The Last Refuge has been sharing some wonderful patriotic videos:
The Last Refuge has been sharing some wonderful patriotic videos:
Frontpage, by Matthew Vadum, July 3, 2015:
Federal investigators may be closer to seizing former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s illicit off-site email server as evidence emerges that she transmitted classified information through it and that key Obama White House officials knew about her clandestine email account for years.
On Tuesday the Department of State made available on its website 3,000 pages of Clinton’s emails. Clinton emphatically declared months ago that none of the thousands of emails she sent using her hacker-friendly dedicated server contained classified information.
As it turns out the State Department had to redact 25 of the newly unveiled emails because they contained the very same classified information Hillary said she didn’t send. This is but a fraction of the 55,000 pages of email the former secretary of state gave to the diplomatic agency for processing. Under federal court order, the State Department is conducting monthly Clinton document dumps after screening and redacting the emails.
Clinton has admitted that tens of thousands of the emails she sent that happened to be U.S. government property were deleted. Emails were scrubbed while subject to a subpoena from the House Select Committee that is investigating the terrorist attack on a U.S. outpost in Benghazi, Libya, that took place on Sept. 11, 2012.
Around the time of the attack Clinton scapegoated the innocent director of an anti-Islam movie trailer that almost nobody had seen. She claimed back then that the sophisticated military-style operation materialized spontaneously from an angry mob of protesters gathered outside the facility which was in Islamist-held territory. The Benghazi coverup the Obama administration engineered to get President Obama safely reelected in November 2012 has been gradually falling apart.
This new revelation that classified information went out into cyberspace by way of Clinton’s laughably insecure server clears the way for the U.S. government to seize the machine itself, the Washington Times reports.
Despite demands from Republicans on Capitol Hill who are investigating Clinton, she has steadfastly refused to hand over the server whose existence became public knowledge earlier this year. She caused a firestorm before launching her presidential bid when she admitted that all her government emails from her time at the Department of State were routed through her own personal Internet server that has been traced back to her Chappaqua, N.Y., home address.
PolitiFact confirmed that Clinton didn’t use government email when she was at the State Department — not even once. “Although some former secretaries of state occasionally used personal emails for official business, Clinton is the only one who never once used an @state.gov email address in the era of email,” the fact-check organization previously concluded.
A former senior intelligence official told the Washington Times that government policy now requires a thorough investigation with an eye to the other Internet servers through which the classified information may have passed.
According to the news report:
The procedures are spelled out by the National Security Agency’s special panel on controlling leaked secrets, called the Committee on National Security Systems. It published a policy, “Securing Data and Handling Spillage Events,” that fits the case of Mrs. Clinton’s unauthorized private server, kept at her home while she was secretary of state, according to the retired officer’s reading of the regulations.
The policy stipulates that “[m]alicious attacks are alarming, but more often spillages occur from unintentional user error or negligence.”
“Hillary Clinton’s server has classified information and should be taken by the government and sanitized, wiped clean or destroyed,” said the cybersecurity expert who requested anonymity. It is not clear if any of the procedures have yet been carried out in this case, he said.
Clinton’s fast and loose approach to email security almost certainly compromised U.S. national security.
Clinton’s emails and telephone calls were probably targeted by foreign governments’ intelligence agencies, the former official said. Her server was probably breached, he added.
“If Clinton’s personal email server wasn’t hacked by China or Russia, forget the Presidency,” Chris Soghoian the ACLU’s lead technologist quipped on Twitter
quipped on Twitter. “She should be the next cyber czar.”
Clinton’s email account was a virtual open book for hackers from hostile governments and terrorist groups, but anyone who interacted with her through it was also placed at risk. This is because, as one news report stated, whoever created the system “didn’t enable what’s called a Sender Policy Framework, or SPF, a simple setting that would prevent hackers sending e-mails that appear to be from clintonemail.com.”
The publication of Clinton’s emails this week also demonstrates that senior Obama operatives David Axelrod, Rahm Emanuel, and John Podesta were long aware of Clinton’s cloak-and-dagger email infrastructure. The irretrievably corrupt Clintons created the system to frustrate Freedom of Information Act requesters, shield Hillary’s correspondence from congressional oversight, and steer money to the international cash-for-favors clearinghouse known as the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation.
Jihad Watch, by Hugh Fitzgerald, June 25, 2015:
Six years ago I delivered a talk I titled “Strategies of Denial.” As it did not appear at Jihad Watch but at another site, New English Review, many who come here may not have seen it. And since what I noted at that time does not date, I am taking the liberty of reprinting it here, in segments, with some updated comments interpolated throughout. There is really nothing new to say about Islam; it demands of commentators that they keep repeating themselves, in slightly different words, to put into context each new manifestation of Islamic behavior, whether it be an attack on Infidels, or something less dramatic. There are new attacks, new outrages, but there are no new explanations of Muslim behavior. Each new attack bears mentioning, and each new attempt to explain it away as “un-Islamic” deserves comment, but the generalizing about the subject — the overview — does not need revision, merely constant repetition and, where appropriate, new application.
