Sharia and the U.S. Constitution

082411_koran-constitution-lg“(Mohammed) declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind…The precept of the Quran is, perpetual war against all who deny that (Mohammed) is the prophet of God.”
President John Quincy Adams
Son of President John Adams

By John Guandolo at his blog, Understanding the Threat, 6/20/14:
It is a historical fact that America’s first war following the Revolution was a war with the Muslim (Barbary) states. In 1786, two of America’s greatest founders, John Adams (Ambassador to England) and Thomas Jefferson (Ambassador to France) met with the emissary of Tripoli to Britain – Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja to discuss the Barbary Pirates demands for tribute from U.S. ships. After this meeting, Adams and Jefferson submitted a report to Congress detailing Adja’s answer to why the Muslims were attacking the U.S. ships without any provocation. The report reads, in part:
“The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their prophet, that is was written in their Qur’an, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

As we close this weeks series on Sharia and its importance in today’s world events, it must be again reiterated that everything the United States is dealing with in the current war is all about Sharia. Al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamic states around the world, and the doctrine of Islam itself all mandate Sharia be imposed on the entire world until there is “Peace.”

It seems fitting, then, to conclude our series on the most basic of questions: Is Sharia comparable with our Constitutional Republic in any way? The unequivocal answer is NO.

Article VI of the Constitution mandates that “…all Executive and Judicial officers, both of the United States and the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution.”

By an Act of the U.S. Congress under Title 5 Section 3331 of the U.S. Code, all elected or appointed officials shall take an oath as prescribed in that law to defend the Constitution against “all enemies, foreign and domestic.”

Former Inspector General of the United States Department of Defense and Constitutional professor Joseph Schmitz has specifically highlighted three key areas where Sharia is in direct contradiction with our Constitution: Popular Sovereignty, Supremacy of the Constitution, and Freedom of Religion.

Specifically, the U.S. Constitution, in its Preamble, identifies the People as sovereign under our system. Sharia specifically states all of mankind must submit to Islam: “Sovereignty in Islam is the prerogative of Allah Almighty alone.” (Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence, Mohammed Hashim Kalamali)

Article VI of the U.S. Constitution states “This Constitution…shall be the supreme law of the land.” As was noted in an earlier UTT Blog this week, the most popular Junior High School text in American Islamic schools – What Islam is All About – states, “The law of the land is the Shari’ah of Allah.”

Finally, the U.S. Constitution guarantees all Americans the freedom to practice their faith and religion without government interference. The First Amendment reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech…” Sharia, which comes from the Quran and the example/teachings of the prophet Mohammed, states “Fight and slay the unbeliever wherever you find them and lie and wait for them in every stratagem of war” (Quran 9:5); and “But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah. But if they turn away from Islam, seize them and slay them wherever you find them, and take no friends or helpers from among their ranks.” (Quran 4:89) In Sharia, there is no disagreement among the scholars and 100% of authoritative Islamic Law legally puts Muslims at a higher status in the community with greater rights than those of non-Muslims, and 100% of all Islamic Law mandates that all apostates from Islam be killed.

What the Global Islamic Movement intends to do, and says it intends to do, and is killing tens of thousands of people across the globe and overthrowing countries in furtherance of, is the imposition of Sharia on the world. This is not about religious freedom for Muslims in any way. It is about a violent and organized effort to impose foreign law (Sharia) on American citizens in direct conflict of the U.S Constitution and U.S. Federal Code.

Those who have sworn an Oath to protect and defend America and our Constitution must do so against any incursion into our system by Sharia. Sharia should be viewed as a cancer inside our system – a viewpoint which was crystal clear to our Founders.

Sharia and Human Rights

cairo-1990-declarationBy John Guandolo at his blog, Understanding the Threat:

The primary focal point for this week’s daily articles on Sharia (Islamic Law) is to get readers to digest the reality that when Islamic Leaders speak, their words must be translated into what Islamic Law would have them mean. The phrase “Human Rights” is no exception.

To put it as simply and as factually as possible, when Islamic Leaders say “Human Rights” they mean the “Imposition of Islamic Law.”

In 1990, the leadership of the entire Muslim world – at the Head of State and King level – signed the Cairo Declaration. In summary, the Cairo Declaration states the Islamic world agrees with the International Declaration of Human Rights insofar as (1) it does not contradict Sharia, and (2) the Muslim world only understands Human Rights as the Sharia defines it.

In 1993, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) – now calling themselves the Organization of Islamic Cooperation – served the Cairo Declaration as a formal document to the United Nations. This means that at the Head of State and King level, the entire Muslim World has officially defined “Human Rights” as the imposition of Sharia since 1993.

The last two articles in the Cairo Declaration read:
“Article 24: All rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari’ah. Article 25: The Islamic Shari’ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles in this Declaration.”

What is most interesting is that most people at the U.S. State Department have never heard of the Cairo Declaration. The practical reality is, however, that when our leaders call for certain Islamic leaders to be brought before international legal forums for “justice” because of their “Human Rights” violations, the legitimate defense for these tyrants is that they are legally on the record stating Sharia defines human rights. So, homosexuals can be killed, women can be treated as property, those who leave Islam can be killed, and non-Muslims can have less rights under an Islamic government than Muslims – and there is nothing the World Court or the United States can do about it because Sharia unequivocally states all these things are a part of Islamic Law and legally binding.

Notably, the OIC’s Ten Year Programme of Action approved in Saudi Arabia in 2005 reaffirms the entire Muslim leadership’s understanding of “human rights” under section VIII “Human Rights and Good Governance” where it states: “Call upon the Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers to consider the possibility of establishing an independent and permanent body to promote human rights in Member States, in accordance with the provisions of the Cairo Declaration…”

Most disturbing is that the promotion of the “Islamophobia” campaign is not a random occurrence but a part of an international strategy to silence truth-speaking critics of Islam and destroy the freedom of expression in the West and elsewhere. Islamophobia campaign is the imposition of the Islamic Law of “Slander” which Sharia makes a capital crime for saying anything about Islam or Muslims the a Muslim would “dislike.”

In the OIC’s Ten Year Programme it specifically calls for criminal punishments for those who slander Islam (according to the definition of “slander” under Sharia, not Western law). Under section VII entitled “Combating Islamophobia” sentence (3) states: “Endeavor to have the United Nations adopt an international resolution to combat Islamophobia, and to call upon all States to enact laws to counter it, including deterrent punishments.”

Sentence (4) in that same paragraph calls for Muslim countries to be empowered to “help in the war against extremism and terrorism.” Readers of UTT will recall that “terrorism” in Islam is the killing of a Muslim without right. As a bonus for today…”Extremism” in Islam is exceeding your ability or authority. For instance, a few years ago when Islamic jurists contemplated labeling Osama bin Laden an “extremist” our government got giddy assuming THOSE particular Islamic jurists must be “moderates.” In fact, Osama bin Laden’s forces were losing a lot. Since Allah never loses a jihad, the jurist argued bin Laden had exceeded his ability to succeed and was thus putting the Muslim ummah (community) at greater risk, making him an “extremist.”

Words matter in this war. Sharia matters in this war. Knowing something of Sharia matters if we intend to win the war.

It should not surprise us that Parvez Ahmed, the former Chairman of the Board for Hamas in America (dba CAIR), was voted back on as the Human Rights Commissioner by the city council in Jacksonville, Florida last year. His definition of “human rights” is significantly different than the councils. Since being the leader of a designated terrorist organization (Hamas) didn’t stop the Jacksonville City Council from voting him in back in, Ahmed’s support for the imposition of Sharia likely won’t sway them in the future either.

Also see:

Sharia, Permissible Lying, and the Duality of the Message

taqiyya1-300x225By John Guandolo at his blog, Understanding the Threat, 6/18/14:

“You send two messages, one to the Americans and one to the Muslims.”

Omar Ahmad
Chairman of the Board
Hamas (dba CAIR), 1994-2005

“It is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible, and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory.”

Um Dat al Salik
Islamic Sacred Law (Reliance of the Traveller)

While there are individuals who identify themselves as Muslims who do not seek to impose Sharia on the world, there still exists a Global Islamic Movement which seeks to do just that through all means possible including armed conflict. Woven into Sharia is the self-protective measure of lying to the unbeliever in order to further the Jihad until the war is won. As a matter of fact, lying to the infidel is obligatory if the goal is obligatory—Jihad is obligatory in the Sharia until the world is claimed for Islam.

The Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda, and the Organization of the Islamic Conference (all 57 Islamic States in the world represented at the Head of State/King level) all seek to impose Sharia on the rest of us per their stated doctrine.

So when Western leaders turn to their left or to their right to get advice from their “Islamic Advisors” and these advisors can be easily identified as being a part of the Muslim Brotherhood Movement, we know our leaders are most likely being lied to. The strategic loss in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq despite overwhelming U.S. military victories there is just one example of the cost of relying on men who we know are not telling us the truth about the reality on the ground.

The US v Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (“HLF”) was the largest terrorism financing and Hamas trial ever successfully prosecuted in American history (Northern District of Texas, Dallas, 2008). When HLF was indicted immediately after 9/11 it was the largest Islamic charity in America, and it was Hamas. HLF was one of four entities created by the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee (Hamas) in the United States. The other three organizations were the UASR (United Association for Studies and Research), IAP (Islamic Association for Palestine), and CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations).

