Mapping Sharia Project Goes Beyond Islamophobia to Raving, Paranoid, In(SANE)ity! updated 7/21/14

Sheila Musaji

Posted Jul 21, 2014      •Permalink      • Printer-Friendly Version
Bookmark and Share

Mapping Sharia Project Goes Beyond Islamophobia to Raving, Paranoid, In(SANE)ity! - David Yerushalmi and Mordechai Kedar Outdo Themselves

by Sheila Musaji

The Mapping Sharia Project just posted an article which contained the following statement:

When reading Shari’a and Violence in American Mosques, a picture emerges that may give researchers, as well as law enforcement officials, a way to monitor or potentially to predict where violent jihad may take root. Potential recruits who are swept up in this movement may find their inspiration and encouragement in a place with ready access to classic and modern literature that is positive toward jihad and violence, where highly Shari’a-adherent behavior is practiced, and where a society exists that in some form promotes a culture of martyrdom or at least engages in activities that are supportive of violent jihad. The mosque can be such a place.

The survey, Shari’a and Violence in American Mosques, found a strong correlation between the presence of severe violence-promoting literature and mosques featuring written, audio, and video materials that actually promoted such acts.

51% of U.S. mosques had texts that either advocated the use of violence in the pursuit of a Shari’a-based political order or advocated violent jihad; another 30% had texts that were moderately supportive of violence. 19% had no violent texts at all.

The mosques surveyed contained a variety of texts, ranging from contemporary printed pamphlets and handouts to classic texts of the Islamic canon. From the perspective of promoting violent jihad, the literature types were ranked in the survey from severe to moderate to nonexistent. The texts selected were all written to serve as normative and instructive tracts and are not scriptural. This is important because a believer is free to understand scripture literally, figuratively, or merely poetically when it does not have a normative or legal gloss provided by Islamic jurisprudence.

Alarmingly, many of these texts are currently endorsed by The American Muslim website in its “List of Recommended Books on Islam.” al-Misri’s Umdat al-Salik, the Tafsir Ibn Kathir, and the Qutb’s explicitly political tract, Milestones, are each singled-out for praise.

In addition, the list of recommended books contains other works by several writers included in the Mapping Shari’a Project‘s survey of texts which advocated the use of violence in the pursuit of a Shari’a-based political order or advocated violent jihad. The American Muslim recommends books by Maududi (author of Jihad in Islam and Tafhim al-Qur’an) and al-Nawawi (author of Riyad-us-Saliheen). The American Muslim also recommends work by the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, Yusuf al-Qaradawi. It is no surprise that the website and its author, Sheila Musaji, have been highly critical of US anti-terror policy and any negative criticism of Islamism and the Muslim Brotherhood.

The literature assessed in mosques includes the following works. Click the book covers below to find out more.

The report this is referring to is Shari’a and Violence in American Mosques by Mordechai Kedar and David Yerushalmi which was published in the Middle East Quarterly Summer 2011 issue.  You can read the full report here.

This article says that ”... al-Misri’s Umdat al-Salik, the Tafsir Ibn Kathir, and the Qutb’s explicitly political tract, Milestones, are each singled-out for praise” in the TAM recommended book list.  Actually, they are not.  There are only a few books on the list singled out for praise as being particularly useful in understanding a particular subject, and these are not among them. 

Among the books and/or authors that are on the TAM recommended book list is Milestones by Sayyid Qutb.  I would agree that this is a very controversial work, and one with which I personally disagree on most points.  However, to understand anything about the development of the Muslim Brotherhood movement in Egypt and elsewhere, and the subsequent development of other extreme political movements this is a book that provides necessary understanding of the thought process that led to these movements.  Anyone who is interested in understanding, and countering their arguments would need to be familiar with this book.

The only book by Maududi on the TAM recommended list is Four Qur’anic Terms - the other books by Maududi to which the authors object are not on our recommended list.  The only book by al Nawawi is the 40 hadith collection.  The only books by al Qaradawi are The Lawful and Prohibited in Islam and Islamic Awakening, Between Rejection and Extremism.  None of these books promote violence.

Why the Mapping Sharia folks singled out the TAM list of recommended books is curious - and the fact that they do not understand much about Islam or Muslims is obvious.  This same TAM book list includes many more books on Sufism than on any other topic.  It includes books by Muslims and non-Muslims, by Sunni and Shia, etc.  Actually, the authors of the Shari’a and Violence in American Mosques report and the Mapping Sharia project use Sheikh Hisham Kabbani as a reference in supporting their discredited 81% figure for mosques that are radicalized or promote violence.  Our TAM list contains more books by Sh. Kabbani than any of the authors they object to.  That is the difference between extremists of any sort who hold absolute, black and white views, and those of us who see shades of grey.  I absolutely disagree with Sh. Kabbani’s statement about American mosques.  However, that doesn’t mean that I therefore reject everything else that he has said or written.  I absolutely disagree with some positions of Sh. al Qaradawi, but that doesn’t mean that I therefore reject everything else that he has said or written.

