CAIR, Recognized Terrorist Org., Exposed in TV Debate

Cair-Nihad-Awad-Ibrahim-Hooper-HP_11Clarion Project, BY RYAN MAURO, November 20, 2014:

A senior official of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Nezar Hamze, repeatedly denied the existence of Department of Justice documents tying CAIR to the Muslim Brotherhood. Hamze made the remarks during a televised debate with Clarion Project National Security Analyst Ryan Mauro on NewsmaxTV’s “MidPoint with Ed Berliner.”

The topic of the debate was the designation of CAIR as a terrorist organization by the Muslim government of the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

Hamze, Regional Operations Director of CAIR-Florida, argued that there’s no evidence that CAIR is linked to the Muslim Brotherhood or Hamas and is a moderate organization. Yet he failed to answer the charge of CAIR being a terrorist organization.

Mauro argued that documents provided by the Justice Department establish a firm connection between CAIR and the internationally designated terrorist group the Muslim Brotherhood and brought forward those documents as proof.

You can watch the debate below:

 

CAIR Denies Existence of Publicly-Available Evidence

The most remarkable feature of the discussion was that Hamze repeatedly denied the existence of quotes by federal prosecutors about the CAIR-Brotherhood connection, even after those quotes were read aloud and the documents were shown to the audience. All of these documents are publicly available online.

Mauro opened the discussion by reading an exact quote from federal prosecutors in a court filing that states:

From its founding by Muslim Brotherhood leaders, CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists…the conspirators agreed to use deception to conceal from the American public their connections to terrorists.

Hamze’s response was that the quote does not exist. He said, “No U.S. government or U.S. prosecutor has ever said that CAIR has any ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.”

When Mauro referenced U.S. government documents, Hamze again said this evidence does not exist.

He accused CAIR’s critics of making things up out of thin air. He claimed, “Their evidence is very well-documented by themselves. They create it; they regurgitate it; they put it out on the Internet and it’s fantastical… In reality, it’s just a bunch of propaganda.”

Mauro pointed out that the Justice Department’s list of unindicted co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation trial explicitly lists CAIR as an entity of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood. He even showed the document to the audience. CAIR is listed in the third section of the document on page 5 (line 11).

Hamze — yet again — said no such documentation exists. He rebutted, “It doesn’t say anything like that.”

CAIR Dismisses Muslim Brotherhood Documents

Mauro also showed a 1994 Muslim Brotherhood document discussing how to “develop [the] work of” CAIR, mentioning it by name.

Hamze’s rebuttal was, “We have nothing to do with the production of that document and Ryan knows that.”

He was responding to an accusation that was never made. The argument was that the Muslim Brotherhood wrote the document and it proves a link to CAIR; not that CAIR produced it.

CAIR Denies Prosecution of Its Officials

Hamze said, “No CAIR leader, no CAIR organization, no CAIR chapter, has ever been charged with a crime.”

This is patently false. There are at least four convicted CAIR officials:

  • Ghassan Elashi, founding board member of CAIR-Texas (sentenced to 65 years in prison for terror-related charges in Holy Land Foundation trial)
  • Randall (Ismail) Royer, a CAIR communications specialist (sentenced to 20 years for aiding and abetting other terrorists in gaining access to a training camp in Pakistan)
  • Bassem Khafagi, CAIR director of community relations (sentenced to 10 months in prison for bank and visa fraud).
  • Muthanna Al-Hanooti, CAIR-Michigan executive director (sentenced to 1 year in prison for attempting to buy oil from Saddam Hussein’s Iraq while it was under sanctions)

In 2011, it was reported that CAIR co-founder Omar Ahmad was nearly indicted. Serious questions are also being asked about foreign donations to CAIR and possible money laundering. This list does not include fundraisers who have been indicted or deported, such as Mohammad El-Mezain who raised over $100,000 for CAIR-NY.

Keep in mind, the core issue isn’t illegal activity. It is CAIR’s legal activity in support of the Islamist ideological cause.

The evidence introduced in the Holy Land Foundation suggests CAIR was established to support the Islamist agenda through influencing the media, governmental officials and public policy. It may not be a revenue stream for Hamas, as one of the purposes of the Holy Land Foundation was, but CAIR is still part of the Muslim Brotherhood network.

CAIR Claims Unindicted Co-Conspirator Listing Means Nothing

Hamze dismissed the list of unindicted co-conspirators as being just a “list of names” and “just a blatant list of things.” Being listed by the Department of Justice as an unindicted co-conspirator in a terror financing trial doesn’t happen to just anyone. The designations happen for a reason.

An unindicted co-conspirator is defined as a “person who is identified by a law enforcement officer to have engaged in a conspiracy, but who is not charged in the indictment charging that person’s fellow conspirators.”

CAIR was included because of its involvement in the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood conspiracy to support Hamas, which one main component – the Holy Land Foundation – was successfully prosecuted for.

What CAIR Didn’t Tell You About the Judge’s Ruling in 2009

Hamze correctly states that a federal judge ruled in 2009 that the Justice Department should not have made the list of unindicted co-conspirators public. What he chose not to mention is that the judge upheld the designation, ruling that the government provided “ample evidence” to justify it.

He also claimed that CAIR was not given an opportunity to challenge the designation. This was true of the Holy Land Foundation, hence the 2009 ruling. However, CAIR was given the opportunity to defend itself to Judge Solis and it failed.

CAIR Says It Shouldn’t Be Held Responsible for CAIR’s Actions

Hamze distanced himself from CAIR’s national leadership and other chapter leaders by describing it as a “federation of chapters” and saying he does not report to the Executive-Director.

CAIR chapters register independently, but Hamze’s organization wouldn’t be called CAIR-FL if it wasn’t a part of CAIR. If his chapter doesn’t reflect CAIR, then it wouldn’t have been honored with the2013 CAIR Chapter of the Year Award.

The deceptive registering of independent front groups was discussed by CAIR co-founder Omar Ahmad during a 1993 Brotherhood/Hamas meeting that was wiretapped by the FBI. He was recorded saying, “Registering an organization is easy. I can register 100 organizations in 100 cities in one day.”

And even if CAIR-FL were independent, it has its own radical history. For example, in June, CAIR-Tampa leader Hassan Shibly said, “Nationalism was pumped into Muslim communities to divide us to weaken Islam which united us.” You can read more about his history here.

It is ludicrous to suggest that the actions of senior CAIR officials do not reflect the entire organization. If a senior CAIR official like Hamze genuinely objects to CAIR’s conduct, he can leave.

