Islamists are rising in America while we sleep

image1-231x180By Allen West,  April 11, 2014

This week we covered two key stories that I’m quite certain aren’t getting much play: the rejection of Muslim women’s advocate Ayaan Hirsi Ali by Brandeis University and the Muslim Brotherhood forming a political bloc in America.

We are indeed witnessing the rise of Islamists in America. How has it come to this, that such a small minority has gained such a powerful political voice and influence? How is it that an organization like the Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR) is even allowed to exist in our Republic?

It’s simple, we have become so damn politically correct that a vile organization that was an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest Islamic terrorist funding case in America can thumb its nose and by intimidation and coercion deny free speech and freedom of expression in our country. We have fallen under the spell of the bumper sticker “coexist” and have failed to heed the lessons of history.

What is even worse, we have failed to even take this enemy — yep, I mean it –enemy to heart for what they have openly stated their objective to be. Just read the Strategic Memorandum discovered in 1991 if you still have any doubts.

However, most importantly, we have seen a class of political cowards who castigate those of us who recognize this enemy as “Islamophobes” and “extremists.”

And why is that possible? Because we refuse to develop our own energy independence so that we can tell OPEC and the 56 nations of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation to get bent. Instead, they use our petrodollars to hold us hostage, fund their Islamic terrorism, export their materiel propaganda, and worst of all, buy off American political cowards.

We need to follow the money in America from these Islamist organizations to any politician and defeat them. We then need to find courageous men and women who will be relentless in identifying these Islamist infiltrators and their enablers, and ban them from operating in our country. If the Egyptians can categorize the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group, so should the United States of America. And in turn, classify those groups associated and listed in the Strategic Memorandum of the Muslim Brotherhood as terrorist organizations and cease their operations in America.

Read more

Allen West appeared on Fox News April 17, 2014 to discuss the implications of this civilization jihad:

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

A detailed look at ‘the purge’ of U.S. counter-terrorism training by the Obama administration

By Patrick Poole:

Tonight’s episode of For The Record investigates a series of policies established by the Obama Administration during 2011-2012 that effectively neutered FBI counter-terrorism training and blinded our nation’s intelligence agencies to the threat from Islamic terrorism.

In what some experts have termed a hostile “political warfare campaign” driven by an alliance between the administration, Islamic organizations and cooperating media figures, analysts and subject matter experts were blacklisted, and books and training materials were purged from official counter-terrorism training programs government-wide.

This “purge” has contributed to clues being missed by the FBI in major terrorism cases, including last year’s bombing of the Boston Marathon recounted this past September in an episode of For The Record:

Institutional Failure

One of the first indicators of these efforts was the cancellation of an anti-terrorism conference scheduled for August 10-12, 2011 hosted by the CIA’s Threat Management Unit.

As reported by veteran Pentagon reporter Bill Gertz at the Washington Times, the conference was cancelled at the demand of Islamic groups who objected to presentations that were to be conducted by former Joint Chiefs of Staff intelligence analyst and international law expert Stephen Coughlin (who is featured in tonight’s episode) and Steve Emerson of The Investigative Project on Terrorism. An email sent to conference registrants explained that the Department of Homeland Security would be formulating new guidelines for vetting speakers and screening presentation content.

The cancellation of the CIA terrorism conference was followed in September 2011 by a series of articles by far-Left blogger Spencer Ackerman at WIRED Magazine that claimed counter-terrorism trainers and materials used by the FBI were promoting “Islamophobia.” One of Ackerman’s targets was books in the library at the FBI Academy in Quantico, Virginia, that he deemed offensive. It should be noted that as a general rule banning books in government-funded libraries is considered rank censorship.

While a number of claims made by Ackerman in his series of articles were later found to be manifestly false, inside U.S. government agencies individuals targeted by Ackerman’s articles were prohibited from speaking publicly in defense of themselves and their work and “The Purge” continued apace.

Black October

Then in October 2011, a remarkable series of events dramatically shifted U.S. government policies largely fueled by Ackerman’s reporting.

The first event was the circulation by Homeland Security’s Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties to government agencies of a list of “Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) Training Do’s and Don’ts.” Among those targeted in the DHS training ban were what the document called “self-professed ‘Muslim reformers,’” who the agency warned “may further an interest group agenda instead of delivering generally accepted, unbiased information.”

Among other “don’ts” declared by DHS was this warning:

Don’t use training that relies on fear or conspiracies to motivate law enforcement. Don’t use training premised on theories with little or no evidence to support them. Examples (from the report “Manufacturing the Muslim Menace”) of unsubstantiated theories include…Mainstream Muslim organizations are fronts for Islamic political organizations who true desire is to establish Sharia law in America.

Remarkably, some of the very organizations that the Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties had partnered with had been identified by the Justice Department as fronts for international terrorist organizations in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing trial in 2007 and 2008, including the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). At the time these guidelines were published, the president of ISNA, Imam Mohamed Majid, was serving on the DHS Countering Violent Extremism Working Group.

Not only had the Justice Department named these organizations as unindicted co-conspirators during the trial, but federal prosecutors had outline in court documents that these organizations were integral parts of an international conspiracy to funnel money to the terrorist group HAMAS. In one Justice Department filing, prosecutors noted that “numerous exhibits were entered into evidence establishing both ISNA’s and NAIT’s intimate relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood, the Palestine Committee, and the defendants in this case.”

In another filing they observed:

ISNA and NAIT, in fact, shared more with HLF than just a parent organization. They were intimately connected with the HLF and its assigned task of providing financing support to HAMAS. Shortly after HAMAS was founded in 1987, as an outgrowth of the Muslim Brotherhood, Govt. Exh. 21-61, the International Muslim Brotherhood ordered the Muslim Brotherhood chapters throughout the world to create Palestine Committees, whose job it was to support HAMAS with “media, money and men.” Govt. Exh. 3-15. 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 [Islamic Association for Palestine], and the UASR [United Association for Studies and Research]. CAIR was later added to these organizations. Govt. Exh. 3-78 (listing IAP, HLF, UASR and CAIR as part of the Palestine Committee, and stating that there is “[n]o doubt America is the ideal location to train the necessary resources to support the Movement worldwide…”). The mandate of these organizations, per the International Muslim Brotherhood, was to support HAMAS, and the HLF’s particular role was to raise money to support HAMAS’ organization inside the Palestinian terrories. (p. 13, emphasis added)

During the Holy Land trial, FBI Agent Lara Burns testified in court that CAIR was a front for HAMAS. One trial exhibit submitted by federal prosecutors – and stipulated to by the defense in the case – explained that these organizations were dedicated to a “civilizational-jihadist process” to destroy America from within and replace the Constitution with sharia (Islamic law):

The Ikhwah [Muslim Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in 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 God’s religion [Islam] is made victorious over all other religions. (p. 21)

Federal prosecutors specifically cited this internal Muslim Brotherhood planning document as the strategic goal of these U.S.-based Islamic groups – the very same group advising the Obama Administration. The federal judge in the Holy Foundation case agreed with the case presented by the federal prosecutors had made regarding these organizations, stating in one ruling that “the Government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations with CAIR, ISNA and NAIT with HLF…and with HAMAS.” (p. 14-15)

One of the architects of the new DHS guidelines was Mohamed Elibiary, who served on the DHS Countering Violent Extremism Working Group, was appointed in October 2010 by Secretary Janet Napolitano to the Homeland Security Advisory Council and is now a senior fellow for the agency, who has publicly admitted to his role in developing the DHS guidelines. Unsurprisingly, he was a regular source for WIRED’s Spencer Ackerman.

Much more at The Blaze

Patrick Poole is a counter-terrorism and national security consultant for TheBlaze. You can follow him (@pspoole) on Twitter.

