CAIR goes after “National Security Summit” I’m moderating

By Allen West:

One of our cherished freedoms is our First Amendment right of free speech. It is a freedom the Founding Fathers bequeathed to us as a result of England’s attempt to silence their voices — as detailed in Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence grievances.

So how is it we’ve come to a point in America where any special interest group feels it is entitled to or capable of silencing the voices of others? And even more disturbing, this special interest group is clearly aligned with America’s enemies.

The group of which I speak, of course, is the Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR). We’ve addressed this group countless times here as an unindicted co-conspirator of the largest terrorist funding case in the United States, the Holy Land Foundation case in Houston, Texas.

As well, CAIR is listed on the FBI no-contact list as a result of its questionable affiliations. CAIR is nothing more than a Muslim Brotherhood front group in America and its fundraising efforts have served to benefit the Palestinian wing of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas. And when it comes to stifling free speech in America, let’s remember CAIR’s efforts to stymie Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s recognition at Brandeis University where their tactics of fear, intimidation, and coercion made the administration there fold like a cheap chair. CAIR used that success as a rallying cry in a fundraising email to its supporters — aka “stealth jihad terrorist sympathizers.”

cair-488x630

Now CAIR is using social media and the same ol’ tactics to try and cancel another event and this time they picked the wrong fight because I’m involved in it. CAIR very kindly posted the entire flyer on its Facebook page. Its part of a speaker series entitled, “Israel Security Summit: The Fight for Western Civilization, Israel-Global Jihad-America.” The panelists assembled include two retired U.S. military three-star generals, men who have dedicated their entire lives to the service of our Republic — one, LTG Boykin was an original founding member of U.S. Special Forces Operational Detachment (Delta): “Delta Force.” You can download the complete flyer here.

However, you can see CAIR is already starting its campaign to have this event cancelled. They’re using threats of violence to scare the community of Stoughton, Mass. Now, I have a simple question. Why is it when another Muslim Brotherhood front group, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) wants to hold a conference, no one is trying to get it cancelled? But that doesn’t mean there aren’t many of us who want to sound the alarm and educate our fellow Americans about the goals and objectives of these cultural jihadists.

cair-Twitter-630x539

Spare me the “Islamophobe” bovine excrement. I can’t think of a better time to have a panel to discuss Hamas, ISIS, al-Qaida, AQIM, AQAP, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Abu Sayyaf, Jemmat al-Islamiya, Boko Haram, Al Shabab, Taliban, Haqqani Network, Iran, Muslim Brotherhood, Qatar, Turkey — as you can see, we do have a problem with the rise of Islamic totalitarianism and jihadism globally.
Read more at http://allenbwest.com/2014/08/cair-goes-national-security-summit-im-moderating/#3GeYolCsPs6QwiJJ.99

Also see:

American Muslim Organizations Pen Letter Against Surveillance of Islamist Groups (counterjihadreport.com)

 

 

American Muslim Organizations Pen Letter Against Surveillance of Islamist Groups

fbi_agents_AFPBreitbart, by KYLE SHIDELER:

Fresh off the successful elimination of the highly respected NYPD intelligence program, the Islamist-left alliance which seeks to utterly neuter American intelligence and law enforcement has set its sights on the last line of defense: your local law enforcement.

Federal Law enforcement has already faced a complete purge of training materials, aiming to eliminate any vestige of information regarding how Jihadi terror groups draw their threat doctrine from Islamic sources. Long established specialists on political Islam, counterterrorism, asymmetrical warfare and counterinsurgency have lost their jobs, been publicly ridiculed, or, if they wish to continue to instruct, suffer through turning over their intellectual work products to a faceless committee to determine what can and cannot be said about America’s enemies. This review committee is so secretive that even Congressional staffers on the relevant committees have been denied information about their identities.

That purge was kicked off by a letter sent by 57 organizations, including multiple organizations with known ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, including the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and The Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC).

Now, another letter has been sent featuring 75 organizations, including many of the same Muslim Brotherhood-linked groups.  As in the first purge, the letter writers claim to be responding to a news story featuring leaked classified information. In 2012, it was a Wired.com story by Spencer Ackerman. This time around it’s Glenn Greenwald (of Snowden fame)’s piece on the -completely legal- electronic surveillance of several individuals with known Islamic extremism and terror ties.

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

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

Tellingly, the day prior to the letter’s official unveiling, Mohammed Elibiary, himself instrumental in the first training purge, essentially declared “checkmate” on twitter saying, “With my 22+ yrs in @GOP, friends thru out 100s US security/policing agencies & academia; no future presidency will reverse reforms underway.”

Sadly, Elibiary may be correct. If the pattern from the 2012 purge experience holds, we can expect a rapid response from the Obama administration in support of this letter, and equally rapid implementation of its demands. If so, at the very time respected Middle East analysts like Ali Khedary are saying that the Obama Administration “doesn’t take the threat of transnational jihad seriously,” we may find that no one, from the FBI, CIA and DOD analysts, to the small town sheriff’s deputies, will be so much as permitted to say the word jihad in their training.

