Brandeis, Female Mutilation and the Falsehoods of a Faculty Petition

But this woman is a black, feminist atheist from Somalia. And so what we’re learning here, which is fascinating, in the hierarchy of progressive-politics identity-group victimhood, Islam trumps everything. Islam trumps gender. The fact that she’s a woman doesn’t matter. It trumps race. The fact that she’s black doesn’t matter. It trumps secularism. The fact that she’s an atheist doesn’t matter. They wouldn’t do this if it was a Christian group complaining about her, if it was a Jewish group complaining about her. But when the Islamic lobby group says oh, no, we’re not putting up with this, as I said, these jelly-spined nothings at Brandeis just roll over for them. – Mark Steyn


fgm (2)By 
Jamie Glazov:

Last Tuesday, on April 8, Brandeis University rescinded its invitation to human rights activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali to receive an honorary degree from the institution. Brandeis caved in the face of intimidation from CAIR and other Muslim Brotherhood front groups, as well as a student petition on Change.org and a faculty petition – the contents of which have now become known.

The faculty petition is a textbook case of leftist pathology and of how “progressives” demonize true heroic freedom fighters and push millions of victims of totalitarian regimes and ideologies into invisibility for the sake of their own egotistical and destructive agendas.

A case in point in this ugly leftist narrative is how the signatories of the Brandeis petition have succeeded in banning a woman from their university who is the victim of female genital mutilation (FGM), suffered under an Islamic knife because of Islamic doctrine. She represents millions of Muslim females — mutilated and mutilated-to-be. And yet the signatories of the petition are callously indifferent, because they have their progressive program to attend to and fulfill.

The Brandeis faculty petition, written on April 6 and addressed to President Lawrence, stresses “the horrible message” that inviting Ali to the university “sends to the Muslim and non-Muslim communities at Brandeis and beyond” because of Ali’s “virulently anti-Muslim public statements.” Aside from complaining about Ali’s truth-telling about Islam, the petition also issues a dire warning about the “unnecessary controversy” that the human rights activist’s presence would bring to the campus.

To be sure, who needs nightmarish scenarios like debate and intellectual diversity when the Marxist Left has already lovingly bestowed the peaceful the Party Line?

The petition then references the major issues with which Ali is concerned: female genital mutilation, forced marriages, and honor killings. “These phenomena,” the petition flippantly notes, are not “exclusive to Islam.” This is a standard and perpetual tactic of obfuscation and equivocation employed by the Left whenever a monstrous evil is labelled in a totalitarian enemy. It serves as an excuse for inaction by presupposing that if a crime is committed by someone else, somewhere else, that it somehow justifies doing and saying nothing in the face of a crime being perpetrated on a mass scale right before our eyes – and one that we can do something about.

In other words, the logic implies that if a sin or an injustice exist somewhere else on the planet, that one must never fight for — or defend the victims of — any one ideology or system (unless it is of the western variety, of course).

Thus, if one dares to show concern for the millions of Muslim girls who are victims of female genital mutilation, the leftist will reflexively retort: “Muslims are not the only group that practice FGM.”

But so what? The bottom line is that Muslims are the principle religious group that practices this sexual violence against women. And if a young girl is a victim of FGM, the chances are that she lives in a Muslim household and in a Muslim culture. And this barbarity is kept alive and legitimized by Islamic theology.

The faculty petition to President Lawrence also expresses a deep concern about the fact that Ali has suggested “that violence toward girls and women is particular to Islam or the Two-Thirds World.” This is intolerable (even though completely true) because, according to the petition, it obscures “such violence in our midst among non-Muslims, including on our own campus.”

This is another consistent tactic that the Left engages in to insert its falsehoods into dialogues about oppressed people under monstrous tyrannies. The plain fact staring everyone in the face is that while violence may exist among non-Muslims, their laws and institutions delegitimize and illegalize such conduct. For instance, if a non-Muslim anywhere in the United States, including on a university campus, engages in violence against a woman and the police are called, he will be charged. In Islam, violence against women is inspired and sanctioned by the institutions themselves, precisely because misogyny, including wife beating, is embedded in the Qur’an.

In other words, non-Muslims who are violent toward women operate despite and against the laws of their lands; Muslims, on the other hand, are violent toward women because of their laws, and that is why they are, in turn, protected by those laws.

Thus, in terms of female genital mutilation, millions of Muslim girls are victims of this horrifying crime which is rooted in Islam and is integral to Islam’s misogynist structures. The road to saving millions of Muslim girls from this crime is to do what Ayaan Hirsi Ali is bravely doing, and what the signatories of the Brandeis faculty petition are trying to stop her from doing: to isolate and pinpoint Islam as the main culprit in this context.

The point cannot be stressed enough: female genital mutilation is fundamentally Islamic and it is rooted in Islamic texts such as Umdat al-Salik:

“Circumcision is obligatory (O: for both men and women. For men it consists of removing the prepuce from the penis, and for women, removing the prepuce (Ar. Bazr) of the clitoris.” Sacred Islamic Reliance: page 59, Umdat al-Salik  (“Reliance of the Traveler”), a manual of the Shafi’i school of Islamic jurisprudence, endorsed by Egypt’s very own Al-Azhar University of Cairo — the oldest and most prestigious university in the Islamic world.

This explains why one of Sunni Islam’s “Four Great Imams,” Ahmad ibn Hanbal, quotes Muhammed as saying: “Circumcision is a law for men and a preservation of honour for women?” It is no shock, therefore, that Sheikh Muhammad Sayyed Tantawi of Egypt’s Al-Azhar University has called circumcision “a laudable practice that did honor to women.”

Read more at Front Page (with video)

From ACT! For America:

According to the World Health Organization, more than 125 million girls and women alive today have been subjected to Female Genital Mutilation (FGM).

The African Women’s Health Center of the Brigham and Women’s Hospital, report that approximately 228,000 women and girls in the U.S. have either suffered the procedure or are at risk of having it done to them. Many of these young girls are subjected to FGM when they vacation in a country that sanctions the practice. In other cases, circumcisers are brought into the U.S. – even though FGM is illegal in this country.

ACT! for America has been working diligently at the state level to see legislation passed so that no girl ever suffers the horrors of FGM – either on U.S. soil or elsewhere.

Also see:

One Year Anniversary of Boston Bombing: A Lesson in FBI Failure

la-afp-getty-us-attacks-russia-chechnya-jpg-20130427-450x337by :

With the first anniversary of the Boston Marathon jihad bombings approaching, the New York Times made yet another attempt to exonerate the Obama Administration of responsibility for one of its manifest failures, claiming that an inspector general’s report on the bombings was an “exoneration of the F.B.I.,” as it showed that “the Russian government declined to provide the F.B.I. with information about one of the Boston Marathon bombing suspects that would most likely have led to more extensive scrutiny of him at least two years before the attack.”