Muslim Brotherhood Infiltration at the Hartford Seminary

**Shoebat Exclusive**
By Walid Sheobat and Ben Barrack

Abubaker Y. Al Shingieti: On Hartford Seminary Board after eight years serving State Sponsor of Terrorism.

Abubaker Y. Al Shingieti: On Hartford Seminary Board after eight years serving State Sponsor of Terrorism.

How Abubaker Y. Ahmed Al Shingieti got his position as a member of the Board of Trustees of the Hartford Seminary in Connecticut should raise eyebrows, especially since he has provided his terror-connected background. Aside from the $1 million grant the Seminary received from Muslim Brotherhood front, the Islamic Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), why such a rebel is allowed to sit on the Board of Trustees is difficult to fathom.  Shingieti’s bio is littered with very close links to wanted international war criminal, President Omar al-Bashir of Sudan.

In 1994, Al Shingieti was interviewed for an extensive article by Arabic publication Al-Wasat (click here and select link if hyperlink does not work). The subject of the article were reports of “ghost houses” that were used to torture detainees in Sudan. Here is the translated excerpt that featured Al Shingieti’s perspective on “People’s Camps” that groomed attendees to become jihadists:

People’s Camps
The topic of public freedom in Sudan is always discussed. There is also the issue of “People’s Camps,” where citizens are receiving different types of training in the use of weapons, as well as lessons that “enlighten and educate” through religious instruction “to grow the citizen’s personality and preparation to defend his homeland ,” said Abu Bakr Shanqeeti, director of external media in Khartoum. The truth is that people I met from the new generation of Sudanese is completely different from the previous generation due to training received in the camps. (The Camp) makes ​​him more patient and grants the ability to endure hardship; he accepts his work in a more active and voluntarily way. Young people, mostly, people with beards trimmed a certain way inconsistent, so they look as a milestone. For girls, traditional Sudanese clothes consisting of a headscarf as in Malaysia. The robe includes a long shirt over tight trousers. Despite the stifling heat, a large number of the women wear black gloves to cover their hands.

I did not meet any Sudanese girl that spoke at length about the experience of her military training in one of the camps but much was said about this phenomenon in Khartoum and beyond. “Valmjendh” accompanied the Mujahideen, who are going to defend their homeland in the south and to take care of the wounded and sick while urging the mujahideen to fight “infidels”. A girl named “Q” told me that the training course, which has been a requirement two or three times a day near Khartoum, hours after the end of the official working hours. The girl did not go into great details about the “military” nature of her experiences. I realized it might be one of the (unintelligible) who accompanied me. “Ahmed” told me that he had received the training session that lasted 45 days and divided the daylight hours between religious instruction and enlightenment lessons about jihad, both old and new, as well as daily periods of training in the use of weapons. He said,“These trained officers from the armed forces are not strangers among us as is alleged in some quarters”.

Several things are clear in that excerpt.

  1. In his capacity as external media for al-Bashir, part al-Shingieti’s job was to put a positive spin on these camps.
  2. These camps taught Muslim fundamentalism and Jihad.
  3. Part of this Jihad training included grooming students to fight “infidels” in South Sudan, a region al-Bashir has been interested in Islamizing for years.
  4. Military officers from Sudan were involved in administering the training.
  5. Mujahideen = al-Qaeda.

In addition to serving as the Executive Director for the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), based in Herndon, VA, Shingieti’s position at the Hartford Seminary in Connecticut is a position he’s held since 2012, when he was welcomed by Seminary President Dr. Heidi Hadsell. A reliable source in the Hartford area tells Shoebat.com that when Al Shingieti’s terror links and history with Sudan were brought to Hadsell’s attention, she acknowledged Al Shingieti’s time as a high-ranking official with al-Bashir but dismissed any significance because Al Shingieti no longer works for al-Bashir, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) on several counts relating to crimes against humanity.

International war criminal al-Bashir who also employs President Barack Obama’s brother Malik, now has a connection to Muslim Brotherhood front group in the U.S. through his former employee, Al Shingieti.

Ismail Raji al Faruqi: Founder of the IIIT.

Ismail Raji al Faruqi: Founder of the IIIT.

One of the founders of the IIIT was Ismail Raji al-Faruqi. Prior to his death in 1986, al-Faruqi published a book entitled, The Cultural Atlas of Islam. Faruqi is still very highly regarded by the IIIT. Hadsell delivered a speech at the Al Faruqi Memorial Lecture, an annual IIIT event, in 2012. AsShoebat.com reported previously, former Senior Adviser to George W. Bush, Karl Rove wascaptured in a photograph in the Texas Governor’s mansion – circa 2000 – with then Governor Bush and a delegation consisting of members from Muslim Brotherhood front groups, to include Abdurahman Alamoudi, who is serving a prison sentence for charges related to terrorism.

It’s already been made clear that Republican politicians – particularly those belonging to the Republican establishment, like Rove – do not want to expose the problem of Muslim Brotherhood infiltration in the U.S. Doing so would require such individuals to acknowledge some very uncomfortable truths about how grossly they misjudged the Muslim groups they engaged. The desire not to come clean about all of this suggests they knew better at the time. The photo above was taken a year prior to the 9/11 attacks. Bush’s inner circle – to include Rove – didn’t just have their photos taken with Brotherhood leaders in the U.S.; that inner circle embraced such figures with the help of Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan. According to Breitbart, Rove’s PAC gave Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) more than $25 Million in 2012.

Karl Rove carrying book written by IIIT Founder al-Faruqi.

Karl Rove carrying book written by IIIT Founder al-Faruqi.

Read more at Shoebat.com

Face the Truth: Pakistan Is Not An Ally

pak

The U.S. government is in dire need of an intervention: its friends need to get it to seek professional help for its addiction to shoveling huge amounts of money to old Cold War allies that aren’t really allies at all. The problem is that the only friends who could stage such an orchestrated effort are just as far gone themselves.

By Robert Spencer:

Journalist Carlotta Gall, who reported from Afghanistan for the New York Times for twelve years, reported Wednesday that

“soon after the Navy SEAL raid on Bin Laden’s house, a Pakistani official told me that the United States had direct evidence that the ISI chief, Lt. Gen. Ahmed Shuja Pasha, knew of Bin Laden’s presence in Abbottabad. The information came from a senior United States official, and I guessed that the Americans had intercepted a phone call of Pasha’s or one about him in the days after the raid. ‘He knew of Osama’s whereabouts, yes,’ the Pakistani official told me. The official was surprised to learn this and said the Americans were even more so.”

He shouldn’t have been. It has been obvious for years that the Pakistanis have been aiding the same jihadists that the U.S. government has been giving them billions of dollars to fight. The New York Times reported on that at length back in 2008. And now we learn that not only did Ahmed Shuja Pasha, the head of the Pakistani government’s spy service, knew the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden, but also that so did many other top officials in the Pakistani government.

Those who are genuinely surprised by this news probably also think that Islam is a Religion of Peace that has been hijacked by a Tiny Minority of Extremists. After all, this is the country where the jihad terror leader Hafiz Saeed, on whom the U.S. has placed a $10 million bounty, lives openly and comfortably. International Business Times reported in early March that Saeed “lives as a free man in Lahore,” even though he is “chief of Jamaat-ud-Dawah (JUD), a parent organisation of banned Lashkar-e-Taiba (LET). The organization was implicated in the 2008 attacks on Mumbai in India, which claimed 166 lives.” Not only that, but “Pakistan had twice placed Saeed under house arrest since 2001, but had let him go under suspicious circumstances.” And today, “JUD operates quite visibly in parts of Pakistan, with its own website and a twitter page.”