Kyle Shideler is the Director of the Threat Information Office at the Center for Security Policy

**********

Gorka: 11 Years After 9/11 – What Went Wrong With American Policy

Published on Nov 3, 2012 by emetonline

 

Also see:

BLIND TO TERROR: THE U.S. GOVERNMENT’S DISASTROUS MUSLIM OUTREACH EFFORTS AND THE IMPACT ON U.S. MIDDLE EAST POLICY BY PATRICK S. POOLE

 

Hollywood: Sharia-Compliant

20130813_HOLLYWOOD_movies_TV_LARGEby EDWARD CLINE:

Hollywood has rarely produced a trustworthy depiction of historical events. My own philosophy of historical fiction is that historic events should serve as background to the conflicts, aspirations, ambitions, betrayals and destiny of the principal characters in the story. Further, the plot in which these characters move – or, even better, when these characters move the plot itself – should not conflict with the historic events, but be in sync with those events. The principal conflicts should be between the characters, not between the story and history. I obeyed this rule while writing the Sparrowhawk series, and also my period detective novels.

Hollywood does not adhere to such rules. I don’t think it has even formulated them.

Thus we have such examples as the 1936 Charge of the Light Brigade, in which the sequence of events of the Indian Mutiny and the Crimean War was reversed (the war, 1853-1856; the mutiny, 1857).  Otherwise it would have required Errol Flynn to survive the Charge and travel to India to rescue Olivia de Havilland from Surat Khan’s filthy clutches. History was tweaked, but not by much, to accommodate the plot. The lavish 1968 Tony Richardson version, however, was a plotless anti-war statement, complete with animated period political cartoons and caricatured Victorian figures. And, because it was an anti-war statement, it was gorier than its predecessor.

There are innumerable films and TV series grounded in history. I could write a book about the subject. I might do that, some day. What looms largest in my mind, however, and at the moment, is David Lean’s Lawrence of Arabia (1962). At the age of 17, when I first saw it shortly after its release, I was literally smitten by it. It got me to read up on World War One. Although I entertained doubts about its accuracy, it was a grand scale film, one of the last. My positive appraisal of it gradually diminished over the years, the more I learned about how and why the Allied campaign in the Middle East was conducted.

Clinching my final negative appraisal was Efraim Karsh’s August 9th, 2013 article, “Seven Pillars of Fiction,” originally published in the Wall Street Journal and reprinted by the Middle East Forum. It concluded that Lawrence was indeed a consummate charlatan, and that the “Arab Revolt” was a fiction invented by one ambitious Arab potentate and cashed in on by another, the Saudi “king,” Abdul Aziz ibn Saud. Saud sat out the war and did not participate in any of the warfare conducted against the Turks by Lawrence under the aegis of Hussein ibn Ali, the putative “Sharif of Mecca,” and Prince Faisal, one of his sons. Hussein also sought the title, “King of the Arabs.” I provide many more details of this pragmatic episode of “nation building” in my detective novel, The Black Stone.

It also led me to the conclusion that David Lean, one of the finest film directors to ever peer through a camera lens, was just another ingenuous dupe of the legend of Lawrence of Arabia. At the time, questioning the stature of T.E. Lawrence would have been treated as slanderous heresy. His film, which I still maintain is a magnificent example of what films could be, was inspired by and produced as a result of the success of Terence Rattigan’s 1960 play, Ross, which was closer to the truth in its depiction of Lawrence than was Lawrence of Arabia.

I’ve often written about Hollywood’s Leftist, anti-American crusade, and its penchant for obliging the sensibilities of offended Muslims in the past, for example, herehereherehere, and most recently, here, about the Disney/ABC Family Group‘s capitulation to the demands of the Hamas-connected Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) that it cancel a TV program, “Alice in Arabia.” Nick Provenzo wrote about the murder of Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh in 2006, why Hollywood had little or nothing to say about it, and why Hollywood changed the villains from Muslims to “neo-fascists” in the production of Tom Clancy’s novel, The Sum of All FearsWikepedia has the “low-down” on why the villains’ identities were changed. The screenwriter, Dan Pyne, protesteth too much.

The Disney/ABC decision garnered little or no mention in the mainstream media, nor did the announcement that Disney/ABC would work with Muslim screenwriters to produce future programs that would not offend Muslim feelings or invite chares of blasphemy or “slandering” the good name of Islam. The Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), a Muslim Brotherhood front group, announced also that it would provide Disney/ABC with this “talent.”

That boils down to: MPAC wonks voluntarily installed by Disney/ABC as paid censors of its output.  It means: Disney/ABC is willing to submit to Islamic Sharia law, and avoid any criticism of Islam, and the Muslim wonks will be there to ensure that Disney/ABC complies.

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

Hollywood is but one miserable wing of the “house” the Brotherhood and its Islamic terrorist allies wish to bring down and convert to their own brand of totalitarianism. Just as the Soviets infiltrated our government and our culture in the 1930’s, including Hollywood, just as Hollywood obeyed Washington and refrained from producing movies during World War II critical of our totalitarian ally, Josef Stalin’s Soviet Russia, Islam has made a key beachhead in Hollywood, to guide its Leftist denizens in the Sharia way.