During a 1993 meeting of the U.S. Palestine Committee in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Hamas leaders from all over the country attended including senior Hamas official Omar Ahmad, founder of CAIR. The FBI wiretapped phone conversations, microphones meeting rooms, and conducted physical surveillance the attendees because this was a meeting of Hamas leaders in America. During a meeting on October 2nd, Omar Ahmad – who helped plan and organize this meeting—was recorded discussing his assessment of where Hamas was in the United States and how to move forward. Specifically, he stated:

“I believe that our problem is that we stopped working underground. We will recognize the source of any message which comes out of us…the media person among us will recognize you send two messages; one to the Americans and one to the Muslims. If they found out who said that – even four years later – it will cause discredit to the Foundation as far as the Muslims are concerned as they will say ‘Look, he used to tell us about Islam and that it is a cause and stuff while he, at the same time, is shooting elsewhere.’ Then if we want to do something like that it is better that it is an independent, separate and new organization and no one knows any connections it has with Holy Land.”

In very practical terms, Omar Ahmad was restating what Sharia demands – there must be a duality of communications from Islamic leaders. It is a capital crime in Islam for a Muslim to teach another Muslim something that is false about Islam, yet it is obligatory for Sharia adherent Muslims to lie to non-Muslims in pursuit of Jihad and the imposition of Sharia globally. Therefore, Sharia adherent Muslims must “send two messages” that necessarily contradict one another – one to the Muslim community and one to the non-Muslim community.

The key to Ahmad’s above mentioned recorded conversation is he is articulating what all of the Hamas/Muslim Brotherhood leaders understand—if we (Americans) find out these Muslim leaders are lying to us, it will discredit them. Then we would realize the same guys telling us they mean us well and want to help us are actually a part of a larger jihadi organization killing people elsewhere. Well, that wouldn’t be good for business.

Factually, we know the Muslim Brotherhood, in the form of the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT) and the Fiqh Council of North America (which ensures everything the Muslim Brotherhood does in North America is done in accordance with the Sharia) has its authoritative stamp of approval in the front of the Reliance of the Traveller—14th century authoritative Islamic Sacred Law published in Beltsville, Maryland. As is true with all authoritatively published Islamic Law, this MB-approved Sharia law only defines Jihad as “warfare against non-Muslims” (Book O, Justice) and makes it obligatory until the world is under the rule of the Sharia. This same book, quoted above, obliges Muslims to lie to non-Muslims in the pursuit of obligatory objectives (e.g. JIHAD).

Therefore, if we can identify Muslim leaders as being a part of the Muslim Brotherhood’s movement, we know they are obliged to lie to us regarding these matters. This might explain why 100% of Sharia is in agreement on the matter of Jihad and its obligation by the Muslim community, but why all of our American leaders argue Islam “doesn’t stand for” what Al Qaeda is doing. Despite the fact Al Qaeda has never misquoted Islamic Law, our leaders call Al Qaeda’s pursuits “extreme” or a “warped version” of Islamic Law.

When we see Muslim Brotherhood leaders like Imam Mohamed Magid, President of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) sitting on the Homeland Security Advisory Council, giving presentations at CIA Headquarters, and briefing the National Security Council, the one thing we know is this—when his lips are moving, he is lying.

Finally, we must ask ourselves a question – at what point do U.S. officials hold these Muslim leaders accountable for providing years of counter-factual information to our National Security apparatus which has led to catastrophic decisions in our war planning, foreign policy, and domestic counterterrorism strategy. More to the point, when do Americans hold our leadership accountable for the criminal negligence of utilizing such enemies to “help” us while citizens are dying on the battlefield and places like Little Rock, Boston, Fort Hood and elsewhere?

Signs of Sharia Adherence

jihad flagBy John Guandolo at his blog, Understanding the Threat:

As Americans come to better understand that Sharia is real law and jihadis intend to impose it on all Muslims and non-Muslims alike, it becomes important to know when Sharia adherence is increasing in a particular area because it indicates violence from the jihadis will soon follow.

As law enforcement and military units have discovered, adherence to Sharia is directly proportional to the level of violence advocated in the Islamic community against those who do not want to be adherent to Sharia – Muslims and non-Muslims alike. A 2004 study entitled Understanding Terror Networks by a former CIA case officer revealed that 97% of jihadis were highly adherent to Sharia. This adherence was measured in observable behavior including the wearing of traditional Islamic garb and growing a Sharia adherent beard.

A study published in 2011 randomly surveyed 100 mosques across America and measured the correlation between Sharia adherence and the promotion of violence through published literature at the mosque, comments and teachings of the Imam, and other factors. This “Mapping Sharia” study revealed a one to one correlation between Sharia compliance and violence taught at Islamic Centers, Mosques, and Masjids.

In the New York Police Department’s landmark 2007 report on the homegrown threat entitled, “Radicalization in the West” the NYPD identified the implementation of Sharia and the establishment of a global Islamic state (Caliphate) as the driving “Jihadi-Salafi ideology” behind jihadists in the U.S and beyond (page 17). The report notes the “progression or gravitation towards Salafi Islam” and regular attendance at a Salafi mosque are two key indicators of “radicalization” of Muslims towards jihad. The term “Salafi” comes from the Islamic phrase “al salaf al-salih” or the “righteous predecessors”—the first three generations of Muslims. These are individuals who strictly follow Sharia, and while there are debates among Salafis on a variety of issues, there is no legal disagreement in the Sharia on the definition and obligation of jihad, nor of how Muslims must relate to non-Muslims.

The NYPD report identifies “signatures” of “Salafism” – or what I call here “Sharia Adherence”—which include: being part of a group which will strengthen your Salafis/Sharia Adherence, and “wearing traditional Islamic clothing, growing a beard (page 31).” If you see an increase in Sharia adherence in your community, you will see an increase in violence and jihad.
Here are a few of those signatures of Sharia adherence:

Sunnah Beards

Sharia adherent men will have short/trimmed mustaches but their beards are often unkempt.

“Cut the mustaches short and leave the beard as it is.” Bukhari 7:781

Henna Beards

In Islam, Mohammad is the most perfect example of a Muslim. Islamic men who dye their beards red with henna are identifying themselves with the Prophet Mohammad who wore his beard this way.

Black Islamic Headdress

Islamic men who wear the black headdress are identifying themselves as jihadis. Overseas, American military soldiers and Marines understand this. While only a few sightings have been reported in the United States, if this is seen in your community, it should be taken seriously.

Gold and Silver

In Sharia, men are not to wear gold and women are not permitted to wear silver.

Hijabs and Burkas

The greater degree to which an Islamic woman covers herself is indicative of the level of Sharia adherence to which she subscribes or, more likely, with which she is forced to comply.

Black Flag of Jihad

While seeing the black flag of Jihad is not common in the United States, it is becoming more common in Europe and elsewhere. Seeing this flying in a market place (as it has been seen and photographed in numerous cities around Europe) is a significant indicator of violence brewing in your community. It means the jihadist are identifying themselves in the open meaning they are bold and unafraid of the local security apparatus (police etc).

Sharia: Real Law and the Language Our Enemies Use

By John Guandolo at his blog, Understanding the Threat, June 16, 2014:

The following is the first installment of a 5-part series this week on Sharia (Islamic Law) and why Americans need to pay attention.

Sharia is REAL Law

“To begin with, the law of the land is the Shari’ah of Allah. The leader, or Khalifa of the Islamic nation, implements the Shari’ah in society and the people try to follow it…The basis of the legal and political system is the Shari’ah of Allah.” So states What Islam is All About, (pages 376 ad 381) one of the most popular junior high school text books used in Islamic schools in America.

This is a good place for us to begin this week’s series on Sharia – Islamic Law. Sharia is the “law of the land.” It is not ‘religious law’ or a ‘spiritual guide.’ It is law. Sharia is law adjudicated by jurists and legal scholars, and ruled on by Qadi judges. Sharia is real law. It should be likened to U.S. Federal Code, not Jewish Halakhah or Christian Canon Law.

So here is our first challenging question of this week’s series on Sharia: How can Sharia be so clearly defined and implemented by Islamic legal scholars and jurists around the world, taught to elementary and junior high school students in Islamic schools around the world, yet appears to be very confusing to leaders in the West?

ScreenShot2014_06_16at7_23_55PM

Now, on to the lesson…

Islam defines itself as a “complete way of life.” What Islam is All About teaches the junior high schoolers “The way of life known as Islam is a complete code of life.” It is political life, cultural life, social life, religious life, military life, and everything else, all governed by Sharia.

The Sharia is primarily derived from the Quran and the Sunnah – the collection of the Hadith and the Sira (authorized sacred biographies of Muhammad).

For Muslims, the Quran is considered the “uncreated word” of Allah (the God of Islam). According to Islam, the contents of the Quran come from direct revelations to the Prophet Muhammad beginning in the year 610 AD and continuing to approximately 632 AD. The Quran’s 114 auras (chapters) are arranged generally by size, largest to smallest, not chronologically. This is critical to understanding the Quran, and therefore Sharia, because the chronologically earlier peaceful verses were abrogated/over-ruled (Quran 2:106, 16:101, 17:106) by the later violent verses calling for jihad as a permanent obligation until the world is conquered for Islam (9:5 and 9:29 among others). Specifically, the chronologically last Sura in the Quran is Sura 9, where Jihad is made a permanent obligation on the entire Islamic community. The last Sura to discuss relations with non-Muslims is Sura 5 (“Take not the Jews and Christians as your friends…” 5:51)

Every verse in the Quran has been authoritatively defined by Islamic jurists and legal scholars and compiled in Tafsirs. Remember Sharia is a legal system not a religious guide. Individual Muslims do not get to render their opinion on what certain Quranic verses mean to them. This bears no weight in Islam, just as Americans do not get to make up legal definitions for words already defined in the law.

In Islam, the Prophet Muhammad is the most perfect example of a Muslim. All he did and said is to be modeled by Muslims. The Hadith is the collection of all the practices, sayings and traditions of Muhammad and has been ranked and categorized based on authenticity by Islamic jurists and legal scholars. For instance, Muhammad married Ayisha when she was 6 years old and consummated the relationship when Ayisha was 9. Therefore, Sharia cannot make it unlawful for a 60 year old man to marry a 10 year old, for instance, because the example of the Prophet makes it lawful. Likewise, the Quran commands Muslims to wage war against non-Muslims until: (1) they are killed, (2) pay the jizya (non-Muslim poll tax) and submit to Sharia, or (3) convert to Islam. Muhammad waged numerous battles where he did just that. Therefore, Jihad in the Cause of Allah until the unbelievers either convert, submit, or are killed is a core part of Sharia and Islamic doctrine.