Throughout the debate Hamze was unable to answer the charges levied against his organization, namely that the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) is a designated terrorist organization listed alongside Al-Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood and the Islamic State by the United Arab Emirates (UAE). He could not refute that it forms part of the Muslim Brotherhood’s network of affiliated organizations dedicated to furthering to cause of the international Muslim Brotherhood’s totalitarian Islamist goals.

***

Poole tweet

 

PPoole tweet

 

Also see:

Who let CAIR off the hook in the first place?

CAIRdiorama32 (1)WND, By ERIK RUSH:

As was widely reported this week, the Council on American-Islamic Relations and the Muslim American Society were recently designated as terrorist organizations by the United Arab Emirates. The two American groups were named alongside ISIS, al-Qaida and Muslim Brotherhood branches in a list numbering 83 Islamist groups.

CAIR, which claims to be a mainstream “religious community service organization,” is widely known to be a terror sponsor and a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood – itself the wellspring from which all global Sunni Muslim terror organizations flow. They were named by federal prosecutors in 2007 as an “unindicted co-conspirator” in a Hamas funding case connected with the Holy Land Foundation trial. Hamas has been designated as a foreign terrorist organization by the U.S. government since 2007.

If you’re thinking that the Muslim UAE’s designation of CAIR as a terrorist organization speaks volumes vis-à-vis the group’s geopolitical toxicity, you’re quite right. CAIR was also one of the organizations that sponsored the first Muslim prayer service held at the Washington National Cathedral last Friday, by the way.

Earlier this week, it was also revealed that CAIR is spearheading efforts to exacerbate racial tensions in Ferguson, Missouri, by using social media to advance the claim that Michael Brown (the black teenager who was shot and killed by a police officer in August) and Luqman Ameen Abdullah (a Muslim activist shot during an FBI raid in 2009) were victims of racist police targeting blacks. According to federal prosecutors, Abdullah was a radical Islamist intent upon overthrowing the U.S. government.

In July of 2009, U.S. District Judge Jorge A. Solis supported CAIR’s request to strike its name from documents listing it as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation case. While Solis is often portrayed as having been critical of CAIR (sometimes even being credited with publicly outing the CAIR-Hamas connection), the fact that he essentially acted on the organization’s behalf is evident in his order.

Then, in October of 2010, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals determined that the Justice Department had violated the Fifth Amendment rights of CAIR and another Muslim advocacy organization by including them on the publicly filed co-conspirator list in the case.

The pressing question here is how the government got from the firm belief in CAIR as a terror supporter to practically being an advocate for their so-called civil rights.

I believe it is high time we expose the irresponsibility, incompetence and/or corruption in such instances – no matter where the trail leads. It isn’t enough for Americans to be outraged time and again at the fact that our courts and government officials pay inordinate deference to malignant, subversive organizations and let it go at that.

Judges are, of course, quite adept at crafting their rulings, opinions and orders to appear legally iron clad and rhetorically cogent, even if their premises are dramatically flawed. In the interest of expedience, we won’t attempt to unravel those right now.

In the interest of accountability and future reference, however, we can look at the justices involved in this case.

Jorge Solis of the 5th Circuit Court is a George H.W. Bush appointee. Appeals Court Judges Emilio Garza, Fortunato Benavides and Marcia Crone entered the 2010 opinion. Garza, who wrote the opinion, is also a George H.W. Bush appointee. Justice Benavides was appointed to the court by Bill Clinton, and Crone by George W. Bush.

These things considered, while the DOJ may be accused of letting cases against terror facilitators unravel under the Obama administration, it is difficult to make the accusation of the justices engaging in the sort of left-wing, sympathist activism we have seen on the part of federal judges in recent years.

On the other hand, it would not be the first time that even mainstream government officials (including judges, who have political allegiances even though they’re not supposed to) insisted upon treating suspect individuals, governments, or organizations as legitimate, law-abiding contemporaries. This, of course, lends credence to the argument (some claim “conspiracy theory”) that militant Islamic organizations are being deftly manipulated by globalists against America in their own bid for supremacy.

Whatever the case, Americans need to realize that Islam is bad news, and it has been for 1,400 years. There are fewer examples more illustrative of this right now than CAIR. You don’t negotiate, let alone fraternize, with someone whose stated goal is your utter subjugation, and you certainly don’t take their words at face value when lying is actually enshrined as part of their creed.

We need a revival of nationalism in America – not a poisonous “My country, right or wrong” nationalism, but one wherein there is a resurgence of the common belief that there’s nothing wrong with placing our interests first. It is those who advance the notion – subliminally or otherwise – that “America sucks” who need to be driven from the arena of public debate.

First Amendment protections have never superseded national survival; thus First Amendment arguments ought not shield the subversives among us now, whether individuals or organizations.

To this end, we cannot afford to countenance the effete, would-be princes of global governance within the ranks of our government officials or captains of industry, those who are willing to empower primitive, misogynistic pedophiles, regardless of the supposed political or economic advantages. Neither can we afford dunderheads on the federal judiciary who are either corrupt or too short-sighted to know they are being played by the aforementioned parties. Federal judges can be impeached.

Neither globalists nor Islamists would have any sway whatsoever over the American people or our political process if we merely held our public officials accountable and adhered to the Constitution. If a substantial number of Americans decide not to participate in these civic duties, the rest of us can take up the slack.

Media wishing to interview Erik Rush, please contact media@wnd.com.

Also see:

In a written statement, CAIR correctly noted the ruling concluded that the U.S. government violated the rights of Muslim Americans when it made its list of un-indicted co-conspirators public. The list, in addition to containing CAIR’s name, also included the Islamist Society of North America (ISNA) and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT).

However, CAIR failed to mention that the court declined “to strike CAIR, ISNA and NAIT’s names from those documents.” “Maintaining the names of the entities on the List is appropriate in light of the evidence proffered by the Government,” ruled U.S. District Court Judge Jorge Solis.

Solis affirmed that “the government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR, ISNA, NAIT, with NAIT, the Islamic Association for Palestine, and with Hamas.”

As an example of evidence that established these ties, the ruling cited a 1994 Palestine Committee memo naming CAIR and other groups as “working organizations for the Palestine Committee.” According to internal documents submitted as evidence in the 2008 terror financing trial of the Holy Land Foundation, the Muslim Brotherhood created the Palestine Committee with a “designed purpose to support HAMAS” politically and financially.