These folks who want to ban books must not realize that you can get Karl Marx Communist Manifesto and Adolph Hitler’s Mein Kampf on Amazon.  You can also get Syed Qutb’s Milestones, Reliance of the Traveler, al Qaradawi’s Lawful and Prohibited in Islam as well as many more books by al Qaradawi, and lots of books by Maududi, and by al Nawawi.  You can also get many of these books in public or university libraries.

Even the Shari’a and Violence report says that “The Fiqh as-Sunna and Tafsir Ibn Kathir are examples of works that were rated “moderate” for purposes of this survey.”

This article makes a personal attack on me, saying that “It is no surprise that the website and its author, Sheila Musaji, have been highly critical of US anti-terror policy and any negative criticism of Islamism and the Muslim Brotherhood.”  This is not the first such attack, but it is just as spurious as the other such attacks by Islamophobes.  Anyone who has read any of my published articles or who is familiar with my efforts could not make such a ridiculous statement with a straight face.  I have definitely publically criticized political Islam and the Muslim Brotherhood.  However, I totally reject Islamophobes like Yerushalmi and Kedar’s definition and descriptions of what constitutes an “Islamist”.  All Muslims who practice the faith of Islam are not “Islamists”.

This report is an example of how far individuals who are filled with hatred are willing to go to demonize the entire religion of Islam.  In a section on “Identifying Shari’a-Adherent Behaviors” we find this:

Surveyors were asked to observe and record selected behaviors deemed to be Shari’a-adherent. These behaviors were selected precisely because they constitute observable and measurable practices of an orthodox form of Islam as opposed to internalized, non-observable articles of faith. Such visible modes of conduct are considered by traditionalists to have been either exhibited or commanded by Muhammad as recorded in the Sunna and later discussed and preserved in canonical Shari’a literature. The selected behaviors are among the most broadly accepted by legal practitioners of Islam and are not those practiced only by a rigid subgroup within Islam—Salafists, for example.

Among the behaviors observed at the mosques and scored as Shari’a-adherent were: (a) women wearing the hijab (head covering) or niqab (full-length shift covering the entire female form except for the eyes); (b) gender segregation during mosque prayers; and (c) enforcement of straight prayer lines. Behaviors that were not scored as Shari’a-adherent included: (a) women wearing just a modern hijab, a scarf-like covering that does not cover all of the hair, or no covering; (b) men and women praying together in the same room; and (c) no enforcement by the imam, lay leader, or worshipers of straight prayer lines.

What are the characteristics of Imam’s at mosques that they consider “Sharia based Imam characteristics” that should be monitored or looked at with concern? 

— Are men and women segregated during prayer? 
— Does the Imam have a beard?
— Does the Imam wear a head covering?
— Does the Imam wear traditional garb?
— Does the Imam wear his watch on his right wrist?

What characteristics of Muslims who attend mosques are considered “Shari’a-based Worshiper Characteristics” implied to be somehow connected with the possibility of violence?

— Percentage of men with beards
— Percentage of men with hats
— Percentage of men with Western garb
— Percentage of women with modern hijab (vs. traditional hijab/niqab)
— Percentage of girls with hijab
— Percentage of boys with head-covering

What are Shari’a-Adherent Behaviors that might be a cause of concern for the authors of this report?

— Shari’a-adherent communal prayer occurs when men and women are segregated during prayer service. ... Non-Shari’a-adherent communal prayer occurs when men and women are not segregated during the prayer service and the genders mix.
—Shari’a-adherent alignment of men’s prayer lines occurs when either the imam, lay leader, or the worshipers inspect and enforce the straightness of the men’s prayer lines.  Non-Shari’a-adherent alignment of men’s prayer lines occurs when there is no observable attention paid to strict alignment of the men’s prayer lines.
— An imam’s or lay leader’s beard is a Sunna-style (i.e., full) beard, whether trimmed or not and either with or without henna dye coloring the beard.  A non-Sunna style beard is either limited to a chin-beard or if the imam or lay leader wears no beard at all.
— Shari’a-adherent behavior is that the imam or lay leader wore a religious head covering.  Non-Shari’a adherent behavior is that the imam or lay leader did not wear a religious head covering
— Shari’a-adherent garb is any of the following: (a) short thoub; (b) pants rolled up above the ankles; or (c) ankle-length thoub.  Non-Shari’a-adherent garb is Western-style clothing such as modern-style dress or casual pants and shirt.
— Shari’a-adherent behavior Certain Salafists wear the watch on the right wrist. Non-Shari’a-adherent Wearing the watch on the left wrist or not wearing a watch at all.
— Shari’a-adherent behavior is for an adult male worshiper to have a beard (full or not).  Non-Shari’a-adherent behavior is for an adult male worshiper to have no beard.
— Shari’a-adherent behavior is for an adult male to wear a religious hat.  Non-Shari’a-adherent behavior is for an adult male to not wear a religious hat.

