Congressional Candidates Receive Money from Islamists

Nihad Awad (r), executive director and founder of CAIR and Ibrahim Hooper (l), national communications director and spokesperson

Nihad Awad (r), executive director and founder of CAIR and Ibrahim Hooper (l), national communications director and spokesperson

By Ryan Mauro:

The Islamist Money in Politics project has identified 11 candidates — two Republicans and nine Democrats — who received campaign donations this year from Islamists.

The project concludes that prominent Islamists have given at least $700,000 to federal candidates over the past 15 years, including $85,451 to presidential campaigns.

The figures are probably only a shadow of the true numbers, as the first-of-its-kind project does not yet include state-level campaigns like governorships. It also does not include every Islamist or Islamist organization that has donated.

The compiled data is based on campaign contributions by senior officials with five groups. The five groups included in the database all have Islamist origins and are:

1. Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), an unindicted co-conspirator in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation. CAIR was labeled by the Justice Department as a U.S. Muslim Brotherhoodentity.

2. Muslim American Society (MAS), a group that federal prosecutorsconfirmed was “founded as the overt arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in America.”

3. Muslim Alliance in North America (MANA), led by the radical preacher Siraj Wahhaj and included an anti-American militant named Luqman Ameen Abdullah who was killed in a shootout with the FBI.

4. Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), an unindicted co-conspirator in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation. ISNA was labeled by the Justice Department as a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity.

5. Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), a group founded by Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood members, but has taken a stance critical of the Brotherhood and Islamism in recent years.

***

Conclusion

As the Islamist Money in Politics project states, this is only the tip of the iceberg, but the main issue here isn’t necessarily dollar amounts. It’s influence.

A donation of a few hundred dollars won’t buy a candidate’s loyalty, but it may give an Islamist access to a candidate or a campaign’s inner circle of staff and advisors. The donation may indicate a current relationship to a candidate’s campaign or open the doors to a relationship that can influence policy.

When the FBI wiretapped a secret Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas meeting in Philadelphia in 1993 (which included two founders of CAIR), Hamas operative Abdel Haleem al-Ashqar was recorded explaining, “Forming the public opinion or coming up with a policy to influence …the way the Americans deal with the Islamists, for instance. I believe that should be the goals of this stage.”

Read it all at Clarion Project

Also see:

9/11 Museum Refuses to Censor Al-Qaeda Film

sr-2-450x274by Deborah Weiss:

Amidst a barrage of controversy and criticism, the 9/11 museum officials stand firm in their decision to air a documentary on Al-Qaeda without censorship of Islam-related language.

The 911 Museum will open to the public on May 21, 2014, with a preview period for 9/11 families and survivors from May 15, 2014 to May 20, 2014.

Included is a 7-minute documentary titled, “[T]he Rise of Al-Qaeda.” It shows footage of Al-Qaeda’s journey over the prior several years on the way to 9/11, from its training camps to a series of terrorist attacks.  The film will be adjacent to a room displaying photos of the 9/11 hijackers.

The film portrays the 9/11 hijackers as “Islamists” who viewed their mission as a “deadly jihad.” After all, in the words of the hijackers: “[M]any thanks to Allah for his kind gesture and choosing us to perform the act of jihad for his cause and to defend Islam and Muslims.”  So, it was the hijackers themselves that believed they were on a jihadi mission for the cause of Islam.

The film has been thoroughly vetted and its accuracy is not in dispute.  But an advisory panel of interfaith clergy who previewed the film is complaining about the use of the words “Islamist” and “jihad,” insisting that the jihadists should be shown in a greater “context” that portrays most Muslims as peaceful.

Reverend Chloe Breyer (Justice Breyer’s daughter), who preaches at Saint Philips Church in Harlem, wants the video to show Islam as a peace-loving religion where only a few outliers like the 9/11 hijackers are violent.  She believes that the word “jihad” is an Islamic struggle to do good and that the film in its current form may justify bigotry or violence unless accompanied by a disclaimer.

Sheikh Mostafa Elazabawy, the only Imam on the advisory panel, made a splash when he quit the panel in response to the film, stating that “unsophisticated visitors who don’t understand the difference between Al-Qaeda and Muslims may come away with a prejudiced view of Islam, leading toward antagonism and even confrontation toward Muslim believers near the site.”  He went on to say that “the screening of the film in its present state would greatly offend our local Muslim believers as well as any foreign Muslim visitor to the museum.”