There is no such thing as a Sharia which does not mandate Jihad until the world is under the rule of the Sharia, and there is no other definition of Jihad in Sharia other than “warfare against non-Muslims.”

In Sharia there exist “The Hudud” which are seven crimes for which the Quran provides specific punishments. These crimes are: Apostacy; Armed Robbery, Terrorism, and Perpetrating Corruption; Theft; Drinking Intoxicants; Illicit Sexual Intercourse; False Accusation of Illicit Sexual Intercourse; and Rebellion in the Land. For instance, the punishment for Hirabah (Armed Robbery et al) states: “The punishment for those who wage war against God and His messenger and pursue corruption on earth is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land (Islamic Criminal Law, The Hudud, Muhammad ‘at a Alsid Sid Ahmad, Malaysia). Because the punishments come from Allah via the Quran, they must be given to the guilty party and a judge may not show “mercy” because it would directly contradict Allah and is a capital crime.

In practice, there are Sharia Courts all over the world, judges that adjudicate the Sharia, prosecutors who prosecute, and defense attorneys who defend. To say that Sharia is not real law is to be wrong.

In Islamic countries across the globe – there are 56 plus Palestine making 57 Islamic states – where Sharia is the law of the land. The fact that varying levels of Sharia are enforced does not change the fact it is the law of the land and their constitutions say it is.

The Language Our Enemies Use

As has been documented in previous UTT Blogs, the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda, and the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC – the largest international body second only to the UN made up of the heads of states of all Islamic nations), all state the imposition of Sharia and the establishment of the Caliphate (Islamic State) are their end objectives.

When leaders from known Muslim Brotherhood organizations or their allies speak, we must translate the English words they use into the meaning of the word as defined by Sharia. Once we do this, the enemy’s intentions become crystal clear.

“Jihad” and “Peace”
As mentioned earlier, 100% of all Sharia only defines Jihad as “warfare against non-Muslims.” Islam divides the entire world into two parts: the Dar al Islam (the House/Abode of Peace) and the Dar al Harb (the House/Abode of War). Anywhere in the world where there is Sharia under Islamic rule is the Dar al Islam. The rest of the world is the Dar al Harb. The purpose of Islam is to reduce the Dar al Harb to non-existence until the entire world becomes the Dar al Islam – then you have “Peace” under Sharia. Once this is achieved there is no need for Jihad which is why it is not one of the five pillars of Islam.

“Suicide” and “Martyrdom”
Suicide is unlawful under Sharia. Martyrdom, or being killed in Jihad, is the only way under Sharia to guarantee entry into Paradise.

“Innocent”
The only innocent people under Sharia are Muslims. Non-Muslims are never innocent and are guilty of not following Sharia or subordinating themselves to it.

“Terrorism”
Killing a Muslim without right. Under Sharia Muslims can be killed for leaving Islam (Apostacy) and for killing another Muslim without right to do so under Sharia. Any other time a Muslim is killed it is “terrorism.” Under Sharia, an example would be American troops killing Muslims in Afghanistan and Iraq.

“Freedom”
Freedom from man-made laws. Only Sharia can be the law of the land.

“Justice”
Justice under the Sharia.

So, the next time you see a leader of the local Muslim Brotherhood Islamic Center in your hometown says “We denounce terrorism and call for a protection of all innocents because we want freedom, justice, and peace here and around the world” – don’t accuse him of lying because he isn’t. You need to adjust the reception on your end and translate with Sharia as the filter.

Finally, it should be noted that if readers would like to deepen their study on Sharia, they must purchase books written for Muslim audiences by Muslims who are recognized as scholars in the Islamic world. Anything other than this will be meaningless. Why? Because Sharia makes it a capital crime for Muslims to teach other Muslims something false about Islam. Go to your local mosque bookstore and buy books for Muslims on Islamic Law – and take cash.

 

Refusal by Our Leaders to Know the Enemy and Destroy Them Leads to Catastrophic Consequences

AQUTT, by John Guandolo:

The American military crushed the Islamic fighters on the field of battle in Afghanistan and Iraq. Yet, long before the U.S. achieved unconditional surrender from the enemy – which never materialized – the State Department wrote constitutions in those two countries which created Islamic Republics under the rule of Sharia (Islamic Law), thus giving Al Qaeda two of its key regional objectives – Islamic States in Iraq and Afghanistan.

This is one in a long line of policy, war fighting, and foreign policy decisions highlighting the failure of America’s leadership to know our enemy and defeat them. This failure is coming back to haunt us with the events currently unfolding in Iraq and will lead to the loss of Iraq to Jihadi forces, as has been predicted by anyone who understands this enemy.

Today, these Jihadi/Islamic forces – and it does not matter what they call themselves – are moving towards Baghdad and seek to defeat the Iraq military and overthrow the government. In the not-so-distant future, Iraq will fall under the control of the Shia – 60% of the Iraq population – in tandem with Iran. Once the Shia control Iraq, Saudi Arabia will be vulnerable, and they know it. This is why Saudi lobbied so hard for so long to keep American troops in Iraq.

All that is unfolding is the logical outcome of this enemy practically fulfilling its stated doctrine. The Global Islamic Movement does not hate us and wage war against the West because of something we did. Nor do they do it merely for land conquest and material gain.
This enemy does what it does because its doctrine requires it.

The enemy threat doctrine is Sharia (Islamic Law). It is what the enemy states it is fighting to impose on the world, and it is the blueprint for all they do. Sharia is the filter by which we must understand all of their communications at all levels especially militarily and politically.

“Implementation of Sharia law and replacement of system of nation states with a worldwide Caliphate are the ultimate political aims (of the Jihadis).”
NYPD Report: Radicalization in the West

All of the jihadis we capture on the battlefield; all of Al Qaeda’s writings and videos; all of the Muslim Brotherhood’s bylaws, strategic plans, and doctrine; and all of the jihadis we have caught or have conducted operations here in America state they do what they do to impose Sharia and re-establish the global Islamic State (Caliphate). In the investigative world that is called a “clue.” Where do the jihadis get these ideas from? The U.S. Attorney General, military leaders, FBI Director, DHS Secretary, Secretary of State, leaders of both political parties, and many other U.S. leaders call this ideology a “distorted version” or “radical interpretation” of Sharia. So we must ask the question…what Sharia law have you read?

As noted in the UTT May 8th blog article, 100% of all Islamic doctrine – including first grade school books in Islamic schools across the globe – define Islam as a “complete way of life (social, cultural, political, military, religious) governed by Islamic Law (Sharia).” 100% of all published authoritative Islamic Law obliges Jihad until the entire world is subordinated to Islamic Law. 100% of all published authoritative Islamic Law ONLY defines Jihad as “warfare against non-muslims.”

The next time someone tells you this is not true, ask them to produce one authoritative book on Islamic Law which details the “other version” of Islam as described by our leaders. You will not find it because it 1400 years it has never been written.

Until the time comes when America’s leaders decide to face reality that continues to smack us in the face – as jihadis are rising up in nearly every country around the world – that we have an enemy who is doing what they are doing because their doctrine requires it when they have the strength to carry it out, then we will continue to watch nations fall, tens of thousands of people be killed in barbaric ways, and our foreign policy and domestic “terrorism strategies” fail completely because our leaders have made the decision not to know the enemy.

Former FBI Special Agent and counterterrorism expert John Guandolo is the Founder of Understanding the Threat, an organization dedicated to providing threat-focused strategic and operational consultation, education, and training for federal, state and local leadership and agencies.

Sedgwick County Sheriff Surrenders to Hamas

vlcsnap-231158UTT, By John Guandolo:

Sedgwick County Sheriff Jeff Easter today cancelled next week’s planned UTT 2-day training program, caving in to complaints by Hamas and local Muslim Brotherhood leaders in Wichita and other parts of Kansas.

For more details, watch the local ABC Report

The loudest complaints came from Hamas spokesman Ibrahim Hooper. Hooper works for the Hamas organization called the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR). For those confused about CAIR being Hamas…

CAIR is HAMASIn a December 2007 government filing in the US v Sabri Benkhala appeal – an Al Qaeda operative – the government stated: “From its founding by the Muslim Brotherhood leaders, CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists.” A massive amount of evidence entered into the largest Hamas trial ever successfully prosecuted in U.S. history (US v Holy Land Foundation (“HLF”), Dallas, 2008) identified CAIR as the fourth organization created by the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee in America. The Palestine Committee is Hamas. Hamas is a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) by the U.S. government.

When CAIR petitioned the Federal Court to remove it’s name from the Unindicted Co-Conspirator list in the HLF case, the trial Judge Jorge Solis wrote in his 2010 unsealed opinion, “The Government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR, ISNA, and NAIT with the HLF, the Islamic Association of Palestine (“IAP”), and with Hamas.” CAIR was left on the Co-Conspirator list. CAIR appealed the ruling and the appellate court ruled unanimously to keep CAIR listed as an “Unindicted Co-Conspirator” in the largest Hamas trial in U.S. history because of the overwhelming evidence.

Other Muslims in the community who complained to the Sedgwick Sheriff’s office were leaders and spokesmen from the local Muslim Students Associations (the first Muslim Brotherhood organization established in America in 1963) and the Islamic Society of Wichita – a Muslim Brotherhood organization and a subsidiary of the Islamic Society of North America which is the largest MB organization here and a financial support entity for Hamas per the evidence at the HLF trial.