Richard Bartholomew has written an article discussing some of the problems with this report.  A few of his comments:

“The Reliance of the Traveller and the Tafsir Ibn Kathir are both pre-modern compendiums of Islamic law; of course they contain some troubling material, like many other pre-modern texts. But they also contain a lot else: we need to understand why the imams recommend these texts, not just note that they do and therefore chalk up one more extremist.  It’s also unclear whether the imams are being asked about their general recommendation practices in relation to these texts or whether they are simply advising the questioner.”

Further: “If materials available on mosque premises promoted joining a known terrorist organization, such as “mujahideen” engaged in jihad abroad, then the mosque was recorded as having promoted joining a terrorist organization.”  That may seems reasonable so far as it goes, but again it begs a lot of questions. Some general sympathy for a mujahideen group involved in military conflict in somewhere in central Asia is a very different proposition from supporting al-Qaeda, so we need more than just a broad-brush “terrorism” label if we are to understand what is going on and why. And we need to know more about how the materials are made available, and in what ways they are promoted. Are leaflets given out to attendees, or is “promotion” simply an obscure poster pinned to an unmoderated noticeboard somewhere on the premises? There’s scope for various interpretations there.

... And what purpose is served by mixing all this in with a list “Sharia Adherent Behaviors”, other than to give Muslim cultural practices a sinister hue?”

This generalized fear of all Muslims and of Islam is what is being promoted by the authors of this study and their supporters.  Andrew McCarthy in an article praising this report says “Here is the unsettling but sedulously avoided truth: What radicalizes Muslims is Islam.”  Andrew Bostom also praises the report in an article titled “Mosques as Barracks in America”.  Frank Gaffney refers to an “Ominous Jihadist Footprint Being Put Into Place Across The Nation”, and to American mosques as “Jihad incubators”.  Pamela Geller praised the report and called Yerushalmi “America’s leading lawyer in sharia”.  Diana West concludes that the report shows that ” there is an urgent need to halt Islamic immigration to ensure that the demographic for more such mosques doesn’t grow.  ... These alarming data on the promotion of violence within Islam in American mosques are for the wider, still non-Islamic society to address, and before it’s too late.”

I am hopeful that many more individuals will jump in with their analyses.  Someone could write an entire article on the ridiculousness of the “watch on the right hand” issue alone.  And, the straight prayer lines as an indicator of anything other than keeping people from bumping into each other requires an article or a humorous YouTube video to show just how nonsensical this is.  There are so many problems with this report that it is difficult to believe that it is meant to be taken seriously.  It seems more like a satirical article that would be published on “The Onion”.  This report belongs in the category of lunatic ravings rather than of serious research, and deserves to be ridiculed along with Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy Shariah in American Courts and Sharia:// a Threat to America reports.

I find it difficult to believe that any sane individual cannot see that this is Islamophobia.  In fact, it is raving, paranoid, lunacy and In(SANE)ity! 

Are non-Muslim Americans being told that they should be fearful or concerned if a Muslim man is wearing his watch on his right wrist or has a beard, or if a Muslim is wearing a head covering, or if a Muslim is wearing non-Western dress?  Is a Muslim who practices any aspect of Sharia an “enemy”?

There are other religious groups who follow many of these same customs including male-female segregation during prayers at their house of worship, covering the head, wearing beards, wearing special clothing, etc.  Logically, unless your point is that all such religious customs are problematic, the implication of this report is clearly that the religion of Islam is being singled out as somehow different from other religions.

If a man covers his head, wears a beard, wears special clothing to pray, follows dietary restrictions, prays in a house of worship where men and women are segregated for prayers and where women cover their heads and dress modestly, then — if he is an Orthodox Jew is that any different than if he is an observant Muslim?  Obviously, to the authors of this report, this is a problem only for Muslims.

What is particularly sad about such hate mongering masquerading as a serious report is that it actually distracts from any serious attempts to attempt to identify, understand and counter any actual sources of radicalization.

What is particularly ironic about this is that the report was prepared by two Jewish men who should know better.  As Richard Silverstein has pointed out ” Just as Muslims conform their religious lives to Sharia so observant Jews conform theirs to halacha.  Just as Sharia may be applied to normally civil functions like marriage, divorce and estate planning; so too Jews often use halacha in place of civil code in these important life milestones.  If state laws criminalize the application of Sharia to civil matters then there is no reason this wouldn’t happen to halacha as well.”

If this report is taken seriously, then every American Muslim should get ready for that “Are you now, or have you ever been, a Muslim” question.  Let’s just hope that those Halliburton Internment Camps aren’t being refurbished. 


