Islamic Cleric Defends ISIS Beheadings
The Islamic State’s bloody campaign of public beheadings is actually intended to save American lives, Britain’s most notorious Islamic cleric declared in a radio interview.
“One of the primary reasons why you see what you are seeing on your own television and Internet is to try to end the war quickly,” stated radical preacher Anjem Choudary when asked to justify the ISIS beheadings.
“This kind of terrorizing and horrifying the enemy is saying to them, ‘Look, don’t engage with them. Stay away.’ This is supposed to be something which drives the enemy away and therefore saves many lives.”
Choudary made these comments on “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio” on New York’s AM 970 The Answer.
Choudary, founder of the banned terrorist supporting group Al Muhajiroun, attempted to use the Koran to justify the ISIS beheadings, which have included the public executions of two American journalists as well as one American and two British aid workers.
On Friday it was reported that the ISIS beheaded four Christian children in Iraq for refusing to denounce Jesus and convert to Islam, according to the leader of the Anglican church in Baghdad.
Speaking to Klein, Choudary quoted chapter 8, verse 60 of the Koran, which states:
“And prepare against them whatever you are able of power and of steeds of war by which you may terrify the enemy of Allah and your enemy and others besides them whom you do not know [but] whom Allah knows.”
Choudary continued: “I mean, you may see in Somalia with the film “Black Hawk Down” that the Americans withdrew because they could not tolerate what was taking place to their own soldiers.
“And you know, however gruesome it may seem, you know, the propaganda element and the kind of terrorizing effect of this cannot be denied … it is intended to have that effect. To say, ‘Look don’t come to the area.’”
Shouldn’t Select Committee Chairman Look At The Facts First?
Is the fix already in?
In a stunning exchange with Fox News host Greta Van Susteren, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, offered premature judgments on why Ambassador Chris Stevens went to Benghazi, Libya, on September 11, 2012.
Gowdy also espoused personal judgments concerning Stevens’ mysterious final meeting with a Turkish diplomat less than two hours before the Benghazi attack.
Gowdy’s committee is tasked with investigating the events surrounding the attack and not with issuing early conclusions or predictions, especially during the infancy of the hearings.
Yet Gowdy did just that when he was repeatedly questioned by Van Susteren about the meeting between Stevens and a Turkish diplomat at the U.S. special mission in Benghazi just prior to the attack.
The meeting ended at about 7:40 p.m. local time. The attack on the mission began at 9:42 p.m.
Asked about the meeting, Gowdy told Van Susteren: “I have seen no evidence that the meeting with the Turkish diplomat was in any way related to what ultimately happened to the ambassador.”
Van Susteren asked whether the meeting was connected to the presence of the CIA in Benghazi. Gowdy replied, “If there is any evidence to connect the two, I have not seen it, and no one on House intel has told me about it.”
Gowdy’s reliance on the House Intelligence Committee is instructive. Earlier this month, the House committee released a report claiming the CIA did not directly transfer weapons to rebels. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C) slammed the House Committee Intelligence report as “a bunch of garbage” while complaining the committee “is doing a lousy job policing their own.”