See? The bombing was all the fault of that scoundrel Putin. It had nothing to do with the FBI, because of fecklessness and political correctness, failing to act properly on information the Russians gave them.

Full disclosure: I used to give FBI agents and other law enforcement and military personnel training on the teachings of Islam about jihad warfare against and subjugation of non-Muslims, so that they would understand the motives and goals of those who have vowed to destroy the United States as a free society, and be better equipped to counter them. I provided this training free of charge, out of a sense of patriotic duty, and it was well received: I received certificates of appreciation from the United States Central Command and the Army’s Asymmetric Warfare Group.

But as I explain in detail in my book Arab Winter Comes to America, all that ended on October 19, 2011, when Islamic supremacist advocacy groups, many with ties to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, demanded that FBI counter-terror trainers (including me) and training materials that referred to Islam and jihad in connection with terrorism be discarded, and agents educated by them be retrained. John Brennan, then the U.S. Homeland Security Advisor and now the director of the CIA, readily agreed in a response that was written on White House stationery – thereby emphasizing how seriously the Obama Administration took this demand.

Subsequently, as I detail in the book, politically correct willful ignorance then took hold in our intelligence and law enforcement agencies – to the extent that after the Boston Marathon bombing, then-FBI director Robert Mueller admitted that the bureau had not investigated the Islamic Society of Boston, where the Tsarnaev brothers attended mosque, and had not even visited it except as part of an “outreach” program – despite the fact that it was founded by Abdurrahman Alamoudi, who is currently in prison for financing al Qaeda, and was attended by convicted jihad terrorists such as Tarek Mehanna and Aafia Siddiqui.

Read more at Front Page

Tennessee: School enforces sharia, bans town hall on…sharia law

By Creeping Sharia:

via FBI-banned, DOJ classified unindicted terror funding co-conspirator, fed judge confirmed Hamas front group CAIR Welcomes Cancellation of Anti-Muslim Event in Tenn. School

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) today said it has joined with concerned Muslims in Tennessee in welcoming cancellation of an anti-Muslim event scheduled for April 24 at a Knoxville high school.

Another American inflicted with Adult Onset Islam via Approval rescinded for Shari’a Law event at Farragut High School.

"It's kind of an aggressive tone on the flyer," said AbdelRahman Murphy.

“It’s kind of an aggressive tone on the flyer,” said AbdelRahman Murphy.

“Feel free hosting it anywhere else by renting out a banquet hall, but to host it at a public place is one that is not comfortable for the rest of us to know about,” said [AbdelRahman] Murphy.

6 News reached out to the Knoxville chapter of ACT! for America. They say it is about education.

“He is going to be coming to share with us his expertise on what Shari’a law can be doing to Tennessee and to America as a whole,” said John Peach with ACT! For America.

They also say the venue simply should not matter.

“We feel like it’s very important that we have our public institutions take part in this because it’s not meant to be a religious thing. It’s not a political thing. It’s particularly for education purposes,” said Peach.

There is no word yet if ACT! for America plans to hold the event in a new venue.

John Peach issued this statement late Friday afternoon:

“Why is it that Muslims engage in teaching about how good Islam is for Tennessee at the Cedar Bluff Library – a public building, but they feel “uncomfortable” when ACT! for America plans an event to show the opposite viewpoint at a public building? (This is documented as follows):

Muslims like the support the University of Tennessee gives them to host activities and venues on their campus. Furthermore, it likes its Muslim Student Association (MSA) to hold events at their tax supported public UT campus.

“Why is it that all Tennessee social study textbooks to be authorized for use in our public schools must be approved by Muslim affiliates? (Hundreds of reviews have exposed the fact that our textbooks are overwhelmingly biased toward Muslims over Christianity and Judaism, with Islam always portrayed as being more significant than all other religions).

“Political Correctness has gone amuck and is destroying our country. Whatever happened to freedom of speech? If it’s right for Muslims to host events in tax-funded public facilities, then what is wrong with a group of citizens wanting the same privilege?

“Last December, ACT! for America – Knoxville Chapter was granted permission by Knox County Schools to use the facilities of Farragut High School to hold an educational forum including two speakers, followed by an opportunity for the public to answer any questions of the two. This we called the Town Hall – Farragut.

“We in good faith and urgent vitality have been promoting this event for the past four months, believing we were following all the guidelines given to us. We have spent over $1500.00 to advance this cause, including taking out a special insurance policy just to cover this occasion.

“The purpose of the meeting was to educate our local citizens about the dangers of Sharia Law, especially as it negatively affects our children, our churches, our law enforcement personnel, and our community leaders. Now, due to the fear of Muslims in the Knoxville area, the venue for the event that was open to everyone was cancelled. This is a great example of what Sharia Law is doing to America.”

 

 

Council On American-Islamic Relations: Its Use Of Lawfare And Intimidation

download (94)This book is a comprehensive view into the origin, purpose, and operational activities of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as it is constituted in both the United States and Canada. It includes almost 150 documented cases of frivolous lawsuits, extortion, intimidation and subversion undertaken by CAIR, all aimed at silencing its critics and advancing its agenda.

Citizens For National Security, the book’s author, with the help of research done by Deborah Weiss, exposes CAIR’s intent by its conduct, and concludes that its mission is to stifle criticism of Islam; blind the American and Canadian people, their politicians, law enforcement and intelligence organizations to the threats to their societies posed by radical Islam; to dismantle their national security procedures; and, to Islamize corporate America. In effect, waging “lawfare” against the U.S. and Canada, and their institutions and constitutional freedoms.

****************

Dozens of lawsuits used to hide ‘Islamic realities’ 

WND, 11/23/2013,  by MICHAEL CARL:

The Council on American-Islamic Relations, which according to FBI evidence was founded by the Egyptian-based, Saudi-funded Muslim Brotherhood, has filed more than 150 lawsuits over a two-year period that have been aimed at stifling speech – all with the goal of hiding “Islamic realities,” according to a think tank’s report.

CAIR has been described by authorities as a front group for Hamas to promote Islam in the U.S.

It was the Florida-based national security think tank Citizens for National Security that released the report, “Council on American-Islamic Relations: Its Use of Lawfare and Intimidation” to every member of Congress.