Ultimately, it will not be the Brotherhood’s hands that will help to destroy America, but the pragmatic, amoral, manicured hands of Hollywood, busy “reimagining” it.

Read more: Family Security Matters

Islamists Put America On Trial While Shutting Down Free Speech

lawfare projectBreitbart, by :

Human Rights attorney and the director of the Lawfare Project, Brooke Goldstein, asserts that anyone who is brave enough to speak openly about terrorism and its connection to Islam may find themselves on the “receiving end of a frivolous and malicious lawsuit designed to silence and punish them.”

Goldstein claims over the last 15 years, Islamic groups like the Arab league and the OIC attempt to punish any type of speech they consider offensive to Islam. Moreover, she told Breitbart News Executive Chairman Stephen K. Bannon and the host of Breitbart News Sunday  that such groups pair lawsuits with acts of violence and are becoming more aggressive about invoking fatwas, as they did to the Danish cartoonist. Goldstein, also pointed out that  violence and fatwas ensued across the Muslim world when the state department decided to blame a so called anti-Islam YouTube film for the attack on Benghazi.

The human rights and free speech advocate posits that the lawsuits and violence precipitates an inherent self censorship. Altogether these three free speech denying modalities comprise a phenomenon which Goldstein calls “Islamist Lawfare, which is the use of the law as a weapon of war to silence and punish free speech about these issues of public dissonance.”

Bannon asked Goldstein if she thought there was an over-hyping by the Conservative Right of Islamist overreach in America, or is there a real problem as in the UK, where Sharia Law is now becoming codified into English Common law. Goldstein replied that “I wish it was just hype. But what we can measure now, because this has been a strategy that has been pursued, is the effects of the lawfare.”

Goldstein cited one example where Islamist lawfare was carried out and resulted in a major act of terror on American soil. She referred to a community center and mosque called the Islamic Society of Boston, that in 2005 was being investigated for receiving Saudi funding and was breeding Wasabi Islamic radicalism. The mosque turned around and sued at least 17 media defendants tying up the courts in a two year process stymieing police and discouraging further investigations.

The mosque was able to continue its teachings and sponsorship of radical ideology. Unfortunately, several years later, the mosque  produced the two Tsarnaev brothers, responsible for the bombing of the Boston Marathon in 2013, which killed three people including an eight year old boy and wounded many others.

Goldstein expressed her outrage that we have a policy in the government now where the words Islam and Jihad are being redacted from counter terrorism training manuals. She further points out that we have FBI officials and counter intelligence experts “that have been fired because they are Islamaphobic. We have Fort Hood which is reclassified as work place violence, not Islamist terrorism.”

Goldstein concludes that we have an uber PCness  in America that brands people, even if it’s a Muslim criticizing his own religion, as being an Islamaphobe.

***********

Recommended reading:

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.

CAIR tries to shut down briefing on American jihadi networks

 

Sheriff Jenkins

Sheriff Jenkins

Allen West:

Some might say these are all isolated incidents. But connect these dots: this week we reported on the activists tied to the Muslim Brotherhood hosting a Democrat fundraiser. The Muslim Brotherhood’s own Explanatory Memorandum says “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.” Our own president said, “I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.”

So is it any surprise that the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) tried pressure tactics, threats and even a $15,000 cash bribe to shut down a recent counter-terrorism training program for Virginia law enforcement. As reported by World Net Daily, Culpepper County Sheriff Scott Jenkins did not stand down, and the training took place as scheduled – albeit with extra security.

Talk about audacity. CAIR was an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial, the largest terrorism funding case in America’s history. Where was the Virginia Attorney General? Where was U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder? (Oh, never mind).

Washington-based CAIR, an Islamic lobbying group shunned by the FBI due to its ties to terrorist groups, launched a weeks-long campaign to intimidate Culpepper County Sheriff Scott Jenkins into canceling the three-day program, titled “Understanding and Investigating Jihadi Networks in America.”

The lead trainer, former special FBI agent John Guandolo, presented evidence of the radical Muslim Brotherhood’s operations in the U.S. and their jihadi support network, along with a large amount of evidence demonstrating CAIR was created and continues to be an entity of Hamas, a U.S.-designated terror group.

Guandolo detailed for officers how this dangerous Islamic network in America radicalizes, trains and logistically supports jihadi operations in the United States and those launched from the U.S. against overseas targets.

World Net Daily also noted “CAIR has cultivated a number of political supporters, mainly among leading Democrats in Washington, including senior White House officials. Secret Service entry logs show CAIR officials have visited the White House several times during the Obama administration.”

Ladies and gents, first of all, please call Culpepper County Sheriff Scott Jenkins and applaud him for his stand. And if any of you reside in Virginia, please bombard the office of your State Attorney General and ask him “Whiskey-Tango-Foxtrot”? As well, make the calls to the office of House Homeland Security Chairman Mike McCaul to hold an investigative hearing.

My fellow Americans, this is deadly serious. Further, since we appear to have an administration that embraces, supports and enables our enemy how can those actions not be described as “high crimes and misdemeanors?” And as for you progressive socialists, how exactly will you defend this?