Akbar Ahmed, Chair of Islamic Studies at American University, protested that most museum visitors will assume that the language refers to all Muslims. He argues that one shouldn’t associate the terrorists with their religion because doing so implicates 1.5 billion Muslims by association.

John Esposito, an apologist for Islam at the Saudi-funded Prince Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University, generally prefers the phrase “Muslim terrorism” to “Islamic terrorism” in order to dissociate the motivating ideology from the terrorist behavior, and instead give the impression that the terrorist conduct is just coincidently committed by Muslims.

Others want the museum to go out of its way to show Muslims mourning over the 9/11 attacks to “balance out” images of Islam.  Ibrahim Hooper, spokesperson for CAIR, a group which holds itself out as a Muslim civil rights organization but which in reality has many terrorist ties of its own, insisted that the film will reinforce “stereotypes” of Muslims as terrorists.  He emphasized: “it’s very important how Islam is portrayed.”

But the film is not about Islam.  The purpose of the museum is to educate the public on the events of 9/11, including who committed it and what their motivation was.  The focus should be on the atrocity that murdered almost 3000 people in cold blood, not a PC version of feel-good Islam.

Joseph Daniels, the museum’s Executive Director, said that museum officials “stand by the scholarship that underlies the creation of this video.”  NBC News Anchor, Brian Williams, who narrates the film explained, “[w]e have a heavy responsibility to be true to the facts, to be objective.”  He asserted that the film in no way smears a whole religion, but instead talks about Al-Qaeda, a terrorist group.  And, the film clearly acknowledges that Muslims were among the 9/11 victims, mourners, and recovery workers.

So the issue is how the terrorists are characterized and whether the public can discern the difference between Al-Qaeda and those who identify themselves as Muslim but are peaceful and law-abiding.

First, it is a fact that Al-Qaeda’s interpretation of Islam motivated the 9/11 attacks.  To say that acknowledging Al-Qaeda’s motivational ideology indicts 1.5 billion Muslims is to say that all 1.5 billion Muslims agree with Al-Qaeda’s interpretation of Islam.  If they do, they should be indicted. If they don’t, they shouldn’t be offended because the statements don’t apply to them.

Second, it’s unlikely that the Imam on the advisory panel speaks for all local and foreign Muslims, whom he claims to know will all be offended.  If all Muslims should be painted with this broad brush, then the offense is deserved.  If they are not a monolith, they shouldn’t be offended. On the contrary, they should be insulted that some unknown Imam thinks they can’t handle the truth.

Third, to claim that 9/11 or any other Islamic terrorist attack was just terrorism that incidentally was committed by Muslims is just a lie.  It is the terrorists, not the reporters, who assert that they are motivated by their faith.  Those who disagree with the terrorists’ interpretation of their faith should take it up with the terrorists, not those observing and reporting the facts.  The same goes for terrorists who are members of Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Boko Haram, Hezbollah and others.

Fourth, CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terror financing trial in the history of the United States and has many terrorism ties.  It is on a mission to stamp out all criticism of anything Islam-related, even if it’s true.  Indeed, there’s nary a terrorist that CAIR doesn’t defend.  Asserting that the 9/11 hijackers were Islamic terrorists is factual reporting, not “stereotyping.”  But CAIR wants the public to believe that anybody except for Muslims can be terrorists.  Besides, CAIR has no credibility and should not be given legitimacy by accommodating its gripes.

Read more at Front Page

Deborah Weiss, Esq. is a regular contributor to FrontPage Magazine and the Washington Times. She is a contributing author to “Saudi Arabia and the Global Islamic Terrorist Network” and the primary writer and researcher for “Council on American Islamic Relations: Its Use of Lawfare and Intimidation”.

The New York Times: Making the world safe for terrorism

US Muslim groups won’t move to excommunicate Boko Haram

2014-05-12T154806Z_1_CBREA4B17WB00_RTROPTP_4_NIGERIA-GIRLS-e1399930841548

Jihad Watch, By Robert Spencer:

Notice that the Daily Caller’s Neil Munro repeatedly asks Muslim leaders in the U.S. to offer Islamic counter-arguments to Boko Haram’s claims for Islamic justification for its actions, and they refuse to do so. This is, as I am quoted as saying in this piece, because they can’t.

“US Muslim groups won’t move to excommunicate Boko Haram,” by Neil Munro, Daily Caller, May 12, 2014:

U.S. Islamic leaders won’t try to formally excommunicate the Islamist Boko Haram group unless they can meet with its leadership to debate the religious legitimacy of its actions, a spokesman for a leading mosque told The Daily Caller.

“There is a great reluctance to excommunicate someone by extension. … It would be like convicting someone in absentia,” said Imam Johari Abdul-Malik, the spokesman for the “Home of the Migrants” mosque, or Dar Al Hijrah mosque, in Falls Church Va. If crimes have been committed, the Nigerian government should punish the individuals, he added.

On May 7, Abdul Malik led a group of Muslim advocates at a press conference at the National Press Club, where they denied that Islamic strictures are shaping Boko Haram’s years-long campaign of killing and kidnapping Christians.

“Islam is not the problem,” said Ahmed Bedier, a Florida-based Islamic advocate. “We’re tired of people coming on television and asking where does this ideology come from,” Bedier said. “Well, this ideology comes from nowhere,” he insisted….

At his May 7 event, Abdul-Malik urged Boko Haram to change its view of Islam, even as he declined to challenge its religious claims. “Groups like Boko Haram desire to take us back to a medieval … world where kidnapping of women and girls and enslavement and rape are acceptable,” he said.

“The world has changed … [and] in particular we are saying as modern day Muslims that we now rejectall of these acts and that they are contrary to our faith,” he said.

However, Abdul-Malik didn’t promise any religious or political action by U.S. Islamic groups. When pressed May 9 by TheDC to cite Islamic texts that contradict Boko Haram’s Islamist arguments, Abdul-Malik quickly ended the phone call….

In a February video, Shekau justified his murder of Christians by quoting the Quran. The verse cited by Shekau, “We have rejected you, and there has arisen, between us and you, enmity and hatred for ever, unless ye believe in Allah and Him alone,” is found in the fourth verse of the Quran’s 60th chapter.

“We wish to reiterate that our [jihad] is not for personal gain; it is meant to ensure the establishment of an Islamic state by liberating all Muslims from the excesses of the infidels,” the group’s spokesman, Abu Qaqa, said in 2012, according to study of the group. “We don’t kill innocent Muslims. The fact is the bottom line of our struggle is to set the Muslims free from enslavement. We only kill the unbelievers,” he said.

The Muslim groups aren’t excommunicating Shekau’s group because his Islamic claims are based on iconic Islamic texts, said Robert Spencer, the author of several best-sellers on Islamic law and traditions.

Slavery is endorsed in several sections of the Koran, where is described as “those whom your right [sword] hands possess,” he said.

The Quran is said by Muslims to be a direct transcription by Muhammad of statements by their god, Allah.

Close. Muhammad didn’t make transcriptions, according to Islamic tradition; his followers did. But in any case the Qur’an is considered to be a perfect transcription of the perfect and eternal book.

So “it is perfectly legitimate for a Muslim to capture a Christian woman and use her for sex,” Spencer said. “This is something that Mohammad did himself,” according to Islamic traditions, Spencer said.

The acid test of opposition to Shekau’s Islamic claims is whether the U.S. Islamic groups will declare that Shekau’s groups and ideas are heretical, said Spencer. But Islamic debates are very legalistic, so any attempted excommunication would require Islamic groups to cite Islamic texts before pronouncing “takfir” on Shekau and his movement, Spencer said.

TheDC asked Abdul-Malik if Americans Muslim groups would pronounce “takfir” on Boko Haram. “There is a great reluctance to excommunicate someone by extension. … It would be like convicting someone in absentia,” he replied.

The groups won’t take that step, Spencer said, because “they know Boko Haram has a perfectly good case based on the Koran … [and] they know that Muslims in their community … would be indignant towards them if they pronounce ‘takfir’ on a group that is following the Koran.”

Numerous U.S. Islamic groups contacted by TheDC declined to offer Islamic counter-arguments against Boko Haram. Instead, they merely said its actions are “unjust” and “un-Islamic.”

Shekau was trained as a Muslim cleric, according to a report by the International Crisis Group. He includes an Islamic title — imam — in his war-name, which is “Imam Abu Mohammen Abubakar bin Muhammad Shekau.” The name is also a salute to one of Islam’s earliest caliphs, Muhammad ibn Abu Bakr….