FBI Evidence: CAIR Leaders are HAMAS USA

 

Published on Oct 28, 2014 by theunitedwest

Tom Trento presents FBI “smoking gun” evidence that the Palestine Committee which oversaw and ran the Holy Land Foundation (convicted on 36 counts of providing material support to terrorism, money laundering, conspiracy and tax fraud) was founded by a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) and HAMAS Leader Mousa abu Marzook along with Senior Executives Nihad Awad and Senior officer Omar Ahmad who both Co-Founded the largest Muslim advocacy group in the United States CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations) for the purpose of raising money for the HAMAS and to support a media, public relations, and political campaign to ultimately destroy Israel.

CAIR’s Attack on Zuhdi Jasser’s Funders Raises the Questions: Who is CAIR and Where Does Its Money Come From?

John-G600x338ACT! for America, By John Guandolo:

Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, the founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD), served for eleven years as a medical officer in the United States Navy where he was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal. Dr. Jasser is a Past-President of the Arizona Medical Association, and currently has a private practice in Phoenix specializing in internal medicine and nuclear cardiology.
Dr. Jasser, as many are aware, is an outspoken critic of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Movement in the United States, and is harshly critical of those seeking to impose sharia (Islamic Law) in America. He strongly supports the U.S. Constitution as the supreme law of the land.

Zuhdi Jasser is a patriot, an American hero, and a Muslim – which is why Hamas (doing business as CAIR) is attacking him.

Last week, Hamas (dba CAIR) launched yet another assault on Dr. Jasser. In 2012, CAIR unsuccessfully tried to block his appointment to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), where he currently serves. CAIR is calling on the USCIRF to investigate the sources of funding for Dr. Jasser’s organization AIFD.

The fact that a Hamas organization like CAIR could operate so openly in the U.S. without disruption from the current administration is, in and of itself, astonishing. CAIR’s brazenness in attacking an honorable American like Dr. Jasser begs questions that must be answered – Who is CAIR and Where Does Its Funding Come From?

Let us together take a walk through the place CAIR never wants us to go – into the land of facts and evidence.

CAIR was incorporated in 1994 by Nihad Awad, Omar Ahmad, and Rafeeq Jaber. All three of these men were leaders of the Islamic Association of Palestine (IAP), a now-defunct Hamas organization in the U.S. Musa Abu Marzook, the Deputy Political Chief for Hamas and the Leader of Hamas in the United States (Chairman of the U.S. Palestine Committee), was a member of the IAP Board of Directors. FYI, Hamas is a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) by the U.S. government.

In 1993 and 1994, Omar Ahmad served as the National President for IAP, and from 1994-2005 was the Chairman of the Board for CAIR. Omar Ahmad was also on the Executive Committee of the U.S. Palestine Committee (Hamas). Rafeeq Jaber served as the National President of IAP from 1996-98 and 1999-2005.

U.S. government prosecutors and the Department of Justice identify CAIR as a member of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee, which is Hamas in the United States.

In 1993, the leaders of the U.S. Palestine Committee (Hamas) met in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The meeting was covered by the FBI via physical surveillance, microphones in meeting rooms, and wiretaps on phones. An “Action Memo” from FBI’s Assistant Director for Counterterrorism Dale Watson declared this was a “Meeting among senior leaders of Hamas, the HLFRD, and the IAP.” FBI analysis of the Philadelphia meeting, which was entered into evidence at the US v Holy Land Foundation (hereafter “HLF”) trial reveals “All attendees of this meeting are Hamas members.” Nihad Awad and Omar Ahmad were present at this meeting.

Recorded conversations of this meeting captured Awad and Ahmad discussing the creation of a new public relations organization for Hamas which investigators testified was CAIR, created in summer of 1994, less than a year after the Philadelphia meeting.

The HLF Indictment (2004) states: “The purpose of this (1993 Philadelphia) meeting was to determine their course of action in support of Hamas’ opposition to the peace plan and to decide how to conceal their activities from the scrutiny of the United States government.”

In a 2004 FBI raid at the Annandale, Virginia residence of Ismail Elbarasse, a senior Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood (MB) operative, the archives of the U.S. MB were discovered. One of the documents found lists the leaders of the U.S. Palestine Committee (Hamas) – the names of CAIR founders Nihad Awad and Omar Ahmad (alias Omar Yeheya) are on that list.

Because of the overwhelming evidence that CAIR is a Hamas entity, U.S. prosecutors list CAIR as a member of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee (Hamas) and as an unindicted co-conspirator in the HLF trial – the largest Hamas and terrorism financing trial ever successfully prosecuted in U.S. history.

In the government filing requesting a denial of CAIR’s motion to have its name removed from the Unindicted Co-Conspirator list in the HLF case, U.S. prosecutors state, “The U.S. Muslim Brotherhood created the U.S. Palestine Committee, which documents reflect was initially comprised of three organizations: the OLF (HLF), the IAP, and the UASR. CAIR was later added to these organizations…the mandate of these organizations, per the International Muslim Brotherhood, was to support Hamas.”

In his ruling, the federal Judge in this case, Jorge Solis, stated: “The Government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR, ISNA, and NAIT with the HLF, the Islamic Association of Palestine (“IAP”), and with Hamas.”

The question of why the President of ISNA sits on the Department of Homeland Security’s Advisory Committee, works directly with the Secretary of State, briefs National Security staffs, moderates panel discussions at CIA Headquarters, and has been given awards by the FBI will have to be addressed at a later date.

Is anyone else wondering how CAIR and its leaders are allowed to operate freely and unimpeded in America, with their headquarters only a block from the U.S. Capitol?

More evidence…

In the December 2007 government filing in the US v Sabri Benkhala appeal, the government stated: “From its founding by the Muslim Brotherhood leaders, CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists.” So, CAIR is a Muslim Brotherhood organization which supports terrorists. It would appear federal law is being violated here.

This would explain why CAIR has a long record of defending jihadis and jihadi organizations, while publicly condemning the counterterrorism efforts of the U.S. government and local law enforcement. Noteworthy is CAIR’s vigorous defense of Hamas leader Musa Abu Marzook after his arrest, and their criticism of our government for its investigation and indictment of the Holy Land Foundation – another Hamas entity.

What do senior government officials who have seen the evidence have to say about CAIR?

Former FBI Assistant Director Steve Pomeranz stated: “By masquerading as a mainstream public affairs organization, CAIR has taken the lead in trying to mislead the public about the terrorist underpinnings of militant Islamic movements, in particular, Hamas.”