GUARDIAN FUND LOGO

 

Sign up for updates from allenbwwest.com and donate to the Allen West Guardian Fund to help get minority conservative and veteran leaders elected.

 

 

Also see:

 

American Islamist Coalition Launches with Empty Rhetoric

New Coalition of U.S. Islamists to Attempt to Form Voting Bloc

CAIR unindictedBY RYAN MAURO:

In 1991, the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood directed its components to “possess a mastery of the art of ‘coalitions’” in order to wage “a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within.” Seemingly in fulfillment of that directive, eight Muslim groups (seven with solid Islamist records) will announce a coalition on March 12 to increase their political influence.

The new coalition will be announced at the National Press Club. Its name is the U.S. Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO) and one of its objectives is to develop a census that will “create a database that will be used to enhance political participation in upcoming elections.” This coalition undoubtedly will use these census results to make political candidates bend to their will.

U.S. Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO)

The Secretary-General of USCMO is Oussama Jamal. Press reports have alternatively titled him as the President and Vice President of the Mosque Foundation that has extensive links to the Brotherhood and Hamas. Jamal accuses the U.S. government of following the “Zionist agenda” in its counter-terrorism investigations and has questioned whether Arabs were actually involved in the 9/11 attacks.

The coalition consists of eight Muslim organizations. The only one without an extensive Islamist record is the Mosque Cares, part of the Ministry of Imam W. Deen Mohammed:

  • The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is labeled by the U.S. Justice Department as a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity (specifically part of its Hamas support structure) and an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism-financing trial in U.S. history. The FBI has officially stopped using CAIR as an outreach partner and federal prosecutors have definitively said in court that CAIR uses deception to disguise its involvement with terrorists.
  • The Muslim Alliance in North America is led by a virulently radical cleric named Imam Siraj Wahhaj. The NYPD watches his mosque because of evidence linking it to terrorism and his anti-American record is indisputable. He remains committed to implementing Sharia in America but tells Muslims that it’s better not to talk about it to non-Muslims.
  • American Muslims for Palestine is a group that holds conferences with an all-star line-up of Islamists that support the Brotherhood and Hamas. Its leaders have spewed anti-American rhetoric, spoken in support of violence and preached that Muslims should launch an intifada in the U.S. modeled after uprisings by Palestinians and Iraqis.
  • The Muslim American Society was “founded as the overt arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in America” according to federal prosecutors. Some of its chapters held protests in response to the overthrow of the Brotherhood in Egypt.
  • The Islamic Circle of North America is listed in Muslim Brotherhood documents as one of “our organizations and the organizations of our friends.” Its national conferences are filled with Islamist speakers and are held jointly with MAS. It is a derivative of the Pakistani Islamist group Jamaat e-Islami and one of its leaders is wanted in Bangladesh for war crimes.
  • The Muslim Legal Fund of America has strong links to the Muslim Brotherhood, with one of its founders joining the Islamist opposition in Syria. The organization raised money for the defense of terrorists convicted in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation. That charity is another Brotherhood entity that was shut down for financing Hamas.
  • The Muslim Ummah of North America is mentioned in U.S. Muslim Brotherhood documents as one of its components. An internal plan for 1991-1992 tasks its Youth Department/Committee with “arranging the youth’s relationship with ‘MUNA’ [Muslim Ummah of North America]” and “supervising the administrations” of MUNA.

The formation of this coalition is an example of the Brotherhood’s own words being followed. As mentioned, its 1991 strategy document told its various fronts to “possess a mastery of the art of ‘coalitions.’”

Read more at Clarion Project

Five Signs of Hope (Maybe) for Europe

Prince-Charlesby :

Every now and then readers of this site, while thanking me for my coverage of the Islamization of Europe, have kindly asked if it’s possible for me to provide an occasional break from the endlessly depressing accounts of jihad and appeasement and dhimmitude and, quite simply, report on some good news for a change.

Point taken. Here, in recognition of the hopeful message of Christmas and the New Year’s promise, is a year-end dose of tidings of – well, not great joy, but at least possible positive turnarounds on various fronts.

1. BRITAIN: Walking back a dhimmi policy

The Marks and Spencer story. This one went through the whole cycle (from proud corporate declaration of spineless dhimmitude to meek apology therefor) with incredible – and gratifying – rapidity.

Just a couple of days before Christmas, a customer of the posh London retailer told the Telegraph that a Muslim clerk had refused, albeit politely, to ring up her bottle of champagne because the item offended the clerk’s religious convictions. Confronted with this story, a spokesperson for M&S affirmed that, indeed, out of respect for Islam, the store had a policy of allowing Muslim workers to refuse to serve customers purchasing (for example) alcohol and pork, and to pass these haram customers on to other, less discriminating employees.

Result: a huge public outcry, including a Facebook page promoting an M&S boycott. Within hours, M&S was not only apologizing for its wrongheaded policy but (amusingly) insisting that, in fact, it had no such policy at all, and that in the champagne incident the store’s actual policy had not been properly followed.