Meanwhile, Sky News reported in January that “Pakistani officials have reportedly used a secret counter-terrorism fund to buy wedding gifts, luxury carpets and gold jewellery for relatives of ministers and visiting dignitaries.” This is better than funneling to the terrorists themselves the money that the Pakistani government received from the U.S. to fight terror, but it shows how seriously the Pakistani authorities have taken their role in the “war on terror”: not seriously at all.

Read more at Front Page

See also:

  • Video - Documentary: Pakistan Double Cross on Terrorism - includes two part article by written Patrick Poole in 2012 exposing a 20 year influence operation by the Pakistani ISI and Ghulam Nabi Fai that may explain US foreign policy towards Pakistan

Jerome Vitenberg: France Aims to Destroy African Militias

victims of Boko Haram2By Ryan Mauro:

Jerome Vitenberg is an analyst of international politics and taught International Relations and Political Science for the London School of Economics through the University of London’s International Programsat DEI College Greece.

In a column last month, Vitenberg wrote that France’s involvement in the war-torn Central African Republic is part of a strategy to assemble a bloc of liberal democracies in Africa. He explains that France wants to create what he himself has termed the “Doula-Djibouti Corridor” across Africa, although France has never used this term.

CAR’s population is 80% Christian, but an Islamist campaign of violence is causing mayhem and the deaths of over 1,000 civilians and displacement of over 500,000 people. Unfortunately, some Christians have responded with their own militias that have engaged in retaliatory violence.

The following is Vitenberg’s interview with Ryan Mauro, Clarion Project National Security Analyst:

You should read the entire interview at but I want to focus on this part because it speaks to the most often asked question I see: Why do government officials tolerate and appease Islamists even when they are fully aware of their agenda?

Clarion: What is the official stance of France and other European countries towards the Muslim Brotherhood and, specifically, its role in Egypt?

Vitenberg: The French and other European intelligence agencies are fully informed about the jihadist goals and malicious strategies of the Muslim Brotherhood and affiliated organizations.

On the other hand, the political echelons have shown a policy of appeasement towards those organizations within their countries. Each European country has a different theoretical understanding and practical methodology towards its dealings with Muslim organizations, especially the Muslim Brotherhood.

These differences result from how the various states relate to minority groups, the relationship with the minorities’ representative groups and, more generally, the concept of the relationship between the state and the individual.

There is a blatant contrast between the well-known intolerance of the Muslim Brotherhood ideology towards non-Muslim states and societies and the laissez-faire policy of the European governments towards the Brotherhood. There are several hypotheses about the political elites in Europe.

In some cases, the political echelons are naïve and believe in appeasement of jihadist organizations. Their normative and idealist approach prevents them from listening to their security and intelligence agencies.

CJR: See The Cognitive Dissonance of the Progressive World View on Islam

Political elites may be victims of political blackmail that leads to a quiet understanding with the Muslim Brotherhood organizations in their countries. The understanding is that the European government lets the Islamists operate and the Islamists will keep quiet and not cause too much trouble.

The political elites may also be bribed, possibly via financial donations (e.g. from Qatar) for specific national projects or due to corruption with funding deposited into secret bank accounts.

CJR: See John Guandolo: The Muslim Brotherhood in America – We are at war and we are losing, specificallyPart III – The settlement process

There might be more explanations, but I believe that stupidity, fear and greed summarize why politicians are letting the Brotherhood manipulate individuals and families as a first step and societies and governments later.

CJR: see Western Arrogance and Decline  by Bruce Thornton at Front Page

U.S. Islamists Fundraise for Virginia Congressman

Rabia demonstrators

BY RYAN MAURO:

A pro-Muslim Brotherhood group is holding a fundraiser on March 22 for Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA). The congressmen’s Islamist donors prompted one expert, Paul Sperry, to dub him “the Saudis’ new man in Congress” in the past.

Rep. Connolly has won the support of the leadership of Egyptian Americans for Democracy and Human Rights (EADHR) with his opposition to the overthrow of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. Its website shows its sole purpose is to advocate for the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.

EADHR co-founder, Akram Elzend, is leading the fundraiser. Each attendee is expected to give between $150 and $400 to his campaign. Elzend is an official of the Washington D.C. branch of the Muslim American Society. Federal prosecutors said in 2008 that it was “founded as the overt arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in America.”

Another EADHR leader and fundraiser host is Sameh Elhennawy, who was identified by an Egyptian newspaper as a member of the Brotherhood lobby in America.

The president of the group, Hany Saqr, is listed in a 1992 U.S. Muslim Brotherhood phonebook as a member of its Executive Office. The aforementioned Egyptian report also outed him as a member of the Brotherhood lobby in America.

EADHR co-founder Shaker El-Sayed is the imam of  Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Center, a radical mosque with ties to the Brotherhood and Hamas. Last year, El-Sayed was recorded preaching in favor of violent jihad at a high school.

***

The American Islamists’ financial support for Rep. Connolly’s campaigns isn’t about bribery. A campaign is not won or lost on a few thousand dollars. It’s about access. It’s about becoming a trusted source of guidance for him and his staff….

Rep. Connolly is just another example of the Brotherhood lobby’s success.

Read more at Clarion Project

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

In case you missed it here, one more time:

Part III – The settlement process (Published March 12, 2011) by John Guandolo

Understanding the role of the Muslim Brother in North America:

The process of settlement is a “Civilization-Jihadist Process” with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in 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 God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim’s destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who chose to slack. 

Putting It Into Practice 

The above paragraph IS the MB strategy. Civilization-Jihad “by their hands” – OUR hands. The Muslim Brotherhood’s strategy for destroying the United States is to get us, specifically our leadership, to do the bidding of the MB for them. The Muslim Brotherhood intends to conduct Civilization Jihad by co-opting our leadership into believing a counterfactual understanding of Islam and the nature of the Muslim Brotherhood, thereby coercing these leaders to enforce the MB narrative on their subordinates. Be assured they are doing this with great success.

Political, military, law enforcement, media, and religious leaders are being duped across America by the MB leadership. The approach tactics differ depending on the targeted organization – ie for media the approach may be a “civil rights” basis, while for Christian leaders it will be based on the Muslims’ claiming they are “also followers of Jesus” without the explanation that to the Muslims, Jesus was a Muslim prophet.

Here is how it works: a leader of an MB front, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) for instance, who has been a Muslim Brother for 40 years, is a classically trained intelligence officer from a foreign nation, has been in the U.S. for 20+ years, and is a naturalized U.S. citizen, approaches a senior government official (usually with zero counterintelligence training). The Muslim Brother says he is from the largest and “most prominent Muslim organization in America” or words to that effect. He explains he has come to help the official discern fact from fiction about Islam and help deter “radicalization” as well as “Islamaphobia” in the local community. The Brother says he has experience in “building bridges” between the U.S. government and the Muslim community, and even produces photographs with other senior government officials and community leaders. The official, unaware ISNA is a MB and Hamas support entity, an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest successfully prosecuted Hamas case in U.S. history, and the “nucleus” for the Islamic Movement here, begins working with this Muslim Brotherhood leader. They have discussions in the government office building where the senior official works, and the Muslim Brother tells the official ISNA is “moderate” (because he says so) but if he or any of the Muslims at ISNA hear of any “radicals” in the area, they will be sure to let the official know. They also talk about the Brother’s concern about how “aggressive” the U.S. government is perceived in the local Muslim community, and the “fear of backlash” against them. “We want to help you,” the Hamas/MB leader will say, “but we need assurances from you that you will not unnecessarily target Muslims for investigation or go into our Mosques unannounced. In exchage, we will besure to tell you if there is anything nefarious going on in the Muslim community.” The government official buys off on this and, in the interest ofdeepening the relationship with the Muslim and the community-at-large, the government official complies with the MB’s request and eases off. The two men have lunch weekly and develop a relationship – the government official thinks the Muslim Brother actually likes him. The Muslim Brother is actually quite likeable. He was trained to be “likeable” during his counterintelligence training in his home country, which he has perfected during his last 40 years of operating for many of those years in hostile countries before coming to the U.S.