In a 2003 Senate Sub-Committee hearing on radical Islam, Senator Charles Schumer stated, “To make matters worse, the prominent members of the Council’s (CAIR’s) current leadership who you Mr. Chairman invited to the hearings today – they declined to testify – also have intimate connections with Hamas.”

In June 2009, on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives, Congressman Frank Wolf (VA) gave a lengthy speech in which he laid out a great deal of the evidence against CAIR and its ties to Hamas. The transcript of this speech can be found at http://wolf.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/wolf-gives-major-floor-speech-on-fbis-cooperation-with-cair

In a letter dated April 28, 2009 from the FBI’s Assistant Director, Office of Congressional Affairs, to U.S. Senator John Kyl (AZ), the FBI leader details why the FBI cut off all formal ties to CAIR and identifies it as an unindicted co-conspirator in the HLF trial because of its relationship with Hamas.

In a letter dated February 12, 2010 to U.S. Congresswoman Sue Myrick (NC) from Assistant U.S. Attorney General Ronald Weich, Mr. Weich wrote “Enclosed (is)…evidence that was introduced in that trial (US v HLF) which demonstrated the relationship among CAIR, individual CAIR founders, and the Palestine Committee. Evidence was also introduced that demonstrated a relationship between the Palestine Committee and Hamas.”

Screenshot of scanned check given to Islamic organization Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) by the terrorist organization Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Screenshot of scanned check given to Islamic organization Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) by the terrorist organization Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

For those of you who forgot Junior High School math, please allow me to review: If A=B and B=C, then A=C. There is a relationship between CAIR and the U.S. Palestine Committee. There is a relationship between the U.S. Palestine Committee and Hamas. Therefore, there is a relationship between CAIR and Hamas. As was previously stated, on the order from the International Muslim Brotherhood, the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood created the U.S. Palestine Committee to raise “media, money, men and all that” for Hamas. The U.S. Palestine Committee created four organizations to support Hamas with propaganda, money, and recruits: The Occupied Land Fund (which became the HLF), the Islamic Association of Palestine (IAP), the United Association for Studies and Research (UASR), and CAIR.

In the sporting world we call this a slam dunk. But what about the money CAIR receives. Certainly if they are attacking Dr. Jasser and his organization for improprieties in his sources of funding, CAIR must be squeaky clean, yes?

No, actually.

Actually, the Hamas front called the Holy Land Foundation provided CAIR with $5,000 of seed money shortly after CAIR was founded, and, in return, CAIR raised money for HLF. Is there another violation of U.S. law here?

CAIR has also received funds from overseas organizations like WAMY (World Association of Muslim Youth) and IIRO (International Islamic Relief Organization). Both WAMY and IIRO are Saudi-funded groups whose U.S. offices were raided by the government because of their possible ties to Hamas and Al Qaeda.

Most notably, In 1999, CAIR received $250,000 from a Saudi-based bank headed by the former Director of the Muslim World League (MWL). Osama bin Laden identified MWL as a primary source of funds for Al Qaeda. Federal investigators raided MWL’s U.S. offices. It is not a far reach to see that CAIR received money from a source the leader of Al Qaeda recognized was a “primary” source of funding for AQ.

It should be noted the information in this article is a small amount of the massive evidence revealing the Council on American Islamic Relations is a Hamas entity whose role in the greater Islamic Movement here is to “support terrorists” as the U.S. Department of Justice has stated. They do this in a variety of ways. As a matter of fact, CAIR’s website acknowledges that all money donated to it via zakat goes to jihad fisabillillah – the seventh category under Islamic Law – but maybe we should save that discussion for another article.

As CAIR launches its attacks against honorable Americans like Dr. Zuhdi Jasser who are standing firm on the truth about a real and present threat to the American people and our nation, another question must be asked…

Where are the U.S. agencies charged with protecting and defending Americans like Dr. Jasser, and why are they not shutting CAIR down, arresting its leaders, and seizing all of its assets? Maybe they haven’t seen the facts.

John Guandolo is the founder of UnderstandingtheThreat.com and the author of the book Raising a Jihadi Generation, detailing the Muslim Brotherhood’s Movement in the United States. He works closely with ACT! for America and helped with the creation of ACT’s Thin Blue Line Project which educates law enforcement, military, and intelligence professionals about the threat from the Muslim Brotherhood’s Movement, and gives them investigative tools and strategies for addressing this threat. Mr. Guandolo is a 1989 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, a former active duty combat Marine Infantry and Reconnaissance Officer, and a former Special Agent with the FBI. For more information, please go to www.UnderstandingtheThreat.com.

 

DOJ: HLF’s Bid To Vacate Trial Outcome “Strains Credulity”

Judge Ends Imam’s Lawsuit Triggered by IPT Report

IPT News,
June 25, 2013:

Shhhh, Don’t Tell Anyone: Hamas Won

hamas33-450x297By Andrew McCarthy:

(Excerpt)

With Obama on the phone egging him on, Netanyahu abased himself. Not only did he apologize to Turkey, he further capitulated to Erdogan’s demand that Israel pay compensation to the Mavi Marmara “victims.” After the apology, Erdogan briefed his Hamas confederates and announcedhe would be visiting them in Gaza next month. Predictably, he has since announced that Netanyahu’s humiliating act of contrition will not be sufficient to restore diplomatic relations between the two nations. Just as predictably, other Islamic states are now preparing demands for apologies and compensation for sundry exercises of Israeli self-defense against jihadist terror.

There has been no shortage of speculation about why Israel caved. Perhaps it was anxiety over Iranian nukes and Syrian tumult — the hope that rapprochement with Turkey would give Washington more maneuvering room to protect Israel’s interests. Perhaps there were financial considerations, including billions potentially to be made in the exportation of natural gas. None of these explanations is very satisfying. But that is beside the point. For Americans, what matters is not what this episode says about shifts in Israeli policy. It is the sea-change in U.S. counterterrorism that most concerns us.

We now know that Hamas has won.

In 2011, Erdogan made a startling pronouncement on Charlie Rose’s PBS program:

Let me give you a very clear message. I don’t see Hamas as a terror organization. Hamas is a political party. And it is an organization. It is a resistance movement trying to protect its country under occupation. So we should not mix terrorist organizations with such an organization.