These are the groups and individuals who have led the charge to shut this training down in Wichita…enemies of the United States.

Because of the nature of the threat from the Islamic Movement in the United States (an insurgency), the burden falls to local police to be the tip of the spear in countering their efforts here. When local police leaders are not aware of this and do not understand their critical role in the larger war, the war will be lost.

In the press release today the Sedgwick Sheriff’s Office stated: “The Sheriff’s Office will find an instructor, either from the Department of Justice or another subject matter expert to present such material in the future.” Unfortunately for Wichita law enforcement, this material is not being presented by any other organization in the nation besides UTT. A few years ago during a 3-day program at Headquarters Marine Corps for approximately 115 professionals from FBI (to include the National Joint Terrorism Task Force personnel), CIA, DHS, DIA, NSA, local and state police, military, and others, a Counterterrorism Supervisor from FBI Headquarters stood up in front of the entire crowd and stated he never heard any of the material presented but confirmed it was true and factual based on the evidence and materials presented. When asked, none of the other attendees were aware of this information either, including the men and women from the FBI’s National Joint Terrorism Task Force in attendance.

So, by canceling this training in Kansas, the Sedgwick County Sheriff has not only emboldened our enemy – namely the Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas – he has ensured that local law enforcement will NOT get the very training they need to protect and defend their communities.

***********

Contact the Sedgwick County Sheriff’s Office HERE

BREAKTHROUGH: Beverly Hills & Hollywood Elites Denounce Sharia as EVIL

protest2UTT, By John Guandolo:

In what can only be described as a breakthrough in the war of ideas against the Global Islamic Movement and it’s violent assault on liberty, elected leaders, hollywood elites, media organizations, and the gay community came together to denounce Sharia (Islamic Law) this week in the town of Beverly Hills.

In a 5-0 vote Tuesday, the Beverly Hills City Council declared Sharia to be “extreme and inhumane.”

The protests around the posh Beverly Hills Hotel erupted after the man who holds a majority share of the controlling entity for the hotel – The Sultan of Brunei Hassanal Bolkiah – imposed Sharia in his country.

Jay Leno, one of the leading figures in the protest said “This is not a political issue…we get so upset when a team owner says something inappropriate, here are people being killed, stoned to death.”

The L.A. Times reported, “The Motion Picture & Television Fund, which runs the star-studded Night Before the Oscars, said it would not hold its charity event at the hotel in 2015. In a statement, representatives said they met with hotel executives and ‘expressed very clearly that we cannot condone or tolerate these harsh and repressive laws.’”

This is a tremendous victory in the battle to get the truth of Sharia out to the general public and should not be diminished. But this also begs the question, do the same groups and people protesting in Beverly Hills understand the signs of Sharia compliance right here in America? Do they understand that women wearing full burkas, men with Sharia beards, and other behaviors are visual warnings of Sharia compliance here in America?

As has been documented in great detail in previous blogs, the massive evidence in the US v Holy Land Foundation trial (largest Hamas and terrorism financing trial in US history – Dallas, 2008) revealed the majority of Islamic organizations in the United States are a part of the Muslim Brotherhood’s “Islamic Movement” here and their primary goal is to overthrow our system of government and replace it with Sharia (Islamic Law). Since the organizations known to be Hamas/Muslim Brotherhood – Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR/Hamas), Muslim Students Association (MSA), Muslim American Society (MAS), Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), and so many others – are the very organizations working with the President, Senate and House Committees, U.S. State Department, the National Security Council, the Pentagon, FBI, CIA, DHS, Wall Street, national Christian and Jewish organizations doing “interfaith dialogue,” media organizations, universities, state legislators, and others, there is still much work to do.

We must remember ALL Islamic texts – including first grade Islamic school books around the world – state “Islam is a complete way of life” – cultural, social, military, religious, and political – governed by Sharia (Islamic Law). 100% of all published Sharia mandates “Jihad” until the entire world is controlled by Sharia (Islamic Law). 100% of all published Sharia only defines “Jihad” as “warfare against non-Muslims.” Sharia is a legal system required to be imposed on everyone, not just Muslims. Women wearing full burkas and Muslims asking for the authority for Sharia in “family matters” must be told “No.” You cannot separate a “little bit of Sharia” from its full implementation. It must be opposed in its entirety.

Anniversary of America’s First Military Defeat of Islam Passes Quietly By

obannonUTT, By John Guandolo:

April 27th marks the anniversary of a great American military victory, yet most citizens in this nation are simply unaware of the date, and the implications of the event.

On April 27, 1805, First Lieutenant Presley O’Bannon, a United States Marine Officer assigned to the USS Argus and under the command of General William Eaton, led Marines into Battle against the Muslim forces in Tripoli at Derne. This was the first war the United States fought after the revolution and the first time the America flag was planted on foreign soil in combat. And we won.

O’Bannon is a legend in the Marine Corps, but this war – and it was a declared “War” by the U.S. – was the result of years of the U.S. paying more and more tribute to the Islamic nations (“Barbary States”) to ensure the safe passage of U.S. ships and their crews. It is the reason “Letters of Mark” are mentioned in our Constitution.

Here is the official account by the U.S. Marine Corps Historical Division:

For many years the United States had maintained peace with the Barbary States (Algiers, Morocco, Tunis, and Tripoli) by “buying” treaties and paying tribute to the reigning pasha. Although Algiers, Morocco and Tunis were not entirely satisfied, they were more or less complacent, whereas Tripoli continued to make threats against the United States while demanding larger and more frequent “payments.” Finally, on 14 May 1801, the Pasha of Tripoli, Yusut Karamanli, indicated his extreme dissatisfaction with our “tribute” by having the flagstaff cut down in front of the U.S. Consulate. This act led to a declaration of war against Tripoli and the sending of more U.S. war vessels to the Mediterranean. During a storm one of the ships, the USS Philadelphia, went on the rocks off Tripoli and her crew was captured and imprisoned at Derne. After a bombardment of Tripoli by U.S. vessels and the offer of $100,000 ransom for the crew of the Philadelphia had failed to move the Pasha, William Eaton, “Navy Agent for the several Barbary Regencies,” suggested forming an alliance with Hamet, elder brother of the reigning sovereign of Tripoli. The plan was approved by the U.S. Government and Eaton commenced putting his plan into execution.

On 29 November 1804, Eaton, First Lieutenant O’Bannon, Midshipmen George Mann, U.S. Navy, and seven Marines landed at Alexandria, Egypt, from the USS Argus, and a few days later proceeded to Cairo. The party arrived at Cairo on 8 January 1805, where they learned that Hamet and a few Tripolitans had joined a band of rebellious Mamelukes who were defying the rule of the Turkish viceroy. Eaton then pushed on to Fiaum where he communicated with Hamet and made arrangements with him for his cooperation with the expedition against Derne, Tripoli. On 8 April, Eaton and his motley army of about 500 men, 100 camels and a few mules started the long march across the Libyan desert. He arrived at Derne the night of 25 April, and the next day, under a flag of truce, offered terms of amity to the Governor of Derne on condition of allegiance and fidelity to Hamet. The reply to this offer was “My head or yours.” Shortly thereafter, the USS Nautilus arrived in the harbor of Derne, and the next day the USS Argus and Hornet dropped anchor nearby. When the combined land-sea attack commenced on 27 April, Lieutenant O’Bannon, with his Marines, a few Greeks, and as many of the cannoniers as could be spared from the field piece, passed through a shower of enemy musketry, took possession of one of the enemy’s batteries, planted the United States flag upon its ramparts and turned the guns upon the enemy. After two hours of hand-to-hand fighting, the stronghold was occupied and for the first time in history the flag of the United States flew over a fortress of the old world.”

Today, let us remember the victory of America’s first military victory as a nation after the Revolutionary War. Since the Muslims get to celebrate the first Islamic military victory of Muslim forces over non-Muslim forces at the White House – Eid al Fitr – it seems relevant for us to simply acknowledge that our first foe in combat as a nation was an Islamic nation.

Audio: John Guandolo on the Lisa Benson Radio Show

John-G600x338

By Lisa Benson:

John Guandolo is the Founder of UnderstandingTheThreat.com, an organization dedicated to providing strategic and operational threat-focused consultation, education, and training for federal, state, and local leadership and agencies.

Mr. Guandolo is a 1989 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy and took a commission as an Officer in the United States Marine Corps. He served with the 2d Battalion 2d Marines as an infantry Platoon Commander in combat Operations Desert Shield/Storm; he served in 2d Force Reconnaissance Company as a Platoon Commander, Assistant Operations Officer, and the unit’s Airborne and Diving Officer in the Adriatic/Bosnia. He served for one year as the Unit Leader for the CINC’s In-Extremist Force, directly reporting to a Combatant Commander in a classified mission profile. Mr. Guandolo was a combat diver, a military freefall parachutist, and is a graduate of the U.S. Army Ranger School…..

This man of exceptional character and bravery also went on to be:

Shortly after 9-11, Mr. Guandolo began an assignment to the Counter-terrorism division of the FBI’s Washington Field Office developing an expertise in the Muslim Brotherhood, Islamic Doctrine, the global Islamic Movement, and a myriad of terrorist organizations to include Hamas, al Qaeda, and others. In 2006, Mr. Guandolo created and implemented the FBI’s first Counter-Terrorism Training/Education Program focusing on Muslim Brotherhood and their subversive movement in the United States. Mr. Guandolo is now retired from the FBI and uses his knowledge of community penetration by Muslim Brotherhood to advise governments (US and others). He actively advises members of Congress, law enforcement, the intelligence community, military, National Guard, and key community leaders.

download (65)The following are quotes from his book, ”

“It must be understood that the problem is much more a counterintelligence and espionage problem than it is a counterterrorism problem.”