My reason for breaking up the piece is simple: the new material throughout; I have expanded on what was given in a somewhat lapidary fashion, appealing more to our common experience of what is happening all over the West today. And I would like it not to overwhelm or burden the readers at this website, but to be read.
Now let’s go to the original introduction to “Strategies of Denial”:
Strategies of Denial –the title is ambiguous. Possibly deliberately. What might it mean? It might refer to Muslims, and to all the ways that adherents of Islam, “slaves of Allah,” especially those living in the West, have managed so successfully to distract or confuse or intimidate, morally or intellectually or physically, so many non-Muslims, managed to keep those non-Muslims from finding out too much about what Islam inculcates, and to achieve this despite the fact that the Islamic texts — Qur’an, Hadith, and Sira – are easily accessible, no more than a mouse-click away, and their meaning discussed at thousands of Muslim websites. And though not always a mouse-click away, there is the long record of Islamic imperialism, of the conquest through violence and the subsequent subjugation, also through violence and the threat of violence, of non-Muslims, which had always been known throughout the Western world, discussed by its outstanding figures (see John Quincy Adams, see Tocqueville, see Winston Churchill), and noted as a matter of course by Western travelers to Muslim lands, whose own experiences revealed the clear hostility of Muslims toward them (and toward all non-Muslims). When the great mass of Christians in earlier centuries thought about Muslims at all, they never doubted that those who had studied Islam and those who had encountered Muslims must surely be right: Islam was a ferocious and fanatical faith – for “faith” and not “religion” was the word used until the past century. It was American writers of books for children who first began to use that leveling phrase about “the world’s great religions,” and not until recent decades that the soothingly misleading phrase about “the three abrahamic faiths” began to be used. Never before in the history of the Western world would such a phrase have been invoked, never before would it have been taken seriously or used to convince non-Muslims that there was some kind of shared faith and shared traditions which bound Christians (and Jews) to Muslims. People once understood, even if they could not site sura and ayat, the Muslim injunction to “take not Christians and Jews as friends, for they are friends only with each other.” And even if Sura 9 and a hundred other Jihad verses in the Qur’an had not been read, and the hundreds or thousands of malevolent anti-Infidel hadiths were unknown, inhabitants of the Western world – the chief obstacle to the spread of Islam for a thousand years – did grasp, in the main, the nature of Islam.
But in the last few decades, the very decades in which the political and media elites of Europe have permitted millions of Muslim migrants, in an act of civilisational heedlessness and historical amnesia, to settle within their lands, those same elites failed to reconsider their earlier presumptions and negligence, failed to meet their solemn responsibility to study the texts and tenets of Islam, and their observable effect over 1350 years, from Spain to the East Indies, on the behavior of Muslims. They have instead avoided such study, and still worse, have attacked those who have engaged in such study and, armed with the knowledge of the meaning, and therefore the menace, of Islam, have begun to sound all kinds of tocsins.
It’s an amazing feat, really: the ability of millions of Muslims to settle within the non-Muslim lands, what in Islam is called Dar al-Harb, the House or Domain of War, where the writ of Islam does not yet run, and Muslims do not yet rule, and yet those Muslims have been able to prevent, to stave off, to deflect, any serious and widespread study of Islam, and hence to prevent the understanding of the threat that a large Muslim population unavoidably presents (for a handful of apostates, and a slightly-larger handful of those who become “cultural” Muslims or “Muslim-for-identification-purposes-only” Muslims, do not relieve us from worrying about the 90% or more of Muslims who remain True Believers and Defenders of the Faith).
And as of now — late June 2015 — the movement of Muslims into Europe has reached flood tide. They come from North Africa, but not all of North Africa. Their main point of departure is Libya, where the overthrow of Qaddafi meant that no one despot could control the flow of population, as he was willing to do for the right payment, as from the Italian government under Berlusconi. Even if a Western power wanted to pay someone today to prevent Arab and sub-Saharan Africans from leaving in those boats that head toward Lampedusa (the Italian island where these boats often are taken, or the smugglers easily arrange to have then taken — deliberate sinking or half-sinking of vessels by the smugglers is a common tactic) who, exactly, would he pay? No one controls the coast of Libya anymore; at best, some militias might control in Benghazi, or in Misrata, but even they are so fractured, their leaders so changeable, the ability to make sure that a deal that is struck kept so difficult, that Libyan immigration cannot be stopped unless the boats themselves are destroyed, as has been suggested should be done, but for reasons one cannot fathom, this elementary measure of self-defense has not yet been taken.
Fourth of July celebrations were re-scheduled out of respect for Ramadan. This approach highlights Western inability to engage constructively with the Islamic world.