Really? Is this what we now mean by regular politics: In the 1987 charter by which it proclaimed its existence, Hamas explained that it formed in order to “join its hands with those of all jihad fighters for the purpose of liberating Palestine.” Clarifying that Hamas is “one of the wings of the Muslim Brothers . . . the Muslim Brotherhood Movement … the largest Islamic movement in the modern era,” the charter elaborates:

Our struggle against the Jews is extremely wide-ranging and grave, so much so that it will need all the loyal efforts we can wield, to be followed by further steps and reinforced by successive battalions from the multifarious Arab and Islamic world, until the enemies are defeated and Allah’s victory prevails.

Invoking Islamic scripture, the charter further asserts:

Hamas has been looking forward to implement Allah’s promise whatever time it might take. The prophet, prayer and peace be upon him, said: The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them); until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him! [Citing authoritative hadiths.]

In its 25 years, Hamas has made good on its promise to kill. Yet Erdogan has been telling Obama since early 2009 that the United States must “redefine” what it means by “terror and terrorist organizations.” It is increasingly obvious that portraying Hamas as a “political party” and a “resistance movement,” rather than a terrorist organization, is one among the “wide range of issues” on which the president finds himself in agreement with the Turkish prime minister.

Yes, nominally, it is still a crime in the United States to provide material support to Hamas. But these days you have a better chance of being prosecuted under those immigration statutes the administration declines to enforce.

Hamas prosecutions went out with the 2008 Holy Land Foundation trial. Since then, the investigation of outfits proved by the Bush Justice Department to be cogs in the Muslim Brotherhood conspiracy to fund and otherwise encourage Hamas’s jihad against Israel have been dropped. Worse, some of those outfits, such as the Islamic Society of North America, are regular guests at the Obama White House. They are consulted in the formulation of Obama foreign policy, which — lo and behold — just happens to favor lavish financial and military support for the Muslim Brotherhood regime in Egypt. As for Obama national-security policy, Islamic-supremacists have been invited to censor the materials used to train our law-enforcement and intelligence agents.

Realistically, how could anyone expect the Obama Justice Department to prosecute the financial support of Hamas when the Obama administration is actively engaged in the financial support of Hamas — sluicing hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to Gaza, fully aware that it is under Hamas’s totalitarian control. In this, too, Obama is in concord with Erdogan, whose regime has similarly backed Hamas with hundreds of millions of dollars — news that comes to us courtesy of Turkey’s grateful friends at the Union of Good.

Until 2009, U.S. policy was straightforward: Hamas was a terrorist organization and America would not deal with it unless and until it acknowledged Israel’s right to exist and convincingly renounced violence. All that has changed, though. Under Obama’s governance, Islamic-supremacists are bankrolled even as they act on their pledge to destroy Israel. Israel, in turn, is expected to apologize.

Our military’s killing of Osama bin Laden, complemented by the controversial drone campaign, has given President Obama cover. The occasional terrorist is taken out, the administration beats its chest, and few notice that al-Qaeda is resurgent, that the administration spends far more time appeasing Islamists than killing terrorists, and that Hamas has won.

Welcome to the next four years.

Read it all at Front Page

White House Partners with Muslim Brotherhood Front

20110426_ISNAlogoBy Ryan Mauro:

The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), a group with Muslim Brotherhood origins and an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror-financing trial, recently toured the White House and met with multiple officials. According to the group, Paul Monteiro, Associate Director of the Office of Public Engagement, “cited ISNA as his primary means of outreach to the American Muslim community.”

The Obama administration’s close relationship with ISNA is about more than photo ops and press releases. It is about policy formulation. The input of ISNA is so treasured that the officials coached the organization on how to engage the White House.

On March 8, ISNA President Mohamed Magid joined 10 other religious leaders in a 90-minute conversation with President Obama about immigration reform. Also present was senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett, who spoke at ISNA’s 2009 convention. Three days later, Magid took part in a meeting with President Obama where he got “recommendations” in preparation for his Middle East trip, including some from groups with a history of defending Hezbollah.

“Over the past two years, I-along with my White House colleagues-have benefited from the advice of many of your [Magid’s] organizations through our Office of Public Engagement,” said Deputy National Security Adviser Denis McDonough on March 6, 2011 during a speech at the mosque that Magid leads.

ISNA’s White House tour included spending time with George Selim, the White House Director for Community Partnerships, who is an annual speaker at ISNA’s conventions. Selim previously admitted that “hundreds” of meetings have taken place between government officials and the Council on American-Islamic Relations, another group with Brotherhood origins that was designated an unindicted co-conspirator.

The U.S. government stated that ISNA is a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity when it designated it as an unindicted co-conspirator in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation. A federal judge upheld  the designation in 2009 because of “ample” evidence linking ISNA to Hamas. A 1991 U.S. Muslim Brotherhood memo lists ISNA and several of its components among “our organizations and the organizations of our friends,” and a 1988 document says it is part of the Brotherhood “apparatus.”

Read more at Front Page

If you are asking yourself why the Holy land Foundation trial’s findings have been ignored by everyone all you need to do is note the timing of the conclusion of the trial….2008,  just as the Obama administration came into power with Eric Holder at the helm of the DOJ. Since then Obama has been partnering with and empowering the Muslim Brotherhood in every way he can while the various MB front groups work feverishly to undermine the legitimacy of the HLF trial. And 80 file boxes worth of evidence submitted during the 2008 Holy Land Foundation trial including “The Project” documents, are being withheld from the American public by the Department of Justice

Watch The Project to get the whole story:

Related articles

Media Unable to Discern Fact from Fiction Regarding John Brennan

mbBy John Guandolo:

In the aftermath of my interview on the Tom Trento show last week, some in the media seem unable or unwilling to grasp some basic facts about the threat environment in America these days.  In response to numerous omissions in the dozens of stories covering my interview stating that John Brennan is “Unfit” to be the next Director of Central Intelligence, please allow me to share facts and evidence with you about our threat landscape.

The largest terrorism financing and Hamas trial in U.S. history was U.S. v Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), which was adjudicated in 2008 in Dallas, Texas.  HLF and its leadership were found guilty of funneling over $12 million directly to Hamas.  At the time it was indicted, HLF was the largest Islamic charity in America.  A great deal of evidence entered into the HLF trial came from material uncovered during an FBI raid in Annandale, VA in 2004 where the archives of the Muslim Brotherhood in North America were discovered.  These strategic documents, financial documents, audio/video tapes, photos and the like revealed the Muslim Brotherhood’s strategies, plans, tactics, organizations, and leadership in America.  Evidence revealed the very first Islamic organization formed in America – the Muslim Students Association (MSA) – was formed in 1963 by the Muslim Brotherhood.  Today, there are over 600 MSA chapters across the U.S.  From the MSA, the largest and most prominent Islamic organizations in the U.S. were created by the Muslim Brotherhood including the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) and others.  NAIT holds the title/deeds to many of the Islamic Centers in America today.  Hamas is a Muslim Brotherhood (MB) organization, and wherever the MB exists, like in the U.S., the Special Section is always present.  The Special Section is the unit within the MB which conducts military operations – what we call “terrorism.”