“In a counterinsurgency, the focus of the main effort is at the local level. Local police, working together with their local city councils are the first line of defense against this enemy. But first you must have an educated and energized local populus.”

“To Underestimate the enemy is to lose the war.”

“Relatively little research and investigation is required to determine that a large number of the Sunni Islamic Centers in America are directly affiliated with the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and/or the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), thus providing more evidence they are controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood and hostile to the community in which they are located. The Shia Islamic Centers should be investigated for ties to the Iranian Government.”

Listen to Lisa and John:

 

LISA E. BENSON IS A NATIONAL SECURITY DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANT, PUBLIC SPEAKER, POLICY ANALYST, WRITER AND TALK SHOW HOST.

ArchiveListen

 

Also see this interview with John Guandolo in the Josh Tolley Show:

Because We Are at War

UTT, By John Guandolo:

“The Islamic nation must be fully prepared to fight the tyrants and the enemies of Allah as a prelude to establishing the Islamic State.”
By-Laws of the International Muslim Brotherhood
“Killing is to continue until the unbelievers pay jizyah after they are humbled or overpowered.”
Sheikh Muhammad Taqi Usmani
One of the leading Islamic Scholars alive today.
Deputy Chairman, Fiqh Council for the Organization of Islamic Cooperation
Former Judge, Pakistani Supreme Court
“We do not disassociate Islam from war.  On the contrary, disassociating Islam from war is the reason for our defeat.  We are fighting in the name of Islam. Religion must lead to war.”
Sheikh Dr. Yusuf Al Qaradawi
Preeminent Islamic Scholar in the world
Leading Legal Jurist of the International Muslim Brotherhood
Chairman – International Union of Muslim Scholars
“This means that you wage war so that the evil sovereignty of beings other than that of Allah is wiped out and only the law of God operates in the world.”
U.S. Training Guide for Muslims published by
Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) and the Muslim American Society (MAS)
 
“To be true Muslims we must prepare and be ready for jihad in Allah’s way…The military education is glued to the faith and it’s meaning, and the duty to follow it.”
Islamic High School text book, Islamic Center of Oakland (and elsewhere)
“America will become a Muslim country.”
Former Islamic Advisor to President Clinton and convicted Al Qaeda financier Abdurahman Alamoudi
The civilian and military leadership in America, and much of the West, is strikingly blind to and grossly ignorant of the swiftly growing threat we face from the Global Islamic Movement.
Yet those inside government agencies, members of the military, and American citizens who have taken the time to get educated on this threat are horrified at the grand canyon size schism between the reality of the threat and the posture the United States government continues to take – a position which can only be characterized as “Aiding and Abetting” the enemy, Material Support for Designated Terrorist organizations (Al Qaeda and others), and Treason.
Patriots are asking themselves, “How can this be happening?
It is happening because we are at war – and we are losing.

In 2005, the current leader of Al Qaeda, Ayman al Zawahiri said “I say to you that we are in a battle, and that more than half of this battle is taking place in the battlefield of the media.  We are in a media battle in a race for the hearts and minds of our Ummah (global Muslim community).”

Al Qaeda understands the majority of this war is being fought in the Information Battlespace – propaganda, influence operations, and political subversion, are but a few of the tools.
When the Muslim Brotherhood states in their strategic memorandum they are waging Civilization Jihad to “destroy Western civilization from within” and they are going to do it by getting U.S. leadership to do their bidding for them – they mean it.
We are in a war against an enemy who states they are Muslims fighting Jihad in the Cause of Allah in order to impose Islamic Law and re-establish the global Islamic State (Caliphate).  Al Qaeda says it, the Muslim Brotherhood says it, nation-states say it, martyrs say it on their videos, and all of the jihadis we have captured before or after the act (if they lived) all say they did what they did because it is a command to wage jihad until Sharia is the law of the land.  Yet, in the FBI, DHS, and U.S. military, all training on Islamic Law, specifically the requirements of Jihad and the Law of Jihad cannot be taught.  Why?
Because we are in a war – primarily an information war – and we are losing.
100% of all published Islamic Law only defines “Jihad” as warfare against non-Muslims.  Yet, at the leadership level of our civilian government and military, they are still “pondering” what the “root meaning” of Jihad really is.  How can something so objectively clear be so difficult for our leadership to grasp?
How can it be that the most prominent Islamic organizations in America have been identified as being a part of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Movement, yet their leaders serve in advisory roles across the entire spectrum of our government – including the FBI, CIA, and DHS?
In 2012, five Republican Members of Congress layed out the evidence of the Muslim Brotherhood’s network in America and asked the Inspector Generals of key government agencies to consider opening investigations.  These Members of Congress were not publicly blasted by Democrats or the media for this, but by John McCain, John Boehner, Marco Rubio, Eric Cantor, and others.  Why?
Because we are losing in the Information Battlespace.  As a matter of fact, we are not even engaging the enemy there.
The U.S. Department of State wrote the Constitutions in Iraq and Afghanistan which created Islamic States under which Sharia is the law of the land.  Two check marks on Al Qaeda’s regional objectives list.  Civilization Jihad “by our hands.”  How could this happen considering our military crushed the enemy on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan?
How can Jewish Rabbis across America hold “religious outreach” events with known members of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood who are usually also leaders of Hamas?  How was Sheriff Baca of America’s largest county – Los Angeles – able to regularly raise money for Hamas (dba CAIR) without being prosecuted after being told publicly in a hearing by a U.S. Congressman that CAIR is a Hamas entity?
How are elected and appointed officials and law enforcement officers able to publicly promote known Hamas, Al Qaeda, and Muslim Brotherhood organizations with no repercussions?
Because we are at war – a war in the information battlespace – and we are losing.
Our government provided material support to the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda in Libya and are now doing the same in Syria.  Isn’t this in violation of U.S. law?  Wouldn’t any U.S. citizen be prosecuted for this?
Sharia Compliant Finance (SCF) is now promoted by major banks across the globe because Islamic Scholars (like Taqi Usmani and Yusuf Qaradawi – see above) tell the leaders of major financial institutions that SCF is simply a way for Muslims to handle their money in accordance with “religious practices.”  Yet, a portion of the money associated with SCF must go to support Jihad – “terrorism” – in accordance with Sharia.  How can this be?
Because we are at war – and we are losing.
Friends, our enemy has insinuated itself inside local school boards, civic groups, universities, political circles, and is driving the “religious outreach” efforts across this country.  Well intentioned but naive people are being drawn in an used by the enemy to defend the enemy and “stand up” for their “religious” rights.
Men and women in positions of leadership in this nation have not even taken the time to get to know an enemy that unequivocally states he wishes to destroy us.
But, the enemy has taken the time to know us.  This enemy knows us very well.  The enemy knows American leaders are more concerned with their reputations and not being embarrassed than defending the Constitution by all means necessary.
The enemy uses intimidation and pressure tactics – they call it the “political pressure approach” – to get what they want.  What do they want?  They never want us to look at authoritative Islamic Law.  They want to shut down all conversations about the Islamic threat.  They want us looking anywhere but to Islam to define the threat.  Therefore, “Violent extremism” or some other made up and useless phrase becomes the focus of the day.
Advising our senior leaders, controlling the language we use to describe the threat, and shutting down any critique of the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic Doctrine are their goals.  It appears they are batting a thousand.
This is much more a counterintelligence and espionage issue than it is a counterterrorism one.  So we will keep focusing on Counterterrorism – things that go boom and people who want to make them go boom.  That will be our focus.  And while we are doing it, the enemy will continue to work with our leaders to create foreign and domestic counterterrorism policy which serves the enemy’s purposes, softens the ground domestically gets law enforcement to back off so as not to “offend” the Muslim Community, and turns a blind eye to facts and evidence identifying the threat to the American people.
We will continue to let Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, and Al Qaeda leaders to teach our military and law enforcement about “Islam” while the Brotherhood and Hamas build $100 million dollar Islamic Centers across America which their own documents state are military outposts from which jihad will be launched.
And all the while the “mainstream” media in America – ABC, NBC, CBS – is silent…even when Al Qaeda is involved.
Friends, until we realize how dire the situation is, we cannot even begin to discuss solutions. Once you understand how dire the situation is, the solutions required become a whole lot clearer.

CAIR tries bribery to shut down briefing on Muslim threat

 

Former FBI agent John Guandolo and Culpepper County Sheriff Scott Jenkins at Virginia counterterror training seminar

Former FBI agent John Guandolo and Culpepper County Sheriff Scott Jenkins at Virginia counterterror training seminar

WND, March 10, 2014:

Despite pressure tactics, threats and even a $15,000 cash bribe from the Council on American-Islamic Relations to shut down a recent counter-terrorism training program for Virginia law enforcement, the training took place as scheduled, albeit with extra security.

It was one of the rare times government officials have not backed down under the group’s pressure tactics.

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.”

But Jenkins was not deterred, even after agreeing to meet with CAIR officials.

The lead trainer, former special FBI agent John Guandolo, presented some 50 Virginia law enforcement officers with 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. Former U.S. prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy, former Pentagon inspector general Joseph Schmitz and former CIA case officer Clare Lopez also spoke at the seminar.

Now a counter-terrorism and homeland security consultant, Guandolo detailed for officers who attended the Feb. 25-27 seminar 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.

He says CAIR, which is part of that network, was so worried about the training that it sent officials to Culpepper to lobby the sheriff to cancel the program, even offering together with a local mosque to pay for the program’s fees and related expenses.

“They were so bent on making sure this training did not take place that they offered to pay Sheriff Jenkins the entire cost of the training – including travel (expenses) – to keep it from happening,” Guandolo said.

CAIR declined comment.

But CAIR official Corey Saylor told the Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star that he was upset the event got the go-ahead. Saylor, a Muslim convert, said he was “disappointed with the sheriff’s refusal to cancel the training sessions.”