Clarion Project, by Elliot Friedland, June 8, 2015:
This year the U.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Indonesia, celebrated the Fourth of July a month early so as to avoid clashing with the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.
Not only is this absurd, but what could have been a beautiful and respectful intercultural moment instead became a case study of the problematic and wrong-headed way Western leaders often engage with the Muslim world.
The Fourth of July, as America’s Independence Day, should be marked on that day by members of its diplomatic corps, who are America’s representatives around the world. After all, it is the job of American ambassadors to represent their country. That includes proudly celebrating American holidays and presenting the best of America to the world.
Moving Independence Day, on the other hand, belittles America’s standing in the world and shows others that America’s traditions, customs and festivals are negotiable.
The baffling part is that the Fourth of July is not in any way incompatible with Ramadan. One is a religious holy month that Muslims believe commemorates the first revelation of the Quran by Mohammed. The other is a national holiday celebrating independence.
Fourth of July celebrations could easily have been combined with an iftar dinner, the traditional Muslim post-Ramadan feast, taking place after dark and after the fasting has ended. Fireworks are better at night anyway.
Such a thing would have been an appropriate and encouraging demonstration of two cultures coming together in mutual respect to honor each other’s traditions.
Celebrating iftar and the Fourth of July one after the other should also have been no problem, if celebrating them both together seems too much like celebrating neither. If that would not have worked, a more low-key (and foodless) celebration during the day could easily have been arranged.
Many countries around the world celebrate such days and there is no indication that celebrating them causes offense to Muslims (or other faith groups).
Radical Islamists find national holidays offensive because they don’t believe in nations, holding instead that sovereignty belongs to Allah alone and power should be wielded in his name by the caliph. No doubt they will be overjoyed at the decision of America to move the Fourth of July.
But radical Islamists are not the group with which that America needs to be ingratiating itself. On the contrary, they have to be firmly and resolutely opposed to this group.
In and of itself, moving Independence Day is purely symbolic and some might argue, trivial.
But in diplomacy, symbols are very important. This is symptomatic of a broader unease and inability of Western leaders to engage constructively with Islam. In this case they simply negated the American in deference to the Islamic – a pointless gesture which only serves to embolden radicals, infuriate anti-Muslim bigots and confuse moderates.
In other cases, such as Dutch MP Geert Wilders’ preposterous call to ban the Quran, Westerners have demanded that Muslims negate their tradition, religion and culture.
Both approaches are fundamentally flawed.
If we are serious about combatting radical Islamism and supporting open and tolerant Muslim societies then we have to be confident in the ability of two cultures to interact together.
Rather than being a fine example of cultural sensitivity, this moving of Independence Day sends the message that the organizers themselves do not believe that American Independence is compatible with Islam.
That is a far bigger problem than mere scheduling.
CSP, by Kyle Shideler, June 5, 2015:
Mohammad Al-Hanooti, a major leader in the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood, has died,according to funeral arrangement announcements released by Dar Al-Hijrah Mosque in Falls Church, Va. Al-Hanooti was an un-indicted co-conspirator in both the 2008 Holy Land Foundation Hamas Financing Trial and the 1993 World Trade Center Bombing plot. Hanooti was a member of the Palestine Committee, of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood, which was established in order to support Hamas. As part of his role on the Palestine Committee, Hanooti was president of the Islamic Association Palestine (IAP). According to a 2001 FBI Memo, Hanooti had helped to raise $6 million for Hamas-linked entities. Hanooti was also caught on a wiretap discussing raising funds for the defense of Hamas leader Mousa Abu Marzook. Hanooti was also a member of the Fiqh Council of North America (FCNA), and Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), and his Virginia office was located next door to the World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY), and Muslim American Society (MAS),which Hanooti was the prayer leader at the Dar al-Hijrah Mosque, until 2000, when he was replaced by the now late Al Qaeda leader Anwar Al-Awlaki. Hanooti would come to be described as the Mufti of the Washington Metropolitan Area.
Hanooti was also an attendee of the 1993 Philadelphia Meeting, where Palestine Committee members discussed supporting Hamas, and discussed the establishment of an organization which would eventually become the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR).
The passing of Al-Hanooti is a reminder that a changing of the guard is underway regarding the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States. Increasingly the early members of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood, such as Al-Hanooti, and others like Maher Hathout, are aging and passing away. As we get further away from the generation that produced the Muslim Brotherhood documents submitted in the Holy Land Foundation Trial, it will require increased effort to identify and track younger U.S. Brotherhood members. These younger Brothers will have risen to prominence with newly established organizations during a period where they were accustom to the risk of surveillance of their radical activities that the earlier generation had not experienced. As a result open source researchers into the Muslim Brotherhood’s U.S. networks will need to redouble their own efforts.
By Citizen Warrior, June 1, 2015:
I am an American. My ancestors were almost entirely Northern European. Tonight I was at a graduation ceremony for an American university. The party was to celebrate the graduation of fifteen students who were all born in Thailand but are now Americans. Almost everyone in the room was a student at the university and also born in Thailand but raised in America by their Thai parents. They all spoke Thai.
As I looked around the room, I saw people who retained much of their former culture, but also embraced American culture. I have no problem with these people. I welcome them to this country. Almost every culture that has moved to America has done the same thing — Irish, Italians, Japanese, Koreans, Buddhists, Hindus, Jains, Sikhs, Taoists, atheists, etc. — they bring their own culture, but also enjoy what’s good about American culture. They are all welcome here.
But the political ideology of Islam is dangerously domineering. For that reason, it is not welcome. Among its core tenets is a mission to make Islam the dominant religious and political system wherever its believers live, using peaceful means if possible and violent means if necessary.
The Thai students may retain some of their former culture, but they do not try to impose it on anyone else. They don’t protest or riot if anyone does something their culture disapproves of. They don’t sue people or assassinate them if they criticize Thai culture.
I’m not a racist or a xenophobe. I enjoy people from all cultures and religions, except those who are committed to eliminating all other cultures, religions, political systems, and ways of life but their own — a principle that is not only part of Islamic doctrine, it is Islam’s prime directive.
The Blaze, by Benjamin Weingarten, May 29, 2015:
Former federal prosecutor and current National Review contributor Andrew McCarthy has published a slender but substantive new book coincidentally released eerily close to the recent Garland jihadist attack titled “Islam and Free Speech.”
We had the chance to sit down with McCarthy to discuss a variety of topics relating to his new book including a broader question that America has been grappling with for over a decade since Sept. 11, 2001: How can a free and pluralistic society built on protecting liberty including specifically religious liberty adequately counter a theopolitical Islamic supremacist ideology that seeks to use our freedoms and tolerance to undermine us.
Here is how McCarthy responded to the question:
The doctrine of Soviet Communism was … ultimately not just the complete and extensive undermining of [the U.S.], but when and if or if and when finally necessary, the violent overthrow of the United States, or the United States government.
So it’s not like this is the first time that we’ve dealt with a conquest ideology that seeks … to supplant the West with its own vision of what society should be. We’ve had this kind of a problem before.
The difference is, Soviet ideology never traveled under the banner of religious liberty, and there was never the kind of squeamishness about examining it that we have now. And … the best way to combat it is to get over that squeamishness.
What we have to understand is that there is a difference between what we ought to regard as Islam the religion … which is something that is adhered to by, you know, many many many patriotic American Muslims, who have no desire whatsoever to have a United States that’s structured like the totalitarian societies that a lot of them either left or reject for their own reasons.
So we have to distinguish that from this political Islamist ideology that is rooted in Islamic doctrine, and a very literal interpretation of it, and that rejects a division between church and state, or between mosque and state.
That ideology is — it has a religious component — but it’s a political ideology overwhelmingly. And it ought to be dealt with as one. And we should stop — you know our public officials should stop trying to label it as something it isn’t. It’s a political, totalitarian conquest ideology that has certain religious elements to it.
But the important thing from our perspective is it’s like every other political ideology that competes and has animus towards the west. And we have to see ourselves as in competition with it and needing to defeat it, rather than trying to figure out how we can accommodate it under the auspices of our commitment to religious liberty, because overwhelmingly it’s not a religious doctrine. The political element of it is overwhelmingly a totalitarian political doctrine. And we shouldn’t, just because it has a few religious elements to it, lose sight of the bigger picture.
You can listen to our interview in full below, or keep scrolling to listen to select clips on topics ranging from the ignored totalitarian nature of Shariah speech prohibitions to McCarthy’s defense of Section 215 of the Patriot Act and why McCarthy believes that conservative Americans frightened of a government that has targeted them through the IRS should be trusted with such powers.
The Clash of Civilizations Between Islam and the West
The Ignored Totalitarian Nature of Shariah Speech Prohibitions
McCarthy’s Defense of Section 215 of the Patriot Act, and Why We Should Trust Our Government With Such Power
What is In America’s National Interest in the Middle East, and How Should We Pursue It?
NRO, By Tom Rogan — May 27, 2015:
In 2007, the U.S. Marine Corps fought for months to recapture Ramadi from al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI). And even with their exceptional training, leadership, equipment, and enabling support — logistics, intelligence and aviation etc. — the Marines’ battle was bloody and hard-won.
But that was 2007.
In 2015, though the necessity was apparent months earlier, calls from Anbari tribes for military support from Baghdad and President Obama to fight the Islamic State were ignored. Predictably, Ramadi fell. And now the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) and so-called Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) must again retake the city from AQI’s successor, the Islamic State.