Over time, the government official establishes policies and procedures based the advice given to him by the Muslim Brother, which the official has never backstopped to determine if it is factually accurate. A year later, evidence comes to light identifying the Muslim Brother and the true nature of his intentions. The government official must now make a choice. Does he cut off his relationship with his “Muslim friend” and, therefore, admit he was duped and created policies and procedures for his agency based on disinformation fed to him by a Muslim Brother? Or does he silence his subordinates who have brought facts forward clearly identifying the enemy? Sad to say, around the country today, the latter is occurring at a exponentially higher rate than the former.

This is Civilization-Jihad “by their hands,” and evidence of it can be seen in: our universities – many of which have MSA chapters and host Hamas and MB speakers on a regular basis with the support of university Presidents and Boards who silence students challenging the school or Hamas; our intelligence and national security apparatus where analysts and agents on the ground who understand the Muslim Brotherhood threat are disciplined, subject to internal investigations, and threatened with termination for doing their jobs, going after the MB, and speaking up about this threat; our war colleges – at which Muslim Brothers serve as Distinguished Professors or Chairs of Middle Eastern studies programs and pollute the dialogue and suppress any attempt to speak truth into the threats from the Islamic Movement; our financial institutions – many of which are “Shariah Compliant” per the MB’s request and atthe direction of the U.S. Treasury Department; our churches and synagogues – which only seem to outreach to Muslim Brotherhood front groups (note: ISNA is the certifying authority for all Muslim Chaplains in DoD and in the U.S. Bureau of Prisons) and which join the MB in protests against government investigations of anything “Muslim” or “Islamic” (e.g. Congressman King hearings); and the list goes on.

The MB Settled in America to subordinate the Constitution to Shariah. The “Process” by which they did it is a “Civilization-Jihadist Process.” Their methodology is to subvert the primary/foundational institutions in our nation and co-opt our leadership. At a quick glance it appears the score at halftime of this football game is 200-0 in their favor. Time for us to take off the baseball uniforms and engage the MB on the football field.

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

Guess what else they are doing. Marrying into the families of their influence targets such as Christian Ministers. How can a Minister speak out against Islam when his daughter or son is married to a Muslim? Recall that John Kerry’s daughter is married to an Iranian-American who has extensive family ties to Iran.

UK Muslim Brotherhood Leader Featured Speaker At US Muslim Brotherhood Conference; US Officials Also Present

Anas Al-Tikriti

Anas Al-Tikriti

By gmbwatch:

The Muslim American Society (MAS) has announced that UK Muslim Brotherhood leader Anas Altikriti was scheduled to speak last week at a Washington DC conference titled ”Preserving Our Humanity, A Challenge for Democracy” and sponsored by the MAS Public Affairs and Civic Engagement division. According to the announcement, also scheduled to speak at the conference were representatives of the US State and Treasury Departments including Ambassador Richard Schmierer,  Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public Diplomacy in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs. Anas Al-Tikriti himself is the son of Osama Al-Tikriti, one of the leaders of the Iraqi Islamic Party representing the Muslim Brotherhood in that country.  Al-Tikriti is one of the leaders of the British Muslim Initiative (BMI) and the head of Cordoba Foundation, both part of the UK Muslim Brotherhood. The GMDW reported in March that Altikriti, who once supported the Iraqi insurgency against the US, had been part of a White House meeting with an important Iraqi leader that included US President Obama.

The conference sessions at which Al-Tikriti spoke were titled “The Concept of the Arab Spring Versus the Discourse of Extremism” and “Developing the Modern Narrative on Islam and Civic Responsibility.” Altikriti’s co-speaker on the second panel was Dr. Hatem Bazian, President of the Americans for Palestine (AMP),  a Palestinian advocacy group with strong ties to both the US Muslim Brotherhood and to the Hamas support infrastructure in the US. Video from an April 2004 antiwar-rally shows Hatem Bazian calling for an “Intifada” in the US. Other leaders of the US Muslim Brotherhood speaking at the conference included:

  • Dr. Esam Omeish President Center for Libyan-American Strategic Studies and former President of the MAS

According to its website, MAS-PACE is described as follows:

MAS-PACE is a division of the Muslim American Society (MAS) organized as a civic and educational organization. Its primary purpose is to conduct public relations, educate and mobilize the American Muslim community to participate in public affairs and civic activities on a non-partisan basis, and to activate a new generation of community activists.

The MAS was identified in a Hudson Institute report, authored by the GMBDW editor, as a part of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood and closely tied to the Egyptian organization.

That UK Muslim Brotherhood leader Anas Al-Tikriti should appear in the US two times in the last two months in the company of US governmental officials, including at a White House meeting that included President Obama, should raise serious questions about US policy towards the Brotherhood in light of recent developments in the Middle East. Long-time US allies in the Gulf such as the United Arab Emirates, itself engaged in a serious struggle to rid itself of Brotherhood influence, already have serious questions about US policy in the region.

Un-American, Corrupt, and Compromised Politicians Running Rampant in Illinois

by Shoebat Foundation:

There are plenty of un-American activities going on inside the state of Illinois, at the local, state, and federal levels. Those activities involve politically active Muslim Brotherhood front groups and compromised politicians. Unfortunately, though there is an answer for dealing with both, it’s nowhere in sight.

Gov. Pat Quinn (R) praying with Jamal Said (L) in black

Gov. Pat Quinn (R) praying with Jamal Said (L) in black

Less than one month before the Benghazi attacks, Illinois Governor Pat Quinn celebrated the end of Ramadan with 15,000 Muslims at Toyota Park in Bridgeview, IL. The imam who presided over the ceremony was none other than Jamal Said, Walid’s mentor and trainer, prior to Walid’s conversion to Christianity. Walid can provide a firsthand account as to Said’s support for terrorism. The Benghazi attackers and Said both support the Muslim Brotherhood agenda.

At the ceremony, Quinn signed a religious tolerance bill.

On the last day of 2013, in line with the passage of that bill, Quinn’s office released the Muslim“Cultural Sensitivity Guide”, which is to be used by employers in Illinois. Check out some of these guidelines such employers must follow (h/t BNI):

Dress Code

Islam requires women and men to behave and dress modestly. There are a number of ways in which Muslims express such teachings. Here is the most notable attire:

  • Muslim women often times wear a headscarf called a hijab.
  • Muslim men sometimes wear a small head covering called a kufi.

These articles of clothing should not be prohibited in any dress code policies.

Dietary Restrictions

The Quran prohibits the consumption of alcohol, pork and pork byproducts. Many Muslims follow standards of slaughter and preparation of meat and poultry called halal. (Halal is to Muslims what kosher is to Jews.) [Tip: Choose a vegetarian or fish option when catering to Muslims.]

That one is particularly interesting because there is an old American saying that goes something like this: “If you don’t like it, don’t eat it.”

The guidelines also go into significant detail about how Muslim prayer requirements must be adhered to by employers. Have a look at the daily prayer requirements:

Muslims are required to pray five times a day – before sunrise, around noon, mid-afternoon, at sunset and at night. Before prayer, Muslims are required to wash their faces, hands and feet with clean water. Each prayer takes about 5-10 minutes to perform. Prayer may be performed in any quiet and clean place. During prayer, Muslims stand, bow and prostrate to God, facing Mecca (generally, in the northeast direction). During prayer, Muslims are fully engaged and cannot respond to telephone rings or conversations (with the exception of emergencies). Others should not walk in front of or interrupt Muslims during prayer. Muslim employees may pray during lunch and/or other breaks.

Click here to read the entire sensitivity guide.

Gov. Quinn praying directly behind Said.