UPDATE 6/13/2011

Robert Steinback at the Southern Poverty Law Center has just published a review of this report on the SPLC “Hatewatch” section.  The title of this review is ‘Study’ of Mosques Reflects Anti-Muslim Bias of Co-Author.  In that article he notes that:

...  Yerushalmi has made a life’s work of promoting his belief that Shariah – the Islamic code of law and moral conduct – is “inextricably linked” with a global jihadist conspiracy to subjugate the West. He once wrote, “The mythical ‘moderate’ Muslim … the Muslim who embraces traditional Islam but wants a peaceful coexistence with the West, is effectively non-existent.” Yerushalmi authored Tennessee House Bill 1353, which, if signed by Gov. Bill Haslam, would define most practices associated with Shariah as prima facie evidence of a seditious intent to undermine the U.S. Constitution. (Commenting on this legislation, the ACLU said: “Extremist violence is not limited to one religion or belief. Singling out Muslims serves merely to scapegoat and stereotype them, exacerbating an already unfounded fear of and anger toward members of the Muslim community. This bill represents an egregious, un-American form of cultural profiling against an entire faith.”)

So it’s no surprise that the conclusions of Yerushalmi’s study are precisely in line with his long-held beliefs: The more strictly a mosque observes traditional Islamic practices, it claims, the more likely its imam advocates violent jihad and is working to “radicalize” his worshipers. Had the report concluded anything else, Yerushalmi’s entire mission in life might have seemed rather pointless.

...  The report’s conclusion, incidentally, directly contradicts that of a 2008 survey conducted by two Tufts University professors, which showed that affiliation with a mosque actually increases American Muslims’ level of civic engagement. Among the questions Karam Dana and Matt A. Barreto asked in their survey, described as the largest ever of American Muslims, was whether Islam and the American political system are compatible. They found that 77% of Muslims who do not regularly go to a mosque answered “yes,” while among those who are regularly involved in a mosque, that figure rose to 95%. “Data analysis clearly demonstrate that Muslims with a high degree of tadayyun, or religiosity, are significantly more likely to believe Islamic teachings are compatible with political participation in America,” Dana and Barreto concluded. “In contrast, Muslims with the lowest measure of religiosity were much more isolated from the American political system. Thus, we can conclude that Islam, as a religion and as a culture, is not in conflict with the core values of American participatory democracy.”

Yerushalmi is a key member of a tiny, organized cadre of American anti-Muslim activists that is almost singlehandedly responsible for engineering an artificial national panic – at least, among the gullible – over the supposed threat of Islamic jihadists bent on dislodging the Constitution and imposing Shariah law on America. (A detailed look at this group of activists will be published in the Summer 2011 issue of SPLC’s Intelligence Report magazine, due out next week.) Nearly the entire roster of that core group had a hand in promoting this latest sham study: Yerushalmi co-wrote it. Daniel Pipes’ Middle East Quarterly published it. Robert Spencer quickly reposted it on his JihadWatch blog, as did Brigitte Gabriel on her ACT! for America site. Pamela Geller (see also here and here), executive director of the hate group Stop Islamization of America, talked it up on Fox News. David Horowitz’ website, FrontPageMag, published an interview with Yerushalmi. Frank Gaffney praised the report in a Washington Times op-ed piece.


You can read a great deal more about David Yerushalmi, the man behind the Mapping Sharia Project and this current report here, but I will include just some of his background so that you can judge for yourself whether or not this is a rational person.

A lengthy ADL backgrounder on Yerushalmi, filed under extremism includes the following:

One of the driving forces behind Shari’a-related conspiracy theories and growing efforts to ban or restrict the use of Shari’a law in American courts is David Yerushalmi, an Arizona attorney with a record of anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant and anti-black bigotry.

In recent years, Yerushalmi has created a characterization of Shari’a law (i.e., Islamic law) that declares there are “hundreds of millions” of Muslims who are either “fully committed mujahideen” or “still dangerous but lesser committed jihad sympathizers” who, because of Shari’a law, would be willing to murder all non-believers unwilling to convert, in order to “impose a worldwide political hegemony.”  Meanwhile, Yerushalmi asserts, the U.S. government itself has consciously chosen to turn a blind eye to this threat.

To combat this alleged threat, Yerushalmi has vigorously opposed all perceived “inroads” of Shari’a law in the United States, even entirely innocuous measures such as American financial institutions creating financing packages designed to be compatible with Islamic restrictions against loaning money at interest.

...  Yerushalmi has not only actively promoted his conspiratorial vision of Shari’a law, but has also sought to portray all Muslims as a threat. In one March 2006 article, for example, Yerushalmi even went so far as to claim that “Muslim civilization is at war with Judeo-Christian civilization…The Muslim peoples, those committed to Islam as we know it today, are our enemies.”

That same year, Yerushalmi founded the Society of Americans for National Existence (SANE), a “think tank” that has published anti-Muslim, anti-immigration and anti-black materials, as well as New World Order-style conspiracy theories. In 2007, SANE, declaring itself “dedicated to the rejection of democracy and party rule and a return to a constitutional republic [of the original founders of the US],” launched a campaign fueled by suspicion of all Muslims.

