Rochester Man Charged With Assisting ISIS, Plotting to Attack U.S. Armed Forces

 Mufid Elfgeeh

Mufid Elfgeeh

IPT, by Abha Shankar:

A Yemeni native was indicted in Rochester, N.Y. Wednesday for attempting to provide material support and resources to the terrorist group Islamic State of Iraq and the Syria (ISIS), which calls itself the Islamic State. Mufid Elfgeeh, a naturalized American, also is accused of plotting to kill U.S. soldiers and of firearms violations.

According to court documents, Elfgeeh tried to help three people travel to Syria to wage violent jihad alongside ISIS forces. Two of the three turned out to be FBI informants. He also sent $600 to help someone in Yemen travel to Syria to join ISIS.

When one of the informants expressed reluctance to leave his family behind, Elfgeeh encouraged him to take his family with him. He gave examples of families participating in jihadist expeditions, including “a Saudi woman who left her children behind and went to the war for jihad.” He also suggested names of “trustworthy people” the informant should contact, including “someone in Jabhat al-Nusrah [al-Qaida affiliate in Syria] who I told you is from our homeland.”

Elfgeeh showed the informant a list of Facebook friends on his iPhone that included a man named Abu Qays, who he “described as a military leader of the Green Battalion in Homs, Syria.” Elfgeeh noted “that the Green Battalion used to be affiliated with al-Nusrah Front [aka Jabhat al-Nusrah], but they separated from them,” adding “[w]e are coordinating with them [the Green Battalion] on the grounds that they want to pledge allegiance to the State (ISIS), and they would like for the State to support them with ammunition and weapons.”

This followed a series of Twitter posts in which he praised al-Qaida and other terrorist groups and said that “the prophet Muhammad preached that people should fight the infidels with the money, their bodies, and their words,” an FBI affidavit said.

Elfgeeh was arrested in May after trying to buy handguns, unregistered silencers and ammunition from one of the informants. Last December, he mentioned the recent al-Shabaab shooting massacre in a Nairobi shopping mall, saying he was “thinking about just go[ing] to buy a big automatic weapon from off the street or something … and just go around and start shooting.”

In March, he talked about how getting a gun and silence was “a big step.” He talked about posting a video statement “[o]nce we do five or ten already, 15, something like that.”

If convicted, Elfgeeh could face 15 years in prison for charges involving material support for terrorists, and a minimum of 30 years for the firearms possession charges.

Islamic State Atrocities the Product of ‘Grievances’?

Barack ObamaFrontpage, by Raymond Ibrahim, September 17, 2014:

While many have rightfully criticized U.S. President Obama’s recent assertion that the Islamic State “is not Islamic,” some of his other equally curious but more subtle comments pronounced in the same speech have been largely ignored.

Consider the president’s invocation of the “grievances” meme to explain the Islamic State’s success: “At this moment the greatest threats come from the Middle East and North Africa, where radical groups exploit grievances for their own gain. And one of those groups is ISIL—which calls itself the Islamic State.”

Obama’s logic, of course, is fortified by an entire apparatus of professional apologists who make the same claim.  Thus Georgetown professor John Esposito—whose apologetics sometimes morph into boldfaced lies—also recently declared that “The “primary drivers [for the Islamic State’s violence] are to be found elsewhere,” that is, not in Islam but in a “long list of grievances.”

In other words and once again, it’s apparently somehow “our fault” that Islamic State Muslims are behaving savagely—crucifying, beheading, enslaving, and massacring people only on the basis that they are “infidels”:  thus when IS herds and slaughters “infidel” men (citing the example of the prophet)—that’s because they’re angry at something America did; when IS captures “infidel” women and children, and sells them on the sex-slave market (citing Islamic teachings)—that’s because they’re angry at something America did; when IS bombs churches, breaks their crosses, and tells Christians to convert or die (citing Islamic scriptures)—that’s because they’re angry at something America did.

Although the “grievance” meme flies in the face of logic, it became especially popular after the 9/11 al-Qaeda strikes on America. The mainstream media, following the Islamist propaganda network Al Jazeera’s lead, uncritically picked up and disseminated Osama bin Laden’s videotapes to the West where he claimed that al-Qaeda’s terror campaign was motivated by grievances against the West—grievances that ranged from U.S. support for Israel to failure for the U.S. to sign the Kyoto Agreement concerning climate change.

Of course, that was all rubbish, and I have written more times than I care to remember about how in their internal Arabic-language communiques to fellow Muslims that never get translated to English, Osama, al-Qaeda, and virtually every Islamist organization make it a point to insist that jihad is an Islamic obligation that has nothing to do with grievances.

Consider Osama’s own words in an internal letter to fellow Saudis:

Our talks with the infidel West and our conflict with them ultimately revolve around one issue — one that demands our total support, with power and determination, with one voice — and it is: Does Islam, or does it not, force people by the power of the sword to submit to its authority corporeally if not spiritually?

Yes. There are only three choices in Islam: [1] either willing submission [conversion]; [2] or payment of the jizya, through physical, though not spiritual, submission to the authority of Islam; [3] or the sword — for it is not right to let him [an infidel] live. The matter is summed up for every person alive: Either submit, or live under the suzerainty of Islam, or die. (The Al Qaeda Reader, p. 42)

Conversion, submission, or the sword is, of course, the mission of the Islamic State—not alleviating “grievances.”  Yet it’s worse than that; for unlike al-Qaeda, the Islamic State, from day one of its existence, has made it very clear—in Osama’s words, “with power and determination, with one voice”—that its massacres, enslavements, crucifixions, and beheadings of “infidels” are all based on Islamic law or Sharia—not silly “grievances” against the West. Unlike al-Qaeda, the Islamic State is confident enough to avoid the grievances/taqiyya game and forthrightly asserts its hostility for humans based on their religious identity.

Yet by slipping the word “grievances” to explain the Islamic State’s Sharia-based savageries, Obama apparently hopes America has been thoroughly conditioned like Pavlov’s dog to automatically associate Islamic world violence with “grievances.”

What Obama fails to understand—or fails to mention—is that, yes, the Islamic State, al-Qaeda, and countless angry Muslims around the world are indeed often prompted to acts of violence by “grievances.”  But as fully explained here, these “grievances” are not predicated on any universal standards of equality or justice, only a supremacist worldview.

