wives (Qur’an 4:34); and being merciless to a woman who had been beaten so brutally that her bruise was green (Bukhari 5825).
Muhammad also disparaged black people (Bukhari 7038). He murdered between 600 and 900 Jews in one battle, and then distributed the captive women as sex slaves (Ibn Ishaq, pp. 464, 511-512).
With some of these matters in mind, the question surfaces: would or could an American Muslim federal judge consider such material as a basis for his rulings? According to Islamic law, a Muslim judge must do so. Sharia mandates that no true Muslim is obligated to obey the laws of a non-Muslim country. Qur’an 33:1 commands to “not obey the disbelievers and the hypocrites.” Qur’an 4:60 says that those who “refer legislation” to the non-Muslims are led “far astray.” And Qur’an 9:3 says that “Allah is disassociated from the disbelievers, and [so is] His Messenger.” According to Islamic tradition, the revelation of that last verse allowed Muhammad to break the Treaty of al-Hudaibiyah.
Let us be clear: an American judge who follows Muhammad’s example can take an oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution, and not really mean it. In fact, Muhammad instructs such a judge exactly what to do in this situation: “if I take an oath and later find something else better than that, then I do what is better and expiate my oath.” (Bukhari 5518)
The supremacy of Islamic Law over all other laws still applies today. The Islamic website International Shariah Movement is run by certified Islamic scholars. Its post “Obey the Law of the Land?” cites Qur’an 33:1.
Under Sharia, if a woman is raped, a Muslim judge must disregard any forensic or non-witness evidence, because Qur’an 24:13 requires “four male witnesses” for a rape conviction.
A beaten woman may also easily be denied divorce, because Qur’an 4:34 commands that “Men are in charge of women,” and so may “strike them.”
That is exactly what a Muslim judge in an Iranian Islamic court told me personally when I was a 15-year-old child bride, desperate for a divorce to escape the beatings. In fact, a beaten woman who leaves Islam must be hunted down and murdered, according to Islamic law, because Muhammad said, “Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.” (Bukhari 6922)
With all these realities in mind, it is clear that if we cannot at least ask Judge Zahid Quraishi some questions regarding his adherence, or non-adherence, to Islamic law, or even understand that the issue of Quraishi’s Muslimness is an important one to address, then America is in deep trouble.
As an individual who suffered under Sharia, and was able to escape its monstrous clutches, I strongly encourage my fellow Americans to ask the right questions in this vital – and troubling – narrative about America’s new federal judge.
The ‘election’ for president is over in Iran. The grand ayatollah handpicked Ebrahim Raisi who was then ‘elected’. He’s not just a hardline jihadist, but he’s a mass murderer and a big-time one. And more importantly, he’s very proud of his background.
He’s accused by the world of having personally supervised the trials and executions of somewhere between 5,000 and 40,000 Iranians in the 1980s. He has personally been sanctioned by most of the world, including the United States, who cannot even legally talk to him.
Meanwhile, Raisi calls himself a defender of human rights when asked about the mass executions. The guy is a world-class war criminal. He ran the death panel that sentenced and executed tens of thousands of political prisoners at the end of the 1980s. He is now the leader of the world’s most notorious state sponsor of terrorism.
The first thing we have to know about Ebrahim Raisi is that these charges of mass murder as far as the Iranian mullahs are concerned, are not a problem but rather they are a bonus. It’s not that they picked him in spite of his terrible record. They picked him because of his terrible record.
Domestically, the ayatollah is sending a message to the Iranian people who remain discontented in large part with the Islamic regime. The message is simply put, “ you are not going to be able to dissent. There will be no ability to protest. Anybody who expresses any kind of public disagreement, it’s very clear what kind of treatment they’re going to get with Ebrahim Raisi as the President of Iran.”
Keep in mind, Raisi was not elected. He was selected. He was selected by the supreme leader of Iran, who is the real power in the country, and he is going to execute the policies of the supreme leader. The supreme leader’s disposition toward his own people and toward the world is revealed by the person he selects to be the President of Iran.
By picking Raisi, Ayatollah Khamenei is not only showing that he’s going to crack down harshly on dissent within Iran, but he’s showing that he understands that with Biden’s handlers running the United States, that the United States is weak, is not going to stand up to him and this is his time to step up Iran’s support for terrorism worldwide, supporting Hamas, supporting Hezbollah, supporting Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
The Iranian regime has also in the past supported al-Qaida and the Taliban, and other jihadi groups as well as and this is much less known. It’s clear that Iran understands that leftism is corrosive to Western civilization, and they want to destroy Western civilization. Therefore Iran will support both the leftists and the Islamists around the world who are anti-America and anti-Israel.
From now on, we can expect to see increased belligerence on the part of Iran. And Raisi’s ascension to the presidency means that Iran is going to be strutting around and sponsoring terrorism around the world and cracking down on its own people within the country.
By Barry Nussbaum, Son of Auschwitz survivors, Founder American Truth Project, Foreign and Domestic Policy Commentator
REP. CROCKETT’S BOLD CLAIM: REPUBLICANS ALLEGEDLY IN SERVICE AND RUN BY RUSSIA!
NATIONAL SECURITY ALERT: THE REALITY OF HAMAS BACKERS ON AMERICAN SOIL!