 

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

 

Read the rest of Munro’s article, it covers a lot more information.

CAIR, MPAC, Religious Leaders: Don’t Mention Jihad at Ground Zero

Islamists are rising in America while we sleep

image1-231x180By Allen West,  April 11, 2014

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more

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

Justice Department to prohibit agents from considering religion in counterterror investigations

HOLDER-articleLarge-thumb-autox548-4682By Robert Spencer:

Because who ever heard of Muslims being involved in terrorism? The very idea is preposterous! Why would anyone get the idea that counterterror surveillance was ever needed in Muslim communities?

“U.S. to Expand Rules Limiting Use of Profiling by Federal Agents,” by Matt Apuzzo for the New York Times, January 15 (thanks to Linda Sarsour):

The Justice Department will significantly expand its definition of racial profiling to prohibit federal agents from considering religion, national origin, gender and sexual orientation in their investigations, a government official said Wednesday.The move addresses a decade of criticism from civil rights groups that say federal authorities have in particular singled out Muslims in counterterrorism investigations and Latinos for immigration investigations.

The Bush administration banned profiling in 2003, but with two caveats: It did not apply to national security cases, and it covered only race, not religion, ancestry or other factors.

Since taking office, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. has been under pressure from Democrats in Congress to eliminate those provisions. “These exceptions are a license to profile American Muslims and Hispanic-Americans,” Senator Richard J. Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, said in 2012.

President George W. Bush said in 2001 that racial profiling was wrong and promised “to end it in America.” But that was before the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11. After those attacks, federal agents arrested and detained dozens of Muslim men who had no ties to terrorism. The government also began a program known as special registration, which required tens of thousands of Arab and Muslim men to register with the authorities because of their nationalities.

“Putting an end to this practice not only comports with the Constitution, it would put real teeth to the F.B.I’s claims that it wants better relationships with religious minorities,” said Hina Shamsi, a national security lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union.

It is not clear whether Mr. Holder also intends to make the rules apply to national security investigations, which would further respond to complaints from Muslim groups.

“Adding religion and national origin is huge,” said Linda Sarsour, advocacy director for the National Network for Arab American Communities. “But if they don’t close the national security loophole, then it’s really irrelevant.

In other words, she even wants it to be forbidden for Muslims to be placed under surveillance in the interests of national security.

Read more at Jihad Watch

Illinois Governor Addresses Islamist Conference

Pat QuinBY RYAN MAURO:

The annual joint conference of the Islamic Circle of North America and the Muslim American Society brings together Islamist preachers and devotees from around the country. This year’s event had a special keynote speaker: Illinois Governor Pat Quinn.

ICNA is a derivative of the radical Jamaat-e-Islami group in Pakistan. An internal U.S. Muslim Brotherhood document shows that Jamaat-e-Islami is closely affiliated with ICNA.

ICNA is currently investing its time condemning the Egyptian and Bangladeshi governments for their crackdowns on the Muslim Brotherhood and Jamaat-e-Islami.

MAS, for its part, was “founded as the overt arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in America,” according to a 2008 court filing by federal prosecutors. Last year, senior U.S. Muslim Brotherhood figure and convicted terrorist Abdurrahman Alamoudi said, “Everyone knows that MAS is the Muslim Brotherhood.”

ICNA and MAS posted video of Quinn’s address. The speaker recalled how Quinn visited the Hamas/Brotherhood-linked Mosque Foundation and said, “This is the kind of governor that we support and we like.”

Quinn shared the stage with numerous Islamists like Imam Siraj Wahhaj of Masjid At-Taqwa; Jamal Badawi, Yasir Qadhi and Tariq Ramadan, the grandson of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Quinn was also praised for establishing a Muslim American Advisory Council in 2011. Among the chosen members were Ahmed Rehab, leader of the Chicago chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and Safaa Zarzour, former secretary-general of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA).

Both CAIR and ISNA were branded unindicted co-conspirators in a terrorism-financing trial. The U.S. government has said they are both U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entities.

Read more at Clarion Project

MPAC Issues Declaration Against Extremism; Organization Continues To Make Extremist Claims

gI_73756_MPAC

 

By :

US media reported last month that the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) had issued a “Declaration Against Extremism.” According to an LA Times report:

 

December 13, 2013, 12:51 p.m. Highlighting its 25th anniversary, the Los Angeles-based Muslim Public Affairs Council on Friday issued what it called a Declaration Against Extremism, an effort to change public perception by distilling the values of mainstream Islam.

‘We have allowed the extremist voices to run rampant without effectively conveying our message,’ said Salam Al-Marayati, president of the council, among the nation’s most influential advocacy organizations for American Muslims. ‘What this declaration represents is a higher level of conveying the message of Islam, the true spirit of Islam, which is based on spreading mercy, justice and engaging others in a pluralistic society.’

Among other principles, the council’s statement calls for respecting all cultures, equal treatment of women, and upholding the idea that authority comes from God rather than from individual leaders.

Conveying the ideas of Southern California Islamic leader Dr. Maher Hathout — who co-founded the council and is now battling cancer — the declaration also confronts extremism and violence in Islam’s name.

‘Extremism to us is a major threat to our faith,’ Al-Marayati said at a Friday news conference. ‘It disfigures our faith and it creates more misapprehensions about Islam, and indeed it creates misconceptions about Islam that fuels Islamophobia.’

The single-page declaration will be used by the Muslim Public Affairs Council for outreach to Muslims and the broader community, the organization’s leaders said.

Hathout, 77, will be honored this weekend at the councils 25th anniversary convention, to be held Saturday at the Long Beach Convention Center. The organization began with about 300 members and has grown to a membership of about 10,000, Al-Marayati said.

Aside from its L.A. offices, it also has a public policy wing in Washington, D.C.

Although the MPAC Declaration called for, among other things, “respecting all cultures”, MPAC and its leaders have made anti-Semitic statements that assert or imply an organized Jewish effort to defame and exclude U.S. Muslims from U.S. political life and has engaged in frequent and virulent demonization of Israel including describing Israeli actions at the Al-Aqsa Mosque as a “rape of the soul of the Islamic people”, asserting that the objective of Israeli actions in Gaza was “gross killings of Palestinian civilians, including women and children”, and accusing supporters of Israel of using tactics similar to Hitler’s. In December 2009, MPAC reported that “Israeli doctors had extracted human organs from dead Palestinians during the 1988 intifada and into the 1990s.”  MPAC leader Salamn Al-Marayati suggested on a talk radio show on September 11, 2001 that Israel might have been behind the 911attacks. stating:

If we’re going to look at suspects, we should look to the groups that benefit the most from these kinds of incidents, and I think we should put the state of Israel on the suspect list because I think this diverts attention from what’s happening in the Palestinian territories so that they can go on with their aggression and occupation and apartheid policies.

The Investigative Project reported just seven days after MPAC’s “Declaration Against Extremism” that MPAC was promoting a story accusing Israel of opening a dam during a freak winter storm, causing massive flooding in the Gaza Strip. As the IP report noted, the dam in question does not appear to exist.

Read more at GMBWatch

Doesn’t This Matter?

AMACby Justin O Smith:

Increasingly, it appears that many of our so-called “educators” do not have any qualms in aiding and abetting the Muslim Brotherhood’s 25 Year Plan and the American Muslim Advisory Council’s dawa/proselytizing efforts, as they approve indoctrination events and textbooks across the U.S. and here in Tennessee, that describe the process for converting to Islam and teach how to pray like Muslims. Islam is presented in false and glowing terms as “a religion of peace,” which only serves to advance the agenda of wealthy Saudi Arabian Wahabis and other islamofascists; these “educators” affirm an undeserved stature of Islamic superiority, which traps Muslim children in a cycle of Sharia law/doctrine abuses perpetrated under a controlling tribal and unreformed freedom-killing ideology, and this also creates greater opportunities for the indoctrination of vulnerable groups of American children!

In early 2010, Minnesota’s ACLU sued St Paul’s public k-8 Tarek ibn Ziyad Academy for violating the ban against government religious advocacy; Massachusetts schools adopted a Notebook advocated by Harvard’s Middle Eastern Studies Center that claims Muslim explorers discovered the New World and Native Americans had Muslim names; and, in September of 2010, the Texas Board of Education drew heavy criticism after issuing a texbook resolution asking publishers to fix the “pro-Islamic/anti-Christian half-truths, selective disinformation, and false stereotypes” that riddled the textbooks, just as the case has been in Williamson, Rutherford and now Sumner Counties in Tennessee…for example, the brutal and violent conquests of Christian lands by Muslims is now referred to as “migrations” of “empire builders.”