Read more at Understanding The Threat

Why It Should Always Be Called ‘Hamas-CAIR’

By Pamela Geller:

Last Monday, the Supreme Court declined to hear appeals from the Holy Land Five: five former officials of what was once the largest Islamic charity in the United States, the Holy Land Foundation (HLF), who were convicted of funneling millions in charitable donations to the jihad terror group Hamas.  That effectively ends the story of the Holy Land Foundation, but since many of its co-conspirators are still active, notably the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the case is worth revisiting.

In 2008, the U.S. government filed a memorandum in opposition to the request from two of the groups linked to the HLF, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), that the “unindicted co-conspirator” designation they received during the HLF trial be removed (it wasn’t).  The memorandum is a useful and illuminating summary of what some of the most prominent Islamic groups in the U.S. have been involved with.

It noted that some of HLF’s top officials, including Shukri Abu Baker, its secretary and chief executive officer; Mohammed El-Mezain, its director of endowments; and Ghassan Elashi, its chairman of the board, were charged with “providing material support to a foreign terrorist organization,” as well as with “engaging in prohibited financial transactions with a Specially Designated Global Terrorist, money laundering, filing false tax returns, and several conspiracy charges, including: conspiracy to provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization…conspiracy to provide funds, goods and services to Specially Designated Global Terrorist … and conspiracy to commit money laundering[.]”

And the HLF officials “were not acting alone.”  Rather, they were “operating in concert with a host of individuals and organizations dedicated to sustaining and furthering the Hamas movement. … The object of the conspiracy was to support Hamas. The support will be shown to have take several forms, including raising money, propaganda, proselytizing, recruiting, as well as many other types of actions intended to continue to promote and move forward Hamas’s agenda of the destruction of the State of Israel and establishment of an Islamic state in its place.”

ISNA and NAIT were among the groups listed as “members of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.”  During the trial, the government introduced evidence “expressly linking ISNA and NAIT to the HLF and its principals; the Islamic Association for Palestine and its principals; the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States and its Palestine Committee, headed by Hamas official Mousa Abu Marzook; and the greater Hamas-affiliated conspiracy described in the Government’s case-in-chief.”  The Islamic Association for Palestine, since shut down as a Hamas front, is CAIR’s parent organization.

The evidence introduced at the trial “established that ISNA and NAIT were among those organizations created by the U.S.-Muslim Brotherhood.”  They were listed as among those organizations dedicated to the Muslim Brotherhood’s stated goal, according to a captured internal document made public during the HLF trial, of “eliminating and destroying the Western Civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over other religions.”

Read more at American Thinker

Pamela Geller is the publisher of AtlasShrugs.com and the author of the WND Books title Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance.

Another Important Victory: The Holy Land Foundation Trial Redux

Shariah Finance Watch:

Observers who follow such things know how important the Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing trial has been in uncovering the spread of both violent and civilizational jihad in the USA.

For those who may not be familiar with the Holy Land Foundation trial, here is a very brief synopsis:

The Holy Land Foundation was the largest Islamic charity in the United States. It was headquartered in Richardson, Texas, a suburb of Dallas. In 2007, federal prosecutors brought charges against the organization for funding Hamas and other Islamic terrorist organizations. The Holy Land Foundation’s assets were frozen by the European Union and U.S., and the charity was shut down by the U.S. government following the discovery that it was funding Hamas. The 2008 trial of the charity leaders was the largest terrorism financing prosecution in American history. In 2009, the founders of the organization were given life sentences for funneling $12 million to Hamas.

Much was uncovered during the investigation associated with the prosecution, including the extent to which the Muslim Brotherhood had infiltrated America and controlled all of the major Muslim organizations in America, to include the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR). Several such organizations and individuals were named as unindicted co-conspirators in the trial and it was the reported intention of the Dallas US attorney’s office to prosecute at least some of those co-conspirators before Barack Obama ascended to the presidency and Eric Holder became attorney general and shut the whole operation down.

Nevertheless, Holder was too late to save the Holy Land Foundation and the folks who started it.

Not surprisingly, however, the convicted defendants appealed their convictions and became somewhat of a cause celebre among the hard Left in America and the Islamic community, many of whom are members of the organizations listed as unindicted co-conspirators in the first place:

http://electronicintifada.net/content/holy-land-5-appeal-begins-palestinians-gaza-praise-charity-closed-bush/11807

It seems the Islamists wanted us to believe that all the Holy Land Foundation was involved in was good works and sending poor Palestinian Muslims to school. They went to great lengths to highlight these activities.

The problem of course is that this is simply a smokescreen and just because a charity does some “good” work doesn’t mean it doesn’t also take part in nefarious activity as well. Think of the Mafia as another example. Mafia run districts were usually very clean and free of petty crime, but that came at a brutal price.

In terms of Islamic charities, we have proof positive in Shariah that they are instructed to support a variety of activities with money. The money comes from zakat donations, the form of tithing that we have posted about so often on SFW. There are 8 destinations for zakat under Shariah. Seven of them are benign for the most part.

But number 7, as we have pointed out so often, is downright hostile and violent: “those fighting in the way of allah,” defined as those engaged in Islamic military operations who are not part of an army roster. Sounds an awful lot like irregular combatants doesn’t it? That’s because that is exactly what it is.

And that’s why the Holy Land Foundation sent at least $12 million to HAMAS and other Jihadist organizations–they were following Islamic law. As a result, the charity was shut down and its leaders deposited in jail for life.

Anyway, the appeal has gotten all the way up to the Supreme Court level. In the process, a US government bureaucrat testified on behalf of the Holy Land Foundation, with the rather disturbing revelation that one of our US government funded programs was probably guilty of the same offense as the Holy Land Foundation, since it funneled money to organizations that have been deemed to be tied to HAMAS. Of course that disgraceful government employee, Edward Abington, provided that testimony as a means of justifying the Holy Land Foundation’s activity.