Gov. Quinn praying directly behind Said.

Said has an intimate history with Hamas and was named as an “unindicted co-conspirator” in the Holy Land Foundation trial. Both he and Osama bin Laden had a shared mentor in Abdullah Azzam.

Feel free to speculate about why Quinn – and many other politicians – cater to Islamic extremists but two of the top reasons are intimidation and money. Intimidation is where the term “dhimmi” comes from and the more money accepted by said politicians from such groups, the more “dhimmi” those politicians become.

Jamal Said (far left) and U.S. Senator Dick Durbin (far right).

Jamal Said (far left) and U.S. Senator Dick Durbin (far right).

In Illinois, political dhimmis exist at the city, state, and federal levels. As Governor, Quinn is sandwiched between the compromised U.S. Senator from Illinois, Dick Durbin, who has shown coziness with Said in the past, and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who appointed CAIR Executive Director for Chicago Ahmed Rehab to one of his advisory committees.

In this one example – and there are plenty of others – local, state, and federal government representatives have been compromised by the Muslim Brotherhood. These problems are not isolated solely in the state of Illinois. That state is merely a microcosm of a much larger problem.

Jamal Said (Far left) and Ahmed Rehab (Far right)

Jamal Said (Far left) and Ahmed Rehab (Far right)

The Muslim Students Association (MSA) began grooming and teaching Muslim college students how to wield influence at all levels of government in the U.S., the military, and countless institutions. When elected officials have been compromised to the extent that Emanuel, Quinn, and Durbin have, a primary way to deal with it involves the resurrection of the House Un-American Affairs Committee, which was abolished in the 1970′s and its remnants were absorbed by the House Judiciary Committee.

The number 2 man on the Judiciary Committee is none other than Rep. John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), who has a some Muslim Brotherhood front group problems of his own.

The Un-American Affairs Committee is long gone and a long way off if it’s ever going to come back. One such reason has to do with how many U.S. politicians would be caught in its dragnet.

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

Also see:

John Guandolo explains that the Muslim Brotherhood first settled in Indiana, Michigan and Illinois, which explains why the MB’s largest organization, the Islamic Society of North America, is headquartered in Plainfield, Indiana. It explains why Detroit and Dearborn are points for significant jihadi activity, and why Chicago is the hub for Hamas in the U.S.

CPAC 2014 – National “Insecurity” Conservative Conference

islamists

The Republican Party has long identified itself itself as the party of National Security.  When the conservative movement has agents of influence like Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan in their high level ranks it is a personal assault on the GOP.

By :

The buzz on the floor among CPAC 2014 attendees was the virtual absence of National Security issues being debated or discussed.  During the three day conference John Bolton was the only speaker to address national security in depth.  There were two breakout sessions that tested the perimeter of national security issues but that was it for CPAC.

CPAC 2014 had a total of 57  events on the schedule during the three day conference.  Only 3 of those events discussed some national security issues.

Perhaps, current events surrounding the Ukraine, Crimea, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, Egypt, Syria, Israel, Vladimir Putin, China, Russia, Venezuela, Islamic terrorism and expansionism, North Korea, Benghazi, Extortion 17, and our porous southern borders are not important enough national security issues for CPAC 2014 and the ACU Board of Directors.

Or, are there two or more individuals inside the American Conservative Union(ACU) successfully navigating the CPAC agenda away from national security issues – that will be for you to decide

khan_norquist-320x240

American Foreign Policy Ignored At CPAC 2014

The American Conservative Union(ACU) positions itself as the oracle for conservative ideological issues important to conservative voters via the CPAC agenda.  Why was CPAC not scheduling, at a minimum, one third of its agenda categorizing the failures of President Obama’s foreign policy and the threats to our nation.

This absurd notion floated by John Kerry that President Obama’s paralyzing weakness makes him strong while Putin’s takeover of the Crimea makes him weak is profoundly troubling.  Daniel Greenfield sums it up nicely, “ Invading countries is an act of weakness. Being unable to do anything about it is an inaction of strength.”

Now lets turn our eyes to four Middle Eastern failures by the Obama Administration that were spiked from the CPAC 2014 agenda.

Egypt – President Obama backed the Muslim Brotherhood candidate Mohammed Morsi ousting long time U.S. ally Hosni Mubarak.  When the Egyptian people voted out Mr. Morsi,  President Obama stood and still stands with the Muslim Brotherhood, ceding most all of our past Egyptian influence into the hands of Vladimir Putin.

The new Egyptian government declared The Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization, while Pres. Obama keeps political channels open with the Brotherhood further alienating the new Egyptian government.  The ACU should be demanding Pres. Obama declare The Muslim Brotherhood a Foreign Terrorist Organization.

Syria – President Obama sides with the ‘Syrian Rebels’ who are populated by various Al-Qaeda tied groups and The Muslim Brotherhood.  Pres. Obama is backing the Muslim Brotherhood terrorists again.  Pres. Obama ultimate folly was his famous shifting red line nearly drawing the USA into another Islamic civil war.  Mr. Putin came to Pres. Obama’s rescue and brokered the ‘non-invasion’ and Syria is off the front pages.  Vladimir Putin was playing chess and secured the warm water Syrian port of Tartus and cemented Russians long term influence in Syria.  President Obama however, was playing checkers and America achieved nothing other than embarrassment on the world stage.

Iran – President Obama lifted partial sanctions on Iran if they open their nuclear production sites to inspections and stop their pursuit of weapons grade plutonium.  The Mullah’s of Iran say they will keep up construction on the Arak heavy water plant, when operational, will produce plutonium.  President Obama reacts by releasing hundreds of millions of dollars of Iranian assets.  If Iran builds or buys a tactical nuke and threatens the free world,  the dangerous geopolitical world as we know it, radically changes for the worse.

Israel – President Obama is pressuring Israel to recede to its 1967 borders and the formation of contiguous Palestinian State between the West Bank and Gaza. This two state option would leave Israel geographically incapable of defending her borders.  Pres. Obama should be demanding the Muslim Brotherhood Hamas Palestinians and the West Bank Palestinians accept Israel’s unconditional right to exist and take all references to Israel’s destruction out of their respective charters, as a starting point for negotiations.  However,  President Obama is siding with The Muslim Brotherhood again as he did in Egypt and Syria.

These four national security issues plus homegrown Islamic terrorism should have front and center on the CPAC 2014 agenda. Why weren’t they you ask?  For the answer to this question, all roads lead back to two individuals at the American Conservative Union, Grover Norquist and Suhail Kahn.

Attorney General Michael Mukasey, former CIA Director James Woolsey, former Florida Rep. Allen West, retired Army Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin, former chief assistant U.S. attorney Andrew McCarthy, and Frank Gaffney are putting their substantive knowledge of national security that this information on Norquist/Khan cannot be suppressed, ignored, or mischaracterized as it has been to date.  The information these experts above are referring to is Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan’s documented ties to The Muslim Brotherhood and other convicted Islamic terrorists.  (See Center For Security Policies 51 Page Report)

Suhail Kahn is an acting Board member of American Conservative Union.

Suhail Kahn, on video, declares that he has “devoted his life to the Ummah, the Muslim Nation’ ‘What are our oppressors going to do with people like us who love death more than they love life?”

Suhail Khan praises terrorists at 1999 ISNA conference from SuhailKhan Exposed on Vimeo.

Mr. Kahn has publicly acknowledged his parents’ leadership role in organizations that have been identified by the federal government as Muslim Brotherhood front groups, namely the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the Muslim Student Association(MSA).

In June of 2001, at an American Muslim Council event Mr. Kahn personally thanked convicted terrorist Abdurahman Alamoudi as someone, “who have been helping me keep going…and for being very supportive of me.”