On September 11, 2013, Sheridan Middle School (Arkansas) Superintendent Brenda Haynes argued that inviting a Muslim guest speaker, on this day of tragic memories for most of us, was motivated by pure intentions. “There was no thought of having this person address the classes to point Islam as ‘a religion of peace’,” Haynes stated. If there was truly “no thought” of such a scenario arising, how interesting is it that she felt compelled to mention it?

And, what a feeling of shock and disgust must have coursed through parent’s minds upon hearing that Principle Peter Badalament read a Muslim prayer over Concord-Carlisle High School’s (Boston) intercom system, instead of reading the Pledge of Allegiance to the United States; the poem, by Syrian-American poet Mohja Kahf, is contemptuous of America and Americans in general.

Islam is the ideology of death. It demands to this day the deaths of anyone who leaves it, and it regularly demands the deaths of adulterers, homosexuals, infidels, Jews, Christians, and even other Muslims who practice a less strict form of Islam.

Many Americans become offended and indignant over any suggestion, even when presented with proof, that child marriage, honor killings and female excision are, right this very instant, a very real fact of life for many Muslim girls in homes all across America; if 95% of Egyptian girls are genitally mutilated, what percentage of Egyptian girls born in the U.S. are circumcised? None? I don’t think so.

When educators in the U.S., out of a misguided notion founded in diversity, multiculturalism and the desire not to stigmatize Muslims, do not present any information about Muslim women kept from working and being productive, given frequent beatings and forced into arranged marriages that are approved by their parents, communities and imams/preachers, they deny countless Muslim girls their right to be free from this backward culture; they fail to live up to the ideas and values of our democratic republic, and they dishonor the memory of those American women who fought so long and hard for equal rights!

Is there nothing beautiful in Islam? Beautiful architecture and the encouragement of charity, yes, but Islam is built on sexual inequality and on surrender of individual responsibility and choice. This is not just ugly; it is monstrous.

 Lema Sbenaty

Lema Sbenaty

Sure, these things do not happen to all American Muslims, since some Muslims have assimilated better than others; however, we still see thousands of radical Muslim students, young men and women born in the United States, such as Lema Sbenaty of Murfreesboro, TN – a Muslim Student Association (MSA)/Muslim Brotherhood supporter, Islamic sympathizers and liberal educators, who have so manifestly benefitted from every advantage of Western education, ignore the profound differences between a theocratic mind-set and a democratic mind-set.

Sbenaty tells her associates in the Muslim Interscholastic Tournament organization that “We are Muslims in non-Muslim countries. As such, it is the duty of each and every one of us to inform and educate others about Islam… emphasize that your MSA is for anyone interested in… clearing misconceptions about Islam. This may facilitate school approval.” And, this would give her and other adult Muslim women access to young high school students for the purpose of “educating”/indoctrinating them about Islam.

Susan Douglas

Susan Douglas

All of this has contributed to the national dynamic, which has created a sanitized version of Islamic history and dogma that has infiltrated U.S. public textbooks over the last two decades; a great amount of this occurred through the efforts of Muslim convert Susan Douglas, from the Institute on Religion and Civic Values, who wrote lesson plans, advisories, guidelines and pamphlets to soft the image of Islam in public schools for ten years. Central to her works is the ‘Teacher’s Guide to Religion in the Public Schools’, which was promoted as an interfaith ‘First Amendment’.

Surely, we can flatly state, “Islam, based on the Quran, that denies women basic human rights is backward,” even if only as an opinion. And, since this is a valid criticism, ignoring the practice of victimization of women that stems from the Quran only adds harm to its victims: Free speech is the bedrock of liberty and a free society. And yes, it includes the right to blaspheme and offend.

Doesn’t this matter to all those clever young Muslim girls in America, such as Lema Sbenaty?

A lot of Americans, some well intentioned and some not, have a hard time accepting that all human beings are equal, but all cultures and ideologies are not. A culture that values women as masters of their own lives is better than a culture that mutilates young girls and confines them behind walls or murders them for falling in love. A culture that protects women’s rights… where a woman can be appointed to the U.S Supreme Court… is better than a culture that denies a woman’s inheritance rights and dishonors her by questioning her truthfulness as a rule of law. The American culture guided by the Western Enlightenment and the U.S. Constitution is better than anything Islam can offer or has ever offered!

