Tom Trento from the FloridaSecurityCouncil.org makes an urgent appeal for information about imam Musri, the man who attempted to mediate between the ‘Koran-burning’ preacher Jones and the Park51 imam Rauf:
Update: here is one starting point to dig….with many links.
Xanthippa's Chamberpot 
September 11, 2010 at 04:19
Xanthippa:
Granted, burning Qur’ans is an uncharitable and callous thing to do. But it is far less uncharitable and far less callous than building a mosque where its shadow will fall on the place where 3,000 Americans were burned to death by Muslim terrorists. And the sly but stubborn insistence on this particular location makes the motive look a good deal more sinister than mere callousness.
Indeed, this whole issue of mosque-building and Qur’an-burning has become a contest of wills between Islam and America. A symbolic staring contest. And the first one who blinks, loses. It’s that simple, and that basic. And there is no way to rise above it, because the other side would take any such attempt as a surrender by us and a victory for them.
So the worst thing Pastor Terry Jones could do at this point is back down.
Indeed, after being lied to and taken for a chump by the silver-tongued Imam Muhammad Musri, Jones should now burn ten times as many Qur’ans!
Sadly, however, it looks like he will back down. Not because of Muslim threats. And not because of Muslim guile. But because the President of the United States, and the Secretary of Defence, and the Commanding General of the U.S. Forces in Afghanistan, have all taken it upon themselves to pressure him into backing down.
They say if he doesn’t back down he will trigger a Jihad. But didn’t that already start a generation ago? If not, then what have Abu Nidal, Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri been doing for all these years? Why are we fighting them if not because they have already declared Jihad against us?
They say if he doesn’t back down he will boost recruitment of Islamic terrorists. But hasn’t American and British foreign policy in the Middle East been more than enough to swell the ranks of Fatah, Hamas, Hezbollah and al Qaeda with wild-eyed Muslim boys, eager to kill infidels and die for the glory of Allah?
They say if he doesn’t back down he will put our troops in danger. But weren’t they already in danger? Haven’t they been deployed in a war zone since 2001? If there is anything a civilian can do, from 12,000 kilometres away, to increase their danger to any noticeable degree, then it hasn’t been much of a war, has it?
In contrast, there is something the President, the Secretary of Defence, and the General can do to very much heighten the danger faced by the troops under their command. And that is to undermine morale by faint-heartedly forfeiting the very freedom our troops are fighting for, while at the same time encouraging the enemy by making Americans look weak-willed, foolish, and cowardly.
And that is exactly what they have done.
Obama, Gates, and Petraeus have thereby disgraced themselves and brought dishonour upon their country. They should be ashamed of themselves.
We should all be ashamed of them.
Xanthippa says:
CodeSlinger,
I agree with what you said.
With one exception…
It is NOT American and British policy which had caused any of the jihads of today.
Don’t get me wrong – the policies suck. No argument there!
But they are NOT the cause, only the pretext, of the jihads we are dealing with.
Do you know when the first unprovoked attacks on Americans by Muslims occurred?
As soon as they declared independence, American ships started being attacked be the Tunisians. The problem was so big, Jefferson & co. negotiated with their ambassador- and were told that since they are independent of Britain, they are no longer protected by the fees the Brits pay them to leave their ships unmolested. This made the American ships valid targets….
Obama described the negotiations as the first eid dinner at the White House.
That is why all the founding fathers had copies of the Korans, had read it and had educated themselves about ‘the Mohammedans’…
Nothing we have done has CAUSED the jihad.
It is our very existence as non-Muslims that, in their eyes, necessitates the jihad.
The rest is window dressing!
Until Islam becomes dominated by a milder form of its doctrine, there is nothing we can do to prevent jihad….