That campaign, “Mapping Shari’a in America: Knowing the Enemy,” sought to determine exactly what type of Shari’a every single mosque and Muslim religious institution in the U.S. was advocating. A June 2007 press release announcing the campaign indicated that SANE would work to “test the proposition that Shari’a amounts to a criminal conspiracy to overthrow the U.S. government” by investigating and ranking the adherence to Islamic law of mosques and their associated day-schools throughout the U.S. The statement also promised to “advocate for the criminalization of Shari’a” if it felt its targeted investigation into mosques and Islamic day schools proved such a measure necessary. 

SANE also proposed legislation that furthering or supporting adherence to Shari’a “shall be a felony punishable by 20 years in prison.” It called on Congress to declare war on the “Muslim nation,” which it defined as “Shari’a-adherent Muslims,” and further asked Congress to define Muslim illegal immigrants as alien enemies “subject to immediate deportation.”

The SANE press release for the Mapping Shari’a in America project included this statement “Shari’a is not merely speech, and it is certainly not religion as understood by the West,” SANE’s President, David Yerushalmi, said at a morning press conference. “Rather, it is a political and ideological mandate to destroy the West. We believe that every act to teach, preach, and live according to traditional, historical, and authoritative Shari’a contributes to a criminal conspiracy to overthrow our government.”


“The mythical ‘moderate’ Muslim ... the Muslim who embraces traditional Islam but wants a peaceful coexistence with the West, is effectively non-existent ... because he chooses to remain within traditional Shari’a-based Islam, where the Ulamā or Islamic legal scholars, and the Muftoon (singular: Mufti) who issue fatawa (singular: fatwa) or legal edicts, reign supreme together with the lesser mullahs, imams, and maulvis. A ‘moderate’ among these men will simply be shouted down, coerced into silence, or murdered. In contrast, the Muslim Reformer takes the proper position that Islam as it was created, as it has existed for 1,300 years, and as it exists now, is an evil political ideology the goal of which is a worldwide Islamic Caliphate.”  ***

“On the so-called Global War on Terrorism, GWOT, we have been quite clear along with a few other resolute souls. This should be a WAR AGAINST ISLAM and all Muslim faithful…At a practical level, this means that Shari’a and Islamic law are immediately outlawed. Any Moslem in America who adopts historical and traditional Shari’a will be subject to deportation. Mosques which adhere to Islamic law will be shut down permanently. No self-described or practicing Muslim, irrespective of his or her declarations to the contrary, will be allowed to immigrate to this country…”  **

“Islam was born in violence; it will die that way. Any wish to the contrary is sheer Pollyannaism. The same way the post World War II German youth were taught by their German teachers and political leaders to despise the fascism of their fathers, with strict laws extant still today restricting even speech that casts doubt on the Holocaust, so too must the Muslim youth be taught from the cradle to reject the religion of their forebears.” **

“Muslim civilization is at war with Judeo-Christian civilization…The Muslim peoples, those committed to Islam as we know it today, are our enemies.”  **

While our constitutional republic was specifically designed to insulate our national leaders from the masses, democracy has seeped up through the cracks and corroded everything we once deemed sacred about our political order. Prior to the Civil War, the electorate, essentially white Christian men, had access to local government. It was here, where men shared an intimacy born of family ties, shared religious beliefs, and common cultural signposts, that representative government was meant to touch our daily lives. With the social and cultural revolution which followed the emancipation, man’s relationship to political order was radically nationalized and democratized. Today, there is simply no basis to resist “democracy” and the “open society”. **

“Instead of a promise of victory, Sura 24:52 must be made ashes in the mouths of Muslims. A seemingly unending air control campaign over enemy territory is the way to continually remind the Muslims of their subordinate status and the impotence of Allah without becoming mired in the quagmire of counterinsurgency.”   **

“The mythical ‘moderate’ Muslim ... the Muslim who embraces traditional Islam but wants a peaceful coexistence with the West, is effectively non-existent ... because he chooses to remain within traditional Shari’a-based Islam, where the Ulamā or Islamic legal scholars, and the Muftoon (singular: Mufti) who issue fatawa (singular: fatwa) or legal edicts, reign supreme together with the lesser mullahs, imams, and maulvis. A ‘moderate’ among these men will simply be shouted down, coerced into silence, or murdered. In contrast, the Muslim Reformer takes the proper position that Islam as it was created, as it has existed for 1,300 years, and as it exists now, is an evil political ideology the goal of which is a worldwide Islamic Caliphate.” **

“America was the handiwork of faithful Christians, mostly men, and almost entirely white, who ventured from Europe to create a nation in their image of a country existing as free men under G-d.”
Other articles on his website made racist statements such as: “There is a reason the founding fathers did not give women or black slaves the right to vote,” and “Race matters and affects your intelligence. Jews are the smartest white people around. Orientals smarter than Whites. Latinos next. Then Blacks.”