There is a problem with Islam. By ignoring the facts, you, the Muslim student or adult…the “educators”, fail your community. If the goal is to truly seek the truth, which education and textbooks are suposed to provide, then no one can deny that a strict interpretation of Islam is preparation for bigotry, widespread strife and oppression. You cannot deny the link to Islamic beliefs and the failure of Islamic societies to provide peace, opportunity and prosperity to their people. No matter which Islamic country you call you ancestral “home”, you are no longer living there for a reason, so embrace the better life your parents sought for you, by giving birth to you in America or by bringing you to America. And, if you believe there should be Sharia law in America, go home and take a look at what it’s really like!

Islam, Muslims, and the 2012 Election

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

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

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

Clinton, Bush, and Obama: A Brief History

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more

GOP lawmaker: US Muslim leaders ‘complicit’ in terrorist attacks

Mike-Pompeo-550x229

 

Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.) on Tuesday said the failure of Muslim leaders to repudiate acts of terrorism done in the name of Islam makes them “potentially complicit” in these attacks.

“When the most devastating terrorist attacks on America in the last 20 years come overwhelmingly from people of a single faith and are performed in the name of that faith, a special obligation falls on those that are the leaders of that faith,” Pompeo said on the House floor.

“Instead of responding, silence has made these Islamic leaders across America potentially complicit in these acts, and more importantly still, in those that may well follow.”

Pompeo said a religion that claims to be one of peace must “reject violence that is perpetrated in its name.” However, he said that while many Muslims oppose terrorist attacks against the U.S., many mosques and many Muslim leaders across the country are not taking a stand on terrorist violence.

“[T]he silence in the face of extremism coming from the best-funded Islamic advocacy organizations and many mosques across America is absolutely deafening,” he said. “It casts down upon the commitment to peace by adherents to the Muslim faith.”

He said that in cases where extreme Christians or Jews have used their religion to justify violence, leaders of these religions have taken stands against these justifications.

Read more at The Hill

 

Media downplay Tsarnaev connection to Muslim student group

basselnasri2By Charles C. Johnson:

Coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing has ignored admitted bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s connection to his college’s Muslim Student Association, a group that has close relations with both the Muslim Brotherhood and a local imam friendly with an al-Qaida operative.

Although a student leader and the mainstream media have downplayed Tsarnaev’s ties to the the group, Tsarnaev associated frequently with the Muslim Student Association (MSA) at University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth.

The Washington Post on April 27 reported that Tsarnaev, who has admitted his role in the Marathon terrorist bombing to police, played intramural soccer with MSA members, contradicting earlier reports that the U. Mass-Dartmouth student spurned an invitation to join the controversial Muslim Brotherhood-linked student organization.

“For a time, Jahar played on an intramural soccer team composed of students involved with the campus Muslim Student Association,” explained the Post’s Marc Fisher, a fact that has since been missing from coverage.

In fact, Tsarnaev played soccer with the Muslim Student Association nearly every week, according to MSA Secretary Bassel Nasri in an interview with George Stephanopoulos and Diane Sawyer on April 19, 2013. Nasri simply neglected to say they were MSA games. Although Stephanopoulos described Nasri as “a soccer buddy” of Tsarnaev, neither he nor Sawyer mentioned that they were co-religionists and that the soccer games were organized by the Muslim Student Association.

Read more at The Daily Caller

Inside the Muslim Student Association Conference, Part 2

newlogo-450x297By Mark Tapson:

To read Part I, click here

In the previous installment of this short series on the recent 15th Annual Muslim Student Association (MSA) West Conference, which I attended at the University of California, Santa Barbara, I gave a general overview of the conference. The article summarized its pro-Palestinian political agenda, its preoccupation with hyping the threat of Islamophobia, its appeal to political activism in addition to its emphasis on strengthening one’s Muslim faith and community, and its support from some of the most influential Muslim Brotherhood front groups in America. Now let’s look at some of the principal individual speakers involved and their messages.