At the same time, CAIR sent letters to the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice and the Rappahannock Regional Justice Academy requesting that officers attending the seminars not be granted the 24 hours of recertification credits the seminars now carry.

Before the event, CAIR put out an “action alert” calling on Muslim-Americans to contact the sheriff’s office to protest the training session. The group claimed Guandolo, whom it described as an “Islamophobe,” was trying to shut down mosques and prevent Muslims from exercising their right to practice their religion. CAIR did not support the claim with any documentation.

Guandolo says it’s a typical “smear tactic” of CAIR.

“Apparently Mr. Saylor is unaware the Department of Justice lists CAIR as a member of Hamas in America” and its parent organization, the Muslim Brotherhood, he said.

In a December 2007 government filing in the U.S. vs. Sabri Benkhala terror case, the Justice Department stated: “From its founding by the Muslim Brotherhood, CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists.”

In fact, according to the veteran FBI agent, the Justice Department has enough incriminating evidence to file terrorism charges against CAIR and its founders.

“There is enough evidence to indict CAIR, but the government chose not to do so at this time,” said Guandolo, author of “Raising a Jihadi Generation: Understanding the Muslim Brotherhood Movement in America.”

He suggests the government balked at throwing the book at CAIR for political reasons.

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.

Despite its designation as an unindicted terrorist co-conspirator in 2007, the Muslim pressure group in recent years has successfully lobbied for changes in federal policies dealing with the war on terror. For example, CAIR took credit for helping persuade Attorney General Eric Holder to prohibit religious profiling in terror cases, a decision his department is expected to soon formally announce. It also played a key role in the Pentagon’s recent decision to change long-standing uniform rules to allow military personnel to wear Islamic beards and head coverings.

Moreover, a controversial new rule issued earlier this month by the departments of State and Homeland Security to relax U.S. immigration for Palestinian and other foreign “refugees” who have provided “limited” material support to terrorists is also an outgrowth of CAIR lobbying.

Under the Bush administration, Justice implicated CAIR in a criminal conspiracy to raise money for Hamas.

CAIR co-founder Omar Ahmad was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the 2007-2008 Holy Land Foundation case. He and CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad remain under FBI investigation, senior FBI officials have confirmed in letters to Congress. Until their ties to Hamas are resolved, the FBI says it will not formally recognize CAIR as a Muslim outreach partner or meet with CAIR officials. The FBI has effectively banned CAIR pending the outcome of the probe.

Starting in the fall of 2008, Guandolo said the FBI “cut off all ties with CAIR because of their ties to Hamas.”

He explained that CAIR was created in 1994 by the U.S. branch of Hamas, known as the “Palestine Committee,” to function as the “political arm” of the Palestinian terrorist group. A year before founding the front group, Ahmad and Awad attended a secret meeting with “senior leaders of Hamas” at a Philadelphia hotel bugged by the FBI. An internal FBI memo written by the former head of the FBI’s counter-terrorism division describes “all attendees” of the meeting – including Ahmad and Awad – as “Hamas members.”

“CAIR was the fourth organization created by Hamas to recruit jihadis, raise money and gain media favor for Hamas in America,” Guandolo said, adding that phone books, organizational charts, secret manifestos written in Arabic and other documents the FBI seized after 9/11 indicate Awad and Ahmad were in leadership positions in the U.S. Palestine Committee prior to the creation of CAIR.

“CAIR is Hamas,” Guandolo flatly stated.

Get the book that takes you inside the secret world of CAIR, “Muslim Mafia.”

Also see:

 

John Guandolo: The Muslim Brotherhood in America – We are at war and we are losing

I recently attended a talk by John Guandolo where he addressed the recent commendation of the  Dar al Hijrah Islamic Center by the Virginia State Assembly. We should all be outraged and flooding their offices with emails and phone calls politely educating them on the terrorist connections of this mosque. John asserted that this was at the very least an act of criminal negligence and just another indication of the fact that “we are at war and we are losing”. He spoke for about two hours on the Muslim Brotherhood. The material he covered closely follows the following four part series of articles that I found published at Breitbart in 2011.There is a lot of valuable information here which needs to be studied over time so tuck this away in your files. download (82)

By John Guandolo:

Part I – Understanding the Threat  (Published March 2, 2011)

It is now March of 2011. That jihadi attack on the United States is over nine years behind us. The declaration of a global jihad from Iran in 1979 is over 30 years in our rear view mirror. The national security apparatus of the United States has spent hundreds of billions of dollars to “make America safer,” yet we still have not defined our enemy – or even tried. There is no place in the national security structure which has objectively evaluated the threat doctrine of our enemy, and then created a strategic plan for victory for the United States – per U.S. warfighting doctrine. This lack of strategic understanding of the nature of the threat we face is not only costing us lives on the battlefield in wars with no realistically stated objectives, but so long as we drift aimlessly, we cannot win and we allow the enemy to move our boat as he sees fit. That, is the enemy’s strategy. And he is executing with great success.

Does anyone wonder how it is the U.S. military is crushing the enemy on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan (and elsewhere) daily, yet not winning the strategic war?

The United States continues to view the wars (the establishment sees this as several conflicts, not as one global conflict) as kinetic engagements where guns, air power, drones, bombs, and other weapon of war are brought to bear on “Al Qaeda terrorists” and others with whom we are engaged on the many battlefields around the world. At the FBI, the focus is on preventing the next attack. While this is important, “attacks” are not the main focus of effort for this enemy. Local and State Police are also focused on preventing attacks, the physical security of office buildings, critical infrastructure, and the safety of important public figures. When the subject of an investigation is found NOT to be involved in a plot to cause “violence” that case is closed and the investigator goes on to the next one in the stack. This is where we are losing the war. While preventing a school bus bombing or the take-over of a bank by Jihadis should be taken seriously by our law enforcement officers, from the enemy’s perspective, these are tactical engagements, not strategic.

Every brand new intelligence officer in the United States military knows that when the United States evaluates a threat, our doctrine drives us to begin our process with WHO the enemy says he is and with WHAT the enemy says are HIS reasons for acting. That is where the U.S. analytical process begins – per our own doctrine. If we had done this after 9/11, we would not have so much confusion about the enemy we are engaging.

One hundred percent of the enemy we are fighting states he is fighting “Jihad” in the “Cause of Allah” in order to implement Islamic Law (Shariah). Therefore, U.S. analysts must begin here. Does Islamic Law exist? If so, what does it say about “Jihad” and the requirements for Jihad? In fact, authoritative Islamic Law does exist. There are not “a thousand interpretations” as the Muslim Brotherhood advisors tell our leadership. Islamic Law does define “Jihad” and the requirements for Jihad. Islamic Law as defined by those using it to kill us and overthrow our government necessarily becomes the “Stated Enemy Threat Doctrine.” As a 4-star general told me a few months ago when I asked him what he thought about the fact that when Al Qaeda quotes Islamic Law they are always accurately quoting Islamic Law: “Well, if that’s true, it completely changes the nature of the way we are fighting this war.” Exactly.

Our entire national security apparatus is focused (fixed) on the threat of the violent Jihadis – Al Qaeda and the hundreds of other jihadi groups throughout the world engaging U.S and allied troops on the ground around the world.

Read more at Breitbart

Part II – MB history and their arrival in America (Published March 6, 2011)

In the autumn of 1914, the nearly 700 year old Islamic state (Caliphate), known as the Ottoman Empire, entered World War I on the side of the Central Powers (Germany et al), having already signed a secret agreement with Germany a few months earlier to do so. Following the defeat of the Imperial German Army and the end of the war, the Allies partitioned the Turkish country which led to the Turkish War of Independence. National hero and leader Mustafa Kemal created the secular nation-state of Turkey, and became its first President. Mustafa Kemal “Ataturk” (father of Turks) dissolved the Islamic Caliphate, did away of the position of “Sultan” in the system, banned overt Islamic signs such as the growing of beards, wearing of head coverings, and the public call to prayer by the muzzeins, and replaced Arabic script with Latin. The legal, business and social systems were turned on their heads in favor of those fashioned closer to a Western-style than an Islamic one. Ataturk built a secular military to protect Turkey.

The 700 year old Islamic Caliphate was dissolved. Across the Muslim world, this was not well-received.

A few years later (1928) outside of Cairo,Egypt, Hassan al Banna and his colleagues formed the Society of Muslim Brothers. Their purpose: to re-establish the Caliphate under which Shariah (Islamic Law) is the law of the land, and liberate the Islamic nation from the yolk of foreign rule. The Creed of the Brotherhood was, and is today: “Allah is our goal; the Messenger our Guide; the Koran our law; Jihad is our Way; and martyrdom in the way of Allah is our highest aspiration.”

download (81)Over the next decade, the “Muslim Brotherhood” built a multi-tiered system in furtherance of achieving its objectives – the same objectives they maintain today. Spreading throughout Egypt, the Brotherhood – or “MB” – strongly opposed the presence of British military troops and influence in Egypt. Under Islamic Law, the presence of non-Muslim forces in Muslim lands is a “weighty matter which cannot be ignored.” The Brotherhood used violence against the British troops and their families. They also fought against the system in Egypt which was not adhering to Islamic Law, targeting judges and others in the government. The Egyptian government sought to identify, capture, and/or kill members of the Brotherhood. In 1948, the Muslim Brotherhood killed the Prime Minister of Egypt, and in 1949, the Egyptian security service gunned down MB founder Hassan al Banna on the streets of Cairo.

This is not surprising, since violence is inherent to the MB’s structure. The “Special Section” is an integral part of the Muslim Brotherhood and conducts “Special work” – “military work” or violence and warfare. These are the guys who conduct assassinations, bombings, and other similar operations within the MB. The Special Section still exists today – several of the International leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood or “Supreme Guides” have come from the Special Section – a hint the MB doesn’t eschew violence as they say they do.