But the ISF and PMF aren’t the U.S. Marine Corps. Instead, they’re a ramshackle formation born of desperation.
While the ISF has a few professional (albeit ill-equipped) units, those units are few and far between. In turn, while the PMF has many hardened combat veterans, those veterans are Shia absolutists with their own divided loyalties.
Consider the groups that form the PMF.
First, there’s Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq (AAH), a group of Iranian-supported terrorists responsible for many atrocities (including executing handcuffed Americans during the Karbala raid of 2007). Then there’s Kata’ib Hezbollah, another Iran-supported proxy that made its name killing Americans during Iraq’s pre-2010 period. There’s also the Badr Organization, which simultaneously controls Iraq’s Interior Ministry (responsible for domestic security) and deploys its own militia without restraint. Speaking unambiguously to its Shia-militant identity, the PMF logo replicates the outstretched Kalashnikov symbol of the Lebanese Hezbollah.
PMF fighters aren’t paper tigers when it comes to sectarian brutality — their inhumanity has been proven repeatedly in the thousands of innocent Sunnis they have murdered. For a taste of PMF’s fanaticism, read about one of their heroes, Mr. Power Drill, a.k.a. Abu Deraa.
The ISF and its PMF ‘allies’ will struggle to retake Ramadi. In fact, they might completely fail.
And the PMF’s name for the Ramadi operation — “I am here for you, Husayn” — tells another tale. “Husayn” refers to Husayn ibn Ali, the revered Shia martyr who was beheaded by Sunni forces at the seventh-century Battle of Karbala. The PMF’s implied intent in Ramadi is thus clear — advancing Shia power in confrontation against Sunnis, rather than against the Islamic State.
Regardless, the ISF and its PMF “allies” will struggle to retake Ramadi. In fact, they might completely fail. After all, while they’ll be able to secure Ramadi’s northern and western approaches by dominating its Euphrates River crossing points, the Islamic State will turn Ramadi’s streets into death traps. Lacking coordination, ISF and PMF units therefore face great risk of dissection by Islamic State car bombs, booby traps, alleyway ambushes, and shifting lines of attack. Indeed, the ISF/PMF urban-assault record is far from impressive. To their embarrassment, back in March, they were forced to rely heavily upon U.S. air strikes to defeat Islamic State forces in Tikrit.
As I say, these groups are not the USMC.
Unfortunately, as much as it’s tempting to believe that Islamic State and PMF fanatics killing each other is a good thing, as I explained this weekend, these divisions threaten a sectarian total war. Consider what’s happening beyond Ramadi. Today, the Islamic State’s successes enable it to project power in all directions, including toward the Shia holy city of Karbala — a long-term Islamic State target. In turn, Iran is responding with another injection of its own sectarian forces to dominate Iraq.
The Middle East is a region in which political moderation is rapidly being vaporized. We must challenge this extremism in order to protect America, because at present, our strategy is an unmitigated failure.
But don’t take my word for it. Yesterday I spoke with the anti–Islamic State monitoring group Raqqa Is Being Slaughtered Silently. I asked them what impact coalition air strikes against Islamic State positions in Raqqa were having. Their response?
“Not a lot.”
— Tom Rogan is a panelist on The McLaughlin Group and holds the Tony Blankley Chair at the Steamboat Institute. He tweets @TomRtweets.
By Cultural Jihad, May 25, 2015:
In Questionable Charity Groups Cloud Syrian Benefit we reported on Syrian songwriter/singer/activist Yahya Hawwa touring Muslim communities in America as part of a benefit to help Syrians in need. It was noted that one of the organizations sponsoring the event, Life for Relief and Development (LIFE), is one of the larger U.S. based Islamic Charities. It also has past partnerships with organizations such as Human Appeal International (HAI), a group reportedly linked to Hamas.
LIFE’s ties to the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood originate with it’s founder and former CEO, Khalil Jassemm and his association with the late MB leader Dr. Ahmed Elkadi while residing in Panama City, FL. Elkadi’s father-in-law, Mahmoud Abu-Saud was also living in the Panama City area at the time. Abu-Saud was known for his expertise in finance and central banking and being heavily involved in the Muslim Brotherhood’s beginnings in Egypt. Abu-Saud and Elkadi worked together with the formation of several Islamic organizations including the first Islamic Center of Northwest Florida in 1986.
In 1985, Jassemm joined with Elkadi to form at least one charity, the Welfare Trust for Needy Patients, Inc in Panama City. The organization was dissolved in 1991. Jasseemm moved to California and started LIFE in 1992. LIFE was moved to Michigan in 1994. In the mid 1990s, Jasseemm maintained his ties to Elkadi while working as a visiting professor at the University of Maine, Department of Survey Engineering – Orno sponsored by Elkadi’s Institute of Islamic Medicine for Education and Research.
Jasseemm is also the author of several books relating to Islamic charities. His, “Islamic Perspective on Charity, a Comprehensive Guide for Running a Muslim Nonprofit In the U.S.” provides extensive guidance for Islamic charity officials in regards to laws governing such groups. Jasseemm is no longer listed as being affiliated with LIFE and is believed to be living in Jordan.
LIFE’s current board listing still reflects its MB influences and includes:
Dr. Gindy is a co-founder and board member of CAIR Michigan.
M. Yahia Abdul-Rahim
We’ve covered Dr. Rahim’s MB ties a number times. He is listed as the NAIT contact for the Bay County Islamic Society and is a director of the the Panama City Advanced School Corporation. In the 1992 Phone Book seized during the Holyland Foundation investigation into terrorist funding, Dr. Rahim (Y. Abdul-Raheem) was listed as the economic head of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.
A lessor known document showing Rahim’s MB ties is a 1994 Florida corporate filing for the Muslim Financial Group, Inc., which was dissolved one year later. In addition to Rahim named as director, it includes Mohamed Mabrook and Jamal Nyrabeah.
Mabrook was president of Global Chemical and had been convicted in 2002 of mail and wire fraud – defrauding investors of the company. According to a 2002 Wall Street Journal report it was a bit more complicated, involving suspected ties to Saudi investments and terror groups:
One month after the Sept. 11 attacks, the U.S. Treasury labeled Mr. [Yassin] Qadi, who is 47 years old, a “specially designated global terrorist” and froze his assets in the U.S. and Europe. The government says that Mr. Qadi and organizations he controls move money from Saudi sources through numerous businesses and charities world-wide. Some of the money ends up in the hands of terrorists, the U.S. says. Mr. Qadi declines to comment, but through his lawyers, he denies ever knowingly doing business with terrorists or financing them. He hasn’t been prosecuted, and his attorneys are trying to persuade the Treasury of his innocence.
The article refers to Mabrook’s company …
In the mid-1990s, another company to which Mr. Qadi had ties, Abrar Investments Inc., joined with International Relief Organization [IIRO] to invest in a Chicago chemical company — a deal that is also drawing scrutiny from federal investigators.
Abrar Investments was a Stamford, Conn., company that sought “Islamically permissible investment opportunities in the United States,” according to its prospectus. The company’s name means “the do-gooders.” Mr. Qadi’s lawyers confirm he, among others, invested money in the U.S. through Abrar Investments. He was also a director of Abrar’s Malaysian corporate parent, according to records gathered by terrorism researcher Rita Katz of the nonprofit SITE Institute in Washington.
Abrar and International Relief Organization jointly invested more than $2 million in Global Chemical Corp., which said it made household- and pool-cleaning supplies. Abrar provided $250,000 itself, as well as another $345,000 that came from one of its clients, according to an affidavit by FBI agent Valerie Donahue filed in federal court in Chicago in January 1997. International Relief Organization invested more than $1 million and guaranteed Abrar Investments against any potential loss from the deal, the Donahue affidavit said. Two of International Relief’s top officials owned a total of a 20% stake in Global Chemical, according to the Donahue affidavit.
The president of Global Chemical was Mohammed Mabrook, a Libyan immigrant and Islamic activist who during his college years in Tennessee organized opposition to the secular dictatorship of Libyan Col. Moammar Gadhafi. In 1985, Mr. Mabrook, had worked for a pro-Palestinian group headed by Mr. Marzouk, the senior Hamas leader who the U.S. believes was a coinvestor with Mr. Qadi in BMI, according to a 2001 federal-court filing in Chicago.
Global Chemical kept a warehouse full of highly toxic chemicals but appeared to have few if any customers, according to the Donahue affidavit. Alarmed, the FBI asked one of the government’s senior experts on chemical weapons, Dennis J. Reutter, chief of the army’s Materiel Command Treaty Laboratory in Edgewood, Md., to look at the chemicals Global Chemical was purchasing.
The FBI included an ominous excerpt from Mr. Reutter’s Oct. 23, 1996, report in Ms. Donahue’s affidavit. The purchases, he wrote, “do not appear to be consistent with R&D for formulation of commercial cleaning products or for quality control of commercial cleaning products.” The names of the chemicals weren’t made public. His report concluded that “taken in total, the purchases appear to be more consistent with support” of a laboratory performing biochemistry or “organic synthesis.” Mr. Reutter declines to comment.
Organic synthesis is one way to describe the process used to manufacture some explosives. But U.S. law-enforcement officials in Chicago say they didn’t find direct evidence of any bomb making at Global Chemical.
Mr. Salah — the confessed Hamas operative who received funds both directly from Mr. Qadi and from the Woodridge, Ill., real-estate investment Mr. Qadi financed — also allegedly had an interest in dangerous chemicals. In the 1995 confession to Israeli authorities, which he subsequently retracted and which the FBI summarized in court filings, Mr. Salah allegedly said that while in Chicago in the early 1990s, he trained recruits to work with “basic chemical materials for the preparation of bombs and explosives,” as well as various toxins.
Qadi was one of the original investors in Bait ul Mal, Inc. (BMI), an Islamic investment firm tied to the MB. A 2003 National Review article provides additional details regarding BMI and terror funding tied to charities, including IIRO.
Court documents for U.S. vs Mabrook portray Dr. Rahim a victim of fraud committed by Mabrook indicating he invested $600,000 in the Mabrook’s chemical company. In light of Rahim’s position in MB financial matters, Yassin Qadi’s funding activities and the involvement of IIRO the “victim” label is questionable.
Nyrabeah resided in Panama City, FL along with Dr. Rahim and Dr. Elkadi. In 1993 Nyrabeah become a director of the Benevolence International Foundation (BIF) and is cited in court documents. A Canadian corporation filing also shows Nyrabeah as a listed director along with Enaam Arnaout for the Benevolence International Fund, incorporated in 2000. In 2002, Enaam Arnaout was linked by prosecutors to Osama bin Laden’s terrorist network and was sentenced to 11 years in federal prison. In 2002, the U.S. Government designated BIF as a “Financiers of Terrorism” for providing support to Hamas as well as Al Qaeda. Nyrabeah apparently was not charged.
Dr. Saqar’s ties to the MB can be found in the 1992 Phone Book seized during the Holy land Foundation investigation into terrorist funding. He is listed (spelled as Hani Shaker) as a member of the MB executive committee and as the “Masul” (leader) of the Administrative Office for East America.
Saqar was the former director of the Noor Islamic Cultural Center in Dublin, Ohio (NICC) until a disagreement emerged with other NICC members. Reporter Patrick Poole has written about the NICC’s former spirtual leader, Dr. Salah Sultan and his ties to Hamas and the MB. Up until recently, Saqar was president of the The Egyptian Americans for Democracy and Human Rights (EADHR), a group reported by the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) to be a pro Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood group.
This year LIFE is not as visible with Hawwa’s fund raising appearances.
The primary sponsoring groups are Syria Relief and Development and United Muslim Relief. Both organizations under control of individuals with strong Muslim Brotherhood affiliations.
Syria Relief and Development was formed and incorporated in Kansas in 2011. It’s 2013 filings report over $5 million in relief efforts.
The organization’s books were initially handled by Mohamad Albadawi. The Causingfitna blog has some extensive information covering Albadawi’s ties to MB organizations and the myraid of Islamic special interest groups he is involved with.
For many years, Stephen Clouse has made videos designed to inspire donations to worthy causes. Recently, he made a different kind of video. It’s not designed to solicit donations but to honor those who have given so much for our country.
In this video, veteran Hollywood actor Tony Lo Bianco reads a poem called “Just a Common Soldier.” It’s a moving tribute to the soldiers, sailors, Marines and airmen who have served our country. As Tony reads the poem, viewers are treated to emotional images of our honored vets. As they were on the battlefield; and as they are now.
Clouse is asking Americans to share the video with their followers on Facebook and other social media channels such as YouTube and Twitter. The goal is to get 21 million “likes”—that’s one for every one of the estimated 21 million living veterans—between Memorial Day on May 25 and Veteran’s Day on Nov. 11.
By Citizen Warrior, May 21, 2015:
Many people think we in the West have nothing to worry about from Islam. The West has superior weapons, a superior military, and orthodox Muslims are not going to start an all-out war with western powers. All of this may be true. What we westerners should be more concerned about is perpetual Islamic political encroachment as democracies give Islam one political concession after another until we’ve helped build a trap for ourselves from which we cannot escape.
1. Suppress criticism of Islam. At the very least, you can cry, “Racism!” (even though Islam is not a race) and that might silence someone or get them fired. But you can often go much farther. When someone says anything against the teachings of Islam, Islamic organizations like CAIR can sue the writer, the publisher, or the television station for defamation of a religion or libel or discrimination. Since many of these suits are brought by Muslims with excessive oil money (and can afford good lawyers and long legal campaigns) it makes people think twice about speaking openly, even in free countries. Islamic countries repeatedly push at the United Nations to make criticism of Islam an international crime. And of course, instilling the fear of death also helps suppress criticism.
2. Use deceit to keep non-Muslims confused, at odds with each other, and ineffective. Islam has a principle called taqiyya, which means “religious deception.” Basically it stems from the Islamic concept that Islam is at war with all non-Muslims, and all is fair in love and war. Deceit is used by most military strategists as a legitimate weapon, and it is permissible and even encouraged in the Koran against anyone who is not a Muslim.
