Thursday, March 31, 2011

EGYPT: Salafi Uprising

The Egyptian Military rulers are moving extremely quickly towards actively supporting Islamisation on all fronts, as a precursor they released nearly 1700 Islamic terrorists, many of which are hard lined Salafists.
Now that the Salafist leaders have been released, they have immediately swung into action to make up for lost time, they appear daily on television and controlled their mosques.

Now flyers were printed and distributed through out the country calling on citizens to join the Salafi movement and denouncing democracy. In addition the Salafist movement announced its intention to form a political party.

The flyers warn “threaten” against the dangers of backing away from a religious state and resorting to systems based on democracy or liberalism, which would lead to transgression of religious prohibitions. The values of democracy violate the law of God. Further, democracy "allows the people to govern themselves even if they are violating the rule of God." The flyer, titled "Be a Salfi" called on citizens to reject all voices advocating for a civil state, as such a state would mean the separation of religion from general life and people being governed without the law of God.

The flyer added that the civil state "equates between citizens in their rights and duties, even if God has created differences in them", liberalism is described as “making man his own God” and as being “governed by that which is not God’s law.” The flyer also calls on citizens to spread these ideas and to return to the Quran and the Sunnah.

Hassan Nafaa, a political science professor at Cairo University, said the content of these flyers "is expected from some Salafist groups, whose members reject anyone different to them."
He went on to say, "It is the state’s duty to criminalize such practices, which interfere with every citizen’s freedom of expression and belief. The fear is that such practices could influence those with limited intelligence, who could then be exploited in supporting and promoting these ideas."

The Salafi movement does not accept the appointment of women or non-Muslims to leadership positions. Salafis adopt a literal interpretation of religious texts, and therefore do not see parliament as the legitimate source of legislation, nor the people as the source of authority. They also made moves to force all Egyptian women to wear a veil and punish those who don't adhere by burning their faces with acid, this is a direct threat aimed at Coptic Christian Women.

the Egyptian Military have installed a “radical” in the position of Foreign Minister.

Nabil El-Araby the FM is now seeking to engage with Hamas, Hezbollah and IRAN, (he has caught the Kevin Rudd virus of engaging with radical islamic organisations).
El Araby, who was appointed on March 6 2011, refuses to wait till after the September elections, and is determined to immediately implement his radical changes.
He said “Hezbollah is part of the political and social makeup of Lebanon, and that communication between Hezbollah and the Egypt is welcomed.”
The Egyptian foreign minister also said “coupled with increased dialogue with Hamas he is committed to improving the humanitarian needs in the Gaza Strip and Rafah crossing.”
When asked about Hamas and Hezbollah been involved in terror acts, he responded “We will not become involved in internal matters of other countries", this comes despite egypts support for foreign intervention in the internal affairs of Libya.
He went further and stated, "Iran is a state in the region, and we have had long-term historical ties with it over the different periods," al-Arabi told a press conference. "We will turn over a new leaf with all Arab states, including Iran."
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for his part said, “Mubarak was too closely connected with America, Western powers and Israel, this must change.”
As for Israel El-Araby said “the Jewish state must be tried for genocide.”
Israel has previously said El-Araby is anti-Israel and not objective, no doubt they will be more concerned now he is foreign minister.
Assad Elepty