The Muslim Brotherhood worked with the Nazi’s during World War II, as Hassan al Banna was fond of Hitler. Under the guidance of Muslim Brother Haj Amin al Husseini, the Grand Mufti (senior Islamic Jurist) of Jerusalem, the MB created an all Muslim SS Division within the Nazi’s Third Reich.

Read more at Breitbart

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

Thus far in our journey towards better understanding the threat from the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) in the United States, we have laid the foundation of their global strategy, their foundational beliefs, and their arrival in the U.S. in the 1960’s. As we have discussed, the Brotherhood established their first organization in 1963 at the University of Illinois in Urbana – the Muslim Students Association (MSA) – and from the MSA, nearly every major Islamic organization in the United States was formed – all MB front groups.

But how did the Brotherhood actually insinuate itself into the fabric of America? How is it possible that today the most prominent Islamic organizations in North America are controlled by the Brotherhood and actually seek to subordinate the individual liberties of Americans (and Canadians) to the slavery of Shariah (Islamic Law)? In Part III of this series, we set out to help clarify the way the MB “settled” here in America. Please note the MB did so with their objectives clearly at the forefront of their minds – (1) re-establish the global Islamic state (Caliphate) and (2) implement Shariah (Islamic Law).

For this exercise I will use two extremely useful Muslim Brotherhood documents. The first is a speech given by Zaid Naman (aka Zeid al Noman), a member of the MB’s Board of Directors and the “Masul” (Leader) of the MB’s Executive Office in the United States. Naman was speaking in the early-1980’s to a group of Muslim Brothers in the U.S. A recording of this speech was discovered in the 2004 FBI raid of the Annandale, Virginia residence of Hamas/MB official Ismail Elbarasse, where the archives of the Muslim Brotherhood in the U.S. were found. The English transcript of this speech was entered into evidence at the US v HLF trial in Dallas 2008 – the largest successfully prosecuted terrorism financing and Hamas trial in U.S. history. This speech is so powerful because this group of Muslim Brothers shared the history and strategy of the Brotherhood here in the U.S. with the expectation their comments would never see the light of day.

The second source is the Muslim Brotherhood’s strategic document – An Explanatory Memorandum – dated 1991 and also seized during the Elbarasse raid in 2004. This document was written by Mohamed Akram, a senior Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood official in the U.S. at the time, and approved by the MB’s Shura Council and Organizational Conference – the two governing bodies within the MB structure here. (The third part of the MB structure is the “General Masul” or Leader of the MB for the entire U.S.)

HLF doc

Unless otherwise noted, all quotes in this section are from Naman’s speech.

Naman acknowledges that after the formation of the MSA in the U.S. in the early 1960’s, there was not a lot of organization, and he describes this period as a “Gathering or a grouping for Islam activists without an organizational affiliation.” But the MSA was the center of the activity: “As for Recruitment in the ranks of this Movement, its main condition was that a brother…must be active in the general activism in the MSA.” As Muslim Brothers came from various countries, they settled in small groups or “usras” (families), sometimes hundreds of miles apart. They were called to recruit other arriving Muslims into the Brotherhood, and do what they could with what they had. The object was to grow these usras into large groups of Muslim Brothers so, eventually, the growing concentric circles of influence covered large areas.

As Naman puts it: “The first generation of Muslim Ikhwans in North America composed of a team which included he who was Ikhwan in his country or he who was a member of the Worshipers of the Merciful Group or he who doesn’t have a direction but who is active in Islamic activism. This was the first point or group which gave or planted the Muslim Brotherhood seed in America.” (emphasis added)

By the 1970’s, arriving Brotherhood members were upset with the lack of activism and recruitment in the U.S. by the MB already here. Saudi Muslim Brothers and others came to America and joined the ranks. They demanded clearer commitments and “Ikhwan formulas” of how to accept Muslims into the MB ranks of “this Dawa’a and to make work secret.”

The MB established 5-year plans, the first of which, from 1975-1980 was the period of “General work and dedication to general work organizations.” During this time the Brotherhood went through infighting and turmoil as it sought to organize and agree on strategies and tactics.

By 1980, the Brotherhood emerged with strong leadership and a more focused commitment to the long-term strategy. 1981-1985 was a period of “Regional Planning and Growth.” Over time, the Brotherhood organized regionally in the U.S. and formed “Coordination Councils” which had leadership and committees to begin better organizing their efforts. Plans were developed, and the Brotherhood came up with primary and secondary goals for the Movement at that time.

“The main goals which were approved by the executive office were five…First of all: Strengthening the internal structure; second, administrative discipline; third, recruitment and settlement of the Dawa’a; four, energizing the organizations’ work; five, energizing political work fronts. Also, it adopted eight of the secondary goals on top of which were: finance and investment; second, foreign relations; third, reviving women’s activities; four, political awareness to members of the Group; five, securing the Group; six, special activity; seven, media; eight, taking advantage of human potentials.” (emphasis added)

Later in the Q & A session, Naman is asked about the aforementioned statement. An unidentified Muslim Brother asks, “By ‘Securing the Group’ do you mean military securing?” Naman responds with: “No, Military Work is listed under ‘Special Work.’ Special work means military work. ‘Securing the Group’ is the groups security, the Group’s security against outside dangers. For instance, to monitor the suspicious movements…which exist on the American front such as Zionism and Masonry…etc. Monitoring the suspicious movements or the sides, the government bodies such as CIA, FBI, etc, so that we find out if they are monitoring us, are we not being monitored, how can we get rid of them. That’s what is meant by ‘Securing the Group.’”

The aforementioned comment needs little reinforcement, except to add that inherent to the MB structure is the “Special Section” which conducts “special activity” or activity more commonly known to us as “terrorism.” This includes assassinations, bombings, kidnappings, etc. And that’s what makes it “Special Work.”

Additionally, during the speech Naman mentions the differences between Muslim Brothers coming to the U.S. from various nations, and how difficult it is in those nations to partake in certain activities. He offers one pertinent example for us: “…if the asking brother is from Jordan, for instance, he would know that it is not possible to have military training in Jordan, for instance, while here in America, there is weapons training at many of the Ikhwan (Muslim Brotherhood) camps…”

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

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.

Read more at Breitbart

Part IV – Crossing the bridge: the implications of the Holy Land Foundation Trial (Published April 11. 2011)

On a seemingly normal day on the outskirts of Annapolis, Maryland, a singular event led to the revelation of a deep-rooted enemy with a massive infrastructure inside the United States well on its way to achieving its goal of overthrowing the United States Constitution.

It is August 20, 2004. A Friday in the summertime, and the feds, lobbyists and businessmen chained to their desks in Washington, D.C. can’t wait to bust out the doors and head to the beaches on the Eastern shore of Maryland and Delaware – Rehoboth, Bethany, Ocean City, and others. The traffic on Route 50 East on the Chesapeake Bay Bridge (Maryland) is picking up after the lunch hour, and will be ugly in a couple hours.

Westbound lanes, however, are pretty clear. Traveling on 50 West is a Baltimore County (MD) Marine Police unit carrying two officers. They are slowly overtaking a silver Infiniti sport utility vehicle when they notice the passenger is fully covered in what they believe is traditional Islamic garb. Her attire is not what gets their attention though – she is filming the support structures of the Bridge with a video camera. As they come alongside the vehicle she pulls the camera down, and resumes the filming when the police have passed. The officers catch that move. They notify the Maryland Transportation Authority (MTA) who has jurisdiction of the bridge. The officers conduct a vehicle stop at just about the time the MTA unit arrives on scene.

One of the three children in the vehicle, a daughter, will later tell how the police treated her family like animals, and she will complain that it was all so scary and….more propaganda.

The way this was handled was a fair reaction from law enforcement officers when we understand the driver of the vehicle was identified as Ismail Elbarasse – a Hamas operative (and, therefore, a Muslim Brother), wanted on a Material Witness warrant in a Hamas case out of Chicago. As more officers and the FBI are notified, the cops on scene realize there is something big going on. Why is a Hamas guy filming the support structures of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge? Investigators will later suggest that because of Al Qaeda’s reduced ability to operate in the U.S. after 9/11, it was using other groups, like Hamas, to conduct pre-operational surveillance of its targets. What is most historically earth-shattering is what follows the car stop.

The FBI executes a search warrant of Elbarasse’s home and vehicle in Annandale, Virginia. In the basement of the residence is a sub-basement. In the sub-basement, the archives of the Muslim Brotherhood are discovered. Historical documents, financial documents, strategic documents, organizational documents, and all kinds of other items are found among this incredible discovery.

Many of these documents will be entered into evidence at the largest successfully prosecuted terrorism financing and Hamas trial in U.S. history – US v Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (or “HLF” for short). These documents were stipulated to by the defense counsel, meaning there is no legal basis to contest their validity as being what they purport to be.

These documents, in conjunction with testimony, recorded conversations, financial records, and other evidence entered at the HLF trial, as well as evidence revealed at other terrorism trials revealed a few key facts:

  1. Holy Land Foundation was the largest Islamic non-profit in the United States and it was a Hamas entity.
  2. The leaders of HLF were senior Hamas leaders.
  3. Hamas was created out of the Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood.
  4. There is a significant Muslim Brotherhood Movement in the United States which began in the 1950’s.
  5. The first national Islamic organization, the Muslim Students Association, was created by the Muslim Brotherhood.
  6. The MB seeks to subordinate existing U.S. law to Shariah (Islamic Law) and re-establish the global Islamic State (Caliphate).
  7. The most prominent Islamic organizations in North America are controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood’s Movement to include, but not limited to: Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), Muslim Students Association (MSA), International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), Fiqh Council of North America (FCNA), Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), and the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) which was demonstrated to be a Hamas entity in the United States.
  8. ISNA and NAIT are Hamas support entities.
  9. ICNA is partnered with the Muslim American Society (MAS), and their training program to Muslims across North America includes the call to “wage war” against all systems of government not under Islamic rule, and calls Muslims to “hate and despise” all un-Islamic governments, among other things.
  10. “Islamic Societies” and “Islamic Centers” across North America are controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood, meaning along with the mosques, non-profit organizations, lobbying groups, for-profit businesses, and the covert organizations controlled by the MB, the Muslim Brotherhood has thousands of entities in the U.S. at all levels of society working daily to bring Islamic law and Islamic rule to the United States.