At CPAC 2011 Suhail Kahn denied on camera The Muslim Brotherhood exists.  At CPAC 2014 he admitted there is a Muslim Brotherhood but he doesn’t know much about them.

At CPAC 2011 David Horowitz said, “Suhail Khan’s failure to disassociate himself from his parents’ movement (The Muslim Brotherhood) is instructive:  Horowitz went on to say, “When an honest person has been a member of a destructive movement and leaves it, he will feel compelled to repudiate it publicly and to warn others of the dangers it poses.  This is a sure test of whether someone has left the Muslim Brotherhood or not.”

At a 1999 ISNA Convention Suhail Khan articulated his heartfelt identity which in and of itself should cause great concern to the ACU. Suhail Khan said, “Our freedoms, my dear brothers and sisters, are under attack…And those rights must be defended with all the determination, all the resources, all the unyielding vigilance of the believing mujahid.  That is the spirit of Islam.  The mark of the Muslim.”

Mujahid is singular for Mujahideen which translates as a follower of Islam who struggles in the path of Allah.  The word is from the same Arabic triliteral root as Jihad.  Mujahideen has been closely associated with radical Islam, encompassing several militant groups and struggles.

Grover Norquist

Grover Norquist also has documented ties to convicted terrorist Abdurahman Alamoudi.  Alamoudi provided seed money for Norquist’s Islamic Institute which shares space with his Americans For Tax Reform.  Norquist was instrumental in getting the terrorist Alamoudi access to a White House prayer service after the 9/11/2001 attacks.

Mr. Norquist “served as a key facilitator between Al-Arian, Alamoudi and the White House.  … In June 2001, Al-Arian was among the members of the American Muslim Council invited to the White House complex.  … The next month, the National Coalition to Protect Political Freedom—a civil liberties group headed by Al-Arian—gave Norquist an award for his work to abolish the use of secret intelligence evidence in terrorism cases.” (Rep. Frank Wolf (R.-Va.)

The Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) agenda is determined by the American Conservative Union(ACU).”

Sami Al-Arian pled guilty in 2006 ‘to a charge of conspiring to provide services to the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), a specially designated terrorist organization, in violation of U.S. law.

For a window into Mr. Norquist’s core beliefs, he used Americans for Tax Reform to circulate a petition in support of the ‘Ground Zero Mosque’.  The Ground Zero Mosque was the failed multi million dollar mega Mosque project a block away from the fallen twin towers on 9/11/2001.

In 2004, at age 48, Mr. Norquist married a Palestinian Muslim name Samah Alrayyes.  Ms. Alrayyes-Norquist was the Director of the Islamic Free Market Institute which was connected financially to convicted terrorist Abduraham Alamoudi and founded by Grover Norquist.

Read more at Dr. Rich Swier’s blog

John Brennan: From Mecca to Washington

Graphic by Bosch Fawstin http://fawstin.blogspot.com/

Graphic by Bosch Fawstin
http://fawstin.blogspot.com/

Front Page, February 18, 2013, by Daniel Greenfield:

In 1853, the British explorer Sir Richard Francis Burton visited Mecca. Since Mecca was and is off limits to non-Muslims on pain of death, Burton passed himself off as a Muslim by undergoing circumcision and disguising himself as a Pashtun. “Nothing could save a European detected by the populace, or one who after pilgrimage declared himself an unbeliever,” Burton wrote.

Three hundred and fifty years earlier, the Italian adventurer Ludovico di Varthema became the first non-Muslim to enter Mecca since the Muslim conquest. Ludovico had enlisted as a mercenary and succeeded in passing as a Mamluk, one of the white slave soldiers of the Sultanate, who had been converted to Islam.  Ludovico was eventually caught out as a Christian, but escaped after a love affair with one of the Sultan’s wives.

Other Christians had visited Mecca, but always disguised as Muslims. The British cabin boy Joseph Pitts, captured by Muslim slavers and forcibly converted to Islam, visited Mecca, before managing to return home and return to his religion. Similar accounts were told by other European Christian slaves.

In 1979, hundreds of Islamists using weapons smuggled in a coffin seized the Grand Mosque of Mecca. The Saudi military, commanded by the sons of important men, rather than by competent men, proved absolutely hopeless in fighting them. So instead they turned to the French.

The French commandos of GIGN were expert at dealing with terrorist crises, but they were not Muslim and so could not be allowed into Mecca. The solution was simple. The Frenchmen underwent a rapid conversion to Islam and the siege of the Great Mosque commenced. The conversion did not take hold, but the principle remained. An infidel could not enter Mecca, even to save the House of Saud.

During his time as the CIA Station Chief in Saudi Arabia, John Brennan spoke of marveling “at the majesty of the Hajj and the devotion of those who fulfilled their duty as Muslims by making that pilgrimage.”  If Brennan did indeed visit Mecca during the Hajj, then he could have only done it by converting to Islam, like John Pitts, or pretending to have done so, like the GIGN commandos.

John Guandolo, a former FBI agent and Islam expert, has alleged that the conversion took place during Brennan’s time in Saudi Arabia. And he also alleges that this conversion has been confirmed by other American officials who were in Saudi Arabia at the time. These allegations are especially explosive as Brennan has moved up through the ranks to become Obama’s nominee to head the CIA.

Guandolo’s allegation goes beyond the question of religion. Rather he alleges that the conversion was part of an espionage recruitment process.  In an interview with Tom Trento of The United West, he said, “Mr. Brennan did convert to Islam when he served in a senior official capacity in Saudi Arabia. His conversion to Islam was the culmination of a counter-intelligence operation against him to recruit him.”

The Soviet Union recruited spies by convincing them of the virtues of Communism. Saudi Arabia might well recruit its infidel agents by convincing them of the worth of Islam. There is of course no way to know what is in Brennan’s heart. But while we may not know what Brennan believes, as John Guandolo has pointed out, we do know what he has done.

Brennan’s supposed conversion to Islam was only the third of two other points that the former FBI agent argued make him unfit for duty. The first is that Brennan has developed links with the Muslim Brotherhood and that he has brought “known leaders of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood into the government in positions to advise the US Government on counterterrorism strategy as well as the overall quote unquote War on Terror.” And the second is that Brennan reduces the War on Terror to Al Qaeda.

While Brennan did not innovate either of these two approaches, if he was indeed recruited by the Saudis, then they may be more than mere cluelessness. It’s not unusual for military and intelligence officials to visit Saudi Arabia and then leave it repeating the classic Saudi talking points about Islam as a stabilizing influence on the region and Israel as a destabilizing influence.

There are countless generals and diplomats who robotically insist that Bin Laden must not be referred to as a Muslim to diminish his influence and that the Muslim Brotherhood and other political Islamists are the only hope for countering the violent Islamism of Al Qaeda. The fundamental question is whether such disinformation is spread out of ignorance, or out of knowledge.

That is the final question that Guandolo raises about John Brennan. “The fact that foreign intelligence service operatives recruited Mr. Brennan when he was in a very sensitive and senior US Government position in a foreign country means that he is either a traitor, which I’m not saying, but that’s one of the options, and he did this all unwillingly and unknowingly ,or he did this unwittingly, which means that he is naive and does not have the ability to discern, to understand how to walk in those environments, which makes him completely unfit to be the Director of Central Intelligence.”

What is problematic in a general or a senator is even more troubling in the Director of the CIA. Military men are expected to be somewhat direct and take things as they are. But the director of an intelligence agency is expected to see threats where no one else does, to test the waters and look past the obvious. And if he cannot do that, then he is simply not qualified. And that is the larger point that John Guandolo makes.

Whether or not Brennan had a moment of submission on the road to Mecca or whether he is simply acting as a useful idiot for the people who perpetrated the attacks of September 11, he is not qualified to be the point man in the War on Terror. As the military side of the war draws to a close with a defeat in Afghanistan, the Central Intelligence Agency will take on a greater degree of importance in the fight against Islamic terrorism.