We rather think that Abington’s testimony should produce an invasive, hostile audit of just where our tax dollars are going. Clearly we do not benefit from creeps like Abington directing those dollars.

http://vinienco.com/2012/10/29/holy-land-foundation-trial-continues/

In closing we are pleased to report that the Supreme Court has in fact refused the Holy Land Foundation appeal.

Chalk one up for the good guys.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=%2Fdocketfiles%2F11-1390.htm

End of the Line for HLF

IPT News:

The United States Supreme Court has decided not to accept appeals from the five Holy Land Foundation officials convicted of illegally funneling more than $12 million to Hamas, essentially concluding the case.

The court had no comment in declining to hear the case Monday.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected similar arguments last year in upholding the convictions against Ghassan Elashi, Shukri Abu-Baker, Mohammad El-Mezain, Mufid Abdulqader and Abdulrahman Odeh. They were convicted on a total of 108 counts in 2008 and are serving sentences ranging from 15 years to 65 years in prison.

The defendants wanted the Supreme Court to overturn the Fifth Circuit ruling by rejecting the prosecution’s use of Israeli security officials whose identities were never disclosed. That, defense attorneys argued, hampered their ability to cross-examine the witnesses and violated the defendants’ rights to confront their accusers.

But other testimony and evidence was consistent with the Israelis’ testimony, the Fifth Circuit found. And there is precedent – especially in drug prosecutions – for courts balancing witness safety against the defendants’ confrontation rights. “[T]here was a serious and clear need to protect the true identities of [the Israeli witnesses] because of concerns for their safety,” the Fifth Circuit ruling said.

In addition, prosecutors did provide sufficient information for defense attorneys to cross examine aggressively. The “defense was therefore well-armed with information upon which to confront and cross-examine both,” the appellate court found.

The defense and its supporters continue to cast the Holy Land Foundation as a victim of overzealous post-9/11 prosecutions. The group merely raised money for needy Palestinians, they argue, and was never connected to any violence.

But evidence and testimony in the trial showed the HLF sent money to Palestinian charities controlled by Hamas. “The purpose of creating the Holy Land Foundation was as a fundraising arm for Hamas,” U.S. District Judge Jorge Solis said at the 2009 sentencing hearing.

HLF had been one of the nation’s largest Muslim charities before being shut down in 2001. Other disclosures in the case tied several prominent American Islamist groups – especially the Council on American-Islamic Relations – to a Muslim Brotherhood network in the United States created to provide Hamas with political and financial support.

Beyond The Line For HLF:

While Monday’s refusal by the U.S. Supreme Court to hear an appeal by defendants in the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) prosecution effectively closes the case for the defense, it could open options for the government.

In addition to the five defendants, HLF as an organization also was convicted in the case. As we reported in December 2008, there are potential enforcement ramifications stemming from the HLF case beyond the five convicted defendants. This is particularly true now the appellate process has been exhausted in favor of the prosecution.

Since HLF has now been legally determined to have been an organization involved in terrorism support, foreign nationals who worked for HLF or otherwise assisted it may be subject to immigration enforcement action in the form of removal (deportation) proceedings.

In fact, even naturalized U.S. citizens who may have been involved in HLF activities before they naturalized may be subject to either criminal fraud prosecution and/or revocation of their citizenship status if they misrepresented their involvement with HLF or the nature of HLF activities while they were affiliated with the organization.

The Supreme Court decision finalizing the HLF appeals process firmly strengthens the position for law enforcement agencies, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and their ability to aggressively investigate and prosecute additional suspects who may have been involved with this organization.

More People Must Care about CAIR

Nihad Awad

By Adam Turner:

It has come to my attention that I may be suffering from “CAIRophobia.”

Almost certainly, according to the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), I am already afflicted with “Islamophobia,” which they define as “unfounded fear of and hostility towards Islam. Such fear and hostility leads to discriminations against Muslims, exclusion of Muslims from mainstream political or social process, stereotyping, the presumption of guilt by association, and finally hate crimes.”  Islamophobia is actually a term the Muslim Brotherhood – the granddaddy of all Islamist groups – and their cohorts may have invented to take advantage of the bleeding hearts among the politically correct.  So, if I am suffering from it, I suppose it is just a short hop to also suffering from “CAIRophobia,” which I define as having a very rational fear of CAIR.

I accept this phobia.  In fact, I sure wish some others had CAIRophobia.

CAIR is very busy pressure group these days.  Recently, it demanded that the Pentagon drop a former CIA operative who worked inside Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, known by his pseudonym of Reza Kahlili, as a lecturer at the Department of Defense’s Joint Counterintelligence Training Academy.  Although Kahlili is primarily known for teaching, writing and lecturing about the dangers the radical Iranian regime poses to the West, CAIR still felt the need to call for his dismissal for his supposed “anti-Islam agenda” as a former Muslim-turned-Christian.  This is all part of CAIR’S continuing quest to purge the Defense Department and other government departments or agencies of the services of any expert who identifies radical Islam as a major threat to our nation.  CAIR’s public relations “jihads” have been waged against such people as Robert Spencer, John Guandolo, and Matthew Dooley.  In Kahlili’s case, the Pentagon refused to drop him, but it did go out of its way to assure CAIR that Kahlili “does not lecture on or about Islam or any religious treatise, and his personal beliefs are his own.”

CAIR has also recently been hard at work attempting to shame and malign Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-MN), and her four congressional compatriots for their letters to the Inspector Generals (IGs) of the Defense Department, the State Department, the Justice Department, the Homeland Security Department, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.  These letters asked the IGs to investigate thoroughly the degree to which members of, or sympathizers with, the Muslim Brotherhood are active in our defense and intelligence communities, and what impact that possible infiltration might be having on our national security.  Through its pressure, CAIR presumably hopes to force the congressional leadership to block any such investigation. Harming the political careers of these Congressmen and intimidating others from ever addressing any issue related to radical Islam is an added benefit.

Further, CAIR, with the help of its left-wing friends at the Associated Press, along with other politically correct leftists, has also sought to embarrass and intimidate the New York Police Department (NYPD) from doing its job: protecting the public of New York City.  The NYPD has found itself in CAIR’s crosshairs because of its continuing surveillance of Muslim people, mosques, etc. in public areas.  Even though going to Muslim-inhabited areas to surveil Muslim terrorists makes as much sense as going to an Italian-American club to surveil possible members of the Italian Mafia or going to an Irish-American bar to surveil potential IRA terrorists, CAIR believes that Muslim Americans deserve the special right not to be surveilled.