Society of Americans for National Existence (SANE)

SANE (Society of Americans for National Existence)  released a policy paper that in part stated: WHEREAS Islam requires all Muslims to actively and passively support the replacement of America’s constitutional republic with a political system based upon Shari’a.    Whereas, adherence to Islam as a Muslim is prima facie evidence of an act in support of the overthrow of the US Government through the abrogation, destruction, or violation of the US Constitution and the imposition of Shari’a on the American People.    HEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED THAT: It shall be a felony punishable by 20 years in prison to knowingly act in furtherance of, or to support the, adherence to Shari’a.    The Congress of the United States of America shall declare the US at war with the Muslim Nation.    **

The SANE website is no longer open to anyone except members.  That means that original documents are not available and can only be referenced through articles about them, or if someone has done a screen capture.

Society of Americans for National Existence (SANE) was involved with Dave Gaubatz in the Mapping Shari’a in America Project which was sponsored by the Center for Security Policy.


Dr. Mordechai Kedar, is a lecturer on Arabic literature at Bar Ilan University in Israel.  Ami Kaufman reports that: “It’s important to point out that Kedar is the chairman of Israel Academia Monitor, a watchdog group that tries to blacklist post and anti-Zionist academics in Israel who speak out against government policies or the state.”  He served for twenty-five years in IDF Military Intelligence.

Mordechai Kedar said: “Jerusalem is not on the negotiating table,” and that “Jerusalem belongs to the Jews, period.”  **

UPDATE 7/21/2014

During the ongoing Israeli assault on Gaza this month, Jonathan Cook reports Calls for genocide enter Israeli mainstream:

Mordechai Kedar, a lecturer on Arabic literature at Bar Ilan University, believes the sisters and mothers of Palestinian “terrorists” should be raped:

A terrorist, like those who kidnapped the boys [in the West Bank on June 12] and killed them, the only thing that will deter them, is if they know that either their sister or mother will be raped if they are caught. What can we do? This is the culture that we live in.

Note that his university did not reprimand him. They defended his comments:

The purpose was to define the culture of death of the terrorist organizations. Dr Kedar illustrated in his words the bitter reality of the Middle East and the inability of a modern and law-abiding country to fight the terror of suicide bombers.