What is most disturbing from this factual information is that federal agencies charged with the security of the United States, as well as state and local law enforcement organizations, have primarily worked with ISNA, CAIR, MSA, MAS or other hostile organization over the years – and continue to do so today. This creates a significant legal and practical danger to American citizens when the very agencies sworn to “protect and defend” are taking their advice from an enemy – the Muslim Brotherhood / Hamas / Al Qaeda – who has made their violent objectives crystal clear to anyone who has eyes to see and ears to hear.

Even if someone chooses to believe the Muslim Brotherhood will never achieve its stated goals, what is clear is that the MB is well-organized, well led, well trained, well funded (primarily by Saudi Arabia), and has strategic objectives guided by tactical milestones to get them there. Across the United States, our state and federal officials are not even aware of the MB Movement here. While the MB might not achieve their objectives, the odds are heavily in their favor.

John Guandolo, Former FBI Special Agent and counter-terrorism expert is the Founder of Understanding the Threat, an organization dedicated to providing threat-focused strategic and operational consultation, education, and training for Federal, State and local agencies.

Mr. Guandolo is a 1989 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy and took a commission as an Officer in the United States Marine Corps. He served with 2d Battalion 2d Marines as an Infantry Platoon Commander in combat Operations Desert Shield/Storm. From 1991–1996, he served in 2d Force Reconnaissance Company as a Platoon Commander, Assistant Operations Officer, and the unit’s Airborne and Diving Officer. During this time, he also deployed to the Adriatic/Bosnia. He served for one year as the Unit Leader for the CINC’s In–Extremis Force, directly reporting to a Combatant Commander in a classified mission profile. Mr. Guandolo a graduate of the U.S. Army Ranger School, a combat diver, and a military freefall parachutist.
In 1996, Mr. Guandolo resigned his commission in the Marine Corps and joined the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), serving at the Washington Field Office. From 1996–2000, he primarily conducted narcotics investigations domestically and overseas. In 2001, he served for one year as the FBI Liaison to the U.S. Capitol Police investigating threats on the President, Vice President, Members of Congress and other high–level government officials. Shortly after 9/11, Mr. Guandolo began an assignment to the Counter-terrorism Division of the FBI’s Washington Field Office developing an expertise in the Muslim Brotherhood, Islamic Doctrine, the global Islamic Movement, and a myriad of terrorist organizations to include Hamas, Al Qaeda, and others.

In 2006, Mr. Guandolo created and implemented the FBI’s first Counterterrorism Training/Education Program focusing on the Muslim Brotherhood and their subversive movement in the United States, Islamic Doctrine, and the global Islamic Movement. He was designated a “Subject Matter Expert” by FBI Headquarters. This course was hailed as “groundbreaking” by the FBI’s Executive Assistant Director in a brief to the Vice President’s National Security Staff. For his efforts, in 2007 Mr. Guandolo was presented the “Defender of the Homeland” Award, by U.S. Senators John Kyl and Joseph Lieberman, on behalf of the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C. While at the FBI, Mr. Guandolo received two (2) United States Attorney’s Awards for Investigative Excellence.

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

More from John Guandolo:

 

 

Religion News Service, Washington Post bemoan fact that foes of jihad terror “still popular in law enforcement training”

Omar-Sacirbey_avatar-300x300By :

Omar Sacirbey, the fiercely smiling author of this RNS editorial masquerading as a news story that the Washington Post picked up, has all the journalistic standards of Josef Goebbels. Recently he published assertions about me that were obviously and flagrantly false, whereupon I wrote him asking for a retraction and an apology. He wrote back saying that his “editor” had sided with him (big surprise) and thus the lies stayed up.

In this piece he is no less magnificently unimpressed with the truth, as he assembles an impressive tissue of smears, half-truths, innuendos and lies about various foes of jihad terror, and wraps them up nicely into a “news story” that the WaPo, eager as ever to run defamation in the service of Islamic supremacists and jihadists, then presents to its hapless readers. Sacirbey is smarting because a Hamas-linked CAIR smear campaign failed to get former FBI agent John Guandolo’s training course for law enforcement officers canceled in Culpeper County, Virginia. Sacirbey wrote up this hit piece to try to ensure that this failure would not be repeated.

“Anti-Muslim speakers still popular in law enforcement training,” by Omar Sacirbey for the Religion News Service, March 12:

Law enforcement officers in Virginia will no longer receive credit for a counterterrorism course taught by a former FBI agent and anti-Muslim activist after the academy where the course was taught canceled its accreditation the day it was scheduled to begin.

Sacirbey uses “anti-Muslim” throughout this piece for foes of jihad terror, which — as I have said before when pseudo-journalistic ideologues like Sacirbey have used this term in the past — is like calling foes of Nazism “anti-German.” It shows Sacirbey’s bias and sympathy for jihadists, and should never be acceptable practice in what are supposedly respectable journalistic outlets like RNS and the WaPo. But standards go out the window when it comes to journalists covering for jihad terrorism; they do it so unanimously, zealously and unflinchingly that they must either be true believers or paid off, or both.

Nevertheless, the three-day course with John Guandolo, which Culpeper County Sheriff Scott Jenkins vigorously defended, proceeded at nearby Germanna Community College late last month.

Some 50 people, many from out of state, reportedly enrolled in the seminar, “Understanding and Investigating Jihadi Networks in America,” advertised as $225 per trainee.

Note the emphasis on the fee. Leftist allies of Islamic supremacism such as the Center for American Progress and the Southern Poverty Law Center have millions upon millions of dollars — far more than any counter-jihad organization of individual has ever had. But it is a staple of these smear pieces that the so-called “Islamophobia industry” is a well-heeled machine in which people are just in it for the money, as if getting regular death threats and constant vilification is worth any amount of money. Anyway, $225 is a perfectly reasonable charge for a seminar like this one — indeed, far lower than what other organizations charge for programs of similar duration. But Sacirbey is following his marching orders: Imply that it’s all about the money.

The Culpeper controversy is the latest law-enforcement training course to draw harsh criticism from Muslim groups who say agencies hire purported experts in Islam or counterterrorism who in fact have other agendas.

While Muslim-American activists and media reports have raised awareness about anti-Muslim trainers, occasionally resulting in curriculum reviews and canceled classes, many say the problem persists because there are too few police administrators to properly vet courses and instructors.

What Sacirbey means is: “The problem persists because there are too few Leftists and Islamic supremacists putting pressure on police administrators so that they don’t dare host a course that tells the truth about Islam and jihad.”

The consequences, critics add, go beyond political incorrectness and include undermining public safety and obscuring real dangers as police officers chase bad leads based on profiling.

What’s behind this absolutely baseless charge (for which Sacirbey offers no evidence, because there is none) is the ongoing effort by Hamas-linked CAIR and other groups like it to end all surveillance of Muslim communities, including the NYPD’s program which just withstood a Leftist/Islamic supremacist challenge in court.

After 9/11, several anti-Muslim activists emerged, speaking about Islam to audiences at churches, synagogues, political organizations and universities. With the nation focused on homeland security, many anti-Muslim speakers began offering their courses to local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies, which paid for them with taxpayer-funded government grants.

Nearly 13 years later, these speakers continue to win lucrative fees to train law enforcement officers despite a history of rhetoric that seems to undermine their credibility.

Note again the emphasis on the money. I would have told Omar Sacirbey if he had asked me, but of course he didn’t, because he didn’t want the truth: when I was flying around the country in order to help give training seminars for the FBI, CIA, JTTF, and military groups, I didn’t get paid. Not a penny. Not even for expenses. I paid my own way, bought my own hotel rooms, etc. On a few occasions a Colonel who had me speak several times on military bases told me about a form I could fill out for reimbursement of my travel expenses. I never filled out the form. I did the training out of a sense of duty to my country, not for personal gain. If Omar Sacirbey were a journalist rather than a smear merchant, he might have asked me and some others what we were paid, whether we were paid, etc. But quite obviously he is not a journalist.

For example, Guandolo, who taught the Culpeper class, is seen saying in a YouTube video with anti-Muslim blogger Robert Spencer that CIA Director John Brennan converted to Islam. In another recording, he claims that Brennan is “unfit for duty,” because he has brought in leaders of Hamas to advise the government.

Note again the identifier intended to demean: “anti-Muslim blogger.” Not, say, “bestselling author and former FBI trainer.” Daniel Martin Varisco, another “Islamophobia” smear merchant, has a blog and wasrecently whining about how it was less popular than this one. But you can be sure that Sacirbey would never, ever refer to Varisco as a “blogger.”

Anyway, Sacirbey presents Guandolo’s charge that Brennan is a Muslim as if it were self-evidently false. On what basis? Has Brennan ever denied this? No. Is it widely known that there is a top intelligence official in the Obama Administration’s CIA who has converted to Islam? Yes. It was reported in none other than the Washington Post in 2012. Why couldn’t it be Brennan? Did Sacirbey speak to Brennan? If he did, he doesn’t mention it in the article. What is much more likely is that Sacirbey didn’t speak to Brennan, and has no idea whether or not he is a Muslim, but since Brennan hasn’t said anything one way or the other about the charge, he uses it to portray Guandolo as crazy. (You can see the video of my interview with Guandolo here.)

Read the rest of this excellent rebuttal at Jihad Watch

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