2. FRANCE: Walking back a dhimmi report

Here’s another example of outraged reactions to dhimmitude having a real effect. Earlier this month, Le Figaro revealed the contents of a new report – commissioned by France’s socialist prime minister, Jean-Marc Ayrault – which recommended a veritable blizzard of revolutionary acts by the government, from renaming streets and squares after immigrants to prohibiting the mention of transgressors’ ethnicity in the news media. Among much else, school curricula would be dramatically transformed to make them radically multicultural. Accepting the report on November 13, Ayrault promised that the recommendations would be acted upon tout de suite.

Then the protests started pouring in. “It will no longer be up to immigrants to adopt French culture,” charged Jean-Francois Cope, head of the opposition UMP party, “but up to France to abandon its culture, its values, its history to adapt to the culture of others.” Geoffrey Didier, also of UMP, called the report “a crime against republican assimilation and another step in the communitarian strategy of the Socialist Party.” And National Front leader Marine Le Pen denounced it as “a “declaration of war on the French who are calling for an end to the policy of mass immigration and the reaffirmation of our republican laws and values.” The nationwide outrage led one commentator to describe Ayrault as having “shot himself in the foot.” Confronted with the reaction, Ayrault did a snappy about-face, saying meekly: “Just because I get a report doesn’t mean it’s government policy.”

3. BRITAIN: A Prince who May or May Not Be Snapping out of It

Over the years, Prince Charles’s gushing praise of Islam, his enthusiastic participation in Islamic ceremonies, and his occasional references to his own purportedly serious study of the religion have fed speculation that he was either a secret Muslim or was well on his way to becoming one. (A 1997 article in the Middle East Quarterly, entitled “Prince Charles of Arabia,” carefully sifted through the evidence for this proposition.) As recently as 2010, Charles gave a speech extolling Islamic “spiritual principles” as environment-friendly.

How surprising it was, then, to hear the Prince of Wales saying in a speech earlier this month that “we cannot ignore the fact that Christians in the Middle East are, increasingly, being deliberately attacked by fundamentalist Islamist militants.” Underscoring that he had been trying for twenty years “to build bridges between Islam and  Christianity,” he lamented that “we have now reached a crisis where the bridges are rapidly being deliberately destroyed by those with a vested interest in doing so, and this is achieved through intimidation, false accusation and organised persecution, including to Christian communities in the Middle East at the present time.” Refreshingly, he made no apparent attempt to draw a false moral equivalency, to put the crisis down to the usual “interreligious tensions”: no, Charles actually said that Muslims were persecuting Christians, and condemned it outright.

This doesn’t mean he’s now a hero of the counterjihad resistance, but it’s something.

Read more at Front Page

U.S. Government Purges of Law Enforcement Training Material Deemed ‘Offensive’ to Muslims

politicallycorrectphotoby JUDICIAL WATCH:

“Documentation and Analysis of Islamist Active Measures and Influence Operations Targeting Anti-terrorism Training” includes detailed chronology, identifies specific propaganda organizations, names top Obama administration “Islamist influence operators” 

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today released a “Special Report: U.S. Government Purges of Law Enforcement Training Material Deemed ‘Offensive’ to Muslims: Documentation and Analysis of Islamist Active Measures and Influence Operations Targeting Anti-terrorism Training.”

The 26-page Special Report includes a detailed chronology, identifies specific Islamic propaganda organizations, and identifies five top “Islamist influence operators” associated with the Obama administration. More than 12 years of Judicial Watch work on national security issues is featured in the Special Report, highlighting information from government documents exclusively obtained by the organization.

If you would like to receive weekly emails updating you about all of our efforts to fight corruption, please sign up here.The heavily footnoted Report centers on the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) purge of anti-terrorism training material and curricula deemed “offensive” to Muslims.  The curricula purge – documented through a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit in June 2013 – occurred following a February 8, 2012, meeting between FBI Director Robert Mueller and various Islamic organizations.  According to the Report, the purge was part of a “broader Islamist influence operation” designed to “influence the opinions and actions of persons, institutions, governments and the public at-large.” The Report also documents incidents of “Islamic influence operations” at the Departments of Justice and State, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Obama White House.

According to the Report, during the February 8 meeting, FBI Director Mueller assured the Islamic groups in attendance that the agency had ordered the removal of presentations and curricula on Islam from FBI offices around the country that were deemed “offensive.” One group that met with Mueller – the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) – had been named by the government in 2007 as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terrorist financing lawsuit, along with the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT).

The Report lists the reasons given by the FBI for purging “offensive” training documents:

  • “Page 13 inaccurately states that AQ [al Qaeda] is responsible for the bombing of the Khobar Towers and that AQ is ‘clearly linked’ to the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.”
  •  “The Qur’an is not the teachings of the Prophet, but the revealed word of God.”
  •  “Remove sweeping generality of ‘Those who fit the terrorist profile best (for the present at least) are young male immigrants of Middle Eastern appearance.'”
  • “[A]uthor seems to conflate ‘Islamic Militancy’ with ‘terrorism’ and needs to define the difference and use it in their analysis.”

Included in the Special Report’s “Chronology of Recent Developments in Influence Operations” are the following incidents:

  • October 2011: 57 Muslim groups send a letter to White House demanding “purge” of all counterterrorism training materials and “re-education” of all FBI agents exposed to “Islamophobic” training.
  • October 2011: DOJ Civil Rights Division meeting with Islamic groups to discuss criminalizing criticism of Islam as “discrimination.”
  • October 2011: Joint Chiefs of Staff issues action directive to screen trainers for military intelligence and psychological operations based solely on Ackerman’s Wired report.
  • November 2011: White House responds to Muslim groups’ “purge” demand letter, agrees to set up inter-agency task force, including extremist Muslim groups, to oversee FBI counterterrorism training development.
  • January 2012:  U.S. Military Academy at West Point cancels an address by a highly decorated founding member of Delta Force and former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, Jerry Boykin, after complaints from the Hamas front group CAIR.
  • February 2012: Islamic groups meet with FBI to ensure compliance with demanded Islamophobia” purge.
  • July 2012: Top DOJ Civil Rights official refuses to vow to Congress not to push Saudi-style blasphemy laws.
  • September 2012: Obama administration blames attacks on U.S. Embassy Cairo and the “Special Mission Compound” in Benghazi on a YouTube movie trailer.

According to the Report, “The Obama administration has been penetrated by Islamist influence operators, seeking to advance an ideological agenda completely at odds with our constitutional system.  The penetration is, in many cases, by the Obama administration’s invitation.  Some of the more public and controversial figures associated with the Obama administration have included:

  • “Rashad Hussain – U.S. Special Envoy to the OIC … has a history of participating in events connected with the Muslim Brotherhood.
  • “Huma Abedin – Long-time personal aide to former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton [whose] late-father, mother and brother are all connected to Muslim Brotherhood organizations or operatives.
  • “Daliah Mogahed – An advisor to the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.  Mogahed’s 2009 book Who Speaks for Islam? is viewed by many as an apologia for the growing power and influence of radical Islamists.  Mogahed is an unapologetic defender of unindicted terrorist conspirator organizations such as CAIR and ISNA.
  • “Momamed Elibiary – A Texas-based security consultant and Islamic cleric who was named to President Obama’s Homeland Security Advisory Council in 2010.  He has close ties to a convicted Hamas fundraiser and other radical Islamist causes ….
  • “Mohamed Magid – … President of the ISNA, an unindicted terrorist conspirator organization. Magid was appointed by President Obama to the Department of Homeland Security’s Countering Violent Extremism Working Group. From that position, Magid was key in influencing and directing the purge of training materials and policies in the FBI and other federal agencies.”

The Report concludes, “It is fair to say that not a single U.S. government employee goes to work each morning with the mission of identifying and defeating the Islamists’ active measures campaigns.  Large bureaucratic institutions are reluctant to ‘disturb’ operations with examinations for deception and manipulation.  Those same organizations are loath to raise those subjects in congressional appropriations requests and hearings fearing any political criticism. Until there is someone with the job of defeating the Islamist active measures campaign targeting our nation – and resourced to roll back the Islamists and win – the United States and her citizens are in grave peril.”

Read more: Family Security Matters 

An Islamist Thanksgiving

american-muslims-for-palestine-ad-metro-northby Ryan Mauro

Islamists even see Thanksgiving as a time to advance their cause. In the morning, Islamists exploited the parade and in the evening, Islamists assembled in Illinois for the “Conference for Palestine in the U.S.” And one of their favorite evangelicals was there to join them.

The organizer of the event was American Muslims for Palestine (AMP) and it took place at Crowne Plaza O’Hare in Rosemont, Illinois from November 28 to December 1. The Islamist group often works with interfaith coalitions and one of its very partners is Presbyterian Reverend Donald Wagner, former director and current board member of Evangelicals for Middle East Understanding.

Last year’s AMP conference had at least 13 Islamist speakers with pro-Hamas and pro-Muslim Brotherhood agendas and had education for children about their cause. Reverend Wagner was also on the speaker’s roster and is back again this year.

The AMP explicitly says that he “works internationally to educate Christians about the problems of Christian Zionism.” He falsely states that evangelicals support Israel only to trigger an Armageddon and the Second Coming of Christ. To put it another way, Wagner and his group see them as the Christian equivalent of Ahmadinejad.

And his group isn’t just talking among themselves and to Islamists that don’t need convincing. In November 2012, Wagner’s group held a Middle East briefing at the Billy Graham Center of Wheaton College. The speakers were hostile to Israel and support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign.

Wagner’s fellow speakers at the Thanksgiving Weekend conference are prominent Islamists whose backgrounds are simple to find. He and the other non-Muslim speakers like Max Blumenthal and Josh Ruebner, National Advocacy Director of the U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, have no excuse. They are either don’t care about the conference’s extremism or don’t care to know.

AMP Chairman Hatem Bazian is one of the Islamist co-founders of Zaytuna College in California. In 2004, he was videotaped calling for an “intifada” in America to “change fundamentally the political dynamics here.” He told Muslims to follow in the footsteps of Palestinians fighting Israel and Iraqis fighting U.S. forces.

Osama Abu Irshaid is a board member of the AMP. He used to be the editor for a Muslim Brotherhood front in the U.S. and legitimized Hamas’s attacks on Israel in 2010 as legally justifiable. He also has called Hamas “the resistance.”