ISIS Releases New Agitprop Video, Goes Underground

From the Islamic State's propaganda video "Flames of War"

From the Islamic State’s propaganda video “Flames of War”


Clarion Project, Wed, September 17, 2014:

In an apparent response to America’s top general saying that he could foresee American troops on the ground in Iraq, the Islamic State released a new propaganda video titled “Flames of War” (see below).

The 52-second clip, purported to be the trailer for a longer movie “coming soon,” shows Hollywood-like special effects used to blow up an American tank and troops, and injured American soldiers being loaded into an emergency vehicle.  The clip cuts to U.S. President Barak Obama saying that, “Combat troops will not be returning to fight in Iraq.” The video’s final frames show Islamic State fighters aiming a pistol over kneeling prisoners, ostensibly captured American soldiers.

The video was released to social media outlets hours after Army General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a Senate panel that he may end up recommending the use of some American forces on the ground in Iraq, namely by embedding them within Iraqi and Kurdish forces fighting to regain territory seized by the Islamic State.

“If we reach the point where I believe our advisers should accompany Iraqi troops on attacks against specific targets, I will recommend that to the president,” Dempsey said, using the term “close combat advising” to describe the role of these troops.

Addressing the fact that Obama has said that there will no troops on the ground, Dempsey added, “At this point, his stated policy is we will not have U.S. ground forces in direct combat. But he has told me as well to come back to him on a case-by-case basis.”

Those cases may include using U.S. personnel on the ground to call airstrikes.

U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel joined Dempsey at the hearing, explaining that U.S. efforts in Iraq and Syria will last for a number of years. There will be no “shock and awe” strategy that characterized the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, Hagel said.

Meanwhile, despite the Islamic State’s media bravado, the group has been taking direct action in anticipation of American strikes. Local citizens have reported that the group has gone underground in its “capital” stronghold of Raqqa, Syria as well in Iraq.

The Islamic State has been moving and dispersing their heavy equipment daily, with some equipment being abandoned altogether. Fighters are now trying to blend in to local populations. Their office headquarters have been evacuated, and families of Islamic State militants have been relocated.

“They are trying to keep on the move,” one Raqqa resident, who requested anonymity, was quoted as saying. “They have sleeper cells everywhere. They only meet in very limited gatherings.”

However, the group is still highly operational. A recent attack on a Syrian government war plane flying near Raqqa scored a direct hit.

Citizens in Raqqa have also been living cautiously since Obama’s latest speech. Shops in the town now routinely close early in the day, and the value of the U.S. dollar has seen a significant increased in the area. Although a number of residents have left the city, there has not been a mass exodus.

Meanwhile, the Islamic State is keeping up its local propaganda as well. A flier distributed to Raqqa’s residents reminded them that they are expected to comply with a strict code of behavior as mandated by sharia law (no smoking, drinking, etc.). The flier also told women that they must stay at home and that anyone caught with a connection to the Assad government would be killed.

Ironically, the flier announced that residents would see “the great difference” between living under the Islamic State the “oppressive secular government.”

No Place for Iran in ISIS Plans

3184128428Center For Security Policy, by Fred Fleitz:

Secretary of State John Kerry’s awkward denial that the United States has not proposed “coordinating with Iran” against ISIS suggests the Obama administration did indeed propose this and is engaged in damage control after its efforts were revealed by Iranian officials.

I wrote in a Sept. 3 Newsmax article that while the U.S. should attack ISIS — also known as ISIL and the Islamic State — in Syria even though this will help keep Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in power, the United States must resist the temptation to draw Iran further into the crises in Iraq and Syria. I believe this because Iran bears significant responsibility for the outbreak of sectarian tensions in Iraq since 2011 due to its strong support for the Nouri al-Maliki government and by its training of Shiite militias that have massacred Iraqi Sunnis.

An increased Iranian presence in Iraq would alienate Iraqi Sunnis and make it more difficult to bring them back into the political process.

I believe the Obama administration has been unable to resist the temptation of trying to bring Iran into the battle against ISIS. According to The New York Times, Iranian officials claim they have rejected multiple invitations by the United States to join a coalition against ISIS.

According to the Iranian state news agency — IRNA — Iran’s President Khamenei recently said, “The American ambassador in Iraq asked our ambassador [in Iraq] for a session to discuss coordinating a fight against Daesh [ISIS].”

Khamenei said the Iranian government rejected this request.

Kerry’s denial of Khamenei’s claim was tortuous and hard to believe. Kerry said today that he is not going to get into a “back and forth” with Iran over whether his diplomats suggested that the U.S. and Iran join forces against ISIS. Kerry also said, “I have no idea of what interpretation they drew from any discussion that may or may not have taken place. We are not coordinating with Iran. Period.”

The Los Angeles Times reported today that the U.S. has been discussing ISIS with Iran. According to a Sept. 14 LA Times article, “The U.S., for its part, says it is not coordinating military efforts against Islamic State with Iran, though it has repeatedly discussed the issue with Iranian officials.”

Despite holding behind the scenes discussions with Iran about Iraq, Syria and ISIS, the United States vetoed Iran’s participation in an international conference that opened today in Paris on the ISIS threat. While I agree this was the right move, the Obama administration’s decision to publicly block Iran from the Paris ISIS conference while it conducts secret talks with Tehran on the same issues this conference will be addressing suggests Obama officials are trying to conceal what they are discussing with Iran from the American people and Congress.

So when do U.S. talks with Iran about ISIS become cooperation? More importantly, why is the United States using nuclear talks with Iran — which are going very badly — to discuss Iraq and Syria? What purpose could this achieve other than getting Iran more involved in these two countries.

It is fortunate that Iran revealed the overtures by Obama officials to coordinate on the ISIS threat since Congress can now demand answers from the administration about this latest foreign policy blunder and hopefully force the president to halt any efforts by his diplomats to draw Iran further into the crises in Iraq and Syria.

Syrian Brotherhood Stands Nearer to ISIS Than to U.S.

by Ravi Kumar
IPT News
September 16, 2014

1063While the United States tries to build a coalition of Arab allies to join the fight against the terrorist group ISIS, now known as the Islamic State, one group which stands to benefit directly is coming out against Western intervention and expressing unity with other radical jihadists.

A Syrian Muslim Brotherhood spokesman says attacks on the Islamic State by the United States and its allies are not the answer.

“Our battle with ISIS is an intellectual battle,” Omar Mushaweh said in a statement published Sept. 9 on the Syrian Brotherhood’s official website, “and we wish that some of its members get back to their sanity, we really distinguish between those in ISIS who are lured and brainwashed and they might go back to the path of righteous, and between those who has foreign agendas and try to pervert the way of the [Syrian] revolution.”

Rather, the first target for any Western intervention should be dictator Bashar al-Assad’s regime, Mushaweh asserts, according to a translation of his comments by the Investigative Project on Terrorism.

Such comments should reinforce Western concerns about the Syrian Brotherhood, whose members are prominent among the Free Syrian Army (FSA), one of the supposedly moderate factions in the Syrian civil war which receive U.S. training and weapons. And it shows the challenge of finding truly moderate allies on the ground in Syria. Compared to ISIS, the FSA might be considered moderate. Then again, ISIS was so ruthlessly violent that al-Qaida disavowed the group in February.

In addition, the Syrian Brotherhood openly mourned the death last week of a commander in Ahrar Al Asham, a Syrian faction with ties to al-Qaida.

Mushaweh’s views about the U.S. intervention are shared by other Brotherhood members. Another Brotherhood leader, Zuher Salem, minimized the ISIS threat by comparing current American rhetoric to that which preceded the 2003 Iraq invasion.

“All of these tales that are being told by America about the primitive, terrorist and threatening nature of the Islamic State are similar to the tales that have been told in regard to the Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, and about the crimes against humanity,” Salem wrote in an article published Sept. 13 by the Arab East Center, a think tank associated with the Muslim Brotherhood. “It is trifling to race with others to condemn terrorism and the killing of the American journalist, because we should be aware the aim of this anti ISIS coalition is to pave the way for an Iranian hegemony over the region.”

Yusuf Al Qaradawi, an influential Brotherhood cleric living in Qatar, joined in criticizing the American military campaign against ISIS. “I totally disagree with [ISIS] ideology and means,” he wrote on Twitter, “but I don’t at all accept that the one to fight it is America, which does not act in the name of Islam but rather in its own interests, even if blood is shed.”

While both are Sunni Muslim movements, each seeking to establish a global Islamic Caliphate, ISIS views the Brotherhood as too passive, while the Brotherhood sees ISIS as being unnecessarily violent in pursuing its aims.

The two have common enemies, however, including the ruling regimes of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, United Arab Emirates, and Jordan, which have worked to cripple the Brotherhood, and which ISIS considers infidel regimes which should be toppled in pursuit of a broader Islamic Caliphate.

In another indication the Syrian Brotherhood is no moderating force, it issued a statement on its website Sept. 10 mourning the killing of Ahrar Al Asham leader Hassan Aboud in a suicide bombing.

“Syria has given a  constellation of the best of its sons, and the bravest leaders of the Islamic front and Ahrar Al Sham,” the head of the Brotherhood’s political bureau, Hassan Al Hashimi, said in the statement translated by the IPT. “We consider them Martyrs.”

Ahrar Al Sham is a radical group co-founded by Abu Khaled al-Suri, who was al-Qaida chief Ayman al-Zawahiri’s designated representative in Syria. Al-Suri was killed in February in a suicide bombing believed to be carried out by ISIS.

Aboud made clear his ideological links to al-Qaida clear in a July 2013 Twitter post. “May God have mercy on the Mujahid Sheikh Abdullah Azzam. He was a scholar of Jihad and the morality.” Azzam was considered a mentor to Osama bin Laden, and pushed conspiracy theories involving Jewish and Christian plots against Islam.

The Brotherhood official mourning Aboud, Al Hashimi, has visited the United States a couple of times since the Syrian civil war started.

1064He spoke at the controversial Dar al-Hijrah mosque in northern Virginia on Nov. 17, 2013, as part of a program organized by the Syrian Emergency Task Force (SETF). The SETF has worked closely with Muslim Brotherhood members and some of its officials have expressed anti-Semitic statements and solidarity with Hamas.

Still, the SETF has partnered with the State Department to implement training projects in Syria. Last December, the SETF’s executive director endorsed working with a coalition of Syrian opposition groups called the Islamic Front, even though several entities involved, including Ahrar Al-Sham, had fought with ISIS and the radical Jabhat al-Nusra, or al-Nusra Front. Four Islamic Front affiliates also endorsed a declaration calling for “the rule of sharia and making it the sole source of legislation” in a post-Assad Syria.

The announcement of the event was distributed to the Dar Al Hijrah mailing list, but without mentioning that Al Hashimi is the head of the political bureau of the Muslim Brotherhood.

AG Eric Holder: Citizens can’t use zoning laws to block mosques

Originally posted on Refugee Resettlement Watch:

More evidence of the stealth jihad?  You betcha!

I guess what Holder is saying is that gobbling up land, overcrowding roads, and overloading sewer and water systems is O.K. if it is done for Allah.  Note that this has stemmed from cases in Minnesota (the first state to fall to Islam?).

Hey, let’s distract them with the ISIS crisis while we establish the caliphate right here in America!

And, this is what I would like to know—where are the environmentalists who have spent decades putting land use laws in place?

FromAmerican Thinker(Hat tip Judy)—Holder Issues Fatwa:

The Grand Mufti of the Department of Social Justice (aka, DOJ) has issued a fatwa prohibiting states from using zoning laws to deny building permits for Islamic “culture centers” — Mosques with “youth centers.”

… as a grand jury investigates another Minneapolis mosque for radicalizing recruits for ISIL, the…

View original 139 more words

U.N. to dump flood of Muslim refugees on U.S.

Syrian-refugees-protest (1)By LEO HOHMANN:

Displaced Syrians will likely make up the next big wave of Muslim refugees coming to America.

Since the early 1990s, the United Nations high commissioner for refugees has selected 200,000 to 250,000 refugees from Islamic countries to be resettled in the United States. Most of them have come from Somalia and Iraq.

Syria could soon be added to the mix in the midst of that country’s brutal civil war. The Obama administration has been greasing the skids for the Syrian refugees for months, WND has learned, and the refugees will soon be dumped on American cities throughout the U.S.

In February, the State Department moved to ease the rules that protect the U.S. from accepting refugees with potential ties to terrorist organizations. The rules were seen as “too strict” by the refugee-resettlement groups that lobby Congress and the administration to continuously let in more Muslims from the war-torn Middle East.

Then on Sept. 4, a U.S. State Department spokeswoman hinted at her daily press briefing that a new wave of refugees will soon be coming from another predominantly Muslim nation – Syria.

“The United Nations high commissioner for refugees just this year started referring Syrian refugees to the United States for processing,” said Marie Harf. “Obviously, we have several thousand in the pipeline, and that number will continue to go up.”

Obama’s State Department is expected to present Congress with a list within the next two weeks that shows the total number of foreign refugees it wants to accept into the country over the next year and the countries from which they will come. The new fiscal year begins Oct. 1.

A few local newspaper reports have already surfaced, providing clues as to where some of the Syrian refugees will be delivered. The Winston-Salem Journal carried a reportlast week that the Triad area of North Carolina could receive some of the refugees. The first Syrian family has already arrived in Greensboro, North Carolina, and is living in a hotel there, according to the Journal.

The Cleveland Plain Dealer reported Sept. 10 that the city’s social services were preparing for “a flood of refugees” from Syria and Iraq later this year. Cleveland, Akron and Columbus, Ohio, have been hotspots in the past for Muslim refugees coming from the Middle East.

Once the refugees are relocated to an American city, they are quickly connected to an array of taxpayer-funded social services, including Medicaid, food stamps and subsidized housing. Interpreters and tutors are often provided to help bridge the language gap that refugee children will find in local public schools.

Groups like Human Rights First, World Relief Corp., the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, the Catholic and Lutheran churches all have strong presences in Washington and often do the bidding of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services, World Relief, Episcopal Migration Ministries, Church World Services and the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society push for more foreign refugees to be resettled in America, which results in more federal grants flowing into their coffers.

WND has documented in previous stories that more than 90 percent of the money used by these religious charities for resettling refugees comes from federal grants. They operate like government contractors in the lucrative resettlement business under the guise of providing “charity.”

Most of the Syrian refugees will likely be coming from Turkey, where thousands have fled across the border from Syria, but others are huddled in refugee camps in Lebanon, Jordan and Egypt.

Melanie Nezer, head of policy and advocacy at Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, one of the organizations that resettles refugees in the U.S. using federal grants, wrote an op-edMarch 28 in the New York Daily News in which she called for the U.S. to accept 75,000 Syrian refugees over the next five years. That would be 15,000 a year coming to the U.S. under permanent refugee status.

“That’s a huge number,” said Ann Corcoran, a writer and researcher for Refugee Resettlement Watch, a group that monitors the U.N.’s distribution of foreign refugees throughout the United States. She said 15,000 a year would be on a par with the Iraqi refugee program, which has produced the largest, fastest-growing refugee community in the U.S. since Sept. 11, 2001.

“Most of the Syrian refugees in these refugee camps are Sunni Muslims; they’re not Christians,” said Corcoran. “The camps in places like Turkey and Jordan, you’re not going to find a ton of Christians.”

The United Nations, working with the U.S. State Department, has already shipped approximately 115,000 Iraqis to American cities since Sept. 11. Another 100,000 Somalis have been resettled in the United States since that country devolved into civil war in 1993. The Somali refugees have been described as 99.9 percent Muslim by Somali-American leaders. The Iraqi refugees have also been majority Muslim and, while the exact percentages are more difficult to track, the Iraqis coming to the States have been estimated at 62 percent Muslim.

Culture clash in American cities

Once here, Muslim families have vastly more children than the typical American family. The average Somali couple in Minnesota, for example, has six children.

These refugee families have changed the demographics of their host cities, such as Shelbyville, Tennessee; Lewiston, Maine; and Minneapolis, Minnesota, all of which have reported culture clashes between Muslims expecting everything from foot baths at public colleges to dietary concessions at public schools. A Tyson Foods meat-packing plant in Shelbyville decided in 2009 to acquiesce to a local union’s demands to drop the paid holiday of Labor Day in favor of the Muslim holiday Eid al-Fitr, a decision that Tyson later reversed in the wake of a public backlash.

Read more at WND

Into The Fire…

130514151816-holder-0514-story-top
Center For Security Policy, By Kyle Shideler:

The Department of Justice has announced its new strategy for dealing with the threat of recruitment by the Islamic State of Iraq and Al-Sham (ISIS).  This threat of ISIS recruitment in the Homeland took center stage recently, when Fox News’ Megan Kelly and Greta Van Susteren, highlighted the  activities of Egyptian ISIS recruiter at a Minnesota mosque.

Unfortunately, but unsurprisingly, that strategy will be yet more “community outreach” in an effort to “counter violent extremism.” According to Attorney General Eric Holder:

Today, I am announcing that the Department of Justice is partnering with the White House, the Department of Homeland Security, and the National Counterterrorism Center to launch a new series of pilot programs in cities across the nation. These programs will bring together community representatives, public safety officials, religious leaders, and United States Attorneys to improve local engagement; to counter violent extremism; and – ultimately – to build a broad network of community partnerships to keep our nation safe. Under President Obama’s leadership, along with our interagency affiliates, we will work closely with community representatives to develop comprehensive local strategies, to raise awareness about important issues, to share information on best practices, and to expand and improve training in every area of the country.

Time and time again, our government has shown that when it chooses community partners from the Muslim community in the United States, they almost invariably choose those who have ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. This sad fact is bipartisan, evidenced in the Clinton, and Bush Administrations, but made the center piece of all Counterterrorism efforts by the Obama Administration and the Countering Violent Extremism strategy. This is policy announcement appears to be an expansion, a doubling down, on the CVE policy which has already failed dramatically.  That said, the focus on an effort to “expand and improve training in every area of the country” is particularly worrisome, as it appears to echo a letter sent to the Obama administration’s counterterrorism czar by Muslim Brotherhood-aligned groups, and their allies, to target federal, state and local law enforcement for “reeducation.” As I noted in a piece at Breitbart News warning of this coming policy extension:

In the letter, the organizations call for an auditing of all intelligence and law enforcement training materials, and mandatory retraining for any federal, state or local law enforcement official who has ever received the training the group finds objectionable. They also seek to extend the training purge to any federal, state or local law enforcement organization which has receives federal money.

This reeducation program, if enacted by the Obama Administration, will represent a final victory for Islamists seeking to control U.S. policy on dealing with the jihadist threats.

You cannot defeat terrorism by running from ISIS into the waiting arms of the Muslim Brotherhood. That has always been the inherent strategic logic in the division of labor between Jihad (conducted by Al Qaeda, and now ISIS), and Dawah (preaching) carried out principly by the Brotherhood. This is shariah’s one-two punch, where the terrorism and violence of ISIS and Al Qaeda represents only the jab. As Sayyid Qutb, the infamous Muslim Brotherhood ideologue remarked,

This movement uses the methods of preaching and persuasion for reforming ideas and beliefs and it uses physical power and Jihad for abolishing the organizations and authorities of the Jahili (ed. ignorant, non-believing) system.”

The Obama Administration strategy for dealing with homegrown recruitment appears to be to send us from the ISIS frying pan into the Ikhwan fire.

Beheading Raises Islamic State Street Cred

378657_ISIL-David-Haines-450x341Frontpage, by Dawn Perlmutter, September 16, 2014:

The Sept. 13, 2014 beheading video of David Haines, British aid worker and military veteran, is almost identical to the Foley and Sotloff productions establishing an Islamic State forensic signature, PSYOPS pattern and a winning recruitment strategy. The David Haines beheading video titled “A message to the allies of America” is addressed to Prime Minister David Cameron who failed rapper turned jihadi executioner calls the “obedient lapdog” of America. This expression is a double insult signifying that he is controlled by America and intrinsically impure. The in your face disrespect will have particular appeal in recruiting British Islamists. Although the latest victim David Haines is British, the beheading video continues to symbolically reference Gitmo by making the hostages wear orange clothing. The disarticulated head placed on the center back of the body is identical to the forensic signature of the beheadings by Al Qaeda in Iraq, the predecessor group to Islamic State. The end of the video is a uniquely terrifying characteristic of IS messaging displaying their next victim, in this case hostage Alan Henning.  Similar to the two previous videos, Haines is not murdered on film and only ten seconds of the 2:30 second film displays violent imagery. Unlike the Foley and Sotloff videos that humiliated President Obama the Haines video was easily accessible online.

Although the beheading video was addressed to Prime Minister Cameron it was also a response to the ineffectiveness of President Obama’s September 10, 2014 speech that obviously did not strike fear into the hearts of the IS. The Presidents refusal to call the Islamic State by their chosen name or to recognize them as Islamic or a state not only demonstrated his inability to understand the threat but symbolically reflected an unwillingness to know and face the enemy. A semiotic principle expressed in magical thinking is that fear of naming something represents actual fear of the thing itself. Ancient societies believed in word magic, the idea that words, particularly names are imbued with magical powers. They attached great importance to the knowledge of names and believed that to know the true name of something gives one power over it. Furthermore it was a common belief that pronouncing the names of gods or demons in their original form and language would bring them into existence. That is the origin of the expression ‘speak of the devil and he will appear’. To name something makes it real and a force to be reckoned with. Hence to choose politically correct messaging that creates taboo words such as Islamic, State or War has the unintended consequence of evincing fear and weakness. Conversely, tribal warrior cultures like the Islamic State instinctively understand the power of words.

The significance of names as a form of symbolic warfare is evident in gang graffiti where it is common for gang members to cross out names of rival gangs. For example, to spray paint over another gangs tag, cross it out and then put your name up right next to it is an act of disrespect. Crossing out a rivals name and putting a ‘K’ next to it, signifies your intent to kill a member of that rival gang if they come into your territory. This is precisely the same message that the Islamic State sent in their beheading videos, if you enter our territory we will kill a member of your gang. By making good on their threats to kill, the Islamic State raised their street cred. Their credibility and level of respect is what attracts new recruits. Islamic State beheading videos and social media messaging should be interpreted in the same manner as gang codes. For example, the hundreds of IS beheadings of soldiers and civilians can be understood as initiation rituals similar to the concept of ‘Blood in Blood Out’ which requires a new member to commit murder. The beheading videos can be viewed as similar to the revenge threats coded in gang graffiti dissing President Obama and Prime Minister Cameron. Similar to gangs without the appropriate timely, symbolic and proportional response the videotaped revenge killings will not only continue but escalate.

Islamic State recruitment has been so successful because they understand the signs, symbols and language of the street and the urge to jihad. This is evident in the thousands of Westerners they recruited to join the fight in Syria and Iraq. Conversely The State Department’s ‘Think Again Turn Away’ campaign demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of jihadist messaging. The campaign which utilizes twitter, Facebook and jihadist own violent imagery to attempt to dissuade foreign recruitment into IS is based upon a nonexistent we-are-the-world shared humanitarian rational worldview that presumes everyone is appalled by acts of brutality.  The campaign is based on a false premise that permeates President Obama’s policies and strategies, a fallacy of universal characteristics of human nature, in this case the belief that all people are inherently good and strive for the same things. The Obama fallacy can only comprehend beheadings, violence and terrorism as a direct or indirect result of oppression, colonization, child abuse, poverty, lack of education or some other social ill.  This dangerous misconception is also responsible for the inexplicable denial that countries can be invaded and conquered in the 21st century and the denial that Islamist jihadists around the globe want to rule the world.

While the state department sometimes utilizes the words shame and honor in their messaging they completely misunderstand the nature of warrior honor cultures, particularly the importance of instilling fear, showing strength and making good on their threats. Once the Islamic State took control of cities, like any gang or cartel, any attempts to reclaim designated territory provokes revenge killings.  The president’s refusal to acknowledge the conquered territory in Iraq and Syria as an Islamic State reveals that the administration does not comprehend that when Westerners join IS they are essentially pledging allegiance to another country, the enemies of America. Instead of ‘Think Again Turn Away’, a better slogan would be ‘Join Jihad, Lose Citizenship, Stay Away’.

Similar to President Obama the Prime Minister refuses to call the enemy by name and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg does not recognize them as a state. In response to the beheading of David Haines Prime Minister David Cameron said, ‘They are killing and slaughtering thousands of people – Christians, Muslims, minorities across Iraq and Syria. They boast of their brutality. They claim to do this in the name of Islam. That is nonsense. Islam is a religion of peace. They are not Muslims, they are monsters”….“This murderous organisation calls itself Islamic State. But it is not a state, it is a brutal terrorist outfit” The hundreds of potential British recruits interpret this language as punk ass fear unworthy of respect. The Islamic State names their enemies and through the power of words, images and videos they sounded a call to arms throughout the world. Their first strategic advantage is their willingness to name their adversary, hence the acknowledgement that they are ready, willing and able to confront the West. Their second strategic advantage is the West’s reluctance to name them which allows Islamist jihadists to live in America and Britain hiding in plain sight. It’s time for the West to properly name, thereby, accept the nature of their enemy.

Obama’s Go-To ‘Moderate Islamist’

pic_giant_091714_SM_-Mohamed-ElibiaryNational Review, By Andrew C. McCarthy, SEPTEMBER 17, 2014:

On Monday, I had a follow-up to last week’s column on why members of the Obama administration and other transnational progressives deny that the Islamic State is Islamic — viz., because they want to ally with what they call “moderate Islamists.” If Americans grasp that “moderate Islamists” and violent jihadists share the same basic ideology, such an alliance becomes politically untenable.

Case in point: The curious tale of Mohamed Elibiary, the Obama administration’s go-to “moderate Islamist” for counterterrorism advice.

The “moderate Islamist” folly has both domestic and international components, and the Obama administration is far from alone in it. On the foreign-policy side of the equation, see David French’s excellent post on Monday highlighting how the administration (echoed by the GOP’s McCain wing) is again calling for the arming of the purportedly “moderate Syrian rebels” — and don’t miss continuing coverage of these U.S.-backed “moderates” as they collude with terrorists from al-Qaedaand the Islamic State. When that same strategy was applied in Libya, it gave us the Benghazi Massacre, contributed to the rise of the Islamic State, and left the country in jihadist clutches.

My Monday follow-up column dealt with the domestic side of our government’s “moderate Islamist” charade: the appearance last week of several administration officials with a number of their Islamist advisers — leaders of enterprises linked to the Muslim Brotherhood. These organizations and institutions continue to have Obama’s ear even though some were proved in court to have conspired in the Brotherhood’s conspiracy to provide material support to Hamas, its Palestinian terrorist branch, through a “charity” known as the Holy Land Foundation.

Now the Washington Free Beacon’s Adam Kredo reports on Mr. Elibiary, Obama’s appointee to the Department of Homeland Security’s Advisory Council . . . though not for long. The administration has quietly announced that Elibiary is about to be cashiered.

Obama and then–DHS secretary Janet Napolitano made Elibiary a key counterterrorism adviser even though he had been a regular contributor to the very Holy Land Foundation charity the Justice Department had prosecuted. The HLF, it turns out, was established by Elibiary’s longtime friend Shukri Abu Baker. The latter was among the defendants convicted of using the “charity” to finance Hamas — he is serving a 65-year sentence from the prosecution that Elibiary dismisses as Islamophobic persecution.

Elibiary’s intriguing credentials also include his appearance at a 2004 conference in Dallas that paid “Tribute to the Great Islamic Visionary” Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. In addition, he has publicly praised the Islamic-supremacist writings of Muslim Brotherhood theorist Sayyid Qutb, so inspirational to Osama bin Laden, Omar Abdel Rahman (the Blind Sheikh), and other infamous terrorists.

As I’ve previously recounted, Elibiary was tapped by the Obama Homeland Security Department for its expert working group on “Violent Extremism” (because we wouldn’t want to call it “Jihadist Terrorism”). It was this panel that formulated the president’s vaunted counterterrorism strategy, which envisions having law-enforcement agents pare back their intelligence-gathering activities and take their marching orders from “community partners” (i.e., local Islamist organizations).

Elibiary’s star has fallen because even this Islamist-friendly administration is embarrassed over his commentary about the “inevitable” return of the Muslim “caliphate.” Islamic-supremacist rhetoric is not out of the ordinary for this, shall we say, nuanced counterterrorism expert, but it was a tad untimely: Elibiary’s tweets are being praised by Islamic State affiliates, potentially facilitating their recruitment of young Muslims into the anti-American jihad.

That’s not all. There are also allegations, broken by investigative journalist Patrick Poole in 2011, that Elibiary used the access to sensitive information afforded by his DHS position to obtain documents that he is said to have peddled to the media for purposes of manufacturing a claim of “Islamophobia” (what else?) against Texas governor Rick Perry.

Congressman Louie Gohmert (R., Texas), among others, has been pressing the administration for an explanation regarding both the leak allegations and how Elibiary managed to get a security clearance. Representative Gohmert, you may recall, is also one of the five House conservatives who asked how Hillary Clinton’s top aide, Huma Abedin, managed to get a security clearance despite her extensive (and not very moderate) Islamist connections. For their trouble, the five were vigorously attacked by Senator McCain, who took time out from calling for arming the “moderate Islamists” in Libya — or was it in Syria? — to defend Ms. Abedin on the Senate floor.

Obama’s DHS denied any wrongdoing by Elibiary after what it claimed was a full investigation. Nevertheless, Mr. Kredo reports that when Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act claim for details about this investigation, DHS said it did not have any. After the usual Obama-administration foot-dragging, DHS finally acknowledged in a 2013 letter that it could not find any “investigative records regarding the alleged mishandling” of sensitive information by Elibiary.

Was there a real investigation by the Obama administration of its Islamist counterterrorism adviser? We don’t know. We just know it has suddenly been announced that Elibiary won’t be reappointed.

By the way, the Obama administration also consulted with Muslim “experts” when it purged information about Islamic-supremacist ideology from the materials used to train our law-enforcement, intelligence, and military personnel. I know you’ll be shocked to hear this, but the administration refuses to identify its expert consultants — in fact, the administration took the astonishing step of classifying their identities when Congress started asking questions.

But don’t worry: We can rest assured that the experts Obama put in charge of what our national-security agents get to learn about our enemies are very “moderate Islamists.”

— Andrew C. McCarthy is a policy fellow at the National Review Institute. His latest book is Faithless Execution: Building the Political Case for Obama’s Impeachment.

Obama’s Self-Defeating Fight

WireAP_0bae6af261174ccc93186590385b497b_16x9_992-432x350by Caroline Glick:

Originally published by the Jerusalem Post

The United States has a problem with Islamic State. Its problem is that it refuses to acknowledge why Islamic State is a problem.

The problem with Islamic State is not that it is brutal. Plenty of regimes are brutal.

Islamic State poses two challenges for the US. First, unlike the Saudis and even the Iranians, IS actively recruits Americans and other Westerners to join its lines.

This is a problem because these Americans and other Westerners have embraced an ideology that is viciously hostile to every aspect of Western civilization.

Last Friday, Buzz Feed published a compilation of social media posts published by Western women who have left their homes in Chicago and London and other hometowns to join IS in Syria.

As these women’s social media posts demonstrate, the act of leaving the West and joining IS involves rejecting everything the West is and everything it represents and embracing a culture of violence, murder and degradation.

In the first instance, the women who leave the West to join IS have no qualms about entering a society in which they have no rights. They are happy covering themselves in black from head to toe. They have no problem casting their lot with a society that prohibits females from leaving their homes without male escorts.

They have no problem sharing their husband with other wives. They don’t mind because they believe that in doing so, they are advancing the cause of Islam and Allah.

As the women described it, the hardest part about joining the jihad is breaking the news to your parents back home. But, as one recruiter soothed, “As long as you are firm and you know that this is all for the sake of Allah then nothing can shake you inshalah.”

Firm in their belief that they are part of something holy, the British, American and European jihadistas are completely at ease with IS violence. In one post, a woman nonchalantly described seeing a Yazidi slave girl.

“Walked into a room, gave salam to everyone in the room to find out there was a yazidi slave girl there as well.. she replied to my salam.”

Other posts discussed walking past people getting their hands chopped off and seeing dead bodies on the street. Islamic State’s beheadings of American and British hostages are a cause for celebration.

Their pride at the beheadings of James Foley and others is part and parcel of their hatred for the US and the West. As they see it, destroying the US and the West is a central goal of IS.

As one of the women put it, “Know this Cameron/ Obama, you and your countries will be beneath our feet and your kufr will be destroyed, this is a promise from Allah that we have no doubt over…. This Islamic empire shall be known and feared world wide and we will follow none other than the law of the one and the only ilah!” These women do not feel at all isolated. And they have no reason to. They are surrounded by other Westerners who joined IS for the same reasons they did.

In one recruitment post, Western women were told that not knowing Arabic is no reason to stay home.

“You can still survive if you don’t speak Arabic. You can find almost every race and nationality here.”

The presence of Westerners in IS, indeed, IS’s aggressive efforts to recruit Westerners wouldn’t pose much of a problem for the US if it were willing to secure its borders and recognize the root of the problem.

But as US President Barack Obama made clear over the summer, and indeed since he first took office six years ago, he opposes any effort to secure the US border with Mexico. If these jihadists can get to Mexico, they will, in all likelihood, have no problem coming to America.

But even if the US were to secure its southern border, it would still be unable to prevent these jihadists from returning to attack. The policy of the US government is to deny the existence of a jihadist threat by, among other thing, denying the existence of the ideology of Islamic jihad.

Read more at Frontpage

Also see:

The War at Home

Ali-Muhammed-Brown-445x350Frontpage, By Robert Spencer:

As the Islamic State beheads a third hostage and the world recoils in horror and reassures itself that all this has nothing to do with Islam, it is useful to remember that jihad activity continues in the United States – although hardly anyone notices amid the rush to dissociate Islam from the mounting violence committed in its name and in accord with its literal teachings.

Take, for example, a Muslim from Seattle, Ali Muhammad Brown. KING 5 News reported that Brown is “currently in jail on $5 million bail for the alleged murder of a college student in late June.” He has “already been charged with gunning down two men at 29th and King Street in Seattle’s Leschi neighborhood on June 1.” And he is “now the prime suspect in a fourth homicide.”

The report noted laconically in its fifth paragraph, without elaboration, that “multiple sources with knowledge of the investigation say Brown told police he carried out the murders because he was on a jihad to kill Americans.” NJ.com added, also deep in its story on Brown’s murders: “Prosecutors say Brown is a devout Muslim who had become angered by U.S. military intervention in the Islamic world, which he referred to as ‘evil.”

That report also noted: “Ali Muhammad Brown said he considered it his mission to murder 19-year-old Brendan Tevlin as an act of ‘vengeance’ for innocent lives lost in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and Iran. ‘All these lives are taken every single day by America, by this government. So a life for a life.’” This is a reference to the Qur’an: “We ordained therein for them: ‘Life for life, eye for eye, nose or nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth, and wounds equal for equal’” (5:45).

New York radio host Todd Pettengill, host of WPLJ’s “The Todd Show,” said that Brown’s murder of Tevlin was evidence that “domestic terrorism is already here.” Pettengill declared: “It was in fact an act of jihad, perpetrated by a fellow American who sympathized more with those who want to annihilate us than with his own country and its people.”

Pettengill is right. Domestic terrorism is indeed already here. And it was here before Ali Muhammad Brown went on his killing spree. Another Muslim from Seattle, Musab Mohamed Masmari, was sentenced on July 31 to ten years in prison for pouring gasoline onto a stairway in a famous gay nightclub, Neighbours, and setting the stairway on fire last New Year’s Eve, when the club was crowded. If the fire had not been put out – the carnage would have been great.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Todd Greenberg said: “One of Masmari’s close associates was interviewed by investigators and reported that Masmari confided in him that he ‘burned a gay club’ and that he did it because ‘what these people are doing is wrong.’” In another report from February, we learn that an informant told the FBI before this attack that Masmari could be planning “terrorist activity,” and that he had “opined that homosexuals should be exterminated.”

This incident should have been the impetus for a national discussion of violent Sharia enforcement in the U.S., and an examination of what could be done to stop Sharia vigilantism. Instead, the mainstream media largely ignored the obvious motive; in this report, it is discussed as “homophobia,” with no hint that this was one of the first incidents of violent Sharia enforcement in the U.S.

There are many more recent domestic terrorism cases as well. In mid-June, a Tampa Muslim named Sami Osmakac was convicted of plotting to bomb a Tampa bar and then blow himself up in a jihad-martyrdom suicide attack in another crowded area of the city. Osmakac said of non-Muslims: “We will go after every one of them, their kindergartens, their shopping centers, their nightclubs, their police stations, their courthouses and everything until we have an Islamic state the whole world.” Shades of “slay them wherever you find them” (cf. Qur’an 2:191; 4:89; 9:5).

Then there was Ahmed Abassi, who, according to the New York Post, wanted to derail a New York-to-Toronto Amtrak train. He also discussed with another jihad terrorist “a plot to release bacteria in the air or water to kill up to 100,000 people.” He was also, according to Manhattan US Attorney Preet Bharara, plotting to “commit acts of terror and develop a network of terrorists here” in the U.S.

Abassi could have gotten fifty years in prison, but he “avoided terrorism charges by pleading guilty in Manhattan federal court to lying on his visa application and to immigration officials when asked why he flew to the United States in 2013.” Consequently, he could soon be a free man. What could possibly go wrong?

And let’s not forget Mufid Elfgeeh, a Muslim businessman from Rochester, New York. AP reported on June 2 that Mufid Elfgeeh “bought two handguns and the silencers as part of a plan to kill members of the U.S. armed forces returning from war as well as Shiite Muslims in western New York.”

AP, as anxious as Barack Obama or David Cameron to absolve Islam of responsibility for the evils done in its name, explained that Elfgeeh (like Ali Muhammad Brown) was plotting to kill troops “as vengeance for American actions overseas.” So why did he want to kill Shi’ites as well? As vengeance for Iran being a bitter enemy of his bitter enemy, the U.S.? Obviously Elfgeeh is a Sunni Islamic jihadist who wants to kill members of groups that he considers to be enemies of Islam. But AP will never tell you that.

The war is not just in Iraq and Syria (and Nigeria, and Thailand, and the Philippines, and Afghanistan, and Israel, and Egypt, and on and on). It is in the United States already. That war is the Islamic jihad against the West and the free world. There will be many more men like Ali Muhammad Brown and Musab Mohamed Masmari in the United States in the coming years. Actions like theirs will one day, not too long from now, be a more or less daily occurrence in the United States. But no need to be concerned: just remember, when things get really hot, that all this has nothing to do with Islam.

Obama ‘Enabler-In-Chief’ For Islamists

 

Washington Free Beacon:

Zuhdi Jasser, founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, tore apart President Obama’s claim that “ISIL is not Islamic,” calling Obama both the “excommunicator-in-chief” and “enabler-in-chief” for Islamist groups.

Jasser labeled Obama the “excommunicator-in-chief” for publicly declaring who is and isn’t ‘Islamic’ during his prime-time address on the Islamic State. Jasser argued the Islamic State is indeed ‘Islamic’ and is representative of the dangerous combination of religion and state in Islamic countries:

[The Islamist groups] want nothing more than to suppress the voices of reform. If you talk to reformers, they will tell you that the Islamic State in Iraq now, or out of Syria where it originated, is a clinic in exactly what happens in every one of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation states where you mix religion and state and prevent the reform that the West went through in the American Revolution.

Jasser called Obama an “apologist” for Islamists across the planet, making him the “enabler-in-chief” for groups such as ISIL, the Muslim Brotherhood, and Hamas:

If you take away the word ‘Islam,’ you’re basically allowing the Islamists to monopolize and suffocate reformers from ever having a place at the table because they don’t want us to have a voice. And they do that by saying they control what is and what is not Islam.

Fox News host Megyn Kelly asked Jasser to elaborate on the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), citing a dispute that erupted online after her interview with CAIR representative Hassan Shibly–who compared Fox News to ISIL.

“I hope Americans understand CAIR is part of a global lobbying operation of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, an Islamist movement that will do anything to prevent discussion about political Islam,” Jasser said.

“They’re an offshoot of Hamas. they’ve come out of the Muslim Brotherhood legacy group. They don’t want Americans to make the logical conclusion that when the Muslim Brotherhood took over Egypt, the reason majority of Muslims rejected them is they were about to bring something similar to ISIS to the tens of millions of Egypt.”

Hamas linked CAIR national banquet being hosted for third straight year by Crystal Gateway Marriott in Arlington VA.

CAIRdiorama321024x710-vi1

Click here to send your email to hotel officials.

Florida Family Association:

The national Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) is holding their annual banquet on September 27, 2014 at the Crystal Gateway Marriott in Arlington, Virginia.

The Crystal Gateway Marriott also hosted CAIR’s 2013 and 2012 banquets.  Florida Family Association launched an online campaign in September 2013 regarding the 2013 banquet.

Florida Family Association’s online campaigns have influenced several hoteliers.

Not so with Marriott who continues to cater to organizations linked to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas.

Here’s why many American’s are concerned about CAIR’s history and agenda:

  • CAIR chapters demonstrated in the streets across America to show their support for Hamas even declaring that “We are Hamas.” 
  • Omar Ahmad, Chairman and founder of the Council on American Islamic Relations, told a Muslim crowd Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.   At the Islamic Association of Palestine’s third annual convention in Chicago in November 1999, Omar Ahmad gave a speech at a youth session praising suicide bombers who kill themselves for Islam.  Fighting for freedom, fighting for Islam — that is not suicide. They kill themselves for Islam, he said.
  • Nihad Awad, CAIR Executive Director, said I am in support of the Hamas movement.
  • Mustafa Carroll, executive director of the Dallas-Fort Worth CAIR branch, told a crowd at a Muslim rally in Austin, Texas in 2013 If we are practicing Muslims, we are above the law of the land.
  • CAIR pressured the FBI in June 2013 to stop their Most Wanted advertising campaign which helped the FBI gain information regarding the whereabouts of dangerous terrorists.  The list of CAIR officials who have made apologetic comments in the public regarding terrorists is quite extensive.
  • The Council on American Islamic Relations is vigorously fighting bills in twenty state legislatures that would prohibit courts from considering provisions of foreign laws including Sharia if they are inconsistent with the United States and state constitutions. Sharia law is antithetical to the rights and liberties afforded under the United States Constitution.
  • Ghassan Elashi, founder of CAIR’s Texas chapter, in 2009 received a 65-year prison sentence for funneling over $12 million from the Islamic charity known as the Holy Land Foundation to the jihad terrorist group Hamas, which is responsible for murdering hundreds of Israeli civilians.
  • Mousa Abu Marzook, a former CAIR official, was in 1995 designated by the U.S. government in 1995 as a “terrorist and Hamas leader.” He now is a Hamas leader in Syria.
  • Randall Royer, CAIR’s former civil rights coordinator, in 2004 began serving a 20-year prison sentence for aiding al-Qaida and the Taliban against American troops in Afghanistan and recruiting for Lashkar e-Taiba, the jihadist group responsible for the 2008 Mumbai jihad massacres.
  • Bassem Khafagi, CAIR’s former community relations director, was arrested for involvement with the Islamic Assembly of North America, which was linked to al-Qaida. After pleading guilty to visa and bank fraud charges, Khafagi was deported.
  • Rabih Haddad, a former CAIR fundraiser, was deported for his work with the Global Relief Foundation (which he co-founded), a terror-financing organization.
  • CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case–so named by the Justice Department during the HLF trial.

Americans who are concerned about CAIR’s history and agenda have the First Amendment Right to complain about this event and choose hoteliers who do not give place to the same.

Florida Family Association has prepared an email for you to send to Marriott’s officers and directors.  Your email will not only voice concern about this important issue but it will also educate corporate officials with facts regarding CAIR’s history.

To send your email, please click the following link, enter your name and email address then click the “Send Your Message” button. You may also change the subject or message text if you wish.

Please click here to send your email to Marriott officials.