The amazing part of all this is that CAIR has an uncanny, Teflon-like ability to avoid mainstream criticism of its own disturbing background.

These are the facts involving CAIR.  CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding caseSome of its members have been indicted and then convicted of terrorism, fraud or other criminal charges.  Research has shown that CAIR does not seem to have much of an American membership, and that it probably relies on funding from other sources, including the now defunct Hamas-funder, the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), and potentially illegal foreign funding, especially from Saudi Arabia. CAIR even hit up the despicable Gaddafi regime in Libya for cash.  The executive director of CAIR, Nihad Awad, participated in a three-day summit of U.S.-based members and supporters of the Palestinian terrorist organization Hamas.  CAIR refused for many years to unequivocally condemn Hezbollah and Palestinian terror organizations by name, even those which are formally designated terror groups by the U.S. and international community. Members of CAIR have also been caught promoting or making anti-Semitic statements. For much more information on CAIR, just see this website devoted to exposing CAIR, which CAIR unsuccessfully attempted to shut down through a defamation lawsuit.

Luckily, there are some other prominent CAIRophobes.  The FBI has severed its ties with CAIR.  Numerous U.S. senators and congressmen have condemned it, including Democratic Senators Charles Schumer and Dick Durban.  Numerous judges, FBI agents, and even a U.S. attorney have also weighed in.

Read more at Front Page

 

 

CAIR’s Next Generation Radical

IPT News:

Zahra Billoo may be one of the more refreshing new faces among Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) officials.

A Recent Case Sheds Light on the Muslim Brotherhood, but Most Republicans Ignore It

When the five House Republicans rose up to call for scrutiny of enemy efforts to  influence our government, they were not speaking hypothetically. The effort is  very real. And the enemy is now so brazen, so confident about the inroads it has  made, that it publicly closes ranks around its operatives even after their  treachery has been laid bare.

by ANDREW C. MCCARTHY

I’m a big fan of the 1 percent. No, not the dastardly 1 percent of Occupy    Wall Street myth; I’m partial, instead, to the 1 percent of Congress that takes  seriously the threat of Islamic-supremacist influence operations against our  government.

The people have 435 representatives serving in the House and another hundred  in the Senate. Of these 535, a total of 288 are Republicans – 241 and 47 in the  lower and upper chambers, respectively. Of these, only five House conservatives  – five – have had the fortitude to raise concerns about the Islamist  connections of government officials entrusted with positions enabling them to  shape U.S. policy.

Think about that. Republicans purport to be the national-security party. For  decades this claim was well founded, starting with Ronald Reagan’s clarity in  seeing the Soviets as enemies to be defeated, not accommodated. President  Reagan’s plan for the Cold War was, “We win, they lose,” and he pulled it off  because he was not under any illusions about who “they” were.

But something happened to the GOP in the Bush years. For all the welcome  understanding that Bill Clinton was wrong – that the jihad could not be indicted  into submission – the Bush administration never learned a fundamental truth that  Reagan knew only too well: You cannot defeat your enemies unless you understand  them, and you cannot even begin to understand them if you are too craven to name  them.

As they gather in Tampa for their quadrennial showcase, Republicans, but for  the 1 percent, remain timorous on the subject of America’s enemies. Oh, they’ll  tell you that we must confront “terrorism” and crack down on the “terrorists.”  But that’s not much different from claiming to be against “burglary” and  “burglars.” Terrorism is a vicious crime, but it becomes a national-security  threat only when it is an instrument of an ideology that aims to destroy our  country. What made the terrorist organizations armed and trained by the Soviets  in the Sixties and Seventies a threat was the Soviets, not the  terrorism.

America’s enemies are Islamic supremacists: Muslims adherent to a  totalitarian interpretation of Islam who, like Soviet Communists, seek to impose  their ideology throughout the world, very much including the United States.  Terrorism is an offensive strategy they use, but it is only one arrow in the  quiver. Its chief utility, moreover, is not that it will coerce surrender on its  own; it is the atmosphere of intimidation it creates. That dramatically  increases the effectiveness of the enemy’s several other offensive strategies –  legal demands for concessions, media campaigns, infiltration of society’s major  institutions, and influence operations against government.

The most disheartening thing about the modern Republican party’s dereliction  – about its accommodation and empowerment of our enemies under the delusional  guise of “Muslim outreach” – is that it flies in the face of the Bush Justice  Department’s signal counterterrorism achievement.

That was the 2007-08 Holy Land Foundation case. For once, political  correctness and the fear of being smeared as “Islamophobic” were shelved. In the  course of convicting several Hamas operatives, prosecutors proved that the  Muslim Brotherhood is engaged in a far-flung enterprise aimed, in the Brothers’  own words, at “eliminating and destroying” our way of life “from within” by  means of “sabotage.” The Bush Justice Department not only showed that what the  Brotherhood calls its “grand jihad” (or “civilization jihad”) is real; Justice  shed light on the ideology that fuels this enterprise, and expressly identified  many of the global Brotherhood’s accomplices.

Alas, this achievement is one today’s Republicans prefer to ignore. The party  of Ronald Reagan would have worn it like a badge of honor. Today’s GOP would  rather engage our enemies and call them our friends – not understand them, call  them what they are, and defeat them. Today’s Beltway Republicans save their  wrath for the occasional conservative – the messengers who embarrass them by  illustrating how small the big time has made them.

Did you know, for example, that when the Republican establishment had its  hissy fit over the inconvenient 1 percent – when John McCain and John Boehner  led the shrieking over their five conservative colleagues’ purported  scaremongering over Islamist influence-peddling – the fact that this  influence-peddling effort exists had just been proved in court?

As Patrick Poole, one of few to cover the  case, has observed,  it is the biggest spy scandal you’ve never heard about. Right around the time  McCain and Boehner were dressing down the 1 percent last month, Ghulam Nabi Fai  was finally heading off to prison. He had pled guilty last December to acting as  a secret foreign agent against our government.

In sum, Fai was paid millions of dollars over two decades by the Pakistani  intelligence service to push its agenda through a D.C.-based front, the Kashmiri  American Council. You haven’t heard much about it because it is a Muslim  Brotherhood operation through and through, one that demonstrates exactly what  the 1 percent is warning about.

Read more at American Thinker

FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributor  Andrew C. McCarthy is  a senior fellow at the National Review Institute, author ofWillful  Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad and blogs at National Review Online’s The  Corner.