3. Convert kafirs into Muslims. Outreach programs, television programs, one-on-one conversations, advertising — they use it all, and they present only a friendly face of Islam to kafirs (non-Muslims), hoping to dupe them into joining this “peaceful, tolerant religion.” Or they use the “join with us and end your persecution” approach (for minorities). They also have a very successful track record of converting thugs in prisons into fanatical Muslims. They try every avenue they can find.
4. Increase your numbers inside the non-Muslim country. Orthodox Muslim men sometimes have several wives, even in western democracies where it is illegal, and have many children per wife. Muslim men sometimes try to get non-Muslim women to marry them, but get them to convert first. Another way they increase their numbers is to help get more Muslims to immigrate into the non-Muslim countries. They recognize the power of numbers and they are actively pursuing that course. Serge Trifkovic (author of The Sword of the Prophet) said Muslims have proven throughout history that “once they reach the numbers that allow them to impose their will, they will do so.” Raymond Ibrahim calls it the Rule of Numbers.
5. Gain small, incremental, legal concessions from non-Muslim countries. And make sure you give no concessions in return. For example, the Phoenix airport capitulated to some Islamic women’s demands to change the uniform of their employees. The airport’s uniform included pants, and the Islamic women said they couldn’t wear them and they wanted to wear skirts. So the airport conceded. No big deal, right? Concessions like this are being made constantly, with more and more frequency. When it all adds up, it is a big deal. The fact that each concession is so small is one of the reasons people allow it.
These five strategies are already being done right under our noses. The way to stop the slow-encroachment invasion is to educate non-Muslims. Once people can see what orthodox Muslims are doing, they’ll vote against it, and they’ll vote for representatives who demonstrate they see it too.
The end result will be no more concessions to Islam. The encroachment must be stopped. You can help. In fact, you must help. We need all the help we can get, and the sooner the better. Have conversations like these with people you know. Talk to them about Mohammad. Share articles with them. Loan them good DVDs. Start today. We can stop the invasion; we just have to be smart about it.
Originally posted on Refugee Resettlement Watch:
Rep. Peter King (R-NY)
Rep. King (R-NY) has announced a hearing this Thursday (hat tip: Rosemary), May 21, 9 a.m. entitled:
The witness list includes:
Dr. Seth Jones
International Security and Defense Policy Center
Mr. Thomas Fuentes
Assistant Director (Ret.)
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Dr. Steven Bucci
Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign and National Security Policy
The Heritage Foundation
Regular readers will remember that the full committee held a hearing in February where the FBI gave damaging testimonythat they could not adequately screen Syrian refugees entering the US. I wonder why the chairman couldn’t get the FBI back? I’ll bet Jeh Johnson put the kibosh on that! (Note that Mr. Fuentes is a former FBI assistant director.)
By the way, as of the first of May, the US Refugee Admissions Program…
View original 70 more words
Clarion Project, May 17, 2015:
The Islamic State (ISIS) has turned people smuggling into big business, reportedly making millions from trafficking migrants into Europe.
Time magazine gained access to an intelligence report on the Islamic State’s finances and wrote, “The report estimates that ISIS needs between $523.5 million and $815.3 million a year to run its operations, including to pay its fighters, run social services, and buy weapons and ammunition.”
Reduced income from oil production since the U.S. bombing campaign against their air fields has pushed the Islamic State into diversifying its revenue streams. The report states that Islamic State oil production has been cut in half since last year when the UN estimated to be making up to $3 million/day.
The report lists the Islamic State’s other income as follows:
People trafficking is big business and the Islamic State is maneuvering to exploit the trade, according to a new report by the Global Initiative against Transnational Organized Crime.
The report states that the Islamic State is deliberately creating refugees and attacking refugee camps in order to create more migrants to smuggle.
It states that the trade is worth “US$ 255 – 323 million per year in Libya alone. The value of this trade dwarfs any existing trafficking and smuggling businesses in the region, and has particularly strengthened groups with a terrorist agenda, including the Islamic State.”
The Islamic State is meanwhile continuing to make advances in Syria, coming dangerously close to the ancient Roman city of Palmyra, a UNESCO World Heritage Site.
Other historic cultural sites captured by the Islamic State have been destroyed, and it is feared that if it falls, Palmyra will meet the same fate. On Friday, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reported, “The Islamic State group executed by gunfire 23 civilians, including nine children, in the village of Amiriyeh, north of Tadmor [Palmyra]”
At least 76 people have been killed so far in the battle for Palmyra. The Syrian regime has reportedly pushed the Islamic State back.
U.S. commandos also carried out an operation and killed one of the Islamic State’s senior commanders: Abu Sayyaf.
Despite these atrocities, the Islamic State’s appeal in the West seemingly continues to grow along with those of other terrorist groups. In the UK, 56 teenagers were arrested last year on terrorism charges, double the previous year’s figure of 26. There were a record 338 terrorism related arrests last year, up from 254 previously.