A Who’s Who of the Anti-Muslim/Anti-Arab/Islamophobia Industry, Sheila Musaji
ACT for America launches media blitz to win yes vote in Oklahoma anti-Sharia ballot 
The advance of the anti-Muslim movement across America, Paul Woodward
All Bigoted Islamophobic Roads Lead to Frank Gaffney, Richard Allen Smith
The American Muslim Community and Rep. Peter King’s “Islamic” Radicalization Hearings, Sheila Musaji (section on linkage with anti-Sharia movement)
American Muslims must defend the Constitution of the United States , Sheila Musaji
America’s Ideals Are Being Challenged By Cordoba House Controversy, Sheila Musaji
Anti-Islam Group (SANE) is Also Anti-African American, CAIR
Anti-Mosque Coalition’s Website Owned By Neo-Conservative Islamophobe Frank Gaffney, Alex Seitz-Wald
Anti-Sharia Advocates: We’ve Not Yet Begun to Fight, Tim Murphy
Apostasy and Freedom of Faith in Islam, Sheila Musaji
The Archbishop of Canterbury and the Sharia Debate, Sheila Musaji
The Archbishop of Canterbury’s Trouble with Shariah, Yahya Birt
Are Opponents of Shariah Anti-Islam?, Farzana Hassan-Shahid
Are Sharia Laws and Human Rights Compatible?, Emran Qureishi & Heba Ezzat
Michele Bachmann Endorses Call for Anti-Muslim Inquisition, Daniel Luban
Bent on Confusing the Public about Islam:  The Far Right Exploits Rifqa Bary’s Case to Distort Islam, Louay Safi
Calls for genocide enter Israeli mainstream, Jonathan Cook
Center for Security Policy background
Center for Security Policy Sharia Report a Threat to American Ideals, Sheila Musaji
Challenge to Islamic Jurisprudence, Robert D. Crane
Clearing the fog of Shariah, Daisy Khan
Conservatives Chew Up Their Own in Battle Over Islamic Community Center, Bill Berkowitz
Conservative Feud Grows Over Muslims White House Staffers, Shahed Amanullah
Controversy Over Khalil Gibran Academy and Debbie Almontaser
Henry Cooper background, Rightweb
Cordoba House:  Hope From the Ashes of Tragedy, Sheila Musaji
Cordoba House versus Team B:  Key to the Global 21st Century,  Dr. Robert D. Crane
Stephen Coughlin: Islamofascist Nonsense, Larry Johnson
Discussion of Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf’s views on Sharia, Enver Masud
Does the first amendment apply to Muslims?, John Guardiano
FBI Leaking To Neocon Conspiracy-Theorist Frank Gaffney?
For critics of Islam,“sharia” becomes shorthand for extremism, Michelle Boorstein
Forget ‘Ground Zero Mosque’, It’s the Great Sharia Conspiracy, Daniel Luban
Fox & Friends crops Rauf’s CFR comments to fearmonger about Sharia law, Justin Berrier
Fox Promotes NSS “Islamic Crescent Logo” Conspiracy Theory, Richard Bartholomew
Free-speech hero or an anti-Islamic publicity hound? Geert Wilders is coming to America., Mark Hosenball
The future of Shariah, Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na’im
Gaffney: The left and Islamists are both “advancing the takedown of America”,
Gaffney: The President ‘May Actually Still Be’ A Muslim
Frank Gaffney: At War with Islam
Frank Gaffney: Obama Duped America Like Hitler Duped Chamberlain
The Gaffney Report aka ‘The Return of Dr Strangelove’, Abdul Cader Asmal
Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy Sharia Report a Threat to American Ideals, Sheila Musaji
GOPer can’t define, but wants to ban, sharia law, Justin Elliott
Higher Objectives of Islamic Law (Maqasid ash-Sharia), Mohammed Hashim Kamali 
Pete Hoekstra, Shameless Buffoon, Steve Benen
Hoekstra’s “epic grandstanding”, Jason Linkins
David Horowitz’s Blog Spouting Propaganda as Usual on Sharia
How to talk about Shariah in Oklahoma, Eboo Patel
International Humanitarian Law: Western Innovation Or Islamic Breakthrough, Mahmoud Mobarak
Introduction to Shariah and Fiqh,
Interview with Imam Feisal on Sharia, Laura Sheahen
Is Killing An Apostate in the Islamic Law?, Dr. Ibrahim B. Syed
Is Sharia law reconcilable with modernity?, Sh. Ali Gomaa 
Islam and democracy - article collection
Islamic Finance: A Question of Law or Justice?, Dr. Robert D. Crane
Islamic Law:  A Thematic Primer on Human Rights, Dr. Robert D. Crane
Islamic Sharia and Jewish Halakha Arbitration Courts, Sheila Musaji
Islamic (Sharia) Government, Ahmed Hulusi
Islamophobia Machine Targets American Muslims, Nihad Awad
Islamophobia no longer questioned - even by our elected representatives, Sheila Musaji (includes quotes by many elected officials)
Israelis, McCain Neocons Behind Anti-Islam “Obsession” DVD, Kurt Nimmo
The Issue of Usury and Interest in Islamic Faith and Law, Dr. Abdulaziz Sachedina
Jewish “Ahavah shel achvah” Brotherly Love is Difficult for Some to Attain, Sheila Musaji
Mordechai Kedar - Israeli scholar: ‘Only raping the sister of a terrorist can deter him’, Ami Kaufman
Mordechai Kedar - Israeli academic: raping Palestinian women would deter attacks
Legal Rationality vs. Arbitrary Judgement:  Re-examining the Tradition of Islamic Law, S. Parvez Manzoor rife with anti-Muslim rhetoric in weeks leading up to 9-11 anniversary
Mapping Sharia in America Project, Richard Bartholomew
Mapping Shari’a in America Project, Yes, Just a bunch of nut cases but….
Meet the White Supremacist Leading the GOP’s Anti-Sharia Crusade, Tim Murphy
Meet the nutter behind the Sharia Report, Daniel Luban