Muslims in Egypt Demand Release of Alleged Convert to Islam By Mary Abdelmassih

(AINA) -- Hundreds of Muslims staged a protest in front of the State Council this morning, during the hearing of the case filed by a number of Muslim clerics with the administrative judiciary court, contesting the validity of the detention of Camelia Shehata and Wafaa Constantine in the churches of Pope Shenouda III.
After a three-months pause Muslims resumed their demonstrations today against the Egyptian Coptic Church, demanding the release of Camelia Shehata, a the priest's wife, and "her sisters in faith," whom they allege converted to Islam and are imprisoned by the Church and tortured to give up Islam (AINA 9-18-2010).
Pope Shenouda III told Al Ahram newspaper at the beginning of this crisis in August 2010 that Camelia is a Christian and no one has the right to know her whereabouts or ask where she is. Camelia later appeared on a video taken by the independent newspaper ElYoum7 and confirmed she is a Christian, never converted to Islam, and is staying of her free will in a place belonging to the church (video of Camelia with English subtitles).
Demonstrators held photos of Camelia and chanted slogans demanding her release, saying she was being held in one of the monasteries after she converted to Islam. They also distributed a statement entitled "from Camelia Shehata to Muslims," urging Muslims to defend her and set her free.
A number of Muslim leaders announced during their sit-in today the establishment of the "Coalition for the Support New Muslims", a coalition between several Muslims and Muslim Brotherhood leaders, in addition to the Islamic Group.
Representatives of the coalition distributed a statement that their goals were to set free new Muslims, held captives within the Church, which they claim total nearly 70 women and men. Included in this list are Wafaa Constantine, Mary Abdullah Zaki, Camelia Shehata, Marianne Makram, Teresa Ibrahim, Abeer Ibrahim and Elia Nabil Ayad.
They also demanded to hold accountable anyone involved in the kidnapping, detention or torture of any Muslim convert, and to provide legal protection and human rights for anyone who wants to convert to Islam.
Today's demonstration was covered by the media due to the propaganda that preceded the event. Muslims announced on the web that any woman seen without Hijab or not covering her head on Tuesday March, 29, would be killed, which frightened many Christian women. This prompted the Egyptian Union of Human Rights Organization (EUHRO) to file a complaint against the Muslims with the office of the Head of the Military Council, accusing them of terrorizing Christian women (video of demonstration).
Dr. Mohamad Moneer Megahed, head of the organization "Egyptians Against Discrimination" condemned this threat and called on Coptic women to go out in the streets in defiance.
The Media heavily criticized this threat both on TV and in newspapers, with Amr Adib, a prominent show master on Orbit Channel calling it "political suicide" on the part of the Muslims. Yesterday evening the Muslims denying making this threat, although it was published on their Facebook page and was distributed in the streets.
Islamic thinker Dr. Salim Al-Awa said yesterday on the popular TV program "90 Minutes" that Camellia Shehata is not a Muslim, never converted to Islam and is still a Christian. Al-Awa said: "I said on more than one TV channel that the issue of Camellia is a personal issue with her husband."
Dr. Hossam elBokhary, Coordinator of the Coalition told the independent newspaper ElYoum7 that the goal of the coalition is managing the crisis of those women who are detained by the Church, because of its seriousness saying, "We must block the way for any act of chaos which exploits the issue of Camelia as happened in the events of the bombing of the Church in Iraq and the Church of the Two Saints in Alexandria.
In an interview with Coptic activist Mariam Ragy of Free Christian Voice, a Muslim demonstrator said that the reason for this protest was the follow-up of the Camelia case "according to the law". He said that Muslims have nothing against the Christians, but with those who are forcibly confining any Christian female who converts to Islam to revert her back by force to Christianity. "We have proof which we will put in front of Court" he said.
Another demonstrator introduced himself as doctor Mohamad and said "The matter is simple, we want Pope Shenouda to bring Camelia out in a non-biased place, if she is not a Muslim he can take her back." He said that they have a rule in Sharia Law that says that as long as there is a Muslim "captive," then all Muslim have a duty to save that person. "All demonstrators believe that Camelia is a captive." He said that the matter would end as soon as Camelia comes out in a non-biased place and say that she is not under any pressure, and then whatever she says, the matter will be closed.
Dr. Georget Kellini, former member of the People's Assembly and the semi-governmental Egyptian Human Rights Organization proposed as a solution for the Camelia crisis, that Al-Azhar Grand Imam and Pope Shenouda III agree on the formation of a reliable tripartite committee to includes a member of Al-Azhar, an independent member that has the support and trust and a member of the media. This committee to meet with Wafaa Constantine and Camelia Shehata separately and without interference, listen to them and write down everything. This information would be presented to the public and as such their exact position will become clear to all and whether any one of them is subjected to any pressure, or is kept against her free will. Kellini added that no one had the right to compel a person to appear before the media against their wish.
Muslims have organized since the outbreak of the "Camelia Episode" seventeen demonstrations demanding the return of Camelia and threatening the Pope and the Church. The last of these demonstrations was held in Alexandria, just a few hours before the bombing of the "Two Saints" Church in Alexandria on New Year's Eve 2010, in which they threatened to turn matters for the church into "Blood in Blood."
The return of Camelia from the prisons of the Coptic Church was also the reason Al-Qaida gave for the massacre 58 Assyrians at "Our Lady of Deliverance" Church in Baghdad on October 31, 2010.
By Mary Abdelmassih