September 12, 2010 at 03:14
Xanthippa:
You are right: the Americans and British did not create the concept of Jihad, nor did they cause it to be carried out. But American and British corporate, diplomatic, military and intelligence operations – aided and abetted by the Saudis, Israelis and Pakistanis – were the main driving force behind the re-radicalization of Islam in modern times. Without the intervention of those strange bedfellows to create the requisite political and economic climate, neither Khomeini nor the Taliban could have come to power. And the modern Jihadi movement would not exist.
Now, having said that, there is no denying that the practice of Jihad is a good deal older than America or Britain. But the embers of that fire were already going out at the beginning of the 20th century, with the decline of the Ottoman Empire and the Westernization of Persia. Sadly, the Americans and the British have since then fanned the flames of Jihad back to voracious life in pursuit of their interests in the region, vis-à-vis Russia and now China.
In consequence, there is no chance of the blood-thirsty passages of the Qur’an losing their authority in favour of the more peaceful interpretations of Jihad as a purely spiritual quest, such as might have flowered within Sufi teachings if times were calmer.
What are those passages? This is important to know because, no matter how Islam became what it is today, we have to deal with it as it is today. So here are a few direct quotes from the Hilali-Khan version of the Qur’an, the officially-sanctioned English translation. Text in parentheses, i.e. (), is in the original; text in braces, i.e. {}, is mine.
Jihad (holy fighting in Allah’s Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you.
— Surah 2:216
Kill the Mushrikun (atheists, polytheists, idolaters, pagans, etc.) wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and prepare for them each and every ambush.
— Surah 9:5
Fight against them so that Allah will punish them by your hands and disgrace them and give you victory over them.
— Surah 9:14
Fight against those who believe not in Allah, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah {per-head tax for living} with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
— Surah 9:29
And that’s only from the first 9 Surat. Out of 114.
So we have a fight on our hands, and it’s not going to be pretty. Yes, the Americans and the British had a hand in getting us to this point. But that doesn’t mean they can call it off. No one can call it off anymore. So we have to stand beside them and fight. What else can we do?
Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those who say this are witless. Islam says, kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all! Kill them, put them to the sword and scatter their armies.
— Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini
Xanthippa says:
CodeSlinger, I agree with much of what you say.
I am unconvinced that American and British policies were as responsible for the re-birth of the jihad as you suggest: there were other factors, at least as influential, which are not even mentioned these days, much less discussed. But I agree with you fully that attempting to ‘undo’ things will not stop or slow down the jihadi movement today. To the contrary: any potential consequence of that would simply fan the flames.
And, we have another problem, quite aside from the violence issue. I do not mean that violence is not an issue – obviously, it is! What I mean is that even after the ‘violence issue’ is solved, there is a problem which is, I suspect, even more difficult to address.
It is expressed in several passages, but let me quote just one: (My ‘official, Saudi-approved translation’ of the Koran is currently out on loan and I am using the copy which I happen to have closest to hand – which is the most currently translated one. I like to use this version precisely because the text attempts to convey the interpretation of meaning that is currently most widely used among Muslims. It may not be technically the most accurate translation, but it is the one that most accurately conveys the meaning most frequently acted upon by Muslims now.)
“…
All government belongs to Allah.
…”
– Surah 3:155 (revealed after Hijra)
If you cannot have one set of civil (as in, not theological ones) laws which applies equally to everyone and which is accepted as binding by everyone, you do not have a society!
A bit of a problem…
September 12, 2010 at 14:18
Xanthippa:
Indeed. That’s why “fighting to bring them democracy” is worse than a waste of time:
Democracy is a menace we inherited from an alien government. It is part of the system we are fighting against.
It is not possible to work within a democracy and establish an Islamic system. You just dirty your hands by dealing with it.
The notion of the sovereignty of the people is anti-Islamic. Only Allah is sovereign.
— Hafiz Mohammad Saeed
So let’s be very clear about this: we are not fighting to bring them democracy.
We are fighting to preserve our own.
September 18, 2010 at 11:30
[…] XANTHIPPA– ‘Moderate’ imam Musri: is he ‘al-Qaida in Armani’? …. […]