During the Cold War, the CIA was often infiltrated by the KGB, nullifying America’s intelligence capabilities in the Cold War. It would be a terrible shame if history repeated itself with Islam in the War on Terror.

Much more on John Brennan in CJR archives

Former FBI Agent Says Leading Muslim Group a ‘Hamas Front’

hamas-cairArutz Sheva, By Orli Baruch and Ari Soffer:

Former FBI Counterterrorism expert John Guandolo, known for his controversial calls for Americans to “expose Al Qaeda agents” in their neighborhoods, has reiterated his calls to the public to pressure officials to prosecute the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) for supporting terrorism.

In an interview with Arutz Sheva, the author of the book explained how CAIR - which claims to be a “civil liberties” organization representing moderate Muslims in the US – was established by Islamist leaders closely linked to the radical Muslim Brotherhood, of which Hamas is an offshoot. The organization was set up specifically to provide propaganda and other forms of nonviolent support for Hamas, which is a designated terrorist group in the US.

 

The Brotherhood first established a presence in the US in the 1950s, and by the 1960s had set up several front groups, including the US-Palestine Committee. Guandolo describes how the FBI documented a key meeting of the Committee in 1993 at which the two men who would later found CAIR - Omar Ahmad and Nihad Awad – were present.

At the meeting, “those two men specifically discussed with other Hamas leaders creating a public relations front for Hamas that wasn’t affiliated with Hamas,” Guandolo relates, “and less than a year later CAIR is created in Washington D.C.”

Since then, he says, CAIR has actively supported Hamas in the US, and should qualify for prosecution for providing material support to a terrorist group as a result.

He points out that the organization is among several “unindicted conspirators” in the 15-year investigation surrounding the Holy Land Foundation, which in 2001 was shut down after being designated as a terrorist organization by the US government.

Faced with the evidence, Guandolo says he can’t understand why the group is still operating legally.

“The question we as Americans need to be asking is: ‘Why is this Attorney General and Department of Justice not indicting and prosecuting CAIR and its leaders?’”

Grover Norquist & Co. Build Islamist Influence in GOP

Grover at CPACClarion Project, by Ryan Mauro, Tue, March 4, 2014

How the GOP Came to Embrace the Muslim Brotherhood Lobby

Islamism is not a partisan issue. Special interests, major companies and foreign powers have long tried to affect both political parties—and the Muslim Brotherhood lobby is no different. Ten former senior officials, including a former CIA director, have issued a  joint statement with meticulous documentation about how the Republican Party was and is influenced by this lobby.

The Beginning

When the Muslim Brotherhood arrived in the U.S. in the 1960s, it recognized that violent action is counterproductive. Instead, it began political organizing so it could lead the growing Muslim-American community and use it to affect U.S. policy.

In the 1980s, the FBI recruited a confidential source deep inside the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood lobby. He warned that the Brotherhood established a network of front groups including the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), Muslim Students Association,Islamic Society of North America and North American Islamic Trust. One of the chief objectives was to penetrate the U.S. government with sympathizers and IIIT already claimed success.

The network was so impressive that Pakistani intelligence bred itsown influence operation from it in 1990 with the Brotherhood’s support. It donated to campaigns on both sides of the political aisle and met with officials involved in foreign policy.

The U.S. Muslim Brotherhood drafted a secret plan in 1991 that defined its “work in America as a kind of grand jihad…in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within.” It was not a doctrine of violence, but of activism based on aligning with non-Muslim political forces. It listed about 30 of “our organizations and the organizations of our friends” to accomplish it. This document was recognized as authentic by the U.S. Department of Justice as was introduced as evidence in the Holy Land terror financing trial.

In 1993, the FBI wiretapped a secret meeting of top Brotherhood operatives in Philadelphia. A key theme was deception and secrecy in support of their non-violent activism. In the words of one participant, the objective was “forming the public opinion or coming up with a policy to influence…the way the Americans deal with the Islamists, for instance.”

The Brotherhood decided that a new front with an apparently clean track record was necessary. Two of the participants in that meeting founded the Council on American-Islamic Relations the following year. By 1994, the infrastructure of the Brotherhood lobby was in place, though it would continue to expand with new organizations and name changes.

The Influence Peddlers

The most senior elements of the Brotherhood lobby handled outreach to the Clinton Administration and both political parties, especially the presidential campaign of then-Texas Governor George W. Bush.

SamiSami al-Arian was a central figure. He admits having been a Muslim Brotherhood member from 1978 to 1982, but his involvement in the American lobby continued after that. In a 1992 letter, al-Arianacknowledged that his organization and IIIT, the aforementioned Brotherhood front, were essentially one and the same. He was convicted in 2006 of the charge of conspiring to provide services to the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), a specially designated terrorist organization.

Another central figure was Abdurrahman Alamoudi and his American Muslim Council. He developed intimidate ties to both political parties, despite his support of terrorist groups. In 2004, he was indicted on terrorism-related charges. He later wrote from his prison cell, “I am, I hope, still a member of the Muslim Brotherhood organization in the U.S.A,” as reported by the Grand Deception documentary.

In 2000, Alamoudi was asked by an Islamic website how Muslims should “decrease the influence of the Zionist lobby on presidential candidates.” He said they must elect sympathetic candidates like Rep. Tom Campbell (R-CA).

Rep. Campbell spoke at the Brotherhood lobby’s events and touted their causes. He became the example and was rewarded with political support and donations to his Senate campaign in 2000, including a fundraiser that brought in $35,000. The man guiding Campbell was Suhail Khan, his campaign coordinator in 1995 and press secretary and legislative assistant from 1996 to 1999.

Read more

Ryan Mauro is the ClarionProject.org’s National Security Analyst, a fellow with the Clarion Project and is frequently interviewed on top-tier TV stations as an expert on counterterrorism and Islamic extremism.

safe_image

click the image to sign the petition

‘Conservative’ Attorney called out for Denial of Muslim Brotherhood Infiltration

By Walid Shoebat:

It never ceases to amaze how blind people can be when it comes to the tactics of Muslim Brotherhood operatives and sympathizers in the U.S. The latest example comes courtesy of Attorney Cleta Mitchell, an otherwise incredibly intelligent woman, who represents American patriot and True the Vote founder Catherine Engelbrecht in the latter’s battle with the IRS.Nonetheless, she has apparently constructed a firewall in her mind that fends off uncomfortable facts regarding Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan.

Mitchell: Insists Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan are clean.

Mitchell: Insists Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan are clean.

The inability or unwillingness of Mitchell to see these realities may extend to the tax-exempt status received by Malik Obama’s foundation. We have provided Mitchell’s office with our work on this matter and walked them through many of the details. Contrasting the treatment received by the President’s brother with that received by Engelbrecht provides an excellent opportunity for Mitchell to go on offense for her client. Then again, if she cannot acknowledge the uncomfortable yet simple truths about Norquist and Khan, it’s quite possible she’ll stand down. Unfortunately, it’s her client who would suffer in that case.

Like Norquist and Khan, Mitchell has served on the Board of the American Conservative Union (ACU), which is the umbrella organization for the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). She used to be the ACU Chairman but no longer holds that position. Khan is still listed as a Board member; Norquist is not.

In 2011, the Center for Security Policy’s Frank Gaffney sent a letter to then ACU Chairman Mitchell, requesting an investigation of Norquist and Khan. The evidence against these men is overwhelming.

Both Norquist and Khan are closely linked to convicted terrorist Abdurahman Alamoudi.