What is a Salafi

What is a Salafi
Post Egyptian revolution, the Muslim brotherhood has sought to shield them selves from accusations of criticism by allowing Salafists to take the lead on the streets and push their agenda. Today we read that Salafists are quickly menacing society, making extremists threats and using the tactics of the Muslim Brotherhood of Old.
So what is a Salafi? and where did they come from?

A Salafi is a follower of an Islamic movement that believe in a literal reading of the Koran and maintaining a lifestyle that replicates early Islam in the days of Mohammed. It is in effect a draconian ideology seeking to retard society back to the 7th century. The word “Salafi” is an Arabic noun which translates to "predecessor", or "forefather" and collectively referred to as the "Salafi- a-Saaleh", or Pious Predecessors, namely the first three Muslim generations.
The Salafists view themselves as the true modern day Sahabah "Companions" of Mohammed, strict adherents of the first three generations following Mohammed. They consider other Muslim sects have strayed from the true tenets of Islam. Salafist’s consider they are the true guardians of “Islamic orthodoxy” and role models of how Islam should be practiced.
Salafism is not considered a sect foreign to orthodox Islam by the Sunni Muslim brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood currently sees the Salafists “as a very useful instrument in Egypt”. The Salafists are in effect they are doing the “dirty work” the Muslim Brotherhood is unable to do under the current circumstances. The world wide focus on the Muslim Brotherhood has to some extent shackled the Brotherhood; they are desperate to portray themselves as a non violent tolerant sect pursuing a political role in modern day Egypt.
The goals of the MB are infact in tangent with the objectives of the Salafists. The principal tenet of Salafism is that “Islam as preached by Muhammad and practiced by his Companions”, is the pure, unadulterated ultimate authority for the interpretation of the two sources of revelation given to Muhammad, namely the Qur'an and the Sunna”, uninfluenced by western democracy.

So where did they come from?
The term Salafi is sometimes replaced with “Wahhabi”, the form of Islam practiced in Saudi Arabia. (Like the Brotherhood, both sects are directly linked with terrorism or "extremist" in Islam).
Egyptian ex-pats working in Saudi Arabia have been greatly influenced by Wahhabism and have imported it to Egypt. Whilst they have the same ideology Salafis reject the label “Wahhabi” and argue that Mohammed Ibn Abd al Wahhab (Mohammed son of Abd al Wahhab) did not establish a new school of thought but merely revived the pure, unadulterated Islam that was practiced by the earliest generations of Muslims. With the exception of that difference, Salafists have a mirror ideology of Wahhabism.
In essence the Salafists seek to mirror the same form of Islam practiced in Saudi Arabia. This ideology will not only suppress Christians, but it will also treat women as second class citizens. Women will banned from driving, voting and travelling unaccompanied by Father, Son, or husband in public, the burqa will be mandatory, “all under threat of corporal punishment or execution”. Matters such as rape, will be dealt with under strict koranic interpretations, where four independent male witnesses are required to corroborate the woman’s allegations, minimum marriage age will be scraped and child brides accepted and other aspects of shariah implemented.
Having said the latter, the Muslim Brotherhood who are far more organised and regimented, by far out number the Salafists in Egypt. The Muslim Brotherhood working closely with the Military cunningly organised the release of Salafist leaders at a critical juncture, “just before the constitutional referendum”. Whilst the MB will not allow the Salafists to assume the lead and take power in Egypt, they were desperately needed to secure the outcome of the referendum and enshrine Islam as part and parcel of modern Egypt.
Two weeks ago the Salafists were on the front foot, securing the “yes vote” and suppressed the youth that ensured the over throw of Mubarak and pushed for a “No Vote”.
Today Egypt is predominantly “Ahl-as-Sunna” (family of the Sunna), led by the Muslim brotherhood and Al-Azhar, the oldest and highest Islamic institute in the world, and they have no intention of allowing the Salafists assume supremacy in Egypt.
When the world witnessed a vocal call “for removal of article 2 of the constitution”, this greatly concerned the MB, and led them to use “the Salafists as a convenient street level force to counter the drive to abolish article 2” and the loud call for democracy widely sought by the educated and enlightened Egyptian youth and Coptic Christians.
The Muslim brotherhood is an extremely tenacious, tactical, and well organised machine, and quickly responded to the situation whilst remaining at arms lengths from any criticism of extremism.
No doubt the point will come when the Salafists will be at logger heads with the MB, especially as now the Salafists have declared their intention to form a political party to rival the MB. I predict the MB who are closely aligned with the military in an unholy alliance, will no doubt counter the proposal and suppress the MB. With the benefit of Hindsight, it is now clear Mubarak was not the failure many perceived, including myself. I was extremely critical of Mubarak’s rule; however it is now evident that to control Islamists the ruler has to be brutal and relentless. There is no doubt Mubarak had a deep appreciation of the threats Islamists posed to society, and these is evident as we witness events unfold. The question begs to be asked, “What possessed the Military to free these radicals in mass?” Recently on Insight, one Coptic Lady attended and voiced her support for Mubarak against the majority opinion, the events we see occur to day certainly giver her stance merit and validity. Despite Mubarak’s misgivings, he certainly kept the Islamists on a tight leash and caged the radical ring leaders.

There is a glimmer of hope for the future destiny of Egypt. The constitution subject of recent voting is an “interim constitution” to guide the country until a permanent document is drafted. Parliamentary elections are scheduled for September and the first presidential elections after the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak will be held in October or November.
The make up of the new parliament and the new president will ultimately determine the future path of Egypt. There is no doubt the Muslim Brotherhood, Salafists and other Islamic groups will do their utmost to influence the outcome of the upcoming elections.
At the same time secular parties are aware of the threat and will like wise act to counter the anti-democratic movement. Time is short and the winner of the arm wrestle will no doubt emerge victorious. The over riding threat at present comes from Salafists who are prepared to resort to violence, terrorism, thuggery and brutality to suppress those seeking a moderate democratic society and influence the outcome of the upcoming elections by stealth.

To a very large extent, the entire episode will be determined by the response of the ruling military and how they deal with criminal and subversive behaviour of the Islamists, "Judging by the actions of the military to date it is not looking promising".

Prayer Prayer and Prayer is our greatest weapon against the forces of satan.

Assad Elepty

Sunday, March 27, 2011

Friday, March 18, 2011



SUNDAY, MARCH 20th, 4pm-8pm, 2011

Mr. Ahmed Abaza, and The Truth TV, arranged and sponsored Sheikh Imam Mohamed El Hassan, Mr. Ahmed Paul, Sheikh Abdulla Al Sabah, and Mrs. Manal Faragalla to be a part of this event.

Mr. Ahmed Abaza, and The Truth TV, arranged and sponsored Sheikh Imam Mohamed El Hassan, Mr. Ahmed Paul, Sheikh Abdulla Al Sabah, and Mrs. Manal Faragalla to be a part of this event.

Prosecuting Attorney, Ahmed Abaza - Mr. Abaza is the Founder of the International Christian TV (The Truth TV). Mr. Abaza is a former Muslim who accepted the Lord Jesus in 1987.

Defense Attorney, Sheikh Imam Mohamed El Hassan - Mr. Hassan ran for President of Sudan in April 2010. He is the President of the Islamic Center in Texas, USA, and the Sheikh of the Islamic Sofia Way.

Expert Witness, Mr. Ahmed Paul was a Presidential guard, which is equivalent to a secret service agent, in Egypt. Mr. Paul is a former Muslim who accepted the Lord Jesus in 1997 and has served the Lord since that time.

Expert Witness, Sheikh Abdulla Al Sabah, from the Royal family of Kuwait, is a former Muslim. He was imprisoned for becoming a Christian. Muslims made many attempts to kill him by lethal injection. He accepted the Lord Jesus in 1995.

Expert Witness and Translator, Mrs. Manal Faragalla, whose father was killed by Islamic Sharia Law because of his faith and preaching of the Word of God. The Lord Jesus trained and educated her to be one of His soldiers for the sake of His people who are under the yoke of Sharia Law.

This is an OPEN PUBLIC event.

If we are proven wrong, we will issue a public apology. Otherwise, if the Koran is found guilty, it will be 'executed' in one of the following ways, chosen by an International POLL: 1) Burning 2) Drowning 3) Shredding or 4) Firing squad.


Please financially support us as we organize this event and fight the ban against Dr. Terry Jones from the UK:

Pastor Terry Jones: INTERNATIONAL JUDGE (then Burn) the KORAN DAY
This Sunday, March 20, 4-8pm Gainesville, FL 352 371 2487

Stand Up America
The event will be BROADCAST LIVE via internet feed and satellite, internationally on The Truth TV The event will take place in ARABIC with translation into ENGLISH so that the original text can be discussed.

Saturday, March 12, 2011

West Bank settler family murdered in their beds

ITAMAR SETTLEMENT, Palestinian Territories (AFP) – Five members of an Israeli family including a baby were murdered in their beds in a West Bank settlement in an attack blamed on Palestinians, sparking a huge manhunt and international condemnation on Saturday.

Media reports said a baby girl of three months, two children aged three and 11, and their parents Ehud and Ruth Vogel were all stabbed to death in the Friday night attack in Itamar near the Palestinian town of Nablus.

Army radio said two other children had been spared and a third, a girl of 10, had arrived home late and alerted neighbours that something was wrong.

"It was one in the morning when their daughter Tamar came to ask me to go home with her. She was worried because there was no answer when she knocked on the door which was locked," said Rabbi Yaakov Cohen, who found the bodies.

The radio said the killer or killers had managed to get past an electric fence surrounding the settlement, which was targeted in a 2002 attack by Palestinian assailants when a woman and three children were killed.

In front of the Vogel home, settlers lit candles on Saturday night in memory of their slain neighbours.

Rabbi Avichai Ronski, spokesman for the settlement which is home to 800 Jews, was defiant after the attack. "Our response to this crime is not to seek revenge but to carry on with construction" of more Jewish homes.

The army, meanwhile, set up new checkpoints in the Nablus area and deployed in force in the Palestinian village of Awarta near Itamar. Soldiers questioned residents during house-to-house searches, Palestinian security sources said.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the authorities would do everything possible to protect Israelis and demanded Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas punish those responsible for the murders.

The premier also urged Abbas's Palestinian Authority (PA) to "halt incitement in mosques and in the media under its control."

He said he expected an "unambiguous denunciation of the murder of babies" from the international community and called on countries that "run to the UN to condemn planned Israeli building" to condemn the knife attack in the same way.

Later the premier said on state television that "terrorism will not dictate" the policy of settlements in the West Bank.

Abbas condemned the attack, while reaffirming the need to reach a just and lasting settlement to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. "I denounce all violence against civilians, whatever the motive," he said.

In a telephone call, Abbas personally expressed his regrets to Netanyahu, the Israeli leader's office said.

Palestinian prime minister Salam Fayyad also denounced the attacks. "We clearly and firmly condemn all forms of violence, and I condemn what happened last night in Itamar, just as I condemn the crimes against Palestinians."

Netanyahu said the PA condemnation was "weak and ambiguous" but urged settlers to show restraint and not to take justice into their hands.

Amid a chorus of condemnation from the international community, including the Middle East diplomatic Quartet, the White House said: "There is no possible justification for the killing of parents and children in their home."

There was no immediate claim of responsibility but Al-Quds (Jerusalem) Brigades, the armed wing of the hardline Islamic Jihad, condoned the attack as an act of resistance against Israeli occupation of Palestinian land.

Tensions between Palestinians and Jewish settlers in the Nablus area have been high this week. On Monday, Israeli soldiers fired live rounds at Palestinians after they fought with settlers

Has the Coptic Church failed the Revolution?

Has the Coptic Church failed the Revolution?
By: Sherif Rizk

It’s not often that you hear Copts arguing against their much-beloved spiritual leader, His Holiness Pope Shenouda III. The blind trust in His Holiness’ guidance of the church has been unwavering and inspiring at times, as the embattle community rallied around its pontiff to protect him from harsh criticism and false rumors. But it has come to the attention of many Copts that the octogenarian primate has distanced himself from the revolution that swept Mubarak out of office and, even worse, has seemed to vouch for the rule of the deposed Mubarak instead of the impending change that is coming. Now, His Holiness may never have said those words since January 25th, but the Pope’s public support of Mubarak and his supposed successor Gamal are still very fresh in the minds of disgruntled Egyptians. Even to this day, the Pope has been reluctant to call Copts, weary and anxious of change for the worse, to the streets to join their Muslim counterparts. This comes despite the overwhelming scenes of national unity that have often defined the spirit of this revolution, and with the memory of the Alexandria Bombing on New Year’s Eve gradually receding into the distant existence of the past.

The question on many people’s minds is clear; why has His Holiness been so reluctant to promote the revolution in the eyes of his flock, and why hasn’t he spearheaded the push for building a secular and civil Egypt? Has the Coptic church failed the revolution? Is it fair to say that the church has disconnected itself from the voice of the streets?

I have never agreed with the political role that the church has placed on itself in society, and especially the political role that the Coptic church has given its aging pontiff. While it’s true that the church plays an important political role in Egypt’s society (and will continue to hold this role should democracy come to Egypt soon), the leadership of the church should concern itself with the spiritual matters of its flock and not involve itself in the politics of the country by attempting to sway the outcome of the country’s leadership. Copts should learn to vote for those whom they think is best for themselves and the country, not necessarily who their spiritual leader advocates for. However, one must sympathize with the position of the Pope; after witnessing decades of religious persecution aimed at his own people, and at times even at himself, the Pope has learned that it is better to trust he who you know more than he who you don’t know. But while this adage may have been true of Mubarak’s era, that same mentality is no longer applicable to this new Egypt in construction.

I had hoped that His Holiness would take a position similar to his Muslim counterpart, Dr. Ahmed El-Tayeb, in supporting the revolution and distancing the religious institutions from the running of the country. However, it should be noted that I do not agree with Dr. El-Tayeb’s stance on Article 2 of the Egyptian Constitution; the establishment of a civil state should be free from the interference of any religious institution, regardless of the size of the institution or the size of the adherents of said institution. It is important to note that the position of Grand Imam of Al-Azhar has been appointed by previous executives; no doubt a method of controlling the religious teachings that are disseminated throughout the country’s mosques. As Egypt moves to liberalizing its political and social institutions on all levels, Al-Azhar will certainly not be immune to such shifts, and indeed this move has great support from within the Al-Azhar circles for the election, rather than the appointment, of its Grand Imam. However, to place a singular religious institution in control of the primary source of legislation of a multicultural country is simply incompatible with the principles of a civil state, regardless of how democratic and transparent the election of Al-Azhar’s executive is. Egypt cannot depend on two independent, contrasting judicial systems on the national level; it must move to choose one that must take into consideration the popular will of the people, while respecting the rights of those who do not want to abide by a particular or any religious code. Countless philosophers have argued for the importance of placing the civil, secular state above the interests of religious institutions in order to ensure the fairness and equality of all members of society, and one need look no further than the US Constitution to see how important this is to enshrine equality in a government’s affairs. Therefore, Dr. Al-Tayeb’s stance, albeit well-intended to safeguard the values of Islam in the new Egyptian society, are selfish and do not take into account the considerations and interests of Copts or Egyptians in general.

So, when one compares His Holiness’ stance on the revolution to that of Dr. El-Tayeb’s, it may seem that the Coptic church’s tame stance has failed the revolution. However, Dr. El-Tayeb’s stance may also be doing the same, or at least setting up the new constitution to fail the revolution in the same manner. It is here that we find the ultimate truth about the most fundamental need in the future of Egyptian society; the time has come for Egyptians to realize that the disconnect between spiritual and political life is an absolute must for the peaceful existence of the future Egypt. Perhaps it is this aspect of reality that one will have to grapple with a lot since it will require, as Antonio Gramsci once said, an internal revolution from each one of us.