CFNS co-founder William Saxton said the study focuses on CAIR’s practice of “lawfare” to silence critics and force corporations, private citizens and charitable organizations to pay large sums of money to settle lawsuits out of court.

Saxton said the two-year task force project found CAIR has filed more than 150 lawsuits with the intention of silencing critics.

“CAIR has a pattern of behavior and a specific campaign of intimidation to stifle free speech. By stifling free speech, they’re hoping to prevent the public from seeing Islamic realities,” Saxton said.

Peter Leitner, also a co-founder for CFNS, confirmed other Islam analysts’ findings that the Muslim Brotherhood established CAIR to engage in “misinformation.”

“CAIR is the operational part of the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States. As such, and as part of Hamas, they’re the domestic side of an international terrorist group. What they’re doing is psychological operations,” Leitner said.

“Their mission to do misinformation and psy-ops is for the purpose of supporting jihadist movements in the United States and Canada,” Leitner said.

Contacted by WND, CAIR declined to respond to a request for comment.

Some of CAIR’s activities came to light during the Holy Land Foundation terrorism funding trial.

Leitner says CAIR hopes to stay one step ahead of the public.

“More people in the U. S. know about CAIR and their connections to the Muslim Brotherhood. But they’re hoping that not enough people will recognize who they are until the Muslim population in the U. S. can grow big enough to be politically powerful enough,” Leitner said.

Leitner said CAIR’s “masquerade is to divert attention from the Islamic threat in the U. S. by oversensitizing law enforcement and intelligence officials.”

“To make that happen, they’ve infiltrated their agents into the various national security agencies,” Leitner said.

CAIR intimidates the government agencies into providing “trainers” for law enforcement, he pointed out.

“They want to provide sensitivity training to misdirect people’s attention away from the real threat,” he said, and “stifle free speech among critics of Islam via lawsuits and further threats of legal action.”

Leitner explained that the Muslim Brotherhood begin infiltrating universities and colleges in the U.S. in 1962 through the Muslim Students Association, beginning with Palestinians and later through Pakistanis.

A significant portion of Muslim Brotherhood funding comes from outside the U.S., Leitner noted.

The money, Leitner says, is used to fund an entire network of Islamic groups tied to the Muslim Brotherhood. Along with stifling free speech, Leitner points to a second major purpose.

Groups such as the Muslim American Society, Muslims of the Americas and Jam’at al-Fuqua, which began in 1980, have infiltrated the culture enough that American converts to Islam have formed their own groups.

“John Walker Lindh, the American Taliban, is an example of one of their converts. We all know he ended up in Afghanistan fighting against U. S. troops,” Leitner said.

Leitner added that the method employed once influence has been gained is disinformation.

“Their greatest work is to create a grand illusion of a peaceful religion to distract attention from what their real plan is,” Leitner said.

He also says the lawfare tactics ares fundraising mechanism.

He cited a fight with Nike.

“They threatened to boycott if Nike didn’t change their logo because ‘it looked like’ the Arabic name for Allah at a great distance,” Leitner said.

CAIR forced Nike to apologize to the Islamic community, globally recalled the shoes in question, cooperated with CAIR in a redesign of logos and images and donated $50,000 to the Dar al-Hijra mosque in Washington, D.C., for playground equipment.

The report has details on CAIR’s 150 lawsuits or cases against government agencies, corporations and private foundations.

“CAIR even went after the producers of ‘South Park’ for how they portrayed Muhammad. They’ve gone after cartoonists, TV producers and tea party groups,” Leitner said.

Leitner said the sheer volume of CAIR’s legal actions prompted U. S. law enforcement agencies to dig into CAIR’s extended relationships and connections. Once the FBI and city police departments began to investigate, they found CAIR had connections to the network of the “blind sheik,” Omar Abdel-Rahman, who was convicted in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

Leitner said CAIR takes advantage of constitutional freedoms “to deny us our freedoms.”

Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va., a frequent advocate for persecuted Christians, affirmed that his committee  research shows that CAIR and Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated terrorist organizations pose a real security threat.

“The threat is real and I serve on the committee that has jurisdiction of the FBI. We’ve put language in a bill that will completely prevent the FBI from involving themselves with CAIR,” Wolf said.

“An example of the depth of the threat comes from the Somali al-Qaida-affiliate al-Shabaab. Imams recruit for al-Shabaab from Somali groups in Minneapolis. Not only that, they’re telling Somalis not to cooperate with federal authorities who are investigating the Somali mosques,” Wolf said.

The FBI has become more cautious in its dealings with CAIR, he said, as has his committee.

“I know we’ve been very careful interacting with any group that is involved with CAIR,” Wolf said. “I refused to go to any group that has connections to CAIR.”

Also see:

Thousands of NGOs get foreign money but don’t report it

Originally posted on Money Jihad:

MHA warns of terror fundings in NGOs

India’s home ministry has found that the number of non-governmental organizations receiving funds from outside India is on the rise, and that most of the groups receiving the foreign funds aren’t reporting it as they are required to do under the law, highlighting the vulnerability that such funding goes toward terrorist purposes.

Some of the external funding involved comes from Western nonprofits that send money to Islamic front charities or alleged Kashmiri relief groups that are actually turning over the cash to jihadi militants.

India isn’t alone in the struggle to get nonprofit organizations to disclose foreign sources of funding. Compliance in the U.S. with the Foreign Agents Registration Act is a joke. Penalties for noncompliance with 501(c)(3) filing requirements are miniscule. The tendency for regulators globally is to be tougher on existing groups that have gone through the registration process rather than on discovery of groups that have failed…

View original 276 more words

The Roots of CAIR’s Intimidation Campaign

pic_giant_041214_SM_The-Roots-of-CAIRs-Intimidation-Campaignby ANDREW C. MCCARTHY:

Author’s Note: This week, capitulating to Islamic-supremacist agitation led by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Brandeis University reneged on its announced plan to present an honorary degree to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the heroic human-rights activist. In my 2010 book, The Grand Jihad, I devoted a chapter to the origins and purposes of CAIR, its roots in the Muslim Brotherhood’s Hamas-support network, and its aim to silence critics of Islamic supremacism. In light of the continuing success of this campaign – despite a federal terrorism-financing prosecution that exposed CAIR’s unsavory background – it is worth revisiting that history. What follows is an adapted excerpt from that chapter.

In January 1993, a new, left-leaning U.S. administration, inclined to be more sympathetic to the Islamist clause, came to power. But before he could bat an eye, President Bill Clinton was confronted by the murder and depraved mutilation of American soldiers in Somalia. A few weeks later, on February 26, jihadists bombed the World Trade Center. The public was angry and appeasing Islamists would have to wait.

Yasser Arafat, however, sensed opportunity. The terrorist intifada launched at the end of 1987 had been a successful gambit for the Palestine Liberation Organization chief. Within a year, even as the body count mounted, the weak-kneed “international community” was granting the PLO the right to participate (though not to vote) in U.N. General Assembly sessions. And when Arafat made the usual show of “renouncing” terrorism – even as he was orchestrating terrorist attacks in conjunction with Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and other Islamist factions – the United States recognized him as the Palestinians’ legitimate leader, just as the Europeans had done. Arafat blundered in 1991, throwing in his lot with Saddam Hussein during the Gulf War, and that seemed to bury him with the Bush 41 administration. But Clinton’s election was a new lease on life.

Anxious to chase the holy grail of Middle East peace and suddenly in need of demonstrating toughness against jihadist terror, the new “progressive” president was made to order for the wily Marxist terror master. If Arafat could resell his “I renounce terrorism” carpet yet again, chances were he could cash in. And so he did, purporting to commit the Palestinians to the 1993 Oslo Accords – an empty promise of peaceful coexistence exchanged for hundreds of millions in aid (much of which he pocketed), an open invitation to the Clinton White House (where he became a regular visitor), international recognition (as a statesman, no less!), and a ludicrous Nobel Peace Prize (forever degrading a once prestigious honor into a punch line).

The Muslim Brotherhood, for one, was not amused. Islamists had murdered Egyptian president Anwar Sadat in 1981 for striking a peace pact with Israel. Sure, they knew Arafat and understood what chicanery he was up to. But acceptance of the Zionist entity’s right to exist was utterly unacceptable, even if done as a ploy.

Israel, the Brotherhood also realized, would not be the only thing squeezed by Clinton at Arafat’s urging. After a shaky start, the new president was winning global plaudits for his Orwellian “peace process.” Clinton must have known that Arafat was stringing him along, but with the theater of negotiation and ostensible progress drawing rave reviews, that was a problem for another day. The immediate concern was that Hamas jihadists could spoil the show with their implacable jihad, their blunt insistence that nothing less than Israel’s obliteration would satisfy them. That gave the fledgling administration a powerful incentive to crack down on them. Arafat would be the beneficiary as the Americans squeezed his rivals for power.

A ‘Media Twinkle’ in Philadelphia
Though the United States had been a cash cow for Hamas, it was thus a perilous time for the organization when 25 of its members and supporters gathered at a Marriott Hotel in Philadelphia on October 27, 1993. They were unaware that the FBI was monitoring their deliberations. The confab was a brainstorming exercise: How best to back Hamas and derail Oslo while concealing these activities from the American government?

A little more background to the Philadelphia meeting: For nearly two decades until his extradition in 1997, Hamas leader Musa Abu Marzook was the most consequential Muslim Brotherhood operative in the United States. Now living in Egypt, he remains to this day deputy chairman of Hamas’s political bureau. In the early Nineties, he actually ran the terrorist organization from his home in Virginia.

During his time in the U.S., Marzook formed several organizations to promote the Palestinian jihad against Israel. In 1981, for public-relations purposes, he established the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP) in conjunction with two other jihadists: future Hamas chief Khalid al-Mishal and Sami al-Arian (the latter was eventually convicted of conspiring to support Palestinian Islamic Jihad).

In December 1987, the intifada was launched and Hamas was born. Marzook immediately formed the “Palestine Committee” to serve as an umbrella organization, directing the various pro-Hamas initiatives that were developing. He brought under its wing both the IAP (which concentrated on “the political and media fronts”) and a fundraising entity he had established. That entity would eventually be called the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) – though it was then known as the “Occupied Land Committee.” The reorganization would better enable the Palestine Committee to comply with the Muslim Brotherhood’s instructions to “increase the financial and the moral support for Hamas,” to “fight surrendering solutions” (like Oslo), and to publicize “the savagery of the Jews.”

It was under the auspices of the Palestine Committee that the 1993 Philadelphia meeting was convened. It was clear even then that Marzook’s Hamas network was anticipating the birth of yet another organization. The Palestine Committee’s amended by-laws declared that an as-yet-unnamed entity was already in the larval stage, “operat[ing] through” the IAP, and soon to “become an official organization for political work, and its headquarters will be in Washington, insha Allah.”

In the United States, the “political work” was crucial. The overarching mission, of course, was quite clear. As the IAP had explained in a December 1988 edition of its Arabic magazine, Ila Filastin, “The call for jihad in the name of Allah is the only path for liberation of Palestine and all the Muslim lands. We promise Allah, continuing the jihad way and the martyrdom’s way.” But while blatant summonses to jihad might stir the faithful in Islamic countries openly hostile to Jews, they were not going to fly in America – and even less so in an America whose financial heart had just been shaken by the jihadist bombing of the World Trade Center. The Brotherhood’s approach in the U.S. would have to be more subtle.

That was where the new organization would come in, as those gathered in Philadelphia – including Marzook’s brother-in-law and HLF co-founder Ghassan Elashi – explained. Although the Brotherhood had ideological depth and impressive fundraising mechanisms, Marzook had long been concerned that his network lacked the media and political savvy needed to advance an agenda in modern America. Now more than ever, they needed what HLF’s Shukri Abu Baker called “a media twinkle.”

In the U.S., Hamas was now perceived as the principal enemy of the popular “peace process.” After all, its charter explicitly called (and continues to call) for Israel’s annihilation by violent jihad. Therefore, its known supporters – the Muslim Brotherhood, the Palestine Committee, the IAP, and the others – were tainted in the American mind as terror-abettors, hostile to U.S. interests. As one attendee urged in Philadelphia, “We must form a new organization for activism which will be neutral, because we are placed in a corner. . . . It is known who we are. We are marked.” The new entity, by contrast, would have a clean slate. Maybe it could steal a page out of Arafat’s “hear what I say, don’t watch what I do” playbook. The new entity’s Islamism and Hamas promotion would have to be less “conspicuous.” It would need to couch its rhetoric in sweet nothings like “social justice,” “due process,” and “resistance.” If it did those things, though, it might be more attractive . . . and effective. A Muslim organization posing as a civil-rights activist while soft-pedaling its jihadist sympathies might be able to snow the American political class, the courts, the media, and the academy. It might make real inroads with the transnational progressives who dominated the Clinton administration.

Read more: Family Security Matters

Britain’s Jihadists Within

70976852_019514832-2-450x325by :

Some of the “freedom fighters” who are at war against the evil tyrant Assad in Syria, the “rebels” whom both U.S. President Obama and British Prime Minister Cameron wanted to help, have now been re-classified as “the biggest threat to Britain’s security” and a “greater threat than al-Qaeda terrorists in Pakistan and Afghanistan.” The British Home Office identifies Syria as “the most significant development in global terrorism.”

More than half of anti-terror investigations by the UK security service MI5 involve “Britons” who went to fight in Syria. Charles Farr, the Home Office’s counter-terrorism chief, and others warned that the Syrian war is stoking the biggest terror threat to the West since September 11, and this problem is predicted to persist for as long as the hostilities will continue.

Syria is much closer to Europe than Afghanistan and Pakistan, making it a particularly easy and dangerous destination for UK Muslims who come back well trained, armed and ready for business: terrorism. And because the security services monitor about half of them, the risk is very high.

Robert Spencer asks some pertinent questions:

Why aren’t they monitoring the rest? And why were these men let back into the country in the first place? Simply because they’re citizens? (Are they even all citizens?)

In the past three years, from the beginning of the conflict, no fewer than 500 Britons have travelled to Syria to fight, many more than the corresponding number for Iraq. According to French President Francois Hollande, they are actually up to 700.

Between 250 and 400 of them are believed to be back with us, although the number may be higher. Apparently, they found life there “too hard,” so they say. But they may have been encouraged to return “home” in order to carry out attacks in the UK.

Hundreds more are still in Syria, and one of them has posted an Internet video urging his coreligionists in Britain to join them and help their Syrian brothers and sisters, saying: “The doors of jihad are still open.” He is a member of the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS), a group which wants Syria to become an Islamic state ruled by Sharia law and which is considered too extreme even by Al-Qaeda, that officially disowned it. The first jihadists returning provincial capital to be occupied by ISIS was the city of Raqqa, on whose Christian community it has imposed payment of the jizya and other rules associated with dhimmi status.

These are people who know their Islam, no doubt. They’ve forced even the BBC reporters to become familiar with the triple choice: convert, submit, die.

Read more at Front Page

Gavin Boby’s Fight Against Muslim Rape Gangs in the U.K. — on The Glazov Gang

mrg-450x227by Frontpagemag.com 

This week’s Glazov Gang was joined by Gavin Boby of the Law and Freedom Foundation. He shared his fight againstMuslim Rape Gangs and Mosque Building in the U.K.:

 

Read Gavin’s reports:

What Goes on in a Mosque – Evidence from America

Comprehensive Report on the Grooming Gangs - “Easy Meat”: Multiculturalism, Islam and Child Sex Slavery

 

One of the things I like about Gavin Boby is his unshakable self confidence and optimism. He is absolutely certain that we will win this war, “People Power” will prevail…”the only thing holding up the joint for Islam in the UK and in Europe is political pandering by the elites and handing over money from the elites. It’s a parasitic tendency..that will disappear, governments will go broke, they’ve got less and less money and there will be less and less capitol in pandering to Islam” 

I would like to point out that here in the US, if predictions are correct, our 2014 elections will see many new faces elected to congress. I would recommend that citizens prepare themselves to educate their new representatives on the civilization jihad that is taking place before they are compromised by the various Muslim lobbies. Join ACT! for America and learn how to interact with congress. Help ACT grow to be as formidable a lobby as the NRA!

 

 

 

Farid Foundation defends ICNA donation

ICNA relief USABy A. D. Kendall:

The Islamic Circle of North American (ICNA) is the progeny the Muslim Students Association and the Islamist Jamaat-e-Islami movement.  ICNA was previously directed by Ashrafuzzaman Khan, who was convicted in absentia by Bangladesh last year for war crimes committed during that country’s war of independence in the 1970s.

Tariq Farid, founder and CEO of the fruit basket company Edible Arrangements, and trustee of the Farid Foundation, has donated money to ICNA.  This revelation comes from the Farid Foundation’s own website and from Farid’s attorney, who wrote last week that, “…the Farid Foundation’s only contribution was to a special fund of the ICNA called ‘ICNA Relief USA’, an organization in New York City, which, among other things, helps women with temporary housing.”  The lawyer’s statement was made in response to an article published at Blue MauMau, a website for franchisees.

The Blue MauMau article highlighted a lawsuit filed by former Edible Arrangements controller Tara Perino, who says that Farid maintained a hostile workplace and discriminated against non-South Asians and non-Muslims.  The lawsuit also describes the Farid Foundation’s support to ICNA:  “Farid and his brother, Kamran Farid (Edible Arrangements’ Chief Operating Officer), at all relevant times hereto have been the two trustees of a foundation called the Farid Foundation, operated out of the same location as Edible Arrangements. Farid Foundation makes significant contributions to Islamic causes and organizations,  including the Farid Foundation Pakistan; the Salma K. Farid Academy; Islamic Circle of North America Relief; the Muslim Coalition of Connecticut; the Inner-City Muslim Action Network; the Wallingford Islamic Center; Masjid AI-Islam; and the Islamic Association of Southern Connecticut.”

The author of the Blue MauMau article, Corbin Williston, noted that, “The head of ICNA at the time the suit was filed was Ashrafuz Zaman Khan”—the same man convicted of war crimes—and that the argument that the ICNA donation was “only” to a special fund wouldn’t comfort the people whose loved ones were tortured and murdered by Khan.

Read more at The Terror Finance Blog

CAIR Pressures Another College

CAIR has spoken out against numerous sections of the book, including portions that allegedly read, “Islam is an ideology of control, not for human and brotherly love,” and “Muslims would try to force their values and traditions on others callously. They would force their neighbors to cover their heads; otherwise they taunt them for not being modest; Muslim teachers would try to make their Christian students pray according to their Islamic religion.”

Muslim advocacy group calls for investigation by Oberlin College into lecturer’s ‘bigotry’

From: ChronicleOnline
By: Chelsea Miller, April 11, 2014

OBERLIN — The Cleveland chapter of the Council on America-Islamic Relations is asking Oberlin College to investigate a lecturer in the Arabic Language Department whom they say openly promotes “anti-Muslim bigotry and crude stereotypes of Muslims in his writings on campus.”

CAIR-Cleveland said lecturer Samir Amin Abdellatif is the publisher of a 290-page tract that “vilifies” Islam and Muslims. The organization said Abdellatif’s publication, entitled “The Unknown History of Islam,” promotes xenophobic views about Muslim immigration to the West, as well as supports “outlandish conspiracy theories.”

CAIR-Cleveland has requested that the college investigate Abdellatif’s teachings through a letter sent to Oberlin College President Marvin Krislov on March 11. In the letter, Shearson wrote, “We believe the reputation of Oberlin College is tarnished and students are done a disservice by having an Arabic language instructor who openly promotes anti-Muslim bigotry and who condones crude and ugly caricatures of Muslims.”

Full Article: http://chronicle.northcoastnow.com/2014/04/11/muslim-advocacy-group-calls-investigation-oberlin-college-professors-bigotry/

∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞

COMMENT/ANALYSIS: As is often the case, CAIR continues to attack and attempt to silence critics of  Islam.  The irony being that they are protesting a book that ” would try to force their values and traditions on others” … what CAIR regularly does as demonstrated with this incident.  It should be noted that the person that called CAIR on this matter is listed in the below article – accused of harrassment of another professor.

Related:

Why Have American Taxpayers Supported Hamas Trainers?

Youth training at the Al-Futuwa program. Photo: Paldf.net.

Youth training at the Al-Futuwa program. Photo: Paldf.net.

 Algemeiner, By Dexter Van Zile:

Should American taxpayers be funding an organization that has provided activist training to an illegal terrorist group?

This is not an abstract question. It has happened.

In a recent report, NGO Monitor revealed that the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a non-profit funded largely by the U.S. Congress (i.e. American taxpayers), gave approximately $232,000 to the Holy Land Trust (HLT) between 2006 and 2012.  A search of NED’s website confirms that it has given multiple grants to the organization.

HLT is a Bethlehem-based “peacemaking” organization whose leader, Sami Awad, has stated publicly that his organization has given training in non-violence to Hamas and other militant groups in Palestinian society.

He did it in a speech he gave at the National Leadership Conference for the Vinyard Church in Galveston, Texas in 2009. “[W]e’ve actually done training in non-violence for Hamas leaders and other militant groups as well,” he told the audience.

At the Christ at the Checkpoint Conference held in Bethlehem in 2012, Colin Chapman, an expert on Islam praised Awad for his willingness to speak with Islamists and to form genuine “face-to-face” relationships with them.

“Sami Awad has, for several years, been working with people in Hamas exploring with them a genuinely Islamic basis for non-violence, peacemaking and reconciliation,” Chapman said.

While some people might praise Awad for speaking words of peace to Hamas, there is little, if any evidence that his words have had much of an impact on the organization, which was designated a “foreign terrorist organization” in 1997. It still remains committed to Israel’s destruction and has engaged in numerous attacks against Israel.

Clearly, Awad’s activism has a strong ecumenical component. In the 2009 speech to Vineyard Church leaders he said, “Any community that asks us, we’re there to serve.” Still, Hamas is a bit much.

A line has to be drawn somewhere.

Hamas is on the other side of that line.

It’s pretty irresponsible and naïve for Awad to teach the language of peacemaking to totalitarian fascist organizations such as Hamas. Such training can easily be repurposed by Hamas leaders so as to make its messaging more effective to Westerners. Awad himself seems to understand this. In 2008 he told Michael Lerner, “Hamas is not denouncing nonviolence. There are Hamas people who see nonviolence as a useful tool.”

Why would Hamas see nonviolence as a useful tool?

Simple.

It’s not just acts of terror that makes groups like Hamas effective, but the story they tell to justify and frame this violence. And Awad’s Holy Land Trust, has given Hamas and other militant groups expertise in framing their acts of terror for Western audiences.

As I have written elsewhere, “Awad’s group, the Holy Land Trust, has taught Hamas and other militant groups that seek Israel’s destruction how to speak the language of peace activists in the West and appeal to the conscience of human rights activists in the U.S. and Europe.”

In addition to being irresponsible, it may also be illegal. Federal law prohibits providing terrorist organizations with material support, which according to the statute includes “training” and “expert advice.” That seems to describe what HLT has, by Awad’s admission, provided to Hamas and other militant groups.

Why has the National Endowment for Democracy given money provided by American Taxpayers to the Holy Land Trust, an organization whose leader has admitted to and been praised for interacting with – and giving training to – Hamas?

Just what type of oversight has the National Endowment for Democracy exercised over the Holy Land Trust?

And what type of oversight has Congress exercised over the NED?

What is going on here?

Dexter Van Zile is Christian Media Analyst for the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA).

Facebook Exec to Headline Muslim Advocates “Countering Hate on the Internet” Dinner

Facebook-AFPBreitbart, by Pamela Geller:

Increasingly, the war in the information battlespace is being waged outside the hallowed halls of the enemedia. The Islamic supremacist group Muslim Advocates has announced that its Annual Gala 2014 on May 3 will host an “onstage conversation” about “countering hate on the internet” featuring Monika Bickert, the Head of Global Policy Management for Facebook, along with Muslim Advocates’ Executive Director Farhana Khera and Hilary Shelton of the NAACP.

The key to winning this war for freedom is in the war of ideas. So the apparatuses that truth-tellers and voices of freedom including my colleagues and me use, tools such as Facebook, Twitter, and Linkedin, are of cardinal importance. When news from my website AtlasShrugs.com goes viral, invariably it is Facebook that drives it.

This makes sense. Facebook is the personal bulletin board for millions of Americans, on which they share family photos, personal victories or defeats, and news that they believe to be of critical importance. So of course Atlas Shrugs news items would be trafficked there frequently. And that’s why this particular news story about Monika Bickert’s appearance at the Muslim Advocates Annual Gala, although innocuous on its face, is of grave significance.

Islamic supremacists and stealth jihadists are very aware of the ways in which voices of freedom get the word out after having been blacklisted from conventional means of communication and information dissemination. And so these well-funded savages host expensive, silly dinners, galas, and conferences full of empty praise and flattery for clueless tools like Bickert. While Bickert’s name is clearly not on the lips and minds of most Americans, she has the keys to the proverbial kingdom. She is the gatekeeper.

Who exactly is Monika Bickert? As Head of Global Policy Management for Facebook, she is Facebook’s speech police. So is it any wonder that groups like Muslim Advocates would be feting her? Muslim Advocates is an organization of Sharia enforcers, enforcers of the blasphemy laws under Sharia. According to the Investigative Project on Terrorism, in 2011 Khera wrote a letter, also signed by 57 Muslim and allied organizations, to then-Homeland Security Adviser John Brennan, demanding that he create “an interagency task force, led by the White House” to “review all counterterror trainers, so as to purge those that the Muslim organizations, which included many with Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood ties, found unacceptable.” FBI trainers such as Islamic scholar Robert Spencer were summarily dropped.

Khera also demanded that the Obama Administration:

“[P]urge all federal government training materials of biased materials”; “implement a mandatory re-training program for FBI agents, U.S. Army officers, and all federal, state and local law enforcement who have been subjected to biased training”; and more to ensure that only the message about Islam and jihad preferred by the signatories would get through to intelligence and law enforcement agents.

Counter-terror training materials were subsequently scrubbed of all mention of Islam and jihad in connection with terrorism, leaving our law enforcement agents completely unequipped to understand the foremost terror threat of our time.

Groups like these have millions of dollars and an obviously subversive mission, and for them someone like Bickert is a key player. How many of you who are reading this know exactly what I’m talking about? How many of you have been banned from Facebook for twenty-four hours for posting a jihad story or saying something that might offend Muslims? I myself have been banned numerous times for merely posting a link to a jihad article. The well-oiled machine of Islamic supremacists descends daily on Facebook and flags or reports stories that they deem unacceptable for the eyes of the Facebook user and American news consumer.

We cannot abandon Facebook or the other enormously popular social media outlets. We cannot cede the field. The freedom of speech doesn’t mean the freedom to speak in the wilderness, where no one is there to hear us. That’s not what freedom of speech is. Freedom of speech is the protection of all ideas, not just those that global jihadists deem to be Sharia-compliant.

Despite this fictional narrative about a “lucrative Islamophobia industry,” counter-jihad freedom fighters don’t have the funds to fete a tool like Bickert. Only groups like Muslim Advocates do.

These “galas” such as the one that Muslim Advocates is holding should chill you and compel you to action. Many of my colleagues, such as Anders Gravers of Stop Islamisation of Europe (SIOE) have been silenced. His personal Facebook page and organization page have been disabled, shut down, and silenced by these same supremacist cretins.

Most Americans assume that we all share a value system based on freedom and individual rights. But such an assumption can no longer be made. You can’t expect that such freedoms will be automatically protected. We have to fight every single battle. Every attack. We have to counter every hostile attack on our freedoms with an equal or more powerful response. Otherwise, make no mistake: we will lose our freedom of speech. Its continued existence is not guaranteed. Its survival depends on us.

Pamela Geller is the President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), publisher of PamelaGeller.com and author of The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America and Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the ResistanceFollow her on Twitter here.

The Support for Sharia Law Around the World

Sharia_dominate1-450x299By Rachel Molschky:

Sharia law is gaining ground across the world. An overwhelming majority of Muslims support the implementation of Islamic law in Muslim countries, in non-Muslim countries- in any country where they live.

The mainstream media wants us to believe that Muslims are well integrated, and only jihadists go around terrorizing people and subjugating them to Sharia law, like the new report of a jihadist group in Libya which now hopes to take over the town of Derna and enforce Sharia.“We also declare our hostility towards the enemies of G-d and His prophet — Jews, Christians and Taghouts.” (“Taghouts” are apparently non-Sharia compliant state institutions.)

While groups like this one and the Sharia-based Taliban are viewed as dangerous and militant, in varying degrees, Sharia law is the norm in nations like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Yemen, United Arab Emirates, Iran, Iraq and Pakistan. Many other Islamic nations implement at least part of Sharia law in their governments, and more are following suit.

This past fall, Brunei became the first East Asian State to fully adopt Sharia law and begin following a Saudi Arabia-style penal code. Ankit Panda of The Diplomat writes, “… some commentators have suggested that such strict Sharia law may be in conflict with Malay culture, and Brunei’s peaceful nature. Brunei, officially known as the Nation of Brunei, the Abode of Peace, might find itself hard-pressed to retain that moniker with its foray into such a draconian legal system.” Funny how implementing the laws of the “Religion of Peace” onto the “Abode of Peace” is not very peaceful!

The adherents of this supposed “Religion of Peace” have declared their full support of Sharia on a global scale. A Pew study done in 2013, asked Muslims from 23 countries across Southeastern Europe, Asia, North Africa and the Middle East, their views on Sharia. The study found that “in 17 of the 23 countries where the question was asked, at least half of Muslims say sharia is the revealed word of G-d.” The top four in this group were Pakistan, where 81% believe this, Jordan which tied with Pakistan, and Egypt and the Palestinian territories, each with 75%.

Yet nearly all the Muslims surveyed either believe that it is the revealed word of G-d, or was developed by men but based on the word of G-d. There really is not much distinction between the two. Either way, they believe it is inspired by G-d. Looking at the complete numbers this way, the percent of Sharia supporters in the very same countries are 89% in Pakistan, 99% in Jordan, 95% in Egypt and 91% in the Palestinian territories.

In Afghanistan where Western countries have fought hard against the Taliban, which “inflicts” its strict Sharia rules onto the “poor, non-extremist” Muslim population, it turns out that 94% of Muslims there support Sharia law after all.

But who wants to make Sharia the official law of their country? According to the survey results, the overwhelming majority of Muslims in Southeast Asia (like Malaysia at 86%), South Asia (Afghanistan 99% and Pakistan 84%), the Middle East and North Africa (the highest being Iraq at 91% and the Palestinian territories at 89%), and Sub-Saharan Africa (with the biggest supporter being the Muslims of Niger.)

So what’s the big deal over Sharia law anyway? Shouldn’t every religion have the right to follow its own laws? Well, not exactly. Not when the laws of the religion conflict dramatically with the laws of the land.

In the case of Sharia, the laws are incompatible with Western society, which is largely based on a common Judeo-Christian culture. Other religions besides Judaism and Christianity often share a similar moral foundation, making it easier for their adherents to assimilate. Islam, however, fails miserably. Most Muslims who integrate well into our Western culture are secular, but fundamentalism is a growing trend and is more of a normality among Muslims than among other religious groups. This explains why the global support for Sharia among Muslims is so high.

What is Sharia?

Read more at Cherson and Molschky

Also see:

The Reliance of the Traveller

HOLTON: Islamic Radicals Mount Influence Operation On Louisiana Leges

“You must move in the arteries of the system without anyone noticing your existence until you reach all the power centers… until the conditions are ripe, they [the followers] must continue like this.  If they do something prematurely, the world will crush our heads, and Muslims will suffer everywhere…”

- ​​​​​​Fethullah Gulen

reception-save-the-date-april-21Later this month, organizations affiliated with the Turkish-based Gulenist Islamist movement will hold a reception lobbying Louisiana’s lawmakers.

Why would a Turkish-based Islamist movement seek to lobby lawmakers in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA? For the same reason they have conducted similar influence operations in almost every state capitol in the United States.

The Gulenist Islamist movement is a 25 billion dollar empire that raises money partially through membership dues and partially through commercial activities, such as their Shariah-compliant bank, their Shariah-compliant insurance company, a media empire consisting of TV networksnews agencies, and news magazinesindustrial trade organizationsuniversities, and a network of 1300 schools in the US, Europe, Central Asia, the Middle East and Africa.

The Gulenist movement’s main focus in the US has been its network of schools, two of which have operated here in the state of Louisiana:

• Abramson school in New Orleans, which had its charter revoked and was shut down in the midst of public bribery and misconduct allegations.

• Kenilworth Science and Technology Academy in Baton Rouge, which was raided by the FBI late last year and is the target of a federal investigation.

By now you’re wondering what the Gulenist movement is, no doubt. The Gulenist movement is a secretive, controversial Islamist movement founded by Fethullah Gulen, a Turkish Islamic scholar with a controversial history and a great many followers and admirers in both the Islamic and Western worlds. However, a close analysis of Gulen and his movement reveals what may very well be a disturbing threat, rather than the benign movement that many suppose. (Gulen fled Turkey for the US in 1998 and settled in a massive, fortified compound in rural Pennsylvania.)

Gulen preaches peace on the one hand – while on the other hand credible reports indicate that the Gulenist movement controls the secret police in Turkey, which has been key to brutally suppressing recent pro-democracy protests there. But Gulen’s primary relevance to Americans comes from something quite peculiar – namely, the fact that his movement is associated with roughly 1,200 schools in numerous countries around the globe, including approximately 135 schools here in the USA. The American Gulenist schools are mostly taxpayer-subsidized charter schools and there is much to be concerned about, both in terms of their goals and operations. And Americans – and in particular those Americans charged with credentialing these schools – know scant little about with whom they’re dealing.

In reviewing the long-form literature on Fethullah Gulen, without exception, every single book about Gulen paints him in a positive, almost saint-like light. In order to fully grasp the man and his motivations, one has to read his own work – the most troubling and revealing of which is his 1998 book Prophet Muhammad as Commander.

While much of the book details the life of Muhammad as a military commander and political leader, the opening sections of the book reveal more about the author than they reveal about Muhammad, about whom much is already known and documented. The first 37 pages of Prophet Muhammad as Commander contain revealing, troubling passages that provide a window on Fethullah Gulen’s views on Jihad and warfare.

In Prophet Muhammad as Commander, Gulen explains Muslim hostility toward non-Muslims in a similar manner that most non-Muslims will find at least very curious:

“For this reason, a Muslim’s enmity towards unbelievers is, in fact, in the form of pitying them.”

Gulen ties this pity in with the concept of “compassion.” Unbelievers who deny that Allah is the only god and that Muhammad was his prophet are thought to be committing an “injustice.” Out of “compassion” for those unbelievers and to prevent them from committing further injustice, Muslims have enmity towards them and in some cases fight them as enemies.

Jihad as a concept fits in with justice. In fact, according to Gulen (page 20), Jihad is integral to justice:

“God does not approve wrongdoing and disorder. He wills that human beings should live in peace and, accordingly, that justice should prevail amongst them. It is therefore incumbent upon those who believe in One God and worship Him faithfully to secure justice in the world. Islam calls this responsibility jihad.”

Gulen then goes on to explain the various forms of jihad, including warfare.

Read more at The Hayride

Obama Admin: Fighting Terrorism but Supporting Terrorists?

1340112075904by Raymond Ibrahim:

News recently emerged that “the Obama administration is imposing sanctions on an Egypt-based group that has claimed responsibility for attacks against Egyptian officials, Israeli interests and foreign tourists in Cairo and the Sinai peninsula. The State Department said Wednesday [4/9/14] it has designated Ansar Bayt al-Muqadis a ‘foreign terrorist organization.’”

While ostensibly a laudable move, some—many in Egypt—think this announcement is a ruse to portray the Obama administration as committed to combating terrorism, even as it supports the head of the terrorist-snake, the Muslim Brotherhood.

For instance, according to Mustafa Zayid, the Coordinator of the Sufi Coalition Forces in Egypt, “The expectation was for the United States of America to announce its designation of the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization—as opposed to Ansar Bayt al-Muqadis, which takes its lead from it [Brotherhood].”

The Sufi leader further added in published comments to Watan “that Ansar Bayt al-Muqadis is a pseudonym for the terrorist Brotherhood organization, clarifying that what the U.S. State Department did was one of the administration’s tricks to deceive the world, mocking it into believing that the U.S. is combatting terrorism.”

He further added that “the U.S. supports the Muslim Brotherhood and sponsors its terrorist activities throughout Egypt.”

Nor is the Sufi the only one making such charges.  According to Nabil Na’im, a Salafi, former member of Egyptian Islamic Jihad and confidante of al-Qaeda leader Ayman Zawahiri, Ansar Bayt al-Muqadis is funded by Khairat al-Shatter, the currently imprisoned, multi-millionaire Brotherhood leader.

Of note is the fact that, although al-Shatter was never part of the Morsi government, U.S. diplomats often met with him, including Ambassador Anne Patterson and Sen. John McCain.

***************

Former Jihadi Leader: Brotherhood Bought Al-Qaeda ‘Terror Support’ for $25 Million

Yesterday on Haya TV, Nabil Na‘im, a former leader of Egypt’s Islamic Jihad and close confidante of current al-Qaeda leader, Ayman Zawahiri—who also helped found Egypt’s Islamic Jihad—asserted that, during the reign of former president Muhammad Morsi, Zawahiri was given $25 million from Muslim Brotherhood leader Khairat al-Shatter to organize, fund, and assemble the jihadi groups “in order to support the Brotherhood.”  (For more on the Muslim Brotherhood/Al-Qaeda relationship, click here).

13820221303436It should be noted that al-Shatter, though not a member of Morsi’s government—only a leader of the Brotherhood—was, after being imprisoned after the revolution, asked for personally by John McCain during his visit to Egypt some months back, when he pushed for Brotherhood reinstatement.  Also, U.S. ambassador to Egypt Anne Patterson was reportedly seen visiting Shatter often.

Earlier, Na‘im, the former Jihad leader had said that attempts by the U.S. to “reconcile” Egypt with the Muslim Brotherhood was “nothing but a conspiracy by the American administration,” and that the Brotherhood, when in power, had betrayed Egyptian sovereignty, adding that ousted president Morsi granted Egyptian citizenship to more than 60,000 Palestinians, many of whom were in the ranks of the jihad.