Rashid Khalidi of Columbia University is well-known for his incendiary comments. He says he is a “severe critic” of Hamas but described the killing of Israeli soldiers as “resistance” in 2002. His wife also worked for the PLO when it was officially designated as a terrorist group by the U.S.

Abdelfattah Mourou is a co-founder of the Ennahda Party that currently leads Tunisia. The population that once elected it to power has since turned against it. It is essentially the Brotherhood’s branch there and he co-founded it with Rachid Ghannouchi, a prominent Islamist with a long record of extremism.

Sheikh Kifah Mustapha is an imam and Associate Director at the Mosque Foundation in Bridgeview, Illinois. He is an unindicted co-conspirator in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation.

The U.S. government specifically listed him as an elite operative of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood as a member of its secret Palestine Committee. These operatives covertly advance the interests of Hamas through a web of fronts. He was even in a pro-Hamas band.

According to AMP, Mustapha is the chairman of the Quran Institute of the Chicago chapter of the Muslim American Society. He is also the President of the Shura of Islamic Family Counselors of America and chairman of the Illinois Council of Imams and Scholars. Several other positions are listed in his bio, reflecting the success the Brotherhood has had in building and infiltrating Islamic institutions in America.

Read more at Front Page

Islam, Muslims, and the 2012 Election

by David J. Rusin
Middle East Quarterly
Summer 2013, pp. 21-35 (view PDF)

Just as the 2012 elections maintained the status quo in Washington, D.C., so too did they reinforce decade-old trends concerning Muslims and the American political process: The images (81)Muslim population further solidified as a Democratic voting bloc, and parties’ outreach efforts once again legitimized Islamists. However, 2012 was notable for Islam’s impact as a political issue in the presidential primaries and several congressional races.

Whether or not Washington experiences a power shift in the years to come, it is likely that the current relationship between Muslims and American politics will hold for the foreseeable future. Avoiding the pitfalls of this reality begins with understanding it.

Clinton, Bush, and Obama: A Brief History

Much has changed since this journal analyzed the 1996 and 2000 elections, both of which broke new ground in the political engagement of Muslims. Though Muslims at the time still debated whether they should take part in American democracy at all, Khalid Durán described the 1996 campaign as “the moment when the ‘Muslim vote’ first began to count in American politics. And Muslim Americans left no doubt that they hoped their involvement would be decisive for Islam in the United States.” With quality data scarce in the contest between President Bill Clinton and Sen. Bob Dole, Durán concluded: “All that can be said with some certainty is that the ‘Muslim vote,’ such as it is, went more solidly for Clinton than did the nation as a whole.”[1]

The question of participation having been settled, a number of Islamist groups launched the American Muslim Political Coordination Committee (AMPCC) in an attempt to speak with one voice. After an unprecedented level of outreach to Muslims, Republican presidential nominee George W. Bush earned AMPCC’s endorsement in 2000. Islamists were quick to take credit for his razor-thin victory over Vice President Al Gore, with one poll reporting that 91 percent of Florida Muslims had backed Bush. In his postmortem for the Quarterly, Alexander Rose warned of “unscientific and dubious self-administered surveys” but conceded that “it can be said with reasonable certainty that the Texas governor did better among Muslims than Dole did four years earlier.” However, he cautioned that “what tilt there was to Bush in 2000 was most likely a temporary aberration caused by the election’s unique nature.”[2]

Rose’s prediction proved correct as the attacks of September 11, 2001, catalyzed Muslim voters’ return to the Democratic fold. While Bush kept meeting with Islamists and professed that “Islam is peace,”[3] his military campaigns abroad and counterterrorism programs at home alienated many Muslims who had cheered his promises to conduct a humble foreign policy and end the use of secret evidence. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), an influential Islamist group, released an “exit poll” claiming that 93 percent of Muslims had voted for Sen. John Kerry in 2004.[4] According to a 2007 study by the Pew Research Center, 71 percent voted for Kerry and 14 percent for Bush.[5]

images (79)Having increased their political footprint in subsequent years with the election of the first two Muslim congressmen—Keith Ellison (Democrat, Minn.) and André Carson (Democrat, Ind.), each of whom has exhibited Islamist tendencies[6]—Muslims continued their move toward the Democrats in 2008 even though presidential nominee Barack Obama did not court them publicly. In one infamous gaffe, two hijab-wearing women were prevented from sitting behind the podium at an Obama campaign rally.[7] A 2011 Pew survey found that 92 percent of Muslims had cast their votes for Obama nonetheless.[8]

6a00d8341c630a53ef01156fc9728b970c-800wiAs president, Obama shed his reluctance to embrace Islam. Efforts during his first term, which began with a prayer service featuring Ingrid Mattson of the Islamic Society of North America,[9] included Obama’s choosing al-Arabiya television network for his initial interview;[10] erroneously labeling the United States“one of the largest Muslim countries”;[11] lauding the Muslim world in his June 2009 Cairo speech and declaring it “part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam”;[12] supporting the right to construct an Islamic center near Ground Zero;[13] backing Hillary Clinton’s aide Huma Abedin when she was accused of Muslim Brotherhood ties;[14] pursuing policies that empowered Islamists in the Middle East;[15] maintaining a chilly relationship with Israel;[16] and stating that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”[17] Additionally, his administration placed several Muslims with Islamist backgrounds in key posts;[18] refused to link Islam and terrorism;[19]routinely met with Islamist groups;[20] purged training material deemed “Islamophobic”;[21] sent an envoyto the Organization of Islamic Cooperation[22] and joined it in the “Istanbul process” to curb “defamation of religion”;[23] intervened in local disputes over mosque building;[24] and sued on behalf of a teacher who had been denied three weeks off to visit Mecca.[25]

Obama’s time in office also saw significant evolution of Islam as a political issue, as highlighted by the Muslim Brotherhood’s becoming a household name and the rising danger of homegrown terrorism,[26] which was underlined by congressional hearings on Muslim radicalization that infuriated Islamists.[27] Fallout from the Holy Land Foundation (HLF) terrorism-funding trial,[28] which had concluded just months before Obama entered the White House, cast a long shadow over several U.S. Muslim groups implicated in the conspiracy to finance Hamas and gradually opened many eyes to the Brotherhood’s stealth jihad of “eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within.”[29] In addition, research documented deference to Shari’a (Islamic law) in state courts,[30] sparking a legislative push to restrict consideration of foreign law,[31] and grassroots anti-jihad activism came into its own with opposition to the Ground Zero mosque.[32]

Subjects such as jihad and Shari’a influenced the 2012 political landscape, and Muslims, repeatedly told by Islamists that they were under attack, may have looked to Democrats for protection.

Read more

The Islamist Ties of ‘Religions for Peace USA’

religionsforpeace_lgBy :

Religions for Peace USA (RFPUSA), which says it is “the largest and most broadly-based representative multi-religious forum in the United States,” is holding a webinar on July 25 titled, “What You Can Learn from the Fight to End Islamophobia.” The group is yet another coalition of Islamists and their non-Muslim political allies. And, as usual, it is tarring the Islamists’ opponents as “Islamophobes.”

The webinar is being jointly held with the American Center for Outreach, a Tennessee Muslim group that will use the event to highlight its “successful challenge to the nation’s most vehemently anti-Muslim legislation in 2011.”

The seminar is being promoted by the Shoulder-to-Shoulder Campaign, another interfaith bloc allied with the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity. You’ll notice a lot of cross-pollination if you look at the leadership of RFPUSA, Shoulder-to-Shoulder and ISNA’s declared“interfaith partners.”

Naeem Baig, President of the Islamic Circle of North America, sits on RFPUSA’s Council of Presidents and Executive Council. A 1991 U.S. Muslim Brotherhood memo identifies ICNA as one of its fronts as part of its “kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within.” The memo instructs its members to use “the art of ‘coalitions,’ the art of ‘absorption’ and the principles of ‘cooperation.’”

ICNA’s conferences bring together the rock stars of the Islamist movement. At its 2011 event, radical imam Siraj Wahhaj advised the audience to wait to talk about Sharia because “we are not there yet.” At ICNA’s event over Memorial Day Weekend, radical imam Zaid Shakir told the audience of 32,000 that the U.S. Constitution is inferior to Sharia because Muslims and non-Muslims are equal.

Read more at Front Page

Bloomberg vs. CAIR’s Interfaith Friends

bloomberg-nypdBy Ryan Mauro:

The Shoulder-to-Shoulder Campaign, an interfaith coalition allied with the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), is praising the passage of two bills by the New York City Council aimed at stopping the alleged abuses of the NYPD. Mayor Bloomberg says he will veto the bills, even though they passed with enough support to override it.

The passed bills, the End Discriminatory Profiling Bill and NYPD Oversight Bill, outraged Mayor Bloomberg and NYPD Police Commissioner Ray Kelly. The latter bill requires the overseeing of the NYPD by an independent Inspector-General. The former opens the door for the NYPD to be sued in state court for policies that disproportionately affect certain ages, genders, sexual orientations or housing statuses.

Mayor Bloomberg considers the bills to be a matter of “life and death” vows to “not give up for one minute.”

“The bill would allow virtually everyone in New York City to sue the Police Department and individual police officers over the entire range of law enforcement functions they perform,” Kelly explained.

He said the result will be skyrocketing liability costs, the unnecessary use of resources and an overall decrease in effectiveness.

When asked about the so-called problem of NYPD racial profiling, Bloomberg dismissively said, “Nobody racially profiles.” He made perhaps the most politically-incorrect statement of his career in defense of the NYPD:

“…They just keep saying, ‘Oh it’s a disproportionate percentage of a particular ethnic group.’ That may be, but it’s not a disproportionate percentage of those who witnesses and victims describe as committing the murder. In that case, incidentally, I think we disproportionately stop whites too much and minorities too little.”

Bloomberg refuses to apologize. “The numbers clearly show that the stops are generally proportionate with suspect’s descriptions,” he said.

The bills were aggressively supported by the New York chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), joined by the American Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU has often allied itself with the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood network that CAIR and ISNA belong to.

Read more at Front Page