Edina Lekovic

Edina Lekovic

The conference featured a range of professors, imams, businesspeople, media representatives, linguists, and even engineers. The biggest names were Imam Siraj Wahhaj and Edina Lekovich, Director of Policy and Programming for MPAC, the Muslim Public Affairs Council. Lekovich, a prominent Islamic face in the mainstream media, has claimed in the past that Muslims are everywhere being slaughtered by “Zionists,” and she edited a UCLA Muslim student paper that cast doubt on Holocaust claims and praised Ayatollah Khomeini and bin Laden as freedom fighters. At the UCSB conference her topic was “Beyond the Muslim Bubble,” which emphasized the very innocuous-sounding aim of “integrating ourselves into American society” to “build bridges with non-Muslims”: “We weren’t made to sit on the sidelines and not play an active role in society.”

Siraj Wahhhaj

Siraj Wahhhaj

Siraj Wahhaj, the imam of the Al-Taqwa mosque in Brooklyn, spoke at two main sessions at the conference: “Messengers of the Messenger,” about committing oneself to carrying forth the message of Muhammad today, and “Cultivating Our Own Spring,” about “actualizing our potential” to create a concrete foundation and strategy for the future. Both of his presentations were very vague and rambling. In the program booklet’s biography of Wahhaj, it wasn’t mentioned that he had been named as a possible co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and had invited the infamous Blind Sheikh to address his congregation several times. It neglects to point out that he advocates replacing the U.S. government with an Islamic caliphate, and has supported violent jihad. “You don’t get involved in politics because it’s the American thing to do,” Wahhaj said in 1991. “You get involved in politics because politics are a weapon to use in the cause of Islam.” A few years later he stated that “In time, democracy will crumble, and there will be nothing, and the only thing that will remain will be Islam.”

The cagey Wahhaj and Lekovich said nothing so controversial in the course of their MSA West conference sessions, however. After all, in addition to avoiding exposing their radical message to outsiders like myself, they are also keen to seduce into the Brotherhood fold any naïve Muslim students who might be in attendance. But the mere presence of Wahhaj and Lekovich, as well as the involvement of Brotherhood legacy groups, as I mentioned, confirm the radical underpinnings of the MSA West conference.

Read more at Front Page

 

Inside the Muslim Student Association Conference, Part 1

msaBy :

Last weekend I attended the 15th Annual Muslim Student Association (MSA) West Conference at the University of California campus in the beautiful seaside town of Santa Barbara. A thousand Muslim students flocked to the school for a packed three-day weekend of speaker sessions and workshops on spiritual tools, campus activism, and “institution building,” all with the supervision and support of the American branches of the subversive Muslim Brotherhood.

The MSA is a fifty-year-old Muslim Brotherhood affiliate with chapters on many hundreds of college campuses (check out this report on the MSA from Steven Emerson’s Investigative Project on Terrorism). The Brotherhood, as I’m sure all FrontPage Mag readers know, is devoted to the elimination of Western civilization. They don’t officially exist in the United States, but of course they have operated here for many decades in the guise of powerful, well-funded legacy groups, the most prominent of which were intimately involved in the MSA West Conference.

The thrust of the annual conference, as its welcome letter stated, was “to inspire, empower, and provide attendees with a tangible plan” – “action items… to improve their personal lives, their MSAs, and their communities at large” – and to link spirituality and activism: “Spirituality is the foundation, providing roots for activism; activism is actualized when produced by a sound spiritual community.” “We weren’t made to sit on the sidelines and not play an active role in society,” reads the description of a workshop led by Edina Lekovic, Communications Director for the Muslim Public Affairs Council.

Toward that end, the MSA hosted nearly 1000 Muslim students, according to its website, for the intense conference. I can attest to the fact that the 860-seat Campbell Hall auditorium, where the main sessions of the conference took place, was always almost entirely full for the main sessions, with more young women than young men in the strictly segregated audience. Speaking of the young women: by my estimate, more than 90% of them were wearing the hijab.

Many of the program listings for the weekend sounded as innocuous and self-actualizing as a Deepak Chopra seminar: “Unlock Your Potential,” one was titled. “Rebirth of the Spiritual Warrior” was another. “Blueprint from the Divine.” “Finding the One.” “Green Your Deen.” Even “Time and Stress Management.” And indeed, there was much lecturing from the speakers about purely spiritual matters: how to be a better Muslim, how to more closely model one’s behavior after the Islamic prophet Muhammad and his companions (whom one speaker, Maryam Amirebrahimi, referred to as “the Prophet’s homeboys and homegirls”), how to redefine masculinity and womanhood, how to deal with campus temptations like drinking and gender relations, etc.

There were also, however, quite a few workshops and talks with an overtly political slant.

Read more at Front Page