Meet Wyoming’s Anti-Shari’ah Crusader, Sarah Posner
The Misinformants: What ‘stealth jihad’ doesn’t mean, Lisa Miller
Moral Maturity of Two Year Olds: Reward and Punishment Mentality of Muslims, Pamela Taylor
Thomas More Law Center’s claim of Sharia Law in Dearborn defies reality, reason
Mosque debate is not a distraction, Glenn Greenwald
MPAC’s Response to Frank Gaffney’s Slander 
Muslim Americans and Shariah
NeoCons Make Unapologetic Call for McCarthyism against Muslims
Neoconservatives hate liberty as much as they love war, Glenn Greenwald
New Rainbow of Islamic Knowledge and Religious Diversity: Zaytuna College, Dr. Ibram Rogers 
The New Anti-Semitism: Recent attacks on Islam in the United States echo old slurs against Jews, Daniel Luban
Notion of Shura, Shura and Democracy, Tariq Ramadan
Nuclear Security Summit Logo Is Proof of What?, Sheila Musaji
Obsession:  Deja Vu! Never Again?, Jeff Siddiqui
Origins of Islamic Law
The Pathetic Desperation of the Anti-Kagan Campaign
The philosophy of Sharia - the Clear Path, Faraz Rabbani
Policy Exchange, SANE and the ‘vital importance of controlling the Arabs’, Tom Griffin 
Propaganda, the internet and the media: from CounterJihad to the Decent Left, Tom Griffin
Progressive radio show in NY serves up neocon moonshine about Islam, Philip Weiss
Re-examining primary and secondary sources of Shariah, Farzana Hassan-Shahid
Review: Documentary “America at a Crossroads”, Rafia Zakaria
Right-Wing Nuts: “Obama is a Mooslim, Convert Mooslims”
The Right’s Anti-Islam Extremists, John Guardiano
Rise of Professionalism in Moral Awareness, Robert D. Crane
Pat Robertson continues fight against halal food
Role of Morality in Politics, Robert D. Crane
On Team B-ing, Spencer Ackerman
Daniel Pipes Brings Weak Sauce: Sharia, Halakha, and Double Standards; Part 1 
SANE: An Islamophobic group attempts to banish Islam from the U.S.,  Abdus Sattar Ghazali
Separation of church and state - article collection
Setting the Record Straight on Sharia, An Interview with Intisar Rabb, Sally Steenland
Sharia - collection of articles
Shariah and Contemporary Issues, By Dr. Adbul Basit
Sharia and Fiqh: Understanding Ijtihad, Abu Munir Winkel
Shariah and Religious Absolutism, Farzana Hassan
Sharia is not the problem
Shariah Law Explained, BBC special report
SHARIAH: Legacy of the Prophet:  The Role of Human Rights in Islamic Law, Dr. Robert D. Crane
Sharia and day to day existence, Dr. Sherman Jackson
Sharia in America, how Islamic laws change, Dr. Sherman Jackson
Sharia panic factory, Justin Elliott 
Source Methodology in Islamic Jurisprudence, Taha Jabir al’Alwani,
South Dakota Considering Ban on Courts Using “Foreign Religious or Moral Code”“foreign-religious-or-moral-code”/ 
Specter Embraces Pipes Islamophobia, Richard Silverstein
Spies, Lies from “Mapping Sharia” Group Hit Dar Al-Hijrah, Tariq Nelson 
States Move To Ban Islamic Sharia Law: NPR interview with Yerushalmi and Intisar Rabb
Stop the Islamization of America (SIOA) New Anti-Islam Group, Same Old Faces, Richard Bartholomew
Tennessee bill would jail Shariah followers
Tennessee bill not good law
Tennessee Sharia law ban, Elizabeth Tenety
Tennessee Legislation demonstrates ignorance, promotes hate
Tennessee lawmaker would make practicing Islamic law a felony
Tennessee’s Anti-Muslim Bill is an American Disgrace, Daniel Tutt
The Terror Industry And Anti-Jihadism, Who Benefits?, Richard Silverstein
Ulama, Hegemony and Reform, Chandra Muzaffar, 
Umar Faruq Abd-Allah says U.S. and Islamic Law Congruent
Understanding the Four Madhabs, Abdul Hakim Murad,
Unity Through Schools of Thought, Abdal Hakim Murad
Unintended consequences of anti-Sharia legislation, Muqtedar Khan
The Week in Sharia: Elvis Retreats, Texas Reloads, Tim Murphy  - The Week in Sharia: Texas Has Its Sputnik Moment
Welcome to the Shari‘ah Conspiracy Theory Industry, Sarah Posner
Allen West on Frank Gaffney’s radio program discussing anti-Sharia proposals
What Sharia law actually means, Justin Elliott
What Shariah Law Is All About, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf
Why Shariah?, Noah Feldman
Who Decides Right or Wrong, Tariq Ramadan
Who Owns Islamic Law?, David Glen
Will Muslims impose Sharia?, Dr. John Esposito
Who’s Afraid of Shariah? , Sumbul ali-Karamali
Why the GOP embraced Islamophobia, Joe Conason
Woolsey’s World War IV Comments Reveal Truth About War on Iraq, Stan Moore
Would Oklahoma anti-Sharia law violate Native American tribal treaties?

David Yerushalmi and (in)SANE, Sheila Musaji
David Yerushalmi, Anti-Semitic White-Supremacist Orthodox Jew Tries To Ban Islam In US, Bruce Wilson
Yerushalmi: Devout Jewish Fascist, Richard Silverstein
David Yerushalmi: A Driving Force Behind Anti-Sharia Efforts in the U.S. - an ADL backgrounder
Yerushalmi: House Republicans pal around with anti-Muslim, anti-Black racist David Yerushalmi, Alex Kane
Yerushalmi:  Neocon ‘Team B’ Author: ‘Islam Was Born In Violence; It Will Die That Way’
Yerushalmi: How Many Muslims Contributed To New Right-Wing ‘Team B’ Report On Islamic Sharia Law? None, Matt Duss
Who is David Yerushalmi, CAIR


A lengthy collection of articles by Arabs and Muslims about the current wave of Islamophobia and anti-mosque hysteria (updated regularly)