The 2011 letter sent to ACU’s Board of Directors by Mitchell in response to the Center for Security Policy’s claims smacked of someone in denial. When someone is presented with truths they don’t want to face, said person often lashes out at the messenger, which is what Mitchell did. Here are some excerpts from her 2 1/2 page letter:

Mr. Gaffney has… persistently attacked Grover over a period of many years… there was absolutely nothing contained in any of the materials that in any way linked Suhail (or Grover) to such organizations or their activities… With respect to Mr. Gaffney’s allegations against Grover, those are purely and simply character assassination… Mr. Gaffney simply has some personal animosity toward Grover and, because he cannot wage any winning battle with Grover, Mr. Gaffney has turned his attention to Suhail and has mercilessly attacked Suhail with no basis in fact to do so – while continuing to wage a rumor battle against Grover… I have tried to talk Mr.Gaffney into ceasing these attacks – but to no avail… Mr. Gaffney’s baseless attacks… Grover Norquist and Suhail Kahn, against Mr.Gaffney’s ceaseless war against them. It is reprehensible and simply has no place in the conservative movement.

There are two paragraphs in Mitchell’s 2011 letter that go a long way in explaining her denial of very painful truths. They are based on faulty premise, that individuals granted security clearances could not possibly have nefarious motives:

I have specifically pointed out to Mr. Gaffney (repeatedly) thatafter 9/11, Suhail was on the staff of the White House, in the Executive Office of the President, with a security clearance. I asked Mr. Gaffney (repeatedly), “How do you account for the fact that Suhail was subject to FBI background checks and cleared to work directly for the President and Vice-President? How would the FBI have ‘missed’ ties to such groups if those ties existed?” I have never received any reasoned response to this crucial question.

Perhaps one of the most consequential results of Khan getting a security clearance was his becoming a White House ‘gatekeeper’ for Muslim Brotherhood leaders. In one of the most revealing articles on the subject, New Republic’s Franklin Foer explained – just two months after the 9/11 attacks – how Khan brought in Muslim Brotherhood leaders to meet with the President. This must have shaped a very flawed policy relative to Muslim Brotherhood groups in the U.S.

Instead of considering that the security clearance process may have been compromised or corrupted, Mitchell assumed it is airtight and impenetrable. Big mistake. How does one explainHuma Abedin’s case or, for that matter, Malik Obama’s?

Mitchell makes a similar mistake when talking about Norquist’s wife. That mistake is assuming that the security clearance process has not been corrupted:

And I’m certain that Mr. Gaffney’s hatred is further fueled by the fact that Grover is married to a Muslim-American woman (who also has worked for the United States government in very responsible positions, I might add!)

In much the same way that Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) smacked down Rep. Keith Ellison’s two-page letter in defense of Abedin in 2012 with a 16-page letter, Gaffney’s group has now responded to Mitchell’s three-page letter with 51 pages, signed by some prominent figures to include a former CIA Director, a former Attorney General, a former 3-Star General, a 4-Star Admiral, and several others.

We encourage you to visit the hyperlinks embedded above to view the evidence against both Khan and Norquist but here are two videos of Khan at CPAC, 2011 and 2012 respectively.The first is Khan being asked about the Muslim Brotherhood groups in the U.S. Keep in mind that his father helped to found the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the Muslim Students Association (MSA), both Muslim Brotherhood front groups. His mother sat on the Board of a Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) chapter. Watch as Khan issues a bald-faced lie, saying there are ‘no Muslim Brotherhood groups in the United States’. He denied his parents’ work:

 

At CPAC one year later (2012), Khan was approached by Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer. This video says it all. In response to claims that he’s tied to Alamoudi, Khan accuses Geller of being tied to… Barack Obama’s hero, Saul Alinksy?

 

Also see:

 

 

 

U.S. Lifts Ban on Immigrants With Links to Terrorism

immigrants oath

The Obama admin.is overriding the U.S. Criminal Code for individuals who have provided material support to terrorism.

BY CLARE LOPEZ:

Muslim Brotherhood affiliates scored a major victory in their efforts to degrade U.S. national security measures in early February 2014 when the Obama administration decided to override by fiat portions of the U.S. Criminal Code and immigration policy pertaining to individuals who provide “material support to terrorism.”

As published in the Federal Register on February 5, 2014, the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of State issued a joint notice that, henceforth, certain asylum seekers and refugees who only provided “limited material support” to terrorism would be allowed into the U.S.

The earlier law as written, The Real ID Law of 2005, states quite explicitly that the definition of engaging in terrorist activity includes:

To commit an act that the actor knows, or reasonably should know, affords material support, including a safe house, transportation, communications, funds, transfer of funds or other material financial benefit … to a terrorist organization [emphasis added]

Such activity, no matter how minor, constituted grounds for exclusion from entry to the U.S.

By unilaterally lifting restrictions — without so much as consulting Congress — for those intending immigrants who engaged in “(1) certain routine commercial transactions or certain routine social transactions (i.e., in the satisfaction of certain well-established or verifiable family, social, or cultural obligations), [or] (2) certain humanitarian assistance,” that benefited terrorist organizations, the Obama administration simply overrode existing law. So far, both the judicial and legislative branches of the U.S. government have let the administration get away with it.

According to the Daily Caller, Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson and Secretary of State John Kerry signed the exemptions despite very real concerns about the legality of the executive branch deciding to ignore aspects of an existing law it doesn’t want to enforce and replacing them with its own guidelines.

Former State Department official and current director of policy studies for the Center for Immigration Studies Jessica Vaughan worried as well that “those evaluating these cases will be ordered to ignore red flags in the applications, especially if the applicant is supported by one of the many advocacy groups that have the ear of senior DHS staff.”

The new policy decree marks a significant win for agents of influence belonging to advocacy groups acting on behalf of the Muslim Brotherhood agenda to pursue “civilization jihad” “to destroy Western civilization from within…by [our] hands,” as asserted in the “Explanatory Memorandum,” a key Brotherhood document introduced as evidence in the 2008 Holy Land Foundation HAMAS terror funding trial.

As described at some length in “The Islamists’—and their Enablers’—Assault on the Right: The Case Against Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan,” an February 11, 2014 dossier of particulars published by the Center for Security Policy (CSP), it is precisely in executing political influence operations aimed at U.S. national security leadership (whether Republican or Democratic) that the Muslim Brotherhood so excels.

The CSP paper explains in exhaustive detail and with meticulously referenced citations how the Muslim Brotherhood targeted the Republican Party and the conservative movement over a period of years and succeeded in placing senior operatives such as Abdurahman Alamoudi, Sami al-Arian, Nihad Awad, and Khaled Saffuri deep inside senior leadership circles.

It was at those top levels of government—the Executive Branch, the Intelligence Community, and the National Security Council—where critical decision-making took place, especially in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, that set U.S. counterterrorism strategy on a hopeless loop that deliberately avoided, and indeed later would forbid, knowledge about Islamic doctrine, law and scripture as the animating inspiration for Islamic terrorism.

By divorcing the enemy’s core ideology from study of the enemy threat doctrine, Muslim Brotherhood agents of influence succeeded in ensuring that U.S. blood and treasure would be endlessly and fruitlessly expended in Counterinsurgency (COIN) warfare, nation-building exercises and democracy experiments in the most unsuitable places possible: Muslim lands under rule of Islamic law (sharia).

As noted in CSP’s 2010 Team B II Report, “Shariah: The Threat to America,” Americans do pretty well at defending against military-style frontal assaults. We do far less well, though, at either recognizing or countering the “menace posed by jihadist enemies who operate by deceit and stealth from inside the gates.

And yet it is the latter threat that poses a far more serious threat to open, tolerant societies like ours than the openly terrorist attack like the one that struck on 9/11.

Read more at Clarion Project

Clare Lopez is a strategic policy and intelligence expert with a focus on the Middle East, national defense and counterterrorism. Lopez served for 20 years as an operations officer with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

Also see: