By Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld and Alyssa A. Lappen *
New York Sun | Apr. 19, 2006

Tariq Ramadan, who is barred from the U.S., is invited to speak at a conference on May 4-5, 2006, sponsored by the American Embassy in Rome, on “Immigration and Integration: Islam in Europe and Islam in the U.S.” The conference is organized by the Centro Studi Americani in Rome, which according to the Web site of its affiliate, John Cabot University, is “one of the major American institutions in Europe.” The American Ambassador, Ronald P. Spogli, is scheduled to open the conference.

Ramadan, a Swiss citizen and grandson of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Hasan al-Banna, had his visa revoked by the Department of Homeland Security on July 28,2004.The visa was revoked under the Immigration and Nationality Act, amid press speculation that the revocation stemmed from the section barring entry to persons with a “position of prominence within any country to endorse or espouse terrorist activity,” or who have “potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States.”

While no specifics were detailed for this revocation, apparently his activities, lectures and writings in support of the Islamist agenda were the cause for this decision. According to a Spanish judge, Balatasar Garzon, Ramadan had “routine contacts” with Ahmed Brahim, an Algerian believed to be the financial chief of Al Qaeda and the financier of the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania.

In 1995, during a series of terrorist attacks in Paris perpetrated by the Algerian Armed Islamist Movement, or AIM, the French interior minister, Jean Louis Debre, forbade Ramadan to enter France because of his connections to that terrorist group.

Moreover, according to the French daily newspaper Le Monde, Ramadan is also believed to have organized a 1991 meeting between Al Qaeda’s second-in-charge, Ayman al Zawahiri, and Omar Abdel Rahman, who was convicted in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, which killed six people and injured more than 1,000.

Interviewed by the Italian magazine Panorama, on September 23, 2004, about “The art of ‘explaining’ the killing of Jews,” Ramadan’s answer to the question of “whether it is right to kill children and Israeli civilians because they are considered soldiers,” was that it is “contextually explicable.”

Indeed, Ramadan has given enough public speeches in mosques all over Europe, inciting his Muslim listeners against the West, that the founder of Doctors Without Borders, Bernard Kouchner, describes him as a “most dangerous man.”

The Muslim Brotherhood and Ramadan usually refrain from publicly advocating violence. However, as stated on the Muslim Brotherhood charter and its Web site, it seeks to install an Islamic totalitarian empire, a worldwide caliphate, through stages designed to Islamize targeted nations by whatever means available. This should not be a message promoted by the U.S. embassy in Rome.

If Ramadan’s invitation was not deliberate, it is a case of gross negligence on the embassy’s part. When the Department of Homeland Security ruled that he was denied entry to the U.S., presumably for endorsing and espousing terrorist activity, it was a signal that he posed a danger to U.S. interests.

Nothing that Tariq Ramadan has done since his visa was revoked in 2004 has given any reason to doubt the judgment of the Department of Homeland Security. Inviting Ramadan to a U.S.-sponsored event sends the message that his views are worth hearing out and are a valid part of the debate, even if we disagree with them.

The cultural affairs officer of the embassy, Mark Smith, gave the following response to our inquiry: “Mr. Ramadan was invited by the Centro…. The embassy is not providing any funding or other support for Mr. Ramadan’s participation in the conference.” This is an inadequate and worrisome response. The fact that the Centro Studi Americani and not the embassy invited Ramadan is irrelevant. By supporting and sponsoring the conference and using the Great Seal of the United States on the conference invitation, the embassy is conferring the prestige and approval of America upon a hearing of Ramadan’s despicable views – which the Department of Homeland Security deemed sufficiently dangerous to bar him from the country.

If America is to win the war on terrorism, we must not provide legitimacy to Islamist extremists deemed too dangerous to enter the U.S. If the American Embassy does not withdraw its sponsorship of this conference, it is likely the harbinger of a tilt in U.S. policy toward dialogue with those who wish to destroy us, or at least an indication that the State Department has a very different view of what poses a threat to this country.

* Note: As a matter of editorial policy, the New York Sun never ran double bylines or gave credit to more than one author, even when credit was due; consequently, this piece originally ran without proper credit to co-author Alyssa A. Lappen.

All Articles, Poems & Commentaries Copyright © 1971-2021 Alyssa A. Lappen
All Rights Reserved.
Printing is allowed for personal use only | Commercial usage (For Profit) is a copyright violation and written permission must be granted first.

By Rachel Ehrenfeld and Alyssa A. Lappen
Washington Times | Mar. 12, 2006

Thanks to our congressmen who lined up against trusting the management and leases of U.S. ports to the sheikdom of Dubai, Dubai Ports World announced on March 9 that it will transfer its U.S. operations to an American entity. However, it is not clear that they gave up the ownership.

Our elected officials knew all along that this deal would have been a grave mistake. But even they did not realize this deal’s full implications. DP World’s acquisition of the British Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation (P&O;), is not merely a financial transaction. Rather, it signals a major advance in the economic jihad waged by the Islamic world against the West.

According to a fatwa issued on July 10, 2002 by Hussein Shihata, Professor of Islamic Economy at Cairo’s al-Azhar University, economic jihad’s “primary aim is to weaken the economy of the Zionists, the Crusaders and their allies, while at the same time, it strengthens the Arab and Islamic economy in a way that make it a self-dependent economy.”

The Dubai government’s recent acquisitions have serious global strategic and security implications, since it puts the Islamic city-state of Dubai, one of the United Arab Emirates (UAE), in control of major ports worldwide. On Feb. 26, while the uproar about the sale of the leases and management of 22 U.S. ports to Dubai was raging, a sister emirate, Abu Dhabi, demonstrated the real attitude toward the U.S. by confiscating a text book, ‘World Cultures,’ used at the American school there.

The Ministry of Education banned the book “for allegedly presenting Islam and the Muslim countries including Gulf States in a negative light while glorifying Israel on the other hand.” And despite repeated statements that the UAE joined the U.S. war on terrorism, after September 11, on December 4, 2002, Abu Dhabi Islamic Bank, controlled by members of the ruling family transferred $26,616.6 to Hamas’ Tulkarem Zakat and Sadaqat Committee. Another transfer on April 7, 2003 of $11,416 to the same Hamas organization, was also documented by the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center at the Center for Special Studies. Yet the UAE is praised by members of the Bush administration as “an important ally against terrorism,” and “a good ally.”

Gaining possession of P&O;’s worldwide operation followed Dubai Ports World’s $1.15 billion 2004 purchase of the Florida-based CSX World Terminals, “a leading international container terminal developer and operator with operations in Asia, Europe, Australia and Latin America.”

The P&O; operations included “29 container terminals and logistics operations in over 100 ports, from China and India, to Argentina, Canada, the U.S., Russia, the Middle East and Africa. It also managed “freight and tourist passengers between the UK and Belgium, France, Holland, Ireland and Spain.” In addition, P&O; held property in the U.K., Europe and the United States. Now, most of these are controlled and operated by the Dubai government-owned DP World.

In Australia, for example, P&O; established “Defense Maritime Services, ” focusing “on the Government sector (with Defense, Science and Security) and the specialized bulk (port and ship) services sector.” From there, P&O;’s “primary operational regions were South East Asia, Australia, the Antarctic and Southern Oceans.” These, too, are now the possessions of the UAE through DP World. On March 9, 2006, DP World declared its purchase of P&O; complete. According to the announcement, “The deal makes DP World a top three global port operation, with 51 terminals in 30 countries across 5 continents.”

To help finance the purchase of P&O;, DP World has issued “the world’s biggest-ever Islamic bond issue,” a $3.5 billion Sukukbond — together with Dubai’s Ports Customs and Free Zone Corp. (PCFC). The Sukuk is the Islamic version of an asset-backed zero coupon bond, which pays yield and principle at maturity. This Sukuk was underwritten by the PCFC and Dubai Islamic Bank, and 30 percent of each bond is convertible into PCFC shares when the company goes public in 2007.

The Sukuk issue has attracted non-Muslim investors, including banks, asset management companies, and high-net-worth individual from across Europe and Asia. Since Islamic law governs the Sukuk, all these non-Muslim investors will subscribe to Islamic laws along with their bond purchases. This extremely attractive variable yield of 7.25 percent to 8.25 percent is some 250 to 350 basis points more than that offered on a two-year dollar Libor swap. In the current fixed-income market, where two-year U.S. Treasuries yield 4.66 percent, it is virtually impossible to find an investment-grade two-year bond with such a high interest rate anywhere else.

With such tempting returns, it is not surprising that Western investors have been lured into supporting the growing influence of the sharia-controlled Islamic financial system. This is one way in which the West weakens its financial underpinnings while strengthening “the Arab and Islamic economy in a way that make it a self-dependent economy,” as advocated by Hussein Shihata’s fatwa.

How long will it take for Islamic companies running Western ports and the banking institutions funding them to demand that all products shipped through these ports meet Islamic laws? How long before pork and alcohol are banned from ships going through ports controlled by Islamic companies and laws?

The purchase of P&O; promises Islamic interests a head start on gaining control over the majority of global shipping facilities, and marks an important step in the growing Islamic financial network.

Rachel Ehrenfeld is the director of American Center for Democracy and a member of the Committee on the Present Danger. Alyssa A. Lappen is a senior fellow at the American Center for Democracy.

All Articles, Poems & Commentaries Copyright © 1971-2021 Alyssa A. Lappen
All Rights Reserved.
Printing is allowed for personal use only | Commercial usage (For Profit) is a copyright violation and written permission must be granted first.